sathweb
02-25 04:50 PM
I read the beginning of the thread, did not read all the posts.
I have been thinking something similar. Instead of targeting one Senator/Congressman we have to present our case to as many as Senators/ Congressman. Lets prepare a good power point or some other presentable document.
I am ready to take appointment with my local Senator/Congressman and present our case. I am positive I can get appointment with my local congresswoman. Please lets create a plan.
I have been thinking something similar. Instead of targeting one Senator/Congressman we have to present our case to as many as Senators/ Congressman. Lets prepare a good power point or some other presentable document.
I am ready to take appointment with my local Senator/Congressman and present our case. I am positive I can get appointment with my local congresswoman. Please lets create a plan.
wallpaper 2008 Mercedes-Benz C-Class
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,
newuser
02-26 02:51 PM
I don't think you have waited for 6 years after your PD to be able to file for EAD/AOS Benefits... the whole thing is messed up... There are people who filed during July Bulletin Fiasco and there are who could not even though their PDs are before yours. So do you ask them to SHUT UP ?
Didn't you read what was said by realizeit in his intital post?
�A journey of a thousand miles begins with a small step.�
All I said was not to mix all the issues into one and sell it. We all know what happened with CIR.
Didn't you read what was said by realizeit in his intital post?
�A journey of a thousand miles begins with a small step.�
All I said was not to mix all the issues into one and sell it. We all know what happened with CIR.
2011 Mercedes-Benz C-Class Estate
santb1975
12-03 08:31 PM
I will add in a 100$ for every 5000$ we raise as well
more...
deecha
07-20 12:59 PM
From february 2004 (expiry date of i-94 card) until april 1994 it looks like you accrued unlawful presence. The unlawful presence stopped when you filed the 485.
The unlawful presence was wiped out when you left and re-entered usa (the 3 year bar didn't kick in because the unlawful presence was less then 180 days).
You will be fine.
Just be truthful that you filed 485 before; you had divorce and all the employers that you worked with. Only thing they can get you on is if you try to embelish or hide things even though they were forgiven when you left and re-entered.
Thanks UnitedNations ! That's what my lawyer said too. In fact he prepared the I-485 packet and is sending it to the USCIS Nebraska center today. In my I-485 packet he has included a rider (part 3, I believe) stating that a I-485 was filed earlier and withdrawn by me and has included evidence documents to that effect.
The unlawful presence was wiped out when you left and re-entered usa (the 3 year bar didn't kick in because the unlawful presence was less then 180 days).
You will be fine.
Just be truthful that you filed 485 before; you had divorce and all the employers that you worked with. Only thing they can get you on is if you try to embelish or hide things even though they were forgiven when you left and re-entered.
Thanks UnitedNations ! That's what my lawyer said too. In fact he prepared the I-485 packet and is sending it to the USCIS Nebraska center today. In my I-485 packet he has included a rider (part 3, I believe) stating that a I-485 was filed earlier and withdrawn by me and has included evidence documents to that effect.
leoindiano
08-22 02:06 PM
I couldnt stop myself from posting...
Republicans, capitolists? may be for their own families and freinds? thats why economy is in dumps? i get it...
God, what did you do to my freinds on IV? Give them GC and heal...
Republicans, capitolists? may be for their own families and freinds? thats why economy is in dumps? i get it...
God, what did you do to my freinds on IV? Give them GC and heal...
more...
thefar
01-18 04:34 PM
This is an very very good forum that has helped to answer many of my questions, or clear myths if I might say so... Thanks to everyone who have been posting.
I had one question which I hope someone could help me with. I have a full-time job offer in a very reputed company and am in the same boat as many before me with graduation towards May end (cannot get a degree completion letter before that) and no hopes of the quota for 2009 (Master's) lasting till then. My employer can also apply for the H1 based on my undergrad because my job profile is such. I wanted to know what are the pros and cons (specifically cons) of doing so for the future legal paper-work. I know for one that I might get into the lottery scenario if the similar situation like last year happens. However, I cannot avoid that. I specifically wanted to know what could happen if I do have to change jobs in the next 3 years (and the new employer has specifically hired me based on my Master's degree). In addition, if I have the company start my GC paperwork after 1 year and I need to renew my H1 after 3 years based on my Master's degree, would I need to restart the GC process?
Any other disadvantages of applying for the undergrad quota (for a Master's student) would be welcome.
Thanks.
I had one question which I hope someone could help me with. I have a full-time job offer in a very reputed company and am in the same boat as many before me with graduation towards May end (cannot get a degree completion letter before that) and no hopes of the quota for 2009 (Master's) lasting till then. My employer can also apply for the H1 based on my undergrad because my job profile is such. I wanted to know what are the pros and cons (specifically cons) of doing so for the future legal paper-work. I know for one that I might get into the lottery scenario if the similar situation like last year happens. However, I cannot avoid that. I specifically wanted to know what could happen if I do have to change jobs in the next 3 years (and the new employer has specifically hired me based on my Master's degree). In addition, if I have the company start my GC paperwork after 1 year and I need to renew my H1 after 3 years based on my Master's degree, would I need to restart the GC process?
Any other disadvantages of applying for the undergrad quota (for a Master's student) would be welcome.
Thanks.
2010 Mercedes-Benz C-Class Estate
pappu
12-19 09:23 AM
Thank you everyone for being a part of this campaign. We are seeing lot of support from members and contributions are coming in. The drought is ending with some showers, buts lets continue the showers so that we can have a good crop next season. Pls. continue this drive so that we can achieve our target. I will be updating the numbers soon.
Thank you Anurakt for your previous contributions of $400 in the past months and this pledge for $1000. I am sure all our members have accepted your challange and will make sure to do their bit.
Thank you Anurakt for your previous contributions of $400 in the past months and this pledge for $1000. I am sure all our members have accepted your challange and will make sure to do their bit.
more...
amitjoey
12-19 02:05 PM
Contributed $50 ----Receipt Number: 4231-6491-4474-3546
Thanks kasanski33
Thanks kasanski33
hair 2008 Mercedes-Benz C-Class
chanduy9
07-05 04:05 PM
Just an idea, if someone can spend some time near the office videotaping flower arrivals, we can do a piece on youtube. It can potentially get more media attention if the media does not catch up immediately.
Media will not loose NEWS..please send the flowers and spread it to your friends,media will come automatically when there is a news. we will discuss the plan of action on 9th.
Thanks,
Chandra.
Media will not loose NEWS..please send the flowers and spread it to your friends,media will come automatically when there is a news. we will discuss the plan of action on 9th.
Thanks,
Chandra.
more...
waitnwatch
04-12 03:14 PM
hope you have received it.
hot 2008 Mercedes-Benz C-class Luxury estate
Milind123
09-07 11:09 PM
We have known Rosa Park personally and she was a speaker at one of our meetings and let me tell you none of you are close to what she was.
It looks like you are planning to go to DC. There is big difference between planning and execution. You folks are theoritical and not practical. This time the bus will be empty. You just don't have it in you. Take it from me.
BTW it's Parks not Park. Of course she was a great lady. If any one of us are close to her, no one really knows. Not ever you. Maybe we will get a "Rosa Parks" in this rally. If that happens you will write:
"We have known "Rosa Parks" and she was a speaker at one of our meetings and let me tell you ........"
It looks like you are planning to go to DC. There is big difference between planning and execution. You folks are theoritical and not practical. This time the bus will be empty. You just don't have it in you. Take it from me.
BTW it's Parks not Park. Of course she was a great lady. If any one of us are close to her, no one really knows. Not ever you. Maybe we will get a "Rosa Parks" in this rally. If that happens you will write:
"We have known "Rosa Parks" and she was a speaker at one of our meetings and let me tell you ........"
more...
house 2008 Mercedes-Benz C-Class
texanguy
08-21 04:24 PM
We have been fooled so many times in the past with the predictions of the visa allocation being over etc. I would take this with a grain of salt.
Whenever someone starts the thread with a line "A friendly IO told me blah blah blah"....my response is *YAWN*
Whenever someone starts the thread with a line "A friendly IO told me blah blah blah"....my response is *YAWN*
tattoo 2008 Mercedes Benz C Class
cloud 9
05-11 05:21 PM
Talk about present and future. Use good language, bad language shows your mentality
I was asking a question as to what should be done to people who already got their GC thru Labor Sub, since someone said that all the subs of 2007 should get the I-140 filing date as the priority date. I care only about the present and future. This is what I meant when I asked the question.
Sorry, if I could not write it properly for you to understand.
I was asking a question as to what should be done to people who already got their GC thru Labor Sub, since someone said that all the subs of 2007 should get the I-140 filing date as the priority date. I care only about the present and future. This is what I meant when I asked the question.
Sorry, if I could not write it properly for you to understand.
more...
pictures Speed. Exterior 2008
greatguy
12-20 11:01 AM
Not all members are loging in around this time. Admins, think of sending out emails requesting for funds.
dresses 2008 Mercedes Benz C Class
mohanty999
08-21 10:28 AM
Bottom line is getting VISA number assigned to file when current, and let them complete review at later time, once File has VISA number then its ready to for approval.
Really? I thought the visa number is assigned only after the review is complete.
Really? I thought the visa number is assigned only after the review is complete.
more...
makeup Scope Mercedes-Benz C-Class
PlainSpeak
04-15 11:18 AM
Plainspeak says.."As far as i know the whole MS F1 visa is a big scam and loophole to enter us and stay here when you are not supposed to and that is the loophole that needs to be closed first instesad of worrying about fruad porting and EB1 fraud. Closing thsi student GC loophole will clear up the whole EB retrogression mess "
F1 is not a scam. its legal visa. once u enter into usa on F1, u can stay here to study. while doing MS, u can also work on CPT legally. after completion of the MS degree, it is legal to stay on OPT and work. recently the US govt has increased the OPT period from 12 to 29 months. again its legal. its legal to apply for H1B while maintaining a proper F1 status or OPT.
People who dont like this.... dont either because they dont understand F1 very well, or just plainly speaking jealous or out of their mind.
i guess we should be happy if someone is making progress legally even if we are not in the same boat.:)
Let us say that i agree to what ever you say. In what way does everything you stated above make a STEM graduate eligible for GC without an Employer sponsership. Why does it have to be only STEM graduates which will not need employer sponsership. If giving GC based on completion of MS in us is bypassing the employee sponserhsip then that has to be extended to all EB categories of immigrants (EB1/EB2/EB3) and the benefit o those visas have to be passed to the badly retrogressed category first.
It si not teh question of liek or unliking or having jealousy. It is the question of law. According to the US law employee sponsership is EB category so any new bill which has to be introduced will have to follow the EB category employee sponsership rule, othwer wise it wil not see the light of the day
Personally i see no chance of this DV lottery STEM billpassing in any shape or form either now or in the future
F1 is not a scam. its legal visa. once u enter into usa on F1, u can stay here to study. while doing MS, u can also work on CPT legally. after completion of the MS degree, it is legal to stay on OPT and work. recently the US govt has increased the OPT period from 12 to 29 months. again its legal. its legal to apply for H1B while maintaining a proper F1 status or OPT.
People who dont like this.... dont either because they dont understand F1 very well, or just plainly speaking jealous or out of their mind.
i guess we should be happy if someone is making progress legally even if we are not in the same boat.:)
Let us say that i agree to what ever you say. In what way does everything you stated above make a STEM graduate eligible for GC without an Employer sponsership. Why does it have to be only STEM graduates which will not need employer sponsership. If giving GC based on completion of MS in us is bypassing the employee sponserhsip then that has to be extended to all EB categories of immigrants (EB1/EB2/EB3) and the benefit o those visas have to be passed to the badly retrogressed category first.
It si not teh question of liek or unliking or having jealousy. It is the question of law. According to the US law employee sponsership is EB category so any new bill which has to be introduced will have to follow the EB category employee sponsership rule, othwer wise it wil not see the light of the day
Personally i see no chance of this DV lottery STEM billpassing in any shape or form either now or in the future
girlfriend Mercedes-Benz C-Class Estate
vinerva
08-26 12:08 PM
Is it 2 PM PST or EST?
I am not sure ..I think it is 2PM EST
I am not sure ..I think it is 2PM EST
hairstyles 2008 Mercedes-Benz C-Class
texanguy
08-21 04:24 PM
We have been fooled so many times in the past with the predictions of the visa allocation being over etc. I would take this with a grain of salt.
Whenever someone starts the thread with a line "A friendly IO told me blah blah blah"....my response is *YAWN*
Whenever someone starts the thread with a line "A friendly IO told me blah blah blah"....my response is *YAWN*
newbie2020
02-25 12:02 PM
The idea needs to be taken to the next step, How about a conference call....I can provide a Bridge for the call
bigboy007
05-10 11:06 PM
Since the dates went back ppl wake up and say now I want to shoot this bird, not knowingly how many cases are there... A simple question to you, (I know the point this thread is raising is going no where becoz for years many ppl discussed this and at the last USCIS deciced to stop this forever which is indeed a good move).
Will all the ppl who came after ppl stuck in BEC (Labor) will go back the line ? will they relinquish ... A simple answer "NO" So why are we debating on items that doesnt exist?
IV for now has only one goal "recapture". There is no way USCIS can go back and change the dates who ever used Subs( I am not talking about FRAUD- FRAUD shouldnt exist period) as per law the dates should be ported.
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.
Will all the ppl who came after ppl stuck in BEC (Labor) will go back the line ? will they relinquish ... A simple answer "NO" So why are we debating on items that doesnt exist?
IV for now has only one goal "recapture". There is no way USCIS can go back and change the dates who ever used Subs( I am not talking about FRAUD- FRAUD shouldnt exist period) as per law the dates should be ported.
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.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar