trd
07-20 10:04 AM
BTW how did Obama vote?????
He did not voted
He did not voted
wallpaper Vampire Smiley Face Post Cards
gova123
08-02 05:41 PM
Bumping ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
SkilledWorker4GC
07-15 10:37 AM
Money raised in a day = $1014.00
Lets raise $2000 today.
Please keep track of $$ raised. It helps motivate ppl. to come forward
Lets raise $2000 today.
Please keep track of $$ raised. It helps motivate ppl. to come forward
2011 The smiley face.
CaliHoneB
03-05 05:44 PM
I don't have any LUDs on mine even though I opened an SR and requested infopass appointment for my delayed EAD
more...
Ramba
10-21 06:18 PM
Thanks Ramba for your insights.
Whatever the reasons - its apparent USCIS is not following the AC21 regulations and it is not fair. I believe, AC21 regulations are made with an objective of improving immigration rules for 21st century (and thus the name American Competetiveness for 21st century) and provide some mobility for the applicants while their GC applications are pending. The delay in application processing is still relevant (actually its more severe) - irrespective of whether its caused by processing or because of lack of visa numbers. AC21 regulations never mentioned about the origin of delay or the longivity of applicant with original company. Changing interpretation of a rule they made, that too without notice is unfair and maybe even unlawful.
So far I was thinking that its a case of misinformed IO rejecting I485 once they see a I140 revocation. But rejecting MTR on the grounds that employee has left the company on his/her own and so does not have intent of continuing in the job is just plain twisting of their own rules. And we need a much bigger effort - if its a case of a few misinformed USCIS employees incorrectly rejecting I485 - then it could have been fixed with a low key effort that we are doing. We are seeing more rejections based on unknown "interpretations" - and even MTR getting rejected - it kind of gives a feeling that they have a bigger agenda here and we need to fight on a bigger scale.
If a guy lawfully changed the job after 180 days of 485 filing, it is remain valid even if employer revokes already approved 140. Only solution to overcome this MTR, is taking this to court. In the case of dispute between employee and employer regarding "intent", the employee will have more leverage if he had a considerable period of employment relationship sponsor.
Whatever the reasons - its apparent USCIS is not following the AC21 regulations and it is not fair. I believe, AC21 regulations are made with an objective of improving immigration rules for 21st century (and thus the name American Competetiveness for 21st century) and provide some mobility for the applicants while their GC applications are pending. The delay in application processing is still relevant (actually its more severe) - irrespective of whether its caused by processing or because of lack of visa numbers. AC21 regulations never mentioned about the origin of delay or the longivity of applicant with original company. Changing interpretation of a rule they made, that too without notice is unfair and maybe even unlawful.
So far I was thinking that its a case of misinformed IO rejecting I485 once they see a I140 revocation. But rejecting MTR on the grounds that employee has left the company on his/her own and so does not have intent of continuing in the job is just plain twisting of their own rules. And we need a much bigger effort - if its a case of a few misinformed USCIS employees incorrectly rejecting I485 - then it could have been fixed with a low key effort that we are doing. We are seeing more rejections based on unknown "interpretations" - and even MTR getting rejected - it kind of gives a feeling that they have a bigger agenda here and we need to fight on a bigger scale.
If a guy lawfully changed the job after 180 days of 485 filing, it is remain valid even if employer revokes already approved 140. Only solution to overcome this MTR, is taking this to court. In the case of dispute between employee and employer regarding "intent", the employee will have more leverage if he had a considerable period of employment relationship sponsor.
willwin
04-01 04:34 PM
First of all why do U wanna ask that? Its an employment based visa that ur GC is based on. So, ur employer shud ask that. Why are u asking IVans to do something which is not in their control??? I keep getting red and dont mind if I'm banned. But excuse me...u r misleading IVans. My point is this. We can protest, rally based on the delay. Thats pretty much we can do. Inquiring into a Government agency's internal affairs is none of ur business. And I repeat u dont have any rights to do that as u have NO direct link to USCIS. U have applied thru ur employer and ur employer shud speak for u. Do u even get it? Ur statements and arguments have no logic whatsoever and misleading.
I tend to disagree on this. Sorry about that. What you are saying may be true until the case is in LC phase or perhaps, I140 phase. Beyond that, I BELIEVE (correct me if I ma wrong and dont jump on me) that the individual can deal with USCIS as far as queries are concerned. May be, if there was a RFE, then the employer/attorney should dela with. But not queries.
If not, why is USCIS even responding to queries on 485. Are they doing something that they shouldn't be doing??
I tend to disagree on this. Sorry about that. What you are saying may be true until the case is in LC phase or perhaps, I140 phase. Beyond that, I BELIEVE (correct me if I ma wrong and dont jump on me) that the individual can deal with USCIS as far as queries are concerned. May be, if there was a RFE, then the employer/attorney should dela with. But not queries.
If not, why is USCIS even responding to queries on 485. Are they doing something that they shouldn't be doing??
more...
lonedesi
08-08 08:22 AM
People who have been waiting for I-140 approvals from TSC & NSC and those filed during Jun-Aug 07, please join this campaign to make it effective. Unless people who are suffering, actively participate in this campaign, we will not be able to achieve anything. Its still not too late...get those letters (modify to your personal situation) and get those DHS Form 7001 completed and mail them out soon. We need to act now, instead of just expressing our frustration on the forums...fight for yourself, no one will do it for you. If not, USCIS with the idiotic rules, will our petitions still pending even one year from today...for some or other reason.
My sincere thanks to members who have already mailed the documents. Please leave a comment on this thread, so that we have an idea about how many people actually took the time to send it out.
My sincere thanks to members who have already mailed the documents. Please leave a comment on this thread, so that we have an idea about how many people actually took the time to send it out.
2010 Smiley Face
gcsim
06-10 07:02 AM
yeah just checked....EB3 'U' and EB2 1 April 2004 :-( more waiting ......nothing like last July.God help us.
more...
amitjoey
05-13 09:45 AM
2 more days. Please call. those who have not please help.
hair Smiley Face Royalty Free Stock
Green.Tech
06-12 11:29 AM
got 1 friend to donate yest., he should be posting the receipt Id soon.. I have the ID but didn't wanna post myself to double count.
Guys, please persuade your friends and coworkers.
Thanks.
Good work, add78!
Guys, please persuade your friends and coworkers.
Thanks.
Good work, add78!
more...
lifesucksinUS
08-13 03:56 PM
I am sorry but is the September visa bulliten out? What is the status for EB2..
Thnx
Thnx
hot Green smiley face symbol
pmamp
07-12 10:36 AM
Where did you get your DL renewed? Which state? :confused:
Hoosier land - Indiana.
Hoosier land - Indiana.
more...
house scenery full smiley face
nk2006
07-05 12:17 PM
Bill Clinton & Hillary Clinton is coming to TANA in Washington.. i am from bay area.. i know lot of people are going this.. please take a print out and talk personally, explain our problems.. Please Thanks
I suggested this other day - nobody responded. Please anyone attending TANA can you please contact organizers and see if they can arrange couple minutes of Hillary's time to highlight this issue.
I suggested this other day - nobody responded. Please anyone attending TANA can you please contact organizers and see if they can arrange couple minutes of Hillary's time to highlight this issue.
tattoo evil smiley face!
I_need_GC
03-14 09:53 AM
:confused:Dear All,
I am still on H1 (not utilized EAD), the visa on my passport expired last year. Planning to visit India next week, should I be getting a visa stamped or use AP?
APPRECIATE INPUTS FROM THE EXPERIENCED/SIMILAR SITUATION. Any USCIS link will also help.
Regards
Well my friend people here will tell you that once you use AP your h1B is not valid any more thats not true. I confirmed this with 2 Immigration officers and my attorney. AP and h1b have nothing to do with each other. One is an entry permit the other is to work with a specific company. no link so use you AP at re entry when IO ask why did you go to india don't say vacation. thats all.
I am still on H1 (not utilized EAD), the visa on my passport expired last year. Planning to visit India next week, should I be getting a visa stamped or use AP?
APPRECIATE INPUTS FROM THE EXPERIENCED/SIMILAR SITUATION. Any USCIS link will also help.
Regards
Well my friend people here will tell you that once you use AP your h1B is not valid any more thats not true. I confirmed this with 2 Immigration officers and my attorney. AP and h1b have nothing to do with each other. One is an entry permit the other is to work with a specific company. no link so use you AP at re entry when IO ask why did you go to india don't say vacation. thats all.
more...
pictures smiley face clip art images.
singhsa3
07-20 04:15 PM
You forgot to attach the link!
As per this link, there is premium processing for EAD. I think whoever needs immediate can take advantage of this instead of waitinf for months
As per this link, there is premium processing for EAD. I think whoever needs immediate can take advantage of this instead of waitinf for months
dresses Sad smiley faces
gc28262
03-06 05:44 PM
.................................................. ....................
.................................................. .................................................. .......
Also, current Economy may force them to use larger number of FB visas for EBs for next few years.
.................................................. .....
Could you explain this point. Why would lesser number of FB visas be issued in a bad economy ?
Does economy state has any relation to FB visas ?
For pre-adjudication, visa availability or the chances of PD becoming current is not necessary. They can pre-adjudicate based on receipt date.
My guess:
Probably they are processing all employment based applications right away so that they can prepare for CIR 2009. I guess Obama will take CIR this year itself as he has a very high approval rating and lot of goodwill now.
.................................................. .................................................. .......
Also, current Economy may force them to use larger number of FB visas for EBs for next few years.
.................................................. .....
Could you explain this point. Why would lesser number of FB visas be issued in a bad economy ?
Does economy state has any relation to FB visas ?
For pre-adjudication, visa availability or the chances of PD becoming current is not necessary. They can pre-adjudicate based on receipt date.
My guess:
Probably they are processing all employment based applications right away so that they can prepare for CIR 2009. I guess Obama will take CIR this year itself as he has a very high approval rating and lot of goodwill now.
more...
makeup Green Smiley Face T-shirt
srikondoji
08-13 03:59 AM
Hey nave_kum,
Why do you think this is misleading? If you look at the date of the post, then the monday should be the following monday from that date which passed long time back. Let me know exacly what misled you, i may try to re-interpret if need be.
It is upto you to conclude who is right and who is wrong and nobody here is warning him because he is junior.
I have politely warned him, because i thought it was the right thing to do because of this discussion going in the wrong direction. I complained the adminstrator and moderator becuase that was the only tool available to me. Whatz wrong in this approach?
Best regards and cheers.
Guys...
I just logged in thinking that by Monday, we July 2nd filers wud be getting receipts. But after flipping the pages back on this forum, I saw that the Monday was indeed the previous one. This is indeed misleading. After seeing the ongoing tussle between buddyinus and Srikondo, I realised Buddyinus is right. Whats wrong in whatever he's saying??? The purpose of this thread is to discuss about the so called Monday's receipts. But since that Monday is gone, looks like u r fighting over nothing. How dare u warn anybody on this thread. I am with Buddyinus on this. He may be a junior but u dont have any rights to warn him. Beware.
Why do you think this is misleading? If you look at the date of the post, then the monday should be the following monday from that date which passed long time back. Let me know exacly what misled you, i may try to re-interpret if need be.
It is upto you to conclude who is right and who is wrong and nobody here is warning him because he is junior.
I have politely warned him, because i thought it was the right thing to do because of this discussion going in the wrong direction. I complained the adminstrator and moderator becuase that was the only tool available to me. Whatz wrong in this approach?
Best regards and cheers.
Guys...
I just logged in thinking that by Monday, we July 2nd filers wud be getting receipts. But after flipping the pages back on this forum, I saw that the Monday was indeed the previous one. This is indeed misleading. After seeing the ongoing tussle between buddyinus and Srikondo, I realised Buddyinus is right. Whats wrong in whatever he's saying??? The purpose of this thread is to discuss about the so called Monday's receipts. But since that Monday is gone, looks like u r fighting over nothing. How dare u warn anybody on this thread. I am with Buddyinus on this. He may be a junior but u dont have any rights to warn him. Beware.
girlfriend smiley face on white
ItIsNotFunny
10-21 04:41 PM
It is tricky. The intent can be proved only by how long the employee has worked for sponsor. If he/she worked considerable period (lets say for 2-3 years in non-immigrant visa (H.L,E) before filing 485 and worked for about 1 year after filing 485) then, it is very easy for the employee to prove his/her intent to have a permanent employment relationship with sponser, if employer try to revoke 140 based on the fact that employee does not have intent. The longivity of the employment relationship with sponser is a great proof. Some people are abusing (by misguidence of few lawyers, as they claim GC is for future job) AC21, without even working for single day with sponser, trying to get GC. USCIS may be controlling that kind of abuse.
One historical background reason for AC21 is that, in 2000, even though all catagories are "current", INS was very slow in approving 485. The delay for approval of 485 in year 2000 is caused by USCIS poor customer service. It took atleast 2 years for 485 approval, though the visa numbers were continously available for the entire 2 years. Therefore, the AC21 is an incentive for USCIS delay.
Now, if the visa numbers are continously available (for example EB1, EB2-ROW) USCIS is approving 485 within 6 months, except july 07 fiasco surge. So now AC21 users are only those who suffers in retrogression, not by USCIS administartive delay. That may be the another reason why USCIS becoming hard on AC21.
I understand what you say but interpretation differs from IO to IO. It still goes to chances....
One historical background reason for AC21 is that, in 2000, even though all catagories are "current", INS was very slow in approving 485. The delay for approval of 485 in year 2000 is caused by USCIS poor customer service. It took atleast 2 years for 485 approval, though the visa numbers were continously available for the entire 2 years. Therefore, the AC21 is an incentive for USCIS delay.
Now, if the visa numbers are continously available (for example EB1, EB2-ROW) USCIS is approving 485 within 6 months, except july 07 fiasco surge. So now AC21 users are only those who suffers in retrogression, not by USCIS administartive delay. That may be the another reason why USCIS becoming hard on AC21.
I understand what you say but interpretation differs from IO to IO. It still goes to chances....
hairstyles Angry yellow smiley face icon
immm
07-19 01:21 PM
Cases will be processed on RD only. However approval is based on PD.
Due to heavy backlogs, it is automatically assured that the person with an older PD will get his GC first - even if he filed later.
Not necessarily. Here is a hypothetical scenario:
PersonA = PD of May 30th, 2003 and RD of June 15th, 2007.
Assume that an additional 150,000 I-485 applications were filed petween PersonA and PersonB
PersonB = PD of May 15, 2002 and RD of July 15th 2007.
USCIS starts pre-adjudicating cases based on Receipt date. Assume that by October 1, 2007, they have pre-adjudicated PersonA plus 9,000 of the 150,000 applications and haven't reached PersonB's application yet (they go by RD).
Assuming that the visa cutoff date in Oct, 2007 bulletin is June, 2003 making both PersonA and personB current:
PersonA (PD of 2003) will get a visa number and get the case approved while PersonB (PD of 2002) with an older priority date will have to wait a while because his case hasn't been touched by USCIS yet due to the additional 150,000 filings in between that have to be pre-adjudicated first based on RD even if they have 2004/2005/2006/2007 priority dates!!
.
Due to heavy backlogs, it is automatically assured that the person with an older PD will get his GC first - even if he filed later.
Not necessarily. Here is a hypothetical scenario:
PersonA = PD of May 30th, 2003 and RD of June 15th, 2007.
Assume that an additional 150,000 I-485 applications were filed petween PersonA and PersonB
PersonB = PD of May 15, 2002 and RD of July 15th 2007.
USCIS starts pre-adjudicating cases based on Receipt date. Assume that by October 1, 2007, they have pre-adjudicated PersonA plus 9,000 of the 150,000 applications and haven't reached PersonB's application yet (they go by RD).
Assuming that the visa cutoff date in Oct, 2007 bulletin is June, 2003 making both PersonA and personB current:
PersonA (PD of 2003) will get a visa number and get the case approved while PersonB (PD of 2002) with an older priority date will have to wait a while because his case hasn't been touched by USCIS yet due to the additional 150,000 filings in between that have to be pre-adjudicated first based on RD even if they have 2004/2005/2006/2007 priority dates!!
.
ziri
07-20 06:54 PM
During the failed CIR bill people here were praising Sen. Sessions for supporting legal immigration and I almost shed tears because deep in my heart I know how they hate immigrants both legal and illegal. The only way we can expect relief is a good comprehensive immigration bill but not from ammendments on other bills like the now defense bill.
danu2007
05-22 05:02 PM
I have made a one time contribution of $100.
Receipt ID: 97J49355KG857603M
Thanks
Receipt ID: 97J49355KG857603M
Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment