alterego
06-08 07:09 PM
Nobody should get red for expressing their thought!! So if at all I give you some, it would be only green!
coming to your point: Even in the thread you referenced to, I have posted a comment "Mr. Oppenheim's statements do not add up...his statements logically contradict each other (well you can not expect LOGIC from USCIS). and so the exact scenario will only be clarified with VB, date movements and finally, their year end statistics".
Accordingly, moving the EB2 I and C together, they have proven that "they are getting ready to spill over". Moreover, EB2 China has used up "its own quota" and will need spill over to move. EB2 ROW on the other had has not used up "its own quota" and will not need spill over (as it is current and not together with India and china). So any spill over from EB1 will come to EB2 India and China (effectively only to India). And if EB2 ROW does not use up their remaining numbers (which they have not so far) during the rest of fiscal year they will also spill to EB2 India.
Agree with your logic. However, if there is anything about the USCIS/State Dep't we have learnt over the last 2 yrs, they and their rules/logic is inconsistent at best and idiotic at worst. When someone picks and chooses which guidelines they follow at different times, and interpret the rules in such a haphazard manner, predicting anything in this regard is about as accurate as predicting the weather on the day I get my green card.
coming to your point: Even in the thread you referenced to, I have posted a comment "Mr. Oppenheim's statements do not add up...his statements logically contradict each other (well you can not expect LOGIC from USCIS). and so the exact scenario will only be clarified with VB, date movements and finally, their year end statistics".
Accordingly, moving the EB2 I and C together, they have proven that "they are getting ready to spill over". Moreover, EB2 China has used up "its own quota" and will need spill over to move. EB2 ROW on the other had has not used up "its own quota" and will not need spill over (as it is current and not together with India and china). So any spill over from EB1 will come to EB2 India and China (effectively only to India). And if EB2 ROW does not use up their remaining numbers (which they have not so far) during the rest of fiscal year they will also spill to EB2 India.
Agree with your logic. However, if there is anything about the USCIS/State Dep't we have learnt over the last 2 yrs, they and their rules/logic is inconsistent at best and idiotic at worst. When someone picks and chooses which guidelines they follow at different times, and interpret the rules in such a haphazard manner, predicting anything in this regard is about as accurate as predicting the weather on the day I get my green card.
wallpaper miley cyrus tattoos pictures.
snathan
03-11 09:19 PM
If we put the word H1B in the Visa Re-capturing bill, the bill would be doomed. As few have rightly pointed out, it would be taken out of context probably advertised and interpreted as increasing H1B visas.
If we put the words, eliminating per country limits, it would doomed. The CNN headlines would scream "Indians and Chinese are coming".
If we put any changes to the current requirements of I-485 filing, it would be interpreted as diluting the existing laws to import more cheap foreign workers faster. The anti-immigration forces would be all over it like a monkey on a cupcake.
If we keep it simple : Re-capturing unused visa numbers for Employment Based Categories for Foreign Born Professionals already employed in the US legally and in the queue for Permanent Residency, we have a high chance of success.
IV team please start the fund raising for re-capturing visa numbers. Thanks.
Before starting new fund raising...do you consider to contribute for the current drive.
If we put the words, eliminating per country limits, it would doomed. The CNN headlines would scream "Indians and Chinese are coming".
If we put any changes to the current requirements of I-485 filing, it would be interpreted as diluting the existing laws to import more cheap foreign workers faster. The anti-immigration forces would be all over it like a monkey on a cupcake.
If we keep it simple : Re-capturing unused visa numbers for Employment Based Categories for Foreign Born Professionals already employed in the US legally and in the queue for Permanent Residency, we have a high chance of success.
IV team please start the fund raising for re-capturing visa numbers. Thanks.
Before starting new fund raising...do you consider to contribute for the current drive.
girijas
09-10 11:01 AM
There were discussing the first bill - something about horses.
They have gone to recess and will be back at 1pm. I guess they will start with the horses again and then the next two bills concerning humans and we are next - the aliens :)
They have gone to recess and will be back at 1pm. I guess they will start with the horses again and then the next two bills concerning humans and we are next - the aliens :)
2011 Miley has a heart-shaped
Pineapple
11-18 06:59 AM
My receipt number is NRC2008064605.
more...
vagish
04-04 04:25 PM
04/04/2007: Senator Durbin and Senator Grassley Introduced H-1B and L-1 Visa Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act of 2007
* We reported earlier that these Senators were considering introduction of this foreign worker restriction bill in the Senate. Here we go. This bill was introduced in the Senate late last week. As seen in the summary of Senator Durbin, this bill proposes to apply to all the employers the restrictive portion of the current H-1B rule that applies only to the H-1B dependent employers. Together with the USCIS announcement of FY 2008 H-1B cap exhaution in one day, this legislative bill casts a dark shadow over the foreign worker immigration system. In a way, it is a frontal assault on the immigration of foreign professional workers. Please stay tuned to this web site for our summary of this nightmarish bill. Admittedly, the event in the last two days suggests that there is a room for potential abuse of the H-1B visa system under the current law and some level of change should be considered in one way or another. However, Senator's bill may not be a right way to correct the problems in the current system.
Even immigration-law.com admits there is a potential fraud going on ,read the last few lines.
thanks
* We reported earlier that these Senators were considering introduction of this foreign worker restriction bill in the Senate. Here we go. This bill was introduced in the Senate late last week. As seen in the summary of Senator Durbin, this bill proposes to apply to all the employers the restrictive portion of the current H-1B rule that applies only to the H-1B dependent employers. Together with the USCIS announcement of FY 2008 H-1B cap exhaution in one day, this legislative bill casts a dark shadow over the foreign worker immigration system. In a way, it is a frontal assault on the immigration of foreign professional workers. Please stay tuned to this web site for our summary of this nightmarish bill. Admittedly, the event in the last two days suggests that there is a room for potential abuse of the H-1B visa system under the current law and some level of change should be considered in one way or another. However, Senator's bill may not be a right way to correct the problems in the current system.
Even immigration-law.com admits there is a potential fraud going on ,read the last few lines.
thanks
Dakota Newfie
07-03 06:22 AM
...that the system is severely backlogged and needs repair but to say it is unfair to limit the number of immigrants from one country does not make sense. Removing the per country limit would allow one or two countries to dominate the EB system because their high populations allow them to produce more skilled labor. So removing the per country limit would remove the "bias" off these countries and move it to the ones with lower populations; so, in essence the discrimination would be reversed? Maybe a point-based system that incorporates a per country score would be better?
more...
Legal
07-04 09:17 PM
Another myth: USCIS processed 60,000 485 in June. It is wrong. They processed 60,000 485 over the period of 6 months to 5 years. And they just approved in June, based on earlier processing.
In their "normal" pace they would be giving finishing touches and slowly releasing them over the course of next 12 months! Do you agree?
But they worked overnight and weekend to finish up and deny benefits to the July filers? Therein lies the problem. what do you think?
In their "normal" pace they would be giving finishing touches and slowly releasing them over the course of next 12 months! Do you agree?
But they worked overnight and weekend to finish up and deny benefits to the July filers? Therein lies the problem. what do you think?
2010 The small tattoo of a heart
guy03062
11-11 05:00 PM
Good one :p
I am surprised that this thread is still active. Usually by this time somebody from the core group puts a statement and that usually closes the discussion. I am sure this will happen soon since atleast a few posters have been requesting asistance from Pappu regarding this issue. I am just waiting for that post to come...dont know when. Hey pappu why are you taking so long......why dont you post and tell all our friends who are currently so emotional about the reality of pursuing the legal option...
I am surprised that this thread is still active. Usually by this time somebody from the core group puts a statement and that usually closes the discussion. I am sure this will happen soon since atleast a few posters have been requesting asistance from Pappu regarding this issue. I am just waiting for that post to come...dont know when. Hey pappu why are you taking so long......why dont you post and tell all our friends who are currently so emotional about the reality of pursuing the legal option...
more...
spicy_guy
08-11 05:57 PM
Again, as I mentioned, we are jumping all over the board with different ideas and opinions. This leads to no where. Someone who has good understanding of USCIS / DOS / Govt procedures should come up with an agenda and move forward from there. We'll need to work with IV leadership team too. (At this time, I don't think they are even looking into this effort, as understandably they have other goals in hand). However, we should approach them with concrete plan of action.
Everyone is willing to Donate $$$. But for what? What are we going to spend that money on?
We need focused efforts.
Lets join hands and maybe the OP can take the lead in preparing the agenda / plan of action.
What say you guys?
Bottom line: I believe we can do! Of course, we need to procure support from multiple sources like some of the ideas mentioned by the posters CompleteAmerica, Talking to senators on Aug 15th, etc.
Everyone is willing to Donate $$$. But for what? What are we going to spend that money on?
We need focused efforts.
Lets join hands and maybe the OP can take the lead in preparing the agenda / plan of action.
What say you guys?
Bottom line: I believe we can do! Of course, we need to procure support from multiple sources like some of the ideas mentioned by the posters CompleteAmerica, Talking to senators on Aug 15th, etc.
hair MILEY CYRUS was just caught by
rbms
10-15 08:29 PM
Will mail on Friday
more...
GCNirvana007
10-12 11:15 AM
The part I didnt understand is how come you are so stupid? I hope you carry your passport when you go to the bathroom also because a dumb ass sheep like you probably needs it.
Mr.Bhootia - It wont take a second to type back the same.
I mentioned about LAW and you are calling me stupid, that explains how you roll isnt it.
Mr.Bhootia - It wont take a second to type back the same.
I mentioned about LAW and you are calling me stupid, that explains how you roll isnt it.
hot Rumer Willis cross tattoo on
gc28262
08-10 03:26 PM
Before proposing a solution, we need to make sure these are valid arguments. We need to crack INA ourselves to make sure were making a valid legal argument.
Those of you are willing to join effort on the following thread, please pm GCPerm.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum85-action-items-for-everyone/1599562-team-visa-allocation-by-dos.html#post1977684
Those of you are willing to join effort on the following thread, please pm GCPerm.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum85-action-items-for-everyone/1599562-team-visa-allocation-by-dos.html#post1977684
more...
house The second tattoo that Miley
zuhail
03-11 08:58 PM
By the way there is a thread where it is mentioned that the spill over to EB2 and EB3 still works the same.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=325657
This would mean that there would be no significant movement in EB2 and EB3 India numbers.
Time is RIGHT NOW to introduce a bill for recapturing Visa Numbers.
Thanks de2002 for The NyTimes Editorial. ( I only wish this had also come from WSJ).
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/opinion/03fri2.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=legal%20immigration&st=cse
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=325657
This would mean that there would be no significant movement in EB2 and EB3 India numbers.
Time is RIGHT NOW to introduce a bill for recapturing Visa Numbers.
Thanks de2002 for The NyTimes Editorial. ( I only wish this had also come from WSJ).
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/opinion/03fri2.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=legal%20immigration&st=cse
tattoo images miley cyrus tattoo
Jaime
09-14 11:35 AM
Guys EVERYBODY needs to come to DC, there are few valid excuses not to attend! Many people are flying from far-flung places and making this sacrifice for you. You need to make a sacrifice for them too!!!!
more...
pictures tattoo miley cyrus tattoo.
.soulty
03-09 11:28 PM
dope renders so far.. on march 10 when he have the entries we will set up a poll.. keep them coming. oh btw.. when you provide the final render, need to provide the wireframe aswell ;)
dresses miley cyrus cross tattoo
bijualex29
07-24 09:31 AM
I think that is a very good idea, we should have several backup plans.
I never thought that �Ability to file I-485� is within USCIS power.
I too have researched and found out that the just � Memo � was issued to change the procedure to file I-485/I-140 concurrent filing.
Here � Ability to file will be within USCIS power� , but granting a green card is controlled by law.
I never thought that �Ability to file I-485� is within USCIS power.
I too have researched and found out that the just � Memo � was issued to change the procedure to file I-485/I-140 concurrent filing.
Here � Ability to file will be within USCIS power� , but granting a green card is controlled by law.
more...
makeup miley cyrus tattoo of justin
rayoflight
06-11 09:57 AM
Sent to MD Senators
girlfriend and Miley+cyrus+new+tattoo
paskal
01-28 11:34 AM
i hear a lot of complaints from you and i do understand your frustration.
i also seem to realize that you want a lot and are holding on to anything you might give in return.
work like lobbying is done in the background- and you seem to know that. it is not the time to send web faxes. last time an update came there was a war here, and there has been an iv newsletter in the new year. unnecessary information provided publicly can backfire on us in the worst way possible. incidentally you are further wrong- lawmaker contacts are taking place and updates are being given- in the state chapters. repeatedly, members have been begged top join a state chapter, or if one does not exist, to help start it. have you joined one? i humbly suggest you do. you may see a lot more action there- and maybe actually do something, rather than constantly whining here that no one is updating you. in our state chapter teleconference an iv core member updated us. subsequently another core member has posted mails on the group with advice and suggestions and resources.
i hate writing posts like this or even responding to posts like this. please understand that people like me who are trying to get things moving are as frustrated as you are, because we can't get enough support.
we are not iv core. and they have full time jobs and families. still, they are traveling, contacting lawmakers, helping and updating state chapters and coordinating with lobbyists and friendly organizations, getting prepared for upcoming legislative action.
if your $20 is dependent on their making more time for you, WITHOUT you making any time for iv except to complain, then maybe it's best in your pocket. you seem to forget, and i have said this before, it's not iv as an organization that will derive any benefit from the money- it is YOU and ME and EVERY OTHER PERSON STUCK IN RETROGRESSION.
so please help yourself. this is not a free lunch. if your money is so valuable, make time. but do something- add members - and then, your complaints will begin to have some legitimacy in other's eyes. if you are doing all these things already, i apologize- but i doubt it- you would be complaining less once you understood how hard it really is to move people off their butts.
enough said and thanks for reading.
i also seem to realize that you want a lot and are holding on to anything you might give in return.
work like lobbying is done in the background- and you seem to know that. it is not the time to send web faxes. last time an update came there was a war here, and there has been an iv newsletter in the new year. unnecessary information provided publicly can backfire on us in the worst way possible. incidentally you are further wrong- lawmaker contacts are taking place and updates are being given- in the state chapters. repeatedly, members have been begged top join a state chapter, or if one does not exist, to help start it. have you joined one? i humbly suggest you do. you may see a lot more action there- and maybe actually do something, rather than constantly whining here that no one is updating you. in our state chapter teleconference an iv core member updated us. subsequently another core member has posted mails on the group with advice and suggestions and resources.
i hate writing posts like this or even responding to posts like this. please understand that people like me who are trying to get things moving are as frustrated as you are, because we can't get enough support.
we are not iv core. and they have full time jobs and families. still, they are traveling, contacting lawmakers, helping and updating state chapters and coordinating with lobbyists and friendly organizations, getting prepared for upcoming legislative action.
if your $20 is dependent on their making more time for you, WITHOUT you making any time for iv except to complain, then maybe it's best in your pocket. you seem to forget, and i have said this before, it's not iv as an organization that will derive any benefit from the money- it is YOU and ME and EVERY OTHER PERSON STUCK IN RETROGRESSION.
so please help yourself. this is not a free lunch. if your money is so valuable, make time. but do something- add members - and then, your complaints will begin to have some legitimacy in other's eyes. if you are doing all these things already, i apologize- but i doubt it- you would be complaining less once you understood how hard it really is to move people off their butts.
enough said and thanks for reading.
hairstyles miley cyrus tattoo 2011.
Eveready
07-05 02:44 PM
I totally agree we need money to run this website and I also agree that we Desis never pay for quality and never ever for service.
Guess it is time to change. Make it a paid website and only Members should be allowed to post queries etc. Putting advertisments on the site too is not a bad idea and I think we work some thing out.
Guess it is time to change. Make it a paid website and only Members should be allowed to post queries etc. Putting advertisments on the site too is not a bad idea and I think we work some thing out.
rajsand
09-26 12:22 PM
Thanked her, appreciated her and also
requested her to look into our issues and come up with something similar for all of us looking to shroten the route to GC!
requested her to look into our issues and come up with something similar for all of us looking to shroten the route to GC!
bkarnik
07-25 06:46 PM
Thanks a lot, please keep us posted about the outcome, even if we have one percent of hope, there is no harm trying that.
Guys,
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Anyways, I sent the following email to my lawyer, the entire chain with names deleted is reproduced here for your reading pleasure. This exchange highlights the apathy with which the legal community (at least my lawyer) view the issue and their knowledge of the law.... enjoy.. :(
From: Attorney
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
I see your point. You should contact the American Immigration Lawyers Association with your question. If the issue has not already been addressed by this organization, I'm sure they will readily champion your cause.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:49 AM
To: attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
Thank you for your time and the quick turnaround. However, the question still remains. If you notice in the link sent by you below, the USCIS refers to the US 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c) According to the USCIS, the CFR is the interpretation made by the agencies of the INA as passed and amended by Congress. The INA itself does not seem to have any clause relating to EAD for employment based categories because I believe the Congress never foresaw a situation where it will take up to 5-6 years for the process to complete.
I know that the USCIS has on many occasions by using the Federal Register or by Memorandums modified the CFR or changed the regulations governing the validity of the EAD, and I am wondering if something similar can be achieved in this case, wherein an appeal is made to the USCIS to change the rules governing eligibility for issuing an EAD.
Thanks once again.
Bkarnik.
-----Original Message-----
From: AttorneySent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
Hello BKarnik,
Your argument is sound, however, U.S. Immigration does indeed adjudicate
I-765 EAD applications based upon eligibility for filing. Please click this
link: http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/i-765.htm. It will take you to the USCIS web site where you can download form I-765. Included with the form is an instruction sheet. In the section entitled "Eligibility Categories", U.S. Immigration spells out the categories for which form I-765 may be filed. For example, under the "Foreign Students" title, you can see that an F-1 OPT student is eligible to obtain EAD work authorization pursuant to subsection (c)(3)(i). Your eligibility for EAD work authorization will fall under the "EAD Applicants Who Have Filed for Adjustment of Status" title under subsection (c)(9). Unfortunately, there is no eligibility category for I-140 IVP applicants or for IVP approval notice holders.
I hope this answers your questions.
Attorney
________________________________
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 2:16 PM
To: Attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
I had a question for you (actually, it is a series of sub questions).
However, this has nothing to with my employer or my GC, so if you feel that replying to this question will take up an inordinate amount of time or of you think that this is something that is worthwhile in pursuing, please let me know what your charges will be and I will let you know if I can afford them :)) With that out of the way, here goes:
The question is about getting an EAD before filing the I-485. I was perusing the INA as posted on the USCIS website. I did not find any applicable law that directs the USCIS when it can issue EADs. It is quite likely that I missed the section as I am not a student of laws as you are.
If so, can you let me know where to find it? As you know, the EAD issue is mentioned in the US 8 CFR sec. 274a. Now, the USCIS website explains that the CFR thus: The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies.
These
regulations apply the law to daily situations. Thus, the CFR is the interpretation of the law by the USCIS for application in daily life.
If
that is the case, what prevents the USCIS from issuing EADs upon the approval of Form I-140? Especially, since as you very well know, the Form I-140 is an application made by the employer to the USCIS to petition for an alien worker to become a permanent resident in the United States.
Therefore,
the form requires the employer to fill in all the pertinent information about the alien and his dependents. An approval of the Form I-140 indicates (at least to me) that the USCIS has agreed with the employee that the labor certification is good and the alien is approvable as a permanent employee.
I guess that is one of the reasons, the USCIS allows concurrent filing of the I-140/I-485.
With the current retrogression concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 is not possible, if the USCIS were to be agreeable to issue EADs to persons with approved I-140 it would make life a lot easier for all while at the same time not impacting the green card process itself. All we are asking is that the EAD be issued after I-140 approval, because it does not make sense to tell an employer that the alien is approved for permanent employment, but at the same time asking the employer to keep the employee in a H1B (i.e.
temporary status) at no fault of the employer/employee. Can you let me know if my argument is flawed? If not, do you think we have a way by which we can ask the USCIS for its interpretation or opinion on the issue? If we can, and you are willing to take the matter, can you let me know your fees?
I know that you are very busy, and may not be able to take on the matter even if you find merit in it. In that case, would know of a competent person willing to take it up?
Thank you for your time and patience,
Sincerely,
Bkarnik
Guys,
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Anyways, I sent the following email to my lawyer, the entire chain with names deleted is reproduced here for your reading pleasure. This exchange highlights the apathy with which the legal community (at least my lawyer) view the issue and their knowledge of the law.... enjoy.. :(
From: Attorney
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
I see your point. You should contact the American Immigration Lawyers Association with your question. If the issue has not already been addressed by this organization, I'm sure they will readily champion your cause.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:49 AM
To: attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
Thank you for your time and the quick turnaround. However, the question still remains. If you notice in the link sent by you below, the USCIS refers to the US 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c) According to the USCIS, the CFR is the interpretation made by the agencies of the INA as passed and amended by Congress. The INA itself does not seem to have any clause relating to EAD for employment based categories because I believe the Congress never foresaw a situation where it will take up to 5-6 years for the process to complete.
I know that the USCIS has on many occasions by using the Federal Register or by Memorandums modified the CFR or changed the regulations governing the validity of the EAD, and I am wondering if something similar can be achieved in this case, wherein an appeal is made to the USCIS to change the rules governing eligibility for issuing an EAD.
Thanks once again.
Bkarnik.
-----Original Message-----
From: AttorneySent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
Hello BKarnik,
Your argument is sound, however, U.S. Immigration does indeed adjudicate
I-765 EAD applications based upon eligibility for filing. Please click this
link: http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/i-765.htm. It will take you to the USCIS web site where you can download form I-765. Included with the form is an instruction sheet. In the section entitled "Eligibility Categories", U.S. Immigration spells out the categories for which form I-765 may be filed. For example, under the "Foreign Students" title, you can see that an F-1 OPT student is eligible to obtain EAD work authorization pursuant to subsection (c)(3)(i). Your eligibility for EAD work authorization will fall under the "EAD Applicants Who Have Filed for Adjustment of Status" title under subsection (c)(9). Unfortunately, there is no eligibility category for I-140 IVP applicants or for IVP approval notice holders.
I hope this answers your questions.
Attorney
________________________________
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 2:16 PM
To: Attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
I had a question for you (actually, it is a series of sub questions).
However, this has nothing to with my employer or my GC, so if you feel that replying to this question will take up an inordinate amount of time or of you think that this is something that is worthwhile in pursuing, please let me know what your charges will be and I will let you know if I can afford them :)) With that out of the way, here goes:
The question is about getting an EAD before filing the I-485. I was perusing the INA as posted on the USCIS website. I did not find any applicable law that directs the USCIS when it can issue EADs. It is quite likely that I missed the section as I am not a student of laws as you are.
If so, can you let me know where to find it? As you know, the EAD issue is mentioned in the US 8 CFR sec. 274a. Now, the USCIS website explains that the CFR thus: The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies.
These
regulations apply the law to daily situations. Thus, the CFR is the interpretation of the law by the USCIS for application in daily life.
If
that is the case, what prevents the USCIS from issuing EADs upon the approval of Form I-140? Especially, since as you very well know, the Form I-140 is an application made by the employer to the USCIS to petition for an alien worker to become a permanent resident in the United States.
Therefore,
the form requires the employer to fill in all the pertinent information about the alien and his dependents. An approval of the Form I-140 indicates (at least to me) that the USCIS has agreed with the employee that the labor certification is good and the alien is approvable as a permanent employee.
I guess that is one of the reasons, the USCIS allows concurrent filing of the I-140/I-485.
With the current retrogression concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 is not possible, if the USCIS were to be agreeable to issue EADs to persons with approved I-140 it would make life a lot easier for all while at the same time not impacting the green card process itself. All we are asking is that the EAD be issued after I-140 approval, because it does not make sense to tell an employer that the alien is approved for permanent employment, but at the same time asking the employer to keep the employee in a H1B (i.e.
temporary status) at no fault of the employer/employee. Can you let me know if my argument is flawed? If not, do you think we have a way by which we can ask the USCIS for its interpretation or opinion on the issue? If we can, and you are willing to take the matter, can you let me know your fees?
I know that you are very busy, and may not be able to take on the matter even if you find merit in it. In that case, would know of a competent person willing to take it up?
Thank you for your time and patience,
Sincerely,
Bkarnik
No comments:
Post a Comment