mani_r1
09-01 01:53 PM
We too got the magic emails saying our 485 has been approved. It was indeed a long journey that started back in 2000. Happy that it all ended well. My priority date is Dec 2005. I did create a service request early August which helped a lot. All the best to the rest of the guys who are waiting for the approval emails.
wallpaper com/happy-irthday/54.gifquot;
alterego
03-08 06:27 PM
Very well written. I can tell you through my observations of living in this society for 35 years:
1) People leaving because of long wait is a losing argument. Available information doesn't back it up. We have had severe retrogression since 2005 (h-1b quota cases have finished in matter of days)
2)USA is destination of choice. 9 million people file through greencard lottery for 50,000 slots and the main populated countries aren't even eligible to file (ie., India, China, Pakistan, Canada, etc.)
3) Call it what it is: Employment base immigration is least impacted. It is the only class of immigrants who are allowed to work/live in USA while they wait for greencard. Just about every other class has to wait outside until their number is called. This is number one impediment to EB grievances.
4) Stating that one is paying taxes, etc., is also losing argument. You are comparing yourself to the people who are here unlawful. Paying taxes isn't some virtue, it is the law.
5) Country quotas is fundamental to US Immigration. Getting rid of it for one class; ie employment base without looking at the whole thing is waste of time (ie., lottery, family base, etc.).
Now I don't want to get people upset but let's look at some things that have happened since 2005:
There was considerable debate on immigration.com of how the country quotas work and spillover of visas. Depending on how you read the law you would keep coming up with different conclusions. One way was to look at it as hard cap of 7% across all 140,000 visas that is 10,000 or so and it didn't matter about eb1,eb2, eb3. Any unused visas from ROW in EB1 would not go to india but rather flow down to eb2 row and then eb3 row. That s unused would go vertical instead of horizontal.
In uscis fiscal year 2004 eb3 went unavailable in summer of 2005. Statistics showed that India went well over their 7% limit.
In USCIS fiscal year 2005 we had severe retrogression for India. Visa bulletin states that spillover will be vertical instead of horizontal. Statistics showed that India only received 10,500 visas
Now, fiscal year 2006 . We have slow movement in visa dates; it appears that they are going vertical with spillover. However, in July 2007 they make it current for everyone and India goes over the 7% limit.
Fiscal year 2007 it appears from visa bulletin that they are going to go horizontal instead of vertical. No statistics yet of how much went to India.
Therefore; department of state has changed policy, interpretation without law change. Talk to many lawyers and they will tell you that spillover is supposed to happen vertical instead of horizontal. indian nationals have been benefitted greatly by department of state changing it on their whim. You don't see many people from ROW on these boards bellyaching about this; or contacting senators, or threatening lawsuits do you?
This is something to think about? As people keep highlighting this issue and if they continually point it out to lawmakers and someone from ROW gets the birght idea to challenge department of state then it will make it worse for India. I don't foresee any change whatsoever in country quota limits; mainly because it is fundamental to immigration and fundamental things don't change very easily.
In defense of the EB2I argument thought UN, I could argue that the Horizontal spillover was right all along and it was EB3ROW that benefited since 2005 at the expense of EB2I + C.
As you rightly point out, there is room for interpretation in the way the law is written, and that is why we keep having this discussion. I remember vehemently having this discussion with you on immigration.com. The bottom line is I am still waiting having been "current" twice since that time, I believe that there are many Eb3ROW folks with PDs later than mine that have sailed through ahead of me! The interpretation view of spillover over the last year is the only thing that gives me any hope near term.
In the mean time, those like me have dealt with a barrage of other processing changes that have also affected EB2I ie Labor Subs., Eb3-EB2 jumpers, the July VB fiasco impact on older 485s etc. Not sure about the exact extent of each, but nonetheless, you feel screwed by the system when your 485 is pending for near 4 yrs.
This is one harrowing experience everyone wants to forget once they get greened. Thanks for sticking around with your valuable insight.
1) People leaving because of long wait is a losing argument. Available information doesn't back it up. We have had severe retrogression since 2005 (h-1b quota cases have finished in matter of days)
2)USA is destination of choice. 9 million people file through greencard lottery for 50,000 slots and the main populated countries aren't even eligible to file (ie., India, China, Pakistan, Canada, etc.)
3) Call it what it is: Employment base immigration is least impacted. It is the only class of immigrants who are allowed to work/live in USA while they wait for greencard. Just about every other class has to wait outside until their number is called. This is number one impediment to EB grievances.
4) Stating that one is paying taxes, etc., is also losing argument. You are comparing yourself to the people who are here unlawful. Paying taxes isn't some virtue, it is the law.
5) Country quotas is fundamental to US Immigration. Getting rid of it for one class; ie employment base without looking at the whole thing is waste of time (ie., lottery, family base, etc.).
Now I don't want to get people upset but let's look at some things that have happened since 2005:
There was considerable debate on immigration.com of how the country quotas work and spillover of visas. Depending on how you read the law you would keep coming up with different conclusions. One way was to look at it as hard cap of 7% across all 140,000 visas that is 10,000 or so and it didn't matter about eb1,eb2, eb3. Any unused visas from ROW in EB1 would not go to india but rather flow down to eb2 row and then eb3 row. That s unused would go vertical instead of horizontal.
In uscis fiscal year 2004 eb3 went unavailable in summer of 2005. Statistics showed that India went well over their 7% limit.
In USCIS fiscal year 2005 we had severe retrogression for India. Visa bulletin states that spillover will be vertical instead of horizontal. Statistics showed that India only received 10,500 visas
Now, fiscal year 2006 . We have slow movement in visa dates; it appears that they are going vertical with spillover. However, in July 2007 they make it current for everyone and India goes over the 7% limit.
Fiscal year 2007 it appears from visa bulletin that they are going to go horizontal instead of vertical. No statistics yet of how much went to India.
Therefore; department of state has changed policy, interpretation without law change. Talk to many lawyers and they will tell you that spillover is supposed to happen vertical instead of horizontal. indian nationals have been benefitted greatly by department of state changing it on their whim. You don't see many people from ROW on these boards bellyaching about this; or contacting senators, or threatening lawsuits do you?
This is something to think about? As people keep highlighting this issue and if they continually point it out to lawmakers and someone from ROW gets the birght idea to challenge department of state then it will make it worse for India. I don't foresee any change whatsoever in country quota limits; mainly because it is fundamental to immigration and fundamental things don't change very easily.
In defense of the EB2I argument thought UN, I could argue that the Horizontal spillover was right all along and it was EB3ROW that benefited since 2005 at the expense of EB2I + C.
As you rightly point out, there is room for interpretation in the way the law is written, and that is why we keep having this discussion. I remember vehemently having this discussion with you on immigration.com. The bottom line is I am still waiting having been "current" twice since that time, I believe that there are many Eb3ROW folks with PDs later than mine that have sailed through ahead of me! The interpretation view of spillover over the last year is the only thing that gives me any hope near term.
In the mean time, those like me have dealt with a barrage of other processing changes that have also affected EB2I ie Labor Subs., Eb3-EB2 jumpers, the July VB fiasco impact on older 485s etc. Not sure about the exact extent of each, but nonetheless, you feel screwed by the system when your 485 is pending for near 4 yrs.
This is one harrowing experience everyone wants to forget once they get greened. Thanks for sticking around with your valuable insight.
tonyHK12
02-14 01:29 PM
Thanks indigokiwi, shrma, mp70, hx82, gcgonewild, phigi, chichannagri, ravi.shah, neil.0505, subho, Hopeful567, princeusa2006, sanatshah for your contributions. Tracker is at 6%.
Amount raised................$3,300.00
Contributions needed.....$46,700.00
.
.
Amount raised................$3,300.00
Contributions needed.....$46,700.00
.
.
2011 happy-irthday/109.gifquot;
glus
05-23 11:26 AM
Fax numbers to key senators in DC offices:
Clinton: 202-228-2082
Schumer: 202-228-3027
Lott: 202-224-2262
Reid: 202-224-7327
Cornyn: 202-228-2856
Hagel: 202-224-5213
Martinez: 202-228-5171
McConnell: 202-224-2499
Kennedy: 202-224-2417
I faxed them....do it tooo......its for our good and our future.
Clinton: 202-228-2082
Schumer: 202-228-3027
Lott: 202-224-2262
Reid: 202-224-7327
Cornyn: 202-228-2856
Hagel: 202-224-5213
Martinez: 202-228-5171
McConnell: 202-224-2499
Kennedy: 202-224-2417
I faxed them....do it tooo......its for our good and our future.
more...
gcformeornot
02-18 06:57 PM
for FP for myself. Dependents did month ago....
willigetgc?
02-21 08:39 AM
Thank you all for contributing. We do need more funds though....please spread the word.
more...
solaris27
08-13 08:24 AM
1) Contacted Senator/Congressman/Governor - No reply or progress
2) Filled 7001 form for Ombudsman - waiting for reply
3) Called USCIS 10 times in last 10 days and come to know that everything is cleared on my and wife applications. - everytime they tell someting diffrenet .
its shows how USCIS work ... as if everything is cleared our 485 should be cleared .
can't take infopass ( no option to check case status) or open SR ( as its not beyond 30 days) .
B
2) Filled 7001 form for Ombudsman - waiting for reply
3) Called USCIS 10 times in last 10 days and come to know that everything is cleared on my and wife applications. - everytime they tell someting diffrenet .
its shows how USCIS work ... as if everything is cleared our 485 should be cleared .
can't take infopass ( no option to check case status) or open SR ( as its not beyond 30 days) .
B
2010 happy birthday gif
chanduv23
03-10 07:10 AM
well you have a cooperative lawyer and a co operative employer...That is not always the case...Sometimes the employers are just using this excuse to keep folks working in the same position just because it suits employer's interests....
I agree no less with you. I went through a very bad employer who made me travel crazily (90%) though travel was not a part of the job and never gave access to vacations, nor bonuses and meagre hikes just because my GC was backlogged and my manager knew everything about it as he did all the paperwork. I did this for 4 years, later switched to a consulting company where employer is very cooperative.
Having a cooperative employer makes a big difference, something that makes you comfortable.
Weighing out various options like Canada, Australia must be of high priority as these countries, though racist, at the end of the day, you are not bonded with the people (you have choice to stay away from exploitation). Though there may not be as many jobs in those countries, it could just be a backup plan and who knows, every country is catching up now.
After 9/11, pro immigration policies are getting difficult and we never know the outcomes of these CIR bills, it is getting delayed now and we don't know how things are going to be.
In short, retrogression will be there and will affect us.
If you can do eb3 to eb2 conversion with an old PD, you are better off - go ahead and do that, if you have a recent eb3 PD, you must look for choices. USCIS clearly know the pattern and the "trickling effect" which was explained in murthy.com clearly explains the way these visas will be handled.
I agree no less with you. I went through a very bad employer who made me travel crazily (90%) though travel was not a part of the job and never gave access to vacations, nor bonuses and meagre hikes just because my GC was backlogged and my manager knew everything about it as he did all the paperwork. I did this for 4 years, later switched to a consulting company where employer is very cooperative.
Having a cooperative employer makes a big difference, something that makes you comfortable.
Weighing out various options like Canada, Australia must be of high priority as these countries, though racist, at the end of the day, you are not bonded with the people (you have choice to stay away from exploitation). Though there may not be as many jobs in those countries, it could just be a backup plan and who knows, every country is catching up now.
After 9/11, pro immigration policies are getting difficult and we never know the outcomes of these CIR bills, it is getting delayed now and we don't know how things are going to be.
In short, retrogression will be there and will affect us.
If you can do eb3 to eb2 conversion with an old PD, you are better off - go ahead and do that, if you have a recent eb3 PD, you must look for choices. USCIS clearly know the pattern and the "trickling effect" which was explained in murthy.com clearly explains the way these visas will be handled.
more...
shana04
12-17 12:37 AM
After reading so many real life incidents, I do not understand if I should take it positively or just bear with it.
I am really counting my 180 days (day in and day out)
All I need is freedom more that GC and this can be achived only with GC, so I need GC.
Then thinking about AC21, atleast we get some freedom. But some thing always scares from behind. Does this desi employer play some tricks by revoking I 140 (which is approved).
All I need is freedom....
My employer has tied me to a place where I do like to be. Does not increase my pay, does not let me take a decison. All he needs is money. My freedom is lost.
I need freedom to go around and live my life my way.
I wish good luck to one and all.
I feel some one from USCIS read our pathetic stories and do some thing.
Good luck my friends.
:)
I am really counting my 180 days (day in and day out)
All I need is freedom more that GC and this can be achived only with GC, so I need GC.
Then thinking about AC21, atleast we get some freedom. But some thing always scares from behind. Does this desi employer play some tricks by revoking I 140 (which is approved).
All I need is freedom....
My employer has tied me to a place where I do like to be. Does not increase my pay, does not let me take a decison. All he needs is money. My freedom is lost.
I need freedom to go around and live my life my way.
I wish good luck to one and all.
I feel some one from USCIS read our pathetic stories and do some thing.
Good luck my friends.
:)
hair Birthday Scraps : irthday
Rohan99
10-12 01:57 PM
Was your I-140 approved also at NSC? Maybe that's the reason why you have an NSC receipt. My I-140 was approved from TSC.....
My 140( in 2006) was from TSC and 485 from NSC
My 140( in 2006) was from TSC and 485 from NSC
more...
eb3_nepa
08-18 02:38 PM
Exactly... there is no such thing as LOW HANGING BALLS.... they shuld be fair to everyone... this is just a case of discrimination... first make all these useless categoreis... EB-1, eb2 blah blah..... i mean cummon who the fuck are they to decide how important my work is.... or under what category it falls... i thought the americans considered all work equal.. and respected everyone... well that was my impression before coming here... anyways.... so much fucking hipocrisy....
Ok people, the *F* bomb is being thrown about a LITTLE too much here.
Ok people, the *F* bomb is being thrown about a LITTLE too much here.
hot irthday greetings gif images.
qasleuth
02-12 03:52 PM
So both you and the other guy "qasleuth" have decided not to present any real reasons or arguments to support why I should not advise people to be ethically and morally responsible, but instead go after me to prove that I am somehow also morally corrupt like you guys are.
You want to bring in refugees from Siberia or where ever into this discussion just to dilute the real topic of the thread. You are no better than any politician for that matter.
That "qasleuth" has also not answered my question as to where and when I claimed that I am trying to pretend I have better standards than the next person on this forum or anywhere.
Since the two of you don't have answers to these questions of mine, I rest my case until that!
You have reading comprehension issues as well...if you get over yourself then you can comprehend things (let me be clear, I am referring here to my own posts and none of the other ones). You made your point on page 2 about the moral/ethical/legal perils of what the OP has done/proposing to do. You were fine with me. Continuously pointing out at other people as to how morally bankrupt they are (including your latest post) or how bad there comm skills are (written or otherwise) will certainly expose you to shots from others (like me). When you continuously point out others' morals then the presumption here is that you are squeaky clean. I pointed out, you are not. That is all. It does not mean, OPs post is morally/ethically/legally on the right side or I hold that opinion (actually I do not).
You want to bring in refugees from Siberia or where ever into this discussion just to dilute the real topic of the thread. You are no better than any politician for that matter.
That "qasleuth" has also not answered my question as to where and when I claimed that I am trying to pretend I have better standards than the next person on this forum or anywhere.
Since the two of you don't have answers to these questions of mine, I rest my case until that!
You have reading comprehension issues as well...if you get over yourself then you can comprehend things (let me be clear, I am referring here to my own posts and none of the other ones). You made your point on page 2 about the moral/ethical/legal perils of what the OP has done/proposing to do. You were fine with me. Continuously pointing out at other people as to how morally bankrupt they are (including your latest post) or how bad there comm skills are (written or otherwise) will certainly expose you to shots from others (like me). When you continuously point out others' morals then the presumption here is that you are squeaky clean. I pointed out, you are not. That is all. It does not mean, OPs post is morally/ethically/legally on the right side or I hold that opinion (actually I do not).
more...
house happy birthday gif. enough
gc28262
03-07 11:02 AM
Good point, has anybody asked this to any lawyer ? Can we challenge this in court ? This is the definition of judiciary review...If we can proove the country cap to be unconstitutional..
Judicial Review is when the Supreme Court reviews an act of Congress to see if it is Constitutional.
Judicial Review is the power of the Supreme Court to declare a law unconstitutuion (violation against the laws of the Constitutuion).
Do we have any reference to say it is unconstitutional ? If EB country cap is unconstitutional, FB cap would be unconstitutional too.
IMO this entire country cap rule has racist intent. If the caps were to promote diversity, the cap should be based on ethnicity of US population (ctizens and GC holders). Are Indians and Chinese a a mjority in this country ? No.
How does putting a cap on total visa allocation per year promote diversity ?
Judicial Review is when the Supreme Court reviews an act of Congress to see if it is Constitutional.
Judicial Review is the power of the Supreme Court to declare a law unconstitutuion (violation against the laws of the Constitutuion).
Do we have any reference to say it is unconstitutional ? If EB country cap is unconstitutional, FB cap would be unconstitutional too.
IMO this entire country cap rule has racist intent. If the caps were to promote diversity, the cap should be based on ethnicity of US population (ctizens and GC holders). Are Indians and Chinese a a mjority in this country ? No.
How does putting a cap on total visa allocation per year promote diversity ?
tattoo /happy-irthday-girl.gifquot;
raydhan
04-30 11:16 AM
rags,
Do you have the Bill Number by any chance so that we can look it up on the Thomas Library and see the contents?
Thanks. Good luck to us all.
Do you have the Bill Number by any chance so that we can look it up on the Thomas Library and see the contents?
Thanks. Good luck to us all.
more...
pictures birthday3.gif
shreekarthik
10-08 06:40 PM
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
dresses hi5/happy-irthday/glitter
english_august
07-09 04:59 PM
here's a writeup for reporters.
You might want to use the well formatted documents on this thread
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6248
They incorporate most of your arguments here.
You might want to use the well formatted documents on this thread
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6248
They incorporate most of your arguments here.
more...
makeup HappyBirthday48.gif
Libra
09-04 10:12 AM
congrats heathere3, and welcome to IV. there is a rally on sep 18th in DC if you dont know about it. please participate in rally and contribute in whatever way you can. thanks.
I received my receipts from the lawyer this morning. July 2nd applicaiton to NSC, transfered to TSC, labour approved TSC in Aug 2006.
Heather
EB-3 ROW
PD: Aug 2006
RD: July 2, 2007
ND: Aug. 24, 2007
EAD: ??
AP ??
I received my receipts from the lawyer this morning. July 2nd applicaiton to NSC, transfered to TSC, labour approved TSC in Aug 2006.
Heather
EB-3 ROW
PD: Aug 2006
RD: July 2, 2007
ND: Aug. 24, 2007
EAD: ??
AP ??
girlfriend Birthday Native American Girl
qasleuth
02-12 06:57 PM
d
hairstyles Happy Birthday
jindhal
09-24 11:42 PM
Guys this year's party is pretty much over :rolleyes:....whts the point debating something whether right or wrong which pretty much nobody can do anything about except went frustration from whichever side of the isle one sits on.....
As per Mr C.O. of USCIS I guess they have sent out the party invitation for the year so I guess there is no point sniping at each other. New inivitations will start from July next yr...;)
Take a chill pill guys....its a weekend.....get a beer....enjoy life( beleive me GC or no GC these days will not come by:make the most) :D
I agree..
As per Mr C.O. of USCIS I guess they have sent out the party invitation for the year so I guess there is no point sniping at each other. New inivitations will start from July next yr...;)
Take a chill pill guys....its a weekend.....get a beer....enjoy life( beleive me GC or no GC these days will not come by:make the most) :D
I agree..
rajuseattle
08-15 03:46 PM
My I-140 applied on july 13 2007 at NSC Transferred to TSC on 07/23/2007.
I-485/EAD/AP applied for me and my wife on 08/07/2007 at NSC per USCIS current filing instructions based on area where we live.
LUD 08/12/2007 on I-140.
---------------------------------
EB-3 (India) June 2003
LC (RIR) AD - 05/11/2007
I-140 (NSC) - 07/13/2007 --Transferred to TSC 07/23/2007
I-485/EAD/AP - 08/07/2007 - No receipt
I-485/EAD/AP applied for me and my wife on 08/07/2007 at NSC per USCIS current filing instructions based on area where we live.
LUD 08/12/2007 on I-140.
---------------------------------
EB-3 (India) June 2003
LC (RIR) AD - 05/11/2007
I-140 (NSC) - 07/13/2007 --Transferred to TSC 07/23/2007
I-485/EAD/AP - 08/07/2007 - No receipt
Dhundhun
07-21 09:44 PM
I'm confused!
I am July 2nd filer from last year. I did receive a FP notice in Oct 2007 but couldn't go for it. I sent a letter asking for another date but TSC..So go figure!...
Is e-filing costly? - NO
Does paper based filing not trigger FP? - NO
Is it slower? - NO
I am July 2nd filer from last year. I did receive a FP notice in Oct 2007 but couldn't go for it. I sent a letter asking for another date but TSC..So go figure!...
Is e-filing costly? - NO
Does paper based filing not trigger FP? - NO
Is it slower? - NO
No comments:
Post a Comment