antihero
04-15 12:21 AM
What is the need of any sublabor demand ( per direction of this thread?) if they just retain 140 date ? There would no need in first place for any one to use it.
The intent of a subst labor was to save the company time and money for obtaining another labor for the same position in case the original beneficiary drops out. Remember, labor was a company petition, not employee petition. The companies still would have wanted it even if it does not retain its original PD.
The basic thrust behind the idea of changing the rules of PD allocation for subst cases is to push forward PD to july 07 level. Most of the subst happened in that month. we are not asking subst labor folks to quit the queue, just asking them to move behind.
The intent of a subst labor was to save the company time and money for obtaining another labor for the same position in case the original beneficiary drops out. Remember, labor was a company petition, not employee petition. The companies still would have wanted it even if it does not retain its original PD.
The basic thrust behind the idea of changing the rules of PD allocation for subst cases is to push forward PD to july 07 level. Most of the subst happened in that month. we are not asking subst labor folks to quit the queue, just asking them to move behind.
wallpaper 2011 BMW X5
veereddy
03-06 01:36 PM
I'll contribute, thanks for the initiative.
amitps
09-08 12:07 AM
Jobs in America is for Americans. If at all it gets outsourced to your country then it is yours. But as long as that job is in my country, I will defend it and not let some Strive or Skill act take it away from me.
Could do our jobs why would the employers be willing to sponsor our GREEN CARDS and spend '000s of dollars to keep us :confused:
:D:D:D:D:D
Could do our jobs why would the employers be willing to sponsor our GREEN CARDS and spend '000s of dollars to keep us :confused:
:D:D:D:D:D
2011 2011 Bmw X5 Xdrive35i Front
smitin_2000
02-25 06:14 PM
This is a very great idea, and I think with the aggresive efforts and campaign we can achieve this as we have achieved Julye'07 I485 filling and 2yr. EAD solution, let's discuss and have action plan on how to move forward on this matter, united we can achieve this.
more...
BharatPremi
11-22 12:27 PM
My only point was... there is a reason they encourage $100 minimum for a one time contribution. They could have simply published the email id and opened the doors to $5/ $10 contributors... i.e. the folks who say they would happily contribute this small amount if they had that option.
BTW I think you can send money over paypal only to email ids registered with paypal. info@iv is not, i believe.
Yes, info@iv is not, I tried that before jotting down my frustration on this thread. The only email id what you gave me works and I confirmed with As**** in iv core as well.
BTW I think you can send money over paypal only to email ids registered with paypal. info@iv is not, i believe.
Yes, info@iv is not, I tried that before jotting down my frustration on this thread. The only email id what you gave me works and I confirmed with As**** in iv core as well.
ujjwal_p
08-21 07:02 PM
Many guys here worry too much, just relax and live a peaqceful life. Jus think this, we are highly educated and would defintely be able to make a living anywhere in the world, not just US. Don't worry tooo much and think others have no work and want to fool you guys.
Just my 2 cents......
lol.. well said dude.. you may already know, but happy news digests better.. i dont know if what you are saying is true or not, although I wouldn't be surprised if it is true given what we've seen before. anyway, when you come up with something like this, you trigger massive defense mechanisms of people who are refreshing iv/cris every few minutes. so u shudnt be surprised by the responses.
Just my 2 cents......
lol.. well said dude.. you may already know, but happy news digests better.. i dont know if what you are saying is true or not, although I wouldn't be surprised if it is true given what we've seen before. anyway, when you come up with something like this, you trigger massive defense mechanisms of people who are refreshing iv/cris every few minutes. so u shudnt be surprised by the responses.
more...
axp817
08-22 08:48 AM
at some point the visa numbers are going to be all used up. The lucky ones would get their GC by then and the others will have to wait for a few months.
Why worry over it? The line only gets shorter and shorter and everybody will get their turn sooner than later.
As long as they don't waste any visa numbers, there is no need for any worry. Even their random processing order does not bother me that much, because demand for EB2 will be less than supply next year. Its time for EB3 to fasten the seat belts....
+1
Why worry over it? The line only gets shorter and shorter and everybody will get their turn sooner than later.
As long as they don't waste any visa numbers, there is no need for any worry. Even their random processing order does not bother me that much, because demand for EB2 will be less than supply next year. Its time for EB3 to fasten the seat belts....
+1
2010 2011 BMW X5
praveen_maru
12-19 05:39 PM
Contributed $20 for the first time....Via Paypal
more...
.jpg "بی ام و BMW X5 - 2011 -")
waitnwatch
12-19 06:53 PM
Made another $30 contribution through paypal
hair 2011 BMW X5 – Seats View
vnsriv
11-12 12:13 PM
It's very sad to hear this story.Please read this article before making any decision. This is also helpful for rest of us.
http://www.divinecaroline.com/article/22129/35503-household-employment-101--employ-nanny
http://www.divinecaroline.com/article/22129/35503-household-employment-101--employ-nanny
more...
sshekar
07-06 11:46 AM
ORDER ID:
EGONZA0EGEU0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECIPIENT INFORMATION:
Name: Emilio Gonzalez
Company: US Citizen and Immigration Services
Address: Director of USCIS
20 Massachusetts Ave NW
Washington , DC 20529
Card Message: Dear Mr. Sanchez
Thanks for giving us hope for few hours
on July 1st and taking it away(I-485
Reversal). All the best for future
Employment Based Visa predictions.
Day Phone: 202-307-1565
Evening Phone:
E-mail:
EGONZA0EGEU0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECIPIENT INFORMATION:
Name: Emilio Gonzalez
Company: US Citizen and Immigration Services
Address: Director of USCIS
20 Massachusetts Ave NW
Washington , DC 20529
Card Message: Dear Mr. Sanchez
Thanks for giving us hope for few hours
on July 1st and taking it away(I-485
Reversal). All the best for future
Employment Based Visa predictions.
Day Phone: 202-307-1565
Evening Phone:
E-mail:
hot 2011 BMW X5,
Immi_Nightmare
07-05 04:26 PM
This is a great idea , but then DOS overturned the USCIS decision (hence the letter to Mike Chertoff and Condy of DOS from one the Congresswoman) . Shouldn't the flowers go to one of these guys ???
more...
house 2011 BMW X5 Performance
jsb
08-14 02:15 PM
Your PD is not yet current.
If they have issued GC to you, it was a mistake and you should report it to USCIS to avoid future problems.
There were several discussions on this forum about this issue.
Report to USCIS ASAP that you have been approved by mistake.
I thought with PD of 2004 by now you should be well aware of how Visa bulletins work. :confused:
Either you went into hibernation after filing for your GC back in 2004 or you are just faking your profile.
If your PD was current, but they didn't give you a visa, that is a mistake. Why should someone report getting a visa is a mistake? He applied for the visa, he/she got it. Is it his/her job to watch USCIS? What future problems should he/she expect for getting a visa?
Further, it is great mis-impression that everyone who applies for a GC watches visa bulletins, or knows how they work. I for one, knew nothing about visa bulletins, or EB1,2,3 etc. until the Washington rally. When my LC was filed, I only knew that my GC has been filed, and it would take years. At that time, even until recently, I never even expected a GC would come before I would decide to go back. There is a higher percentage of those who don't watch VB than those who do. I know many in my circle, who are waiting for GC but never bother about VB. Some don't even have emails. Perhaps VB watching is more prominent among computer guys.
If they have issued GC to you, it was a mistake and you should report it to USCIS to avoid future problems.
There were several discussions on this forum about this issue.
Report to USCIS ASAP that you have been approved by mistake.
I thought with PD of 2004 by now you should be well aware of how Visa bulletins work. :confused:
Either you went into hibernation after filing for your GC back in 2004 or you are just faking your profile.
If your PD was current, but they didn't give you a visa, that is a mistake. Why should someone report getting a visa is a mistake? He applied for the visa, he/she got it. Is it his/her job to watch USCIS? What future problems should he/she expect for getting a visa?
Further, it is great mis-impression that everyone who applies for a GC watches visa bulletins, or knows how they work. I for one, knew nothing about visa bulletins, or EB1,2,3 etc. until the Washington rally. When my LC was filed, I only knew that my GC has been filed, and it would take years. At that time, even until recently, I never even expected a GC would come before I would decide to go back. There is a higher percentage of those who don't watch VB than those who do. I know many in my circle, who are waiting for GC but never bother about VB. Some don't even have emails. Perhaps VB watching is more prominent among computer guys.
tattoo 2011 BMW X5 3
gcdreamer05
03-09 02:17 PM
Thanks just now i contributed 25$ .... Go IV...
more...
pictures The 2011 BMW X5 facelift will
vicks_don
04-11 09:19 AM
USCIS UPDATES COUNT OF FY 2008 H-1B CAP FILINGS
WASHINGTON � U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced an updated number of
filings today as the counting of H-1B petitions received on April 2 and 3 continues. On April 3, USCIS
announced that it had received enough petitions to meet the congressionally mandated cap for fiscal year
2008 (FY 2008) and that it would conduct a computer-generated random selection of cap-subject petitions
filed on Monday (April 2) and Tuesday (April 3) to determine which cases would be accepted for processing.
As of April 9, USCIS has determined that approximately 119,193 of the H-1B petitions received on April 2
and 3 are subject to the FY 2008 congressionally mandated cap.
USCIS received on April 2 and 3 a total of approximately 12,989 cases requesting an exemption from the FY
2008 H-1B cap because they were filed on behalf of aliens holding a master�s degree or higher from a U.S.
institution. USCIS can now announce that the cap of 20,000 on these exempt cases remains open and that
USCIS will continue to monitor these filings.
USCIS will provide regular updates as the processing of FY 2008 H-1B cap cases continues.
Is this the final number or interim number while the counting is going on.
WASHINGTON � U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced an updated number of
filings today as the counting of H-1B petitions received on April 2 and 3 continues. On April 3, USCIS
announced that it had received enough petitions to meet the congressionally mandated cap for fiscal year
2008 (FY 2008) and that it would conduct a computer-generated random selection of cap-subject petitions
filed on Monday (April 2) and Tuesday (April 3) to determine which cases would be accepted for processing.
As of April 9, USCIS has determined that approximately 119,193 of the H-1B petitions received on April 2
and 3 are subject to the FY 2008 congressionally mandated cap.
USCIS received on April 2 and 3 a total of approximately 12,989 cases requesting an exemption from the FY
2008 H-1B cap because they were filed on behalf of aliens holding a master�s degree or higher from a U.S.
institution. USCIS can now announce that the cap of 20,000 on these exempt cases remains open and that
USCIS will continue to monitor these filings.
USCIS will provide regular updates as the processing of FY 2008 H-1B cap cases continues.
Is this the final number or interim number while the counting is going on.
dresses 2011 BMW X5 interior
conundrum
03-09 02:50 PM
Pledged $25, donated $50
more...
makeup بی ام و BMW X5 - 2011 -
fatjoe
08-22 12:27 AM
kpchal2,
Your case may be preadjudicated.....(if at all that is actually true)....yet it does not stop USCIS from sending an RFE for anything especially it has been over a few months since they last saw ur case....and once an RFE is issued you again go back in the list and the wait continues to next year when the window again opens for a short time.
It is absolutely nonsense that preadjudicated cases are in a pile waiting for visa number...this is from my attorney....USCIS can issue n number of RFEs.....and each time it is issued it furthers the chance of green....
SoP
How do you know if your case is pre-adjudicated or not. Could we call USCIS and ask the representative about this?
PD - July 2004 - EB2
I-485 RD - August 17, 2007 - TSC
I-485 ND - Oct 16, 2007
Is there a chance that mine pre-adjudicated? I attended the interview on Jun 25, 2009. The DAO asked me for various docs and I provided all those. Is there a chance of getting RFE still?
Your case may be preadjudicated.....(if at all that is actually true)....yet it does not stop USCIS from sending an RFE for anything especially it has been over a few months since they last saw ur case....and once an RFE is issued you again go back in the list and the wait continues to next year when the window again opens for a short time.
It is absolutely nonsense that preadjudicated cases are in a pile waiting for visa number...this is from my attorney....USCIS can issue n number of RFEs.....and each time it is issued it furthers the chance of green....
SoP
How do you know if your case is pre-adjudicated or not. Could we call USCIS and ask the representative about this?
PD - July 2004 - EB2
I-485 RD - August 17, 2007 - TSC
I-485 ND - Oct 16, 2007
Is there a chance that mine pre-adjudicated? I attended the interview on Jun 25, 2009. The DAO asked me for various docs and I provided all those. Is there a chance of getting RFE still?
girlfriend 2011 BMW X5 Xdrive35i Side
nrk
08-12 02:51 PM
To my knowledge it is Notice Date.
People we have a question, throw us some light now that our application officailly falls under current dates....
Our service center is Texas Center and the dates -
Priority Date - Oct 18 2004
485 Received Date - Aug 17th 2007
485 Notice Date - Oct 16th 2007
The current processing time for Texas Service Center is August 23rd 2007. Do they process based on reciept date or notice date? From the past experience we know that they donot process based on priority dates (We have been current for 3 times in the past and saw approvals for PD's in 2006 with earlier notice and receipt dates)
People we have a question, throw us some light now that our application officailly falls under current dates....
Our service center is Texas Center and the dates -
Priority Date - Oct 18 2004
485 Received Date - Aug 17th 2007
485 Notice Date - Oct 16th 2007
The current processing time for Texas Service Center is August 23rd 2007. Do they process based on reciept date or notice date? From the past experience we know that they donot process based on priority dates (We have been current for 3 times in the past and saw approvals for PD's in 2006 with earlier notice and receipt dates)
hairstyles 2011 BMW X5 xDrive35i 2011 BMW
gc_on_demand
03-10 10:10 AM
This is on immigration-law.com
03/10/2009: Understanding Management, Uses, and Availability of Individual Private Records of USCIS Computer Immigration Benefits Information System
The USCIS published this information as part of its compliance with the Privacy Act. Understanding this information is helpful to the immigration stakeholders, immigrants, nonimmigrants, and related parties in handling immigratiopn benefits applications.
Benefits Information System: The DHS is managing the following computer information system relating the immigrant and nonimmigrant processings: SORN: CLAIMS 3, CLAIMS 4, the Redesigned Naturalization Application Casework System (RNACS); the Citizenship and Immigration Services Centralized Oracle Repository (CISCOR), the Interim Case Management System (ICMS), Integrated Voice Response System (IVRS), and the Integrated Card Production System (ICPS).
Purposes and Uses of the Information System: The records and information in the system broadly serves three purposes: (1) Automatic access and retrieval in immiration benefits and naturalization applications processing and adjudication for efficiency and fraud detections. (2) National and homeland security. (3) Information sharing with local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies or other government and private entities within the parameters of the Privacy Act of the country. As for the purpose of achievement of efficiency of immigration benefits processing and adjudications, the system assists in the automated processing of f immigrant and nonimmigrant benefit petitions and applications. Both investigative and administrative records are maintained in this system to permit USCIS to function efficiently. Reports are also generated from the data within the system of records. This system of records notice enables DHS/USCIS to provide automated support to process applications and/or petitions for benefits; determine the status of pending applications and/or petitions for benefits; account for and control the receipt and disposition of any fees and refunds collected; conduct searches pursuant to FOIA and Privacy Act requests; and locate related physical and automated files to support DHS/USCIS responses to inquiries about these records.
Categories Individuals Covered: Persons who have filed (for themselves or on the behalf of others) applications or petitions for immigration benefits (other than asylum and refugee) under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, and/or who have submitted fee payments or received refunds from such applications or petitions; current, former and potential (e.g., fianc[eacute]) family members of applicants/petitioners; persons who complete immigration forms for applicants and petitioners (e.g., attorneys, form preparers); name of applicant's employer; and individuals who seek access to records retained in the Benefits Information System under the Freedom of Information/Privacy Acts (FOIA/PA).
Categories of Records in the System:
Individual's name;
Social Security Number (if applicable);
A-Number (if applicable);
Addresses;
Telephone numbers;
Birth and death information;
Citizenship or nationality;
Immigration status;
Marital and family status;
Personal characteristics (e.g., height and weight);
Records regarding tax payment and financial matters;
Records regarding employment;
Medical records;
Military and Selective Service records;
Records regarding organization membership or affiliation;
Biometric and other information collected to conduct background checks;
DHS issued card serial numbers;
Records regarding criminal history and other background check information; and
Case processing information such as date applications were filed or received by USCIS; application/petition status, location of record, FOIA/PA or other control number when applicable, and fee receipt data.
Record and Information Safeguards: Records in this system are safeguarded in accordance with applicable rules and policies, including all applicable DHS automated system security access policies. Strict controls have been imposed to minimize the risk of compromising the information that is being stored. Access to the computer system containing the records in this system is limited to those individuals who have a need to know the information
for the performance of their official duties and who have appropriate clearances or permissions. The system maintains a real-time auditing function of individuals who access the system. Additional safeguards may vary by component and program.
It ain't interesting? Don't try to be outsmart over the federal institutions! For additional details, readers may review the USCIS published notice.
can't they join two tables or data to find out that information ? Why they want to hide from us ?
03/10/2009: Understanding Management, Uses, and Availability of Individual Private Records of USCIS Computer Immigration Benefits Information System
The USCIS published this information as part of its compliance with the Privacy Act. Understanding this information is helpful to the immigration stakeholders, immigrants, nonimmigrants, and related parties in handling immigratiopn benefits applications.
Benefits Information System: The DHS is managing the following computer information system relating the immigrant and nonimmigrant processings: SORN: CLAIMS 3, CLAIMS 4, the Redesigned Naturalization Application Casework System (RNACS); the Citizenship and Immigration Services Centralized Oracle Repository (CISCOR), the Interim Case Management System (ICMS), Integrated Voice Response System (IVRS), and the Integrated Card Production System (ICPS).
Purposes and Uses of the Information System: The records and information in the system broadly serves three purposes: (1) Automatic access and retrieval in immiration benefits and naturalization applications processing and adjudication for efficiency and fraud detections. (2) National and homeland security. (3) Information sharing with local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies or other government and private entities within the parameters of the Privacy Act of the country. As for the purpose of achievement of efficiency of immigration benefits processing and adjudications, the system assists in the automated processing of f immigrant and nonimmigrant benefit petitions and applications. Both investigative and administrative records are maintained in this system to permit USCIS to function efficiently. Reports are also generated from the data within the system of records. This system of records notice enables DHS/USCIS to provide automated support to process applications and/or petitions for benefits; determine the status of pending applications and/or petitions for benefits; account for and control the receipt and disposition of any fees and refunds collected; conduct searches pursuant to FOIA and Privacy Act requests; and locate related physical and automated files to support DHS/USCIS responses to inquiries about these records.
Categories Individuals Covered: Persons who have filed (for themselves or on the behalf of others) applications or petitions for immigration benefits (other than asylum and refugee) under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, and/or who have submitted fee payments or received refunds from such applications or petitions; current, former and potential (e.g., fianc[eacute]) family members of applicants/petitioners; persons who complete immigration forms for applicants and petitioners (e.g., attorneys, form preparers); name of applicant's employer; and individuals who seek access to records retained in the Benefits Information System under the Freedom of Information/Privacy Acts (FOIA/PA).
Categories of Records in the System:
Individual's name;
Social Security Number (if applicable);
A-Number (if applicable);
Addresses;
Telephone numbers;
Birth and death information;
Citizenship or nationality;
Immigration status;
Marital and family status;
Personal characteristics (e.g., height and weight);
Records regarding tax payment and financial matters;
Records regarding employment;
Medical records;
Military and Selective Service records;
Records regarding organization membership or affiliation;
Biometric and other information collected to conduct background checks;
DHS issued card serial numbers;
Records regarding criminal history and other background check information; and
Case processing information such as date applications were filed or received by USCIS; application/petition status, location of record, FOIA/PA or other control number when applicable, and fee receipt data.
Record and Information Safeguards: Records in this system are safeguarded in accordance with applicable rules and policies, including all applicable DHS automated system security access policies. Strict controls have been imposed to minimize the risk of compromising the information that is being stored. Access to the computer system containing the records in this system is limited to those individuals who have a need to know the information
for the performance of their official duties and who have appropriate clearances or permissions. The system maintains a real-time auditing function of individuals who access the system. Additional safeguards may vary by component and program.
It ain't interesting? Don't try to be outsmart over the federal institutions! For additional details, readers may review the USCIS published notice.
can't they join two tables or data to find out that information ? Why they want to hide from us ?
pritesh80
05-13 06:09 PM
If my wife who is an MBA finance from Mumbai, currently working as a corporate banker with one of the top 5 banks in the world comes to the US on an H4 & decides to do a CPA certification, can she work on OPT until the H1B quota opens up next year???
It will be ok as long as they give her an F1. Here is something from a website -
Eligibility for OPT
OPT must be in the field of your declared or intended major. The relation can sometimes be fairly loose; for example, a math major would often be relevant to a business job involving statistics, analysis of data, financial figures, etc. The determination is up to your employer, but they are well advised to be cautious. In case of doubt, it might be good for them to insert a mention in your offer letter subtly mentioning your major as being relevant to the job.
Your employment must be commensurate with your educational level; for example, cooking fast food would not be commensurate with a completed Business major.
You must have been in F-1 status at some point for at least 9 continuous months as a full-time student, not including high school. These 9 months can include summer vacation; one summer plus one semester might or not be enough. These 9 months can include time as a student in J-1, J-2, or other appropriate status.
It will be ok as long as they give her an F1. Here is something from a website -
Eligibility for OPT
OPT must be in the field of your declared or intended major. The relation can sometimes be fairly loose; for example, a math major would often be relevant to a business job involving statistics, analysis of data, financial figures, etc. The determination is up to your employer, but they are well advised to be cautious. In case of doubt, it might be good for them to insert a mention in your offer letter subtly mentioning your major as being relevant to the job.
Your employment must be commensurate with your educational level; for example, cooking fast food would not be commensurate with a completed Business major.
You must have been in F-1 status at some point for at least 9 continuous months as a full-time student, not including high school. These 9 months can include summer vacation; one summer plus one semester might or not be enough. These 9 months can include time as a student in J-1, J-2, or other appropriate status.
reedandbamboo
09-13 12:48 AM
Folks,
I edited the letter so please take a look at this version. Some of you'll have suggested I condense the letter to a series of questions alone - I think this is a good idea and will be more effective in capturing attention. I will prepare something in this format (but it will have to wait for the weekend).
For now, my intent with this letter is to ask that the ARBITRARY nature of the visa bulletin be put to an end. I am exhausted by the cycle of raised and dashed hopes when the visa bulletin moves forward and backward.
To those of you'll who brought up the issue of schisms between EB2 and EB3, please read paragraph two above. Let us correct this randomness before we tackle each of the issues that are making life so difficult for us. You could start by gathering your friends, co-workers and other EB3 applicants and put together your list of issues to be addressed along with solutions. My view is that if USCIS is incapable of taking care of the matter then we have to pitch in and suggest/prod/request/demand it of/from them.
Together we can do it!
And here's the letter:
The Ombudsman
USCIS
September xx, 2008
Sir/Madam,
On behalf of the employment-based legal immigrant community in the United States of America, I am writing to highlight the ongoing egregious inefficiencies in the immigration “services” provided by the USCIS and the DOS. There have been numerous occasions when there have been erratic movements in the DOS published visa bulletin dates. This, as we understand it, is owing to USCIS under- or over-estimating the number of applicants available for adjustment of status. And in the rare instances when the date finally moves forward by a substantial window, USCIS tends to approve the more recent applications as opposed to the ones that were filed earlier. Let me explain with an example: in the July 2008 visa bulletin, the cut-off date for the India EB2 category was 01 April 2004. A month later, the cut-off date for Indian EB2 applicants abruptly moved forward two years and was set at 01 June 2006. Instead of approving applicants who applied in 2004 and 2005, USCIS approved applicants from 2006. Where is the justice in that??? Why bother publishing the cut-off date if approvals are to be randomly allocated???
We understand we have to stand in line and wait our turn. Each applicant is assigned a priority date which chronologically determines his/her turn for approval. To further complicate matters, once the I-485 is filed, a crop of other dates are issued by the USCIS – a receipt date, a notice date and a processing date. USCIS then takes the liberty to throw random rules at us – “Case adjudication is based on receipt date” “No, we process applications based on notice date”, “Actually, it’s the processing date that determines which applications are adjusted.” !!!
Please take a moment to consider how these conflicting statements and arbitrary decisions wreak havoc on our morale and psyches? No one, NOT even the USCIS, has a clue as to what exactly is happening in their processing centers. The USCIS has never been able to clearly state the exact number of applications languishing, excuse us, we meant pending, in their “service” centers! We, employment-based immigrants, are tax-paying, law-abiding, educated individuals contributing to America’s knowledge economy - yet we have been subjected to the worst aspects of the US employment-based immigration system. These include:
1) Extended wait times at each step of the immigration process.
2) Lack of transparency on the part of USCIS (re: priority date, receipt date, notice date).
3) Lack of USCIS customer service – once applications are submitted to USCIS they disappear into a black hole. Barring a website where one nominally can check one’s case status (but which in reality remains static for months, even years!) there is no concept of updating an applicant on where his case stands. And this is despite the applicant paying immigration fees that often run into thousands of dollars over the years. We are simply expected to wait in a complete void of information, for however long it may take, until approval.
4) Lost opportunities owing to the lack of job portability during the process (a time period spanning an average of five years, whereas an applicant from any country besides India gets his/her PR card in under two years).
While we are grateful for the opportunity to partake in the American dream, it is ironic that we arrive in America and find that our freedom is shackled – we are bound to our sponsoring employer from the start to the end of the extremely lengthy process. Although legal immigration reform is our ongoing aim, for now, we sincerely request you to investigate the process whereby the monthly visa bulletin is set and to ensure FIFO (first in, first out) adjustment so that those of us who have been waiting longer receive attention prior to those who have applied later. We want USCIS to be accountable to us, its paying customers.
We request you to lend us your ear and address these issues so that we are not subjected to them in the future.
Thanking you,
I edited the letter so please take a look at this version. Some of you'll have suggested I condense the letter to a series of questions alone - I think this is a good idea and will be more effective in capturing attention. I will prepare something in this format (but it will have to wait for the weekend).
For now, my intent with this letter is to ask that the ARBITRARY nature of the visa bulletin be put to an end. I am exhausted by the cycle of raised and dashed hopes when the visa bulletin moves forward and backward.
To those of you'll who brought up the issue of schisms between EB2 and EB3, please read paragraph two above. Let us correct this randomness before we tackle each of the issues that are making life so difficult for us. You could start by gathering your friends, co-workers and other EB3 applicants and put together your list of issues to be addressed along with solutions. My view is that if USCIS is incapable of taking care of the matter then we have to pitch in and suggest/prod/request/demand it of/from them.
Together we can do it!
And here's the letter:
The Ombudsman
USCIS
September xx, 2008
Sir/Madam,
On behalf of the employment-based legal immigrant community in the United States of America, I am writing to highlight the ongoing egregious inefficiencies in the immigration “services” provided by the USCIS and the DOS. There have been numerous occasions when there have been erratic movements in the DOS published visa bulletin dates. This, as we understand it, is owing to USCIS under- or over-estimating the number of applicants available for adjustment of status. And in the rare instances when the date finally moves forward by a substantial window, USCIS tends to approve the more recent applications as opposed to the ones that were filed earlier. Let me explain with an example: in the July 2008 visa bulletin, the cut-off date for the India EB2 category was 01 April 2004. A month later, the cut-off date for Indian EB2 applicants abruptly moved forward two years and was set at 01 June 2006. Instead of approving applicants who applied in 2004 and 2005, USCIS approved applicants from 2006. Where is the justice in that??? Why bother publishing the cut-off date if approvals are to be randomly allocated???
We understand we have to stand in line and wait our turn. Each applicant is assigned a priority date which chronologically determines his/her turn for approval. To further complicate matters, once the I-485 is filed, a crop of other dates are issued by the USCIS – a receipt date, a notice date and a processing date. USCIS then takes the liberty to throw random rules at us – “Case adjudication is based on receipt date” “No, we process applications based on notice date”, “Actually, it’s the processing date that determines which applications are adjusted.” !!!
Please take a moment to consider how these conflicting statements and arbitrary decisions wreak havoc on our morale and psyches? No one, NOT even the USCIS, has a clue as to what exactly is happening in their processing centers. The USCIS has never been able to clearly state the exact number of applications languishing, excuse us, we meant pending, in their “service” centers! We, employment-based immigrants, are tax-paying, law-abiding, educated individuals contributing to America’s knowledge economy - yet we have been subjected to the worst aspects of the US employment-based immigration system. These include:
1) Extended wait times at each step of the immigration process.
2) Lack of transparency on the part of USCIS (re: priority date, receipt date, notice date).
3) Lack of USCIS customer service – once applications are submitted to USCIS they disappear into a black hole. Barring a website where one nominally can check one’s case status (but which in reality remains static for months, even years!) there is no concept of updating an applicant on where his case stands. And this is despite the applicant paying immigration fees that often run into thousands of dollars over the years. We are simply expected to wait in a complete void of information, for however long it may take, until approval.
4) Lost opportunities owing to the lack of job portability during the process (a time period spanning an average of five years, whereas an applicant from any country besides India gets his/her PR card in under two years).
While we are grateful for the opportunity to partake in the American dream, it is ironic that we arrive in America and find that our freedom is shackled – we are bound to our sponsoring employer from the start to the end of the extremely lengthy process. Although legal immigration reform is our ongoing aim, for now, we sincerely request you to investigate the process whereby the monthly visa bulletin is set and to ensure FIFO (first in, first out) adjustment so that those of us who have been waiting longer receive attention prior to those who have applied later. We want USCIS to be accountable to us, its paying customers.
We request you to lend us your ear and address these issues so that we are not subjected to them in the future.
Thanking you,
No comments:
Post a Comment