kumarc123
03-12 12:59 PM
u would think..... that everyone follow action items...... then y would we be in this mess if everyone is doing what they should......
i think greyhair, you, kumarc123 are all part of the problem...... let me re-phrase that.... u r all a disease plaguing this eb community...... everyone has their own little petty reason for not participating...... so just eat taco with u'r $25, no need to think over.... keep volunteering me for doing things for u.... i don't care much for this bickering back & forth.... so leave me alone & let me enjoy my friday....
Excuse me who are you calling a disease?
who has given you the right to name call, when I have not used any profanity words? Please choose your words carefully, as it does not reflect a good reputation on part of a person who is trying to make a point and bring awareness.
Just because you have 1485 filed much before your PD and have the better half of the situation, does not allow you to be an advocator on behalf of IV.
The question was means for IV and PAPPU, and to galvanize this organization to do something big, than take things for granted.
Thank you
i think greyhair, you, kumarc123 are all part of the problem...... let me re-phrase that.... u r all a disease plaguing this eb community...... everyone has their own little petty reason for not participating...... so just eat taco with u'r $25, no need to think over.... keep volunteering me for doing things for u.... i don't care much for this bickering back & forth.... so leave me alone & let me enjoy my friday....
Excuse me who are you calling a disease?
who has given you the right to name call, when I have not used any profanity words? Please choose your words carefully, as it does not reflect a good reputation on part of a person who is trying to make a point and bring awareness.
Just because you have 1485 filed much before your PD and have the better half of the situation, does not allow you to be an advocator on behalf of IV.
The question was means for IV and PAPPU, and to galvanize this organization to do something big, than take things for granted.
Thank you
wallpaper Coheed and Cambria background
ps57002
09-10 07:53 PM
2 sites reporting that the bills were marked up....
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6221
so is it true that they are now going to go to the floor????
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6221
so is it true that they are now going to go to the floor????
akhilmahajan
10-16 08:48 AM
I will be mailing my letter today for myself and my wife and will be requesting my friends to do the same. Thanks a lot for taking the initiative.
GO I/WE GO.
GO I/WE GO.
2011 Coheed And Cambria IV - Band,
abhishek101
12-26 04:06 PM
You have pretty much written my hit list. I could not have put it in better words.
Just to add I work for a bank and to open an account within bank I had to go through a long paper process, whereas any outsider (Citizen/GC) can get it in 5 min online.
But as a bank employee I do understand that while we at bank would love to open all accounts online (less cost and all) the US government has restrictions under Know your customer requirement, that prevents us from doing so. So while most of the business understand that they are losing business they are pretty much restricted by the laws of the land.
there are two ways out of it:
1. Support legislative action for getting GC faster, for that support IV.
2. Make the immigrant group a huge economic success that the business has incentive to provide it better services.
Just to add I work for a bank and to open an account within bank I had to go through a long paper process, whereas any outsider (Citizen/GC) can get it in 5 min online.
But as a bank employee I do understand that while we at bank would love to open all accounts online (less cost and all) the US government has restrictions under Know your customer requirement, that prevents us from doing so. So while most of the business understand that they are losing business they are pretty much restricted by the laws of the land.
there are two ways out of it:
1. Support legislative action for getting GC faster, for that support IV.
2. Make the immigrant group a huge economic success that the business has incentive to provide it better services.
more...
immigrant2007
08-12 08:10 AM
Guys,
I have thought of one more idea..
We know very well that by current interpretation EB3 is permanently fixed to the back of the line. NO EB3 will get processed until the last EB2 who files in the year 2013 gets approved, (counting out the regular quota).
And why are we here? Many believe (or know) that it is because of the 245(i) amnesty signed by Clinton and Bush.
Isn't it ironic that the illegals that were put in the line are not being moved back as the line expands? Why only we legals? Maybe there is some scope to challenge the 245(i) visa number allocation and point out that legal immigrants are waiting in line then how can you admit illegals in front
Anyone having the facts and numbers of 245(i)?
I have asked this question over and over again but Iv doesn't seem to entertain it. IV number crunchers are busy developing and applying patent for a sofware on GC estimation.
245(i) consumed EB3 worldwide quota and is responsilbe to backlog along with deliberate delay by USCIs.
But thas history now, what do we do in future matter more...I think If economy doesn't improves EB3s are infor a big shock.
Post election if Republicans win then they will do their best to deny GCs to all backlog guys so that they can enjoy thier loot (Social secuirty,foreclosed homes)...
I have thought of one more idea..
We know very well that by current interpretation EB3 is permanently fixed to the back of the line. NO EB3 will get processed until the last EB2 who files in the year 2013 gets approved, (counting out the regular quota).
And why are we here? Many believe (or know) that it is because of the 245(i) amnesty signed by Clinton and Bush.
Isn't it ironic that the illegals that were put in the line are not being moved back as the line expands? Why only we legals? Maybe there is some scope to challenge the 245(i) visa number allocation and point out that legal immigrants are waiting in line then how can you admit illegals in front
Anyone having the facts and numbers of 245(i)?
I have asked this question over and over again but Iv doesn't seem to entertain it. IV number crunchers are busy developing and applying patent for a sofware on GC estimation.
245(i) consumed EB3 worldwide quota and is responsilbe to backlog along with deliberate delay by USCIs.
But thas history now, what do we do in future matter more...I think If economy doesn't improves EB3s are infor a big shock.
Post election if Republicans win then they will do their best to deny GCs to all backlog guys so that they can enjoy thier loot (Social secuirty,foreclosed homes)...
smalgin
04-21 11:20 AM
I cannot attend, but only because I am far away geographically. (LA Area)
Please tell Mr. Gutierrez that I support Title 5 of STRIVE Act.
Please tell Mr. Gutierrez that I support Title 5 of STRIVE Act.
more...
joydiptac
06-08 08:31 PM
Thanks Deepak for clearing the uncertainty. At least now I know my wait is 10 more years.
Wonder how many more years I will be able to keep my EB3 Job and job description. :(
This sort of slow torture is nothing less than "Curry Bashing" openly happening in Australia.
(Source : http://bkhush.com/dev/content/lets-go-curry-bashing )
The rate at which USCIS is denying H1B, L1 Extensions it EB 3- PD 2001 - Wait till 2015
EB 3- PD 2002 - Wait till 2019
EB 3- PD 2003 - Wait till 2024
Wonder how many more years I will be able to keep my EB3 Job and job description. :(
This sort of slow torture is nothing less than "Curry Bashing" openly happening in Australia.
(Source : http://bkhush.com/dev/content/lets-go-curry-bashing )
The rate at which USCIS is denying H1B, L1 Extensions it EB 3- PD 2001 - Wait till 2015
EB 3- PD 2002 - Wait till 2019
EB 3- PD 2003 - Wait till 2024
2010 coheed and cambria close up
Abhinaym
09-10 11:09 AM
I will update here for those who cannot enter chat
Right now they are discussing
H.R. 6598
the "Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2008
I will update here once HR 5882 starts
Thanks Chintu! I'll look forward to your updates.
Right now they are discussing
H.R. 6598
the "Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2008
I will update here once HR 5882 starts
Thanks Chintu! I'll look forward to your updates.
more...
senthil1
02-04 12:58 PM
Most of your points are ok. But someone has to arrive with a calculation that how much improvement will EB3 get. If it is atleast 2 years then the time and money spent may be Ok. I am sure EB2 will get a very big benefit and I doubt EB3 will get much benefit. My assumption may be wrong. If it is ok even for small benefit we can go ahead with this campaign as the main aim is to remove unfairness in law.
I have to say that I am a bit ticked off by your ignorance. Did not expect this from someone who has been a long time member. You should have thought it through. See my response below.
I have to say that I am a bit ticked off by your ignorance. Did not expect this from someone who has been a long time member. You should have thought it through. See my response below.
hair Coheed and Cambria,
24fps
02-19 07:59 PM
read my lips, THIS BILL WILL NEVER PASS
its so redundant that even NumbersUSA haven't even reported.
its so redundant that even NumbersUSA haven't even reported.
more...
drirshad
06-30 08:38 PM
It has never happened in the history that they revised any visa bulletin, just hope for the best & pray .......
hot coheed and cambria wallpaper - 83766. Overall Rating:
GreenCard4US
07-13 07:20 PM
Reputed lawyers like Carl Shusterman came out the very next day swinging with hard hitting statements. What was Murthy doing then? I have been ripped off earlier by Murthy. Anybody who has spoken to her will understand that she is all about $$$ and nothing else. I hope by our posting, others don't get ripped off and see her true colors...
more...
house coheed and cambria wallpaper
StarSun
03-24 02:12 PM
Thank you for registering with Immigration Voice for the advocacy efforts in Washington DC. Your participation in such efforts will help tremendously in bringing about the positive changes we seek.
Many of you may have questions regarding the advocacy event. To answer your questions, we are holding a conference call this weekend. An email was sent out to confirmed members today (Mar 24) with the subject line: IMPORTANT: IV Advocacy Conf Call Info. Please check your email for the conference call details and other important information.
The conference call in number and details cannot be made public.
Thank you.
Many of you may have questions regarding the advocacy event. To answer your questions, we are holding a conference call this weekend. An email was sent out to confirmed members today (Mar 24) with the subject line: IMPORTANT: IV Advocacy Conf Call Info. Please check your email for the conference call details and other important information.
The conference call in number and details cannot be made public.
Thank you.
tattoo coheed and cambria
ashishgour
09-10 02:03 PM
Guess they had an extended lunch session...!!! Finally back..but no discussion yet...
more...
pictures RC Gallery - Photo and Video
varshadas
03-05 06:00 AM
Thanks. I don't think I will be able to make it. Let us know how it goes.
dresses Coheed amp; Cambria
GC_US_64
12-26 03:58 PM
We cannot save for our children's college in college savings plan as every plan needs a GC.
more...
makeup coheed and cambria wallpaper
piperwarrior
07-16 09:55 PM
The point is not about changing NumbersUSA supporters (that will not happen). The idea is to discredit this organization in the same publications that have profiled them (i.e., NY Times and LA Times) and show that their arguments don't hold water.
We all know that people on H1 status pay federal,state and social security tax. So I checked IRS site and searched for H1B. They have couple of links that shows H1b should pay tax. My point is everyone knows IRS and they know how much they go after people who are not paying taxes. If we can point to IRS which itself states by way examples that H1B should pay tax then at least the fence sitters will not jump on their side. I doubt if hardcore NumberUSA supporter will believe this anyway but we need turn the fence sitters around which may be the majority.
Here is the first one:
I have an H-1B Visa and my husband has an F-1 Visa. We both lived in the United States all of last year and had income. What kind of form should we file? Do we file separate returns or a joint return?
Assuming both of you had these visas for all of last year, you are a resident alien. Your husband is a nonresident alien if he has not been in the United States as a student for more than 5 years. You and your husband can file a joint tax return on Form 1040, 1040A, or 1040EZ if he makes the choice to be treated as a resident for the entire year. See Nonresident Spouse Treated as a Resident in chapter 1. If your husband does not make this choice, you must file a separate return on Form 1040 or Form 1040A. Your husband must file Form 1040NR or 1040NR-EZ.
Here is an example where they use person on H1b as an example. I'm giving the link as the explanation is long. Just look at example 10
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=129428,00.html
Example 8.
Mr. Gerhard Schwarz was a citizen and resident of Germany just prior to his arrival in the United States. He arrived in the United States on 08-15-99 as a professor of physics on an H-1b visa. He intends to remain in the United States for two academic years, and does not intend to change his immigration status during that period before returning home. Determine his residency starting date.
What kind of federal income tax returns will he file for 1999 and 2000?
We all know that people on H1 status pay federal,state and social security tax. So I checked IRS site and searched for H1B. They have couple of links that shows H1b should pay tax. My point is everyone knows IRS and they know how much they go after people who are not paying taxes. If we can point to IRS which itself states by way examples that H1B should pay tax then at least the fence sitters will not jump on their side. I doubt if hardcore NumberUSA supporter will believe this anyway but we need turn the fence sitters around which may be the majority.
Here is the first one:
I have an H-1B Visa and my husband has an F-1 Visa. We both lived in the United States all of last year and had income. What kind of form should we file? Do we file separate returns or a joint return?
Assuming both of you had these visas for all of last year, you are a resident alien. Your husband is a nonresident alien if he has not been in the United States as a student for more than 5 years. You and your husband can file a joint tax return on Form 1040, 1040A, or 1040EZ if he makes the choice to be treated as a resident for the entire year. See Nonresident Spouse Treated as a Resident in chapter 1. If your husband does not make this choice, you must file a separate return on Form 1040 or Form 1040A. Your husband must file Form 1040NR or 1040NR-EZ.
Here is an example where they use person on H1b as an example. I'm giving the link as the explanation is long. Just look at example 10
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=129428,00.html
Example 8.
Mr. Gerhard Schwarz was a citizen and resident of Germany just prior to his arrival in the United States. He arrived in the United States on 08-15-99 as a professor of physics on an H-1b visa. He intends to remain in the United States for two academic years, and does not intend to change his immigration status during that period before returning home. Determine his residency starting date.
What kind of federal income tax returns will he file for 1999 and 2000?
girlfriend Coheed and Cambria Sonisphere
waitforevergc
02-14 10:02 AM
this is an irrelavant thread. pls delete this thread.
'ethnic cleansing' is a strong word and shouldnt be used in our context.
thanks.
'ethnic cleansing' is a strong word and shouldnt be used in our context.
thanks.
hairstyles Home by Coheed amp; Cambria
we_can
01-03 11:06 PM
Posted on immigration.about.com
http://forums.about.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ab-immigration&tid=13888
http://forums.about.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ab-immigration&tid=13888
alterego
07-04 08:31 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS’s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
harshalx
04-14 01:00 AM
To get rid of these problems which we face with untrustworthy consultants I've started http://www.goolti.com
<a href="http://www.goolti.com">http://www.goolti.com</a>
where you can read/write reviews about Desi consulting companies.
<a href="http://www.goolti.com">http://www.goolti.com</a>
where you can read/write reviews about Desi consulting companies.
No comments:
Post a Comment