wanna_immigrate
06-13 12:59 PM
Looks like CIR will be back
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/4886286.html
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/4886286.html
wallpaper funny quotes about oys being
reddog
04-08 11:19 AM
Pending clearance on rumors, if POE called employer, it is likely that employer(s) may answer about US Citzen hiring to yes, but it is very "generic". The "generic" information my be mis using by POE either intentional or unintentional . It is better off giving heads up to company HR department about these enquiries (if they are not rumors) and brainstrom them about procedure and time lines to hire US citizen and impact on business if non immigration is not available immediately. Otherwise, employer may say yes to hire US citizen "in general".
The 'head up' part is a good suggestion. However, if this rumor has any substance, it is highly unjust. And we trying to get around these unjust practices can only make matters worse.
Tomorrow, media can pick up this story saying, the IO did call the companys HR, in the middle of the night and the HR said it needed the H1B guy, whose papers were filed on a job requirement 2 years back. And some poiclitical nut on a news channel might promote it as a 'employer-employee' nexus.
Said that, lets believe that this might have happened, where a IO could have called the company and the company could have said something adverse to the non-immigrants status. But he being deported for that? Unless there was something else involved, the matter would defintely be with some immigration lawyer in the country.
On the IV side, core has already taken an initiative on helping people facing these unjust difficulties (extremely appreciable task).
Core should make it a permanent red-lettered sticky on the front page for people in a EB based immigration limbo to seek help.
The 'head up' part is a good suggestion. However, if this rumor has any substance, it is highly unjust. And we trying to get around these unjust practices can only make matters worse.
Tomorrow, media can pick up this story saying, the IO did call the companys HR, in the middle of the night and the HR said it needed the H1B guy, whose papers were filed on a job requirement 2 years back. And some poiclitical nut on a news channel might promote it as a 'employer-employee' nexus.
Said that, lets believe that this might have happened, where a IO could have called the company and the company could have said something adverse to the non-immigrants status. But he being deported for that? Unless there was something else involved, the matter would defintely be with some immigration lawyer in the country.
On the IV side, core has already taken an initiative on helping people facing these unjust difficulties (extremely appreciable task).
Core should make it a permanent red-lettered sticky on the front page for people in a EB based immigration limbo to seek help.
nk2006
04-03 05:56 PM
?? A new bill in senate to reform H1B ???
I was just watching LuDobb's show on CNN and saw a clip on a proposed bill (being prepared by Sen.Durbin and another whose name I forgot) to revamp/reform H1B program. From the brief discussion, got the impression that the bill is more concentrated on controlling the h1B program with more checks and rules etc. Obviously Dobbs liked it - not sure if there are any other measures in that bill. Also not sure why another bill if CIR/STRIVE act is in works which is supposed to cover all immigration issues. Anyone else saw any related news elsewhere?
Also saw this article (sorry if its already discussed somewhere):
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/03/HNsenateh1bbill_1.html
I was just watching LuDobb's show on CNN and saw a clip on a proposed bill (being prepared by Sen.Durbin and another whose name I forgot) to revamp/reform H1B program. From the brief discussion, got the impression that the bill is more concentrated on controlling the h1B program with more checks and rules etc. Obviously Dobbs liked it - not sure if there are any other measures in that bill. Also not sure why another bill if CIR/STRIVE act is in works which is supposed to cover all immigration issues. Anyone else saw any related news elsewhere?
Also saw this article (sorry if its already discussed somewhere):
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/03/HNsenateh1bbill_1.html
2011 funny quotes about men being
mpillai
05-08 10:04 AM
I feel your pain, But, what was the point of firing same requests to USCIS from thousands of users? Wont that cause more delay for some other FOIA requests? FOIA requests are required to be responded by law, so you are guaranteed a reply even if only 1 user files the request.
I got a reply from USCIS saying that they can process the request sorted by priority date and country of birth of the applicant.
I got a reply from USCIS saying that they can process the request sorted by priority date and country of birth of the applicant.
more...
va_dude
08-21 10:08 AM
Uscis has done nothing wrong.
This person who posted the new thread seems to have come in to the country without even a passport. How is that legal?
How in the world can we expect Uscis to overlook all that? Don't criticize uscis for doing their job right (for once) :)
This person who posted the new thread seems to have come in to the country without even a passport. How is that legal?
How in the world can we expect Uscis to overlook all that? Don't criticize uscis for doing their job right (for once) :)
Aah_GC
12-12 03:01 PM
Great point -- never thought of it this way before.
addsf345, you are attacking people. Grow up and quit doing that. Attack my views if you want to attack. No one has answered my question yet - If we are so "highly skilled", why no one is listening to us in this country. Kavita, I do not know about your field but in my field, IT, I see so many people, wanting to live in this country at any cost. They would work for any salary, they are OK to get relocated 6 times in a year, they would put up with any BS imposed by desi employers, but they would never go back. Now, I do not think they are "required" here. They are fighting to survive here. Again, nothing wrong in fighting to survive but to say that I am "required" here is a bit far from reality. If they (so called required population fighting for green card) leave tomorrow, nothing will change.
America wants us as a temporary worker, with emphasis on the word temporary. America has no incentive to give us Green Cards. You work for 6 years, pay social security and Medicare and then pack up your bag and go back. Thank you very much, we appreciate your business. Don't you see it written on the wall? Especially those who are in EB3-I category? I can see it!
Is country quota in EB category justified? Hell No. But you know what - if you remove that then entire EB system would be high jacked by Indians, just like they have high jacked H1-B and L-1 visa category. So much so that IMHO H1-B visa has lost its sole purpose. It was designed to give American companies the ability to hire talented people from other countries. It wasn't designed for Desi employers to hire desi consultants and then make those desi consultants run coast to coast looking for projects. Infosys and Satyam can open up shops on US soil and can call themselves American companies but you and I both know the fact, how American those companies are! So, being in EB3-I category, and after living here for almost 8 years on temporary visa, I can feel the pain, but in some part we are also responsible for this mess.
Once again, only grown ups are requested to reply. Thank you.
addsf345, you are attacking people. Grow up and quit doing that. Attack my views if you want to attack. No one has answered my question yet - If we are so "highly skilled", why no one is listening to us in this country. Kavita, I do not know about your field but in my field, IT, I see so many people, wanting to live in this country at any cost. They would work for any salary, they are OK to get relocated 6 times in a year, they would put up with any BS imposed by desi employers, but they would never go back. Now, I do not think they are "required" here. They are fighting to survive here. Again, nothing wrong in fighting to survive but to say that I am "required" here is a bit far from reality. If they (so called required population fighting for green card) leave tomorrow, nothing will change.
America wants us as a temporary worker, with emphasis on the word temporary. America has no incentive to give us Green Cards. You work for 6 years, pay social security and Medicare and then pack up your bag and go back. Thank you very much, we appreciate your business. Don't you see it written on the wall? Especially those who are in EB3-I category? I can see it!
Is country quota in EB category justified? Hell No. But you know what - if you remove that then entire EB system would be high jacked by Indians, just like they have high jacked H1-B and L-1 visa category. So much so that IMHO H1-B visa has lost its sole purpose. It was designed to give American companies the ability to hire talented people from other countries. It wasn't designed for Desi employers to hire desi consultants and then make those desi consultants run coast to coast looking for projects. Infosys and Satyam can open up shops on US soil and can call themselves American companies but you and I both know the fact, how American those companies are! So, being in EB3-I category, and after living here for almost 8 years on temporary visa, I can feel the pain, but in some part we are also responsible for this mess.
Once again, only grown ups are requested to reply. Thank you.
more...
amsgc
02-05 09:24 PM
It is very important that we point this out to Lawmakers/public when they begin drafting the CIR.
Big question:
Why not put a country cap on the CIR for all undocumented?
What are the reasons for not doing that?
Lawmakers give a rationale of diversity as the reason for country caps. Why is the reason for diversity not relevant for undocumented? I am sure there are undocumented from all countries and not just one country?
Big question:
Why not put a country cap on the CIR for all undocumented?
What are the reasons for not doing that?
Lawmakers give a rationale of diversity as the reason for country caps. Why is the reason for diversity not relevant for undocumented? I am sure there are undocumented from all countries and not just one country?
2010 cool quotes on oys. cool
natrajs
07-11 10:49 PM
You are absolutely right dude :)
All (whose PD will be current) the Eb2 India folks try your luckkkkkkkkkkkkk..
Even after your PD becomes current you are still at the mercy of the IO and RD, ND and all the odd's
Its like Mega Million or Power ball lotto. I don't trust USCIS/DOS until I have the GC plastic in my hand.
In mean while we have to focus on the legislative efforts, Especially for EB3-I with out that it will be very hard.
So folks be active and get involved in IV's effort
All (whose PD will be current) the Eb2 India folks try your luckkkkkkkkkkkkk..
Even after your PD becomes current you are still at the mercy of the IO and RD, ND and all the odd's
Its like Mega Million or Power ball lotto. I don't trust USCIS/DOS until I have the GC plastic in my hand.
In mean while we have to focus on the legislative efforts, Especially for EB3-I with out that it will be very hard.
So folks be active and get involved in IV's effort
more...
abhijitp
07-23 08:07 PM
Employer is happy to give
I wonder if not providing the emlpoyment letter helps ensure that you cannot switch jobs easily using AC-21? I hope I am wrong. Experts please opine.
I wonder if not providing the emlpoyment letter helps ensure that you cannot switch jobs easily using AC-21? I hope I am wrong. Experts please opine.
hair funny quotes about oys. funny
rajuseattle
07-14 05:31 PM
ajthakur,
You should have wait for at least 6 months before switching jobs.
You can talk to the attorney who can give you some advice on AC-21.
Per Ac-21 provisions you r very safe if you switch jobs after 180 days, even without letting USCIS know about it. Yours is a different situation as you switched job just 1 month after filing I-485, and it could be difficult for any attorney to make AC-21 arguments in your favour.
Your best bet if USCIS let you do the AC-21 switching and use the employment letter from the new EMployer who is sponsoring your H1B visa, if u dont respond to this RFE they may very well deny your I-485, remember the I-485 is dependent for at least 180 days on the underlying I-140 petition filed by the GC sponsoring employer, after 180 days you are free to take new job position in the similar field with same salary mentioned in your approved LC or salary greater than the one on aprroved LC.
Please cosult with a competent immigration attorney and try to make argument using the AC-21...thats your last hope to save your PD.
USCIS will know about your job switching as they have all the information when you transfer your H1B visa and received 3 yr extention. Be truthful here and state that you intent to be employed with the original sponsor, but due to circumstances you were forced to switch the job and your new employer is willing to sponsor your employment and you are in legal status while I-485 is pending since July 2007.
Hope this helps...I am not an attorney, but thought my few cents might help you.
You should have wait for at least 6 months before switching jobs.
You can talk to the attorney who can give you some advice on AC-21.
Per Ac-21 provisions you r very safe if you switch jobs after 180 days, even without letting USCIS know about it. Yours is a different situation as you switched job just 1 month after filing I-485, and it could be difficult for any attorney to make AC-21 arguments in your favour.
Your best bet if USCIS let you do the AC-21 switching and use the employment letter from the new EMployer who is sponsoring your H1B visa, if u dont respond to this RFE they may very well deny your I-485, remember the I-485 is dependent for at least 180 days on the underlying I-140 petition filed by the GC sponsoring employer, after 180 days you are free to take new job position in the similar field with same salary mentioned in your approved LC or salary greater than the one on aprroved LC.
Please cosult with a competent immigration attorney and try to make argument using the AC-21...thats your last hope to save your PD.
USCIS will know about your job switching as they have all the information when you transfer your H1B visa and received 3 yr extention. Be truthful here and state that you intent to be employed with the original sponsor, but due to circumstances you were forced to switch the job and your new employer is willing to sponsor your employment and you are in legal status while I-485 is pending since July 2007.
Hope this helps...I am not an attorney, but thought my few cents might help you.
more...
crazyghoda
01-30 03:17 PM
Ok now I am very very confused :confused:
Your statement mentions that the 485 does not cover out of status from last non-immigrant visa entry to 485 filing. I have always been working during that time. No issues. After filing 485, I exited and reentered twice using my H1. Last entry was in March 2008 I think. After that, I changed employers using AC21 and got my H1 transferred so I was still on an H1 status. Finally I departed the US in Dec 2008 for vacation while still on H1 status with an active job. I got laid off while I was out of the US.
Now, at that time I had a stamped H1 as well as an AP. I could have used either. However, I felt that using the H1 would be wrong as I no longer had a job with the H1 employer. So I decided to brave the secondary inspections and entered on AP. Since then I have been looking for a job.
My question is - Is the time I havent been working considered as Out of Status?
Your statement mentions that the 485 does not cover out of status from last non-immigrant visa entry to 485 filing. I have always been working during that time. No issues. After filing 485, I exited and reentered twice using my H1. Last entry was in March 2008 I think. After that, I changed employers using AC21 and got my H1 transferred so I was still on an H1 status. Finally I departed the US in Dec 2008 for vacation while still on H1 status with an active job. I got laid off while I was out of the US.
Now, at that time I had a stamped H1 as well as an AP. I could have used either. However, I felt that using the H1 would be wrong as I no longer had a job with the H1 employer. So I decided to brave the secondary inspections and entered on AP. Since then I have been looking for a job.
My question is - Is the time I havent been working considered as Out of Status?
hot cute funny quotes about oys.
deepimpact
09-11 01:39 PM
And one thing that has not got enough press here is , how the EB3-ROW has got significant overflow in the last two months though EB2- I/C are no where near current. Per common understanding , they should not get a single overflow till EB2 is current .
Street Justice ??
EB3-ROW Pending per Aug 2009 I-485 Inventory ~ 63K
The EB3-ROW Demand for October 2010 ~ 45K.
So actually backlog reduction for EB3 ROW has just been 18 K (much less than the 30K they should get). I don't see where you are seeing the overflow.
The total Pending in Aug 2009 was
EB2 ALL- 75K. EB3 all -151K . So total ~ 225K
The demand data today is EB2 = 34K(this is only I/C, no ROW demand)
Demand for EB3 = 136K.
So even though reduction in backlog is significant (225K- 170K =55K). It is not going to all categories evenly.
And unless USCIS comes up with a smarter way to determine demand data other than counting pending I-485, once this demand goes to zero they will have to advance EB2 I/C dates. Now they can be smart and advance it by 6 months to not open up floodgates and test the post 2007 demand, or just follow the rule blindly that supply > demand and the category is current. Either way, the law prevents any spillover from a category unless it is current and EB2 I/C is not getting current in 2-3 years.
I also want to believe like you that the hidden demand post 2007 for EB2I/C + EB3 ROW is as low as possible. And we won't know about the exact number till USCIS does a better job of reporting approved I-140 by country.
Street Justice ??
EB3-ROW Pending per Aug 2009 I-485 Inventory ~ 63K
The EB3-ROW Demand for October 2010 ~ 45K.
So actually backlog reduction for EB3 ROW has just been 18 K (much less than the 30K they should get). I don't see where you are seeing the overflow.
The total Pending in Aug 2009 was
EB2 ALL- 75K. EB3 all -151K . So total ~ 225K
The demand data today is EB2 = 34K(this is only I/C, no ROW demand)
Demand for EB3 = 136K.
So even though reduction in backlog is significant (225K- 170K =55K). It is not going to all categories evenly.
And unless USCIS comes up with a smarter way to determine demand data other than counting pending I-485, once this demand goes to zero they will have to advance EB2 I/C dates. Now they can be smart and advance it by 6 months to not open up floodgates and test the post 2007 demand, or just follow the rule blindly that supply > demand and the category is current. Either way, the law prevents any spillover from a category unless it is current and EB2 I/C is not getting current in 2-3 years.
I also want to believe like you that the hidden demand post 2007 for EB2I/C + EB3 ROW is as low as possible. And we won't know about the exact number till USCIS does a better job of reporting approved I-140 by country.
more...
house cool quotes on oys. cool oys
zram1977
06-08 06:08 PM
Welcome to the club, China! :D
What is the status of unused Eb1 /Eb2 visas of ROW?
Will it spill over or be wasted?
GOK
What is the status of unused Eb1 /Eb2 visas of ROW?
Will it spill over or be wasted?
GOK
tattoo funny quotes for best friends.
pappu
07-01 10:22 PM
Info on the lawsuit by AILA:
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
more...
pictures quotes about oys lying.
GCVivek
03-21 02:42 PM
UMA001,
Your case may be sad and I understand your frustration but the fact that you joined the company ONLY FOR GC is itself ILLEGAL. You should have known this was coming. There is no legal standing for them to sponsor your GC without having a job for you (needing your services) AFTER you are granted GC.
This is simply the truth!
-Vivek
Mayhemt,
Please dont talk without knowing the truth.
I joined the company only for green card, I was a consultant for them before I became full time. They told me this 'We will sponsor green card, will you become full time' I said if you do green card I will join. But they did not keep their promise. Thatis give and take. They already gained from their investment, Thats y they dont want to sponsor anymore. They do green card for what we do for 6 years not for sticking with them for 20+ years.
if I was in my company shoes , I would not take the documents, drag for 2.5 years and say 'We found candidates' . I would have either said in 6 months sorry we cant do or file green card.One need to have honesty. If I am that smart likemy employer I would ve started a company already and firing H1 guys left n right
Your case may be sad and I understand your frustration but the fact that you joined the company ONLY FOR GC is itself ILLEGAL. You should have known this was coming. There is no legal standing for them to sponsor your GC without having a job for you (needing your services) AFTER you are granted GC.
This is simply the truth!
-Vivek
Mayhemt,
Please dont talk without knowing the truth.
I joined the company only for green card, I was a consultant for them before I became full time. They told me this 'We will sponsor green card, will you become full time' I said if you do green card I will join. But they did not keep their promise. Thatis give and take. They already gained from their investment, Thats y they dont want to sponsor anymore. They do green card for what we do for 6 years not for sticking with them for 20+ years.
if I was in my company shoes , I would not take the documents, drag for 2.5 years and say 'We found candidates' . I would have either said in 6 months sorry we cant do or file green card.One need to have honesty. If I am that smart likemy employer I would ve started a company already and firing H1 guys left n right
dresses funny quotes on oys. quotes
a_yaja
01-31 02:24 PM
I believe it is also illegal to work before getting a social security number. When you are on H4 you dont have a social security number (you have an itin which is not good enough for working). You will not get a social security number unless you have work authorization (i797). H1 will start only after october 1, so you can apply for social security number only after October 1 (i.e if you have i 797), it will take you about 4 to 7 weeks to get ssn. You can work only after getting the ssn. Somebody correct me if i wrong here.
You can work without SSN provided you are authorized to work (H1, EAD, etc) and you have applied for SSN number. The usual practice is to pay for the first two pay cycles, and if you have not received your SSN by then, then the employer will withold wages till SSN arrives. I know this because when I came to the US as a student, I received my first paycheck without SSN. By the second paycheck (I was paid monthly), I had my SSN and so no issues. My roommate, on the other hand did not receive his SSN for nearly 3 1/2 months - the University paid his first two paychecks but did not handout his third. They told him that they would wait till he showed his SSN card to them. After he received his SSN card, they released his paycheck.
Bottom line is, you can work even without SSN card - and if you don't receive your card on time, at most the employer can withold pay until you show them your SSN card. But the employer has to pay you for any work done in legal status and they cannot refuse pay for the period during which your application was pending with SSA.
You can work without SSN provided you are authorized to work (H1, EAD, etc) and you have applied for SSN number. The usual practice is to pay for the first two pay cycles, and if you have not received your SSN by then, then the employer will withold wages till SSN arrives. I know this because when I came to the US as a student, I received my first paycheck without SSN. By the second paycheck (I was paid monthly), I had my SSN and so no issues. My roommate, on the other hand did not receive his SSN for nearly 3 1/2 months - the University paid his first two paychecks but did not handout his third. They told him that they would wait till he showed his SSN card to them. After he received his SSN card, they released his paycheck.
Bottom line is, you can work even without SSN card - and if you don't receive your card on time, at most the employer can withold pay until you show them your SSN card. But the employer has to pay you for any work done in legal status and they cannot refuse pay for the period during which your application was pending with SSA.
more...
makeup cute funny quotes about oys
TomPlate
10-21 11:40 AM
Obama is more a talking person. He would have given lot of information during this campaign season. But he will not execute. Everyone in the campaign said he is always on the neutral side. He is not with Yes Or No answers.
One thing I want to explain about tax decrease plan.
When the tax decreases for middle class and tax increases for upper class, then the upper class CEO and the business would like to see how they can increase their profit by not increasing the wage of a middle class.
Obama followed a non american politics giving lots and lots to public. But in reality he may sit quiet and only enjoy his benefit as a President.
If Obama elected as President, this economic mess is not going to go away.
Because it is now Global.
I will say if Obama is elected Health care change he expects may not be executed as per his plan.
And it goes on....
One thing I want to explain about tax decrease plan.
When the tax decreases for middle class and tax increases for upper class, then the upper class CEO and the business would like to see how they can increase their profit by not increasing the wage of a middle class.
Obama followed a non american politics giving lots and lots to public. But in reality he may sit quiet and only enjoy his benefit as a President.
If Obama elected as President, this economic mess is not going to go away.
Because it is now Global.
I will say if Obama is elected Health care change he expects may not be executed as per his plan.
And it goes on....
girlfriend funny quotes about oys and
Macaca
01-26 08:29 AM
Finally, I understood the purpose of this forum. No, the title is not wrong.
I understand that you are
1. explaining retrogression, and
2. predicting time it will take a person to get GC.
The above are based on
1. applications with USCIS, and
2. USCIS policy to approve GC.
If this is true, it is the first good idea I have seen here. Alisa for president! (Arnold, California Gov, is working on changing rules for naturalized citizens).
I have the following suggestions. I will help after I read everything. Give me some time.
1. Indians are over-represented in IV. Consider the case of a country that is doing better and mention countries that are worst.
2. Write a short paragraph that goes in IV email sales pitch. This has a URL to this complete report.
3. This complete report has URL to USCIS data.
4. We work on similar report (with URLs) on lobbying effort and funding level of anti-immigration organizations.
USCIS numbers and rules are not the only factors against us. The anti-immigrants are a much bigger factor.
5. IV email sales pitch has a para with URL on
a. explaining retrogression (this report).
b. lobbying effort and funding level of opponents (next report).
c. IV's experience with legislation.
d. BEGing for contributions.
6. KISS principle baby: Keep It Simple, Stupid. Too much gymnastics in IV writeups.
I understand that you are
1. explaining retrogression, and
2. predicting time it will take a person to get GC.
The above are based on
1. applications with USCIS, and
2. USCIS policy to approve GC.
If this is true, it is the first good idea I have seen here. Alisa for president! (Arnold, California Gov, is working on changing rules for naturalized citizens).
I have the following suggestions. I will help after I read everything. Give me some time.
1. Indians are over-represented in IV. Consider the case of a country that is doing better and mention countries that are worst.
2. Write a short paragraph that goes in IV email sales pitch. This has a URL to this complete report.
3. This complete report has URL to USCIS data.
4. We work on similar report (with URLs) on lobbying effort and funding level of anti-immigration organizations.
USCIS numbers and rules are not the only factors against us. The anti-immigrants are a much bigger factor.
5. IV email sales pitch has a para with URL on
a. explaining retrogression (this report).
b. lobbying effort and funding level of opponents (next report).
c. IV's experience with legislation.
d. BEGing for contributions.
6. KISS principle baby: Keep It Simple, Stupid. Too much gymnastics in IV writeups.
hairstyles funny quotes and sayings about
ksvreg
04-09 11:32 AM
That is the reason I mentioned before that we have to give heads up to employer's HR department about these scenarios and let them come up with correct wording for POEs questions. This could be new virus breakout and we need to find a cure or prevent it someway tactically until the strategy in place. Not sure I make much sense here. In a nutshell, we need to contact our HR and request them to anwer (HR has to answer like this: It is possible to hire citizen but can not be done immediately. Its a process and takes a while to do that and no guarantee that citizen can be found. Until that time business will be impacted badly.) POE officer in case if there are any such questions. Generic answer from HR misleads and misued at POE.
mariner5555
03-10 07:21 AM
dude, i was being funny. which part of the smiley didn't you get?
I have been resisting to get dragged into this, but I have to post! Not only are you incapable of understanding humor, but you are totally incompetent in understanding plain English.
I never wrote dirty linen is "writing the fact that we have to wait for years and years" or "having the poll" either. singhsa3 is trying his best to make a case that all of us who are "waiting for years and years" have the potential to buy houses, and therefore give us GCs. Dirty linen is when people like me and Pegasus503 offer our contrasting views (and get red-dotted by immature posters who cannot have a civil debate) AND the media thinks these IV folks are not even in agreement on this subject. This to me would be detrimental to singhsa3's efforts and thus I wrote let's not bicker/argue/wash dirty linen about whether we agree with singhsa3's idea or not.
As far as your advice "if you are not convinced then stay out of the way", take a cold shower, dude. I was the first to delete my post and asked others to do the same so this would benefit singhsa3's campaign. If your miniscule brain cannot fathom my posts, ignore them and help singhsa3 out instead. And yes, while you are growing up, do resist the urge to add those red-dots......that's not getting you your green card any faster.
Kutra ..who the heck has the time to read yr senseless humor - it doesnt matter if you put a smiley face next to it. this is a serious issue and using senseless humor does not help ..I wont argue too much nor do I want to get into personal fight ..so I will stop. btw ..I dont have time to give you red dots nor do I care for them. what is sad is that if we cannot capitalize in some way the fact that many many of us are not buying houses (made by American workers BTW), cars, home improvement items etc etc ..then there is little chance that any other campaign will ever work
I have been resisting to get dragged into this, but I have to post! Not only are you incapable of understanding humor, but you are totally incompetent in understanding plain English.
I never wrote dirty linen is "writing the fact that we have to wait for years and years" or "having the poll" either. singhsa3 is trying his best to make a case that all of us who are "waiting for years and years" have the potential to buy houses, and therefore give us GCs. Dirty linen is when people like me and Pegasus503 offer our contrasting views (and get red-dotted by immature posters who cannot have a civil debate) AND the media thinks these IV folks are not even in agreement on this subject. This to me would be detrimental to singhsa3's efforts and thus I wrote let's not bicker/argue/wash dirty linen about whether we agree with singhsa3's idea or not.
As far as your advice "if you are not convinced then stay out of the way", take a cold shower, dude. I was the first to delete my post and asked others to do the same so this would benefit singhsa3's campaign. If your miniscule brain cannot fathom my posts, ignore them and help singhsa3 out instead. And yes, while you are growing up, do resist the urge to add those red-dots......that's not getting you your green card any faster.
Kutra ..who the heck has the time to read yr senseless humor - it doesnt matter if you put a smiley face next to it. this is a serious issue and using senseless humor does not help ..I wont argue too much nor do I want to get into personal fight ..so I will stop. btw ..I dont have time to give you red dots nor do I care for them. what is sad is that if we cannot capitalize in some way the fact that many many of us are not buying houses (made by American workers BTW), cars, home improvement items etc etc ..then there is little chance that any other campaign will ever work
pointlesswait
11-11 11:01 PM
great idea...but which moron will give u a loan is the million dollar question...
:D
WE SHOULD try to MARKET HOW the high tech IMMIGRANTS CAN HELP THE HOUSING MESS BY BUYING HOUSES.
Did anyone listen to NPR on this topic recently? Looks like people are open to the idea, but some one has to give more visibility to this topic. Can IV do it.....
:D
WE SHOULD try to MARKET HOW the high tech IMMIGRANTS CAN HELP THE HOUSING MESS BY BUYING HOUSES.
Did anyone listen to NPR on this topic recently? Looks like people are open to the idea, but some one has to give more visibility to this topic. Can IV do it.....
No comments:
Post a Comment