ashishgour
09-12 05:19 PM
I am in tooo..DC rally wud not cost me $200...i was in the first one as well..:)
wallpaper Prev middot; Suzi Perry - 12 Next
ssa
09-10 04:33 PM
USCIS currently has no accountability at all. Nor do they seem to have any clue about how many cases they have in the queue. Just see EB2-I dates for all the 12 VBs for the 2008 fiscal year: It started at 1 APR 2004 then retrogressed back steadily till it eventually became "U" just to jump back to 1 Aug 2006 for the last 3 months! Now after one whole year of processing and approving some 20-30K green cards for EB2-I it is starting at 1 APR 2003, a full year back from where it began last year!! Meanwhile they have handed out thousands of green cards to PDs in 2006 when the rule clearly states they have to clear older PDs first! Care to explain, USCIS?
I know people are sending out mails and DHS-7001 forms on their own but these individual scatter-shot attempts will all vanish in a big black abyss of USCIS bureaucracy and fall on deaf years. Only chance to instill some sense in this adhoc process seems to be if IV as a whole organization takes up this matter with Ombudsman and influential congressmen/senators like Zoe lofgren. IV had been very influential in redressing excesses by USCIS in the past - turing back July 2007 fiasco was no mean feat! Can we have some IV action item from core for this?
I'm afraid unless we do something about it as a group there is absolutely nothing to prevent USCIS from doing the same outrageous thing year after year with little fear of any retribution. We will all be practically at complete USCIS mercy!
Finally, I'm nothing but happy for those who got their GCs in this last round of "Lotto drawing" - including those with PD much later than mine - but the prospect of being stuck in a black hole called USCIS year after year scares the hell out of me!
I know people are sending out mails and DHS-7001 forms on their own but these individual scatter-shot attempts will all vanish in a big black abyss of USCIS bureaucracy and fall on deaf years. Only chance to instill some sense in this adhoc process seems to be if IV as a whole organization takes up this matter with Ombudsman and influential congressmen/senators like Zoe lofgren. IV had been very influential in redressing excesses by USCIS in the past - turing back July 2007 fiasco was no mean feat! Can we have some IV action item from core for this?
I'm afraid unless we do something about it as a group there is absolutely nothing to prevent USCIS from doing the same outrageous thing year after year with little fear of any retribution. We will all be practically at complete USCIS mercy!
Finally, I'm nothing but happy for those who got their GCs in this last round of "Lotto drawing" - including those with PD much later than mine - but the prospect of being stuck in a black hole called USCIS year after year scares the hell out of me!
ramus
09-09 09:49 AM
Amma,
Thank you so much for your contribution.
Dear friends,
Contributed $ 300 today via google .
Keep going IV.
Amma
Thank you so much for your contribution.
Dear friends,
Contributed $ 300 today via google .
Keep going IV.
Amma
2011 Suzi Perry reveals all
absaarkhan
04-30 02:45 PM
It is blocked from my Company too.
Please post the updates.
Please post the updates.
more...
dipmay2002
09-07 01:37 PM
Today I completed 10 years in USA and still waiting for GC, PD Dec. 2004 EB3...:confused:
santa123
07-11 09:26 AM
Just wondering...
How many people would benefit out of this big movement?
What estimated # of applications is USCIS expecting through this movement?
If the dates were current last year same time, how many ppl with PDs between 2004 and 2006 would have missed the bus last year? Dont think many wld have...
Excuse my ignorance if there is a basic mistake in my assumption
How many people would benefit out of this big movement?
What estimated # of applications is USCIS expecting through this movement?
If the dates were current last year same time, how many ppl with PDs between 2004 and 2006 would have missed the bus last year? Dont think many wld have...
Excuse my ignorance if there is a basic mistake in my assumption
more...
singhsa3
09-12 01:50 PM
These are all good thoughts but what u are suggesting takes some time.
The issue has two legs:
Leg 1: Process fix
Leg 2: Increasing number of greencards
What I am talking about is leg 1 and what you are talking about is for leg 2
and both are required.
Sanjeev - I personally feel there is no easy solution for this. Our efforts must be well organized and there has to be geniune effort. A lot of people who post here are all frustrated and angered and they channelize their anger and frustration through these forums whereas instead if it is channelized in a positive way - our campaigns will be more effective and we can reach our goals.
The issue has two legs:
Leg 1: Process fix
Leg 2: Increasing number of greencards
What I am talking about is leg 1 and what you are talking about is for leg 2
and both are required.
Sanjeev - I personally feel there is no easy solution for this. Our efforts must be well organized and there has to be geniune effort. A lot of people who post here are all frustrated and angered and they channelize their anger and frustration through these forums whereas instead if it is channelized in a positive way - our campaigns will be more effective and we can reach our goals.
2010 Photo of Suzi Perry 225241
Kodi
06-22 02:59 PM
can some one share there login user name and password to check status of labor. My lawyer has not shared this with me and i have to check with him every other day ... wish i could do it myself ... you can pm me if u prefer
-M
Login is uniqe for each employer. My login will not work for you.
-M
Login is uniqe for each employer. My login will not work for you.
more...
GCBy3000
07-24 06:05 PM
If they are such smart to calculate numbers like you said, which is theoritically possible, they would not be creating mess like this for years.
Yes, it is easy for them to know how many applications are filed and from which country and how many are in which category etc etc. Based on visa numbers availability, they could very well process the applications are request the visa numbers from DHS. When USCIS handles all the 485 processing, then how come DHS is responsible for moving the dates in VB. It is insane and ridiculous for DHS to have this functionality when they do not have any idea on 485 apps with USCIS. They are scewing up immigrants deliberately without transparency between them.
People are jumping into conclusion with a few approvals from 2004/2005, but what you are not considering is the number of people with 2001/2002 priority dates who just applied for 485 in June. There might be a lot of them (I am one of those). If there are not too many of them, it is good for everyone, but its very tough to predict.
From what I heard from my lawfirm, they expect the oct bulletin to go back to 2001 or early 2002. But with everyone filing 485, USCIS should be able to predict the number of applicants and move dates better compared to earlier when they were shooting in the dark and wasting visas.
Anyway, good luck to all
Yes, it is easy for them to know how many applications are filed and from which country and how many are in which category etc etc. Based on visa numbers availability, they could very well process the applications are request the visa numbers from DHS. When USCIS handles all the 485 processing, then how come DHS is responsible for moving the dates in VB. It is insane and ridiculous for DHS to have this functionality when they do not have any idea on 485 apps with USCIS. They are scewing up immigrants deliberately without transparency between them.
People are jumping into conclusion with a few approvals from 2004/2005, but what you are not considering is the number of people with 2001/2002 priority dates who just applied for 485 in June. There might be a lot of them (I am one of those). If there are not too many of them, it is good for everyone, but its very tough to predict.
From what I heard from my lawfirm, they expect the oct bulletin to go back to 2001 or early 2002. But with everyone filing 485, USCIS should be able to predict the number of applicants and move dates better compared to earlier when they were shooting in the dark and wasting visas.
Anyway, good luck to all
hair See more photos Suzi Perry is
theperm
08-01 05:02 PM
would really like to reflect my thoughts, experience & opinion in writing, but please do note: i don`t have a journalisim background.
more...
paisa
09-10 02:40 PM
Guys,
Its only Green card and I am not sure why people get upset big deal. Nobody asked us to move here. And if there is a system in place we cannot be saying its bad and this and that. My PD is DEC 04 do I feel bad someone in 2006 gets it. YES. Is the system crappy yes. I have a MS in US. So all this hoopla about US ms are getting it and not us is wrong. The other question is should I be getting it over others who dont have a MS from US. I believe yes we should.
but thats my thoughts on the subject if someone does not like it I respect his thoughts.
Its only Green card and I am not sure why people get upset big deal. Nobody asked us to move here. And if there is a system in place we cannot be saying its bad and this and that. My PD is DEC 04 do I feel bad someone in 2006 gets it. YES. Is the system crappy yes. I have a MS in US. So all this hoopla about US ms are getting it and not us is wrong. The other question is should I be getting it over others who dont have a MS from US. I believe yes we should.
but thats my thoughts on the subject if someone does not like it I respect his thoughts.
hot licking Mediafire
Humhongekamyab
02-18 05:39 PM
I am seeing a lot of folks predicting the EB2 dates. And I believe they are right in doing so since that is their filign category. What I am asking is if there are any prediction regarding EB3-I. The dates are not moving at all which is absolutely frustating.
I don't think anybody can predict EB-3 India as it is a lost cause (sorry for being pessimistic). The only way EB-3 India will see any meaningful progress is through legislation.
I don't think anybody can predict EB-3 India as it is a lost cause (sorry for being pessimistic). The only way EB-3 India will see any meaningful progress is through legislation.
more...
house Frankie Gavin and Suzi Perry,
ksrk
02-19 08:38 PM
I am hoping they just dont tie EB2 I and Eb2 C at 15th Feb 2005 in April 2009.
Previously we have seen bulletins where Eb2 I and Eb2 C have tied up at 1Apr2004.
I dont know how many iterations it will take before it reaches the RIR/PERM boundary(1 Apr 2005)
We know predicting visa bulletin movement is next to impossible (for anyone) with even a semblance of a proven record (over a long period of time)...
But we still can't turn our heads away and resist the temptation to make an attempt, so here goes...for a tickle, if not anything else...
If previous years (particularly last year) are any indication, since EB2-C has been leading EB2-I for the first two quarters of the FY, it appears that they will tie up at 15FEB05 - IF there was any logic to this...
Now, we know there is no logic or method to this madness - so it might well move further or not move past 01APR04 or not move at all. Three more weeks and we'll know!
Good luck everyone - and don't hold your breath!
Previously we have seen bulletins where Eb2 I and Eb2 C have tied up at 1Apr2004.
I dont know how many iterations it will take before it reaches the RIR/PERM boundary(1 Apr 2005)
We know predicting visa bulletin movement is next to impossible (for anyone) with even a semblance of a proven record (over a long period of time)...
But we still can't turn our heads away and resist the temptation to make an attempt, so here goes...for a tickle, if not anything else...
If previous years (particularly last year) are any indication, since EB2-C has been leading EB2-I for the first two quarters of the FY, it appears that they will tie up at 15FEB05 - IF there was any logic to this...
Now, we know there is no logic or method to this madness - so it might well move further or not move past 01APR04 or not move at all. Three more weeks and we'll know!
Good luck everyone - and don't hold your breath!
tattoo suzi perry photo 2
jonty_11
07-18 12:36 PM
Where are the new members whom I see on other 485 related forums?
We can only hope they join..and pitch in...
We can only hope they join..and pitch in...
more...
pictures Suzi Perry, the
gk_2000
08-24 01:35 AM
GK, All I can say about your disconnected arguments are one thing. Myself and Nathan are talking about fairness about the system and on how corporates exploit the loophole thereby exploiting the hardworking individuals like you and me. We never here scolded and ranted about the program and as a matter of fact we are having issues with the so called "LoopHole" But your arguments are going in a completely different direction. You can re-read all of our posts again and see where we mentioned anything about ranting against the program.
If you really want, you can make sense of the "disconnected" arguments, as they all address various points of your counter-arguments.
And again, we are unable to get enough members to fight for visa recapture or i-485 filing and you want to go about closing loopholes?
And BTW FYI, I never worked for TCS.
There was no way for me to know, but my "guess" is close enough, dont you think?
And to let you know, I did my Masters in Soft Engg from BITS and Bachelors in Technology. When I say I got paid 65k for the kind of service I did to the company(5 yrs ago) , itself says a lot of things on how companies exploit which has no relation to the number of yrs of experience and qualifications.
To remind you, this platform is for what purpose? This argument is tangential, as is the loophole one. We want to focus on what? I will let the below argument pass, after saying this much. But yes, I do emphasize with you on what happened. But I also have my share of tragedies
All that matters for those companies is whether client is made happy or not, irrespective of what you undergo. FYI I worked company starting with W (top 3 IT companies in India at that time) .
Let me explain you how this works.....Exactly as to how it happened in my case.
First you are given ransom salary offer say 30-40% more that what you might be earning and an immediate on-site offer within 12 months of joining the company. You feel pretty happy with all of those initially.
Later they send you onsite as promised on L1 by making you wait for 1 yr, (even when they can sponsor you H1) so person would be eligible on L1. Things will look good until now.
While sending you to onsite, no one will let you know what kind of salary you would be paid. Things will start to get interesting from the moment you land in US.
You are paid just a week of hotel stay(extended stay) and 1 week car rental(only if you have valid DL). You have to beg / borrow for a ride or take public commute if available.
After 2 days of settling you will be given a salary letter stating that your salary is 50k with a bonus of 5k.
This is the catch. The companies feel that sending a guy on site itself is a big deal. Logically you think that person earning more at offshore than the other person will also get paid more. Its not the case, everyone at onsite are paid the same, irrespective of what their salary is are offshore(only 2 salary ranges exist).And there is no offshore component, and the pathetic thing about it is, you are paid basic salary at offshore deducting from your onsite salary.
Also, just so you know, and onsite person playing a manager role is just an additional responsibility and not a dedicated role. So this is on top of your regular technical role.
And now comes your GC step. After you spend 5 yrs onsite, since you have to leave back after 6 yrs, the company will file in EB1-A and thereby getting your GC. After you get your GC, you are already out of touch from the rest of the world except from your daily offshore/onsite issues and so on and you would not be able to know as to what exactly you can do with your GC. All that happens is you will not be fit to work anywhere except the place you were working at. This has happened to many of my colleagues. I was lucky enough to get out of that chaos after my 1 yr at onsite. All I can say is I'm very much happy now with GC filed in EB2 and making much more that what I used to ...
BTW your comment on someone working for $1 or 30k is for their own noble cause and you cannot expect everyone to have that.
So can you force everyone to take higher pay? It's a matter between private persons, isn't it? I guess it is a bigger deal for small guys, as the labor market comes into play. No sense applying it to executives
And coming to a conclusion about someone who you do not know about is uncalled for...
If you really want, you can make sense of the "disconnected" arguments, as they all address various points of your counter-arguments.
And again, we are unable to get enough members to fight for visa recapture or i-485 filing and you want to go about closing loopholes?
And BTW FYI, I never worked for TCS.
There was no way for me to know, but my "guess" is close enough, dont you think?
And to let you know, I did my Masters in Soft Engg from BITS and Bachelors in Technology. When I say I got paid 65k for the kind of service I did to the company(5 yrs ago) , itself says a lot of things on how companies exploit which has no relation to the number of yrs of experience and qualifications.
To remind you, this platform is for what purpose? This argument is tangential, as is the loophole one. We want to focus on what? I will let the below argument pass, after saying this much. But yes, I do emphasize with you on what happened. But I also have my share of tragedies
All that matters for those companies is whether client is made happy or not, irrespective of what you undergo. FYI I worked company starting with W (top 3 IT companies in India at that time) .
Let me explain you how this works.....Exactly as to how it happened in my case.
First you are given ransom salary offer say 30-40% more that what you might be earning and an immediate on-site offer within 12 months of joining the company. You feel pretty happy with all of those initially.
Later they send you onsite as promised on L1 by making you wait for 1 yr, (even when they can sponsor you H1) so person would be eligible on L1. Things will look good until now.
While sending you to onsite, no one will let you know what kind of salary you would be paid. Things will start to get interesting from the moment you land in US.
You are paid just a week of hotel stay(extended stay) and 1 week car rental(only if you have valid DL). You have to beg / borrow for a ride or take public commute if available.
After 2 days of settling you will be given a salary letter stating that your salary is 50k with a bonus of 5k.
This is the catch. The companies feel that sending a guy on site itself is a big deal. Logically you think that person earning more at offshore than the other person will also get paid more. Its not the case, everyone at onsite are paid the same, irrespective of what their salary is are offshore(only 2 salary ranges exist).And there is no offshore component, and the pathetic thing about it is, you are paid basic salary at offshore deducting from your onsite salary.
Also, just so you know, and onsite person playing a manager role is just an additional responsibility and not a dedicated role. So this is on top of your regular technical role.
And now comes your GC step. After you spend 5 yrs onsite, since you have to leave back after 6 yrs, the company will file in EB1-A and thereby getting your GC. After you get your GC, you are already out of touch from the rest of the world except from your daily offshore/onsite issues and so on and you would not be able to know as to what exactly you can do with your GC. All that happens is you will not be fit to work anywhere except the place you were working at. This has happened to many of my colleagues. I was lucky enough to get out of that chaos after my 1 yr at onsite. All I can say is I'm very much happy now with GC filed in EB2 and making much more that what I used to ...
BTW your comment on someone working for $1 or 30k is for their own noble cause and you cannot expect everyone to have that.
So can you force everyone to take higher pay? It's a matter between private persons, isn't it? I guess it is a bigger deal for small guys, as the labor market comes into play. No sense applying it to executives
And coming to a conclusion about someone who you do not know about is uncalled for...
dresses BOOK Suzi Perry »
rameshavula
01-12 03:59 PM
EB3 RIR, Pennsylvania
Sep, 2004
Sep, 2004
more...
makeup Suzi Perry, Czech MotoGP 2008
coopheal
02-23 08:36 PM
What is LUD
Read all about LUDs here http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/LUD
Read all about LUDs here http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/LUD
girlfriend Suzi Perry
eb3_nepa
07-14 12:48 PM
Hello everyone,
I am starting a new campaign for IV's benefit. It is called "Give me a High Five".
The point of this campaign is to send Not $100, not $50, not even $10.
ALL you need to do is write out a $5 cheque and send it to IV on the address listed.
The address to mail the checks to is:
Immigration Voice
P O Box 1372
Arcadia, CA 91077-1372
This address can also be found at: http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=76&Itemid=65
Please make sure you send in a cheque ONLY or do a bill pay so that no paypal/google checkout fees apply and all of the $5 ACTUALLY goes to IV.
We have 30,000 members on here. If EACH of us contributes just $5 we have $150,000.
For the sake of your OWN freedom, can you donate just FIVE dollars to IV? Every single one of you. IV has done a LOT for every legal immigrant. All we ask in return right now is FIVE dollars. FIVE dollars. Not the price of one month of Cable, but the price of a SUBWAY SANDWICH.
The following IV members have entered the High Five Hall of Fame:
bestofall, johnnybhai, Mahatma, sparklinks, kevinkris, hariswaminathan, akhilmahajan, a_paradkar, tejonidhi, ho_gaya_kaya_?, June05, chintainfogc, k_usa, Sri_1975, cheshirecat, satyasaich, pd_recapturing, sajidmd, govindk, mjdup, alok_msh, plreddy, naidu2543, venkygct, j_bharadwaj, gsrknth, cooldude0807, for_gc, Chiwere, jayleno, funny, eight_8, ita, GCOP, desi chala usa, gc_kaavaali, lakshman.easwaran, ebizash, srhari, srinivas_o, ndny, rameshvaid, mhathi, rajesh_kamisetty, shana04, Vsach, leo2606, sujijag, sam2006, dhirajs98, dhirajs98 , vsbalaji, shiankuraaf, nosightofgc, prasadn, prasha98, Mani, DDash, bgp, gc28262, Caliber, gc_on_demand, agc2005, SkilledWorker4GC, vban2007, vvicky72, sriv1, desidude, Suva, sandy_anand, ckichannagari, h1techSlave, kushaljn, sirinme, WeShallOvercome, rajvepa, dodsatya, gc78, hotammo, gcbikari, abhijitp, wizpal
I am starting a new campaign for IV's benefit. It is called "Give me a High Five".
The point of this campaign is to send Not $100, not $50, not even $10.
ALL you need to do is write out a $5 cheque and send it to IV on the address listed.
The address to mail the checks to is:
Immigration Voice
P O Box 1372
Arcadia, CA 91077-1372
This address can also be found at: http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=76&Itemid=65
Please make sure you send in a cheque ONLY or do a bill pay so that no paypal/google checkout fees apply and all of the $5 ACTUALLY goes to IV.
We have 30,000 members on here. If EACH of us contributes just $5 we have $150,000.
For the sake of your OWN freedom, can you donate just FIVE dollars to IV? Every single one of you. IV has done a LOT for every legal immigrant. All we ask in return right now is FIVE dollars. FIVE dollars. Not the price of one month of Cable, but the price of a SUBWAY SANDWICH.
The following IV members have entered the High Five Hall of Fame:
bestofall, johnnybhai, Mahatma, sparklinks, kevinkris, hariswaminathan, akhilmahajan, a_paradkar, tejonidhi, ho_gaya_kaya_?, June05, chintainfogc, k_usa, Sri_1975, cheshirecat, satyasaich, pd_recapturing, sajidmd, govindk, mjdup, alok_msh, plreddy, naidu2543, venkygct, j_bharadwaj, gsrknth, cooldude0807, for_gc, Chiwere, jayleno, funny, eight_8, ita, GCOP, desi chala usa, gc_kaavaali, lakshman.easwaran, ebizash, srhari, srinivas_o, ndny, rameshvaid, mhathi, rajesh_kamisetty, shana04, Vsach, leo2606, sujijag, sam2006, dhirajs98, dhirajs98 , vsbalaji, shiankuraaf, nosightofgc, prasadn, prasha98, Mani, DDash, bgp, gc28262, Caliber, gc_on_demand, agc2005, SkilledWorker4GC, vban2007, vvicky72, sriv1, desidude, Suva, sandy_anand, ckichannagari, h1techSlave, kushaljn, sirinme, WeShallOvercome, rajvepa, dodsatya, gc78, hotammo, gcbikari, abhijitp, wizpal
hairstyles Suzi Perry - Gadget Show Live
JunRN
10-05 01:24 AM
All unrelated amendment were dropped. Do not expect anything about immigration attached to the Appropriations Bill.
matreen
10-17 01:58 AM
Guys,
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
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 your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following 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 candidates 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-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of 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, 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 followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further 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
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
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 your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following 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 candidates 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-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of 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, 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 followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further 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
john2255
07-22 11:05 AM
Hello All,
I live inTexas and fall under Sen. Cornyn constituency. I faxed his Dallas and Washington Office this thank you letter. Everyone of us can send letter to their Senators. After all we are legal tax payers.... what u all say ???
Dear Sen. Cornyn,
Subject: Reintroduce Amendment No. 2339
I applaud your Amendment to provide interim relief for shortages in employment-based visas for aliens with extraordinary ability and advanced degrees and for nurses. I am one of those who are currently stuck in the muck of USCIS. I would like to request you to not give up on us. Please try to introduce another similar amendment to at least help USCIS clear the humongous backlog of Green Cards. We all really appreciate your help!
Regards,
Name
Tel #
Email ID
Good work greenme. The model of your letter is excellent. Everybody in the forum please follow the same model with necessary modifications and fax to their respective senators. Also please call to the senators office and let them know your opinion. Please refer about the bill and convey your opinion according to the particular senator's voting on the amendment. This is very important coz this will greatly influence them and stimulate them for further similar amendments. Please dont delay. Let us heat up the issue. The amendment shows the senators are already aware of unused employment visas of previous years. Lets take this oppurtunity.
I live inTexas and fall under Sen. Cornyn constituency. I faxed his Dallas and Washington Office this thank you letter. Everyone of us can send letter to their Senators. After all we are legal tax payers.... what u all say ???
Dear Sen. Cornyn,
Subject: Reintroduce Amendment No. 2339
I applaud your Amendment to provide interim relief for shortages in employment-based visas for aliens with extraordinary ability and advanced degrees and for nurses. I am one of those who are currently stuck in the muck of USCIS. I would like to request you to not give up on us. Please try to introduce another similar amendment to at least help USCIS clear the humongous backlog of Green Cards. We all really appreciate your help!
Regards,
Name
Tel #
Email ID
Good work greenme. The model of your letter is excellent. Everybody in the forum please follow the same model with necessary modifications and fax to their respective senators. Also please call to the senators office and let them know your opinion. Please refer about the bill and convey your opinion according to the particular senator's voting on the amendment. This is very important coz this will greatly influence them and stimulate them for further similar amendments. Please dont delay. Let us heat up the issue. The amendment shows the senators are already aware of unused employment visas of previous years. Lets take this oppurtunity.
No comments:
Post a Comment