rubaru
10-15 02:27 PM
Hi All,
I received the CPO email yesterday.My case details are PD : Dec 2004, 485 RD : Aug 6th 2007(I140 Filed concurrently),EB2 India.140 was approved on Tuesday.
I140 was pending from 2007.When my attorney followed up in feb this year,USCIS gave the standard reply of waiting for 6months.After that they said,they will update in 10 days.They didn't update even after that and then i moved it to premium processing on Sept 28th.
Took 2 info passes in Septembter(regd i140 mainly).First one was not of much help though the officer told my 485 is assigned to IO on Sept 8th.Second time it was different officer and she was very helpful.Tried looking why my 140 is getting delayed but she said ,if she opens my file then 485 file will go back to review queue as it is currently being reviewed by Sept 18th.So she didn't recommend doing that.I didn't open any SR after my first experience of 6 months waiting(without an result!!!)
Before 485 approval day(i.e Tuesday) i called IO TSC Center but he doesn't know anything when i mentioned that my PD is Dec 2004 & that my case is current from last month.,he told my PD is the RD of 485.I thought no point in arguing with him and hung up.After that i was preparing to send mails to Senator but got the approval before that.
Anyway,happy that it finally got approved .I am waiting on my wife's approval thought
I received the CPO email yesterday.My case details are PD : Dec 2004, 485 RD : Aug 6th 2007(I140 Filed concurrently),EB2 India.140 was approved on Tuesday.
I140 was pending from 2007.When my attorney followed up in feb this year,USCIS gave the standard reply of waiting for 6months.After that they said,they will update in 10 days.They didn't update even after that and then i moved it to premium processing on Sept 28th.
Took 2 info passes in Septembter(regd i140 mainly).First one was not of much help though the officer told my 485 is assigned to IO on Sept 8th.Second time it was different officer and she was very helpful.Tried looking why my 140 is getting delayed but she said ,if she opens my file then 485 file will go back to review queue as it is currently being reviewed by Sept 18th.So she didn't recommend doing that.I didn't open any SR after my first experience of 6 months waiting(without an result!!!)
Before 485 approval day(i.e Tuesday) i called IO TSC Center but he doesn't know anything when i mentioned that my PD is Dec 2004 & that my case is current from last month.,he told my PD is the RD of 485.I thought no point in arguing with him and hung up.After that i was preparing to send mails to Senator but got the approval before that.
Anyway,happy that it finally got approved .I am waiting on my wife's approval thought
wallpaper 2011 a show called “The Voice.
delhirocks
06-29 05:12 PM
Here is why it will not happen on the first 3 or 4 days atleast.
This is not like H1B, which was hyped around for 2 months and forced every one to file on Apr 1st. More over it has a cap of 65k on it.
The most imp thing is there must be some rationale or logic (other than for fees etc) behind how they could make every category current. Some of you might know that DOS gives USCIS visa numbers quarterly. It means that the final quarter quota has not opened yet. The final quarter quota for EB1/2/3 is around 22000 (approx 7500X3). The EB5 leftovers ( conservatively 9000 , see 2006 stats) will also be added to the EB1 and possibly down to EB2/3 . The total number of visas that will be available to USCIS on Jul 2nd (first fiscal day of final quarter)is 31-33,000. The per country limits are relaxed in the final quarter so that unused go to the over subscribed countries.
DOS has to be utterly dumb, insane and ludacris to make every category current, if these 33K are the only numbers available. If DOS and USCIS has statistics for the first 3 quarters ( first 2 quarters + 2 months of 3rd quarter) telling that all the visa numbers released were in the previous quarters were consumed 100%, they would not make it current. That kinda tells us that the numbers allocated in the first 3 quarters were severely under utilized. How severely? No one knows as DOS does not do per quarter statistics.
More over, If its written into law that DOS can only issue VB once per month, and cannot update it during the month, they cannot do a damn thing. If it's not, it comes down to the implementation and interpretation of the agency. USCIS and DOS can release an updated bulletin if they get an over whelming filings for EB 485. Again, there is not enough time for USCIS/DOS to prepare like they did for H1, because the rumor has been out for 4 or 5 days. It might happen in the 2nd week or so if its not written into law.
It is not written in any law, infact the guidelines say that DOS can issue mid-month update
This is not like H1B, which was hyped around for 2 months and forced every one to file on Apr 1st. More over it has a cap of 65k on it.
The most imp thing is there must be some rationale or logic (other than for fees etc) behind how they could make every category current. Some of you might know that DOS gives USCIS visa numbers quarterly. It means that the final quarter quota has not opened yet. The final quarter quota for EB1/2/3 is around 22000 (approx 7500X3). The EB5 leftovers ( conservatively 9000 , see 2006 stats) will also be added to the EB1 and possibly down to EB2/3 . The total number of visas that will be available to USCIS on Jul 2nd (first fiscal day of final quarter)is 31-33,000. The per country limits are relaxed in the final quarter so that unused go to the over subscribed countries.
DOS has to be utterly dumb, insane and ludacris to make every category current, if these 33K are the only numbers available. If DOS and USCIS has statistics for the first 3 quarters ( first 2 quarters + 2 months of 3rd quarter) telling that all the visa numbers released were in the previous quarters were consumed 100%, they would not make it current. That kinda tells us that the numbers allocated in the first 3 quarters were severely under utilized. How severely? No one knows as DOS does not do per quarter statistics.
More over, If its written into law that DOS can only issue VB once per month, and cannot update it during the month, they cannot do a damn thing. If it's not, it comes down to the implementation and interpretation of the agency. USCIS and DOS can release an updated bulletin if they get an over whelming filings for EB 485. Again, there is not enough time for USCIS/DOS to prepare like they did for H1, because the rumor has been out for 4 or 5 days. It might happen in the 2nd week or so if its not written into law.
It is not written in any law, infact the guidelines say that DOS can issue mid-month update
pakrish
08-17 11:17 AM
It's tough to tell. According to processing times on usics.gov, I-90 takes 3.5 months in Nebraska service center. But the form is supposed to be mailed to Phoenix and I could not find any times for the Phoenix office. Since it's a simple correction, I'm hoping a 2-3 week turnaround time but be prepared for a 3+ month wait. If you need to travel, it's better to get an I-551 stamp in your passport so you can travel regardless.
Thanks Rams75 so I guess I need to get an INFOPASS to get the I-155 stamp on passport?
Thanks Rams75 so I guess I need to get an INFOPASS to get the I-155 stamp on passport?
2011 NBC#39;s The Voice Premiere:
immi_seeker
08-18 11:26 PM
Recieved physical cards today.
CPO - Aug 6th
Post decision - August 13th
Approval recieved in snail mail - August 11th
Cards recieved - August 18th
Thus the GC journey of 9 years and 8 months ends. Currently no difference in life it makes. May be when i travel GC may be of more help. (no AP H1B stuff to worry about)
Good luck to all who are current and to all who are waiting. Hang in there. You will definitely get it.
CPO - Aug 6th
Post decision - August 13th
Approval recieved in snail mail - August 11th
Cards recieved - August 18th
Thus the GC journey of 9 years and 8 months ends. Currently no difference in life it makes. May be when i travel GC may be of more help. (no AP H1B stuff to worry about)
Good luck to all who are current and to all who are waiting. Hang in there. You will definitely get it.
more...
ksurjan
07-10 08:48 PM
http://digg.com/remote-done/2457692/1
SaiWelcome
01-04 02:30 PM
Thanks ChainReaction for sharing the article.
more...
AreWeThereYet
09-13 12:33 PM
It is the bulletin month as specified in the original post regarding the stream line email. In this case, it can either be September or October, as you are current in both months and the bulletin is already published for October.
Arewethereyet,
In the email that you send to the streamline address, in the subject we have to write it in the format "I-485/MM". THe document says we have to write the month for "MM" but does not say whether the month is priority date month or the month that your PD will be current. What did you write?
Thanks.
Arewethereyet,
In the email that you send to the streamline address, in the subject we have to write it in the format "I-485/MM". THe document says we have to write the month for "MM" but does not say whether the month is priority date month or the month that your PD will be current. What did you write?
Thanks.
2010 Christina Aguilera played
acecupid
08-21 12:33 PM
I don't think it will do much good sueing uscis on this issue. The point is, they have the legal authority to be the one interporating the law. So, if there is "gray area" in the law, the law says it is their understanding that matters, not ours or any one else's. So, unless the law very specifically says it must be done in another way, you can not argue uscis did the wrong thing.
Now that we see the immigration law does not very specifically regulate how the flow should be like, so uscis have the authority to "understand the intention of the law" and act accordingly. You can't say you think the law means otherwise and thus sue uscis, because that argument makes no sense to the court. The court will only accept the argument when the government is apparently acting against the law.
We can definitely question them on how their understanding changed on visa spill over distribution.
Now that we see the immigration law does not very specifically regulate how the flow should be like, so uscis have the authority to "understand the intention of the law" and act accordingly. You can't say you think the law means otherwise and thus sue uscis, because that argument makes no sense to the court. The court will only accept the argument when the government is apparently acting against the law.
We can definitely question them on how their understanding changed on visa spill over distribution.
more...
santa123
06-10 07:24 AM
when you emphasize something unnecessarily, ("I am also from India") proves that you are lying. So foolish... Try your tricks somewhere else you tunnel rat!:mad::mad:
I am also from India but the point I am discussing here is clearly a violation of law by Outsourcing vendors including IBM (not just Indian companies), TCS, Wipro etc. I work for a medium size consulting firm based in US and on H1 visa ...and I am impacted by these violations and I think I have the right to oppose this act.... to prove my identity shud I tell you my stories in Chennai consulate... or shud I tell u abt my days in b'lore or shud I tell you all abt my 24 years in India.. you can decide :-).
BUT regarding the L1 violation we have decided and this time the vendor is exposed to the authorities and justice is done. We have the support of good client managers who understands visa regulations.
I am also from India but the point I am discussing here is clearly a violation of law by Outsourcing vendors including IBM (not just Indian companies), TCS, Wipro etc. I work for a medium size consulting firm based in US and on H1 visa ...and I am impacted by these violations and I think I have the right to oppose this act.... to prove my identity shud I tell you my stories in Chennai consulate... or shud I tell u abt my days in b'lore or shud I tell you all abt my 24 years in India.. you can decide :-).
BUT regarding the L1 violation we have decided and this time the vendor is exposed to the authorities and justice is done. We have the support of good client managers who understands visa regulations.
hair June 29: The Voice Finale
BharatPremi
09-24 06:04 PM
Many of us could be over-qualified for our current EB3 position (after so many years of wait) and is accepting the current position only to strictly adhere to "same/similar" job classification. In that case employer can file a GC for our real qualification i.e. Eb2.
Yes agree. The point is that for an example in September 2008 if you used AC21 then on that date you and your employer claimed that your skills are matching for "particular EB3 job classification" . Now if you go interfiling to USCIS in March 2009 then USCIS doubt as logically employer ca not establish the "natural skill progression" within 6 months.
One more thing - RFEs. Although people used AC21 in 2007 or start of 2008, just recently USCIS sent RFEs to many. All of them have just finished replying those RFEs in which hthey claimed that they are still working on a "same job" matching EB3 skill. My employer sent that RFE response in May 2009. So my clock starts again from May 2009. In December 2009 it is almost impossible for my employer to show that " I am fit for advanced skills". So this is the glitch that lot many lawyers are strongly hesitant to proceed on interfiling.
Yes agree. The point is that for an example in September 2008 if you used AC21 then on that date you and your employer claimed that your skills are matching for "particular EB3 job classification" . Now if you go interfiling to USCIS in March 2009 then USCIS doubt as logically employer ca not establish the "natural skill progression" within 6 months.
One more thing - RFEs. Although people used AC21 in 2007 or start of 2008, just recently USCIS sent RFEs to many. All of them have just finished replying those RFEs in which hthey claimed that they are still working on a "same job" matching EB3 skill. My employer sent that RFE response in May 2009. So my clock starts again from May 2009. In December 2009 it is almost impossible for my employer to show that " I am fit for advanced skills". So this is the glitch that lot many lawyers are strongly hesitant to proceed on interfiling.
more...
masouds
09-12 11:34 PM
Hello all,
Will it make sense to put the posters for this campaigns in local grocery stores and mandirs over the weekend, so as to create more awareness.
Yes please. Talk to owners first. Once you get them onboard they will make sure that the sign stays there.
Remember: NumbersUSA faxed the senate offices one million times when CIR was being considered. We have to do more than them this time, as they are twisting the facts (Same way Mr. Dobbs of CNN does): Here is a quote from Numbers USA website:
....The bill�s sponsor, Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif), claims it would �recapture unused employer-sponsored visas� from as far back as 1991 and then add them to the current numerical cap of 140,000 employer-sponsored visas that are available each year. Current law, however, clearly states that any employer-sponsored visas not used in one year are allocated to the family-preference categories in the following year. That means that there are no �unused� visas from past years to �recapture.�
The last line above is a blatant lie. Specially when USCIS ombudsman who has access to all the internal material of USCIS says otherwise. Please call, and let the congressmen and congresswomen know about this.
Will it make sense to put the posters for this campaigns in local grocery stores and mandirs over the weekend, so as to create more awareness.
Yes please. Talk to owners first. Once you get them onboard they will make sure that the sign stays there.
Remember: NumbersUSA faxed the senate offices one million times when CIR was being considered. We have to do more than them this time, as they are twisting the facts (Same way Mr. Dobbs of CNN does): Here is a quote from Numbers USA website:
....The bill�s sponsor, Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif), claims it would �recapture unused employer-sponsored visas� from as far back as 1991 and then add them to the current numerical cap of 140,000 employer-sponsored visas that are available each year. Current law, however, clearly states that any employer-sponsored visas not used in one year are allocated to the family-preference categories in the following year. That means that there are no �unused� visas from past years to �recapture.�
The last line above is a blatant lie. Specially when USCIS ombudsman who has access to all the internal material of USCIS says otherwise. Please call, and let the congressmen and congresswomen know about this.
hot quot;The Voice#39;squot; Christina
kicca
01-08 06:54 PM
Send Those Letters! Help Yourselves!
more...
house Christina Aguilera#39;s #39;Voice#39;
jung.lee
01-30 02:34 PM
GLUS,
Can you tell us more about communicating to ALIF? Is it via email?
I think all the folks who visit this thread must send out a complaint.
Also please contact your attorneys and tell them to complain on this half baked PIMS implementation.
My wife received her approval email from Mumbai consulate yesterday. When I contacted my attorney, he asked that after she returns to the US, to send him more details and he will lodge a complaint with the DOS through his liaison.
Can you tell us more about communicating to ALIF? Is it via email?
I think all the folks who visit this thread must send out a complaint.
Also please contact your attorneys and tell them to complain on this half baked PIMS implementation.
My wife received her approval email from Mumbai consulate yesterday. When I contacted my attorney, he asked that after she returns to the US, to send him more details and he will lodge a complaint with the DOS through his liaison.
tattoo Christina Aguilera The Voice
sunty
09-23 04:28 PM
Whats also surprising is that number of pending EB1(India) applications is far less than expected. That would definately help EB2(India) in the spill-over (quarterly or yearly)
more...
pictures Christina Aguilera On #39;The
gc_on_demand
09-09 03:23 PM
Before dawn of tomorrow let make 100 page long thread. I will pray to GOD that it will pass tomorrow..
dresses The new mom showed off her
addsf345
09-22 06:52 PM
any news from sunrocket (teleblend in its new avatar)?
more...
makeup Adam Levine and Christina
lazycis
10-17 12:02 PM
By Mr. Cannon:
"NNCPS is partnering with other Agencies to provide contractors and personnel to process name checks. For example, the FBI and USCIS have implemented a key initiative to use contractor resources to prioritize the processing of "Single-Hit" USClS Name Check requests, that is, pending name check requests that have only one FBI file potentially identified with it that needs to be reviewed in order to process the request. By applying contractor resources to process these "Single Hit" requests, the FBI may significantly reduce the pending USClS name check workload."
Are they interested in national security or just numbers of processed name checks? Why not create a special team to handle requests with the high number of "hits" as those are much more dangerous potentially for the national security?
"NNCPS is partnering with other Agencies to provide contractors and personnel to process name checks. For example, the FBI and USCIS have implemented a key initiative to use contractor resources to prioritize the processing of "Single-Hit" USClS Name Check requests, that is, pending name check requests that have only one FBI file potentially identified with it that needs to be reviewed in order to process the request. By applying contractor resources to process these "Single Hit" requests, the FBI may significantly reduce the pending USClS name check workload."
Are they interested in national security or just numbers of processed name checks? Why not create a special team to handle requests with the high number of "hits" as those are much more dangerous potentially for the national security?
girlfriend The Voice
vgayalu
10-05 08:35 AM
we got approval on our I-485 (PD Jan,2006).
I take this opportunity to THANK IV ans its Core Group for doing this wonderful service to EB Immigrants community.
Thanks and best wishes for those who are in the sprocess.
Ram.
Let me say congrats first.
Why it took upto October in your case?
Mine is April 06- EB2 india. Got RFE. and answered on 29 sep( Received by uscis - 30 Sep) .
When we can I expect approval?
Do you can suggest any thing?
I take this opportunity to THANK IV ans its Core Group for doing this wonderful service to EB Immigrants community.
Thanks and best wishes for those who are in the sprocess.
Ram.
Let me say congrats first.
Why it took upto October in your case?
Mine is April 06- EB2 india. Got RFE. and answered on 29 sep( Received by uscis - 30 Sep) .
When we can I expect approval?
Do you can suggest any thing?
hairstyles #39;The Voice#39; Reveals Final Four
ksrk
09-12 06:41 PM
------------------------------------------------------
Update
------------------------------------------------------
We have learned that in all probability House Judiciary committee will finishing marking up HR5882 in the next committee meeting. The bill is likely to be brought to the House floor the following week. We have been told that if our bill(s) pass the House, Senate will include the language of the bill(s) in another Senate bill that has majority support. We must admit that the time is shot but its still possible.
We request everyone that starting monday, please call all the members of Judiciary committee. Thanks to the members who have already made phone calls to the lawmaker's office. We request you to please call again to show your support starting Monday.
Thanks,
Thanks a lot for the update - this sure is encouraging!
Two quick questions...
1. When is the "next committee meeting" - next week or later?
2. Any changes to the list of members of the Judiciary committee? Better still, it will be great if you could re-post the latest list so we can get going with the fresh wave of phone calls...
Thanks again and let's pull up our socks for the home stretch.
Update
------------------------------------------------------
We have learned that in all probability House Judiciary committee will finishing marking up HR5882 in the next committee meeting. The bill is likely to be brought to the House floor the following week. We have been told that if our bill(s) pass the House, Senate will include the language of the bill(s) in another Senate bill that has majority support. We must admit that the time is shot but its still possible.
We request everyone that starting monday, please call all the members of Judiciary committee. Thanks to the members who have already made phone calls to the lawmaker's office. We request you to please call again to show your support starting Monday.
Thanks,
Thanks a lot for the update - this sure is encouraging!
Two quick questions...
1. When is the "next committee meeting" - next week or later?
2. Any changes to the list of members of the Judiciary committee? Better still, it will be great if you could re-post the latest list so we can get going with the fresh wave of phone calls...
Thanks again and let's pull up our socks for the home stretch.
pani_6
01-04 11:28 PM
This is the time to push for such a Bill..and who could be a better person than Hon congress Woman Joe Lofgren..Please start writing to her..
whitecollarslave
03-26 05:43 PM
I dont know of any link to a particular publication, but I thought it was a common knowledge that the whole point of labor certification process, is for the DOL to monitor that a potential US worker (I thought it meant US Citizen but may be not), is not being displaced by a foreign worker. To be clear here though, the DOL does not prevent an employer from going ahead and sponsoring an H1B and hiring a foreign employee. But DOL is legally directed to reject such labor applications.
Though this is applicable only for H1B hiring and subsequent filing of GC process for such an employee, I am wondering whether there is any loophole in DOL's directives that might provide a cover for employers to enquire whether a propective employee is US Citizens are not.... Especailly in the PERM process don't they have to do active recruiting efforts and gather statiscis that they tried to hire US citizens ..?? How can an employer gather statistics if they didn't ask for work authorization related details....?
May be due to possible loopholes in such laws...they are able to take it a step further and enquiring about the kind of work authorization a candidate possesses!
There are no loopholes. I do not find anything that explicitly states that a US citizen should be given preference over GC or other immigrants. On the contrary, the employment laws explicitly prohibits discrimination based on nationality and immigration status. The whole point of PERM is to protect the "US worker", not just US citizen. See the following -
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_permfl.html
http://www.ailc.com/perm-labor-certification.htm
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/perm.cfm
http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/eta/title_20/part_656/20CFR656.3.htm
They all refer to "US worker" not "US Citizen". I do not see any reason to panic over this.
For the purposes of PERM, the employer only needs to know whether the candidate is legally authorized to work in the US. They do not need to know if the person has a green card or is a citizen or a refugee, etc.
HOWEVER, I am not able to find a concrete definition of a "U.S worker". I am not able to conclusively determine if a person in AOS using EAD falls under the umbrella of a "U.S. Worker" as defined by the law. I would think it would, since somebody on EAD is not just specific to EB immigrants. It applies to FB, refugees, agricultural workers, and a whole bunch of other immigrants.
So, I guess it all boils down to what is the legal status of somebody who has 485 pending, EAD, and AP? At that point you are no longer on H-1B. Is this status covered in the definition of a "U.S. worker"? ... Anybody?
Though this is applicable only for H1B hiring and subsequent filing of GC process for such an employee, I am wondering whether there is any loophole in DOL's directives that might provide a cover for employers to enquire whether a propective employee is US Citizens are not.... Especailly in the PERM process don't they have to do active recruiting efforts and gather statiscis that they tried to hire US citizens ..?? How can an employer gather statistics if they didn't ask for work authorization related details....?
May be due to possible loopholes in such laws...they are able to take it a step further and enquiring about the kind of work authorization a candidate possesses!
There are no loopholes. I do not find anything that explicitly states that a US citizen should be given preference over GC or other immigrants. On the contrary, the employment laws explicitly prohibits discrimination based on nationality and immigration status. The whole point of PERM is to protect the "US worker", not just US citizen. See the following -
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_permfl.html
http://www.ailc.com/perm-labor-certification.htm
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/perm.cfm
http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/eta/title_20/part_656/20CFR656.3.htm
They all refer to "US worker" not "US Citizen". I do not see any reason to panic over this.
For the purposes of PERM, the employer only needs to know whether the candidate is legally authorized to work in the US. They do not need to know if the person has a green card or is a citizen or a refugee, etc.
HOWEVER, I am not able to find a concrete definition of a "U.S worker". I am not able to conclusively determine if a person in AOS using EAD falls under the umbrella of a "U.S. Worker" as defined by the law. I would think it would, since somebody on EAD is not just specific to EB immigrants. It applies to FB, refugees, agricultural workers, and a whole bunch of other immigrants.
So, I guess it all boils down to what is the legal status of somebody who has 485 pending, EAD, and AP? At that point you are no longer on H-1B. Is this status covered in the definition of a "U.S. worker"? ... Anybody?