bank_king2003
04-09 04:29 PM
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.
You are right that it wont make any dent not becasue of the numbers of indians, chinease or mexicans but because we failed to identify the problem at a basic level.
if we have a clear answer and hold on following questions i think then only we can make USCIS/DOS to behave.
1) Is USCIS or DOS accountable for anything? if they do anything wrong can we do anything?
2) If USCIS post incorrect and bogus numbers of demand do we have a right or anything to challenge them?
3) If USCIS says that they are doing quarterly spillover and don't do that can we do anything legally?
You are right that it wont make any dent not becasue of the numbers of indians, chinease or mexicans but because we failed to identify the problem at a basic level.
if we have a clear answer and hold on following questions i think then only we can make USCIS/DOS to behave.
1) Is USCIS or DOS accountable for anything? if they do anything wrong can we do anything?
2) If USCIS post incorrect and bogus numbers of demand do we have a right or anything to challenge them?
3) If USCIS says that they are doing quarterly spillover and don't do that can we do anything legally?
wallpaper Dog Cat Friendship
mk26
03-12 08:26 AM
No change for EB2..... India
EB3 moved about three months
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 8 July 2004 8 July 2004
FX 1 Jan 2005 1 Jan 2005
F2A 1 June 2006 1 June 2006
F2B 1 March 2002 1 March 2002
F3 22 May 2001 22 May 2001
F4 1 March 2000 1 March 2000
E1 Current Current
E2 1 February 2005 Current
E3 8 September 2001 1 February 2003
EW 1 June 2001 1 June 2001
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
Source
Cut Off Dates- Consulate General of the United States Mumbai, India (http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html)
This should have been posted in DONOR's forum :)
EB3 moved about three months
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 8 July 2004 8 July 2004
FX 1 Jan 2005 1 Jan 2005
F2A 1 June 2006 1 June 2006
F2B 1 March 2002 1 March 2002
F3 22 May 2001 22 May 2001
F4 1 March 2000 1 March 2000
E1 Current Current
E2 1 February 2005 Current
E3 8 September 2001 1 February 2003
EW 1 June 2001 1 June 2001
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
Source
Cut Off Dates- Consulate General of the United States Mumbai, India (http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html)
This should have been posted in DONOR's forum :)
delhirocks
07-01 10:00 PM
When prominent business houses like Microsoft, Google, Cisco, Oracle and organizations like AILA seem powerless when it comes to influencing senators, lawmakers and government organizations like USCIS and DOS, what can IV team do to change the policies. Sorry I did not mean to criticize, but that's the truth, unfortunately!
What is the alternative?
We all resign to our fate�or try to do whatever little we can
What is the alternative?
We all resign to our fate�or try to do whatever little we can
2011 Dog amp; Cat Wallpapers. Download
nojoke
09-17 10:06 PM
it seems like that ...actually if things get worse and many of us indeed lose jobs ..then I guess the mighty GC will finally become just a silly card.
here is a link which explains why it is not yet over ..I was talking to a friend and he told me that credit card companies, auto loans , commercial loans are in big trouble and could be the next shoe to drop. as for housing ..there was a small light at the end of tunnel ..but it seems that it was big bang collapse of wall street ..
------------
http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/105782/How-We-Got-Here-It-Is-Housing-Stupid
It will probably cause inflation. Eventually they hope that house prices will catch up with the inflation. But a small problem though. The salary is not going to rise to match the housing price. The great benefits of global economy.:)
here is a link which explains why it is not yet over ..I was talking to a friend and he told me that credit card companies, auto loans , commercial loans are in big trouble and could be the next shoe to drop. as for housing ..there was a small light at the end of tunnel ..but it seems that it was big bang collapse of wall street ..
------------
http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/105782/How-We-Got-Here-It-Is-Housing-Stupid
It will probably cause inflation. Eventually they hope that house prices will catch up with the inflation. But a small problem though. The salary is not going to rise to match the housing price. The great benefits of global economy.:)
more...
GCard_Dream
12-28 12:26 PM
Both of the flights were on the same itinerary and were booked through Thai. United was asking for money for international part of the travel because he said that Thai would charge United for the extra weight if United checked in the luggage all the way to Bangkok, which isn't really true because Thai did allow 70 LB then. I am not sure what the regulation is now.
I think you are right that the guy was probably ignorant and didn't really care becasue I wasn't flying United after LA anyways.
i have never had that problem
may have been because you booked those flights separately, if they are on the same itinerary and both were booked through Thai, United should not do that, guess they don't care because you are not continuing on United. btw how could they demand money for the international part of the flight- they are not Thai and their rules don't apply...i also think the person you dealt with was ignorant...
the problem i have seen- you fly into the US and have a connecting flight onwards- if you take it withing 24 hrs ie same day- bags just continue- if not you are stuck with domestic rules. now it no longer matters on american carriers at least, intl allowance has also been decreased to 50 lbs.
I think you are right that the guy was probably ignorant and didn't really care becasue I wasn't flying United after LA anyways.
i have never had that problem
may have been because you booked those flights separately, if they are on the same itinerary and both were booked through Thai, United should not do that, guess they don't care because you are not continuing on United. btw how could they demand money for the international part of the flight- they are not Thai and their rules don't apply...i also think the person you dealt with was ignorant...
the problem i have seen- you fly into the US and have a connecting flight onwards- if you take it withing 24 hrs ie same day- bags just continue- if not you are stuck with domestic rules. now it no longer matters on american carriers at least, intl allowance has also been decreased to 50 lbs.
ajay
11-10 05:20 PM
I will send.
more...
vamsi_poondla
09-26 09:37 AM
There is a link - To write a note to the editor about this article, click here.
I clicked it and send this message to CNN's editor. All of you can do the same...
Dear Editor,
Last week's Legal Immigration Rally at DC is NOT about H1B increase, It is about the plight of over a million High Tech Skilled Legal Immigrants and their families in a probationary limbo of Green Card Processing. It takes 10 to 12 years to get a green card because of low green card numbers, per country limits and lost Green Card numbers due to inefficient processing of USCIS.
Not sure what is the source of your information. But it is ill-researched and is skewed in nature.
yours truly,
Legal Skilled Immigrants from across the World living in USA
I clicked it and send this message to CNN's editor. All of you can do the same...
Dear Editor,
Last week's Legal Immigration Rally at DC is NOT about H1B increase, It is about the plight of over a million High Tech Skilled Legal Immigrants and their families in a probationary limbo of Green Card Processing. It takes 10 to 12 years to get a green card because of low green card numbers, per country limits and lost Green Card numbers due to inefficient processing of USCIS.
Not sure what is the source of your information. But it is ill-researched and is skewed in nature.
yours truly,
Legal Skilled Immigrants from across the World living in USA
2010 sweet sisters love dog and cat
desi3933
03-09 12:49 PM
by the way shusterman predicted ROW will retrogress in his blog found at shusterman.com there was also an IV post about this (abbout somethin like shusterman got a call from clinton or something)..........
so what happened to the quareterly spill over ???????????
spillover happens only when there are more EB based visas available than the number actually issued in the last quarter,
People who don't believe the slow movement should get reality check done.
so what happened to the quareterly spill over ???????????
spillover happens only when there are more EB based visas available than the number actually issued in the last quarter,
People who don't believe the slow movement should get reality check done.
more...
Jaime
09-11 02:48 PM
Come on guys! Make up your minds and attend the rally! You still have time! We'll help you! LET'S GO!!! Let's make history!!!
hair photo or wallpaper
alisa
01-27 09:25 AM
I am glad you posted this.
I will put the numbers in the excel spreadsheet and see what comes out.
But these might give more sensible results than the preposterous wait times that we were getting.
If the average depletion rate for India is 34K per annum, then the wait times would look a lot better I think.
I am assuming that these numbers include the dependents. So, if 34K adjustment of status were awareded, then, roughly speaking, there were 17K primary applicants, and 17K dependents? Am I correct?
Also, for the accumulation rate, when we say that 65K H-1 visas are given out annually, I am assuming that does not include the dependents. Am I right??
FISCAL ------ Employment ------- EB3
YEAR ----- Total ---- INDIA | Total --- India
2000 ----- 111,024 | 15888 | 51,711 | -5567 :IV FY 2000 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2000%20table%20V.pdf)
2001 ----- 186,536 | 41720 | 90,274 | 16405 :IV FY 2001 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2001%20table%20V.pdf)
2002 ----- 171,583 | 41919 | 87,574 | 17428 :IV FY 2002 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2002%20table%20V.pdf)
2003 ----- -83,020 | 20818 | 47,354 | 10680 :IV FY 2003 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20table%20V.pdf)
2004 ----- 157,107 | 39496 | 88,114 | 19962 :IV FY 2004 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY04tableV.pdf)
2005 ----- 242,335 | 47160 |122,130 | 23399 :IV FY 2005 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY05tableV.pdf)
6 yr total - 951,605| 207001| 487,157| 93441
Annual Avg --------- 34500 | -------- 15574
If this trend would have continued. There should not be any MAJOR retrogression problem, but if you remember from the Nov 05 VB. The warning was very clear:
During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
If you plug this number into your analysis the result might be a couple of years of advance for your predictions.
andy
I will put the numbers in the excel spreadsheet and see what comes out.
But these might give more sensible results than the preposterous wait times that we were getting.
If the average depletion rate for India is 34K per annum, then the wait times would look a lot better I think.
I am assuming that these numbers include the dependents. So, if 34K adjustment of status were awareded, then, roughly speaking, there were 17K primary applicants, and 17K dependents? Am I correct?
Also, for the accumulation rate, when we say that 65K H-1 visas are given out annually, I am assuming that does not include the dependents. Am I right??
FISCAL ------ Employment ------- EB3
YEAR ----- Total ---- INDIA | Total --- India
2000 ----- 111,024 | 15888 | 51,711 | -5567 :IV FY 2000 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2000%20table%20V.pdf)
2001 ----- 186,536 | 41720 | 90,274 | 16405 :IV FY 2001 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2001%20table%20V.pdf)
2002 ----- 171,583 | 41919 | 87,574 | 17428 :IV FY 2002 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2002%20table%20V.pdf)
2003 ----- -83,020 | 20818 | 47,354 | 10680 :IV FY 2003 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20table%20V.pdf)
2004 ----- 157,107 | 39496 | 88,114 | 19962 :IV FY 2004 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY04tableV.pdf)
2005 ----- 242,335 | 47160 |122,130 | 23399 :IV FY 2005 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY05tableV.pdf)
6 yr total - 951,605| 207001| 487,157| 93441
Annual Avg --------- 34500 | -------- 15574
If this trend would have continued. There should not be any MAJOR retrogression problem, but if you remember from the Nov 05 VB. The warning was very clear:
During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
If you plug this number into your analysis the result might be a couple of years of advance for your predictions.
andy
more...
rockstart
03-13 09:44 AM
Has any one working on EAD experienced delays in renewals and how does HR department react to such delay's. Least on H1 it is clear that you can work for 8 months on receipt.
hot dog wallpaper, free dog
superdude
08-06 05:04 PM
Got email approvals on our I485 with PD of Mar10 2006 on EB-2.. Was at NSC.. Looks like they are processing beyond the Mar1st cutoff date..
How come your priority date in the profile says Jan 06. And now you say Mar10 got approved. Please share more information on your case.
Priority Date:
Service Center:
Received Date:
Notice Date:
Changeability Country
How come your priority date in the profile says Jan 06. And now you say Mar10 got approved. Please share more information on your case.
Priority Date:
Service Center:
Received Date:
Notice Date:
Changeability Country
more...
house animal desktop wallpaper. girl
chanduv23
11-21 10:31 AM
I was one of the first few folks who moved on, immediately after the yates memo. I am a lot better now and making 2 times what I used to make and also switched to ebb2 as oppossed to eb3 in my old company where situations have never been good.
tattoo cat and dog - animals, cat,
a_yaja
01-31 02:24 PM
I believe it is also illegal to work before getting a social security number. When you are on H4 you dont have a social security number (you have an itin which is not good enough for working). You will not get a social security number unless you have work authorization (i797). H1 will start only after october 1, so you can apply for social security number only after October 1 (i.e if you have i 797), it will take you about 4 to 7 weeks to get ssn. You can work only after getting the ssn. Somebody correct me if i wrong here.
You can work without SSN provided you are authorized to work (H1, EAD, etc) and you have applied for SSN number. The usual practice is to pay for the first two pay cycles, and if you have not received your SSN by then, then the employer will withold wages till SSN arrives. I know this because when I came to the US as a student, I received my first paycheck without SSN. By the second paycheck (I was paid monthly), I had my SSN and so no issues. My roommate, on the other hand did not receive his SSN for nearly 3 1/2 months - the University paid his first two paychecks but did not handout his third. They told him that they would wait till he showed his SSN card to them. After he received his SSN card, they released his paycheck.
Bottom line is, you can work even without SSN card - and if you don't receive your card on time, at most the employer can withold pay until you show them your SSN card. But the employer has to pay you for any work done in legal status and they cannot refuse pay for the period during which your application was pending with SSA.
You can work without SSN provided you are authorized to work (H1, EAD, etc) and you have applied for SSN number. The usual practice is to pay for the first two pay cycles, and if you have not received your SSN by then, then the employer will withold wages till SSN arrives. I know this because when I came to the US as a student, I received my first paycheck without SSN. By the second paycheck (I was paid monthly), I had my SSN and so no issues. My roommate, on the other hand did not receive his SSN for nearly 3 1/2 months - the University paid his first two paychecks but did not handout his third. They told him that they would wait till he showed his SSN card to them. After he received his SSN card, they released his paycheck.
Bottom line is, you can work even without SSN card - and if you don't receive your card on time, at most the employer can withold pay until you show them your SSN card. But the employer has to pay you for any work done in legal status and they cannot refuse pay for the period during which your application was pending with SSA.
more...
pictures cat-and-dog-home-decor-cat-
mirage
02-04 08:51 PM
Guys,
I know ROW country may not like this thread, but look at EB-3 India or China, put yourself in our shoes and than you may realize how unfair this country is. In this unprecedented financial turmoil, I feel there are very remote chances for CIR or any package which increase immigration etc would pass, I am taking this initiative to gather as many people I can and go to washington. Again this is not an IV effort. If you are with me , you can spare some time it could be few days in Washington!! please PM me.
Again we are not creating any organization or anything, we are not going against IV's agenda. This is also a part of IV's agenda, but for now our sole agenda will be to bring a 2 line bill to remove country quota or increase the country cap(whichever can fly).
PS : For EB-3 India, unless country cap is removed or increased, you can presume you GC application dead forever...For EB-2 India It'll be a long journey for people with PDs sooner than 2005...
Thanks
I know ROW country may not like this thread, but look at EB-3 India or China, put yourself in our shoes and than you may realize how unfair this country is. In this unprecedented financial turmoil, I feel there are very remote chances for CIR or any package which increase immigration etc would pass, I am taking this initiative to gather as many people I can and go to washington. Again this is not an IV effort. If you are with me , you can spare some time it could be few days in Washington!! please PM me.
Again we are not creating any organization or anything, we are not going against IV's agenda. This is also a part of IV's agenda, but for now our sole agenda will be to bring a 2 line bill to remove country quota or increase the country cap(whichever can fly).
PS : For EB-3 India, unless country cap is removed or increased, you can presume you GC application dead forever...For EB-2 India It'll be a long journey for people with PDs sooner than 2005...
Thanks
dresses Cat-amp;-Dog Wallpapers. Download
krishmunn
05-23 02:25 PM
MBA is not for everyone and in addition, an Online MBA doesn't have any value. .
Agree with your first part ---- MBA (or any Masters) is not for everyone -- you are a living example :)
For second part of your post (online MBA does not have any value) ---- you are probably still living in stone age -- BTW, did you hear of something called google :)
Agree with your first part ---- MBA (or any Masters) is not for everyone -- you are a living example :)
For second part of your post (online MBA does not have any value) ---- you are probably still living in stone age -- BTW, did you hear of something called google :)
more...
makeup Cat And Dog Wallpaper,
Jbpvisa
07-12 11:01 PM
http://www.murthy.com/chertoff_murthy.html
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
It was a pleasure and an honor to meet with you and to share my views during your panel discussion at the Harvard Worldwide Congress June 15, 2007 in Washington, D.C. I understand and appreciate that the responsibility vested in you as the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is no simple task. We applaud your service to our nation. After meeting with you personally and speaking with you, I am more convinced than ever that you will do the right thing for our country and for the people you serve, both in terms of securing our nation and in being the leader of the DHS, with over 20 federal agencies reporting to you, including the USCIS.
Purpose of this Letter
I am writing to you at this time to address recent actions by the USCIS to refuse to accept I-485 adjustment of status filing during July 2007 that are having significant impact upon the reliability of the legal immigration system in this country, as well as impacting legal foreign nationals and the many U.S. businesses that rely upon the work they perform.
USCIS Decision Contradicts its Long Standing Procedure
In contradiction of its own long standing policy and procedure, we understand that the USCIS, through its Director Gonzalez, contacted the U.S. Department of State (DOS) and requested or required the DOS to issue a �revised� Visa Bulletin on July 2, 2007. The USCIS then used the revised Bulletin to refuse to accept I-485 filings. This decision deprives thousands of foreign nationals, and their families, of the rights and privileges that are attendant to the I-485 filing.
These Highly Skilled Professionals Followed All the Rules and Believe in the American Dream
These professionals and their employers have played by our established immigration laws and rules. The vast majority of these thousands of potential applicants has a U.S. employer corporation, university or other business as a sponsor for permanent resident status. The exceptions from an employer are for those who are considered of �extraordinary ability� or whose work is in our �national interest.� Many of these applicants have completed their Bachelor�s, Master�s and/or PhD programs from U.S. universities. They believe in the opportunities of this great nation and strive to achieve the American Dream by following all the rules, working hard, paying taxes, and striving to do the right thing. They believe in this country, and rely upon our systems, our government, and our processes. Unfortunately, on July 2, 2007, we let them down. The USCIS abandoned its own system and long standing practices. This happened through manipulation of the use of visa numbers, insisting upon the issuance of a "revised visa bulletin," and instituting the USCIS policy of rejecting every employment-based I-485 that could have been filed during the month of July 2007.
USCIS Decision Denies Substantive and Procedural Rights to Highly Skilled Workers and Their Employers - Many of Whom Have Already Suffered and Will Suffer Further Harm/ Injury
Not only does the USCIS' action harm the individuals and employers involved, it undermines the reliability of our entire employment-based immigration system. The unexpected decision of the USCIS to refuse to accept any I-485 filings denies both substantive and procedural due process rights to would be applicants across the U.S. All of these applicants are employment based (EB) applicants who are primarily highly skilled professionals or experienced workers, that the U.S. seeks in high demand areas, including: science, technology, medicine, research, business, academia, and education.
The harm in not accepting the filings in July 2007 goes beyond mere delay. In reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin, starting in mid-June 2007, these applicants took the steps necessary to prepare their filings and made decisions in reliance upon the USCIS accepting their filings during July 2007. In order to be present in the U.S., as required for these filings, many applicants and their families canceled travel plans abroad or arranged to return to the U.S. on short notice missing family weddings and other important life events. They undertook medical examinations and paid for the required tests which must accompany the I-485 filings. (The USCIS had refused to waive this requirement even temporarily.) They hired lawyers to process their paperwork; they arranged to obtain documents from abroad on an expedited basis, involving foreign lawyers and foreign governments, all at a significant cost. They made employment and other strategic immigration related decisions to be able to process their I-485s for them and their families. Some canceled visa appointments at the consulates, or withdrew other immigration filings, all in reliance upon the USCIS accepting I-485 filings during July 2007.
The applicants and their employers lose the rights and privileges that accompany the filing of the I-485. These include eligibility for the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and Advanced Parole (AP), thus eliminating the need for the individuals and their employers to make the filings necessary to maintain a non-immigrant, temporary status. These same ancillary benefits also apply to dependant family members. Most importantly, those that have not filed I-485s are not eligible for "portability" benefits under the �American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act� of Oct. 2000 or �AC21� as it is sometimes referred to. This ineligibility for AC21 portability forces career stagnation. This is to the detriment of the individual as well as their sponsoring employer. Under AC21 portability, employers can promote and/or relocate employees to positions that are the same or similar job classifications as the positions for which they were initially sponsored. Individuals can utilize these provisions for career advancement, and for entrepreneurship. Given that the green card process often spans many years, AC21 portability allows the necessary flexibility to permit the case to continue, to accommodate changes in the sponsoring employer's needs as well as opportunities that are specific to the beneficiary.
The list of stories of individuals and families harmed by the USCIS decision is endless. We have for example, many spouses who will now be separated potentially for years on end, as one received a green card during the USCIS' June "rush," while the other is now ineligible to file.
The USCIS decision also created a burden on U.S. employers. Further delays in the green card process mean that, at best, U.S. employers have to continue to file temporary petitions to keep their workforce in the U.S. legally; at worst, it jeopardizes the availability of this needed highly educated and skilled workforce.
USCIS Motive is to Collect Millions of Additional Filing Fees
Many are baffled by the USCIS decision to reject I-485 filings in July, and its use of the �revised� Visa Bulletin as an excuse. The suspected motive is the collection of the substantially higher filing fees that will be generated after July 27, 2007. This entire incident sends the wrong message about our government, our policies and our legal system reeking of greed and inconsistency. Even the appearance of such impropriety undermines our system.
.................
continue
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
It was a pleasure and an honor to meet with you and to share my views during your panel discussion at the Harvard Worldwide Congress June 15, 2007 in Washington, D.C. I understand and appreciate that the responsibility vested in you as the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is no simple task. We applaud your service to our nation. After meeting with you personally and speaking with you, I am more convinced than ever that you will do the right thing for our country and for the people you serve, both in terms of securing our nation and in being the leader of the DHS, with over 20 federal agencies reporting to you, including the USCIS.
Purpose of this Letter
I am writing to you at this time to address recent actions by the USCIS to refuse to accept I-485 adjustment of status filing during July 2007 that are having significant impact upon the reliability of the legal immigration system in this country, as well as impacting legal foreign nationals and the many U.S. businesses that rely upon the work they perform.
USCIS Decision Contradicts its Long Standing Procedure
In contradiction of its own long standing policy and procedure, we understand that the USCIS, through its Director Gonzalez, contacted the U.S. Department of State (DOS) and requested or required the DOS to issue a �revised� Visa Bulletin on July 2, 2007. The USCIS then used the revised Bulletin to refuse to accept I-485 filings. This decision deprives thousands of foreign nationals, and their families, of the rights and privileges that are attendant to the I-485 filing.
These Highly Skilled Professionals Followed All the Rules and Believe in the American Dream
These professionals and their employers have played by our established immigration laws and rules. The vast majority of these thousands of potential applicants has a U.S. employer corporation, university or other business as a sponsor for permanent resident status. The exceptions from an employer are for those who are considered of �extraordinary ability� or whose work is in our �national interest.� Many of these applicants have completed their Bachelor�s, Master�s and/or PhD programs from U.S. universities. They believe in the opportunities of this great nation and strive to achieve the American Dream by following all the rules, working hard, paying taxes, and striving to do the right thing. They believe in this country, and rely upon our systems, our government, and our processes. Unfortunately, on July 2, 2007, we let them down. The USCIS abandoned its own system and long standing practices. This happened through manipulation of the use of visa numbers, insisting upon the issuance of a "revised visa bulletin," and instituting the USCIS policy of rejecting every employment-based I-485 that could have been filed during the month of July 2007.
USCIS Decision Denies Substantive and Procedural Rights to Highly Skilled Workers and Their Employers - Many of Whom Have Already Suffered and Will Suffer Further Harm/ Injury
Not only does the USCIS' action harm the individuals and employers involved, it undermines the reliability of our entire employment-based immigration system. The unexpected decision of the USCIS to refuse to accept any I-485 filings denies both substantive and procedural due process rights to would be applicants across the U.S. All of these applicants are employment based (EB) applicants who are primarily highly skilled professionals or experienced workers, that the U.S. seeks in high demand areas, including: science, technology, medicine, research, business, academia, and education.
The harm in not accepting the filings in July 2007 goes beyond mere delay. In reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin, starting in mid-June 2007, these applicants took the steps necessary to prepare their filings and made decisions in reliance upon the USCIS accepting their filings during July 2007. In order to be present in the U.S., as required for these filings, many applicants and their families canceled travel plans abroad or arranged to return to the U.S. on short notice missing family weddings and other important life events. They undertook medical examinations and paid for the required tests which must accompany the I-485 filings. (The USCIS had refused to waive this requirement even temporarily.) They hired lawyers to process their paperwork; they arranged to obtain documents from abroad on an expedited basis, involving foreign lawyers and foreign governments, all at a significant cost. They made employment and other strategic immigration related decisions to be able to process their I-485s for them and their families. Some canceled visa appointments at the consulates, or withdrew other immigration filings, all in reliance upon the USCIS accepting I-485 filings during July 2007.
The applicants and their employers lose the rights and privileges that accompany the filing of the I-485. These include eligibility for the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and Advanced Parole (AP), thus eliminating the need for the individuals and their employers to make the filings necessary to maintain a non-immigrant, temporary status. These same ancillary benefits also apply to dependant family members. Most importantly, those that have not filed I-485s are not eligible for "portability" benefits under the �American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act� of Oct. 2000 or �AC21� as it is sometimes referred to. This ineligibility for AC21 portability forces career stagnation. This is to the detriment of the individual as well as their sponsoring employer. Under AC21 portability, employers can promote and/or relocate employees to positions that are the same or similar job classifications as the positions for which they were initially sponsored. Individuals can utilize these provisions for career advancement, and for entrepreneurship. Given that the green card process often spans many years, AC21 portability allows the necessary flexibility to permit the case to continue, to accommodate changes in the sponsoring employer's needs as well as opportunities that are specific to the beneficiary.
The list of stories of individuals and families harmed by the USCIS decision is endless. We have for example, many spouses who will now be separated potentially for years on end, as one received a green card during the USCIS' June "rush," while the other is now ineligible to file.
The USCIS decision also created a burden on U.S. employers. Further delays in the green card process mean that, at best, U.S. employers have to continue to file temporary petitions to keep their workforce in the U.S. legally; at worst, it jeopardizes the availability of this needed highly educated and skilled workforce.
USCIS Motive is to Collect Millions of Additional Filing Fees
Many are baffled by the USCIS decision to reject I-485 filings in July, and its use of the �revised� Visa Bulletin as an excuse. The suspected motive is the collection of the substantially higher filing fees that will be generated after July 27, 2007. This entire incident sends the wrong message about our government, our policies and our legal system reeking of greed and inconsistency. Even the appearance of such impropriety undermines our system.
.................
continue
girlfriend hot funny cats wallpaper.
gsc999
04-23 02:55 PM
Thank you Nor Cal members, on behalf of 1 member who was unable to attend. I encourage those not already part of the Nor Cal Yahoo group to join it.
There are roughly 10 members trying very hard to boost activity without our section, and it encourages me that there were around 50 or so representatives at the meeting.
Stay active, join your chapter!
-------------
Northern California members we need volunteers for an event on Wednesday (04/25) in Campbell @ 1:00 p.m. for an hour. This is much more interactive event. No undocumented immigration issues just EB related issues. Please join the yahoo group and get involved. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice/
Lets keep the momentum going.
There are roughly 10 members trying very hard to boost activity without our section, and it encourages me that there were around 50 or so representatives at the meeting.
Stay active, join your chapter!
-------------
Northern California members we need volunteers for an event on Wednesday (04/25) in Campbell @ 1:00 p.m. for an hour. This is much more interactive event. No undocumented immigration issues just EB related issues. Please join the yahoo group and get involved. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice/
Lets keep the momentum going.
hairstyles wallpaper cat and dog.
logiclife
01-30 01:34 PM
You can look for reviews at 3 locations.
Here, on immigrationportal.com and on desicrunch.com
Over here and on Immigrationportal.com do a search on forums by typing your company name.
On Desicrunch, I dont know how to look, dont go there very often.
Here, on immigrationportal.com and on desicrunch.com
Over here and on Immigrationportal.com do a search on forums by typing your company name.
On Desicrunch, I dont know how to look, dont go there very often.
satishku_2000
12-27 01:50 AM
I travelled in last november thru hongkong. You dont need a transit visa but I felt humiliated with the treatment. Hope you know what I mean.
And on another note My sis and her husband have been Bank Of America customers for a long time and they have decent amount of funds in their account .Their mortgage application was rejected by BOA because they dont have a GC only to be accepted by other lender and better APR on their loan :)
I like this country and capitalism ...God bless America.
And on another note My sis and her husband have been Bank Of America customers for a long time and they have decent amount of funds in their account .Their mortgage application was rejected by BOA because they dont have a GC only to be accepted by other lender and better APR on their loan :)
I like this country and capitalism ...God bless America.
pointlesswait
03-11 11:04 PM
kelaaaaaa....re kela..
No comments:
Post a Comment