admin
06-04 06:44 AM
The Heritage Foundation is a powerful Conservative Think Tank based out of Washington DC.
More at http://www.heritage.org
More at http://www.heritage.org
wallpaper Halloween Costume Contest
girishvar
04-21 02:06 PM
There is no need to switch from H1 to L1. If you are eligible for EB1 multi national executive/manager green card you will get it independent of whether you are H1B or L1-A.
v7461558
08-11 06:25 PM
http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/pr_1186757867585.shtm item 22.
22. The Administration Will Reform And Expedite Background Checks For Immigration. Current mechanisms for conducting immigration background checks are backed up, slowing processing times and endangering national security. The Administration is investing substantial new funds to address the backlog, and the FBI and USCIS are working together on a variety of projects designed to streamline existing processes so as to reduce waiting times without sacrificing security.
Note that there is no "bill", the DHS is not talking about passing new laws through the Congress. They are talking about using their (and FBI's) existing administrative authority to streamline and expedite background checks. Note that the rule to search the secondary name indexes that was instituted after Sept. 11, 2001 was not a law. It was an interpretation by the DHS of the existing statute, yielding a request from the DHS to the FBI to provide the DHS with the information from the secondary index name search.
Now, if someone would please be so kind as to dig up the original text of the "following reforms [that] represent steps the Administration can take within the boundaries of existing law", released by the DHS on 10 August 2007, or to come up with a conclusion that said text has not yet been made publicly available, we can take this discussion further.
22. The Administration Will Reform And Expedite Background Checks For Immigration. Current mechanisms for conducting immigration background checks are backed up, slowing processing times and endangering national security. The Administration is investing substantial new funds to address the backlog, and the FBI and USCIS are working together on a variety of projects designed to streamline existing processes so as to reduce waiting times without sacrificing security.
Note that there is no "bill", the DHS is not talking about passing new laws through the Congress. They are talking about using their (and FBI's) existing administrative authority to streamline and expedite background checks. Note that the rule to search the secondary name indexes that was instituted after Sept. 11, 2001 was not a law. It was an interpretation by the DHS of the existing statute, yielding a request from the DHS to the FBI to provide the DHS with the information from the secondary index name search.
Now, if someone would please be so kind as to dig up the original text of the "following reforms [that] represent steps the Administration can take within the boundaries of existing law", released by the DHS on 10 August 2007, or to come up with a conclusion that said text has not yet been made publicly available, we can take this discussion further.
2011 Rate This Costume
hopelessGC
04-21 01:45 PM
Yes, you can move to H4 and then to H1-B as long as that H1-B is filed within 12 months. Otherwise, your application will be subject to 65K cap limit
H4 can be filed onself, I have seen some of my friends do it. To file AOS once PD is current, it is essential that one be in H1-B status.
Guys, let us refrain from making incorrect statements. This can affect someone's decision negatively. Post answers only if your are sure that it is a correct answer or have personal experience.
H4 can be filed onself, I have seen some of my friends do it. To file AOS once PD is current, it is essential that one be in H1-B status.
Guys, let us refrain from making incorrect statements. This can affect someone's decision negatively. Post answers only if your are sure that it is a correct answer or have personal experience.
more...
sundeep14
09-27 11:01 AM
this topic is interesting....i do buy/sell stocks usin zecco / BoA etc...which are sites where i can do day trade..im interested to venture into it...
suggestions??
suggestions??
Munna Bhai
08-05 01:56 PM
Hi Friend,
i have sheduled for interview in July,some how i couldn't make it that time.I have requested to postpond for 3 months.Are they assinged any visa for me ? Are they going to call me for interview after 3 month.Can anyone tell me are they going to call me ? Please answer . Thanks
please be more specific ,which interview??
i have sheduled for interview in July,some how i couldn't make it that time.I have requested to postpond for 3 months.Are they assinged any visa for me ? Are they going to call me for interview after 3 month.Can anyone tell me are they going to call me ? Please answer . Thanks
please be more specific ,which interview??
more...
JazzByTheBay
10-27 12:52 AM
It's a well-know fact that Senator Kennedy only empathizes with "undocumented workers", and feels they deserve to be given "a path to citizenship" (amnesty by any other name is still amnesty... ) - understandably so given the demographics and numbers.
jazz
I got this as a real paper letter. The signature is a picture, of course, not real.
No surprise here. We are not even a part of immigration reform for him.:mad:
So in this standard reply "about immigration reform" we are not even mentioned.
EDWARD M. KENNEDY
MASSACHUSETTS
Uinited States
WASHINGTON, DC 20510-2101
October 9, 2007
Dear Mr. :
Thank you for contacting me about immigration reform. This is a complex issue, with many important aspects, and it requires a comprehensive solution. 12 million undocumented workers are now living in the United States. They're working, paying taxes, and raising children who are U.S. citizens if they are born here. They contribute to our economy, and it is time to bring them out of the shadows and end their unfair exploitation by unscrupulous employers in communities across the country.
Funds for border enforcement have increased dramatically over the years. The budget for the Border Patrol has increased from $263 million in 1990 to $1.6 billion today - a six-fold increase. Yet each year during this period, hundreds of thousands of immigrants have continued to enter the U.S. illegally. Our immigration laws are clearly broken, and stronger border enforcement alone will not fix them.
Long and thorough negotiations with the White House and fellow Senators, Republican and Democrat, led to the drafting of a comprehensive bipartisan immigration reform bill this year. It contained important provisions to strengthen border security, but it also contained needed provisions imposing higher penalties on businesses that employ undocumented immigrants, a temporary worker program to help American businesses meet their employment needs, and provisions to address the millions of undocumented immigrants living in the United States by allowing them to obtain legal status after undergoing background checks, paying a fine, and going to the back of the line for green cards. The bill was a realistic and comprehensive solution that would not only protect our borders, but also enable needed temporary workers to enter the country legally, and allow workers already here to become legal.
Unfortunately, this needed legislation has now stalled in the Senate, which is enormously disappointing for Congress and the country. But the battle is far from over. I'm in it for the long haul, and Fm certain that, in the end, we will prevail. Ignoring the problem will not solve it. We cannot afford to do nothing, especially in this post-9/11 era. By heritage and history, America is a nation of immigrants, and we must preserve this tradition. I will continue to fight to reform our immigration laws, so that our borders are secure and immigrant families can continue to live the American dream.
Again, thank you for writing to me about this important issue.
Sincerely,
Edward M. Kennedy
jazz
I got this as a real paper letter. The signature is a picture, of course, not real.
No surprise here. We are not even a part of immigration reform for him.:mad:
So in this standard reply "about immigration reform" we are not even mentioned.
EDWARD M. KENNEDY
MASSACHUSETTS
Uinited States
WASHINGTON, DC 20510-2101
October 9, 2007
Dear Mr. :
Thank you for contacting me about immigration reform. This is a complex issue, with many important aspects, and it requires a comprehensive solution. 12 million undocumented workers are now living in the United States. They're working, paying taxes, and raising children who are U.S. citizens if they are born here. They contribute to our economy, and it is time to bring them out of the shadows and end their unfair exploitation by unscrupulous employers in communities across the country.
Funds for border enforcement have increased dramatically over the years. The budget for the Border Patrol has increased from $263 million in 1990 to $1.6 billion today - a six-fold increase. Yet each year during this period, hundreds of thousands of immigrants have continued to enter the U.S. illegally. Our immigration laws are clearly broken, and stronger border enforcement alone will not fix them.
Long and thorough negotiations with the White House and fellow Senators, Republican and Democrat, led to the drafting of a comprehensive bipartisan immigration reform bill this year. It contained important provisions to strengthen border security, but it also contained needed provisions imposing higher penalties on businesses that employ undocumented immigrants, a temporary worker program to help American businesses meet their employment needs, and provisions to address the millions of undocumented immigrants living in the United States by allowing them to obtain legal status after undergoing background checks, paying a fine, and going to the back of the line for green cards. The bill was a realistic and comprehensive solution that would not only protect our borders, but also enable needed temporary workers to enter the country legally, and allow workers already here to become legal.
Unfortunately, this needed legislation has now stalled in the Senate, which is enormously disappointing for Congress and the country. But the battle is far from over. I'm in it for the long haul, and Fm certain that, in the end, we will prevail. Ignoring the problem will not solve it. We cannot afford to do nothing, especially in this post-9/11 era. By heritage and history, America is a nation of immigrants, and we must preserve this tradition. I will continue to fight to reform our immigration laws, so that our borders are secure and immigrant families can continue to live the American dream.
Again, thank you for writing to me about this important issue.
Sincerely,
Edward M. Kennedy
2010 (Leasburg, MO). Homemade
fortune50
07-17 09:24 PM
Hi,
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
more...
saketkapur
10-14 06:05 PM
I thought AP must ONLY be used for emergency travel purposes, not for vacations, brother's marriage etc. Some IV members shared their experiences at the POE, the IO may ask why you left US, what was the emergency? Please correct me if I am wrong. Can AP be used for casual travel also? Thanks.
Not a lawyer. This is not a legal advice.
I think that is the humanitarian parole......but there have been over aggressive officers at the POE who mix up the two......
My suggestion to you is use your H1B(if possible) or take an infopass and get an expedited AP.
Not a lawyer. This is not a legal advice.
I think that is the humanitarian parole......but there have been over aggressive officers at the POE who mix up the two......
My suggestion to you is use your H1B(if possible) or take an infopass and get an expedited AP.
hair Headless Marie Antoinette
clifford
02-02 06:30 PM
A good business man cares only about profit. Recently US announced that it will be selling arms to Pakistan and few days earlier it had announced that it will be selling billions worth of Arms to India.I think USCIS approved all the 65 K H1b applications in the current quota and now officials at the air port will be kicking back Indians at the port of entry. Creates good business for USCIS, shows airport officials are enforcing laws probably they need to hire more people and creates business for airliners etc, all seem to be benefiting a little bit.
H1B is favorite whipping boy for so many groups of people. Nobody has complaints against communists taking their jobs and making each and every damn thing which is in their home. It is like some so called red necks who will not buy Chinese made tv at walmart but will buy the same thing from a smaller shop thinking that they made a big difference. It pisses off many people that a guy who got educated in 3rd world and does not speak that smartly and probably does not look that smart is beating them at their own game against all the odds. Oddly I think that is what is AMERICAN SPIRIT.
H1B is favorite whipping boy for so many groups of people. Nobody has complaints against communists taking their jobs and making each and every damn thing which is in their home. It is like some so called red necks who will not buy Chinese made tv at walmart but will buy the same thing from a smaller shop thinking that they made a big difference. It pisses off many people that a guy who got educated in 3rd world and does not speak that smartly and probably does not look that smart is beating them at their own game against all the odds. Oddly I think that is what is AMERICAN SPIRIT.
more...
sandy_anand
11-06 04:38 PM
I did not want to start a new thread for this. But I had earlier last month contacted many senators with the official I-485 pending inventory as proof and asking them whether it was humane, ethical and moral to ask someone wait more than 15 years for a green card! And what they are doing to remedy the situation.
This is the reply I received today from Sen. Frank Lautenberg. May be this is very standard format, I am not sure but it does mention specific bill and recapture provision.
In Response to Your Message
From: Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (senator@lautenberg.senate.gov)
Sent: Fri 11/06/09 1:00 PM
To:
1 attachment
0A953776.gif (2.8 KB)
Dear Mr. Mundada:
Thank you for contacting me about employment-based immigrant visas. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.
Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The �Reuniting American Families Act� (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total.
This bill is currently pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am not a member. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind should this or other relevant legislation come before the full Senate. Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
FRL: mts
Thanks for posting this information! Gave you green!:D
This is the reply I received today from Sen. Frank Lautenberg. May be this is very standard format, I am not sure but it does mention specific bill and recapture provision.
In Response to Your Message
From: Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (senator@lautenberg.senate.gov)
Sent: Fri 11/06/09 1:00 PM
To:
1 attachment
0A953776.gif (2.8 KB)
Dear Mr. Mundada:
Thank you for contacting me about employment-based immigrant visas. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.
Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The �Reuniting American Families Act� (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total.
This bill is currently pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am not a member. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind should this or other relevant legislation come before the full Senate. Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
FRL: mts
Thanks for posting this information! Gave you green!:D
hot quot;I was Headless Marie
ilikekilo
07-17 04:24 PM
opening new threads like this is annoying, I see lots of useless thread around here which discourages me to come to IV that often. He is asking update from CORE like they owe him, he must have paid his attorney and should attorney in such way not here. Whenever core has something to share they do share, no doubts.
i agree with you......dont demand..where have u been all these days coming today and asking IV for updated as they owe you...ofcourse bearing the fruits is not the only thing one can do they can contribute as well...will those new poeple who jpined in july will be willing to contribute to IV for fighting for our cuase GIBVE ME A BREAK
i agree with you......dont demand..where have u been all these days coming today and asking IV for updated as they owe you...ofcourse bearing the fruits is not the only thing one can do they can contribute as well...will those new poeple who jpined in july will be willing to contribute to IV for fighting for our cuase GIBVE ME A BREAK
more...
house How To Make A Headless Marie
JazzByTheBay
07-11 10:03 PM
Thanks to the person who posted the link to the Ombundsman report earlier - this is beginning to make sense now.
USCIS Ombundsman report from JUNE 2007 says:
"For example, when employment-based visas are not used during the year they are authorized, they are lost and are not available for future use without special legislation. In FY 06, over 10,000 employment-based visas were lost, even though USCIS had an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 pending applications for employment-based green cards.36 - Based on USCIS use of visa numbers as of May 2007, at present consumption rates approximately 40,000 visas will be lost in FY 07 without a dramatic increase in USCIS requests of visa numbers.37
- As illustrated below, since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Dept of State: Sees visa numbers not being used, chances of visas going unutilized/unused/wasted/lost again this year. Makes July visa bulletin CURRENT for all countries & categories.
USCIS: Scrambles to approve as many visas as possible to 1) Prove they're working hard, in light of the Ombundsman Report from June 2) Save themselves from the avalanche of I-485s, EADs and AP filings in June, knowing 3) Filing fees go up like crazy on 30th July.
End Result: More visa numbers requested (but they didn't complete issuing all of them, even over the weekend).
As things stand, if they approved stuff on 1st July, it means visa numbers were in fact available on 1st July.
If they approved without completing FBI check - that's going to raise a stink and isn't entirely legal anyways.
If they *still had visa numbers available on July 2* - request from DoS but not approved, they're in bigger trouble, imho.
Anybody thinks the above makes sense?
jazz
USCIS Ombundsman report from JUNE 2007 says:
"For example, when employment-based visas are not used during the year they are authorized, they are lost and are not available for future use without special legislation. In FY 06, over 10,000 employment-based visas were lost, even though USCIS had an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 pending applications for employment-based green cards.36 - Based on USCIS use of visa numbers as of May 2007, at present consumption rates approximately 40,000 visas will be lost in FY 07 without a dramatic increase in USCIS requests of visa numbers.37
- As illustrated below, since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Dept of State: Sees visa numbers not being used, chances of visas going unutilized/unused/wasted/lost again this year. Makes July visa bulletin CURRENT for all countries & categories.
USCIS: Scrambles to approve as many visas as possible to 1) Prove they're working hard, in light of the Ombundsman Report from June 2) Save themselves from the avalanche of I-485s, EADs and AP filings in June, knowing 3) Filing fees go up like crazy on 30th July.
End Result: More visa numbers requested (but they didn't complete issuing all of them, even over the weekend).
As things stand, if they approved stuff on 1st July, it means visa numbers were in fact available on 1st July.
If they approved without completing FBI check - that's going to raise a stink and isn't entirely legal anyways.
If they *still had visa numbers available on July 2* - request from DoS but not approved, they're in bigger trouble, imho.
Anybody thinks the above makes sense?
jazz
tattoo Headless Marie Antoinette
BMS1
08-21 02:16 PM
So, once you have finished the security check, your I485 is approved, unless CIS wants to interview you. You said only a small percentage, wow, I hope I don't get called for interview.
How long did you wait after your biometrics to get your 485 got approved?
There were twobiometrics. One was with initial application (probably Nov/Dec 2005) and another was in May 2007 when the first one expired (FP is valid for 15 months).
How long did you wait after your biometrics to get your 485 got approved?
There were twobiometrics. One was with initial application (probably Nov/Dec 2005) and another was in May 2007 when the first one expired (FP is valid for 15 months).
more...
pictures headless Marie Antoinette.
amitjoey
01-26 11:18 AM
Congrajulations! to all the toppers.
dresses Headless Marie Antoinette Costume - JTRForums.com - THE place to be for All
ujjvalkoul
03-06 11:16 AM
Mine was at Texas Service Center.
For EB2INDIA: I filed to get my EAD corrected 3 months ago...no RECEIPT NOTICE yet..
Did you get a RECEIPT NOTICE or you directly received ur Card after 3 months w/o any receipt notice?
For EB2INDIA: I filed to get my EAD corrected 3 months ago...no RECEIPT NOTICE yet..
Did you get a RECEIPT NOTICE or you directly received ur Card after 3 months w/o any receipt notice?
more...
makeup Headless Marie Antoinette
b2visahelp
06-15 11:17 PM
which country are you from?
Indonesia
Indonesia
girlfriend I saw this headless Marie
lrindy
09-27 08:33 AM
Hi All,
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
Don't worry about it. When you go to FP appointment point this out to IO. You are correct "usually" 099 for primary & 088 for dependents. The "A" number is assigned at I-140 approval; that is "usually" the number you have on your receipts & GC when issued.("A" number is Alien Registration number and NOT the actual visa. The "A" number will be assigned to a visa once you get approved for GC.) There have been a few people on various threads have this happen to them. Just let the IO at FP know and they will help you OR speak to your lawyer about it. Note: Some applicants actually end up with a different "A" number on GC approval all together. So don't sweat it!
Cheers,
LRIndy. I am not a lawyer always consult one before making a decision.
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
Don't worry about it. When you go to FP appointment point this out to IO. You are correct "usually" 099 for primary & 088 for dependents. The "A" number is assigned at I-140 approval; that is "usually" the number you have on your receipts & GC when issued.("A" number is Alien Registration number and NOT the actual visa. The "A" number will be assigned to a visa once you get approved for GC.) There have been a few people on various threads have this happen to them. Just let the IO at FP know and they will help you OR speak to your lawyer about it. Note: Some applicants actually end up with a different "A" number on GC approval all together. So don't sweat it!
Cheers,
LRIndy. I am not a lawyer always consult one before making a decision.
hairstyles Headless Marie Antoinette Costume - JTRForums.com - THE place to be for All
mallu
08-06 03:29 AM
Like your thoughts on these topic... pardon me for my ignorance but whats the big deal about Name Check? will this take longer than the rest of the processing stages?
According to USCIS Ombudsman 1/3rd of cases are pending more than 1 year due to namecheck. Also there are many cases stuck for more than 3 years. E
According to USCIS Ombudsman 1/3rd of cases are pending more than 1 year due to namecheck. Also there are many cases stuck for more than 3 years. E
amsgc
12-11 12:50 AM
In a testimony to the House Judiciary Committee back in Apr/May 08, the USCIS clearly stated that it had changed its policy regarding which applications would be adjudicated first.
As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.
The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.
Here is how:
Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.
So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.
When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.
The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.
If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.
As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.
Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.
I wonder how it is they justify over 70K visas to EB2ROW, keeping it current all year, when EB2 I was so retrogressed and got only 15K. FIFO my foot. This is the most mismanaged, subjective thing I have ever seen. Translated for us, luck of the draw.
As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.
The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.
Here is how:
Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.
So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.
When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.
The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.
If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.
As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.
Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.
I wonder how it is they justify over 70K visas to EB2ROW, keeping it current all year, when EB2 I was so retrogressed and got only 15K. FIFO my foot. This is the most mismanaged, subjective thing I have ever seen. Translated for us, luck of the draw.
uumapathi
09-30 10:48 AM
r u from NBKRIST?
What is NBKRIST?
What is NBKRIST?
No comments:
Post a Comment