nitinboston
04-09 04:19 PM
Dear Mrs. Hillary Clinton
Heartfelt thanks for making such an effort to answer consumer grievances. My Admiration for this administration and their efforts to improve communication is growing exponentially every day. God Bless you and God Bless America.
We are wringing these questions in effort to understand the VISA allocation processes followed by DOS. Also how it affects effectively petitioners live to plan their future, travel, Buying house etc...
1.0) Is IVACS primary application for tracking VISA requests from USCIS, Consular posts?
Rationale: Any Software/Application used by DOS should be single source for data entry of all the new application.
1.1) Does IVACS system (DOS�s Inventory system) connects electronically to USCIS system, Consular posts or NVC or any other agencies for VISA demand requests?
Rationale: Any Software/Application used by DOS need talk to Client System (USCIS, Consular posts, NVC or other agencies) every month system for effectively moving VISA bulletin every month.
1.2) In Absence of Interface � Does IVACS system receive VISA demand sent manually through flat file or spreadsheet?
Rationale: In absence of electronic interface DOS need to manually receive data for effectively predicting VISA bulletin every month.
2.0) How many Employment-based I485 VISA demands are pending at USCIS, NVC, Consular posts?
Rationale: We are trying to get Employment based pending applications.
3.0) IS this last Pending EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf on 4/8/2010 - http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf includes all the Employment based I485 VISA demand?
Rationale: We are trying to confirm data received are all inclusive.
4.0) Can DOS Enhance/publish table for �total number of VISA available�� as on report preparation date, rather than total Fiscal availability. As per table showed below,
Rationale: This will help applicants to estimate date of approval and plan for buying house, make major move etc.
Preference China Demand India Demand Maxico Philippines ROW Worldwide limit
Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal
E1
E2
E3
E4
E5
5.0) Can DOS generate monthly VISA returns report from USCIS, NVC, Consular posts or any other agencies that demands Employment VISA?
Rationale: This will help us understand how much visa were available for reallocation.
6.0) INA section Sec 201 (2) mentions usages of visa per �Calendar Quarter� with maximum limit of 27% per quarter. As EB2 & EB3 categories are retro gassed Are Minimum 140k/4 Visa's consumed every quarter? If no which section of INA being applied to not to do so?
Rationale: To understand DOS�s interpretation and application of the law.
7.0) Where we can find DOS published monthly EB/FB permanent residency VISA demand report with country of chargeability, Employment based category (for e.g. EB1, EB2, EB3, �), similar to report published by DOL.
Rationale: This will help applicants to estimate date of approval and plan for buying house, make major move etc.
8.0) What is rational of EB3-India Visa allocation only approximately 100 a month? We feel that before EB3-I become unavailable it should get 140*7%*28.6% = 2802/12 VISA�s every month. EB3-I VISA reductions from Inventory reports before their Priority Date is as follows,
a) Between Inventory Published 03/12/10 & 01/30/10 = 100
b) Between Inventory Published between 01/30/10 & 04/08/10 = 100
Rationale: This will help EB3 applicants to estimate date of approval to plan their future for house Purchase or major move etc.
9.0) How do you propose to reconcile the pending data reported by DOS and USCIS.
We are Comparing data from two sources USCIS published pending inventory and DOS published monthly determination, And we have Found data Differences for following categories,
USCIS Pending for EB3-China as on March 08, 2010 === 5,575
DOS Pending for EB3-China as on March 01, 2010 === 8,900
Rationale: Closing gap in case of data error.
References:
i. EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf - http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
ii. Operation of the Numerical Control Process - http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/Immigrant%20Visa%20Control%20System_operation%20of .pdf
Dude i must say, it must have taken a huge effort to come up with all this. But guess what, it wont make a dent. There are way too many Indians, Chinese and Mexicans in line and too few GC's to give out.
Heartfelt thanks for making such an effort to answer consumer grievances. My Admiration for this administration and their efforts to improve communication is growing exponentially every day. God Bless you and God Bless America.
We are wringing these questions in effort to understand the VISA allocation processes followed by DOS. Also how it affects effectively petitioners live to plan their future, travel, Buying house etc...
1.0) Is IVACS primary application for tracking VISA requests from USCIS, Consular posts?
Rationale: Any Software/Application used by DOS should be single source for data entry of all the new application.
1.1) Does IVACS system (DOS�s Inventory system) connects electronically to USCIS system, Consular posts or NVC or any other agencies for VISA demand requests?
Rationale: Any Software/Application used by DOS need talk to Client System (USCIS, Consular posts, NVC or other agencies) every month system for effectively moving VISA bulletin every month.
1.2) In Absence of Interface � Does IVACS system receive VISA demand sent manually through flat file or spreadsheet?
Rationale: In absence of electronic interface DOS need to manually receive data for effectively predicting VISA bulletin every month.
2.0) How many Employment-based I485 VISA demands are pending at USCIS, NVC, Consular posts?
Rationale: We are trying to get Employment based pending applications.
3.0) IS this last Pending EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf on 4/8/2010 - http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf includes all the Employment based I485 VISA demand?
Rationale: We are trying to confirm data received are all inclusive.
4.0) Can DOS Enhance/publish table for �total number of VISA available�� as on report preparation date, rather than total Fiscal availability. As per table showed below,
Rationale: This will help applicants to estimate date of approval and plan for buying house, make major move etc.
Preference China Demand India Demand Maxico Philippines ROW Worldwide limit
Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal
E1
E2
E3
E4
E5
5.0) Can DOS generate monthly VISA returns report from USCIS, NVC, Consular posts or any other agencies that demands Employment VISA?
Rationale: This will help us understand how much visa were available for reallocation.
6.0) INA section Sec 201 (2) mentions usages of visa per �Calendar Quarter� with maximum limit of 27% per quarter. As EB2 & EB3 categories are retro gassed Are Minimum 140k/4 Visa's consumed every quarter? If no which section of INA being applied to not to do so?
Rationale: To understand DOS�s interpretation and application of the law.
7.0) Where we can find DOS published monthly EB/FB permanent residency VISA demand report with country of chargeability, Employment based category (for e.g. EB1, EB2, EB3, �), similar to report published by DOL.
Rationale: This will help applicants to estimate date of approval and plan for buying house, make major move etc.
8.0) What is rational of EB3-India Visa allocation only approximately 100 a month? We feel that before EB3-I become unavailable it should get 140*7%*28.6% = 2802/12 VISA�s every month. EB3-I VISA reductions from Inventory reports before their Priority Date is as follows,
a) Between Inventory Published 03/12/10 & 01/30/10 = 100
b) Between Inventory Published between 01/30/10 & 04/08/10 = 100
Rationale: This will help EB3 applicants to estimate date of approval to plan their future for house Purchase or major move etc.
9.0) How do you propose to reconcile the pending data reported by DOS and USCIS.
We are Comparing data from two sources USCIS published pending inventory and DOS published monthly determination, And we have Found data Differences for following categories,
USCIS Pending for EB3-China as on March 08, 2010 === 5,575
DOS Pending for EB3-China as on March 01, 2010 === 8,900
Rationale: Closing gap in case of data error.
References:
i. EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf - http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
ii. Operation of the Numerical Control Process - http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/Immigrant%20Visa%20Control%20System_operation%20of .pdf
Dude i must say, it must have taken a huge effort to come up with all this. But guess what, it wont make a dent. There are way too many Indians, Chinese and Mexicans in line and too few GC's to give out.
wallpaper Posts Tagged #39;keanu reeves
signifer123
02-17 05:41 AM
kirupa.com
so!!!!!!!
none of them is free???
uhhh, look at the post in the very first part of the thread i set up this (%0Ahttp://www.gamedev.net/community/fo...topic_id=202348) link for a list of a bunch of 3d programs varying from free to over 5k
so!!!!!!!
none of them is free???
uhhh, look at the post in the very first part of the thread i set up this (%0Ahttp://www.gamedev.net/community/fo...topic_id=202348) link for a list of a bunch of 3d programs varying from free to over 5k
rajeshalex
07-13 06:57 PM
Can IV use FOIA to
1 get the visa numbers allocated by USCIS for the past one year ?
2 pending 485 applns grouped by country/EB category/priority date?
I think this will clear lot of speculations/and if needed we can do something regarding the visa number wastage/retrogression.
Rajesh
1 get the visa numbers allocated by USCIS for the past one year ?
2 pending 485 applns grouped by country/EB category/priority date?
I think this will clear lot of speculations/and if needed we can do something regarding the visa number wastage/retrogression.
Rajesh
2011 pictures keanu reeves 2011
bestin
12-21 08:33 PM
Hi,
My friend working in company A on L1...he has approved H1 also...if he needs to move from L1 to H1, does he needs to go out of country and get it stamped before he starts working on H1?
AFAIK,a person can have only one status at a time.He is already in H1 if he had a I94 attached.However if he intends to travel out of the country and reenter he needs to get his visa stamped .If he has applied 485 then, he also has the option of using AP ,if it is approved.
My friend working in company A on L1...he has approved H1 also...if he needs to move from L1 to H1, does he needs to go out of country and get it stamped before he starts working on H1?
AFAIK,a person can have only one status at a time.He is already in H1 if he had a I94 attached.However if he intends to travel out of the country and reenter he needs to get his visa stamped .If he has applied 485 then, he also has the option of using AP ,if it is approved.
more...
gimme_GC2006
07-12 05:22 PM
All right I am current again..exactly after 2 years
So I am having the butterflies in my tummy with nostalgia of my nail biting thriller during 2008 July-Sep bulletin, where I got royally screwed.
mwuahhhaaaa...c'mon..come to papa now :D:D
tick..tock..tick..tock :rolleyes:
So I am having the butterflies in my tummy with nostalgia of my nail biting thriller during 2008 July-Sep bulletin, where I got royally screwed.
mwuahhhaaaa...c'mon..come to papa now :D:D
tick..tock..tick..tock :rolleyes:
dreamgc_real
07-13 08:43 AM
Does anyone have the list of latest set documents required to file for 485.... can you plzzzz email/post it here... thanks
can it be done without the help of an attorney...????
Check out the USCIS site: USCIS - Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3faf2c1a6855d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D)
You can download the form as well as the instruction to fill out the firm.
As for filing it on your own - depends on how confident you are in your abilities to follow the instructions!!!!!!!!! Just kidding... Try filling the form on a copy.........
can it be done without the help of an attorney...????
Check out the USCIS site: USCIS - Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3faf2c1a6855d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D)
You can download the form as well as the instruction to fill out the firm.
As for filing it on your own - depends on how confident you are in your abilities to follow the instructions!!!!!!!!! Just kidding... Try filling the form on a copy.........
more...
ronhira
03-12 12:37 PM
I made it very clear even in past. I am more rational kinda guy. I want to know where my money is spent at high level - no details. I know its against IV policy. So I admire what IV is doing, I appreciate donor only forum but not contributing yet. May be I am wrong being too hard to be convinced. I will think over.
n.b.: Yes, I do follow all action items including calling and faxing. I think everybody does this so needless to mention.
u would think..... that everyone follow action items...... then y would we be in this mess if everyone is doing what they should......
i think greyhair, you, kumarc123 are all part of the problem...... let me re-phrase that.... u r all a disease plaguing this eb community...... everyone has their own little petty reason for not participating...... so just eat taco with u'r $25, no need to think over.... keep volunteering me for doing things for u.... i don't care much for this bickering back & forth.... so leave me alone & let me enjoy my friday....
n.b.: Yes, I do follow all action items including calling and faxing. I think everybody does this so needless to mention.
u would think..... that everyone follow action items...... then y would we be in this mess if everyone is doing what they should......
i think greyhair, you, kumarc123 are all part of the problem...... let me re-phrase that.... u r all a disease plaguing this eb community...... everyone has their own little petty reason for not participating...... so just eat taco with u'r $25, no need to think over.... keep volunteering me for doing things for u.... i don't care much for this bickering back & forth.... so leave me alone & let me enjoy my friday....
2010 images keanu reeves 2011 girlfriend. keanu reeves 2011.
nixstor
07-04 08:56 PM
Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
more...
mirage
02-06 09:40 AM
You got my point, sir!!!
Though I am posting very late, I fully agree with the intent of the thread starter. If there is anything that we can convince the "balanced" law makers, it is the discrimination based on country based quota.
A person with certain skill set brings same and equal benefits to this country. S/He is hired because the economy of this country needs him/her. Then why issue green card to one because s/he was born in XYZ country and why ask another to wait almost endlessly because s/he was born in ABC country. This is absurd, unjust, unfair and discriminatory, particularly considering the values that United States respects, believes in and follows.
We can sell only this one point to law makers. Selling an idea on how much benefits we bring to this country, and if we can buy homes with 20% down payment, is like waking up a person who is pretending to be asleep. They have decided not to buy that argument no matter what. And then there is Dick Durbyn, Grassley, Jeff Sessions, Steve King and many like them...............
Though I am posting very late, I fully agree with the intent of the thread starter. If there is anything that we can convince the "balanced" law makers, it is the discrimination based on country based quota.
A person with certain skill set brings same and equal benefits to this country. S/He is hired because the economy of this country needs him/her. Then why issue green card to one because s/he was born in XYZ country and why ask another to wait almost endlessly because s/he was born in ABC country. This is absurd, unjust, unfair and discriminatory, particularly considering the values that United States respects, believes in and follows.
We can sell only this one point to law makers. Selling an idea on how much benefits we bring to this country, and if we can buy homes with 20% down payment, is like waking up a person who is pretending to be asleep. They have decided not to buy that argument no matter what. And then there is Dick Durbyn, Grassley, Jeff Sessions, Steve King and many like them...............
hair KEANU REEVES: The actor hinted
CADude
02-21 11:16 AM
YES and YES.
How does one "change" to EB2?. I have a PD of Oct 2003 EB3. Should i submit a new labor and if it is approved my category will be EB2 PD Oct 2003?. Should i also file another I-140?.
Not that i want to. just out of curiosity. thanks
How does one "change" to EB2?. I have a PD of Oct 2003 EB3. Should i submit a new labor and if it is approved my category will be EB2 PD Oct 2003?. Should i also file another I-140?.
Not that i want to. just out of curiosity. thanks
more...
ronhira
04-10 10:40 AM
Time and again I am telling. EB 3 problem is due to 245(i) cases. Once 245(i) primaries are over, their dependent will come into the picture, who are waiting back home. All 245(i) cases have PD before April 2001. For time being, EB3 I or Mexico move beyond April 01 but again retrogress back to the April 01 when cases are accumulate at CP. This is the reason why EB3 I and Mexico is not moving since last many years.
If some one is not convince with me, request under FOIA
1. How many cases filed under 245(i) in India, Mexico, and ROW
2. How many cases filed under I 824 Follow to Join since 2007?
what r u...... y don't u file foia to prove your twisted racist theories.... y r u always attacking mexican immigrants or 245(i)...... 245(i) was a LEGAL provision in the law...... who made that law..... congress....... assuming any merit to u'r racist theory.... y r u faulting the people who filed 245(i)..... y not fault the congress for passing 245(i) & not passing immigration bill....
If some one is not convince with me, request under FOIA
1. How many cases filed under 245(i) in India, Mexico, and ROW
2. How many cases filed under I 824 Follow to Join since 2007?
what r u...... y don't u file foia to prove your twisted racist theories.... y r u always attacking mexican immigrants or 245(i)...... 245(i) was a LEGAL provision in the law...... who made that law..... congress....... assuming any merit to u'r racist theory.... y r u faulting the people who filed 245(i)..... y not fault the congress for passing 245(i) & not passing immigration bill....
hot keanu reeves 2011 girlfriend.
rajuseattle
07-15 07:14 PM
Thakurji,
Until yesterday you were suggesting your employer asked you to do something which you didnt agree and that forced you to quit him.
today you are changing your version suggesting you are feeling sorry you quit him earlier...what had made this sudden transformation. Anyways thats personal thing between you and your ex-employer.
Anyways we are all happy for the Happy end of this story...that your ex-employer is willing to accept you as employee once he gets you GC and he is going to answer RFE.
I dont think you need any competant attorney now, your ex-employer's attorney should be able to answer the RFE.
cheer up...!!!
Until yesterday you were suggesting your employer asked you to do something which you didnt agree and that forced you to quit him.
today you are changing your version suggesting you are feeling sorry you quit him earlier...what had made this sudden transformation. Anyways thats personal thing between you and your ex-employer.
Anyways we are all happy for the Happy end of this story...that your ex-employer is willing to accept you as employee once he gets you GC and he is going to answer RFE.
I dont think you need any competant attorney now, your ex-employer's attorney should be able to answer the RFE.
cheer up...!!!
more...
house keanu reeves girlfriend 2011.
anilsal
09-11 04:23 PM
Have you folks seen this movie?
Waldenpond,logiclife,pappu,sertasheep,paskal,amitp s,janilsal,jaime,
vandanaverdia,texanmom,chandu,needhelp,seahawks and the entire IV community Go To Washington.
Waldenpond,logiclife,pappu,sertasheep,paskal,amitp s,janilsal,jaime,
vandanaverdia,texanmom,chandu,needhelp,seahawks and the entire IV community Go To Washington.
tattoo Links: Keanu reeves girlfriend
divakarr
07-03 03:44 PM
just contribtuted $100. Confirmation Number: 8BU10382JA0786747.
Let's fight.
Let's fight.
more...
pictures cafe that Keanu Reeves
gimme_GC2006
05-15 10:05 AM
If we have all resources required to do MBA fulltime from a reputed school then there is no dilemea, one should opt for it. When resources are limited (need to work fulltime, has family with small kids, limited $$$ etc) then online is a better choice compared with part time. Students working for an Online MBA do develop good network and such degrees are being more and more accepted. Online course needs more descipline and dedication than the regular courses. The interaction between students and professor is more in a online course than in a part time course. You spend more time in research than in travel. Flexibility is another advantage.
My client CIO did MBA from University of Pheonix in 2006 and he was hired as CIO in 2008. I am talking of a company with more than 5000 IT staff. So its my opinion that Online MBA is valued by the industry.
http://rankings.ft.com/exportranking/online-mba-2009/pdf
actually online MBA costs 2 times more than regular MBA in most cases..they dont have concept of instate/out-of-state tuition for online.yeah its online but still people can be within the state paying state taxes or whatever..
they should consider this, I say :cool:
My client CIO did MBA from University of Pheonix in 2006 and he was hired as CIO in 2008. I am talking of a company with more than 5000 IT staff. So its my opinion that Online MBA is valued by the industry.
http://rankings.ft.com/exportranking/online-mba-2009/pdf
actually online MBA costs 2 times more than regular MBA in most cases..they dont have concept of instate/out-of-state tuition for online.yeah its online but still people can be within the state paying state taxes or whatever..
they should consider this, I say :cool:
dresses keanu reeves girlfriend 2011.
rockstart
03-10 03:16 PM
Thank you Saravanaraj that was exactly what I was thinking too but wanted to double check since there were some specific tools mentioned in Column H which I might not use in future. Common sense dictates that it should be similar to the job code and not to those specific tools. I think this will help other in similar boat as well
more...
makeup girlfriend Keanu Reeves
pointlesswait
07-28 12:45 PM
I would recommend each and everyone...be it a believer or a non-believer..
to read the book by Richard Dawkins: The God Delusion..
If u have even an iota of rationality ..you will appretiate the beauty of his argument...This book is a must read for every mortal...
You can get a "used" copy on amazon for 3$...please..i beg u guys to read it!
to read the book by Richard Dawkins: The God Delusion..
If u have even an iota of rationality ..you will appretiate the beauty of his argument...This book is a must read for every mortal...
You can get a "used" copy on amazon for 3$...please..i beg u guys to read it!
girlfriend keanu reeves 2011.
justAnotherFile
07-12 07:53 PM
i believe the argument that this sudden jump was made to help eb2 china is pure hogwash.
quoting from july visa bulletin as someone had pasted before
"Since Section 203(e)(1) of the Act requires that such unused numbers be made available strictly in priority date order, the China and India applicants have been subject to the identical cut-off date. As there are more Employment Second preference applicants from India and the Indian applicants may have earlier priority dates, it is likely that Indian applicants will receive a larger portion of the available numbers than Chinese applicants"
the dos has itself stated that these overflow number have to be allocated strictly according to pd order in order to abide by the law. they are not going to publicly state this and one month later do quite the opposite.
it must be truly a case of the uscis not providing sufficient number of approvable cases. now there could be some leeway there for uscis to help eb2-china by withholding some earlier pd indian applications saying they ar e not in approvable state. but i hope that is not the case.
quoting from july visa bulletin as someone had pasted before
"Since Section 203(e)(1) of the Act requires that such unused numbers be made available strictly in priority date order, the China and India applicants have been subject to the identical cut-off date. As there are more Employment Second preference applicants from India and the Indian applicants may have earlier priority dates, it is likely that Indian applicants will receive a larger portion of the available numbers than Chinese applicants"
the dos has itself stated that these overflow number have to be allocated strictly according to pd order in order to abide by the law. they are not going to publicly state this and one month later do quite the opposite.
it must be truly a case of the uscis not providing sufficient number of approvable cases. now there could be some leeway there for uscis to help eb2-china by withholding some earlier pd indian applications saying they ar e not in approvable state. but i hope that is not the case.
hairstyles Keanu 2011
bomber
06-30 07:30 PM
Way to Go !
Let's get united (for the first time) and fight it tooth and nail.
We should not let them get away with something like this so easily.
To be honest with you all, last week when these rumors started, I thought once my case is filed, I don't care if they revise the bulletin or whatever. But after going through all this since yesterday, I don't want something like this to happen even to my enemies.
Even if my case is accepted(current in June, hopefully lawyer mailed it Friday for monday delivery) I'll support you guys in this fight!
So that it boosts up peoples who are similarly disappointed as i was last evening from 6 thru 9 PM ...
July bulletin is still C and no one can stop us from Mailing/ Posting !!
Let's get united (for the first time) and fight it tooth and nail.
We should not let them get away with something like this so easily.
To be honest with you all, last week when these rumors started, I thought once my case is filed, I don't care if they revise the bulletin or whatever. But after going through all this since yesterday, I don't want something like this to happen even to my enemies.
Even if my case is accepted(current in June, hopefully lawyer mailed it Friday for monday delivery) I'll support you guys in this fight!
So that it boosts up peoples who are similarly disappointed as i was last evening from 6 thru 9 PM ...
July bulletin is still C and no one can stop us from Mailing/ Posting !!
amitjoey
07-05 01:44 PM
Order Details - Jul 5, 2007 11:09 AM PDT
Google Order #448537035986231 Print
Shipping Status Qty Item Price
Not yet shipped 1 Contribute 100 $100.00
Total: $100.00
Thanks waiting4gc.
Google Order #448537035986231 Print
Shipping Status Qty Item Price
Not yet shipped 1 Contribute 100 $100.00
Total: $100.00
Thanks waiting4gc.
chanduv23
12-27 04:36 AM
I liked NW/KLM too. Absolutely no hassles. I hear that NY-Dubai non-stop flight through Emirates is also good, though it is slightly expensive.
London - transit visa needed definitely for inter/intra-airport transfers.
Paris - did not ask for transit visa last when I travelled.
Frankfurt was approving transit visas within the airport for gate transfers last time I visited. Situation might have changed now.
Has anybody travelled through Toronto-New Delhi through Air Canada? This would be a trip over the north pole during the Xmas :D
Thnx for the info. I am travelling JFK - Dubai - Chennai tomorrow in the NY - Dubai non stop. I did apply for a transit visa because I may step out of the airport, but as such, I was told, if I am not stepping out of the airport, there is no need for a transit visa.
NWA , I would say, must be used as the last resort. The flight is lousy and the staff is bad. But then no transit visa issues.
London - transit visa needed definitely for inter/intra-airport transfers.
Paris - did not ask for transit visa last when I travelled.
Frankfurt was approving transit visas within the airport for gate transfers last time I visited. Situation might have changed now.
Has anybody travelled through Toronto-New Delhi through Air Canada? This would be a trip over the north pole during the Xmas :D
Thnx for the info. I am travelling JFK - Dubai - Chennai tomorrow in the NY - Dubai non stop. I did apply for a transit visa because I may step out of the airport, but as such, I was told, if I am not stepping out of the airport, there is no need for a transit visa.
NWA , I would say, must be used as the last resort. The flight is lousy and the staff is bad. But then no transit visa issues.
No comments:
Post a Comment