TomPlate
07-06 10:57 AM
07/07/2007: USCIS Reportedly Admitted Some I-485 Approvals at Last Minutes Without Completion of FBI Security Clearance
* New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/06/us/06visa.html?hp, has reported:
"To complete the applications in time, the immigration agency put employees to work both days last weekend at service centers in Texas and Nebraska, immigration officials said. They said that 25,000 applications were processed in the final 48 hours before Monday�s deadline. In some cases, security clearances required by the F.B.I. were not entirely completed, immigration officials said. The agency approved some applications �when we were certain the process will be completed very shortly,� Mr. Aytes said."
* The report also indicates that the State Department and the USCIS tend to disagree with each other for the root of the problem for the current fiasco. Earlier there was a report in the Washington Post that the USCIS denied that the USCIS worked ceaselessly and frantically during the weekends (two days) before July 1, but it has been admitted since then the employees indeed worked hard during the two days. According to the NY Times report, during the weekend alone, they approved 25,000 I-485 backlog applications.
* We are afraid that the alleged admission of approval of I-485 application before completion of the security clearance is likely to face the legal challenge for violation of the rules which is likely one of the main claims of the AILF lawsuit as well as the political backfire as an issue of security lapse relating to the homeland security. It appears that the July visa bullen fiasco is going out of control and pushes the two agencies into an edge. :eek: :eek: :eek:
DONT CREATE THREAD FOR EXISTING NEWS. WE ARE HOPING FOR POSTIIVE NEWS THE NEXT WEEK OF ACCEPTING APPLICATION WITH SAME FEE ON AUGUST VISA BULLETIN.
* New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/06/us/06visa.html?hp, has reported:
"To complete the applications in time, the immigration agency put employees to work both days last weekend at service centers in Texas and Nebraska, immigration officials said. They said that 25,000 applications were processed in the final 48 hours before Monday�s deadline. In some cases, security clearances required by the F.B.I. were not entirely completed, immigration officials said. The agency approved some applications �when we were certain the process will be completed very shortly,� Mr. Aytes said."
* The report also indicates that the State Department and the USCIS tend to disagree with each other for the root of the problem for the current fiasco. Earlier there was a report in the Washington Post that the USCIS denied that the USCIS worked ceaselessly and frantically during the weekends (two days) before July 1, but it has been admitted since then the employees indeed worked hard during the two days. According to the NY Times report, during the weekend alone, they approved 25,000 I-485 backlog applications.
* We are afraid that the alleged admission of approval of I-485 application before completion of the security clearance is likely to face the legal challenge for violation of the rules which is likely one of the main claims of the AILF lawsuit as well as the political backfire as an issue of security lapse relating to the homeland security. It appears that the July visa bullen fiasco is going out of control and pushes the two agencies into an edge. :eek: :eek: :eek:
DONT CREATE THREAD FOR EXISTING NEWS. WE ARE HOPING FOR POSTIIVE NEWS THE NEXT WEEK OF ACCEPTING APPLICATION WITH SAME FEE ON AUGUST VISA BULLETIN.
deba
10-27 10:36 AM
Tecnically I-140, labor cert belongs to the company. But it is always good to have a copy. I do not think it is necessary to have these docs to invoke AC21. Also, you may not necessarily get RFE for using AC21 either.
Deb
Contrib $900 so far
EB2 India PD 03/05
I140 09/07
I485 07/07
Deb
Contrib $900 so far
EB2 India PD 03/05
I140 09/07
I485 07/07
Blog Feeds
01-09 02:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_QZpVppv4FTs/S0RsZr5XFgI/AAAAAAAAACc/m6OP7jHF9vY/s320/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_QZpVppv4FTs/S0RsZr5XFgI/AAAAAAAAACc/m6OP7jHF9vY/s1600-h/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg)By Deborah Notkin, AILA Past President
Unfortunately, that's exactly what the Gutierrez bill is. While there are many excellent provisions on important components of immigration reform, especially family unity and legalization, the employment immigration provisions are overwhelmingly negative and geared to eliminate the employers from having any reasonable input on the specific types of foreign employees that are required in an evolving economy. The overarching provision is the establishment of a "Commission" that would determine U.S. immigration policy (numbers and categories) pertaining to temporary and permanent workers. A commission of seven "experts" would report to both houses of Congress annually the types and number of workers that could enter the U. S. Unless both houses of Congress acted to block them (a rarity in today's world), the Commission's "recommendations" would become the law of the land.
There are a number of reasons why substituting Congress with a commission is a bad idea. First, we don't have the statistical evidence available to make good measurements on an annual basis. Second, government commissions in DC overwhelmingly end up becoming unelected political entities, with their own agendas, often exceeding their original mission. Third, a politicized commission on such a controversial issue would be especially problematic because it would not be accountable directly to voters as are elected representatives. In a debate on the Commission concept that I attended in New York, proponents were struggling to find even a few examples of Beltway government commissions that worked and did not become politicized.
While the Gutierrez bill should be commended for including provisions requiring employers to take responsibility for utilizing ethical recruiters and providing a few exemptions from the employment based quota for certain types of professionals, it generally negates the legitimacy of corporate needs and lacks any concept of the global economy and the international, competitive personnel market.
Most egregious is the idea of bringing in a lesser skilled workforce through a sort of "hiring hall" lottery system that would eliminate employers entirely from the selection process. Foreign workers would be placed in a database and assigned to employers based on some computer's or bureaucrat's idea of a match. It reminds one of the unfortunate migrants who are day workers standing outside waiting to be randomly hired. Here, they can just stand in their own countries being assigned to an employer they may not have chosen if given the choice.
Additional provisions would eliminate the ability of employers to use entry level wages for entry level temporary workers. Forcing employers to pay foreign nationals more than their U.S. worker counterparts is totally absurd. Is this how we think America will benefit from the many foreign nationals who have just graduated from, among other fields, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathmatics, programs? And of course, the unworkable cap on H-1B temporary professional workers in a healthy economy is totally ignored, evidently to be left to the gang of seven commissioners.
It appears that Congressman Gutierrez put his heart and soul into legalization and family unity but left the employment provisions to be drafted by the most anti-employer parties in this debate. Much is borrowed from the Durbin-Grassley proposed H-1B and L-1B provisions and the Economic Policy Institute's piece on immigration, which starts out by labeling all employers using foreign workers as participants in indentured servitude.
I have only highlighted a few of the egregious provisions that promise to sink an otherwise good piece of legislation. And this does not serve anyone who sincerely wants to find a solution to the human tragedy faced by undocumented migrants in the United States.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4566215004987922662?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/01/gutierrez-billa-good-legalization-and.html)
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_QZpVppv4FTs/S0RsZr5XFgI/AAAAAAAAACc/m6OP7jHF9vY/s320/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_QZpVppv4FTs/S0RsZr5XFgI/AAAAAAAAACc/m6OP7jHF9vY/s1600-h/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg)By Deborah Notkin, AILA Past President
Unfortunately, that's exactly what the Gutierrez bill is. While there are many excellent provisions on important components of immigration reform, especially family unity and legalization, the employment immigration provisions are overwhelmingly negative and geared to eliminate the employers from having any reasonable input on the specific types of foreign employees that are required in an evolving economy. The overarching provision is the establishment of a "Commission" that would determine U.S. immigration policy (numbers and categories) pertaining to temporary and permanent workers. A commission of seven "experts" would report to both houses of Congress annually the types and number of workers that could enter the U. S. Unless both houses of Congress acted to block them (a rarity in today's world), the Commission's "recommendations" would become the law of the land.
There are a number of reasons why substituting Congress with a commission is a bad idea. First, we don't have the statistical evidence available to make good measurements on an annual basis. Second, government commissions in DC overwhelmingly end up becoming unelected political entities, with their own agendas, often exceeding their original mission. Third, a politicized commission on such a controversial issue would be especially problematic because it would not be accountable directly to voters as are elected representatives. In a debate on the Commission concept that I attended in New York, proponents were struggling to find even a few examples of Beltway government commissions that worked and did not become politicized.
While the Gutierrez bill should be commended for including provisions requiring employers to take responsibility for utilizing ethical recruiters and providing a few exemptions from the employment based quota for certain types of professionals, it generally negates the legitimacy of corporate needs and lacks any concept of the global economy and the international, competitive personnel market.
Most egregious is the idea of bringing in a lesser skilled workforce through a sort of "hiring hall" lottery system that would eliminate employers entirely from the selection process. Foreign workers would be placed in a database and assigned to employers based on some computer's or bureaucrat's idea of a match. It reminds one of the unfortunate migrants who are day workers standing outside waiting to be randomly hired. Here, they can just stand in their own countries being assigned to an employer they may not have chosen if given the choice.
Additional provisions would eliminate the ability of employers to use entry level wages for entry level temporary workers. Forcing employers to pay foreign nationals more than their U.S. worker counterparts is totally absurd. Is this how we think America will benefit from the many foreign nationals who have just graduated from, among other fields, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathmatics, programs? And of course, the unworkable cap on H-1B temporary professional workers in a healthy economy is totally ignored, evidently to be left to the gang of seven commissioners.
It appears that Congressman Gutierrez put his heart and soul into legalization and family unity but left the employment provisions to be drafted by the most anti-employer parties in this debate. Much is borrowed from the Durbin-Grassley proposed H-1B and L-1B provisions and the Economic Policy Institute's piece on immigration, which starts out by labeling all employers using foreign workers as participants in indentured servitude.
I have only highlighted a few of the egregious provisions that promise to sink an otherwise good piece of legislation. And this does not serve anyone who sincerely wants to find a solution to the human tragedy faced by undocumented migrants in the United States.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4566215004987922662?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/01/gutierrez-billa-good-legalization-and.html)
jsb
10-30 12:13 PM
^^^^^^bump^^^^^
Can anybody tell what does ^^^^bump^^^^ mean. Is it that the message is deleted by someone, or moved elsehwhere?
Can anybody tell what does ^^^^bump^^^^ mean. Is it that the message is deleted by someone, or moved elsehwhere?
more...
sdeshpan
08-05 07:27 PM
It auto-converts all H1Bs and EADs into Green Cards effective immediately. :)
Do you really think H1-B folks (or even those waiting for PD to be current) will be considered "Long-term conditional residents"?
Not questioning, just wondering...there has to be a catch! But alas, someone is trying for some relief...let's see of this bill ever sees the light of day!
Do you really think H1-B folks (or even those waiting for PD to be current) will be considered "Long-term conditional residents"?
Not questioning, just wondering...there has to be a catch! But alas, someone is trying for some relief...let's see of this bill ever sees the light of day!
neogator
02-15 03:36 PM
Inter-State( Country ) marriages would be on the rise !! :)
more...
vivekjay
03-05 04:20 PM
This is a classic example of election year posturing where republicans want to look tough on immigration. This bill will head straight down the trash.
overhere
07-17 08:50 AM
Please enlighten me. What constitute a proof of immigrant intent?
Filing of:
1. LC
2. I-140
3. Medicals
4. I-485
etc...
I am confuse. Please explain.
in my opinion, the consul will consider lc filing as proof of immigrant intent. remember lc is the first step towards getting a green card so you're intention is to get a green card.
my advise is, if ever you decide you want to push through with your lc plan or change of status from b2 (tourist) to h1 (working), you must stay in the US until you get your gc. never ever visit the US embassy of your home country coz they'll definitely ask you about it and most likely, they'll ban you from entering the US permanently. once again, this is just my opinion. hope this one helps.
Filing of:
1. LC
2. I-140
3. Medicals
4. I-485
etc...
I am confuse. Please explain.
in my opinion, the consul will consider lc filing as proof of immigrant intent. remember lc is the first step towards getting a green card so you're intention is to get a green card.
my advise is, if ever you decide you want to push through with your lc plan or change of status from b2 (tourist) to h1 (working), you must stay in the US until you get your gc. never ever visit the US embassy of your home country coz they'll definitely ask you about it and most likely, they'll ban you from entering the US permanently. once again, this is just my opinion. hope this one helps.
more...
vnsriv
08-14 04:30 PM
I am planning to do that early next year when I go up there for a six week vacation. Thanks for that feedback.
Count me in the R2I for good. My target is next Jun. all the best
Count me in the R2I for good. My target is next Jun. all the best
bidhanc
04-19 02:47 PM
Hi,
I just got back from Mumbai.
My Indian passport was issued here in the States.
My last place of work in India was Delhi (that was in 2000,where I got my initial visa done).
But I am a resident of Bhubaneswar.
I opted for Mumbai as it was going to be my port of entry.
Did not get any such warning or mail.
So not much trouble as far as the stamping was concerned.
Don't understand why they would try and compel you to move to your own district. This must be a recent thing.
Important question is, if they refuse to stamp at your first choice, how do you get the 2nd appointment at your own district? And will it be worth the trouble.
Sorry, don't know abt that.
Bidhan
I just got back from Mumbai.
My Indian passport was issued here in the States.
My last place of work in India was Delhi (that was in 2000,where I got my initial visa done).
But I am a resident of Bhubaneswar.
I opted for Mumbai as it was going to be my port of entry.
Did not get any such warning or mail.
So not much trouble as far as the stamping was concerned.
Don't understand why they would try and compel you to move to your own district. This must be a recent thing.
Important question is, if they refuse to stamp at your first choice, how do you get the 2nd appointment at your own district? And will it be worth the trouble.
Sorry, don't know abt that.
Bidhan
more...
OLDMONK
07-06 01:07 PM
Herndon, Va.: Good Afternoon Kelly, I am tried to ask the same question to previous reporters today in the discussion, but no one replied can kindly advice on this
Poor Coverage in Media Regarding a Very Important Issue where governmental agencies (USCIS/DOS) took unprecedented/unlawful route and resulted in millions of dollars wasted and dreams shattered of hard working, lawfully present Highly Skilled Immigrants.
My Question is why is media acting like an Ostrich on this issue? Answers anyone??
FYI Some individuals and distinguished senators are on top of this already.
Suit Planned Over Visas for the Highly Skilled (The New York Times, July 6)
Rep. Lofgren Issues Statement on Updated Visa Bulletin (Press Release, July 3)
Answered:
John Kelly: Well I don't see that it's totally been ignored. And as you mentioned, there IS a story in the New York Times today. I don't know why this particular wrinkle might not have been covered as much as some might like, but I imagine the crush of other news might be partly to blame.
Poor Coverage in Media Regarding a Very Important Issue where governmental agencies (USCIS/DOS) took unprecedented/unlawful route and resulted in millions of dollars wasted and dreams shattered of hard working, lawfully present Highly Skilled Immigrants.
My Question is why is media acting like an Ostrich on this issue? Answers anyone??
FYI Some individuals and distinguished senators are on top of this already.
Suit Planned Over Visas for the Highly Skilled (The New York Times, July 6)
Rep. Lofgren Issues Statement on Updated Visa Bulletin (Press Release, July 3)
Answered:
John Kelly: Well I don't see that it's totally been ignored. And as you mentioned, there IS a story in the New York Times today. I don't know why this particular wrinkle might not have been covered as much as some might like, but I imagine the crush of other news might be partly to blame.
shana04
11-05 02:34 PM
What if USCIS had not screwed up by using all "C"s in July bulletin? You would not have even filed AOS !! Think positively. And don't show even a sign that you are waiting for 180 days; just count them inside. Until then your sponsor can pull the plug anytime by revolking your I-140, and if that happens, you are back to square one.
It all depends on the rollercoster where you have been in your life.
May be one day I would be on the other side talking more optimistic.
But I would never critic others opinion based on the fact that what they are going through (in life).
But I would say good luck to you my friend.
It all depends on the rollercoster where you have been in your life.
May be one day I would be on the other side talking more optimistic.
But I would never critic others opinion based on the fact that what they are going through (in life).
But I would say good luck to you my friend.
more...
purgan
12-17 12:44 PM
For folks who have waited that long, they should not keep them tethered to the empoyer or occupation. They could perhaps do its administratively...for instance, anyone with a GC petition pending longer than 5 years should be eligible for adjucation on the basis of EXISTING paperwork.
A lot of folks- illegal immigrants especially- are pushing for administrative relief in the Obama Admn and we - legal immigrants- deserve atleast equal treatment.
A lot of folks- illegal immigrants especially- are pushing for administrative relief in the Obama Admn and we - legal immigrants- deserve atleast equal treatment.
vbkris77
02-03 05:21 PM
All State is saying is that they are giving EB2-India a total of 2987 visas. They didn't care about spill over and slow consumption by ROW. They are still acting stupid but this time they are trying to show reasoning for their stupidity. If this report had a consumption of visas till date for FY10 like in a dash board, then they would have seen their own stupidity clearly.
more...
immique
03-30 12:27 AM
please update us on when you get your visa and please post your entire experience as it would help others. you should have applied for AP while you are in US. Now that you are outside and do not have AP, the only options I see are you just wait on the visa from US consulate in Canada or alternatively, you can request your passport back telling them that you would like to apply for visa in India as you cannot stay in Canada for an extended period of time.
ruchigup
06-02 01:49 PM
I know it is overwhelming, when we get email from USCIS about RFE. But be patient it is generally for employment verification, birth certificate, medicals etc. If there is one for spouse it could be for marriage verification.
You need to wait at least 7 days before you should call to check with them. But 7 days is fair time, and 80% (no data backing) of letters are received by then.
You need to wait at least 7 days before you should call to check with them. But 7 days is fair time, and 80% (no data backing) of letters are received by then.
more...
Leo07
02-01 10:25 AM
we all need to fill the survey so that they can at least think about bumping up the priority.
PS: boy, there are lot of anti-immigrants than you'd think on this forum--people giving me RED:(
I'm assuming they'd fill out the survey the other way?
Immigration reform is not even in the list of items. This reflects the priority of CIR in president's todo list.
PS: boy, there are lot of anti-immigrants than you'd think on this forum--people giving me RED:(
I'm assuming they'd fill out the survey the other way?
Immigration reform is not even in the list of items. This reflects the priority of CIR in president's todo list.
belmontboy
03-05 08:24 PM
Can we all try to list some big so called stable banks (as of this writing)........... all we can do is keep the funds in them, but if FDIC tanks, we will loose a LOT.
Wells Fargo
Bank Of America (People may differ with me on this choice)
can we add more to this list
chase
Wells Fargo
Bank Of America (People may differ with me on this choice)
can we add more to this list
chase
manish1905
04-21 01:37 PM
contributed small amount!!!!!
Nikith77
04-09 11:52 AM
congrats, You got green. it was a long wait. I am happy for you.
ragz4u
04-11 02:09 PM
Bumping this thread. Only a handful have sent an email to us. Other folks, please consider volunteering
0 comments:
Post a Comment