supers789
05-12 07:08 PM
Hoping to get some direction / response from IV core.. surprisingly quiet CORE grp this time..
wallpaper tonight#39;s Critics#39; Choice
shreekarthik
10-08 06:40 PM
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
GreenMe
07-03 12:40 PM
Hello folks looks like that link for the "sweetheart roses" doesn't work anymore (They probably ran out!)! The cheapest flowers I could find now are these -
http://www.ftd.com/350/catalog/product.epl?product_id=FFCB&index_id=product_roses
http://www.ftd.com/528/catalog/product_search.epl?expresslane=Yes&AID=search&flc=FTD&website_id=528&SLI_searchintegration=1&search_box=F488&Go.x=13&Go.y=9
Try this link one more time ..
http://www.ftd.com/350/catalog/product.epl?product_id=FFCB&index_id=product_roses
http://www.ftd.com/528/catalog/product_search.epl?expresslane=Yes&AID=search&flc=FTD&website_id=528&SLI_searchintegration=1&search_box=F488&Go.x=13&Go.y=9
Try this link one more time ..
2011 The 16th annual Critics#39;
raju123
07-06 03:38 PM
We need some powerful press release for this Gandhigiri
Absolutely awesome. It's on the front page! Well done! Keep sending those flowers.
Absolutely awesome. It's on the front page! Well done! Keep sending those flowers.
more...
smsthss
03-28 11:28 AM
At one end it is bad that USCIS moved back Nebraska Processing date to June 08 2007 (More than one month backword) but it looks like USCIS is preparing itself to kick EB3-India ahead... It is too early to say this confidently.. But my feeling is that USCIS will keep processing dates tied to June 2007 and will kick EB3-India ahead. I am keeping my fingers crossed. Though as per murthy's web site in May bulletin EB3-India dates will remain same, I am feeling that if my guess is correct then at least from June bulletin we will see 2 patterns 1) Nebraka processing date would not move ahead for some months or will
move ahead very slowly from June 08 2007
2) Eb3-India PD dates will move ahead speedily. To me it looks like USCIS is now prepared to kick EB3-I (Till June 2003 PD) lot out.
How is the nebraska processing date of june 2007 linked to the visa bulletin. How can you say that looking at processing times of june 2007, we can predict that USCIS wants to push out EB3-I past jun 2003?????
move ahead very slowly from June 08 2007
2) Eb3-India PD dates will move ahead speedily. To me it looks like USCIS is now prepared to kick EB3-I (Till June 2003 PD) lot out.
How is the nebraska processing date of june 2007 linked to the visa bulletin. How can you say that looking at processing times of june 2007, we can predict that USCIS wants to push out EB3-I past jun 2003?????
actaccord
02-17 11:11 AM
local chapters....I have been part to two chapters but not seeing any communication happening around. On one chapter last communication is on June 2010 with 170 members and on another chapter last communication is on Dec 2010 with 9 members.
Local chapters need to be as active as IV forum to engage their members to take part actively.
Local chapters need to be as active as IV forum to engage their members to take part actively.
more...
mirage
07-07 11:30 AM
Please make a new thread with date time venue etc. With so much other things being discussed on this thread this thread is messed up. Please create a new thread may be with a poll .
Am in the bay area..
Just reading this thread, so not sure if I can attend today.
Will surely attend the rally with my wife on July14th.
Just a thought..Why not request all our GC/citizen friends to also attend?
I will persuade all my friends to attend.
If not anything, they can see it as a nice stroll in the downtown.
-JK
Am in the bay area..
Just reading this thread, so not sure if I can attend today.
Will surely attend the rally with my wife on July14th.
Just a thought..Why not request all our GC/citizen friends to also attend?
I will persuade all my friends to attend.
If not anything, they can see it as a nice stroll in the downtown.
-JK
2010 It#39;s the good sufficient dress
prince_waiting
08-13 11:58 PM
I filed concurrently for I140 and AOS by sending in the application packet today. My lawyer suggested that even though the USCIS receives the packet tomorrow but are not able to receipt it before the 17th they can reject the it. I am a little confused about his advice, can anyone please provide a clue and sooth my nerves? It would be a tremendous obligation.
more...
FinalGC
07-09 02:06 PM
Yes, that is understood.
The question is if one has worked as a contractor and got a employment RFE and the company provided a letter stating a full time consultant job, has USCIS rejected such a response?
Answer is NO.
The question is if one has worked as a contractor and got a employment RFE and the company provided a letter stating a full time consultant job, has USCIS rejected such a response?
Answer is NO.
hair hot natalie-portman-critics-
anilsal
10-25 11:49 AM
Wonder if dems take the house, will they worry about the 2008 prez elections and not make major decisions?
more...
trueguy
07-28 12:47 PM
Sorry to read blaming debates between eb3 and eb2. Insted of blaming, it is better to take some action. Based on current practice by DOS, EB3-I will be like this for ever, unless more number opens up by any legislative changes. As per law, each EB catagories are allowed to have 40K visas. As demand for EB2 is more, (paricularly by In,Ch) one can not expect any flow from EB2 to EB3 . This is law one can not change it.
Now I am coming to important point to take some action by EB3-I. The law says, 7% country quota will be applied in each prefrence catagory if worldwide demand for visas is more than supply in that catagory. But the law does not set any time frame. Therefore, the real threat for EB3-I is EB3-ROW. As per current practice, untill EB3-ROW become "current" EB3-I will get only 3000 visas per year. What happen if EB3-ROW never become "current" for next 50 years? EB3-I will be stuck in 2001 or 2002 for ever. To add my point, let us imagine a hypothetical case. Lets say in 2010 about 1 million ROW guys neend EB3 visa number. All has PD 2010. EB3-In will be stuck in 2001 till one million EB-ROW with PD 2010 recives GC. In nut shell, a EB3-ROW with latest PD will be given more preference than EB3-In with PD 2001. As current practice does not set any time limit, new flow of applications keeps retrogressed countries stuck for ever. This point has to be conveyed to DOS and USCIS to change the practice. Applications receviced in one fiscal year has to be cleared (grant GC) to process the application from next year. This way new applications from ROW will not stuck the retrogreesd countries for ever.
You already see that happening. EB2-ROW with PD as early as Jan 2008 are getting approved. So they get their GC in less than 8 months (including all the stages).
EB3-ROW will never be current and hence no spillover to EB3-I. EB3-I is screwed up royally. EB3-I will get 3000 visas per year and that will not help move PD by one month even.
Now I am coming to important point to take some action by EB3-I. The law says, 7% country quota will be applied in each prefrence catagory if worldwide demand for visas is more than supply in that catagory. But the law does not set any time frame. Therefore, the real threat for EB3-I is EB3-ROW. As per current practice, untill EB3-ROW become "current" EB3-I will get only 3000 visas per year. What happen if EB3-ROW never become "current" for next 50 years? EB3-I will be stuck in 2001 or 2002 for ever. To add my point, let us imagine a hypothetical case. Lets say in 2010 about 1 million ROW guys neend EB3 visa number. All has PD 2010. EB3-In will be stuck in 2001 till one million EB-ROW with PD 2010 recives GC. In nut shell, a EB3-ROW with latest PD will be given more preference than EB3-In with PD 2001. As current practice does not set any time limit, new flow of applications keeps retrogressed countries stuck for ever. This point has to be conveyed to DOS and USCIS to change the practice. Applications receviced in one fiscal year has to be cleared (grant GC) to process the application from next year. This way new applications from ROW will not stuck the retrogreesd countries for ever.
You already see that happening. EB2-ROW with PD as early as Jan 2008 are getting approved. So they get their GC in less than 8 months (including all the stages).
EB3-ROW will never be current and hence no spillover to EB3-I. EB3-I is screwed up royally. EB3-I will get 3000 visas per year and that will not help move PD by one month even.
hot Actress Natalie Portman makes
GreenMe
07-03 12:30 PM
My Order # FNM1314755
more...
house Critics Choice Awards 2011
clear485
08-18 01:19 PM
You are talking about 2004, 05. What about 2001, 2002 and 2003? There are so many people with 2002 priority dates still waiting just like me. Mine is 02/2002
What a unfair/unethical/inhuman system. I curse everyone who is causing this delay. They will all land up in hell.
I agree....mine is too 2002 PD/EB2
Simple reason USCIS will tell you/senator/judge/anyone who really seek the resolution of our loooooong delayed cases is.....case is in security/background/additional review checks.....so everyone will shut their mouth and forward this message to the concerned person.....
No use....USCIS is a big elephant and acting in sleep....
What a unfair/unethical/inhuman system. I curse everyone who is causing this delay. They will all land up in hell.
I agree....mine is too 2002 PD/EB2
Simple reason USCIS will tell you/senator/judge/anyone who really seek the resolution of our loooooong delayed cases is.....case is in security/background/additional review checks.....so everyone will shut their mouth and forward this message to the concerned person.....
No use....USCIS is a big elephant and acting in sleep....
tattoo Natalie Portman amp; Colin Firth
english_august
07-09 11:12 AM
I found this in the one of the forums.. please people contact the report have people hear us.
Story for the Washington Post
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
I'm a reporter with the Washington Post. If your efforts result in Emilio Gonzalez receiving hundreds of flowers tomorrow, I would very much like to do a story on it. If you're interested in speaking with me and telling me your story and why you've decided to participate in this demonstration, please give me an email or call me. My contact information is below.
Thanks!
Xiyun
email:yangx@washpost.com
office phone: 202 334 6701
I just spoke with her. Please call her with your story as well. The more the better.
Story for the Washington Post
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
I'm a reporter with the Washington Post. If your efforts result in Emilio Gonzalez receiving hundreds of flowers tomorrow, I would very much like to do a story on it. If you're interested in speaking with me and telling me your story and why you've decided to participate in this demonstration, please give me an email or call me. My contact information is below.
Thanks!
Xiyun
email:yangx@washpost.com
office phone: 202 334 6701
I just spoke with her. Please call her with your story as well. The more the better.
more...
pictures 16th Annual Critics#39; Choice
psk79
08-29 09:47 AM
Did your checks cashed before you got the receipts? or receipts much faster?? Congrats!
Sorry! I just saw your other thread about the check mishap..Good luck!
Sorry! I just saw your other thread about the check mishap..Good luck!
dresses 2011 Critics#39; Choice Movie Awards - Natalie Portman - Zimbio
sathweb
01-30 01:05 PM
You are already out of status as H1 accounts for continuous employment along with regular pay. H1 visa, job and pay go hand in hand. Any one component missing means you are out of status.
There is no grace period. As the earlier member said, it is a gray area without any specific guidelines. I have seen people stay out of job (status) for 4 months and have used portability or consulate stamp upon getting a new job. It all depends on the IO.
BTW, did you ever realize how unethical it is to use a consultant for acquiring a H1 visa without actually having a fulltime job? For last 7 years I am on H1 myself and have played by rules… I hate people who false represent the facts for immigration benefits.
Because of people like you genuine candidates who have legitimate jobs are left out as you guys get lucky in the lottery even though you don’t have a regular fulltime job. My wife was forced to stay at home for almost 3 years because of people like you.. FYI she had a job offer (from a F500 Inc.) but people like you got lucky when it came to H1 lottery. Not just that but people like you give a bad name to legal immigrant community.
What’s your problem man? You are mad because your wife did not get H1B/Job? What do you say to a American citizen who is saying that you took his job? It’s all part of the game. Everyone is trying to improve their life.
How can you tell your wife is better? Your wife is doing exactly the same, converting from H4 to H1B. Did she have job offer when she came to USA? You must have come through some consulting company, what kind of offer letter you had when you came to US?
Everyone is playing by the rules, otherwise we would not have been here. dont think you are the only one playing by the rules.
How can you tell he/she is representing false?
People like you are the ones who are dividing the community.
There is no grace period. As the earlier member said, it is a gray area without any specific guidelines. I have seen people stay out of job (status) for 4 months and have used portability or consulate stamp upon getting a new job. It all depends on the IO.
BTW, did you ever realize how unethical it is to use a consultant for acquiring a H1 visa without actually having a fulltime job? For last 7 years I am on H1 myself and have played by rules… I hate people who false represent the facts for immigration benefits.
Because of people like you genuine candidates who have legitimate jobs are left out as you guys get lucky in the lottery even though you don’t have a regular fulltime job. My wife was forced to stay at home for almost 3 years because of people like you.. FYI she had a job offer (from a F500 Inc.) but people like you got lucky when it came to H1 lottery. Not just that but people like you give a bad name to legal immigrant community.
What’s your problem man? You are mad because your wife did not get H1B/Job? What do you say to a American citizen who is saying that you took his job? It’s all part of the game. Everyone is trying to improve their life.
How can you tell your wife is better? Your wife is doing exactly the same, converting from H4 to H1B. Did she have job offer when she came to USA? You must have come through some consulting company, what kind of offer letter you had when you came to US?
Everyone is playing by the rules, otherwise we would not have been here. dont think you are the only one playing by the rules.
How can you tell he/she is representing false?
People like you are the ones who are dividing the community.
more...
makeup Critics#39; Choice Movie Awards
vallabhu
07-20 10:24 AM
Great going guys. Keep it coming. Yes we can for sure extend this to Monday. The more the better.
Can some one tell how to cancel 20$ subscription and start 50$ subscription.
Can some one tell how to cancel 20$ subscription and start 50$ subscription.
girlfriend Best Looks at Critic#39;s Choice
CADude
10-12 03:24 PM
My special Thanks to Mr. Prakash and Ms Windy for raising the issue with USCIS Rep Ms. Debra Roger.
Please don't miss this chance:
Please send details to CIS Ombudsman office with scaned delivery Proof for pending applications. Please mail him all the details. He want to see the trend. No efforts are useless. Not for today nor for future.
USCIS is again not admitting that they are not following the FIFO and per USCIS, we should have got our EAD by now also. :D
Please don't miss this chance:
Please send details to CIS Ombudsman office with scaned delivery Proof for pending applications. Please mail him all the details. He want to see the trend. No efforts are useless. Not for today nor for future.
USCIS is again not admitting that they are not following the FIFO and per USCIS, we should have got our EAD by now also. :D
hairstyles Natalie Portman#39;s stunning
akhilmahajan
02-10 01:35 PM
Thanks a lot sujijag.
Grand Total - $1094
Come on folks lets help IV, to get things done for US.
IV is I/WE.
GO IV GO. TOGETHER WE CAN.
Contributed $50
Immigration Voice $50.00 02/13/2009 8MWS5-D1N6F
Grand Total - $1094
Come on folks lets help IV, to get things done for US.
IV is I/WE.
GO IV GO. TOGETHER WE CAN.
Contributed $50
Immigration Voice $50.00 02/13/2009 8MWS5-D1N6F
simple1
05-01 01:52 PM
yes, I want GC for my wife. 6 months to a year addtional wait is ok. Provided I get cleared soon.
Come on, your comment "limbo for five years" without basis. The FB2 cat is not very far behind. Only 6 months - 1 year behind in most cases. check VB.
Stop using words anti etc. I am just like you frustrated like hell.
My primary point is EB dependents must be out of EB quota.
There is no legal basis for them to be in EB quota. period.
I would not support this at all. Though it would clear the back log for the primary immigrant. What about the spouse and children. When you get your GC, dont you want to get it for your spouse and kids. Do you want them to keep in limbo for five years. It can be counted against family quota but should be given along with the primary. Otherwise its crap.
This might be antis work to divide the community. So be aware.
Come on, your comment "limbo for five years" without basis. The FB2 cat is not very far behind. Only 6 months - 1 year behind in most cases. check VB.
Stop using words anti etc. I am just like you frustrated like hell.
My primary point is EB dependents must be out of EB quota.
There is no legal basis for them to be in EB quota. period.
I would not support this at all. Though it would clear the back log for the primary immigrant. What about the spouse and children. When you get your GC, dont you want to get it for your spouse and kids. Do you want them to keep in limbo for five years. It can be counted against family quota but should be given along with the primary. Otherwise its crap.
This might be antis work to divide the community. So be aware.
here4gc
03-18 11:52 AM
I opened SR in Jan...in Feb they sent letter that security checks are pending..so I took INFOPASS after talking with attorney...went to INFOPASS and was rudely told that it could take a long time because Namecheck is pending..no idea how long it will take...i was like..if security check is pending do my FP and check everything...but no...they want to do name check..okay..then attorney said to wait 1 more month...he called last week to USCIS and they said...oh we responded on FEB..to the original SR..the response was..its still pending..hell..i know that already..what the hell are u doing about it ?? i thought they were supposed to work on an SR and get it out of the way in 60 days..now lawyer is asking to wait 1 more month because he is saying 60 days from Feb...GOSH..and i am waiting for 140 also...filed in July went to NSC-TSC blackhole..God knows what will happen...
No comments:
Post a Comment