senk1s
01-04 12:39 PM
I called in yesterday to the tollfree # - this was the bottomline after the long chat :(
"your case is 1 day beyond the normal processing time- we'll open a SR and send to the IO - please call back after 60 days to check back on the status of the service request"
"your case is 1 day beyond the normal processing time- we'll open a SR and send to the IO - please call back after 60 days to check back on the status of the service request"
wallpaper hot scene girl with medium
Libra
09-11 01:56 PM
thank you leoindiano.
raju123
06-01 04:00 PM
This might be useful to you.
Age-Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "Child Status Protection Act"
The "Child Status Protection Act", effective August 6, 2002, addresses the problems of minor children losing their eligibility for certain immigration benefits as a result of INS (now USCIS) processing delays. Prior to the passage of this law, a child's eligibility in Employment-Based Immigration situations to be part of his or her parent's application as a derivative beneficiary was based on the child's age at the time that the child's I-485 was adjudicated. Because of enormous backlogs and processing delays, many children turned 21 before the their I-485 applications were adjudicated. In such cases, the children "age-out" and are no longer considered to be part of the parent's application and lose their eligibility to obtain green cards as a derivative beneficiary.
Children who otherwise would have aged out may successfully adjust their status through the additional interplay of the new Concurrent Filing rule and the "Child Status Protection Act." According to the "Child Status Protection Act," the eligibility of these aging-out children will be determined by their age at the date a visa becomes available to them minus the number of days that the Employment-Based immigration petition was pending. Furthermore, these children must file for permanent resident status within one year of such availability. For a clearer illustration of this rule, please see the different scenarios below.
Example 1
The Labor Certification application that was submitted on John's behalf on January 1, 2000 was later approved on December 31, 2000. Afterwards, his employer submits an I-140 (EB-2) immigration petition on John's behalf on January 1, 2002. At that time, John's son, Junior, is 20 years and 7 months old. John's I-140 petition was pending for six months and was approved on July 1, 2002, one month after Junior turns 21 years of age. The visa number for EB-2 was available for John on July 1, 2002. Under the old law without the Child Status Protection Act, Junior has aged out because he is now 21 years old. However, under the new law, his age is fixed as of the date that a visa number becomes available minus the number of days that the I-140 was pending. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, these six months must be subtracted from Junior's age at the time the visa number became available on July 1, 2002. Subtracting six months from Junior's age of 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, Junior's age is fixed at 20 years and 7 months. Thus, even though he was already 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, he is still considered a "child" for purposes of accompanying his parents in adjusting his status to permanent residence. However, Junior has to file his I-485 within one year from the date of I-140 approval, that is before July 1, 2003. The length of time that is takes the USCIS to adjudicate Junior's case is no longer important in these cases.
According to "Child Status Protection Act", if through the above calculation, the child's age is fixed at 21 or older, the child would be automatically reclassified to an appropriate category and retains the principal beneficiary's original priority date. Please see the next example below.
Example 2
Same facts as above except that Junior is 21 years and seven months old at the time of John's I-140 approval. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, Junior's age will be fixed at 21 years and one month. Even with the Child Status Protection Act, Junior still ages out and may not adjust his status at this time. However, he will automatically be reclassified to an appropriate category, family-based 2B, and retain his father's original priority date, January 1, 2000, which is the date John's employer filed John's Labor Certification application.
Example 3
Richard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. Richard's son, Simon, is 21 years and one month old. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Richard filed his I-485 because the visa number was currently available for Richard at that time. However, Simon cannot file his I-485 with his father because he aged out.
Example 4
Howard's daughter, Rachel, is 20 years and 10 months old. Howard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Howard and Rachel filed their I-485 since the visa number was available for Howard at that time. Thus, according to the "Child Status Protection Act," no matter how much time Howard's I-140 is pending, Rachel will not age out.
Visa numbers are currently available to all EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. Thus, with the new Concurrent Filing rule, any person who is a beneficiary (or applicant) of an I-140 petition that has already been filed or is filing the I-140 at this time is now eligible to file the I-485 application as well. Family members will be eligible to file the I-485 along with the principal alien. However, since the Concurrent Filing rule became effective, visa numbers may become unavailable in the future because more eligible aliens will be filing their I-485. Thus, eligible aliens with aging-out children should file their I-485 as soon as possible. Please see next example.
Example 5
Jenny filed her I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 10, 2002. Jenny has a son, Benny, who is 20 years and eleven months old. However, due to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, many aliens have filed their I-140 and I-485 together and the visa number for EB-2 has been exhausted. However, the visa number will not be current until December 2002 when Benny will be 21 years and three months old. If Jenny's I-140 is pending for six months and will be approved in February 2003, these six months will be reduced from Benny's age in December 2002 when he is 21 years and three months old. Thus, his age is fixed as 20 years nine months. However, if Jenny's I-140 petition is pending for only two months and will be approved in October 2002, Benny's age will be fixed as 21 years and one month. Thus, Benny ages out in this scenario and must wait until his priority date under family-based 2B immigration becomes current.
Example 6
Jason filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on June 30, 2002. Jason has a son, Ken, who is 20 years and ten months old at that time. According to the visa bulletin, an immigration visa number became available for Jason on July 31, 2002. Ken was 20 years and eleven months on July 31, and he is not in the U.S. but in his home country. Because of the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule Jason filed his I-485 on August 10, 2002. If Jason's I-140 is pending for 6 months until December 31, 2002, one month pending period from June 30 to July 31, 2002 should be subtracted from Ken's age on July 31, 2002. Thus, Ken's age is fixed as 20 years and 10 months. Ken may apply for his immigrant visa through Consular Processing at U.S. Consulate in his home country within one year from July 31, 2002.
For more information about "Age Out", please click the following topics:
What is "Age Out"
Child Status Protection Act
If you are a USC, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
If you are an LPR or will be an LPR, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
Age Out Problems in Employment-Based Immigration
Age Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "CSPA"
Child of Asylee and Refugee
Unmarried Sons or Daughters of Naturalized Citizens
Effective Date of the CSPA
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
Age-Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "Child Status Protection Act"
The "Child Status Protection Act", effective August 6, 2002, addresses the problems of minor children losing their eligibility for certain immigration benefits as a result of INS (now USCIS) processing delays. Prior to the passage of this law, a child's eligibility in Employment-Based Immigration situations to be part of his or her parent's application as a derivative beneficiary was based on the child's age at the time that the child's I-485 was adjudicated. Because of enormous backlogs and processing delays, many children turned 21 before the their I-485 applications were adjudicated. In such cases, the children "age-out" and are no longer considered to be part of the parent's application and lose their eligibility to obtain green cards as a derivative beneficiary.
Children who otherwise would have aged out may successfully adjust their status through the additional interplay of the new Concurrent Filing rule and the "Child Status Protection Act." According to the "Child Status Protection Act," the eligibility of these aging-out children will be determined by their age at the date a visa becomes available to them minus the number of days that the Employment-Based immigration petition was pending. Furthermore, these children must file for permanent resident status within one year of such availability. For a clearer illustration of this rule, please see the different scenarios below.
Example 1
The Labor Certification application that was submitted on John's behalf on January 1, 2000 was later approved on December 31, 2000. Afterwards, his employer submits an I-140 (EB-2) immigration petition on John's behalf on January 1, 2002. At that time, John's son, Junior, is 20 years and 7 months old. John's I-140 petition was pending for six months and was approved on July 1, 2002, one month after Junior turns 21 years of age. The visa number for EB-2 was available for John on July 1, 2002. Under the old law without the Child Status Protection Act, Junior has aged out because he is now 21 years old. However, under the new law, his age is fixed as of the date that a visa number becomes available minus the number of days that the I-140 was pending. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, these six months must be subtracted from Junior's age at the time the visa number became available on July 1, 2002. Subtracting six months from Junior's age of 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, Junior's age is fixed at 20 years and 7 months. Thus, even though he was already 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, he is still considered a "child" for purposes of accompanying his parents in adjusting his status to permanent residence. However, Junior has to file his I-485 within one year from the date of I-140 approval, that is before July 1, 2003. The length of time that is takes the USCIS to adjudicate Junior's case is no longer important in these cases.
According to "Child Status Protection Act", if through the above calculation, the child's age is fixed at 21 or older, the child would be automatically reclassified to an appropriate category and retains the principal beneficiary's original priority date. Please see the next example below.
Example 2
Same facts as above except that Junior is 21 years and seven months old at the time of John's I-140 approval. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, Junior's age will be fixed at 21 years and one month. Even with the Child Status Protection Act, Junior still ages out and may not adjust his status at this time. However, he will automatically be reclassified to an appropriate category, family-based 2B, and retain his father's original priority date, January 1, 2000, which is the date John's employer filed John's Labor Certification application.
Example 3
Richard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. Richard's son, Simon, is 21 years and one month old. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Richard filed his I-485 because the visa number was currently available for Richard at that time. However, Simon cannot file his I-485 with his father because he aged out.
Example 4
Howard's daughter, Rachel, is 20 years and 10 months old. Howard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Howard and Rachel filed their I-485 since the visa number was available for Howard at that time. Thus, according to the "Child Status Protection Act," no matter how much time Howard's I-140 is pending, Rachel will not age out.
Visa numbers are currently available to all EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. Thus, with the new Concurrent Filing rule, any person who is a beneficiary (or applicant) of an I-140 petition that has already been filed or is filing the I-140 at this time is now eligible to file the I-485 application as well. Family members will be eligible to file the I-485 along with the principal alien. However, since the Concurrent Filing rule became effective, visa numbers may become unavailable in the future because more eligible aliens will be filing their I-485. Thus, eligible aliens with aging-out children should file their I-485 as soon as possible. Please see next example.
Example 5
Jenny filed her I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 10, 2002. Jenny has a son, Benny, who is 20 years and eleven months old. However, due to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, many aliens have filed their I-140 and I-485 together and the visa number for EB-2 has been exhausted. However, the visa number will not be current until December 2002 when Benny will be 21 years and three months old. If Jenny's I-140 is pending for six months and will be approved in February 2003, these six months will be reduced from Benny's age in December 2002 when he is 21 years and three months old. Thus, his age is fixed as 20 years nine months. However, if Jenny's I-140 petition is pending for only two months and will be approved in October 2002, Benny's age will be fixed as 21 years and one month. Thus, Benny ages out in this scenario and must wait until his priority date under family-based 2B immigration becomes current.
Example 6
Jason filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on June 30, 2002. Jason has a son, Ken, who is 20 years and ten months old at that time. According to the visa bulletin, an immigration visa number became available for Jason on July 31, 2002. Ken was 20 years and eleven months on July 31, and he is not in the U.S. but in his home country. Because of the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule Jason filed his I-485 on August 10, 2002. If Jason's I-140 is pending for 6 months until December 31, 2002, one month pending period from June 30 to July 31, 2002 should be subtracted from Ken's age on July 31, 2002. Thus, Ken's age is fixed as 20 years and 10 months. Ken may apply for his immigrant visa through Consular Processing at U.S. Consulate in his home country within one year from July 31, 2002.
For more information about "Age Out", please click the following topics:
What is "Age Out"
Child Status Protection Act
If you are a USC, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
If you are an LPR or will be an LPR, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
Age Out Problems in Employment-Based Immigration
Age Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "CSPA"
Child of Asylee and Refugee
Unmarried Sons or Daughters of Naturalized Citizens
Effective Date of the CSPA
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
2011 scene hairstyles for girls
bskrishna
06-10 11:36 AM
So July visa bulletin is out ... we will see comments with frustation and appeals to fight for the cause ... however, this is a prediction thread, so my prediction is that by next week, all affected people will accept the reality and will move on with their life waiting for August visa bulletin or for the next year quota. My purpose is not to offend anyone, but this is just the observation we all had in the past, so why this time around its going to be any different?
Now as far as those three bills are concerned ... at times I feel that they are just pacifiers to amuse the crying babies. We all can see that immigration related bill (fashion models, regional investors etc) are getting passed, but not the one's that we really want. Therefore hearings in the sub-committie and than in full hearings will go on till August, and afterwards presidential election will be the focus ... immigration reforms will take a back seat. New administration in 2009 will have more immediate priorities to fix the economy, war, etc. Immigration will eventually appear on the radar, but only after some time.
So only movement I can see in near future is EB3 to EB2 conversion. That's OK too. because everyone has a right to straddle the lanes. Out of that stampede, some will get approved, some will get rejected, and will create more mess in the system. But that's inevitable ... and if a mass transition happens, USCIS will have no other option to bring in yet another rule to make their life easy, we all can guess ... what that may be ... I think this is one of the reasons why USCIS does not allow 140 premium processing anymore. Now those who are hopefull for EB2, my message is that USCIS can very easily justify visa wastage this year because of the extra load they got from Citizenship applications. Personally, I do not have much hope of USCIS working efficiently.
I am not trying to spread pessimism, but just giving my predictions. We all need to think hard, as to how can we come out of this mess. Flower campaign worked once, but doesn't mean that its gonna be effective again and again.
Fashion models and Sport personnel and EB-5 folks are few in numbers and will go unnoticed by their constituents. Other EB categories are comparatively huge. So I suppose that congress is treading carefully. If the bills does not go though the subcommittee and full ones, opponents will debate that the bill was sneaked in or piggy backed or pushed through. Hopefully something will emerge before the presidential elections. Lets not loose hope and try our best. Anything after the elections will be bound to be bogged down by CIR...
Now as far as those three bills are concerned ... at times I feel that they are just pacifiers to amuse the crying babies. We all can see that immigration related bill (fashion models, regional investors etc) are getting passed, but not the one's that we really want. Therefore hearings in the sub-committie and than in full hearings will go on till August, and afterwards presidential election will be the focus ... immigration reforms will take a back seat. New administration in 2009 will have more immediate priorities to fix the economy, war, etc. Immigration will eventually appear on the radar, but only after some time.
So only movement I can see in near future is EB3 to EB2 conversion. That's OK too. because everyone has a right to straddle the lanes. Out of that stampede, some will get approved, some will get rejected, and will create more mess in the system. But that's inevitable ... and if a mass transition happens, USCIS will have no other option to bring in yet another rule to make their life easy, we all can guess ... what that may be ... I think this is one of the reasons why USCIS does not allow 140 premium processing anymore. Now those who are hopefull for EB2, my message is that USCIS can very easily justify visa wastage this year because of the extra load they got from Citizenship applications. Personally, I do not have much hope of USCIS working efficiently.
I am not trying to spread pessimism, but just giving my predictions. We all need to think hard, as to how can we come out of this mess. Flower campaign worked once, but doesn't mean that its gonna be effective again and again.
Fashion models and Sport personnel and EB-5 folks are few in numbers and will go unnoticed by their constituents. Other EB categories are comparatively huge. So I suppose that congress is treading carefully. If the bills does not go though the subcommittee and full ones, opponents will debate that the bill was sneaked in or piggy backed or pushed through. Hopefully something will emerge before the presidential elections. Lets not loose hope and try our best. Anything after the elections will be bound to be bogged down by CIR...
more...
garika
07-20 09:12 AM
Voting seems to be on political lines. Democrats probably didn't want to yield any ground because of their dear CIR failure. We need a targeted campaign (strategy) on the Democrats - Hillary spoke very favourably to the Indian student community recently about H-1B and immigrant visas but her vote is not in line with her statements
ita
08-26 02:46 PM
I have home loan with Standard Chartered. Got the variable interest loan from them in 2004. One thing I liked is I did not have to goto India for the loan processing!
My brother sent related documents here in US and I signed, got few of those notarised and sent them back. It took about a month for the complete process.
They do charge about Rs. 350 for prepayment though. Otherwise overall I am happy with the service they provided.
I just called the Standard Chartered bank's NY office. The operator told me they don't have anyone to answer any questions regarding home loans as they don't do it. Did you contact Indian office for all your questions or did your brother do all the research and sent you the paperwork? Appreciate your response.
Thank you.
My brother sent related documents here in US and I signed, got few of those notarised and sent them back. It took about a month for the complete process.
They do charge about Rs. 350 for prepayment though. Otherwise overall I am happy with the service they provided.
I just called the Standard Chartered bank's NY office. The operator told me they don't have anyone to answer any questions regarding home loans as they don't do it. Did you contact Indian office for all your questions or did your brother do all the research and sent you the paperwork? Appreciate your response.
Thank you.
more...
saimrathi
07-05 01:18 PM
Please send the contact info, I will call them too.. Iam from PA also..
Finally spoke to my congressman's Immigration contact in Bucks County PA.
He sounded supportive and said he will investigate the matter. I am going to call my state senators Sen Specter and Sen Casey's office as well.
People in PA, unite and call these lawmakers.
Finally spoke to my congressman's Immigration contact in Bucks County PA.
He sounded supportive and said he will investigate the matter. I am going to call my state senators Sen Specter and Sen Casey's office as well.
People in PA, unite and call these lawmakers.
2010 mix color scene hairstyle for
jonty_11
07-06 01:05 PM
He is a excellent lawyer it seems , may be i'll hire him ...
What is his name , is he/she a AILA member ?
Wahtever this may be..lets hope this is also not a rumor like the VB July Fiasco turned out not to be a rumor.
What is his name , is he/she a AILA member ?
Wahtever this may be..lets hope this is also not a rumor like the VB July Fiasco turned out not to be a rumor.
more...
conundrum
03-12 12:05 PM
I am not sure whether it helps to have a donor's only club
IV should be open to anyone and everyone.
My question is what stops a donor from posting stuff in the Donors only forum in the open forum? Is IV going to ban them? What is IV planning on doing if it posted on another forum?
IMHO by creating a donors only forum IV is creating more divisions and problems than it can handle. There is already enough division in the legal immigrant community in IV and one more is definitely not going to help anyone. By all means designate someone as a donor but a seperate forum........
It is very easy to contradict or find errors.
No body is getting paid here to have a tester test it.
Yes I like the idea of donor for paid members. There are 31000 members not even 2500 members are contributing. This is one way of making them pay for the services or the info you get from the forum.
IV should be open to anyone and everyone.
My question is what stops a donor from posting stuff in the Donors only forum in the open forum? Is IV going to ban them? What is IV planning on doing if it posted on another forum?
IMHO by creating a donors only forum IV is creating more divisions and problems than it can handle. There is already enough division in the legal immigrant community in IV and one more is definitely not going to help anyone. By all means designate someone as a donor but a seperate forum........
It is very easy to contradict or find errors.
No body is getting paid here to have a tester test it.
Yes I like the idea of donor for paid members. There are 31000 members not even 2500 members are contributing. This is one way of making them pay for the services or the info you get from the forum.
hair Cute Girl Emo Scene Haircuts
vin13
03-12 03:20 PM
With all due respect to the selfless hard work of IV core, I concur with ItIsNotFunny. There are many members who feel this way. IV core should be more open to members. I feel a cloud of secrecy always surrounding IV. Of course they cannot be public about all their activities, but more needs to be done on this front. You will see more members actively participating if core is more open.
I totally agree to this. Everytime i try to bring this point across all that is being asked is go contribue some money. I have contributed money before and i will contribute lot more if i know what it is getting used for.
There are several of my friends who are not actively looking at IV site. I am sure they will contribute money if they know the initiative IV is currently working on.
I totally agree to this. Everytime i try to bring this point across all that is being asked is go contribue some money. I have contributed money before and i will contribute lot more if i know what it is getting used for.
There are several of my friends who are not actively looking at IV site. I am sure they will contribute money if they know the initiative IV is currently working on.
more...
pointlesswait
04-30 03:53 PM
for many its one and the same..delay in GC
i think nothing will ever happen for GC backlogs in near future..
allowing X-number of immigrants is based on a social vision of US!
Too many from one coutnry will dilute that notion of melting pot and make it too much of "sambar" or "wonton soup"....like londonisthan..americans are not so dumb as those brits!!1
The wait is deliberate and will be that way..like it or not!
these debaters are like laloo prasads of india..talk away to oblivion..
:cool:
lobbying is gorafied version of desi corruption : its only the packaging thats different!;-)
Yes, it appears people on this forum are still confused about backlogs due to unavailable visa numbers and backlog due to CIS having too many 485s to process.
They are 2 different things.
i think nothing will ever happen for GC backlogs in near future..
allowing X-number of immigrants is based on a social vision of US!
Too many from one coutnry will dilute that notion of melting pot and make it too much of "sambar" or "wonton soup"....like londonisthan..americans are not so dumb as those brits!!1
The wait is deliberate and will be that way..like it or not!
these debaters are like laloo prasads of india..talk away to oblivion..
:cool:
lobbying is gorafied version of desi corruption : its only the packaging thats different!;-)
Yes, it appears people on this forum are still confused about backlogs due to unavailable visa numbers and backlog due to CIS having too many 485s to process.
They are 2 different things.
hot that nice scene hairstyle.
bp333
03-04 06:31 PM
You can check status of your case on line:
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/index.jsp
It will show you "Last Updated Date". Soft LUD means status of case is not changed but they updated LUD, virtually means they touched your file.
Appreciate your prompt response.
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/index.jsp
It will show you "Last Updated Date". Soft LUD means status of case is not changed but they updated LUD, virtually means they touched your file.
Appreciate your prompt response.
more...
house scene kids hairstyles
optimystic
09-10 09:36 PM
HR 5882 has the answer for the FIFO problem.
USCIS is pretty good with approving cased based on PD for 3/4th of the year and in the last quarter they for the "Hail mary" play and DOS gives a wide PD range during the last quarter for USCIS to play. Apart from recapturing wasted visa's HR 5882 also has an automatic recapture provision to avoid any future visa wastage. If this provision is in place then UCSIS/DOS will not be in a position to playing the "some how use up visa by sep 31" card to approve random cases.
Rather than focusing on HR 5882 many are still pondering about LUD's and sill day dreaming. The demand for visa's is much higher than the supply of visa's, it doesn't matter what new spillover policy USCIS adopts, it can only provide incremental improvements. For a quantum improvment in the situation we need a legislation and HR 5882 is the best option we have now.
Good points.
However ...
How many visa numbers will get recaptured if 5882 gets approval and how soon (within this FY09 ? )
How many pending applications are there?
How many new ones accumulating every year?
Are there enough recaptured visas to cover all?
Agreed that with more visa numbers, and no potential threat to wastage of visa numbers, USCIS has no incentive nor tricky cards to play to justify their random approval bursts.....but will that be enough to prevent them from doing so, just because they can? I mean this is USCIS we are talking about.....Even with laws/memos/rules already in place, they are violating them left and right....
Whats to say that they won't try to reassure people that they don't have to worry about out of order processing because
- there are enough visa numbers for all.
- Though people may see delays, they will eventually all get their GCs
- Its faster and easier if they just grab the first box that is on the top of the pile, and approve cases from there rather than spending very limited resources they have to try to dig thru the boxes to find the cases with oldest PD.
- It will just be a minor inconveneince to the applicants...Their waiting times would drastically reduce from several years to only couple of years.
Would that be acceptable to us then?
If they say every body will be current, with free job movement due to EADs, and every body will get GC within 2-3 years absolutely. PERIOD. Just no gaurantees of FIFO processing. --- Would that be acceptable to us then?
USCIS is pretty good with approving cased based on PD for 3/4th of the year and in the last quarter they for the "Hail mary" play and DOS gives a wide PD range during the last quarter for USCIS to play. Apart from recapturing wasted visa's HR 5882 also has an automatic recapture provision to avoid any future visa wastage. If this provision is in place then UCSIS/DOS will not be in a position to playing the "some how use up visa by sep 31" card to approve random cases.
Rather than focusing on HR 5882 many are still pondering about LUD's and sill day dreaming. The demand for visa's is much higher than the supply of visa's, it doesn't matter what new spillover policy USCIS adopts, it can only provide incremental improvements. For a quantum improvment in the situation we need a legislation and HR 5882 is the best option we have now.
Good points.
However ...
How many visa numbers will get recaptured if 5882 gets approval and how soon (within this FY09 ? )
How many pending applications are there?
How many new ones accumulating every year?
Are there enough recaptured visas to cover all?
Agreed that with more visa numbers, and no potential threat to wastage of visa numbers, USCIS has no incentive nor tricky cards to play to justify their random approval bursts.....but will that be enough to prevent them from doing so, just because they can? I mean this is USCIS we are talking about.....Even with laws/memos/rules already in place, they are violating them left and right....
Whats to say that they won't try to reassure people that they don't have to worry about out of order processing because
- there are enough visa numbers for all.
- Though people may see delays, they will eventually all get their GCs
- Its faster and easier if they just grab the first box that is on the top of the pile, and approve cases from there rather than spending very limited resources they have to try to dig thru the boxes to find the cases with oldest PD.
- It will just be a minor inconveneince to the applicants...Their waiting times would drastically reduce from several years to only couple of years.
Would that be acceptable to us then?
If they say every body will be current, with free job movement due to EADs, and every body will get GC within 2-3 years absolutely. PERIOD. Just no gaurantees of FIFO processing. --- Would that be acceptable to us then?
tattoo emo hairstyles boy. Scene
needhelp!
09-11 12:57 PM
1, mamthavijai, theMan, lccleared, GC2015
more...
pictures scene kids hairstyles:
santb1975
06-06 03:47 PM
We need to do this
dresses house scene boy hairstyle.
hpandey
08-13 04:24 PM
EB3 can only be helped when every one else is done.The way the preference categories are setup is that and the numerous cases from 2001 amnesty flooded the EB3 queue causing the retrogression. I don't suppose there can be any thing done to help EB3 specifically. We are at the bottom of the pile. If we have to be helped to get up, every one on top needs to be helped first.
Unless the visa recapture happens, there is no hope. Folks with 2001/2002 PD , keep your spirits up. You are almost there.
All others, if you can try EB2 porting, that's the way to go.
---
EB3-I , May 2006
Contributed 100$
EB-3 won't need help when everyone else is done because the only people left to allocate visas would be EB-3 only . I guess we are just in for a long long wait.
Unless the visa recapture happens, there is no hope. Folks with 2001/2002 PD , keep your spirits up. You are almost there.
All others, if you can try EB2 porting, that's the way to go.
---
EB3-I , May 2006
Contributed 100$
EB-3 won't need help when everyone else is done because the only people left to allocate visas would be EB-3 only . I guess we are just in for a long long wait.
more...
makeup Scene Kids Hairstyles
amitjoey
07-13 04:33 PM
In the past, we have sent emails and webfaxes to senators only to get canned- pre typed responses. Recently, I have realised that senators favour written letters, posted (with postage stamp) especially if it comes from constituents from their state. Same with house reps. I have talked to my senator's staff and they have advised me to write a letter. The staff member said, letters are always read, and responded.
Senator will send an inquiry to the appropriate agency. This will create an impact, if all of us write letters. I have written a letter about USCIS Visa- flip flop to my senators.
Senator will send an inquiry to the appropriate agency. This will create an impact, if all of us write letters. I have written a letter about USCIS Visa- flip flop to my senators.
girlfriend scene kids. pictures oy
ksrk
09-10 12:04 PM
They most of the approvals are of US Master degree and above as it is straight fwd EB2 no need to verify skill set etc..
While I can't speak for all cases out there, I can speak for myself and a few of my friends...Master's degree from US universities - CHECK, green card - NOT YET! (the wait continues).
While I can't speak for all cases out there, I can speak for myself and a few of my friends...Master's degree from US universities - CHECK, green card - NOT YET! (the wait continues).
hairstyles Long Emo Girl Hairstyle
sri1309
09-10 05:31 PM
Guys,
Now that the delay happened, lets ask for Citizenship, . We waited 10 years, played by the rules. And we have seen the drama for the last 3-4 years. So why do you want to do these calculations, spillovers etc. We must ask our fair share,,
Think,
Sri..
Now that the delay happened, lets ask for Citizenship, . We waited 10 years, played by the rules. And we have seen the drama for the last 3-4 years. So why do you want to do these calculations, spillovers etc. We must ask our fair share,,
Think,
Sri..
roorry
07-20 11:18 AM
Anybody have a link to the text of amendment. Are we sure, it had any text related to us ?
I guess this link provides the context of the ammendment...
http://cornyn.senate.gov/index.asp?f=record&lid=1&rid=237544
I guess this link provides the context of the ammendment...
http://cornyn.senate.gov/index.asp?f=record&lid=1&rid=237544
jay
07-07 12:40 AM
Can Patton Boggs do better? Haven't we had more legislative success, I mean traction, when we partnered with Quinn Gillespie? Are we receiving sound advice on which of our grievances require legislative action and which ones can be redressed by a mere change in policy on the part of the executive? It looks like most of our current problems were not ushered in by any new law, but rather by a stroke of a pen in a memo by the incompetent and indifferent INS, USCIS, DOL and the State Department. No change in law was needed to make then deny us concurrent filing in Oct 2005 and allow it in July 2007. No change in law was required to deny us visa revalidation. One could argue that no change in law is required to belatedly use unused visas from the previous years. The list goes on. It should be easier to lobby a handful of buffoons in the executive branch with real power than 500+ buffoons on Capitol Hill. Has Patton Boggs served us well?
No comments:
Post a Comment