ItIsNotFunny
03-10 04:22 PM
Until Economy is back on track and unemployment rate is back to below 5%, do not attempt anything that pisses of American public. It is not the public perse, but those anti-immigration idiots will cry foul and make GC process even harder.
Right now, sit tight and wither the financial storm. The best action is to unlink I-485 adjudication to priority date. So, I-485 is approved and status changed to "Approved, awaiting VISA number".
They should create a list where approved I-485s with VISA number pending will be placed in a queue based on original PD. They should get automatic VISA number as soon as one is available in that order. Then the system automatically orders a GC. This should be automated so that another IO shouldn't mess with it.
They can also link this database with FBI or crime database so that if anyone is convicted, it will automatically generate a flag and USCIS can decide what to do with that approved 485. So, this will keep bad guys out if they commit any crimes while 485 is awaiting VISA number.
IV core, think about this.
All of above suggestions needs a strong case building. Getting real information about queue is key factor in case. This is why we have FOIA action item running on full force. Would you like to contribute? http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=325183#post325183
Right now, sit tight and wither the financial storm. The best action is to unlink I-485 adjudication to priority date. So, I-485 is approved and status changed to "Approved, awaiting VISA number".
They should create a list where approved I-485s with VISA number pending will be placed in a queue based on original PD. They should get automatic VISA number as soon as one is available in that order. Then the system automatically orders a GC. This should be automated so that another IO shouldn't mess with it.
They can also link this database with FBI or crime database so that if anyone is convicted, it will automatically generate a flag and USCIS can decide what to do with that approved 485. So, this will keep bad guys out if they commit any crimes while 485 is awaiting VISA number.
IV core, think about this.
All of above suggestions needs a strong case building. Getting real information about queue is key factor in case. This is why we have FOIA action item running on full force. Would you like to contribute? http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=325183#post325183
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
snathan
03-10 01:13 PM
Yes...we need to get the unused visa numbers. But this is not the right time for that. Because of the economy there will be huge outcry and we should avoid the negative publicity.
In this situation if things are not going bad for us, we should be happy. At least for status quo rather than losing what we have.
In this situation if things are not going bad for us, we should be happy. At least for status quo rather than losing what we have.
pappu
07-03 04:38 PM
There have been cases of folks using L1 A Visa. Big outsourcing companies (US & Indian- Does not matter) routinely file for L1 A (intra company transferee - Managerial) when the person is clearly not performing managerial job. Once on L1 A, folks can file for EB1 and get a GC very soon as it is mostly current. I have seen cases in the past like this. I do not know the status now, as DOL is coming down heavily with audits on PERM applicants. This is one area where only deserving people need to be awarded. This post is not to blame anyone, but people do use this Grey area I suppose to their benefit.
If this is true, then everyone who thinks this is unfair must write letters to USCIS, Ombudsman, WH etc
USCIS does not read our forums and will not take action from a forum post.
If you see something wrong, and you feel strongly about it, Do not let it happen.
In hindsight I think we should have done it for labor substitution too.
If this is true, then everyone who thinks this is unfair must write letters to USCIS, Ombudsman, WH etc
USCIS does not read our forums and will not take action from a forum post.
If you see something wrong, and you feel strongly about it, Do not let it happen.
In hindsight I think we should have done it for labor substitution too.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
ek_bechara
04-07 01:49 PM
Can the admins set up a sticky thread for rumors that CANNOT be edited by anybody but the admins themselves. Some people on this forum have way too much time on their hands with the friends friend nonsense. I'm unsure what kick people get out of coming up with putrid talk.
BTW, spreading rumors and creating public fear is a federal offense. Before you post your friends friend story, you might want to think this thing through. Based on your rumor if somebody goes through physical or mental harm, the source of information WILL be traced back to you. At that time your ass is somebody's property will NOT sound like a rumor. Get back to work and do something productive.
If there is any truth to this story then you will see something on murthy.com or other AUTHENTIC immigration portals. If and when that happens, which I highly suspect, we as a community can get together and work through IV and other avenues to address the issue.
Over and out
BTW, spreading rumors and creating public fear is a federal offense. Before you post your friends friend story, you might want to think this thing through. Based on your rumor if somebody goes through physical or mental harm, the source of information WILL be traced back to you. At that time your ass is somebody's property will NOT sound like a rumor. Get back to work and do something productive.
If there is any truth to this story then you will see something on murthy.com or other AUTHENTIC immigration portals. If and when that happens, which I highly suspect, we as a community can get together and work through IV and other avenues to address the issue.
Over and out
more...
feedfront
10-13 01:57 PM
feedfront, the receipt date on my I-485 receipt notice is October 5, 2007.
My attorney had inquired with USCIS but hasn't received any response. As I mentioned earlier neither a SR, senator/congressman inquiry has helped!
I'd also send an email to NSC but got an generic message.
How can I write to USCIS director?
thank you!
thecipher5
Here is the link to a post by 'mchatrvd ' to contact director..
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum5-all-other-green-card-issues/1599351-august-2010-approvals-tracker-58.html#post1982324
My attorney had inquired with USCIS but hasn't received any response. As I mentioned earlier neither a SR, senator/congressman inquiry has helped!
I'd also send an email to NSC but got an generic message.
How can I write to USCIS director?
thank you!
thecipher5
Here is the link to a post by 'mchatrvd ' to contact director..
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum5-all-other-green-card-issues/1599351-august-2010-approvals-tracker-58.html#post1982324
new_horizon
03-17 11:00 AM
the only good thing I see there are families in which both husband and wife filed separate GC petition. When one's gc process goes thru completion, the other petition will be withdrawn from the queue. : )
hope there are more cases like that.
hope there are more cases like that.
more...
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.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
ganguteli
03-09 11:32 PM
I like your idea.
Let us all blame IV core for not getting our greencard and having a crappy visa bulletin this month. :)
I contributed $5 in the high five campaign and I still do not have my labor cleared. I want to blame IV for that too. :)
Did you not see the FOIA action item by IV core?
Let us all blame IV core for not getting our greencard and having a crappy visa bulletin this month. :)
I contributed $5 in the high five campaign and I still do not have my labor cleared. I want to blame IV for that too. :)
Did you not see the FOIA action item by IV core?
more...
shivaz90
07-13 11:44 AM
Reading through this thread I find this intense debate about the value and intentions of Murthy's letter.
Let's first deal with the value part: This letter could be from any one of us or anybody else from Timbuktu. Why does this letter have any special significance except that the DHS secretary may read it because Murthy and the secretary are alumni of the same institution (see how carefully this part is added to the letter for our consumption). Now this feeds into the intention part. Even if Murthy wrote a letter to the DHS Secretary why did she have to publicize it on her website (except for the gullible among us to take notice). Generally publicized letters have value if they are from some influential policy maker or lawmaker. In this case Murthy is neither and so her letter does not add or subtract any value to this debate. So we are left with the question of who gains by publicizing this letter. Your guess is as good as mine.
Ultimately I am left wondering why this thread was started in the first place except to garner cheap publicity. Do we really have so much time on our hands?
"Why does Murthy publicize such a letter?" - well it means that she has a client base who needs to know what she is doing in her capacity as thier attorney. Second - there are thousands of Murthy.com members who are neither her client nor her well wishers - but who go to her site to find what is going on latest in the world of Immigration. Not to discredit anyone's effort in this issue - ask any immigrant or potential immigrant into this country about immigration related question, I can guarantee you that they have gained almost all thier knowledge about the process from Murthy.com site. Intended or unintended - the message to DHS is welcome, particularly at this time, be it from whoever.
Anyone who has been a regular murthy.com visitor knows that her site consists of all her interactions with all the Agency people and government officials regarding immigration. Its called the "Internet". People post stuff - period! If it is meant to garner attention, yes, people will post messages. Its far better than a bunch of goof balls posting in youtube about thier experience with coke and spearmint. Please come out of the caves - people.
Let's first deal with the value part: This letter could be from any one of us or anybody else from Timbuktu. Why does this letter have any special significance except that the DHS secretary may read it because Murthy and the secretary are alumni of the same institution (see how carefully this part is added to the letter for our consumption). Now this feeds into the intention part. Even if Murthy wrote a letter to the DHS Secretary why did she have to publicize it on her website (except for the gullible among us to take notice). Generally publicized letters have value if they are from some influential policy maker or lawmaker. In this case Murthy is neither and so her letter does not add or subtract any value to this debate. So we are left with the question of who gains by publicizing this letter. Your guess is as good as mine.
Ultimately I am left wondering why this thread was started in the first place except to garner cheap publicity. Do we really have so much time on our hands?
"Why does Murthy publicize such a letter?" - well it means that she has a client base who needs to know what she is doing in her capacity as thier attorney. Second - there are thousands of Murthy.com members who are neither her client nor her well wishers - but who go to her site to find what is going on latest in the world of Immigration. Not to discredit anyone's effort in this issue - ask any immigrant or potential immigrant into this country about immigration related question, I can guarantee you that they have gained almost all thier knowledge about the process from Murthy.com site. Intended or unintended - the message to DHS is welcome, particularly at this time, be it from whoever.
Anyone who has been a regular murthy.com visitor knows that her site consists of all her interactions with all the Agency people and government officials regarding immigration. Its called the "Internet". People post stuff - period! If it is meant to garner attention, yes, people will post messages. Its far better than a bunch of goof balls posting in youtube about thier experience with coke and spearmint. Please come out of the caves - people.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
DDD
03-14 07:03 PM
well someone issue the challenge. We can pick up where the BB contest was at. Basically a boxing robot or something like that. Not sure if we want to do realism and all that tho. I can pretty much only do it on weekends so a 4-6 week time frame sounds good.
more...
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.
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
goel_ar
08-08 09:47 AM
I work at one of these companies & they applied for my GC.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
485Mbe4001
09-10 04:36 PM
No offense to the decision makers, but i like these quotes and wanted to share them
There is quote by Elie Wiesel
"
It may well be that our means are fairly limited and our possibilities restricted when it comes to applying pressure on our government. But is this a reason to do nothing? Despair is nor an answer. Neither is resignation. Resignation only leads to indifference, which is not merely a sin but a punishment
"
and
H. L. Mencken:
"As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
The Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
where do we stand. I thought we are legal horses.
There is quote by Elie Wiesel
"
It may well be that our means are fairly limited and our possibilities restricted when it comes to applying pressure on our government. But is this a reason to do nothing? Despair is nor an answer. Neither is resignation. Resignation only leads to indifference, which is not merely a sin but a punishment
"
and
H. L. Mencken:
"As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
The Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
where do we stand. I thought we are legal horses.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
feedfront
09-17 09:58 AM
Anyone received RFE letter? I've not received it yet.
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
nixstor
10-16 05:30 PM
Don't you think we should be more clear in requesting information per specific country instead of lumping China and India together for EB-2 and others for EB-3? Also will it be too much to request pending applications by month/quarter instead of year?
We probably want the report in this format? This is just a suggestion.
This is what is in the letter.
>>>> I request you to provide me with the number of pending employment based AOS applications, (excluding approved/denied) sorted by priority date from 2001 on a yearly basis broken down for each of the following country and category. (Not the combined total of pending EB AOS applications altogether) <<<<
I clearly mentioned each of the following country and category. To make sure, I also mentioned that we do not need combined total of pending AOS applications. If the request is ambiguous or means different things to different people,please let us know and we can make needed modifications asap. Are you recommending to hand out a blank tabular format .to USCIS FOIA?
As far as the year vs quarter thing is concerned, we felt that its best to get some thing out of this rather than tossed around. Most of the data from 2005/post perm can be found on the flcdatacenter and we can sort these ourselves. This leaves with pre perm applications and I believe DOS will have a better handle in moving the PD's a lot better in the last Q, if they have a handle on the number of applications by year. I agree that if info available on a monthly/quarterly basis, it would be even better. But I feel that we will get tossed around
We probably want the report in this format? This is just a suggestion.
This is what is in the letter.
>>>> I request you to provide me with the number of pending employment based AOS applications, (excluding approved/denied) sorted by priority date from 2001 on a yearly basis broken down for each of the following country and category. (Not the combined total of pending EB AOS applications altogether) <<<<
I clearly mentioned each of the following country and category. To make sure, I also mentioned that we do not need combined total of pending AOS applications. If the request is ambiguous or means different things to different people,please let us know and we can make needed modifications asap. Are you recommending to hand out a blank tabular format .to USCIS FOIA?
As far as the year vs quarter thing is concerned, we felt that its best to get some thing out of this rather than tossed around. Most of the data from 2005/post perm can be found on the flcdatacenter and we can sort these ourselves. This leaves with pre perm applications and I believe DOS will have a better handle in moving the PD's a lot better in the last Q, if they have a handle on the number of applications by year. I agree that if info available on a monthly/quarterly basis, it would be even better. But I feel that we will get tossed around
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
shreekhand
07-12 10:15 PM
What is the need for all this ? The visa bulletin is out but no one cares to read it I guess. Every bulletin has these or words to this effect.
"Only applicants who have a priority date earlier than the cut-off date may be allotted a number."
So the date that you see in the table is NOT eligible for visa numbers.
Thanks for good wishes and congratulations to all who become current.
Regarding cutoff date I'm hearing multiple theories -
A. if it says 1st March - then prior to that consider as active - 1st of March is not included
B. some says 1st March is included because it is like UNTIL 1st March
C. Someone told me if cutoff date fall on weekend then consider that date in. 1st March in 2006 was Wednesday - just FYI.
D. someone also told me if it falls during weekdays then consider whole week - until Friday. USCIS taking cases for whole week for processing.
Wow so many options looks like I need to poll this and then wait until next bulletin :)
Once again thanks for good wishes and Congratulations who were waiting for longer period.
-Rwe
"Only applicants who have a priority date earlier than the cut-off date may be allotted a number."
So the date that you see in the table is NOT eligible for visa numbers.
Thanks for good wishes and congratulations to all who become current.
Regarding cutoff date I'm hearing multiple theories -
A. if it says 1st March - then prior to that consider as active - 1st of March is not included
B. some says 1st March is included because it is like UNTIL 1st March
C. Someone told me if cutoff date fall on weekend then consider that date in. 1st March in 2006 was Wednesday - just FYI.
D. someone also told me if it falls during weekdays then consider whole week - until Friday. USCIS taking cases for whole week for processing.
Wow so many options looks like I need to poll this and then wait until next bulletin :)
Once again thanks for good wishes and Congratulations who were waiting for longer period.
-Rwe
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
rajuseattle
07-14 08:23 PM
ajthakur,
dont worry about LUD on 07/13, that was a generic update.
My wife's approved I-539 (H-4) from 2005 received LUD on 07/13, so that's nothing to do with your current RFE situation.
I think you are scared of your past employer or you are worrying too much, god knows what he has asked you to do which you dont want to mention on this forum, but if he has threatened you or if he is doing some illegal activities you have the protection under AC-21 for reporting such employers to USCIS and DoL. Please read the USCIS (Neufield) Memo published in May 2008.
Please let us know whats going on with your ex-employer, if he is trying to get some money from you or abusing you, you can very well report him to DoL and you will be fine under the new AC-21 memo which protects such employees who are whistle blowers and you are fully protected under US laws.
Lot of the times desi blood suckers abuse their employees and this is the reason USCIS came up with whistle blower protection under AC-21. your competent attorney can use this special provision and argue with USCIS why you were forced to change employment after filing your I-485 back in July 2007 and you switch the job under AC-21 provisions in August 2007.
dont worry too much, try preparing your AC-21 letter and Employment verification letter to answer the RFE.
dont worry about LUD on 07/13, that was a generic update.
My wife's approved I-539 (H-4) from 2005 received LUD on 07/13, so that's nothing to do with your current RFE situation.
I think you are scared of your past employer or you are worrying too much, god knows what he has asked you to do which you dont want to mention on this forum, but if he has threatened you or if he is doing some illegal activities you have the protection under AC-21 for reporting such employers to USCIS and DoL. Please read the USCIS (Neufield) Memo published in May 2008.
Please let us know whats going on with your ex-employer, if he is trying to get some money from you or abusing you, you can very well report him to DoL and you will be fine under the new AC-21 memo which protects such employees who are whistle blowers and you are fully protected under US laws.
Lot of the times desi blood suckers abuse their employees and this is the reason USCIS came up with whistle blower protection under AC-21. your competent attorney can use this special provision and argue with USCIS why you were forced to change employment after filing your I-485 back in July 2007 and you switch the job under AC-21 provisions in August 2007.
dont worry too much, try preparing your AC-21 letter and Employment verification letter to answer the RFE.
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
sweet_jungle
03-12 01:08 PM
I am a july 2nd filer and have changed job 2 times in the past one month and I have no intention to let know USCIS because
a) There is no mandatory law that states that we should do it.
b) I personally feel that sending AC21 documents will trigger an RFE for sure,(in the other case, there are chances that u may not get this).
c) Lawyer is asking for $1500 for doing nothing on this.
d) I am prepared to deal with the RFE if it comes thru.
All of the above I did for changing my 7 year old employer who exactly knew that I cannot change job and kept me in the same position for 7 years even though I was exemplary in my job performance.
What about the H1? Your sponsoring employer needs to revoke H1. Won't INS come to know through that?
a) There is no mandatory law that states that we should do it.
b) I personally feel that sending AC21 documents will trigger an RFE for sure,(in the other case, there are chances that u may not get this).
c) Lawyer is asking for $1500 for doing nothing on this.
d) I am prepared to deal with the RFE if it comes thru.
All of the above I did for changing my 7 year old employer who exactly knew that I cannot change job and kept me in the same position for 7 years even though I was exemplary in my job performance.
What about the H1? Your sponsoring employer needs to revoke H1. Won't INS come to know through that?
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
svr_76
02-18 08:57 PM
It will not cause backlog for the undocument. Check my previous posting on this thread. The bill states that aliens adjustment by DHS sec. using this bill will not affect from the numercial visa numbers. In short- No backlog for undocumented folks whereas per country quote of existing application India, China continues...
Anyways...who said ppl are wanting to fix the legal immi. problem here...Here the interest in more in the other category.
Anyways...who said ppl are wanting to fix the legal immi. problem here...Here the interest in more in the other category.
paskal
07-03 02:41 AM
I've said it before and I'll say it again - I don't see how the per country limit is unfair! It was set up so that immigrants from ALL nations would have EQUAL opportunity to immigrate to the U.S. and to prevent any one (or two) countries from monopolizing the visa numbers. Getting rid of the per country limit would most certainly lead to immigration from a limited number of sources (countries) and thus jeopardize the diversity of the immigration process. Getting rid of it would be like robbing Peter to pay Paul because those countries who are severely retrogressed now would only see limited benefits and those who are not all that retrogressed would fall backwards - is that fair!? It seems these forms are dominated by "certain" groups who have their own agenda and don't really care about ROW! It makes me feel uncomfortable being an IV member from ROW!
iv supports a package of measures that includes the recapture and STEM exemptions, not removal of country quotas in isolation. the idea is not to redistribute pain (though frankly country quotas give disproportionate pain to some- for what? being born "wrong'") but to end retrogression by simultaneously increasing numbers available and ending country quotas.
if you want to think about "fair" and "monopolies", i urge you to think of the current monopoly. i am an EB2 in health care- every ROW person with me, waltzes to current GCs and mine is many years away. i cannot change anything about the way i work for years...does my career have the same value as one from ROW? i did not apply for the job as an indian and i was not given a job as one. i had some qualifications that counted....why then are they suddenly subservient to my place of birth?
iv supports a package of measures that includes the recapture and STEM exemptions, not removal of country quotas in isolation. the idea is not to redistribute pain (though frankly country quotas give disproportionate pain to some- for what? being born "wrong'") but to end retrogression by simultaneously increasing numbers available and ending country quotas.
if you want to think about "fair" and "monopolies", i urge you to think of the current monopoly. i am an EB2 in health care- every ROW person with me, waltzes to current GCs and mine is many years away. i cannot change anything about the way i work for years...does my career have the same value as one from ROW? i did not apply for the job as an indian and i was not given a job as one. i had some qualifications that counted....why then are they suddenly subservient to my place of birth?
texanmom
09-26 11:46 AM
I just got a call from Eilene Zimmerman regarding the article and she promised me that she is working on fixing the error soon
If we make a big enough noise, perhaps we can get CNN to write an article focusing on our issues. Please continue to press for changes.
If we make a big enough noise, perhaps we can get CNN to write an article focusing on our issues. Please continue to press for changes.
No comments:
Post a Comment