seattleGC
02-24 08:28 PM
I totally agree. There has to be some way to differentiate else we will be stuck in another retrogression with a few millions people in line.
Hi Guys,
In my humble opinion simple and easyway to distinguish ourselves from illegal immigrants is to have a premium processing for GC. What ever may be the solutions there will always be backlogs either in Labor or I140 or I485 because we are on the same track as millions of others..
From DOL perspective there is no benefit for them to process our applicatins faster than other applications..or they may simply be lacking resources to treat us as we want them to..
I don't think any high skilled professional would mind paying lilttle extra ( or significantly extra) if the process is certain and fast because once we have the GC we will not be at mercy of employers at the time of raises or need not be stuck in less paying jobs etc..
I request IV to incorporate this in their agenda.
Cheers
Hi Guys,
In my humble opinion simple and easyway to distinguish ourselves from illegal immigrants is to have a premium processing for GC. What ever may be the solutions there will always be backlogs either in Labor or I140 or I485 because we are on the same track as millions of others..
From DOL perspective there is no benefit for them to process our applicatins faster than other applications..or they may simply be lacking resources to treat us as we want them to..
I don't think any high skilled professional would mind paying lilttle extra ( or significantly extra) if the process is certain and fast because once we have the GC we will not be at mercy of employers at the time of raises or need not be stuck in less paying jobs etc..
I request IV to incorporate this in their agenda.
Cheers
wallpaper Rose McGowan was in a great,
waitnwatch
07-16 02:38 PM
Wondering whether you would take a decision just based on what we amateurs have to say. At least ask this question on the "free question to attorney thread" if you are looking for an answer you can trust.
Ultimately I guess "same and similar" is a totally gray area. I donot know whether there are some guidelines for the adjudicators but that phrase can be as broadly or narrowly interpreted as the IO wants it to be.
I am currently working as a Programmer Analyst on EB3 and Using my EAD through 485.
I plan to convert to a new postition that of Senior Applications Developer where the job duties will be atleast 50% different from my existing position
But here is the problem If i am using my EAd obtained from Eb3 program Analyst position then can I work on another position which is 50% different from my existing position as per AC21 rules
Ultimately I guess "same and similar" is a totally gray area. I donot know whether there are some guidelines for the adjudicators but that phrase can be as broadly or narrowly interpreted as the IO wants it to be.
I am currently working as a Programmer Analyst on EB3 and Using my EAD through 485.
I plan to convert to a new postition that of Senior Applications Developer where the job duties will be atleast 50% different from my existing position
But here is the problem If i am using my EAd obtained from Eb3 program Analyst position then can I work on another position which is 50% different from my existing position as per AC21 rules
willigetagc
08-15 08:33 AM
because many of the IOs are dumb high school grads with some additional training. They have been told that 2006 is current and so they pick all and only 2006.
is there any way we can get DOS to specifically state that 2006 and all prior years ARE CURRENT instead of just throwing out a current PD in a VB?
Thankfully, not all IOs are so dumb, hence the few pre-2006 approvals. What else could explain this anomaly..... :mad:
is there any way we can get DOS to specifically state that 2006 and all prior years ARE CURRENT instead of just throwing out a current PD in a VB?
Thankfully, not all IOs are so dumb, hence the few pre-2006 approvals. What else could explain this anomaly..... :mad:
2011 Rose McGowan Is Ravishing In
wandmaker
12-02 11:30 PM
Wandmaker, do you know what are the odds of getting approval for COS to B2 from H1B?
I'm about to submit an application for work visa in New Zealand and I want to stay here in the US and wait for my NZ visa approval here. I'm a Filipino national. I'm currently working on some document requirements and my guess-timate is that I'll get my NZ work visa by late January or even February. I do have an employer waiting for me in NZ and I signed an employment contract already. Will all these info be enough to support my application to stay for a few months and leave when I get all my affairs in order (NZ visa,etc)?
Thanks!
As long as your (immigration) records are clean, I do not see any issues in COSing to B2 from H1B. You do not have to go into greater detail about your future employment. You just need to mention that you have some personal closing tasks and site seeing to do before leaving the US for good, it should fetch you 6 months.
I'm about to submit an application for work visa in New Zealand and I want to stay here in the US and wait for my NZ visa approval here. I'm a Filipino national. I'm currently working on some document requirements and my guess-timate is that I'll get my NZ work visa by late January or even February. I do have an employer waiting for me in NZ and I signed an employment contract already. Will all these info be enough to support my application to stay for a few months and leave when I get all my affairs in order (NZ visa,etc)?
Thanks!
As long as your (immigration) records are clean, I do not see any issues in COSing to B2 from H1B. You do not have to go into greater detail about your future employment. You just need to mention that you have some personal closing tasks and site seeing to do before leaving the US for good, it should fetch you 6 months.
more...
pappu
02-11 11:22 AM
Pappu,
I agree, and so just to vent, IV forum participation must be a give and take, it is shameful and unethical to ask questions and run away once its been answered or their problems are resolved, we have thousands of members and only a handful of them have contributed towards 2009 contributions, the total has not even touched $1500?? there is a limit to being a free rider, at times like these when legal immigration has hit bottom in the priorities list, cant we atleast pool some money and support those who are trying to work for us?? is it too much to ask? its just not enough to say "god will help us", god helps only those who help themselves.
I agree. We are not able to exploit our full potential and come up short in our efforts due to lack of enough support. Imagine if we had hundred thousand members.
or even if we can get the current 30k members to contribute it will be a huge boost. I feel if we can get everyone from other websites to IV that may help us get more participation and contributions.
Individual $20 or $50 should get mass participation. We collected 1K yesterday after a lot of effort. That 1K will be peanuts when we take it and talk to a lobbyist. It will not even get us past initial briefing session if you really want to do full fledged lobbying. If your average lawyer charges you $250 to talk to you only for 15 minutes, imagine how much a lobbyist can charge you to talk let alone go out and allow you to purchase the political capital he has. You should look at how much our rivals spend against us. They even have full time employees and lobbyists on payroll and an office . On the other hand we are simply trying to manage this effort while doing our day jobs and reducing our family time in the evening, nights and weekends. Some of us take time off from work and travel to DC. That time could have been used for trips to Home country or for vacations. Core members, chapter leaders and many active members since the beginning of this effort have made sacrifices. I just hope members are able to see the complete picture of this effort before forming an opinion and taking a decision.
When they see it as their own effort they will participate more actively and make IV their website to go to and participate.
I agree, and so just to vent, IV forum participation must be a give and take, it is shameful and unethical to ask questions and run away once its been answered or their problems are resolved, we have thousands of members and only a handful of them have contributed towards 2009 contributions, the total has not even touched $1500?? there is a limit to being a free rider, at times like these when legal immigration has hit bottom in the priorities list, cant we atleast pool some money and support those who are trying to work for us?? is it too much to ask? its just not enough to say "god will help us", god helps only those who help themselves.
I agree. We are not able to exploit our full potential and come up short in our efforts due to lack of enough support. Imagine if we had hundred thousand members.
or even if we can get the current 30k members to contribute it will be a huge boost. I feel if we can get everyone from other websites to IV that may help us get more participation and contributions.
Individual $20 or $50 should get mass participation. We collected 1K yesterday after a lot of effort. That 1K will be peanuts when we take it and talk to a lobbyist. It will not even get us past initial briefing session if you really want to do full fledged lobbying. If your average lawyer charges you $250 to talk to you only for 15 minutes, imagine how much a lobbyist can charge you to talk let alone go out and allow you to purchase the political capital he has. You should look at how much our rivals spend against us. They even have full time employees and lobbyists on payroll and an office . On the other hand we are simply trying to manage this effort while doing our day jobs and reducing our family time in the evening, nights and weekends. Some of us take time off from work and travel to DC. That time could have been used for trips to Home country or for vacations. Core members, chapter leaders and many active members since the beginning of this effort have made sacrifices. I just hope members are able to see the complete picture of this effort before forming an opinion and taking a decision.
When they see it as their own effort they will participate more actively and make IV their website to go to and participate.
ashish.bhatia.h1
04-06 07:45 AM
Closed it with MetLife in October 2009 @ 5.25.. 3% down payment.. with Patterson Schwartz
more...
Blog Feeds
01-12 07:30 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggJ6uFhSs50pg5ni5w6Lua-0hw-jDAkBgP8X0wq0jd0ZtPltuGRykNJ3gV21XfEoEWyCgkVgzGADfGc3_HXJNhNsKOS-dZxsvCvsBIviJKN75_-Ku8wFCRYq-QaSBnHXIPHUi0F3gpxng/s320/2010-01-01+ICE+detention+2.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggJ6uFhSs50pg5ni5w6Lua-0hw-jDAkBgP8X0wq0jd0ZtPltuGRykNJ3gV21XfEoEWyCgkVgzGADfGc3_HXJNhNsKOS-dZxsvCvsBIviJKN75_-Ku8wFCRYq-QaSBnHXIPHUi0F3gpxng/s1600-h/2010-01-01+ICE+detention+2.jpg)All Americans should be outraged by the Sunday New York Times report about how ICE officials schemed to cover up the deaths of detainees in detention. http://bit.ly/6p2xlX. The online edition includes a link to a horrifying video of an ICE detainee, Mr. Boubacar Bah, who, after mysteriously suffering a skull fracture, was handcuffed while writhing in agony on the floor in his own vomit, then locked-up in an isolation cell for 13 hours without medical treatment and, finally, transported to a hospital in a coma where he later died.
It would be one thing if death in ICE detention was a rare occurrence. But, unfortunately, it's all too common. In a related article, also published Sunday, the Times reports about other ICE detainee deaths which were the result of substandard medical care and abuse. http://bit.ly/6gJlXu.
As I sat down to write this blog, I hoped to pen a stinging piece expressing my anger and calling for a full overhaul of ICE's detention system, not just more press releases and empty promises. But the New York Times articles speak for themselves �107 people have died in ICE custody since 2003 (not counting the immigrants who were released shortly before death so they wouldn't be added to the tally). Added to my anger is the revulsion that I feel toward an agency that is not only incompetent to care for those it locks up, but whose bureaucrats conspire to avoid paying detainees' medical bills and hide from bad publicity, rather than attend to immigrants in their custody. It seems not one of the faceless ICE bureaucrats is ever called to answer for his or her transgressions. Indeed, participating in the abuse and neglect of ICE detainees may have resume value. Just ask Nina Dozoretz, who was the longtime manager of ICE's Division of Immigration Health Services and Vice President of the Nakamoto Group, a company that, according to the Times, was hired by the Bush administration to monitor ICE detention. Dozoretz reportedly participated in the ICE conference calls where officials debated ways to avoid paying for Boubacar Bah's medical care, and came up with a scheme to shift the costs to his indigent relatives before he died. Shockingly, she was recently hired by the Obama administration to overhaul the ICE detainee healthcare system (I guess I won't hold my breath waiting for positive change I can believe in as it relates to ICE health care).
The abuse is not limited to ICE detainees who are unfortunate enough to become ill or injured while in custody. Last month Chris Crane, Vice President of the Detention and Removal Operations of the union representing approximately 7,200 ICE employees who work in detention and removal operations, testified before the U.S. Congress. He described the abuse faced by immigrants detained at facilities run by private contractors and seriously questioned ICE's will to investigate and police the system.
I have been told that some contract workers in certain facilities have allegedly engaged in consensual sexual misconduct with detainees and it has also been alleged that there have been instances in which contract guards have raped female detainees. It is also alleged that contractors are smuggling contraband into the detention facilities. In areas near the southern border of the United States where contract workers also assist with the transportation of detainees, it has been alleged that contract guards have been involved in, and arrested for, smuggling foreign nationals into the United States. If any of these allegations are true, it certainly begs the question, "what is ICE doing to stop these problems?" As one veteran ICE officer stated to me last week, during a conversation regarding contract guards smuggling contraband into detention facilities in his area, "ICE managers are well aware of the problems in the contract facilities, but don't seem interested in doing anything about it." While this statement may surprise many in the American public, it would not surprise ICE employees who are well aware of problems within ICE management and the unethical manner in which ICE internal investigations are conducted.
Frankly, I have read enough articles about abuse and death in ICE detention. There can be no doubt that the system is corrupt to its core. Can you imagine if, instead, the Times had reported that an American had died in Iranian, North Korean, Cuban, or Syrian custody under similar circumstances? We would all be incensed. The Administration would call for heads to roll, impassioned speeches would thunder on the floor of Congress, and the blogs and media pundits would rage. But the cruelty described by the Times is homegrown. It is endemic to the ICE detention system and will continue unless something is done to stop it.
Several months ago homeland security secretary Janet Napolitano and ICE assistant secretary John Morton announced a review of the ICE detention operations with the stated goal of creating a "truly civil" detention system. In light of what we now know, that effort is too little, too late. The ICE detention system is a national disgrace, requiring President Obama to take immediate steps to protect the constitutional, civil, and human rights of ICE detainees, including,
Suspending ICE's detention authority by placing it in receivership with the Department of Justice pending a full investigation of the abuse and deaths in detention;
Ordering a top to bottom review of ICE, in particular its detention and removal operations, with the goal of overhauling the agency so that the human rights of ICE detainees will be respected and the rule of law enforced; and
Ordering the Department of Justice to commence appropriate civil and criminal investigations of all deaths in ICE detention and pursue all appropriate civil and criminal remedies.
We owe it to the families of the 107 people who died in ICE custody to see to it that the abuse, neglect, and deaths are stopped once and for all. Maybe then they will be able to take comfort in the fact that their loved ones did not die in vain.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-3721695949729474764?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/01/secret-horror-stories-death-and-abuse.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggJ6uFhSs50pg5ni5w6Lua-0hw-jDAkBgP8X0wq0jd0ZtPltuGRykNJ3gV21XfEoEWyCgkVgzGADfGc3_HXJNhNsKOS-dZxsvCvsBIviJKN75_-Ku8wFCRYq-QaSBnHXIPHUi0F3gpxng/s320/2010-01-01+ICE+detention+2.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggJ6uFhSs50pg5ni5w6Lua-0hw-jDAkBgP8X0wq0jd0ZtPltuGRykNJ3gV21XfEoEWyCgkVgzGADfGc3_HXJNhNsKOS-dZxsvCvsBIviJKN75_-Ku8wFCRYq-QaSBnHXIPHUi0F3gpxng/s1600-h/2010-01-01+ICE+detention+2.jpg)All Americans should be outraged by the Sunday New York Times report about how ICE officials schemed to cover up the deaths of detainees in detention. http://bit.ly/6p2xlX. The online edition includes a link to a horrifying video of an ICE detainee, Mr. Boubacar Bah, who, after mysteriously suffering a skull fracture, was handcuffed while writhing in agony on the floor in his own vomit, then locked-up in an isolation cell for 13 hours without medical treatment and, finally, transported to a hospital in a coma where he later died.
It would be one thing if death in ICE detention was a rare occurrence. But, unfortunately, it's all too common. In a related article, also published Sunday, the Times reports about other ICE detainee deaths which were the result of substandard medical care and abuse. http://bit.ly/6gJlXu.
As I sat down to write this blog, I hoped to pen a stinging piece expressing my anger and calling for a full overhaul of ICE's detention system, not just more press releases and empty promises. But the New York Times articles speak for themselves �107 people have died in ICE custody since 2003 (not counting the immigrants who were released shortly before death so they wouldn't be added to the tally). Added to my anger is the revulsion that I feel toward an agency that is not only incompetent to care for those it locks up, but whose bureaucrats conspire to avoid paying detainees' medical bills and hide from bad publicity, rather than attend to immigrants in their custody. It seems not one of the faceless ICE bureaucrats is ever called to answer for his or her transgressions. Indeed, participating in the abuse and neglect of ICE detainees may have resume value. Just ask Nina Dozoretz, who was the longtime manager of ICE's Division of Immigration Health Services and Vice President of the Nakamoto Group, a company that, according to the Times, was hired by the Bush administration to monitor ICE detention. Dozoretz reportedly participated in the ICE conference calls where officials debated ways to avoid paying for Boubacar Bah's medical care, and came up with a scheme to shift the costs to his indigent relatives before he died. Shockingly, she was recently hired by the Obama administration to overhaul the ICE detainee healthcare system (I guess I won't hold my breath waiting for positive change I can believe in as it relates to ICE health care).
The abuse is not limited to ICE detainees who are unfortunate enough to become ill or injured while in custody. Last month Chris Crane, Vice President of the Detention and Removal Operations of the union representing approximately 7,200 ICE employees who work in detention and removal operations, testified before the U.S. Congress. He described the abuse faced by immigrants detained at facilities run by private contractors and seriously questioned ICE's will to investigate and police the system.
I have been told that some contract workers in certain facilities have allegedly engaged in consensual sexual misconduct with detainees and it has also been alleged that there have been instances in which contract guards have raped female detainees. It is also alleged that contractors are smuggling contraband into the detention facilities. In areas near the southern border of the United States where contract workers also assist with the transportation of detainees, it has been alleged that contract guards have been involved in, and arrested for, smuggling foreign nationals into the United States. If any of these allegations are true, it certainly begs the question, "what is ICE doing to stop these problems?" As one veteran ICE officer stated to me last week, during a conversation regarding contract guards smuggling contraband into detention facilities in his area, "ICE managers are well aware of the problems in the contract facilities, but don't seem interested in doing anything about it." While this statement may surprise many in the American public, it would not surprise ICE employees who are well aware of problems within ICE management and the unethical manner in which ICE internal investigations are conducted.
Frankly, I have read enough articles about abuse and death in ICE detention. There can be no doubt that the system is corrupt to its core. Can you imagine if, instead, the Times had reported that an American had died in Iranian, North Korean, Cuban, or Syrian custody under similar circumstances? We would all be incensed. The Administration would call for heads to roll, impassioned speeches would thunder on the floor of Congress, and the blogs and media pundits would rage. But the cruelty described by the Times is homegrown. It is endemic to the ICE detention system and will continue unless something is done to stop it.
Several months ago homeland security secretary Janet Napolitano and ICE assistant secretary John Morton announced a review of the ICE detention operations with the stated goal of creating a "truly civil" detention system. In light of what we now know, that effort is too little, too late. The ICE detention system is a national disgrace, requiring President Obama to take immediate steps to protect the constitutional, civil, and human rights of ICE detainees, including,
Suspending ICE's detention authority by placing it in receivership with the Department of Justice pending a full investigation of the abuse and deaths in detention;
Ordering a top to bottom review of ICE, in particular its detention and removal operations, with the goal of overhauling the agency so that the human rights of ICE detainees will be respected and the rule of law enforced; and
Ordering the Department of Justice to commence appropriate civil and criminal investigations of all deaths in ICE detention and pursue all appropriate civil and criminal remedies.
We owe it to the families of the 107 people who died in ICE custody to see to it that the abuse, neglect, and deaths are stopped once and for all. Maybe then they will be able to take comfort in the fact that their loved ones did not die in vain.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-3721695949729474764?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/01/secret-horror-stories-death-and-abuse.html)
2010 Will we ever see Rose McGowan
kumar4875
03-01 03:00 PM
Always try to go for group policy with your employer, even if you are paying 100% of the premium and your company is not contributing a dime. That way your premiums are lower than what you get from the open market...may be you do not have that option but good to know... I can vouch for Kaiser, they are very good.
I was using my employers policy where I had $1000 deductible and paying $1100 per month (2adults+2kids).I switched to BCBS for personal insuracne with $5000 out of pocket limits with $435 premium/month. my calcualtion was I pay $5000 as monthly premiusms + $5000 max deductible -$1000per month just like I was with my employer. At least we can see some saving until we have to spend some amount on healthcare as deductible+outofpocket expenses.So far luck is with me and hoping it will continue.
But Again --these plans keep on increasing their price yearly --So I am also looking for good plan in Maryland.When I compared from ehealthinsuranne.com BCBS had better plans than Kaiser.but Kaiser seems to be public choice here.
I was using my employers policy where I had $1000 deductible and paying $1100 per month (2adults+2kids).I switched to BCBS for personal insuracne with $5000 out of pocket limits with $435 premium/month. my calcualtion was I pay $5000 as monthly premiusms + $5000 max deductible -$1000per month just like I was with my employer. At least we can see some saving until we have to spend some amount on healthcare as deductible+outofpocket expenses.So far luck is with me and hoping it will continue.
But Again --these plans keep on increasing their price yearly --So I am also looking for good plan in Maryland.When I compared from ehealthinsuranne.com BCBS had better plans than Kaiser.but Kaiser seems to be public choice here.
more...
Ramba
02-27 07:48 PM
I just sent the fax to senators of my state for amendment to Sen. Specter markup. The current format is not effective.
My main concern is why our people are worrying about filing AOS when visa number unavailable? Man, this should not be our concern at all. Our main concern should be reinstating the AC21 provision that allow the oversubscribed countries to use excess visas in each EB category.
If the current form of specter bill passes, there is no benefit to any of us. If EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3) from count, that drastically increase the visa numbers. The increase is unimaginable, and I feel that it will be about 4 to 5 times than current 140K numbers. If all the listed provisions appears in the final bill, the visa number will always be �current� for all countries for many years, provided AC21 (elimination of per country limit if demand is less than supply) reinstated. If this happens, no one needs to worry about filing AOS when visa number unavailable. That situation never arises.
If current form of Specter bill passes, all the new numbers created thro above listed provisions, will not give any benefit to India/China. DOS simply say per country limit is 10% only no matter what. Remember that, 10% is total of FB+EB numbers. (480000+290000). India and China FB numbers are also heavily backlogged. Therefore our main concern is to reinstate AC21 provision not filing AOS, and keep pressure to keep the listed provisions (EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3)) in the final bill.
Please modify the format.
My main concern is why our people are worrying about filing AOS when visa number unavailable? Man, this should not be our concern at all. Our main concern should be reinstating the AC21 provision that allow the oversubscribed countries to use excess visas in each EB category.
If the current form of specter bill passes, there is no benefit to any of us. If EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3) from count, that drastically increase the visa numbers. The increase is unimaginable, and I feel that it will be about 4 to 5 times than current 140K numbers. If all the listed provisions appears in the final bill, the visa number will always be �current� for all countries for many years, provided AC21 (elimination of per country limit if demand is less than supply) reinstated. If this happens, no one needs to worry about filing AOS when visa number unavailable. That situation never arises.
If current form of Specter bill passes, all the new numbers created thro above listed provisions, will not give any benefit to India/China. DOS simply say per country limit is 10% only no matter what. Remember that, 10% is total of FB+EB numbers. (480000+290000). India and China FB numbers are also heavily backlogged. Therefore our main concern is to reinstate AC21 provision not filing AOS, and keep pressure to keep the listed provisions (EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3)) in the final bill.
Please modify the format.
hair rose mcgowan twitter.
reddymjm
02-05 09:04 PM
You are talking about second FP on 485 right. I did not get it. My wife got it. Other thing I noticed is even after she gave her FP no LUD on her 485. I opened SR @ NSC for my FP notice.
more...
admin
01-29 11:50 AM
Earlier many of us were happy that as per AILA's report, the effect of retrogression might be significantly reduced. Now lawyer Mathew Oh has come out with the some analysis as to why this exuberance might be showtlived and why we need to fight for legislative reform with respect to Employment Based Green Cards. So remember "It aint over till its over".
Here is an excerpt of his analysis from http://www.immigration-law.com/
The State Department's new prediction is derived from two changed circumstances. One is the slow-down of I-485 adjudications by the USCIS and the resultant decrease of the EB visa numbers demand on the part of the USCIS. The second factor is the delays in processing of the old labor certification cases in the Backlog Eliminination Centers of the DOL. It is not clear what has caused the decreased visa number demand from the USCIS EB-485 proceedings, but it may have something to do with the on-going reengineering of the USCIS processing and adjudication system. As for the Backlog Elimination Centers, they have yet to complete the ground work of data entry and 45-day letters, before they can focus on adjudication of the backlog applications. Currently, the USCIS is scheduled to complete the reengineering by the end of September 2006 and the DOL is scheduled to complete the ground work of data entries and 45-day letter processing by approximately the end of June 2006. As we reported earlier, a substantial number of these BEC cases are known to be 245(i) cases, meaning that the cases were filed in traditional regular application type of EB-3 in most cases on or before April 30, 2001. A substantial number of these cases have yet to go through the "supervised" recruitment process to complete the labor certification processing and it will take a substantial period of time before these cases will move into the USCIS I-485 processing system.
From the foregoing analysis, one can predict that the big winners of the new prediction may include (1) those old priority date I-485 cases pending before the USCIS including 245(i) cases which may be approved within next several months; (2) those old priority date I-140 cases pending before the USCIS which may at least move into the I-485 phase and getting the benefits of EAD, AP, and AC 21 change of employment eligibility; and (3) those old priority date backlog labor certification cases which can move into the I-140/I-485 concurrent filing phase upon approval of the delayed backlog labor certification processing with the ancillary benefits that come along with the filing of I-485 applications such as EAD, AP, and AC-21 change of employment benefits. It is anticipated that the cases under the foregoing (3) may remain very limited in numbers due to the BEC processing delays.
The real losers may turn out to be those with late priority dates. Once the USCIS reengineering work is completed by the end of this fiscal year and the BECs start processing backlog cases en masse around the end of this fical year, the stream of visa number demand will move into the State Department visal allocation system. The pressure to the allocation system will mount tremendously as time passes, and unless the Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation brings a cure to the current ailing immigrant visa quota system within this year, it is likely that these late priority date cases may experience tremendous difficulties due to the stand-still or further retrogression of the visa numbers and the resultant unavailability of the ancillary benefits of EAD, AP, and AC 21 change of employment opportunities. It is anticipated that the real crisis may be witnessed beginning the end of this calendar year as by that time it is anticipated that the BECs are expected to pump out certifications of backlog cases.
It is thus obvious that the new prediction of the State Department can turn out to be a short-lived relief for a limited number of immigrants and a sign of foreseeable dark cloud and storm moving into the visa number system for most of the immigrants. The only answer to the clogged employment-based immigration system lies with the reform of the employment-based immigrant quota allocation system and related reform, including but not limited to (1) dependants immigration without taking out visa numbers from the employment-based quota system and (2) eligibility of I-485 applications for those who attained the labor certification approvals or I-140 petitions even during the period of visa number unavailability. For these reasons, the immigrant community should not stop its efforts to bring back (1) the legislative proposals which were reflected in the failed Section 8001 and 8002 of S. 1932 and (2) the adjustment of EB-immigrant quota substantially upward as reflected in the McCain-Kennedy bill.
Here is an excerpt of his analysis from http://www.immigration-law.com/
The State Department's new prediction is derived from two changed circumstances. One is the slow-down of I-485 adjudications by the USCIS and the resultant decrease of the EB visa numbers demand on the part of the USCIS. The second factor is the delays in processing of the old labor certification cases in the Backlog Eliminination Centers of the DOL. It is not clear what has caused the decreased visa number demand from the USCIS EB-485 proceedings, but it may have something to do with the on-going reengineering of the USCIS processing and adjudication system. As for the Backlog Elimination Centers, they have yet to complete the ground work of data entry and 45-day letters, before they can focus on adjudication of the backlog applications. Currently, the USCIS is scheduled to complete the reengineering by the end of September 2006 and the DOL is scheduled to complete the ground work of data entries and 45-day letter processing by approximately the end of June 2006. As we reported earlier, a substantial number of these BEC cases are known to be 245(i) cases, meaning that the cases were filed in traditional regular application type of EB-3 in most cases on or before April 30, 2001. A substantial number of these cases have yet to go through the "supervised" recruitment process to complete the labor certification processing and it will take a substantial period of time before these cases will move into the USCIS I-485 processing system.
From the foregoing analysis, one can predict that the big winners of the new prediction may include (1) those old priority date I-485 cases pending before the USCIS including 245(i) cases which may be approved within next several months; (2) those old priority date I-140 cases pending before the USCIS which may at least move into the I-485 phase and getting the benefits of EAD, AP, and AC 21 change of employment eligibility; and (3) those old priority date backlog labor certification cases which can move into the I-140/I-485 concurrent filing phase upon approval of the delayed backlog labor certification processing with the ancillary benefits that come along with the filing of I-485 applications such as EAD, AP, and AC-21 change of employment benefits. It is anticipated that the cases under the foregoing (3) may remain very limited in numbers due to the BEC processing delays.
The real losers may turn out to be those with late priority dates. Once the USCIS reengineering work is completed by the end of this fiscal year and the BECs start processing backlog cases en masse around the end of this fical year, the stream of visa number demand will move into the State Department visal allocation system. The pressure to the allocation system will mount tremendously as time passes, and unless the Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation brings a cure to the current ailing immigrant visa quota system within this year, it is likely that these late priority date cases may experience tremendous difficulties due to the stand-still or further retrogression of the visa numbers and the resultant unavailability of the ancillary benefits of EAD, AP, and AC 21 change of employment opportunities. It is anticipated that the real crisis may be witnessed beginning the end of this calendar year as by that time it is anticipated that the BECs are expected to pump out certifications of backlog cases.
It is thus obvious that the new prediction of the State Department can turn out to be a short-lived relief for a limited number of immigrants and a sign of foreseeable dark cloud and storm moving into the visa number system for most of the immigrants. The only answer to the clogged employment-based immigration system lies with the reform of the employment-based immigrant quota allocation system and related reform, including but not limited to (1) dependants immigration without taking out visa numbers from the employment-based quota system and (2) eligibility of I-485 applications for those who attained the labor certification approvals or I-140 petitions even during the period of visa number unavailability. For these reasons, the immigrant community should not stop its efforts to bring back (1) the legislative proposals which were reflected in the failed Section 8001 and 8002 of S. 1932 and (2) the adjustment of EB-immigrant quota substantially upward as reflected in the McCain-Kennedy bill.
hot 500full-rose-mcgowan
AtulKRaizada
07-18 06:01 PM
I wonder when illegal can demonstrate, why can't we unite and organize some demonstartions to explain our frustrations and demands.
more...
house rose mcgowan by rankin
frost_oni
04-08 05:20 PM
looks better! but green....lol, looks cools :thumb:
tattoo rose mcgowan twitter
bitzbytz
07-13 03:14 PM
do i need to send flowers to everyone so that you can ignore this thread...i agree that this forum is not the place for my question. i hope u understand.
more...
pictures Twincing Rose McGowan Snooki
485Mbe4001
04-30 12:28 PM
... does it imply that you can work abroad while your work GC is being processed... speculation, no doubt:rolleyes:
According to the WSJ Article today (4/30/07):
Eight (years) refers to the number of years designated to clear the backlog of pending applications for permanent residency documents, or "green cards," from persons abroad or living here with a legal work visa. ... the application backlog would be confined to people who applied before May 2005, when major immigration legislation was introduced in the Senate in the last Congress
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3900&page=49
:confused:
I am on EB3 RW with PD of Feb 06. Does this mean even after CIR + SKIL passes and gets enacted, causing PDs to move forward significantly or become current in some categories and allowing us to file 485 & EAD... we have to wait 8 more years in preadjucation/ FBI name check delays/ Service Center Application backlogs (current NSC backlogged to Sept 06 for EB based 485)?
I am really freaked out. Can someone please shed some light on this.
(I posted this in another forum, but it seems that was shutdown. It's also on News Articles thread - but since that's for news only I wasn't sure if my question would get answered there, so re-posting it. Admin(s), if you must delete this, atleast send me a PM with answer to me question if you know it. Thanks.)
According to the WSJ Article today (4/30/07):
Eight (years) refers to the number of years designated to clear the backlog of pending applications for permanent residency documents, or "green cards," from persons abroad or living here with a legal work visa. ... the application backlog would be confined to people who applied before May 2005, when major immigration legislation was introduced in the Senate in the last Congress
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3900&page=49
:confused:
I am on EB3 RW with PD of Feb 06. Does this mean even after CIR + SKIL passes and gets enacted, causing PDs to move forward significantly or become current in some categories and allowing us to file 485 & EAD... we have to wait 8 more years in preadjucation/ FBI name check delays/ Service Center Application backlogs (current NSC backlogged to Sept 06 for EB based 485)?
I am really freaked out. Can someone please shed some light on this.
(I posted this in another forum, but it seems that was shutdown. It's also on News Articles thread - but since that's for news only I wasn't sure if my question would get answered there, so re-posting it. Admin(s), if you must delete this, atleast send me a PM with answer to me question if you know it. Thanks.)
dresses Rose McGowan is my favourite
number30
03-17 11:25 AM
Add you wife , 2 weeks before she comes, IE if she is coming on 16th may add her on 1st may.
pay some extra premium.
wouldn't that be common sense....
You cannot add before she comes here. She can bring some insurence from country of origin.
pay some extra premium.
wouldn't that be common sense....
You cannot add before she comes here. She can bring some insurence from country of origin.
more...
makeup Rose McGowan at US Hot
atlgc
06-01 11:15 AM
when you say
"If old priority date is not ported then send an email to " means new 140 not showing the old PD correct?
once it shows up then send a interfile request correct or send eitherway
"If old priority date is not ported then send an email to " means new 140 not showing the old PD correct?
once it shows up then send a interfile request correct or send eitherway
girlfriend rose mcgowan twitter. Rose McGowan just had this; Rose McGowan just had this
honeyB
01-23 04:21 PM
bump
hairstyles rose mcgowan twitter.
xela
11-12 10:23 AM
Sounds liek a great idea, I am right there with you, because this just makes no sense.
sertasheep
10-16 09:06 PM
Link at http://groups.google.com/group/iv-mn-mw?hl=en
srgadi
06-23 01:43 AM
ndbhatt,
If I read your profile right, you arrived in US in April 2005 flied for LC in July 07. I think that is a different situation than someone working in H1B since 1999 (F1 since 1996). Do you know anyone in H1B since 1999 and without an EAD option? I suppose waiting 14 years is very different than waiting 5 years..
Yes, it is different and its unfortunate in your case. However, there is nothing you can do other than wait for your date to be current in order for you to apply for I-485 and EAD/AP.
If I read your profile right, you arrived in US in April 2005 flied for LC in July 07. I think that is a different situation than someone working in H1B since 1999 (F1 since 1996). Do you know anyone in H1B since 1999 and without an EAD option? I suppose waiting 14 years is very different than waiting 5 years..
Yes, it is different and its unfortunate in your case. However, there is nothing you can do other than wait for your date to be current in order for you to apply for I-485 and EAD/AP.