
Of the 46 “experts” Sports
va_labor2002
07-25 08:34 PM
Bkarnik,
So did you ever get to contact aila. Or is there anybody who has contacts with aila taken up this issue with them?
May be, everybody should contact their personal attorney and ask this question. We will see what their responses. If it is positive ,we can definitely contact USCIS and ask for clarifications.
I am going to contact my attorney about this question.
So did you ever get to contact aila. Or is there anybody who has contacts with aila taken up this issue with them?
May be, everybody should contact their personal attorney and ask this question. We will see what their responses. If it is positive ,we can definitely contact USCIS and ask for clarifications.
I am going to contact my attorney about this question.
wallpaper Of the 46 “experts” Sports

Phillies pitcher Cliff Lee
lazycis
12-21 10:03 PM
lazycis,
According to 245(k), does it mean that "unauthorized stay" (or stay with expired I-94) of more than 1 year is wiped out if a nonimmigrant went out of the country, entered back with a new I-94 and maintained legal status ever since? He/she should not have any problems in adjusting status with 485?
I like your insight into immigration policies and the way you express them.
Thanks.
8 USC 1182(a)(9)(B) Aliens unlawfully present
(ii) Construction of unlawful presence For purposes of this paragraph, an alien is deemed to be unlawfully present in the United States if the alien is present in the United States after the expiration of the period of stay authorized by the Attorney General or is present in the United States without being admitted or paroled.
Unlawful presence is different from out of status.
The period for unlawful presence begins on:
1) The expiration date* of the visa "status" document (I-94 Arrival/Departure Card), or
2) status violation, determined by an immigration judge, or
3) status violation, determined by the USCIS during the course of adjudicating a benefit application.
245(k) allows up to 180 days of "out of status".
If a person overstays (expired I-94) more than one year, leaves and re-enters within 10 years, it will be a problem for I-485 (if the USCIS finds about it, of course). More likely it will result in removal proceedings and permanent bar to reentry to the US. The only exception is if that person has an immediate relative who is a US citizen (see 8 USC 1255(i)).
So the moral of the story is to never leave the US until you get a green card if you accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presence.
However if a person left and was allowed to re-enter, there is a chance that a person did not accumulated unlawful presence to trigger re-entry ban. Refer to this CIS memo for details regarding "period of authorized stay".
http://www.mnllp.com/GOVbcisnOOSunlawful0403.pdf
According to 245(k), does it mean that "unauthorized stay" (or stay with expired I-94) of more than 1 year is wiped out if a nonimmigrant went out of the country, entered back with a new I-94 and maintained legal status ever since? He/she should not have any problems in adjusting status with 485?
I like your insight into immigration policies and the way you express them.
Thanks.
8 USC 1182(a)(9)(B) Aliens unlawfully present
(ii) Construction of unlawful presence For purposes of this paragraph, an alien is deemed to be unlawfully present in the United States if the alien is present in the United States after the expiration of the period of stay authorized by the Attorney General or is present in the United States without being admitted or paroled.
Unlawful presence is different from out of status.
The period for unlawful presence begins on:
1) The expiration date* of the visa "status" document (I-94 Arrival/Departure Card), or
2) status violation, determined by an immigration judge, or
3) status violation, determined by the USCIS during the course of adjudicating a benefit application.
245(k) allows up to 180 days of "out of status".
If a person overstays (expired I-94) more than one year, leaves and re-enters within 10 years, it will be a problem for I-485 (if the USCIS finds about it, of course). More likely it will result in removal proceedings and permanent bar to reentry to the US. The only exception is if that person has an immediate relative who is a US citizen (see 8 USC 1255(i)).
So the moral of the story is to never leave the US until you get a green card if you accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presence.
However if a person left and was allowed to re-enter, there is a chance that a person did not accumulated unlawful presence to trigger re-entry ban. Refer to this CIS memo for details regarding "period of authorized stay".
http://www.mnllp.com/GOVbcisnOOSunlawful0403.pdf

Philadelphia Phillies starting
desperatedesi
07-23 08:18 PM
Hi,
I am in the same boat and have lost my sleep. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity and my lawyer definitely did not have time to get the employment letter from my wife's employer.
Our attorney has also signed on our behalf in rush to file the 485 before the July 2nd deadline :mad:
Please can someone say with authority whether it is needed or not needed?
Man this is really killing me! I don't to thank or yell at my attorney for the mad rush and filing of 485 for July 2nd deadline.
I am in the same boat and have lost my sleep. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity and my lawyer definitely did not have time to get the employment letter from my wife's employer.
Our attorney has also signed on our behalf in rush to file the 485 before the July 2nd deadline :mad:
Please can someone say with authority whether it is needed or not needed?
Man this is really killing me! I don't to thank or yell at my attorney for the mad rush and filing of 485 for July 2nd deadline.
2011 Phillies pitcher Cliff Lee

Phillies, pitcher Brandon
nixstor
07-05 12:27 PM
So many more places to go to on the internet and get free info and free forums to post on that making this one a paid members only forum would ensure you and a handful of others like you will be best friends posting and viewing on here by yourselves. At least it'll last for a couple of years, you know, longer than a western marriage because you're bound to be waiting considering the USCIS snail work pace. This forum should stay free so everyone can have access to it and be able to communicate with others in similar situations. If one feels like they can/want to contribute for whatever reason, it should be of their own choosing. I just joined so I don't have that sense of gratefulness that longer term posters have but I can see how that could change after being here for a while.
I agree that you can get free information any where on the internet. But what about the main goal of getting funds? Do we care about the main agenda behind this website? Are we doing any thing to do our part by contributing? You only get very succinct info on murthy chat and khanna phone calls. You might get more info on their fourms. They are running those forums not only for community sake but also to get "invaluable" publicity that makes them "the name" in immigration. I got an answer on Murthy forum/Khanna forum indirectly translates into name/fame for the attorneys, which means more business for them. I got an answer on IV neither directly nor inidrectly translates into what??? Nothing.. As long as we tell ourselves that we get info for free, google is our friend, We are just substantiating our thoughts on "How NOT to pay". Nothing else.
I agree that you can get free information any where on the internet. But what about the main goal of getting funds? Do we care about the main agenda behind this website? Are we doing any thing to do our part by contributing? You only get very succinct info on murthy chat and khanna phone calls. You might get more info on their fourms. They are running those forums not only for community sake but also to get "invaluable" publicity that makes them "the name" in immigration. I got an answer on Murthy forum/Khanna forum indirectly translates into name/fame for the attorneys, which means more business for them. I got an answer on IV neither directly nor inidrectly translates into what??? Nothing.. As long as we tell ourselves that we get info for free, google is our friend, We are just substantiating our thoughts on "How NOT to pay". Nothing else.
more...

Phillies pitcher Roy #39;Doc#39;
kumarc123
10-15 07:23 PM
To all my IV Members,
I agree with the fact of Gandhi protest #2, this is the right time, we can start another flower movement, this will help in two ways.
1. Will put pressure on congress to honor the high immigrant bill in duck session.
2. We will get attention and the next upcoming president will know, we are hurting.
Listen guys, I am not here for a popularity contest, I am hurting like you guys. I am tired of making those long list numbers. The result? Well nothing, I am sorry it may hurt some members, but the truth is nothing happened, we were put aside like a rotten paper.
We have been passive for long now, lets be activist.
Let us all, do Gandhi campaign again, we can get a lot of publicity from not only media channels over here, but from Indian network as well. This will put more pressure on congress and USCIS.
Also IV members whoa re confused on what and what not to do, please I request you all to support another big movement.
Please lets not waste any more time in discussion, or questioning each others intentions.
I agree with the fact of Gandhi protest #2, this is the right time, we can start another flower movement, this will help in two ways.
1. Will put pressure on congress to honor the high immigrant bill in duck session.
2. We will get attention and the next upcoming president will know, we are hurting.
Listen guys, I am not here for a popularity contest, I am hurting like you guys. I am tired of making those long list numbers. The result? Well nothing, I am sorry it may hurt some members, but the truth is nothing happened, we were put aside like a rotten paper.
We have been passive for long now, lets be activist.
Let us all, do Gandhi campaign again, we can get a lot of publicity from not only media channels over here, but from Indian network as well. This will put more pressure on congress and USCIS.
Also IV members whoa re confused on what and what not to do, please I request you all to support another big movement.
Please lets not waste any more time in discussion, or questioning each others intentions.

Philadelphia Phillies pitcher
ramus
07-02 06:13 PM
Why we just have $300 contribution so far when we have 1500 members online.. Lets put this thred in every thread..
Pappu, can we put this thread on home page..
Pappu, can we put this thread on home page..
more...

The Philadelphia Phillies
greyhair
03-12 01:50 PM
Mr greyhair with brown matter,
I don�t know those folks you are comparing with me. I just said that IV opened a donor only post in wake of delayed April visa bulletin. I wonder why they did this as this was the time to educate/ inform all the members with whatever information they had (Now it is proved they had no info). This is not what a �non profit� organization or any organization would do in a time of uncertainty
This is obvious that IV can not dictate either USCIS or DOL nor they had any information on April visa bulletin but they did not have to hide anything related to delayed visa bulletin fom the non paying members.
IV is a great platform that bring together all of us under one umbrella so that we all share the information and make plans on how to make employee based immigration more hassle free.
As far as is concerned yes I go there and my id there is same as here. I go there so that I could share my knowledge and experience and gather the same from other folks in the same boat as me and this is the same reason I visit IV.
As far donation is concerned I donated once but after that I could not do it for my personal reasons. I will definitely donate once I am out of my crisis, but yes whenever, there has been any campaign initiated by IV of sending letters or faxes I have done my part sincerely.
I don�t know why people like you think that is there enemy in fact they both are there for the same cause and can work together (I don�t know about any past clashes if any between and IV management)
All I want is that IV be more informative to its members.
So Mr brown matter don�t talk more than what your brain can think of.
You are accusing IV for cheating before saying IV is a great platform. Can't you make up your mind. You sound more like that Congressman Massa from NY. I am no Glenn beck so now don't start to tickle me.
I don�t know those folks you are comparing with me. I just said that IV opened a donor only post in wake of delayed April visa bulletin. I wonder why they did this as this was the time to educate/ inform all the members with whatever information they had (Now it is proved they had no info). This is not what a �non profit� organization or any organization would do in a time of uncertainty
This is obvious that IV can not dictate either USCIS or DOL nor they had any information on April visa bulletin but they did not have to hide anything related to delayed visa bulletin fom the non paying members.
IV is a great platform that bring together all of us under one umbrella so that we all share the information and make plans on how to make employee based immigration more hassle free.
As far as is concerned yes I go there and my id there is same as here. I go there so that I could share my knowledge and experience and gather the same from other folks in the same boat as me and this is the same reason I visit IV.
As far donation is concerned I donated once but after that I could not do it for my personal reasons. I will definitely donate once I am out of my crisis, but yes whenever, there has been any campaign initiated by IV of sending letters or faxes I have done my part sincerely.
I don�t know why people like you think that is there enemy in fact they both are there for the same cause and can work together (I don�t know about any past clashes if any between and IV management)
All I want is that IV be more informative to its members.
So Mr brown matter don�t talk more than what your brain can think of.
You are accusing IV for cheating before saying IV is a great platform. Can't you make up your mind. You sound more like that Congressman Massa from NY. I am no Glenn beck so now don't start to tickle me.
2010 Philadelphia Phillies starting

Phillies: The Phillies are an
buehler
06-13 11:13 AM
I have seen this same footage months ago and to it don't look real, its cooked. Some facts there are just un-digestible like the gora guy will take job of a waiter immediately after working as senior exec. cmon market is not that bad unless he don't know anything else and don't have ability to get other similar job, then he should be fired anyways. and then that carlos guy, his dress up don't seems convincing that other execs will give me good response after presentation. its all cooked... showing 600k+ numbers are all bogus.
I thought that the video was quite funny. Now for some one to think that it is true is even more funny. :D
I thought that the video was quite funny. Now for some one to think that it is true is even more funny. :D
more...

the Phillies and Phillies
feedfront
09-21 04:55 PM
My attorney's office received RFE mail today (Sept 21, 2010). RFE notice was sent on Sept 10, 2010.
RFE was about deficiency in medical exam report. My doctor is in not USCIS list (he was in list July 2007). Well, I called him and he was busy. I will talk to him again.
RFE is about:
1) Provide med exam report from USCIS authorized Civil Surgeon, and
2) Chest x-ray because TB was +ve
I had provided both. I guess I'll have to redo. I've to reply by Oct 13, 2010.
RFE was about deficiency in medical exam report. My doctor is in not USCIS list (he was in list July 2007). Well, I called him and he was busy. I will talk to him again.
RFE is about:
1) Provide med exam report from USCIS authorized Civil Surgeon, and
2) Chest x-ray because TB was +ve
I had provided both. I guess I'll have to redo. I've to reply by Oct 13, 2010.
hair Phillies, pitcher Brandon

Phillies pitcher Cliff Lee
nixstor
07-05 03:58 PM
First of all Nixstor everybody here really appreciates your contributions and support for the community. However, we have to remember that when there is a need people will act. You did no harm by making this very important point. Ofcourse the site might not be converted to a paid one, but your post really brought out certain very important points to light and we really appreciate that. You are right there are many who benefit without contributing. But we have to remember that any efforts similar to this (IV) will cosist of a huge population. Out of that there will always be a percentage who will never contribute and some selfless people like yourself who always take the extra step to help others and in turn recieve help. If this site becomes paid many might simply cut of their visits. And I wont argue with you if you say that aint true. Personally I feel we might loose a lot of the memberships if that happens. Regarding the present fight against the uscis, I dont even think we are in need of that big a sum because the AILF is taking up the case free of cost (correct me if I am wrong). You may / may not contribute. They are already decided and they will fight. Now the drive for the future CIR if any, will go on slowly and can be increased as need arises. More than money what we need now is people sending out information to the media / politicians. Money comes last now, as far as I know.
Money never, never comes last, IMHO. Money does have its place right beside grass root efforts. Any one who undermines either of them at any time is making a huge mistake.
I am scratching my head to figure out how IV benefits with non paying members? If you say that by being a member of IV, we have done the honors, I have no answer for you. If you say that we all boast about being a 15K member org, You can pass on me. Are you a proponent of "I dont care how IV benefits from me, All that I care for is if I got my question answered or not " thought process? As long as we see IV only as a forum and compare with other forums, we will never see the invaluable difference. while eulogizing the founders, also try to see what they would like us to do. I am positive they would love more contributions than a simple eulogy so that we can enable ourselves with more ammo. Thanks for the undeserved pat. I will be happy if people take a moment and introspect their stand on this issue.
Money never, never comes last, IMHO. Money does have its place right beside grass root efforts. Any one who undermines either of them at any time is making a huge mistake.
I am scratching my head to figure out how IV benefits with non paying members? If you say that by being a member of IV, we have done the honors, I have no answer for you. If you say that we all boast about being a 15K member org, You can pass on me. Are you a proponent of "I dont care how IV benefits from me, All that I care for is if I got my question answered or not " thought process? As long as we see IV only as a forum and compare with other forums, we will never see the invaluable difference. while eulogizing the founders, also try to see what they would like us to do. I am positive they would love more contributions than a simple eulogy so that we can enable ourselves with more ammo. Thanks for the undeserved pat. I will be happy if people take a moment and introspect their stand on this issue.
more...

Former Philadelphia Phillies
MDix
03-10 01:37 PM
This is turning out to be TRUE.
Past week, I made this comment and some people made fun of it. But, it's turning out to be true. They are now fully focusing on EB3 and I think they will continue to do untill they finish all Eb3. Once they reached last quarter then they will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB. They don't have to make EB3-ROW current to give some spill-over to EB3-I. What ever will be left at the end of quarter will be spilled across EB's.
I am expecting lot of REDs on this one.
Thanks,
MDix
That is not true, my lawyer who is very influential and he has some good contacts he told me that this year spill-over would be different form last year. I was stupid so didn�t believe him about July 2007, and paying it for now for not having EAD.
I know this is hard to believe especially if something comes from lawyer.
Thank's
MDix
Past week, I made this comment and some people made fun of it. But, it's turning out to be true. They are now fully focusing on EB3 and I think they will continue to do untill they finish all Eb3. Once they reached last quarter then they will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB. They don't have to make EB3-ROW current to give some spill-over to EB3-I. What ever will be left at the end of quarter will be spilled across EB's.
I am expecting lot of REDs on this one.
Thanks,
MDix
That is not true, my lawyer who is very influential and he has some good contacts he told me that this year spill-over would be different form last year. I was stupid so didn�t believe him about July 2007, and paying it for now for not having EAD.
I know this is hard to believe especially if something comes from lawyer.
Thank's
MDix
hot Phillies pitcher Roy #39;Doc#39;

Phillies pitcher Cliff Lee
yabadaba
07-13 05:13 AM
yep ..thats what shes done/trying to do..claim credit for her "hard hitting" letter.
more...
house This past season, the Phillies

favorite Phillies pitcher.
chanduv23
04-09 10:40 PM
We are not saying that they are not doing their job well. We just want better visibility to plan our future. I want to buy Hose which has substancial investment, can I buy during this uncertainity, may be.
Buying a hose is not substantial investment. It may cost $20 to $50 based on the length you need
Buying a hose is not substantial investment. It may cost $20 to $50 based on the length you need
tattoo Philadelphia Phillies pitcher

of Sports Illustrated.
tooclose
07-12 06:52 PM
Hi,
Can you point me to the source of the above? The reason why I ask this is because my priority date falls between March 01 and 07....So near, yet so far!
Thanks,
Same boat, my PD is 3-Mar-2006. Are there any chances that the Sep visa bulletin would atleast move by a month ?
Gurus post your thoughts...
Can you point me to the source of the above? The reason why I ask this is because my priority date falls between March 01 and 07....So near, yet so far!
Thanks,
Same boat, my PD is 3-Mar-2006. Are there any chances that the Sep visa bulletin would atleast move by a month ?
Gurus post your thoughts...
more...
pictures The Philadelphia Phillies

New Design #38: The Sports
paskal
04-08 11:19 AM
If you want a good discussion on a topic stop generalizing things and do not use rants like racist engineers etc. When you make an assumption please be clear about. You have assumed most people work for consulting companies and most people are frustrated with it. Not so. I don't work for them and I am not frustrated with them. My only concern with them is they are exploiting the system to their advantage and at my cost. This has two fold affect not only the take cut from your salary but also put a bad name to H1B visa program in general. Whoever wrote the bill or whatever are the consequences there is definitely some good things in that bill. Let me list out how some provisions are good:
1. If you are employable in US and you have the skills you will get the job with or without these middlemen. They come into picture only because they can start a corporation and then start the exploitation game. If a bill is taking these guys out what's wrong with it ? This will allow genuine corporations to hire the right candidates.
2. Putting 30 days of ad. to hire US citizens first ? What's wrong with it ? If their skills are really outdated and you are the best and the brightest you will get the job.
If you need more evidence of why H1B program needs reform look no further than H1B cap used up on first day. This has put good undue hard ship for good candidates while Infosys/Wipro etc will once again take the lion's share of H1B numbers. Why do you want them to win at your cost ? Stop calling people affected by this mess as "Racist Engineers". Try to put yourself in their shoes and some of these practices are affecting both the H1B visa holders (with indentured servitude) and citizens with wage depression. No body wins in the end but the people who are exploiting the system.
on the face of it i largely agree, you are however misisng something important in my opinion. Look at the Lc process for Gc carefully. A company is required to advertise then employ any citizen with "minimum requirements" whether or not they are suitable or the best candidate. If the same were to be applied to the H1b- and to renewals, mind it, consider whether most H1B visa holders would be able to continue.
the fact that reform is needed does not mean this is the best way.
and btw i wonder what happens to true consulting companies- BCG, Oracle etc whose business is to provide these services. They are not some abusive offshore operation....how is it fair to them? Seems a bit radical to me...not that i oppose the need for reform.
1. If you are employable in US and you have the skills you will get the job with or without these middlemen. They come into picture only because they can start a corporation and then start the exploitation game. If a bill is taking these guys out what's wrong with it ? This will allow genuine corporations to hire the right candidates.
2. Putting 30 days of ad. to hire US citizens first ? What's wrong with it ? If their skills are really outdated and you are the best and the brightest you will get the job.
If you need more evidence of why H1B program needs reform look no further than H1B cap used up on first day. This has put good undue hard ship for good candidates while Infosys/Wipro etc will once again take the lion's share of H1B numbers. Why do you want them to win at your cost ? Stop calling people affected by this mess as "Racist Engineers". Try to put yourself in their shoes and some of these practices are affecting both the H1B visa holders (with indentured servitude) and citizens with wage depression. No body wins in the end but the people who are exploiting the system.
on the face of it i largely agree, you are however misisng something important in my opinion. Look at the Lc process for Gc carefully. A company is required to advertise then employ any citizen with "minimum requirements" whether or not they are suitable or the best candidate. If the same were to be applied to the H1b- and to renewals, mind it, consider whether most H1B visa holders would be able to continue.
the fact that reform is needed does not mean this is the best way.
and btw i wonder what happens to true consulting companies- BCG, Oracle etc whose business is to provide these services. They are not some abusive offshore operation....how is it fair to them? Seems a bit radical to me...not that i oppose the need for reform.
dresses Phillies pitcher Cliff Lee

Phillies pitcher Pedro
alterego
07-04 08:31 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS’s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
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.
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.
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.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
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.
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.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
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.
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.
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.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
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.
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.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
more...
makeup the Phillies and Phillies

This past season, the Phillies
diptam
07-05 12:42 PM
Lets stop this thread and core decide about this ( who are running IV )
This is creating lots of discussions and nothing will come out apart from
wastage of our time... I mean we get attracted to a spicy thread like this automatically and the end result is 0
I agree with you 100%. We are so much divided community, lets not create another factor to divide this community further in paid and non-paid members.
Core, if you see this thread is not part of yor agenda, please close this immediately. This is just dividing us further. Plzzzzzzzz.
This is creating lots of discussions and nothing will come out apart from
wastage of our time... I mean we get attracted to a spicy thread like this automatically and the end result is 0
I agree with you 100%. We are so much divided community, lets not create another factor to divide this community further in paid and non-paid members.
Core, if you see this thread is not part of yor agenda, please close this immediately. This is just dividing us further. Plzzzzzzzz.
girlfriend of Sports Illustrated.

Sports Illustrated picking
rustum
08-21 12:03 AM
Hi,
My company filed EAD for me and my wife along with 485 recently. I am on L1 and My wife is on L2. Is is possible to file one more EAD on L2 status. Looks like, we can get EAD on L2 faster than EAD with 485. My company attorney is suggesting me not to file one more EAD because one with 485 is pending with USCIS. Is it ok to file one more with L2? how long it will take to get EAD on 485 and EAD on L2.
My company filed EAD for me and my wife along with 485 recently. I am on L1 and My wife is on L2. Is is possible to file one more EAD on L2 status. Looks like, we can get EAD on L2 faster than EAD with 485. My company attorney is suggesting me not to file one more EAD because one with 485 is pending with USCIS. Is it ok to file one more with L2? how long it will take to get EAD on 485 and EAD on L2.
hairstyles Former Philadelphia Phillies

of Sports Illustrated,
willigetgc?
08-10 10:30 PM
i feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that eb3 needs iv's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for eb3, as ins merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
I went to the advocacy days in DC this June, and the biggest push IV was/is making - country cap elimination. The biggest benefactor of this change is EB3 (eb2 will be helped too, but that is how INS preference system works) - again, the biggest benefactor of this legislative change is eb3. IV has been pushing this issue over and over - try reaching out about town hall meetings or any such meetings with lawmakers - and you will figure out how much iv is working on behalf of eb3. Unfortunately, not many eb3 were active until the last 2 vbs. So, please do not say, "nothing much can be done for eb3" or "IV is not working for EB3". Its just that you may not see value in the route that IV is pursuing. It is eb3 members' unwillingness to admit that IV needs grass root help more than ever now.
but, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The ina language says that until eb2 is not current, there will be no spillover to eb3. Agreed. but i would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. that is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all eb2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 eb3.
i am sorry to point this out, but you are looking at this from only your angle. Don't get me wrong, i would probably do the same. Having said that, logically this change will not fly with the uscis - 2 reasons - 1. Your contention that this rule is year to year - flawed contention 2. What does all eb2 satisfied mean? - these arguments will not work. I am not pulling you or the idea down - but simply stating my point of view based on what I know of the law.
is this something iv can point out and fight for? Can eb3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
now a days we are seeing more threads related to spill over allocation interpretation etc, but i have not seen any single post by iv core about this. I am from eb3 community and share the frustration among others.
i remember a time just a few months ago this year, eb2 were complaining about spillover not happening, and iv core disputed it, saying that spillover was happening.
i see a lot of people suggesting to port from eb3 to eb2, instead of wasting time on these discussions. Well, porting is not an option for most of us. It is either because we are working for big companies (who do not want to extra burden) or not able to find a small company which can help us.
just like you are seeing the ground realities of porting from eb3 to eb2, i believe that iv knows the ground reality of proposing new interpretations to the law. I would go a little further in saying that the proposals considered here are changes in the law than changes in the interpretation of the law.
I may be wrong on my thinking, but I do hope you take a suggestion - when reading the INS law, understand it independently first. Then go back to see, if it can be applied on your interpretation. Do not start out with it, everything looks red when wearing red tinted glasses.......
After the advocacy days in DC, I am sold on what IV is offering and its commitment to the EB community. I am EB3 too and I am pretty much in the same boat as many of you here.
I went to the advocacy days in DC this June, and the biggest push IV was/is making - country cap elimination. The biggest benefactor of this change is EB3 (eb2 will be helped too, but that is how INS preference system works) - again, the biggest benefactor of this legislative change is eb3. IV has been pushing this issue over and over - try reaching out about town hall meetings or any such meetings with lawmakers - and you will figure out how much iv is working on behalf of eb3. Unfortunately, not many eb3 were active until the last 2 vbs. So, please do not say, "nothing much can be done for eb3" or "IV is not working for EB3". Its just that you may not see value in the route that IV is pursuing. It is eb3 members' unwillingness to admit that IV needs grass root help more than ever now.
but, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The ina language says that until eb2 is not current, there will be no spillover to eb3. Agreed. but i would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. that is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all eb2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 eb3.
i am sorry to point this out, but you are looking at this from only your angle. Don't get me wrong, i would probably do the same. Having said that, logically this change will not fly with the uscis - 2 reasons - 1. Your contention that this rule is year to year - flawed contention 2. What does all eb2 satisfied mean? - these arguments will not work. I am not pulling you or the idea down - but simply stating my point of view based on what I know of the law.
is this something iv can point out and fight for? Can eb3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
now a days we are seeing more threads related to spill over allocation interpretation etc, but i have not seen any single post by iv core about this. I am from eb3 community and share the frustration among others.
i remember a time just a few months ago this year, eb2 were complaining about spillover not happening, and iv core disputed it, saying that spillover was happening.
i see a lot of people suggesting to port from eb3 to eb2, instead of wasting time on these discussions. Well, porting is not an option for most of us. It is either because we are working for big companies (who do not want to extra burden) or not able to find a small company which can help us.
just like you are seeing the ground realities of porting from eb3 to eb2, i believe that iv knows the ground reality of proposing new interpretations to the law. I would go a little further in saying that the proposals considered here are changes in the law than changes in the interpretation of the law.
I may be wrong on my thinking, but I do hope you take a suggestion - when reading the INS law, understand it independently first. Then go back to see, if it can be applied on your interpretation. Do not start out with it, everything looks red when wearing red tinted glasses.......
After the advocacy days in DC, I am sold on what IV is offering and its commitment to the EB community. I am EB3 too and I am pretty much in the same boat as many of you here.
Jai_MD
06-10 06:23 PM
done and request fellow members who are on the sidelines to do the same!
seahawks
06-10 05:49 PM
sent, also forwarded to friends.

No comments:
Post a Comment