feedfront
10-13 01:57 PM
feedfront, the receipt date on my I-485 receipt notice is October 5, 2007.
My attorney had inquired with USCIS but hasn't received any response. As I mentioned earlier neither a SR, senator/congressman inquiry has helped!
I'd also send an email to NSC but got an generic message.
How can I write to USCIS director?
thank you!
thecipher5
Here is the link to a post by 'mchatrvd ' to contact director..
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum5-all-other-green-card-issues/1599351-august-2010-approvals-tracker-58.html#post1982324
My attorney had inquired with USCIS but hasn't received any response. As I mentioned earlier neither a SR, senator/congressman inquiry has helped!
I'd also send an email to NSC but got an generic message.
How can I write to USCIS director?
thank you!
thecipher5
Here is the link to a post by 'mchatrvd ' to contact director..
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum5-all-other-green-card-issues/1599351-august-2010-approvals-tracker-58.html#post1982324
wallpaper Rain Cloud Wallpaper
vandanaverdia
09-11 04:19 PM
bump
logiclife
01-30 01:20 PM
One more thing about desi companies.
When you go from H4 to H1 or F1 to H1, you are legally allowed to work for your sponsor only after H1 approval (I-797) comes, not after the receipt notice comes. When you transfer H1s from company A to company B, you can start working as soon as the receipt notice for transfer petition is received. That is the law.
Now, since our dear desi employers are known to be greedy and also known to be comfortable in bending, breaking or ignoring the law, once they file for your H4 to H1 transfer, they would want you to start working right away. Forget about waiting for H1 approval notice, they are unlikely to wait even for the receipt notice. It would be illegal to work on H4 even if you have the receipt notice in your hands for H4 to H1 transfer.
However, they would want you to work, so that you can start generating the revenue for the company. (hey, it costs money to do your transfer and money doesnt grow on trees). And who's gonna know. Once you are a willing participant in this, you are not going to report it, they are not going to report it and the client (your project location) would not even know the difference between H1 and H4. And ICE has its hands full in busting illegals working in meat packing plants.
Now, that is not all. In order to cover up the fact that you were working (and on their payroll) while in H4 without waiting for H1 approval, they may pay you in checks other than payroll checks. Either as an expense check or something else(cash, money order etc). There is another law they are breaking in the process of covering up the immigration law violation. The tax laws. By not paying you on a regular payroll, they cannot deduct your income tax and the employer's payroll tax. So it would be "Off the books".
Anyways, clarify with them that you will not work until you see the original approval of I-797 in your hands. That way, you wont be dragged into this mud.
-------------------------------------------
PS
I am not advocating that anyone break any laws. I am just stating what I have known from this industry and the usual practices so that people can avoid getting into situations where they unknowingly break the laws due to their employers' greed. Also, I am not denigrating Desis or desi companies, I am myself an Indian.
When you go from H4 to H1 or F1 to H1, you are legally allowed to work for your sponsor only after H1 approval (I-797) comes, not after the receipt notice comes. When you transfer H1s from company A to company B, you can start working as soon as the receipt notice for transfer petition is received. That is the law.
Now, since our dear desi employers are known to be greedy and also known to be comfortable in bending, breaking or ignoring the law, once they file for your H4 to H1 transfer, they would want you to start working right away. Forget about waiting for H1 approval notice, they are unlikely to wait even for the receipt notice. It would be illegal to work on H4 even if you have the receipt notice in your hands for H4 to H1 transfer.
However, they would want you to work, so that you can start generating the revenue for the company. (hey, it costs money to do your transfer and money doesnt grow on trees). And who's gonna know. Once you are a willing participant in this, you are not going to report it, they are not going to report it and the client (your project location) would not even know the difference between H1 and H4. And ICE has its hands full in busting illegals working in meat packing plants.
Now, that is not all. In order to cover up the fact that you were working (and on their payroll) while in H4 without waiting for H1 approval, they may pay you in checks other than payroll checks. Either as an expense check or something else(cash, money order etc). There is another law they are breaking in the process of covering up the immigration law violation. The tax laws. By not paying you on a regular payroll, they cannot deduct your income tax and the employer's payroll tax. So it would be "Off the books".
Anyways, clarify with them that you will not work until you see the original approval of I-797 in your hands. That way, you wont be dragged into this mud.
-------------------------------------------
PS
I am not advocating that anyone break any laws. I am just stating what I have known from this industry and the usual practices so that people can avoid getting into situations where they unknowingly break the laws due to their employers' greed. Also, I am not denigrating Desis or desi companies, I am myself an Indian.
2011 for Checking the rain Desktop Wallpapers desktop wallpaper rain.
cestmoi
01-11 11:46 PM
Am I blind or is part 2 missing one more option?
None of the options apply to me below as I will be applying for employment based Green Card as I have a L1A visa (unless I'm not supposed to be filling out i-485?)
a. An immigrant petition giving me an immediately available immigrant visa number has been approved (attach a copy of the approval notice, or a relative, special immigrant juvenile, or special immigrant military visa petition filed...
b. My spouse or parent applied for adjustment of status or was granted lawful permanent residence in an immigrant visa category that allows derivative status for spouses and children
c. I entered as a K-1 fiance(e) of a US citizen whom I married within 90 days of entry...
d. I was granted asylum or derivative asylum status as the spouse or child of a person granted asylum and am eligible for adjustment.
e. I am a native or citizen of Cuba admitted or paroled into the US after Jan 1, 1959...
f. I am the husband, wife or minor unmarried child of a Cuban described above in (e)....
g. I have continously resided in the US since before Jan 1, 1972
h. Other basis of eligibility. Explain (for example, I was admitted as a refugee, my status has not been terminated, and I have been physically present in the US for 1 year...
None of the options apply to me below as I will be applying for employment based Green Card as I have a L1A visa (unless I'm not supposed to be filling out i-485?)
a. An immigrant petition giving me an immediately available immigrant visa number has been approved (attach a copy of the approval notice, or a relative, special immigrant juvenile, or special immigrant military visa petition filed...
b. My spouse or parent applied for adjustment of status or was granted lawful permanent residence in an immigrant visa category that allows derivative status for spouses and children
c. I entered as a K-1 fiance(e) of a US citizen whom I married within 90 days of entry...
d. I was granted asylum or derivative asylum status as the spouse or child of a person granted asylum and am eligible for adjustment.
e. I am a native or citizen of Cuba admitted or paroled into the US after Jan 1, 1959...
f. I am the husband, wife or minor unmarried child of a Cuban described above in (e)....
g. I have continously resided in the US since before Jan 1, 1972
h. Other basis of eligibility. Explain (for example, I was admitted as a refugee, my status has not been terminated, and I have been physically present in the US for 1 year...
more...
am4gc
09-26 10:49 AM
Dear Editor and Eilene Zimmerman,
Your statement as following has put the marching on capital hill in wrong context:
"Charnock is one of a groundswell of entrepreneurs and advocates for immigrants who say Congress needs to raise the cap on H-1B visas to help the economy. Last week 1,000 protestors-mostly legal immigrants-drew attention to the situation of highly skilled foreigners who want to work for companies in the U.S. by marching on Capitol Hill. "
Marching on Capitol Hill mentioned in the article is NOT about increase of H1B but to request congress to fix the legal immigration system through which these H1B high skilled workers who come to USA in a temporary status become permanent. This is called green card process. Currently to become permanently employed in USA takes 6-12 years for these H1B high skilled workers. This makes their life status probationary as they have to go through various governmental procedures to maintain their status, travel abroad.
Green card process has proved that no US worker is available for the job these high skilled workers do. After proving this, it may take 6-12 years to become permanent worker because per year per country quota. About 50-60% of these workers come from India, China because these two countries possess 40% of world population. So naturally lot of talented people will come from there. Now if we make a quota saying only 14 % will come from these two countries, naturally there will be delay for the worker from these two countries. We demand these per country quota be removed from these high skilled workers’s green card process.
Per year quota of Green card is generally less than the number of high skilled worker apply for green card. Last 3-4 years this quota is not fully utilized because of slowness in process due 9/11 incident. So there are about 60,000 unused visas which were supposed to be available from the quota to these workers. According to law, this unused visa cannot be available. This also increases the wait time.
When these high skilled workers comes to USA under H1B program, their spouse and children are NOT counted for the quota, but when they apply green card, their spouse and children are counted for the quota, resulting huge queue.
Thanks,
XXX
Your statement as following has put the marching on capital hill in wrong context:
"Charnock is one of a groundswell of entrepreneurs and advocates for immigrants who say Congress needs to raise the cap on H-1B visas to help the economy. Last week 1,000 protestors-mostly legal immigrants-drew attention to the situation of highly skilled foreigners who want to work for companies in the U.S. by marching on Capitol Hill. "
Marching on Capitol Hill mentioned in the article is NOT about increase of H1B but to request congress to fix the legal immigration system through which these H1B high skilled workers who come to USA in a temporary status become permanent. This is called green card process. Currently to become permanently employed in USA takes 6-12 years for these H1B high skilled workers. This makes their life status probationary as they have to go through various governmental procedures to maintain their status, travel abroad.
Green card process has proved that no US worker is available for the job these high skilled workers do. After proving this, it may take 6-12 years to become permanent worker because per year per country quota. About 50-60% of these workers come from India, China because these two countries possess 40% of world population. So naturally lot of talented people will come from there. Now if we make a quota saying only 14 % will come from these two countries, naturally there will be delay for the worker from these two countries. We demand these per country quota be removed from these high skilled workers’s green card process.
Per year quota of Green card is generally less than the number of high skilled worker apply for green card. Last 3-4 years this quota is not fully utilized because of slowness in process due 9/11 incident. So there are about 60,000 unused visas which were supposed to be available from the quota to these workers. According to law, this unused visa cannot be available. This also increases the wait time.
When these high skilled workers comes to USA under H1B program, their spouse and children are NOT counted for the quota, but when they apply green card, their spouse and children are counted for the quota, resulting huge queue.
Thanks,
XXX
rimzhim
04-04 04:04 PM
[From here (http://www.ieeeusa.org/policy/issues/).
Enacting legislation to facilitate the admission of foreign professionals with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering and managerial fields as legal permanent residents.
[/LIST]
great to hear that!
also johnifax98: if middlepersons are exploiting the system, it will help to eliminate their role. i agree that is also abuse.
Enacting legislation to facilitate the admission of foreign professionals with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering and managerial fields as legal permanent residents.
[/LIST]
great to hear that!
also johnifax98: if middlepersons are exploiting the system, it will help to eliminate their role. i agree that is also abuse.
more...
ugotdude
11-21 11:03 AM
You guys won't believe how glad I am to read a few posts here where some people are standing up for themselves and refusing to take bullshit from certain lousy employers. This will send a message to those kinds of employers that they can't use the immigration system and treat employees like shit while continuing to profit from these hard-working people.
abc, just one suggestion for you. If you can, hold off until your I-140 gets approved. Once that happens, your 2003 priority date will stick and you can take it with you ( USCIS internal I-140 adjudication manual for your reference ... http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrel...h22_091206R.pdf )
I wish you all the best with your life.
lwpd
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrel...h22_091206R.pdf )
I'm not able to open this URL? Getting the following message
404 - Requested Page Not Found on Site
The page you requested, http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrel...h22_091206R.pdf, is not on our site.
abc, just one suggestion for you. If you can, hold off until your I-140 gets approved. Once that happens, your 2003 priority date will stick and you can take it with you ( USCIS internal I-140 adjudication manual for your reference ... http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrel...h22_091206R.pdf )
I wish you all the best with your life.
lwpd
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrel...h22_091206R.pdf )
I'm not able to open this URL? Getting the following message
404 - Requested Page Not Found on Site
The page you requested, http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrel...h22_091206R.pdf, is not on our site.
2010 Rain desktop wallpaper, Rain stock photo
JazzByTheBay
03-10 01:15 PM
Most of our members lose focus after the first week of anguish immediately following a visa bulletin.
After that, we willingly engage in:
1. LUD-watching (as a sport)
2. Social networking on IV (reading forum threads, responding, stating how anguished we feel, talking about our contributions to the U.S. and how unfair the system is... )
3. Punching the clock, waiting for the next visa bulletin thread
4. Posting and speculating on the next visa bulletin thread, while waiting for the actual bulletin to show up
5. Continue to blame USCIS, DoS, the Congress, the President, and the American people for not realizing our importance.
6. Back to #1 (rinse, repeat... ), and hope for different results.
What we will not do (skip this if you are participating actively):
1. Participate in IV activities/action items
2. Willingly contribute time and/or money towards achieving our goals
As President Obama says (Boston Globe | Obama: Time of crisis can be 'great opportunity' (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/03/08/obama_time_of_crisis_can_be_great_opportunity/?rss_id=Boston.com+--+Latest+news)), an economic crisis presents the biggest opportunity for drastic change.
"We've experienced great trials before," Obama said. "And with every test, each generation has found the capacity to not only endure, but to prosper -- to discover great opportunity in the midst of great crisis. That is what we can and must do today. And I am absolutely confident that is what we will do."If the President sees this time of crisis as a great opportunity, I see no reason why we should see the crisis as the greatest handicap for not working towards change.
Let's realize that we will never reach our goals in this lifetime without working for that change.
jazz
the problem is that we come up with such ideas only when visa bulletins come ..after few days everyone forgets.
there is not much direction from core either and that makes you wonder if there will be any campaigns at all in the future for recapture
the problem is that we come up with such ideas only when visa bulletins come ..after few days everyone forgets.
there is not much direction from core either and that makes you wonder if there will be any campaigns at all in the future for recapture
After that, we willingly engage in:
1. LUD-watching (as a sport)
2. Social networking on IV (reading forum threads, responding, stating how anguished we feel, talking about our contributions to the U.S. and how unfair the system is... )
3. Punching the clock, waiting for the next visa bulletin thread
4. Posting and speculating on the next visa bulletin thread, while waiting for the actual bulletin to show up
5. Continue to blame USCIS, DoS, the Congress, the President, and the American people for not realizing our importance.
6. Back to #1 (rinse, repeat... ), and hope for different results.
What we will not do (skip this if you are participating actively):
1. Participate in IV activities/action items
2. Willingly contribute time and/or money towards achieving our goals
As President Obama says (Boston Globe | Obama: Time of crisis can be 'great opportunity' (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/03/08/obama_time_of_crisis_can_be_great_opportunity/?rss_id=Boston.com+--+Latest+news)), an economic crisis presents the biggest opportunity for drastic change.
"We've experienced great trials before," Obama said. "And with every test, each generation has found the capacity to not only endure, but to prosper -- to discover great opportunity in the midst of great crisis. That is what we can and must do today. And I am absolutely confident that is what we will do."If the President sees this time of crisis as a great opportunity, I see no reason why we should see the crisis as the greatest handicap for not working towards change.
Let's realize that we will never reach our goals in this lifetime without working for that change.
jazz
the problem is that we come up with such ideas only when visa bulletins come ..after few days everyone forgets.
there is not much direction from core either and that makes you wonder if there will be any campaigns at all in the future for recapture
the problem is that we come up with such ideas only when visa bulletins come ..after few days everyone forgets.
there is not much direction from core either and that makes you wonder if there will be any campaigns at all in the future for recapture
more...
sanjay
04-09 03:35 PM
No change. Wohi purani kahaani. Old wine in new bottle.
Would start looking for June now. But, won't expect any thing good until August 2010.
Would start looking for June now. But, won't expect any thing good until August 2010.
hair Bioshock Desktop Wallpaper
GCBy3000
01-16 10:14 AM
I visited this site three times this morning and this thread subject did not attact me at all. Fourth time since I ran out of all issues, I thought to open this up to see what it is.
Surprised to see it is created by IV core for an important issue. I would suggest to change the subject to a catchy one to prompt the users to open it or put this in home page somewhere eye catching.
Surprised to see it is created by IV core for an important issue. I would suggest to change the subject to a catchy one to prompt the users to open it or put this in home page somewhere eye catching.
more...
Jbpvisa
07-12 11:01 PM
http://www.murthy.com/chertoff_murthy.html
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
It was a pleasure and an honor to meet with you and to share my views during your panel discussion at the Harvard Worldwide Congress June 15, 2007 in Washington, D.C. I understand and appreciate that the responsibility vested in you as the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is no simple task. We applaud your service to our nation. After meeting with you personally and speaking with you, I am more convinced than ever that you will do the right thing for our country and for the people you serve, both in terms of securing our nation and in being the leader of the DHS, with over 20 federal agencies reporting to you, including the USCIS.
Purpose of this Letter
I am writing to you at this time to address recent actions by the USCIS to refuse to accept I-485 adjustment of status filing during July 2007 that are having significant impact upon the reliability of the legal immigration system in this country, as well as impacting legal foreign nationals and the many U.S. businesses that rely upon the work they perform.
USCIS Decision Contradicts its Long Standing Procedure
In contradiction of its own long standing policy and procedure, we understand that the USCIS, through its Director Gonzalez, contacted the U.S. Department of State (DOS) and requested or required the DOS to issue a �revised� Visa Bulletin on July 2, 2007. The USCIS then used the revised Bulletin to refuse to accept I-485 filings. This decision deprives thousands of foreign nationals, and their families, of the rights and privileges that are attendant to the I-485 filing.
These Highly Skilled Professionals Followed All the Rules and Believe in the American Dream
These professionals and their employers have played by our established immigration laws and rules. The vast majority of these thousands of potential applicants has a U.S. employer corporation, university or other business as a sponsor for permanent resident status. The exceptions from an employer are for those who are considered of �extraordinary ability� or whose work is in our �national interest.� Many of these applicants have completed their Bachelor�s, Master�s and/or PhD programs from U.S. universities. They believe in the opportunities of this great nation and strive to achieve the American Dream by following all the rules, working hard, paying taxes, and striving to do the right thing. They believe in this country, and rely upon our systems, our government, and our processes. Unfortunately, on July 2, 2007, we let them down. The USCIS abandoned its own system and long standing practices. This happened through manipulation of the use of visa numbers, insisting upon the issuance of a "revised visa bulletin," and instituting the USCIS policy of rejecting every employment-based I-485 that could have been filed during the month of July 2007.
USCIS Decision Denies Substantive and Procedural Rights to Highly Skilled Workers and Their Employers - Many of Whom Have Already Suffered and Will Suffer Further Harm/ Injury
Not only does the USCIS' action harm the individuals and employers involved, it undermines the reliability of our entire employment-based immigration system. The unexpected decision of the USCIS to refuse to accept any I-485 filings denies both substantive and procedural due process rights to would be applicants across the U.S. All of these applicants are employment based (EB) applicants who are primarily highly skilled professionals or experienced workers, that the U.S. seeks in high demand areas, including: science, technology, medicine, research, business, academia, and education.
The harm in not accepting the filings in July 2007 goes beyond mere delay. In reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin, starting in mid-June 2007, these applicants took the steps necessary to prepare their filings and made decisions in reliance upon the USCIS accepting their filings during July 2007. In order to be present in the U.S., as required for these filings, many applicants and their families canceled travel plans abroad or arranged to return to the U.S. on short notice missing family weddings and other important life events. They undertook medical examinations and paid for the required tests which must accompany the I-485 filings. (The USCIS had refused to waive this requirement even temporarily.) They hired lawyers to process their paperwork; they arranged to obtain documents from abroad on an expedited basis, involving foreign lawyers and foreign governments, all at a significant cost. They made employment and other strategic immigration related decisions to be able to process their I-485s for them and their families. Some canceled visa appointments at the consulates, or withdrew other immigration filings, all in reliance upon the USCIS accepting I-485 filings during July 2007.
The applicants and their employers lose the rights and privileges that accompany the filing of the I-485. These include eligibility for the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and Advanced Parole (AP), thus eliminating the need for the individuals and their employers to make the filings necessary to maintain a non-immigrant, temporary status. These same ancillary benefits also apply to dependant family members. Most importantly, those that have not filed I-485s are not eligible for "portability" benefits under the �American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act� of Oct. 2000 or �AC21� as it is sometimes referred to. This ineligibility for AC21 portability forces career stagnation. This is to the detriment of the individual as well as their sponsoring employer. Under AC21 portability, employers can promote and/or relocate employees to positions that are the same or similar job classifications as the positions for which they were initially sponsored. Individuals can utilize these provisions for career advancement, and for entrepreneurship. Given that the green card process often spans many years, AC21 portability allows the necessary flexibility to permit the case to continue, to accommodate changes in the sponsoring employer's needs as well as opportunities that are specific to the beneficiary.
The list of stories of individuals and families harmed by the USCIS decision is endless. We have for example, many spouses who will now be separated potentially for years on end, as one received a green card during the USCIS' June "rush," while the other is now ineligible to file.
The USCIS decision also created a burden on U.S. employers. Further delays in the green card process mean that, at best, U.S. employers have to continue to file temporary petitions to keep their workforce in the U.S. legally; at worst, it jeopardizes the availability of this needed highly educated and skilled workforce.
USCIS Motive is to Collect Millions of Additional Filing Fees
Many are baffled by the USCIS decision to reject I-485 filings in July, and its use of the �revised� Visa Bulletin as an excuse. The suspected motive is the collection of the substantially higher filing fees that will be generated after July 27, 2007. This entire incident sends the wrong message about our government, our policies and our legal system reeking of greed and inconsistency. Even the appearance of such impropriety undermines our system.
.................
continue
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
It was a pleasure and an honor to meet with you and to share my views during your panel discussion at the Harvard Worldwide Congress June 15, 2007 in Washington, D.C. I understand and appreciate that the responsibility vested in you as the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is no simple task. We applaud your service to our nation. After meeting with you personally and speaking with you, I am more convinced than ever that you will do the right thing for our country and for the people you serve, both in terms of securing our nation and in being the leader of the DHS, with over 20 federal agencies reporting to you, including the USCIS.
Purpose of this Letter
I am writing to you at this time to address recent actions by the USCIS to refuse to accept I-485 adjustment of status filing during July 2007 that are having significant impact upon the reliability of the legal immigration system in this country, as well as impacting legal foreign nationals and the many U.S. businesses that rely upon the work they perform.
USCIS Decision Contradicts its Long Standing Procedure
In contradiction of its own long standing policy and procedure, we understand that the USCIS, through its Director Gonzalez, contacted the U.S. Department of State (DOS) and requested or required the DOS to issue a �revised� Visa Bulletin on July 2, 2007. The USCIS then used the revised Bulletin to refuse to accept I-485 filings. This decision deprives thousands of foreign nationals, and their families, of the rights and privileges that are attendant to the I-485 filing.
These Highly Skilled Professionals Followed All the Rules and Believe in the American Dream
These professionals and their employers have played by our established immigration laws and rules. The vast majority of these thousands of potential applicants has a U.S. employer corporation, university or other business as a sponsor for permanent resident status. The exceptions from an employer are for those who are considered of �extraordinary ability� or whose work is in our �national interest.� Many of these applicants have completed their Bachelor�s, Master�s and/or PhD programs from U.S. universities. They believe in the opportunities of this great nation and strive to achieve the American Dream by following all the rules, working hard, paying taxes, and striving to do the right thing. They believe in this country, and rely upon our systems, our government, and our processes. Unfortunately, on July 2, 2007, we let them down. The USCIS abandoned its own system and long standing practices. This happened through manipulation of the use of visa numbers, insisting upon the issuance of a "revised visa bulletin," and instituting the USCIS policy of rejecting every employment-based I-485 that could have been filed during the month of July 2007.
USCIS Decision Denies Substantive and Procedural Rights to Highly Skilled Workers and Their Employers - Many of Whom Have Already Suffered and Will Suffer Further Harm/ Injury
Not only does the USCIS' action harm the individuals and employers involved, it undermines the reliability of our entire employment-based immigration system. The unexpected decision of the USCIS to refuse to accept any I-485 filings denies both substantive and procedural due process rights to would be applicants across the U.S. All of these applicants are employment based (EB) applicants who are primarily highly skilled professionals or experienced workers, that the U.S. seeks in high demand areas, including: science, technology, medicine, research, business, academia, and education.
The harm in not accepting the filings in July 2007 goes beyond mere delay. In reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin, starting in mid-June 2007, these applicants took the steps necessary to prepare their filings and made decisions in reliance upon the USCIS accepting their filings during July 2007. In order to be present in the U.S., as required for these filings, many applicants and their families canceled travel plans abroad or arranged to return to the U.S. on short notice missing family weddings and other important life events. They undertook medical examinations and paid for the required tests which must accompany the I-485 filings. (The USCIS had refused to waive this requirement even temporarily.) They hired lawyers to process their paperwork; they arranged to obtain documents from abroad on an expedited basis, involving foreign lawyers and foreign governments, all at a significant cost. They made employment and other strategic immigration related decisions to be able to process their I-485s for them and their families. Some canceled visa appointments at the consulates, or withdrew other immigration filings, all in reliance upon the USCIS accepting I-485 filings during July 2007.
The applicants and their employers lose the rights and privileges that accompany the filing of the I-485. These include eligibility for the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and Advanced Parole (AP), thus eliminating the need for the individuals and their employers to make the filings necessary to maintain a non-immigrant, temporary status. These same ancillary benefits also apply to dependant family members. Most importantly, those that have not filed I-485s are not eligible for "portability" benefits under the �American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act� of Oct. 2000 or �AC21� as it is sometimes referred to. This ineligibility for AC21 portability forces career stagnation. This is to the detriment of the individual as well as their sponsoring employer. Under AC21 portability, employers can promote and/or relocate employees to positions that are the same or similar job classifications as the positions for which they were initially sponsored. Individuals can utilize these provisions for career advancement, and for entrepreneurship. Given that the green card process often spans many years, AC21 portability allows the necessary flexibility to permit the case to continue, to accommodate changes in the sponsoring employer's needs as well as opportunities that are specific to the beneficiary.
The list of stories of individuals and families harmed by the USCIS decision is endless. We have for example, many spouses who will now be separated potentially for years on end, as one received a green card during the USCIS' June "rush," while the other is now ineligible to file.
The USCIS decision also created a burden on U.S. employers. Further delays in the green card process mean that, at best, U.S. employers have to continue to file temporary petitions to keep their workforce in the U.S. legally; at worst, it jeopardizes the availability of this needed highly educated and skilled workforce.
USCIS Motive is to Collect Millions of Additional Filing Fees
Many are baffled by the USCIS decision to reject I-485 filings in July, and its use of the �revised� Visa Bulletin as an excuse. The suspected motive is the collection of the substantially higher filing fees that will be generated after July 27, 2007. This entire incident sends the wrong message about our government, our policies and our legal system reeking of greed and inconsistency. Even the appearance of such impropriety undermines our system.
.................
continue
hot italy desktop wallpaper
singhsa3
03-03 04:22 PM
That is option # 2
How about another option for people who are going to buy shortly even though their GC approval is far far away?
How about another option for people who are going to buy shortly even though their GC approval is far far away?
more...
house Animated Rain Desktop
GreenLantern
02-15 06:52 PM
Anybody want to post what they have so far? Please?
tattoo Rain Clouds desktop wallpaper, Rain Clouds stock photo
chanduv23
03-17 10:08 AM
Substitute labors for EB2 should not IMPACT the delay more than 3 to 6 months. The reason is total EB2 labor india cases approved in 2004 itself is 3500(Straight out of DOL database, published on this forum last year). Some of these cases may have been substituted, worst case, lets say 100% of them applied to I-485. Now the number is 3 times that of 3500. that is 10500(including spouse and 1 child on average).
Another thing you need to consider is If anycase had a PD before sept 2004 and was filed for I-485 before July 2007. That must have got the approval unless there was a namecheck delay.
That should reduce the number to half., 5500(including dependent cases). This is my educated guess, Please dont pick on me. It wont help anybody.
Below are 3 categories left as per my analysis....
1) the applications filed in or after july 2007 OR
2) applications had a PD after sept 2004
3) Namecheck delayed cases.
Chances are that the volume of Subsitutions and porting PD is massive in July , 2007. Almost every Tom, Dick and Harry filed for 485 at that time. News spread like wild fire about the availability of visas and lawyers and consulting companies wanted to do maximum utilization and maximum business. People applied substituted labors for their cousins, friends etc.... and got EAD and AP, May not be working for the sponsering employer.
Another thing you need to consider is If anycase had a PD before sept 2004 and was filed for I-485 before July 2007. That must have got the approval unless there was a namecheck delay.
That should reduce the number to half., 5500(including dependent cases). This is my educated guess, Please dont pick on me. It wont help anybody.
Below are 3 categories left as per my analysis....
1) the applications filed in or after july 2007 OR
2) applications had a PD after sept 2004
3) Namecheck delayed cases.
Chances are that the volume of Subsitutions and porting PD is massive in July , 2007. Almost every Tom, Dick and Harry filed for 485 at that time. News spread like wild fire about the availability of visas and lawyers and consulting companies wanted to do maximum utilization and maximum business. People applied substituted labors for their cousins, friends etc.... and got EAD and AP, May not be working for the sponsering employer.
more...
pictures pictures wolf rain Wallpaper desktop wallpaper rain.
chanduv23
05-26 04:40 PM
There is a rule that you are suppossed to carry your passport all the times if you are on a visa.
Border patrol has the right to ask you for documents.
Fines are like $100 or so - not quite sure.
I was once driving on Adirondocks and was stopped by the border patrol. I showed my dirver's license but they wanted to see the visa. We waited there for sometime as they validated us on their computer and then let us go - they were friendly and suggested that it is always good to carry documents.
Border patrol has the right to ask you for documents.
Fines are like $100 or so - not quite sure.
I was once driving on Adirondocks and was stopped by the border patrol. I showed my dirver's license but they wanted to see the visa. We waited there for sometime as they validated us on their computer and then let us go - they were friendly and suggested that it is always good to carry documents.
dresses Riverside rain Desktop
insbaby
05-26 05:11 PM
I was so pissed off by this experience, clearly they are doing this to harrase immigrants. theoratically even if I am going for a walk i am supposed to carry immigration papers because a border patrol officer, in theory, could asks me for my papers ?
Yes sir. You have to carry atlest a copy of your papers, H1/L1 approval notice, copy of passport, visa page, I-94 while travelling.
Just keep a copy of those papers in your office bag or in car's dashboard.
Don't take it in the wrong sense. It is WORTH.
I have decided that if anyone ask me such a stupid question again inside the US and i am just going to remain silent even if that means they detain me for some time.
An officer's duty is to ask for papers. And for just few questions you are upset.
Just think about in the other way.
What if the officer gets upset when you remain silent....
You don't have to post such experience as everybody knows what would happen.
Yes sir. You have to carry atlest a copy of your papers, H1/L1 approval notice, copy of passport, visa page, I-94 while travelling.
Just keep a copy of those papers in your office bag or in car's dashboard.
Don't take it in the wrong sense. It is WORTH.
I have decided that if anyone ask me such a stupid question again inside the US and i am just going to remain silent even if that means they detain me for some time.
An officer's duty is to ask for papers. And for just few questions you are upset.
Just think about in the other way.
What if the officer gets upset when you remain silent....
You don't have to post such experience as everybody knows what would happen.
more...
makeup images Collection of Wallpaper quot;Rainquot; wallpaper rain. Rain desktop
Jerrome
07-13 08:30 AM
Let us see the approvals trend till october. I am guessing the PD will move back to MID 2005 or 2004 by October for EB-2 India.
girlfriend desktop wallpaper kiss.
tooclose
07-13 07:14 AM
What is the need for all this ? The visa bulletin is out but no one cares to read it I guess. Every bulletin has these or words to this effect.
"Only applicants who have a priority date earlier than the cut-off date may be allotted a number."
So the date that you see in the table is NOT eligible for visa numbers.
Thanks for the information. I believe I have to wait for another month to get any updates from the Sep visa bulletin or wait till same time next year since my PD is Mar-06.
Congrats to all to have received it and good luck to those who have become current !
"Only applicants who have a priority date earlier than the cut-off date may be allotted a number."
So the date that you see in the table is NOT eligible for visa numbers.
Thanks for the information. I believe I have to wait for another month to get any updates from the Sep visa bulletin or wait till same time next year since my PD is Mar-06.
Congrats to all to have received it and good luck to those who have become current !
hairstyles 3d wallpapers for desktop
greyhair
09-09 12:49 PM
What are the hopes for EB3-I?
ZERO
Till we spend our time in predictions and tracking, till the time we stop jumping the gun in calling for lawsuits, till the time we stop interpreting the INA to find a smoking gun, till the time we stop calling names for USCIS and DOS, till the time we stop blaming 245(i), till the time we stop engaging in eb2 v/s eb3 fight, till the time we stop fighting with each other over irrelevant things, till the time we stop creating these stupid polls, till the time we stop engaging in "number crunching" whatever that means, until that time there is ZERO hope for Eb3-I. Once we stop wasting our time on all these irrelevant things, we will then start spending our time on more meaningful things like speaking with the members of Congress. Then, and only then, there will be a chance of anything good happening for EB3-I.
ZERO
Till we spend our time in predictions and tracking, till the time we stop jumping the gun in calling for lawsuits, till the time we stop interpreting the INA to find a smoking gun, till the time we stop calling names for USCIS and DOS, till the time we stop blaming 245(i), till the time we stop engaging in eb2 v/s eb3 fight, till the time we stop fighting with each other over irrelevant things, till the time we stop creating these stupid polls, till the time we stop engaging in "number crunching" whatever that means, until that time there is ZERO hope for Eb3-I. Once we stop wasting our time on all these irrelevant things, we will then start spending our time on more meaningful things like speaking with the members of Congress. Then, and only then, there will be a chance of anything good happening for EB3-I.
andycool
07-12 04:56 PM
E. APPLICABILITY OF INA SECTION 202(a)(5)(A)AS IT RELATES TO THE ALLOCATION OF �OTHERWISE UNUSED� NUMBERS
INA Section 202(a)(5)(A), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21), provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the otherwise unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. This provision helps to assure that all available Employment preference numbers may be used. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)(A) has occasionally allowed oversubscribed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large quantities of Employment First and Second preference numbers that would have otherwise gone unused.
For example, let us assume that 11,600 Employment Second preference numbers are available in a calendar quarter. There is heavy Employment Second preference demand by China-mainland born and India applicants; however, each country is oversubscribed and would ordinarily be limited to about 800 of the available numbers due to the prorating provisions of INA Section 202(e). Applicants from other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit have reported a total demand of 6,500 numbers. After taking the worldwide demand into account, it is determined that as a result of the China-mainland born and India per-country limits only 8,100 of the total available Employment Second preference numbers would be used in that quarter. In this instance, the otherwise unused 3,500 numbers could then be made available to China-mainland born and India regardless of their per-country limits. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
According to this there should be a quarterly spillover ...:confused: but it looks like spillover is happening only in last quarter :D
INA Section 202(a)(5)(A), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21), provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the otherwise unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. This provision helps to assure that all available Employment preference numbers may be used. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)(A) has occasionally allowed oversubscribed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large quantities of Employment First and Second preference numbers that would have otherwise gone unused.
For example, let us assume that 11,600 Employment Second preference numbers are available in a calendar quarter. There is heavy Employment Second preference demand by China-mainland born and India applicants; however, each country is oversubscribed and would ordinarily be limited to about 800 of the available numbers due to the prorating provisions of INA Section 202(e). Applicants from other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit have reported a total demand of 6,500 numbers. After taking the worldwide demand into account, it is determined that as a result of the China-mainland born and India per-country limits only 8,100 of the total available Employment Second preference numbers would be used in that quarter. In this instance, the otherwise unused 3,500 numbers could then be made available to China-mainland born and India regardless of their per-country limits. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
According to this there should be a quarterly spillover ...:confused: but it looks like spillover is happening only in last quarter :D
Jaime
09-11 03:54 PM
For the first time in its history, the U.S. faces the prospect of a reverse brain drain. New research by my team at the Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University shows that more than 1 million highly skilled professionals such as engineers, scientists, doctors, researchers, and their families are in line for a yearly allotment of only around 120,000 permanent-resident visas for employment-based principals and their families in the three main employment visa categories (EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3). These individuals entered the country legally to study or to work. They contributed to U.S. economic growth and global competitiveness. Now we've set the stage for them to return to countries such as India and China, where the economies are booming and their skills are in great demand. U.S. businesses large and small stand to lose critical talent, and workers who have gained valuable experience and knowledge of American industry may become potential competitors.
The problem is simple. There aren't enough permanent-resident visas available each year for skilled workers and their families. And there is a limit of fewer than 10,000 visas that can be issued to immigrants from any single country. So countries with the largest populations such as India and China are allocated the same number of visas as Iceland and Mongolia.
Visa Delays Deprive U.S. of Talent The result is that wait times for employment visas currently stretch from four to six years for immigrants from countries such as India and China, and all indications are that these delays will get longer. Based on a 2003 study of new legal immigrants to the U.S. called the New Immigrant Survey, we estimate that in 2003, about 1 in 3 professionals who had been through the immigration process either planned to leave the U.S. or were uncertain about remaining. Media reports and other anecdotal evidence indicate that many skilled workers have indeed begun to return home.
Much of the current public debate on immigration centers on concerns over low-skilled immigrants entering the U.S. illegally. We do need to develop fair policies to deal with this problem. But skilled immigrants who enter the U.S. legally are a different issue. Professor Richard Devon of Pennsylvania State University estimates that in the U.S. about $200,000 is invested in a child by the time they gain a bachelor's degree in engineering. That means that the U.S. gains billions of dollars in benefit from educated professionals who leave other countries to come here. And we lose billions when they return home. Additionally, we end up training highly skilled workers in our markets, technology, and way of doing business.
Consider this: Earlier research by my team found that more than half of the engineering and technology companies started in Silicon Valley and a quarter of those started nationwide from 1995 to 2006 had immigrant founders. These companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Their founders tended to be very highly educated in science, technology, math, and engineering-related disciplines, with 96% of them holding bachelor's degrees and 75% holding master's degrees or PhDs (see BusinessWeek.com, 6/11/07, "Immigrants: Key U.S. Business Founders").
Patents: Evidence of Entrepreneurial Activity We also uncovered some puzzling data on patent filings. When we analyzed the international patent database maintained by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), we found that 1 in every 4 patent applications from the U.S. in 2006 listed a foreign national residing in the U.S. as an inventor. This number had increased threefold over an eight-year period and didn't take into account inventors who had become U.S. citizens before applying for a patent.
We realized that these foreign-national inventors were not likely to be from the same immigrant group that was founding high-tech companies. They were likely to be PhD students and employees of U.S. corporations who are in the U.S. on temporary visas. Temporary-visa holders can't easily start their own companies�their visas require them to work full time for the company that sponsored them.
For our new research, we reanalyzed the WIPO patent database to look at which immigrant groups and corporations were applying for the most patents. To understand the foreign-national data, we examined extensive information published by the Homeland Security Dept., the Labor Dept., and the State Dept. We also reviewed the New Immigrant Survey to gain insight into the immigration process and to examine the potential that, even after becoming permanent residents, skilled immigrants might return home.
Here is what we found:
� Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by companies such as Qualcomm (QCOM) (72%), Merck (MRK) (65%), General Electric (GE) (64%), Siemens (SI) (63%), and Cisco (CSCO) (60%). Their contributions were relatively small at Microsoft (MSFT) (3%) and General Motors (GM) (6%). Surprisingly, 41% of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals listed as inventors.
� Foreign nationals contributed to 25.6% of all U.S. international patent applications in 2006, but the numbers were much higher in several states such as New Jersey (37%), California (36%), and Massachusetts (32%).
� In 2006, 16.8% of international patent applications from the U.S. had inventors with Chinese names and 36% of these (or 5.5% of the total) were foreign nationals. Similarly, 13.7% had Indian names and 40% (or 6.2% of the total) were foreign nationals.
� Both Indian and Chinese inventors tended to file most patents in the fields of medicine, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and electronics.
Our analysis of the immigration data produced the most startling results.
"Immigration Limbo" We estimate that, as of Sept. 30, 2006, there were 500,040 individuals in the main employment-based visa categories and an additional 555,044 family members in line for permanent-resident status in the U.S. An additional 126,421 with job offers were waiting abroad. In total, there were 1,181,505 educated and skilled professionals waiting to gain legal permanent-resident status.
In the 2005-06 academic year, there were 259,717 international students in the U.S. There were an additional 38,096 in practical training�many of these are PhD researchers.
One thing is certain: If we wait five years to fix immigration policy, the unskilled workers will still be here, but the skilled workers who are in "immigration limbo" will be long gone. Our loss will be the gain of countries we are increasingly competing with in the new global landscape.
The problem is simple. There aren't enough permanent-resident visas available each year for skilled workers and their families. And there is a limit of fewer than 10,000 visas that can be issued to immigrants from any single country. So countries with the largest populations such as India and China are allocated the same number of visas as Iceland and Mongolia.
Visa Delays Deprive U.S. of Talent The result is that wait times for employment visas currently stretch from four to six years for immigrants from countries such as India and China, and all indications are that these delays will get longer. Based on a 2003 study of new legal immigrants to the U.S. called the New Immigrant Survey, we estimate that in 2003, about 1 in 3 professionals who had been through the immigration process either planned to leave the U.S. or were uncertain about remaining. Media reports and other anecdotal evidence indicate that many skilled workers have indeed begun to return home.
Much of the current public debate on immigration centers on concerns over low-skilled immigrants entering the U.S. illegally. We do need to develop fair policies to deal with this problem. But skilled immigrants who enter the U.S. legally are a different issue. Professor Richard Devon of Pennsylvania State University estimates that in the U.S. about $200,000 is invested in a child by the time they gain a bachelor's degree in engineering. That means that the U.S. gains billions of dollars in benefit from educated professionals who leave other countries to come here. And we lose billions when they return home. Additionally, we end up training highly skilled workers in our markets, technology, and way of doing business.
Consider this: Earlier research by my team found that more than half of the engineering and technology companies started in Silicon Valley and a quarter of those started nationwide from 1995 to 2006 had immigrant founders. These companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Their founders tended to be very highly educated in science, technology, math, and engineering-related disciplines, with 96% of them holding bachelor's degrees and 75% holding master's degrees or PhDs (see BusinessWeek.com, 6/11/07, "Immigrants: Key U.S. Business Founders").
Patents: Evidence of Entrepreneurial Activity We also uncovered some puzzling data on patent filings. When we analyzed the international patent database maintained by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), we found that 1 in every 4 patent applications from the U.S. in 2006 listed a foreign national residing in the U.S. as an inventor. This number had increased threefold over an eight-year period and didn't take into account inventors who had become U.S. citizens before applying for a patent.
We realized that these foreign-national inventors were not likely to be from the same immigrant group that was founding high-tech companies. They were likely to be PhD students and employees of U.S. corporations who are in the U.S. on temporary visas. Temporary-visa holders can't easily start their own companies�their visas require them to work full time for the company that sponsored them.
For our new research, we reanalyzed the WIPO patent database to look at which immigrant groups and corporations were applying for the most patents. To understand the foreign-national data, we examined extensive information published by the Homeland Security Dept., the Labor Dept., and the State Dept. We also reviewed the New Immigrant Survey to gain insight into the immigration process and to examine the potential that, even after becoming permanent residents, skilled immigrants might return home.
Here is what we found:
� Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by companies such as Qualcomm (QCOM) (72%), Merck (MRK) (65%), General Electric (GE) (64%), Siemens (SI) (63%), and Cisco (CSCO) (60%). Their contributions were relatively small at Microsoft (MSFT) (3%) and General Motors (GM) (6%). Surprisingly, 41% of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals listed as inventors.
� Foreign nationals contributed to 25.6% of all U.S. international patent applications in 2006, but the numbers were much higher in several states such as New Jersey (37%), California (36%), and Massachusetts (32%).
� In 2006, 16.8% of international patent applications from the U.S. had inventors with Chinese names and 36% of these (or 5.5% of the total) were foreign nationals. Similarly, 13.7% had Indian names and 40% (or 6.2% of the total) were foreign nationals.
� Both Indian and Chinese inventors tended to file most patents in the fields of medicine, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and electronics.
Our analysis of the immigration data produced the most startling results.
"Immigration Limbo" We estimate that, as of Sept. 30, 2006, there were 500,040 individuals in the main employment-based visa categories and an additional 555,044 family members in line for permanent-resident status in the U.S. An additional 126,421 with job offers were waiting abroad. In total, there were 1,181,505 educated and skilled professionals waiting to gain legal permanent-resident status.
In the 2005-06 academic year, there were 259,717 international students in the U.S. There were an additional 38,096 in practical training�many of these are PhD researchers.
One thing is certain: If we wait five years to fix immigration policy, the unskilled workers will still be here, but the skilled workers who are in "immigration limbo" will be long gone. Our loss will be the gain of countries we are increasingly competing with in the new global landscape.
No comments:
Post a Comment