singhsa3
09-12 10:51 AM
It is a good idea, can please register your vote against "simple letter"
In my opinion, we should do this:
Just send two information to USCIS, DOS, President, VP, First Lady and all Congress person of the following:
1. 1st info should have a photocopy of our degree certificate(s). On the same page, print your expereince in years and total tax paid till date to the US government.
2. On a fresh page, type in all the H1B/L VISA approval information and type in bold, we were wanted/invited here legally (and admitted via H1/L).
And, mention that our I140 is approved which means the immigration department has validated our eligibility to become PR.
Ask a question (larger font) on the same page, why keep us on limbo?
This would keep the whole thing short and sweet. We are explicitly saying that we are legals. And we were invited here - legally. We are approved by immigration team to be a PR.
If we could send couple of thousands of letters, I am sure it would have impact as much as any other letter we have in mind.
We are not humiliating them, we are just expressing our frustrations but in mass. May be we can say something like, "Legal Techie slaves in the land of liberty" or "Immigration process that enslave Legal Techies". But, we should keep it short.
As always, ignore this idea if you guys dont like it.
In my opinion, we should do this:
Just send two information to USCIS, DOS, President, VP, First Lady and all Congress person of the following:
1. 1st info should have a photocopy of our degree certificate(s). On the same page, print your expereince in years and total tax paid till date to the US government.
2. On a fresh page, type in all the H1B/L VISA approval information and type in bold, we were wanted/invited here legally (and admitted via H1/L).
And, mention that our I140 is approved which means the immigration department has validated our eligibility to become PR.
Ask a question (larger font) on the same page, why keep us on limbo?
This would keep the whole thing short and sweet. We are explicitly saying that we are legals. And we were invited here - legally. We are approved by immigration team to be a PR.
If we could send couple of thousands of letters, I am sure it would have impact as much as any other letter we have in mind.
We are not humiliating them, we are just expressing our frustrations but in mass. May be we can say something like, "Legal Techie slaves in the land of liberty" or "Immigration process that enslave Legal Techies". But, we should keep it short.
As always, ignore this idea if you guys dont like it.
lazycis
11-20 06:25 PM
Yep, Ron G. precisely described risks of focusing on maintaining H1 and forgetting about maintaining EAD.
susie
07-28 02:44 PM
update on case
As you know they should have answered law suit at end of May 07, then requested a further 30 days till end of Jun
Just before end of june their attorney called my attorney and said they want a resolution to case, they had little to no paperwork so requested our file which I hand delivered to Tampa on 6th July 07, so asked for another 30 days to end July
Well they have replied and agreed with 90% of our case. they say case is moot because my husband died, but my attorney says no, because they errored whilst husband was alive so irrelevant. They are also saying we cannot sue them, my attorney says there wrong
Anyway I will not bore you with all the details as I now have to do a lot of work, indexing, getting proof my son was issued an L2 visa (they are denying this), getting proof my son took steps to immigrate, which we have as he had INS medical well before his 21st
My attorney says if we win this will help so many others cases from aging out and to be strong, very hard to do at the moment.
Oh and they do not believe I am depressed, but I have the tablets and pescription to prove
And they do not believe my son is his fathers natural son, what b---tards, just cos I did not submit his birth certificate
As you know they should have answered law suit at end of May 07, then requested a further 30 days till end of Jun
Just before end of june their attorney called my attorney and said they want a resolution to case, they had little to no paperwork so requested our file which I hand delivered to Tampa on 6th July 07, so asked for another 30 days to end July
Well they have replied and agreed with 90% of our case. they say case is moot because my husband died, but my attorney says no, because they errored whilst husband was alive so irrelevant. They are also saying we cannot sue them, my attorney says there wrong
Anyway I will not bore you with all the details as I now have to do a lot of work, indexing, getting proof my son was issued an L2 visa (they are denying this), getting proof my son took steps to immigrate, which we have as he had INS medical well before his 21st
My attorney says if we win this will help so many others cases from aging out and to be strong, very hard to do at the moment.
Oh and they do not believe I am depressed, but I have the tablets and pescription to prove
And they do not believe my son is his fathers natural son, what b---tards, just cos I did not submit his birth certificate
needhelp!
03-12 11:21 AM
Please send email to info@immigrationvoice.org
Pappu has addressed this in the original thread posted about Donor Forums.
Looks like it only tracks people who donated for FOIA
Pappu has addressed this in the original thread posted about Donor Forums.
Looks like it only tracks people who donated for FOIA
more...
khukubindu
01-18 10:11 PM
Hello Rameshk75,
Thank you very much for your reply. It gave me a mental peace. Do anyone believe if I go to the local office on next tuesday they will do something for me ?
Thank you very much for your reply. It gave me a mental peace. Do anyone believe if I go to the local office on next tuesday they will do something for me ?
tikka
07-20 10:35 AM
Contributed $100. Will do again. Thanks to IV for the job well done.
your first post is a contribution.. cant wait for the second one :D
Thank you for the contribution...
your first post is a contribution.. cant wait for the second one :D
Thank you for the contribution...
more...
permfiling
12-11 03:07 PM
There could be lots of folks who missed July 07 fiasco. For the people who were able to file during July 07 that EAD is working as good as green card for now.. wish we could. Here is my case if that makes you feel little better that there are lots of people who missed the boat, I Had approved labor with PD Mar 06 and I-140 and i changed my Job in Mar 07 because of issues with desi company. I never imagined that dates will become current in just three months.. :mad:
Now i am still waiting for my labor.. I recently got three years H1b extension. This extension seems like green card to me :o
IVAR,
I am in the same boat as well. I have my PERM pending and it is forever now with the PERM delays.
Now i am still waiting for my labor.. I recently got three years H1b extension. This extension seems like green card to me :o
IVAR,
I am in the same boat as well. I have my PERM pending and it is forever now with the PERM delays.
Humhongekamyab
02-18 03:49 PM
pardon my ignorance. But since you already applied for 485, it means you will get GC in april 2009(if pd becomes dec 2005) ?
Yes and No. If the PD stays at (let's say) December 15, 2005 and during that time the officer is able to review my file and request a visa number from the DOS then I will get the green card BUT if during this process the PD moves back (let's say December 14, 2005) then I will have to wait for it to be current again for me (i.e. December 15, 2005).
Yes and No. If the PD stays at (let's say) December 15, 2005 and during that time the officer is able to review my file and request a visa number from the DOS then I will get the green card BUT if during this process the PD moves back (let's say December 14, 2005) then I will have to wait for it to be current again for me (i.e. December 15, 2005).
more...
eager_immi
02-12 10:56 PM
My spouse's is still pending
PD 03/20/2005
Philly backlog center
Lawyer is filling RIR
PD 03/20/2005
Philly backlog center
Lawyer is filling RIR
prince_waiting
07-05 10:45 AM
My area senator is Mr. Sessions :eek:. What do you guys think, should I email him or not? I am sure that I am not going to get a courteous reply or as a fact of matter a reply at all.
more...
Alien
03-12 09:53 PM
I know someone with PD EB3-I 2003 March who got his GC today.
Mouns
04-30 03:20 PM
:mad:
more...
raysaikat
01-07 12:24 AM
raysaikat, and others, can we call a truce and focus on the original intent of the thread? I am sure we can all agree that the top 5 % of the worst university (does not matter which, or where) are usually better than the bottom 5 % of the best university (again, does not matter).
In my life, in our company, I've seen some of the sharpest brains around (PhDs working for the Russian defence before they defected in late 70's and early 80's) and some of the dumbest (a mechanical engineer who refused to believe me when I mentioned the sun was approximately 300000 bigger than the earth in terms of mass and 1000000 times bigger in terms of volume). Believe it or not, I've met a taxi driver who graduated from an Ivy League institution and used to work at NASA in 60s and 70s and worked on developing algorithms for decompressing transmissions. There are all sorts who make the world a pretty interesting, if unpredictable place. :)
You never know whom you are sitting next to on the plane! ;)
Rather than arguing over silly matters, perhaps we should focus on intelligent analysis and if necessary, rebuttal of arguments.
We do not prove anything by arguing over IIT vs Osmania, or North Vs South, but merely conform the worst aspects of Prof. Wadhwa's sweeping generalizations.
I, for one, have serious questions:
A) The video was edited. It is a collection of sound bites. How do we know the context of the statements if we do not have the full transcript?
B) We have no visuals of the charts and figures referred to by Prof Wadhwa.
C) We have no access to the raw data used by Prof. Wadhwa. He may had published it, but I have not seen any of it. (Unless Macaca can ferret out the details.. if anyone can, he is the man!). I have, for instance, basic questions whether immigrants and foreign students were excluded when he (Wadhwa) was counting the openings filled and engineers graduated in US.
I do not mean to offend anyone, nor am I commenting on any country, university, or anything.. so please do not misunderstand me. Let us focus on the what is more important.
I agree with you. It is important to know if the US data excluded international students or not. You can find the papers here:
http://www.soc.duke.edu/GlobalEngineering/papers.html
The relevant one seems to be the following:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=991327#PaperDownload
In my life, in our company, I've seen some of the sharpest brains around (PhDs working for the Russian defence before they defected in late 70's and early 80's) and some of the dumbest (a mechanical engineer who refused to believe me when I mentioned the sun was approximately 300000 bigger than the earth in terms of mass and 1000000 times bigger in terms of volume). Believe it or not, I've met a taxi driver who graduated from an Ivy League institution and used to work at NASA in 60s and 70s and worked on developing algorithms for decompressing transmissions. There are all sorts who make the world a pretty interesting, if unpredictable place. :)
You never know whom you are sitting next to on the plane! ;)
Rather than arguing over silly matters, perhaps we should focus on intelligent analysis and if necessary, rebuttal of arguments.
We do not prove anything by arguing over IIT vs Osmania, or North Vs South, but merely conform the worst aspects of Prof. Wadhwa's sweeping generalizations.
I, for one, have serious questions:
A) The video was edited. It is a collection of sound bites. How do we know the context of the statements if we do not have the full transcript?
B) We have no visuals of the charts and figures referred to by Prof Wadhwa.
C) We have no access to the raw data used by Prof. Wadhwa. He may had published it, but I have not seen any of it. (Unless Macaca can ferret out the details.. if anyone can, he is the man!). I have, for instance, basic questions whether immigrants and foreign students were excluded when he (Wadhwa) was counting the openings filled and engineers graduated in US.
I do not mean to offend anyone, nor am I commenting on any country, university, or anything.. so please do not misunderstand me. Let us focus on the what is more important.
I agree with you. It is important to know if the US data excluded international students or not. You can find the papers here:
http://www.soc.duke.edu/GlobalEngineering/papers.html
The relevant one seems to be the following:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=991327#PaperDownload
ras
10-16 05:47 PM
Added some missing in's and to's, etc. if it appears appropriate, you may keep the changes.
Issue/Background:
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring it to your attention the hardship faced by I 485 applicants because of inappropriate denials by USCIS with out adhering to AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many applicants have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485 applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing a NOID or an RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS the change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees and psychological stress, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are adhered to when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this could be added to the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant could be issued a NOID/RFE instead of out rightly denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Issue/Background:
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring it to your attention the hardship faced by I 485 applicants because of inappropriate denials by USCIS with out adhering to AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many applicants have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485 applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing a NOID or an RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS the change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees and psychological stress, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are adhered to when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this could be added to the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant could be issued a NOID/RFE instead of out rightly denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
more...
sunofeast_gc
07-23 06:27 PM
This is aboslutly not possible; he/she is trying to fool every one. Before retrogression, the last date to file a 485 for a EB3-Indian with PD 08/2004 was 12/31/2004. From Jan 2005 till July 2007 EB3 Inida was retrogressed for his PD. So he/she could not apply 485 in Feb 2005. The other optins could be he/she may be in EB2 catagory or a Schulde A nurse.
I was in similar time frame; So I know the date well....
Same thing came in my mind too....
it must be EB2 or a Schulde A nurse
anyway it good to know that someone got GC...
I was in similar time frame; So I know the date well....
Same thing came in my mind too....
it must be EB2 or a Schulde A nurse
anyway it good to know that someone got GC...
mpadapa
06-10 12:04 PM
Yes there was an organization just like IV which was instrumental in getting the AC21 provision. I just don't recollect the name probably IV core folks can provide more details.
Those time were different economy was booming and the anti-immigrants orgs esp against legal folks were non existent. Moreover EB folks had big uncertainty after 6yr clock on H1 expires. But now it is different, EB folks are busy tracking receipts and are happy with EAD and AP. SO who cares about rallying for a bill/amendment?
Visa numbers have been recaptured in the past (year 2000, I think).
Do we know more details on how this happened? Who worked for this and what did they do to make their efforts successful?
Same with the AC21 provision that allows changing jobs after 180 days. That is a huge accomplishment for whoever worked to make it happen.
Perhaps we can borrow some of their wisdom.
Those time were different economy was booming and the anti-immigrants orgs esp against legal folks were non existent. Moreover EB folks had big uncertainty after 6yr clock on H1 expires. But now it is different, EB folks are busy tracking receipts and are happy with EAD and AP. SO who cares about rallying for a bill/amendment?
Visa numbers have been recaptured in the past (year 2000, I think).
Do we know more details on how this happened? Who worked for this and what did they do to make their efforts successful?
Same with the AC21 provision that allows changing jobs after 180 days. That is a huge accomplishment for whoever worked to make it happen.
Perhaps we can borrow some of their wisdom.
more...
kevinkris
05-23 03:07 PM
Toppp
hebbar77
09-11 08:53 PM
I am in . What do we do. flowers with calculators or a simple math book seems a good idea.
Green.Tech
06-17 08:17 PM
...looking for Heroes, still!
mw_immi
01-07 12:47 PM
Just send your I-140 approved docs to the bank. I got the approval with my I-140 itself
Who is your banker? I locked in my rate with BOA & after 4 months they say unapproved. I am on EAD (expired H1B and I-94), AOS pending. I gave I-140, I-485 receipt, EAD, attorney letter but nothing worked.
Who is your banker? I locked in my rate with BOA & after 4 months they say unapproved. I am on EAD (expired H1B and I-94), AOS pending. I gave I-140, I-485 receipt, EAD, attorney letter but nothing worked.
docp
04-30 02:44 PM
anything with window media player
No comments:
Post a Comment