FinalGC
12-18 11:00 AM
I would suggest, if we have 4-5 people per day for 31 days do the hunger strike. This will have a greater impact than just 1 day of hunger strike. The day should be strategized to match with the opening of the Congress session in 2007.
Are there 150 people ready to do that.
Are there 150 people ready to do that.
wallpaper Julius Caesar (1953)
leoindiano
03-04 12:30 PM
Cases are being pre-adjucated, So there are RFEs and other inquiries...After this, they will wait for visa number in PD Queue....which is a good thing...This assures there will be no wastage this year....
Anycase, it looks like there will be significant forward movement...
My estimate
EB2I will enter 2005 in next 2 bulletins.
EB3I into 2003 in next 2 bulletins.
Anycase, it looks like there will be significant forward movement...
My estimate
EB2I will enter 2005 in next 2 bulletins.
EB3I into 2003 in next 2 bulletins.
satyasaich
07-14 02:24 PM
Dear IVians
Please make it happen. Just $5 will never hurt anybody's economy / budget.
I wanted to cover 9 more souls if there is any acute shortage of even $5 (not to offend anyone), hence sent a check for $50
Suport IV
Satya
Please make it happen. Just $5 will never hurt anybody's economy / budget.
I wanted to cover 9 more souls if there is any acute shortage of even $5 (not to offend anyone), hence sent a check for $50
Suport IV
Satya
2011 This movie follows the story
p1234
09-13 08:15 PM
I'm getting red dots now for believing in the right!
Who cares? Give all the red dots in the world...:D
Who cares? Give all the red dots in the world...:D
more...
xyzgc
02-14 01:05 PM
will you guys stop acting like kids?
kaisersose
04-30 03:39 PM
This was directed to people who were current. If you are from India, China, Mexico, Philippines, get used to waiting. Your backlog is due to numerical limits. And this won't change (the way I see it)
Yes, it appears people on this forum are still confused about backlogs due to unavailable visa numbers and backlog due to CIS having too many 485s to process.
They are 2 different things.
Yes, it appears people on this forum are still confused about backlogs due to unavailable visa numbers and backlog due to CIS having too many 485s to process.
They are 2 different things.
more...
jbr
06-11 12:59 PM
I have a dumb question: when the above post refers to 25,000 EB2 and EB3 applications does it refer to 25,000 primary applicants or total (applicant and dependent) applications. Does anyone know? -- Thanks.
2010 Julius Caesar Movie Poster
485Mbe4001
08-15 11:50 AM
True, once the people realize that they are close to GC they forget all tasks and move on to the other forums (R2I or USC or whatever) there are very few who actually stay on and help add this to the fact that most of the EB3-I's got fed up with the nonsense going on (most were only looking for a sounding board to voice their dismay, instead they were reminded of the caste system). So EB2's stop working because their PD is current and EBs stop because there is little hope/chance/help. We can dissect the VB as much as we want, the fact of the matter is that EB3 as a whole and EB3 (india &China) in particular are screwed big time. There is hope in the Logfren bills but the congress seems to have other 'important' issues to discuss.
We should take the campaign to a new level move from individuals to involving groups and compaines. They have more money and power to make things move. EB3 & EB2 discussions will go on for ever, we can either decide to wallow in our sorrow or do something. Lets identify groups who can help us and write to them. Each EB should talk to his/her HR and ask them to write a letter to their congressman/Senator it will have a bigger impact.
What are your thoughts?
actually people are already complacent ..eb2 is in joy and waiting impatiently, eb3 people have given up hope and there is not much news from core. people may not like my post but that is the fact
We should take the campaign to a new level move from individuals to involving groups and compaines. They have more money and power to make things move. EB3 & EB2 discussions will go on for ever, we can either decide to wallow in our sorrow or do something. Lets identify groups who can help us and write to them. Each EB should talk to his/her HR and ask them to write a letter to their congressman/Senator it will have a bigger impact.
What are your thoughts?
actually people are already complacent ..eb2 is in joy and waiting impatiently, eb3 people have given up hope and there is not much news from core. people may not like my post but that is the fact
more...
p1234
09-14 05:47 PM
Dost.. tum to bade hi budhu ho.... dawa karao apne dimag ki.... ya ho sakta hai ki tum EB3 ho.
Needless to say.. u are not very intelligent.
I will see how you react when the entire 12 million illegals get chance to file in EB3 and your Eb3 bulletin dates goes to 1968.
Don't put EB3 down, you call yourself a doctorate and yet keep farting around.
Needless to say.. u are not very intelligent.
I will see how you react when the entire 12 million illegals get chance to file in EB3 and your Eb3 bulletin dates goes to 1968.
Don't put EB3 down, you call yourself a doctorate and yet keep farting around.
hair Poster
Abhinaym
12-10 03:37 PM
Was that expected?
more...
MindGlow
07-09 10:38 PM
Received this e-mail from Tom Davis (Virginia congressman for where I live) today (Monday, July 9, 2007). Plan to reply by tomorrow mentioning it is not about "individual redress" rather a wrong imposed by USCIS/DOS on the legal-patiently waiting-community of immigrants. Any suggestions welcome.
Dear Mr. <Name>:
My staff is aware of the situation regarding employment-based visa applicants seeking adjustment of status and the most recent announcement by the State Department of the unavailability of visa numbers. At this time, my staff members are reviewing the situation. Individual redress is not possible at this time.
Thank you for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Tom Davis
Member of Congress
Dear Mr. <Name>:
My staff is aware of the situation regarding employment-based visa applicants seeking adjustment of status and the most recent announcement by the State Department of the unavailability of visa numbers. At this time, my staff members are reviewing the situation. Individual redress is not possible at this time.
Thank you for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Tom Davis
Member of Congress
hot Lyric Opera#39;s #39;Julius Caesar#39;
srmeka
07-15 10:16 PM
Thanks
more...
house ruler Julius Caesar at .
chi_shark
02-23 02:18 PM
It means USCIS has pre-adjudicated your I-485 if it was filed before october 2008.
i thought it meant that you had to wait 4 months after your priority date is current to have any expectation of adjudication... no?
i thought it meant that you had to wait 4 months after your priority date is current to have any expectation of adjudication... no?
tattoo who succeeds Julius Caesar
makemygc
10-25 11:59 PM
I've sent the mails and strongly encourage everyone to come out and take an early action before this gets worse. Even if you are not affected right now, support the cause to make sure that you will not be affected in the future.
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
more...
pictures JULIUS CAESAR MOVIE POSTER LB MARLON BRANDO 1953 | eBay
rajuseattle
08-13 04:52 PM
My only hope is somehow either the senate or the house version of employment based lost visa caoture bill gets into law, either FY2009 or FY2010.
If nothing happens to this effects we are royally screwed , until USCIS and DoL changed their interpretation for the spillover VISA numbers falling into EB-3 bucket we had some hope of catching up with some backlog, but now it seems PD will be stuck around 2001/2002.
I dont know why USCIS /DoL allowed the labor substitutions when they knew majority of the times Labor substitute option was abused by Desi consultants to get Green Cards. Thanks god they stopped this malpractice a year ago and now heavily scritinizing the pending LC applications for I-140 else the genuine folks like me who were the victims of DoL BEC and USCIS backlog would have suffered more.
I am also of the opinion similar to IV member "malagcpahije" and this is probably my last post in the IV as I dont see IV is a united organization, thier is a huge split between different factions of the employment based visa applicants and only relief we are going to get is from US policy makers, in this bad economy noone is willing to even talk about pro-immigration bills. Going to Washington DC will not serve any purpose other than watching those world famous museums and white house.
I am really feeling sad for leaving IV, all the best for the folks who still have faith in IV and its core team.
rajuseattle.....
If nothing happens to this effects we are royally screwed , until USCIS and DoL changed their interpretation for the spillover VISA numbers falling into EB-3 bucket we had some hope of catching up with some backlog, but now it seems PD will be stuck around 2001/2002.
I dont know why USCIS /DoL allowed the labor substitutions when they knew majority of the times Labor substitute option was abused by Desi consultants to get Green Cards. Thanks god they stopped this malpractice a year ago and now heavily scritinizing the pending LC applications for I-140 else the genuine folks like me who were the victims of DoL BEC and USCIS backlog would have suffered more.
I am also of the opinion similar to IV member "malagcpahije" and this is probably my last post in the IV as I dont see IV is a united organization, thier is a huge split between different factions of the employment based visa applicants and only relief we are going to get is from US policy makers, in this bad economy noone is willing to even talk about pro-immigration bills. Going to Washington DC will not serve any purpose other than watching those world famous museums and white house.
I am really feeling sad for leaving IV, all the best for the folks who still have faith in IV and its core team.
rajuseattle.....
dresses Julius Caesar
imv116
07-15 09:04 PM
The problem I see with Los Angeles is the high population of illegals. Any thing here looks like pro-illegal.
Doing the rally in other cities in Los Angeles County or Orange County is the media visibility that we can get.
Any suggestions from SoCAL members?
-imv116
Doing the rally in other cities in Los Angeles County or Orange County is the media visibility that we can get.
Any suggestions from SoCAL members?
-imv116
more...
makeup This film follows Richard from
dhirajs98
01-22 09:12 AM
Received Date on my I-797 for my I-140 is 07/23/2007 and notice date is 08/20/07.
My I-140 is pending in NSC since last July 07. I asked my lawyer's office to check the status. USCIS replied back saying the receipt date in their database is 08/20/07 and it will take long time as they received alot of applications in July 07. USCIS asked my lawyer's office to contact after 45 days.
I thought they should process my I-140 based on the received date mentioned on I-797 but that is not true it seems.
Any idea guys? Anyone faced this issue? Please suggest, is there anything I can do to ask USCIS to process my app based on receipt date?
Also please share the phone number of NSC and sequence of keys to be pressed to reach to the customer service.
Thanks,
-D
My I-140 is pending in NSC since last July 07. I asked my lawyer's office to check the status. USCIS replied back saying the receipt date in their database is 08/20/07 and it will take long time as they received alot of applications in July 07. USCIS asked my lawyer's office to contact after 45 days.
I thought they should process my I-140 based on the received date mentioned on I-797 but that is not true it seems.
Any idea guys? Anyone faced this issue? Please suggest, is there anything I can do to ask USCIS to process my app based on receipt date?
Also please share the phone number of NSC and sequence of keys to be pressed to reach to the customer service.
Thanks,
-D
girlfriend Julius Caesar (1953)
vparam
10-11 06:33 PM
vparam...
Thanks for your detailed anwers.
have you opened your own LLC currently while on EAD?
Yes, Opened and have done business worth 10K :-)
Thanks for your detailed anwers.
have you opened your own LLC currently while on EAD?
Yes, Opened and have done business worth 10K :-)
hairstyles JULIUS CAESAR MOVIE POSTER LB MARLON BRANDO 1953 | eBay
coopheal
02-23 08:36 PM
What is LUD
Read all about LUDs here http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/LUD
Read all about LUDs here http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/LUD
jayram123
08-02 06:14 PM
I am sorry for posting in here, but I was wondering if someone actually went in person to the Houston Consulate to get their passport renewed. Also, do we need to have any reason to attend in person at the Consulate such as emergency, etc.
I am from India and my passport is expiring on Aug 17. I read before in the forum that it is better to go in person to renew the passport. Any experiences please let me know.
Thanks a bunch
I had been hoping somebody would help you and I did not want grief from others for answering your question since you posted in the wrong thread but here it is.
I have renewed my pp last April in person in the consulate. It is very easy. Attending in person is an option available to you with no conditions. It just makes it easier and a little bit faster processing. If you have an emergency and if you request, they may do it faster too.
Houston Consulate folks are very friendly and very helpful based on my experience. Some of my personal friends work there too.
I am from India and my passport is expiring on Aug 17. I read before in the forum that it is better to go in person to renew the passport. Any experiences please let me know.
Thanks a bunch
I had been hoping somebody would help you and I did not want grief from others for answering your question since you posted in the wrong thread but here it is.
I have renewed my pp last April in person in the consulate. It is very easy. Attending in person is an option available to you with no conditions. It just makes it easier and a little bit faster processing. If you have an emergency and if you request, they may do it faster too.
Houston Consulate folks are very friendly and very helpful based on my experience. Some of my personal friends work there too.
sam2006
09-15 01:23 AM
thanks Zappy pvhemanth :)
