h1techSlave
03-22 10:42 AM
I have noticed that the % prior to Jan 2004 is a whopping 44.06. I have a bad feeling that this group (prior to Jan 2004) is growing. :eek:
wallpaper Tags: the beatles cartoon,
gauravster
11-12 04:58 PM
WRONG.
YOU are an EB2 India guy for sure and your PD is close.
If spillover happens, all visas will get used up by EB2 India only. EB3 India gets nothing. There are way too many Indians in the system. Even if something is left from EB2 India, EB3 ROW will get breadcrums.
EB3 India gets nothing. So stop giving wrong logic. I will oppose IV helping EB2 guys with close priority dates and not caring about everyone else.
If spillover happens, it will go to EB2 India sure. But getting the visas used is better than having them wasted. Also, though remote, everyone in EB3 does have a remote chance that at sometime, they might be ported to EB2. For example, those who have EAD, but working with a different employer now (after getting EAD) can ask for the employer to file a new application and be eligible for EB2. Some in same company may also be able to apply for porting.
There is no problem in having multiple fronts of attack to the problem.
YOU are an EB2 India guy for sure and your PD is close.
If spillover happens, all visas will get used up by EB2 India only. EB3 India gets nothing. There are way too many Indians in the system. Even if something is left from EB2 India, EB3 ROW will get breadcrums.
EB3 India gets nothing. So stop giving wrong logic. I will oppose IV helping EB2 guys with close priority dates and not caring about everyone else.
If spillover happens, it will go to EB2 India sure. But getting the visas used is better than having them wasted. Also, though remote, everyone in EB3 does have a remote chance that at sometime, they might be ported to EB2. For example, those who have EAD, but working with a different employer now (after getting EAD) can ask for the employer to file a new application and be eligible for EB2. Some in same company may also be able to apply for porting.
There is no problem in having multiple fronts of attack to the problem.
pappu
07-01 10:22 PM
Info on the lawsuit by AILA:
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
2011 #35:Funny Cartoon Wallpapers
cableching
07-12 05:44 PM
According to this there should be a quarterly spillover ...:confused: but it looks like spillover is happening only in last quarter :D
Spillover happens quarterly, but the visas are allocated in the last quarter! This is because the retrogressed countries are allocated their regular quota every quarter and the extra visas must be allocated based on the priority date, irrespective of the country! It would be difficult to allocate in the earlier quarters to achieve this!
Spillover happens quarterly, but the visas are allocated in the last quarter! This is because the retrogressed countries are allocated their regular quota every quarter and the extra visas must be allocated based on the priority date, irrespective of the country! It would be difficult to allocate in the earlier quarters to achieve this!
more...
joydiptac
02-19 02:22 PM
Guys, this looks good. It is NOT for illegal aliens. Paragraphs (c) and (d) state that the alien must be admissible as an immigrant (i.e. not have broken the law by being an illegal), read paragraph (d) here:
"(d) Security and Law Enforcement Clearances- The alien, if over 15 years of age, shall submit fingerprints in accordance with procedures established by the Secretary of Homeland Security. Such fingerprints shall be submitted to relevant Federal agencies to be checked against existing databases for information relating to criminal, national security, or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a process for challenging the accuracy of matches that result in a finding of ineligibility for adjustment of status."
Read the "or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section"....so, anyone who broke the law by entering the country illegally would NOT be eligible.
So, stop sending those letters opposing this bill, and instead let's support it!!
Totally agree with you. All opposed are not getting the point that they do not stand to loose either way. Hope they come to their senses. Anyhow if nothing happens they will be waiting way more than 5 years. This can only reduce the backlogs. Think with a clear mind. You might have a fast car but you can't go fast if the freeway is clogged. THink!
"(d) Security and Law Enforcement Clearances- The alien, if over 15 years of age, shall submit fingerprints in accordance with procedures established by the Secretary of Homeland Security. Such fingerprints shall be submitted to relevant Federal agencies to be checked against existing databases for information relating to criminal, national security, or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a process for challenging the accuracy of matches that result in a finding of ineligibility for adjustment of status."
Read the "or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section"....so, anyone who broke the law by entering the country illegally would NOT be eligible.
So, stop sending those letters opposing this bill, and instead let's support it!!
Totally agree with you. All opposed are not getting the point that they do not stand to loose either way. Hope they come to their senses. Anyhow if nothing happens they will be waiting way more than 5 years. This can only reduce the backlogs. Think with a clear mind. You might have a fast car but you can't go fast if the freeway is clogged. THink!
go_gc_way
12-28 07:19 AM
Bump /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
more...
tapukakababa
07-18 09:55 AM
Mine reached USCIS Jul 2, 2007 10:25 AM.. no check cashed, no RD..
I will call USCIS next monday if I dont hear anything before then..
what should we ask them for if we call, 'coz they might not have entered our file in their system yet.
I will call USCIS next monday if I dont hear anything before then..
what should we ask them for if we call, 'coz they might not have entered our file in their system yet.
2010 Not each animated cartoon has
vagish
04-04 02:40 PM
It is true. But either Corporate America or Lawyers does not want to address the issues raised by Unions or anti immigrants. They want free ride and does not care about working class. No bold leadership in congress to address both sides issues. Congress members are siding with any one of two groups. Everyone knows that compromise will easily pass. But compromise will not give free ride to any group. Basically moderate H1b and GC increase with protection to US workers without wage pressurw will get most of the congress support. Even with illegal immigration also it is easy to pass if they give citizenship to existing people and allow more workers with complete protection to US workers without wage pressure will get most of congress support.
the reason why Mccain and kennedy partnership failed, because kennedy wanted to put the fair wage clause into the bill so that futurue employees can
atleast get the prevaling wages( it makes sense logically ), but republican Mccain didn't like it because they want employer to pay what ever they feel like,
if that happens you will see that in future the quota for low wage workers will also get filled in one day as we saw with H1B's yesterday, and then even 400000 for semiskilled workers would not be enough.
Iam not saying H1B get paid less, but there is lot of abuse going on,
1500000 application just on aptil 2 tell you a lot of things, no matter how much demand is there, it is outrageous.
when american people see that corporate america wants quota less h1B , they going to be on the streets just like illigals were last year.
thanks
the reason why Mccain and kennedy partnership failed, because kennedy wanted to put the fair wage clause into the bill so that futurue employees can
atleast get the prevaling wages( it makes sense logically ), but republican Mccain didn't like it because they want employer to pay what ever they feel like,
if that happens you will see that in future the quota for low wage workers will also get filled in one day as we saw with H1B's yesterday, and then even 400000 for semiskilled workers would not be enough.
Iam not saying H1B get paid less, but there is lot of abuse going on,
1500000 application just on aptil 2 tell you a lot of things, no matter how much demand is there, it is outrageous.
when american people see that corporate america wants quota less h1B , they going to be on the streets just like illigals were last year.
thanks
more...
sk.aggarwal
07-29 03:02 AM
Add Wachovia now acquired by Wells Fargo to the list. They don't even do H1 extensions.
hair Best Snoopy Cartoon Photos
jk999
05-27 09:05 PM
Once I went to Staples to make photocopies of my passport and the lady suggested it is illegal to make photocopies of such documents unless the copy size is at least 50% bigger.
I like the idea anyway given the small details in the passport. So I've been doing that whenever I have to make copies.
This post has been an awakening to me. I have traveled in and out of northern NH numerous times but have never ever had this happen to me. Such incidents renew the reality for me that I am just a temp here.
I like the idea anyway given the small details in the passport. So I've been doing that whenever I have to make copies.
This post has been an awakening to me. I have traveled in and out of northern NH numerous times but have never ever had this happen to me. Such incidents renew the reality for me that I am just a temp here.
more...
walking_dude
10-29 11:40 AM
Only 67 members so far? I was thinking there would be hundreds of FOIA requests by members, if not in thousands, given all the tracking activity/VB predictions that happen here (and else where too). Now that finally we have a way of accurately predicting PD movement in Visa bulletins and make more accurate prediction of approval than possible through any tracker ( all of them limited to insignificant percentages of the total population to make accurate predictions), just by sending a simple letter; I am baffled by the lukewarm response by a community that's otherwise relentlessly peristent in the tracking/predictions activity.
Having too much fun in those vodoo activities, are we? Welcome to the real world. FOIA is our chance to get the answer we all have been seeking. Will you pop the Red Pill? or continue dreaming in the unreal World of tracking and VB predictions?
Having too much fun in those vodoo activities, are we? Welcome to the real world. FOIA is our chance to get the answer we all have been seeking. Will you pop the Red Pill? or continue dreaming in the unreal World of tracking and VB predictions?
hot keyword: Cartoon wallpaper
vandanaverdia
09-10 01:18 PM
Your spouse, inspite of being a professional, cannot work, as he/she is a dependent. You end up being the only earning member & supporting your family, while your spouse just has to wait endlessly.....
What is stopping you from coming to DC??? Need more reasons???
What is stopping you from coming to DC??? Need more reasons???
more...
house TAG： house phone cartoon
GCcomesoon
03-06 11:33 AM
Hi
So what do we have coming in April bulletin ? I'm not discussing any predictions here but based on some information found on the web & in different forums , it looks like Eb2 might move ? Does anyone agree to the logic for this movement ? Is there any movement expected for EB3 - India , because with the Name check gone & some old cases getting approved , shouldn't the EB3 dates move forward ?
Thanks
GCcomesoon
So what do we have coming in April bulletin ? I'm not discussing any predictions here but based on some information found on the web & in different forums , it looks like Eb2 might move ? Does anyone agree to the logic for this movement ? Is there any movement expected for EB3 - India , because with the Name check gone & some old cases getting approved , shouldn't the EB3 dates move forward ?
Thanks
GCcomesoon
tattoo animated Cartoon Wallpaper
mps
04-23 09:43 PM
Hearty Congratulations !!
You have been a great contributor to this site .. please continue to do so for benefit of rest of us ..:)
You have been a great contributor to this site .. please continue to do so for benefit of rest of us ..:)
more...
pictures animated cartoon wallpapers. animated cartoon wallpapers.
pappu
07-24 10:56 AM
I will try to dig out the actual memo. But this is from the oh law firm page:
---
06/17/2007: Flexible RFE/NOID Response Time Rule and Advisory for July EB-485 Filing
* As we advised earlier, the USCIS published a new rule that allows the USCIS to have more discredtion and control over the two issues: One is shortening of the timeframe for responses to RFE from previous 12 weeks to any period of time which they see fit. The second rule is their authority to either reject or deny petitions or applications without issuing RFE where "initial evidence" is missing in the filing. Previously, the so-called Yates memo indirectly required the agency to avoid rejection and denial with a recommend to issue RFEs as much as possible. This part of the Yates memo is overridden by the new rule who took effect yesterday, June 16, 2007. It is thus likely that the Service Centers will more aggressively reject or deny the I-485 applications where the "initial evidence" are missing in the filing packet. It is thus very important that people understand the definition of "initial evidence." The initial evidence varies between the nonimmigrant and immigrant proceedings and for that matter, each type of proceedings. The immigration regulation lists in details the initial evidence. However, the instructions sheets to each petition or application lists the initial evidence that are required for filing. Accordingly, beginning from today, people may want to read the instruction sheet for I-485 form carefully to learn the list of initial evidence and not to miss omitting these evidence in filing I-485 applications.
* One of the initial evidence which is listed is the sealed I-693, the Medical Examination results completed and sealed by the USCIS designated civil surgeons who examined the applicants per the immigration rules. As we reported yesterday, attorneys asked the USCIS authorities to accept I-485 applications without the medical result, but their answer was that they were taking it under advicement but as it stands now, the sealed medical report would be required as initial evidence, accoring to the USCIS authorities who were present at the AILA Annual Conference in Orlando. We understand that in some areas, there are a huge backlog in the physician's clinics for such medical examination. However, people can shop around the authorized physicians in much broader areas. For instance, people usually were asked to schedule such medical examination in the local "district" office where the applicants resided. The definition of "district office" has been broaden lately. Former district offices have been turned into field offices of a district office. Accordingly, people can schedule the medical examination through a physician located outside of their residence if the area falls under the jurisdiction of "district" even if it is outside the jurisdiction of "field office."
---
---
06/17/2007: Flexible RFE/NOID Response Time Rule and Advisory for July EB-485 Filing
* As we advised earlier, the USCIS published a new rule that allows the USCIS to have more discredtion and control over the two issues: One is shortening of the timeframe for responses to RFE from previous 12 weeks to any period of time which they see fit. The second rule is their authority to either reject or deny petitions or applications without issuing RFE where "initial evidence" is missing in the filing. Previously, the so-called Yates memo indirectly required the agency to avoid rejection and denial with a recommend to issue RFEs as much as possible. This part of the Yates memo is overridden by the new rule who took effect yesterday, June 16, 2007. It is thus likely that the Service Centers will more aggressively reject or deny the I-485 applications where the "initial evidence" are missing in the filing packet. It is thus very important that people understand the definition of "initial evidence." The initial evidence varies between the nonimmigrant and immigrant proceedings and for that matter, each type of proceedings. The immigration regulation lists in details the initial evidence. However, the instructions sheets to each petition or application lists the initial evidence that are required for filing. Accordingly, beginning from today, people may want to read the instruction sheet for I-485 form carefully to learn the list of initial evidence and not to miss omitting these evidence in filing I-485 applications.
* One of the initial evidence which is listed is the sealed I-693, the Medical Examination results completed and sealed by the USCIS designated civil surgeons who examined the applicants per the immigration rules. As we reported yesterday, attorneys asked the USCIS authorities to accept I-485 applications without the medical result, but their answer was that they were taking it under advicement but as it stands now, the sealed medical report would be required as initial evidence, accoring to the USCIS authorities who were present at the AILA Annual Conference in Orlando. We understand that in some areas, there are a huge backlog in the physician's clinics for such medical examination. However, people can shop around the authorized physicians in much broader areas. For instance, people usually were asked to schedule such medical examination in the local "district" office where the applicants resided. The definition of "district office" has been broaden lately. Former district offices have been turned into field offices of a district office. Accordingly, people can schedule the medical examination through a physician located outside of their residence if the area falls under the jurisdiction of "district" even if it is outside the jurisdiction of "field office."
---
dresses Easter Cartoon wallpaper
DallasBlue
09-11 10:29 PM
The Govenors are on our side! There's thousands of us with may reasons why to attend, but here's a very important one:
This is for YOU! Only for YOU! YOU deserve this! That's why we want to see YOU in Washington! Help yourself!!! YOU have earned the right!!!!
Thank you Governor(s)!!
Congressmen/Senators please do what the nation's leaders are are asking you for a long time.
Jaime, Guess we may have to organize a walk to Crawford ? what do you think ?
This is for YOU! Only for YOU! YOU deserve this! That's why we want to see YOU in Washington! Help yourself!!! YOU have earned the right!!!!
Thank you Governor(s)!!
Congressmen/Senators please do what the nation's leaders are are asking you for a long time.
Jaime, Guess we may have to organize a walk to Crawford ? what do you think ?
more...
makeup cartoon wallpapers, have a
eb3_nepa
07-05 01:37 PM
1) You can VIEW the forums ONLY if you are a REGISTERED member (that part is FREE).
2) You can POST replies to people's questions only if you are a REGISTERED member (again this part is FREE).
3) HOWEVER, you can start a NEW Thread ONLY IF you are a PAID member (the minimum fee should be $10 - $20)
2) You can POST replies to people's questions only if you are a REGISTERED member (again this part is FREE).
3) HOWEVER, you can start a NEW Thread ONLY IF you are a PAID member (the minimum fee should be $10 - $20)
girlfriend disney cartoon characters
mbartosik
02-14 02:20 AM
I've not noticed any fighting here. Maybe I've been too busy on IV stuff. There are Indians that I count among my closest friends.
I've pushed for removal of country quotas like many else, even though it would risk pushing me further back in the line. I've pushed for recapture too.
However if IV was only about removal of country quotas and not other issues, then it is fair to say that I wouldn't be here.
I've pushed for removal of country quotas like many else, even though it would risk pushing me further back in the line. I've pushed for recapture too.
However if IV was only about removal of country quotas and not other issues, then it is fair to say that I wouldn't be here.
hairstyles Animal cartoon wallpaper
ssingh92
02-14 12:30 AM
Dude;
This is called natural correction. Read other posts and you would realize that for last 10 yrs majority of these so called IT programmers didn't even go to proper engineering college. More than half of them weren't even qualified to do the jobs. And than most of them came here and sat on bench, even though their actual jobs were still being searched or finalized. This system was mis-used and abused. Now it's time to pay for it!
So thank God this is happening and hope USCIS does good job this time.
I totally agreed with you. This system has to be cleaned. If a system is being misused then the Gov will take some action. I also dont think they want to remove all Indians from US. I believe they will link this system with a new system similar to JRE and TOFFEL so that a police inspector from India can not come as PL/Sql programmer no matter who is hiring. I know my comment will hurt lot of people here.
This is called natural correction. Read other posts and you would realize that for last 10 yrs majority of these so called IT programmers didn't even go to proper engineering college. More than half of them weren't even qualified to do the jobs. And than most of them came here and sat on bench, even though their actual jobs were still being searched or finalized. This system was mis-used and abused. Now it's time to pay for it!
So thank God this is happening and hope USCIS does good job this time.
I totally agreed with you. This system has to be cleaned. If a system is being misused then the Gov will take some action. I also dont think they want to remove all Indians from US. I believe they will link this system with a new system similar to JRE and TOFFEL so that a police inspector from India can not come as PL/Sql programmer no matter who is hiring. I know my comment will hurt lot of people here.
vagish
04-02 03:22 PM
this is not the new trend, back in year 2000 to 2003 , when massive layoffs were going on , it has been prevelant since then. Also if this illegal , how about people who got laid off in those years and never went bak home sitting on bench for a year, if you start to fish around, you will find lots and lots of people
had trouble in maintaining their status in the past.
Fake resume is the fact which has been there for so many years, be it for masters or for just B.E graduates.
thanks
had trouble in maintaining their status in the past.
Fake resume is the fact which has been there for so many years, be it for masters or for just B.E graduates.
thanks
kumar1
12-15 11:01 AM
gcisadawg,
Very well said. What you said, also gives strength to my point. We are self proclaimed "highly skilled" workers. We shouldn't have been trained, we shouldn't have been air lifted by desi consultants. We shouldn't have been sold for short/long term projects after coming to the US.
Actually, during 1999-2000 year, when I was about to graduate from IIT, yes, my class mates used to receive calls from Microsoft based in Seattle and Phillips based in Holland. Those companies paid final year graduating students (with good track record), a return trip to Seattle for interview. That was the real demand! And mind you, those students were very talented. They already had secured 100% aid from excellent US universities. So, it was a scenario of good company taking interest in excellent students and then filing for H1-B and subsequently green card. Can you imagine, Microsoft getting a RFE from USCIS to show "ability to pay"! We have so many people yelling on these forums because companies do not have the ability to pay to these "highly skilled workers".
I can go on and on.....
I do not agree with anyone who claims that we are really "required" here. We are fighting to survive here and we are fighting to get Green Cards. We have 50 million hate groups in the US that do not like us at all. It is a tough road ahead !
kumar1,
I agree to most of the points you wrote. I believe there is one thing that you missed.
H1B is a dual intent visa that allows a foreigner to work in US and also apply for permanent residency. It was originally intended for American companies to hire people from abroad. But how many American companies hire people directly from abroad? Even if there is some, it would be very very minimal.
Body shoppers are the one who take on the difficult task of interviewing/recruiting/sponsoring/air-lifting the foreigner to USA in addition to preparing the candidate to withstand the rigors of a visa interview.
They give initial accommodation (agreed, a 1BR aptmnt cramped with many ppl), pay on bench ( accepted, not all), place the candidate on a project and get the foreigner US work/cultural experience. After they go through the whole nine yards, these American companies jump in and poach these H1Bs.
Take the body shoppers and glorified body shoppers like TCS, wipro, infy etc out of the equation and you would have sheer wastage of H1B numbers since the American companies will not go abroad to recruit someone who is unfamiliar with US work culture.
That is why congress came up with 20K quota for master degree holders who can be recruited directly by US corporations. In my opinion, US corporations should not complain at all since they were never interested in upholding the true spirit of H1B by recruiting people from abroad directly.
-gcisadawg
Very well said. What you said, also gives strength to my point. We are self proclaimed "highly skilled" workers. We shouldn't have been trained, we shouldn't have been air lifted by desi consultants. We shouldn't have been sold for short/long term projects after coming to the US.
Actually, during 1999-2000 year, when I was about to graduate from IIT, yes, my class mates used to receive calls from Microsoft based in Seattle and Phillips based in Holland. Those companies paid final year graduating students (with good track record), a return trip to Seattle for interview. That was the real demand! And mind you, those students were very talented. They already had secured 100% aid from excellent US universities. So, it was a scenario of good company taking interest in excellent students and then filing for H1-B and subsequently green card. Can you imagine, Microsoft getting a RFE from USCIS to show "ability to pay"! We have so many people yelling on these forums because companies do not have the ability to pay to these "highly skilled workers".
I can go on and on.....
I do not agree with anyone who claims that we are really "required" here. We are fighting to survive here and we are fighting to get Green Cards. We have 50 million hate groups in the US that do not like us at all. It is a tough road ahead !
kumar1,
I agree to most of the points you wrote. I believe there is one thing that you missed.
H1B is a dual intent visa that allows a foreigner to work in US and also apply for permanent residency. It was originally intended for American companies to hire people from abroad. But how many American companies hire people directly from abroad? Even if there is some, it would be very very minimal.
Body shoppers are the one who take on the difficult task of interviewing/recruiting/sponsoring/air-lifting the foreigner to USA in addition to preparing the candidate to withstand the rigors of a visa interview.
They give initial accommodation (agreed, a 1BR aptmnt cramped with many ppl), pay on bench ( accepted, not all), place the candidate on a project and get the foreigner US work/cultural experience. After they go through the whole nine yards, these American companies jump in and poach these H1Bs.
Take the body shoppers and glorified body shoppers like TCS, wipro, infy etc out of the equation and you would have sheer wastage of H1B numbers since the American companies will not go abroad to recruit someone who is unfamiliar with US work culture.
That is why congress came up with 20K quota for master degree holders who can be recruited directly by US corporations. In my opinion, US corporations should not complain at all since they were never interested in upholding the true spirit of H1B by recruiting people from abroad directly.
-gcisadawg
No comments:
Post a Comment