baburob2
03-09 10:03 AM
i believe the way it is going to proceed is if they don't have time to discuss everything they will discuss the rest in the senate floor. however if the conflicting ones like illegal aliens one, enforcement ones are resolved then this bill might go to the floor and the remaining ones would be discussed. hence if till tile 3 is over then this bill might be considered for vote on teh senate floor. this is my understnading based on what i heard.
wallpaper hairstyles long hair with side
HumJumboHathuJumbo
09-10 11:36 AM
I, for one, am happy with this Oct visa bulletin. This is how it should be. First give GCs to all those with < 2003 PD. You guys with 2006 and 2007 pd should be glad you even got to file I-485 and EAD. What are you bitching about?.
diptam
07-06 10:20 AM
Nixstor,
AILA's publication itself said that checks were not done... Its evident on also. If you refrain from spicing up things its never going to come up in media. Who cares if 500 mm immigrants are backlogged ?
You are saying that authorities will take retaliatory measures for saying something that really bad happened. Then dont even talk about lawsuit etc... Do you think a lawsuit aginst USCIS/DOS is going to please them very much ???
Take either Boat1 or Boat2 -- Please do not sail keeping your foot in two boats. I apologize if i sound aggressive but it is what it is. Doing a work
in weekend of 48 hours (consuming 25000 visas) which takes even more
than 48 days definitely involves bypassing CRITICAL checks !!
Truth is a truth - neither you or me or anyone can alter it.
Thanks!
What the hell on earth is this? Do you know for sure they have ignored it? Do not add masala to the existing crap. Do you understand the consequences of these kind of spiced up stuff? We all would be sulking in the security check for ever, if DHS gets pissed off or gets a congressional hearing and the authorities get lambasted over this. You are seeing how doctors are being implicated in UK and all over. Security is the most important thing right now on this planet and western world is agog over security. I dont know from where Greg Siskind and Jay Solomon got the tip off. They tipped each of their hats off and put the story in our brains to run the show. Security is not a Joke. Do not make it a bigger issue unless you dont know whether it really has happened. The consequences can be pretty dangerous to the extent of revoking all the issued GC's in the past 20 days, if congress gets high on this. I dont know what lawyers want, but my understanding is none of us want to have negative consequences of this issue.
No matter who screwed up, we should be conveying the following message after we say that USCIS/DOS goofed up.
"The root cause of the situation is the inability of
a) DOS/USCIS to recapture the visa numbers from previous years
b) to carry forward the unused numbers for atleast one year
If congress makes the needed legislative changes to solve the above two issues, USCIS/DOS will not be in the ugliest predicaments like they are in right now"
Its our choice to make USCIS/DOS our enemies or we get compassionate to the situation considering how arcane the current laws are. We agree or not, we have to work with them going forward. Just that they are down and we are on a bashing spree right now doesnt mean that it will be situation for ever.
AILA's publication itself said that checks were not done... Its evident on also. If you refrain from spicing up things its never going to come up in media. Who cares if 500 mm immigrants are backlogged ?
You are saying that authorities will take retaliatory measures for saying something that really bad happened. Then dont even talk about lawsuit etc... Do you think a lawsuit aginst USCIS/DOS is going to please them very much ???
Take either Boat1 or Boat2 -- Please do not sail keeping your foot in two boats. I apologize if i sound aggressive but it is what it is. Doing a work
in weekend of 48 hours (consuming 25000 visas) which takes even more
than 48 days definitely involves bypassing CRITICAL checks !!
Truth is a truth - neither you or me or anyone can alter it.
Thanks!
What the hell on earth is this? Do you know for sure they have ignored it? Do not add masala to the existing crap. Do you understand the consequences of these kind of spiced up stuff? We all would be sulking in the security check for ever, if DHS gets pissed off or gets a congressional hearing and the authorities get lambasted over this. You are seeing how doctors are being implicated in UK and all over. Security is the most important thing right now on this planet and western world is agog over security. I dont know from where Greg Siskind and Jay Solomon got the tip off. They tipped each of their hats off and put the story in our brains to run the show. Security is not a Joke. Do not make it a bigger issue unless you dont know whether it really has happened. The consequences can be pretty dangerous to the extent of revoking all the issued GC's in the past 20 days, if congress gets high on this. I dont know what lawyers want, but my understanding is none of us want to have negative consequences of this issue.
No matter who screwed up, we should be conveying the following message after we say that USCIS/DOS goofed up.
"The root cause of the situation is the inability of
a) DOS/USCIS to recapture the visa numbers from previous years
b) to carry forward the unused numbers for atleast one year
If congress makes the needed legislative changes to solve the above two issues, USCIS/DOS will not be in the ugliest predicaments like they are in right now"
Its our choice to make USCIS/DOS our enemies or we get compassionate to the situation considering how arcane the current laws are. We agree or not, we have to work with them going forward. Just that they are down and we are on a bashing spree right now doesnt mean that it will be situation for ever.
2011 New Long Emo Haircut with Side
nk2006
10-16 04:29 PM
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases – especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer – and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications – ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD’s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to: Ombudsman
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant’s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant’s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases – especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer – and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications – ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD’s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to: Ombudsman
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant’s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant’s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
more...
vin13
02-23 01:55 PM
Processing dates for 485 seems to have greatly improved at NSC. Hopefully now they start issueing based on the priority date.
swo
07-20 06:41 PM
...welcome to the new nightmare, someone did say something about the grass been green on the other side..now that we are on the other side we wait for 485 to be current while we renew EAD/AP each year, fingerprint every 15 months and aviod the namecheck black hole...maybe this is what they(uscis) wanted after all...a steady income stream...good luck :)
Funny! And we screamed to be there :)
Funny! And we screamed to be there :)
more...
rahulpaper
09-13 03:37 PM
Thanks Pappu
Pls see the first post on this thread for directions and the URL
Pls see the first post on this thread for directions and the URL
2010 side bangs hairstyles.
BlueCard
10-01 12:13 PM
If this news is true, then we can see "wild" approvals before the end of September. Some people with complete cases may overtake others.
Mine was probably such a wild case. With a PD of DEC2004 Eb3 ROW, I-140 approved in 2006, filed I-485 in June (ND: June 27), FP: August 1st, "Notice sent welcoming permanent resident" on September 17th, received my card 4 days later, even before the notices. Less than 3 months total processing time, end to end.
I guess they just picked the low hanging fruit and fast-tracked like crazy to waste as little visa numbers as possible. But still not fast enough...
Mine was probably such a wild case. With a PD of DEC2004 Eb3 ROW, I-140 approved in 2006, filed I-485 in June (ND: June 27), FP: August 1st, "Notice sent welcoming permanent resident" on September 17th, received my card 4 days later, even before the notices. Less than 3 months total processing time, end to end.
I guess they just picked the low hanging fruit and fast-tracked like crazy to waste as little visa numbers as possible. But still not fast enough...
more...
AllVNeedGcPc
03-22 03:23 PM
:(
@AllVNeedGCPC : Did you get any updates on I-485
Thanks!
@AllVNeedGCPC : Did you get any updates on I-485
Thanks!
hair long hair layers side bangs.
Dhundhun
09-10 02:09 PM
EB2-I PD announcement, which is a black hole coincided with CERN Big Bang Machine. After watching History Channel (they explained details, how this CERN Colloider can create dark matters and black hole) in mid night, PD announcment turned morning bad.
USCIS is as chaotic as Big Bang and its announcements hits like Black Hole.
It was so bad news, that I could not see any further, what is happening to others.
USCIS is as chaotic as Big Bang and its announcements hits like Black Hole.
It was so bad news, that I could not see any further, what is happening to others.
more...
jk333
07-23 01:47 PM
Just sharing so that this encorages more participation..
Our company fund drive is at 12500$ (in 4 days).. We're trying to hit 15K
by Wednesday, which I hope we'll be able to race past.
Any other company wants to challenge our Drive? :)
Hi guys,
I am sure every company would have their own 'stuck in gc process' alias.
Please start an IV fund drive, so that you can do this on a company basis.
Theres one going on in mine..and guess what..20 contributions in a couple of hours.
Our company fund drive is at 12500$ (in 4 days).. We're trying to hit 15K
by Wednesday, which I hope we'll be able to race past.
Any other company wants to challenge our Drive? :)
Hi guys,
I am sure every company would have their own 'stuck in gc process' alias.
Please start an IV fund drive, so that you can do this on a company basis.
Theres one going on in mine..and guess what..20 contributions in a couple of hours.
hot Long Hairstyles With Layers
rcahk
04-05 09:00 PM
My PD Oct 2001. 45 letter received October 2005. No news at Apr.5 2006:o
more...
house Side Bangs Hairstyles – So
yoda
09-13 03:00 PM
Sent this to Boston Globe and the largest TV Channel of NH (WMUR Channel 9)
tattoo long hair layers side bangs.
minimalist
09-10 12:27 PM
I don't know if anybody has noticed it but the dates for EB-2 for VB October 2007 was April 1, 2004 and for VB October 2008 is April 1, 2003. That is a retrogression of 1 year - not good. :mad:
You see in the real world everything moved 1 year ahead from October 2007 to October 2008. So in USCIS world also it moved by 1year.
You see in the real world everything moved 1 year ahead from October 2007 to October 2008. So in USCIS world also it moved by 1year.
more...
pictures Do Hairstyles, Long Hair
nixstor
04-30 03:07 PM
SO IF they move PD's to 2006 dec then there is aposibility that all 2006 pd 's get GC's before @001 pd's.:mad:
Aytes said " We are moving towards processing based on the shift in priority dates"
what I understood is Aytes is talking about the sweep USCIS is conducting as soon as the VB released. The sweep was mentioned by a lot of service center personnel when members were calling for case status
Aytes said " We are moving towards processing based on the shift in priority dates"
what I understood is Aytes is talking about the sweep USCIS is conducting as soon as the VB released. The sweep was mentioned by a lot of service center personnel when members were calling for case status
dresses long side fringe hairstyles
ca_gc
12-27 08:17 PM
My case is not yet approved, I Filed on Aug 01 st, Vermont Service Center.
Can you really go for H1 stamping when you are coming back on AP.
As far as I know, you should not use H1 at port of entry while coming back, if you do that your green card will be aboundend. Gurus please currect.
If you are not coming back on H1, then why are you going for stamping?
I think , if your I-485 is approved while you are out of US, then you are not supposed to enter on H1. Till that time, you can use AP to enter US, if you prefer.
Can you really go for H1 stamping when you are coming back on AP.
As far as I know, you should not use H1 at port of entry while coming back, if you do that your green card will be aboundend. Gurus please currect.
If you are not coming back on H1, then why are you going for stamping?
I think , if your I-485 is approved while you are out of US, then you are not supposed to enter on H1. Till that time, you can use AP to enter US, if you prefer.
more...
makeup long hair layered side bangs.
santb1975
05-27 11:56 PM
still under 20k :confused:
girlfriend Hairstyles , Long Images
gctest
09-14 02:40 PM
Well ...well ..well.... All this opposition tells me that I am on the right track along with all the people who support this cause.
Infact, we had seen similar opposition when we spoke against labor substitution in 2004 on immigrationcom website.
But labor substitution was stopped and DOL is currently auditing/investigating so many who used it. If you used labor substitution, you mostly should find that your I-140 is not getting adjudicated these days.
Interfiling while being the same company is totally illegal. Its tantamounts to fabricating the job requirements or asking you HR to "create a job position".
I whole heartedly support all EB3s who were qualified for EB2 when they filed their EB3 and we will keep this clause in mind when preparing the lawsuit.
Rest.. good luck.. you might even get your I-140 (or GC) approved based on PD porting ... but we will make sure that you get investigated eventually and the "incorrect decision" overturned.
Infact, we had seen similar opposition when we spoke against labor substitution in 2004 on immigrationcom website.
But labor substitution was stopped and DOL is currently auditing/investigating so many who used it. If you used labor substitution, you mostly should find that your I-140 is not getting adjudicated these days.
Interfiling while being the same company is totally illegal. Its tantamounts to fabricating the job requirements or asking you HR to "create a job position".
I whole heartedly support all EB3s who were qualified for EB2 when they filed their EB3 and we will keep this clause in mind when preparing the lawsuit.
Rest.. good luck.. you might even get your I-140 (or GC) approved based on PD porting ... but we will make sure that you get investigated eventually and the "incorrect decision" overturned.
hairstyles long hair with side fringe
digital2k
05-13 02:34 PM
Don't wait any longer
Everyone must call
Thank You for helping Yourslef
Everyone must call
Thank You for helping Yourslef
ags123
03-02 01:47 PM
Finally 7 more days to go :)
One more consistent fact for the last few bulletins is that it is published on the dot on the monday after the first week.
In this case March 9th.
Also another interesting titbit I found was VB moves only by dates
1st
8th
15th and
22nd
When the VB is 1st Feb 05 it covers dates 1st to 7th , when it is 8th 8th to 14th and so on.
One more consistent fact for the last few bulletins is that it is published on the dot on the monday after the first week.
In this case March 9th.
Also another interesting titbit I found was VB moves only by dates
1st
8th
15th and
22nd
When the VB is 1st Feb 05 it covers dates 1st to 7th , when it is 8th 8th to 14th and so on.
chisinau
07-23 03:06 AM
You are welcome!
I am not sure about DS230, my attorney did it around 27 - 29 of June.
I am not sure about DS230, my attorney did it around 27 - 29 of June.
No comments:
Post a Comment