django.stone
03-09 08:24 PM
Just donated $25 for IV and FOIA. Thanks everybody for the initiative and support.
Mouns
04-30 03:26 PM
Due to 9/11?
Do you understand the frustration among people who want to make this work and who want to defend the system?
In other way, what good is there to follow the law while illegals have it easier?
Great question!
--- Answer
yes we understand (sure...). Two kinds of backlogs:
1) Processing backlogs, due to the surge and other issues. We try to provide services timely, we understand our responsibility (no info as to what is being done and how this will change in the future)
2) Limitations due to law: (PDs). Demands is greater than the visa numbers (China, India, Mexico, Philipine: You are screwed here!) => 20 years or more of waiting.
Do you understand the frustration among people who want to make this work and who want to defend the system?
In other way, what good is there to follow the law while illegals have it easier?
Great question!
--- Answer
yes we understand (sure...). Two kinds of backlogs:
1) Processing backlogs, due to the surge and other issues. We try to provide services timely, we understand our responsibility (no info as to what is being done and how this will change in the future)
2) Limitations due to law: (PDs). Demands is greater than the visa numbers (China, India, Mexico, Philipine: You are screwed here!) => 20 years or more of waiting.
gc_on_demand
12-10 04:38 PM
HOW IS THE PER-COUNTRY LIMIT CALCULATED?
Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.
- The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
- INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness Act in the 21st Century (AC21), removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)has occasionally allowed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE FAMILY PREFERENCES?
Cut-off date movement in most categories continues to be greater than might ordinarily be expected, and this is anticipated to continue for at least the next few months. This is because fewer applicants are proceeding with final action on their cases at consular posts abroad, and the volume of CIS adjustment cases remains low. Once large numbers of applicants begin to have their cases brought to final action, cut-off date movements will necessarily slow or stop. Moreover, in some categories cut-off date retrogression is a possibility. Therefore, readers should be aware that the recent rate of cut-off date advances will not continue indefinitely, but it is not possible to say at present how soon they will end.
WHY DID MOST EMPLOYMENT CUT-OFFS REMAIN UNCHANGED IN RECENT MONTHS?
Many of the categories were "unavailable" at the end of FY which resulted in excessive demand being received during October and November. Coupled with the fact that CIS Offices have been doing an excellent job of processing cases, this has had an impact on cut-off date movements. Some forward movement has begun for January as we enter the second quarter of the fiscal year.
In my view CIS is not processing the applications fast enough to be using the benefits of INA Section 202(a)(5). We need to understand reasons behind this. Per the official bulletin, it is clear that if CIS can process them fast enough, we could see a movement of EB2 till end of the 2005. How many times should CIS pre-adjudicate before actually approving the EB AOS applications?
State made a good start to give an explanation for these dates. But they still didn't consider DOL application volume and CIS processing bottlenecks in processing AOS cases. IV needs to ask CIS on processing capacities of AOS applications. If they can't process them fast enough, They need to open up the AC-140 process for India (it is available only for Bombay) centers to get the cases approved by state department in a much faster way.
In Jan 2010 DOL will publish their data and that will make thing very clear. I think DOS is assuming around 10 -15 k Spill over visas that can be available to Eb2 India ( based on previous years ) and that is what it take them into Oct - Dec 2005 range. They don't factor in CIS processing time. But I think from pool of 40-50k pre adjudicated apps CIS can easily consume 10k visas. But if there are less labors and more spill over visas ( like 30 -40 k) then be ready for mini version of july fiasco.
Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.
- The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
- INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness Act in the 21st Century (AC21), removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)has occasionally allowed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE FAMILY PREFERENCES?
Cut-off date movement in most categories continues to be greater than might ordinarily be expected, and this is anticipated to continue for at least the next few months. This is because fewer applicants are proceeding with final action on their cases at consular posts abroad, and the volume of CIS adjustment cases remains low. Once large numbers of applicants begin to have their cases brought to final action, cut-off date movements will necessarily slow or stop. Moreover, in some categories cut-off date retrogression is a possibility. Therefore, readers should be aware that the recent rate of cut-off date advances will not continue indefinitely, but it is not possible to say at present how soon they will end.
WHY DID MOST EMPLOYMENT CUT-OFFS REMAIN UNCHANGED IN RECENT MONTHS?
Many of the categories were "unavailable" at the end of FY which resulted in excessive demand being received during October and November. Coupled with the fact that CIS Offices have been doing an excellent job of processing cases, this has had an impact on cut-off date movements. Some forward movement has begun for January as we enter the second quarter of the fiscal year.
In my view CIS is not processing the applications fast enough to be using the benefits of INA Section 202(a)(5). We need to understand reasons behind this. Per the official bulletin, it is clear that if CIS can process them fast enough, we could see a movement of EB2 till end of the 2005. How many times should CIS pre-adjudicate before actually approving the EB AOS applications?
State made a good start to give an explanation for these dates. But they still didn't consider DOL application volume and CIS processing bottlenecks in processing AOS cases. IV needs to ask CIS on processing capacities of AOS applications. If they can't process them fast enough, They need to open up the AC-140 process for India (it is available only for Bombay) centers to get the cases approved by state department in a much faster way.
In Jan 2010 DOL will publish their data and that will make thing very clear. I think DOS is assuming around 10 -15 k Spill over visas that can be available to Eb2 India ( based on previous years ) and that is what it take them into Oct - Dec 2005 range. They don't factor in CIS processing time. But I think from pool of 40-50k pre adjudicated apps CIS can easily consume 10k visas. But if there are less labors and more spill over visas ( like 30 -40 k) then be ready for mini version of july fiasco.
franklin
07-18 03:29 PM
I just upgraded my monthly contribution too!
more...
badluck
07-24 01:18 PM
I think I have been very lucky so far. I don't think USCIS processes based on anything concrete, I think it's a little random. Or maybe I am just lucky.
I applied for PERM in Sep 2006 - EB3 - India.
I got approved for PERM in Mar 2007.
I applied for I-140 and I-485 concurrently in Jun 2007.
I-140 got approved July 20, 2007 and on July 23, 2007 I received all 4 receipts for I-140, I-485, EAD and AP. So my approval came before my receipt. I live in California so everything went to Nebraksa.
Lawyers emailed saying they also received the EAD card yesterday July 23, 2007.
Now I have to wait for only AP and Adjustment. And I still have 5 years left on my H1-B (2 years on this visa and then another extension).
So I say, anything is possible. I wake up every morning and pray to USCIS because they made my life better :) :) :)
Something is wrong it is impossible.... wait a minute your name is luckypaji....may be you are sardarji...just kidding brother dont get mad.:cool:
I applied for PERM in Sep 2006 - EB3 - India.
I got approved for PERM in Mar 2007.
I applied for I-140 and I-485 concurrently in Jun 2007.
I-140 got approved July 20, 2007 and on July 23, 2007 I received all 4 receipts for I-140, I-485, EAD and AP. So my approval came before my receipt. I live in California so everything went to Nebraksa.
Lawyers emailed saying they also received the EAD card yesterday July 23, 2007.
Now I have to wait for only AP and Adjustment. And I still have 5 years left on my H1-B (2 years on this visa and then another extension).
So I say, anything is possible. I wake up every morning and pray to USCIS because they made my life better :) :) :)
Something is wrong it is impossible.... wait a minute your name is luckypaji....may be you are sardarji...just kidding brother dont get mad.:cool:
mrdelhiite
06-25 01:28 PM
IV members have saved you a lot of money on attorney phone calls, getting answers to medical test questions and other general questions. Please contribute to IV so that we can keep this effort going. While everybody is busy collecting documents and paperwork for 485, core IV again is doing there personal paperwork and + lobbying.
Please contribute, especially if you are new and never contributed. Please do not be a freeloader and get your questions answered and run away.
Yes Amit you are 100 % right everyone esp I have to do that too ... i work with Aman in state and i see how much work you guys do.... just excuse me for a day or 2 i just have to get a H4 date and marrige done .. my would be is in India right now
-M
Please contribute, especially if you are new and never contributed. Please do not be a freeloader and get your questions answered and run away.
Yes Amit you are 100 % right everyone esp I have to do that too ... i work with Aman in state and i see how much work you guys do.... just excuse me for a day or 2 i just have to get a H4 date and marrige done .. my would be is in India right now
-M
more...
legalVoice
05-03 09:56 AM
Maybe it would be eating and sleeping... if they get bored with that they might approve 1 or 2 cases.
I keep hearing that DOL has allocated more resources to entering data. Does it really take so much effort to perform data entry. One of our customer is a large multinational company that has hired a few interns to convert huge stacks of paper files into electronic format by manually entering data into the system. These paper files go back decades, and these 5-6 interns have been making great progress.
In contrast, how long does it take to enter 300K cases into the system? Besides, if they have hired about 100 additional people or so, why are they using case reviewers to enter data? Can't they use interns to perform such low-skill job while continuing to use reviewers to perform their primary task?
My company recently interviewed a fresh computer science college graduate who is working with DOL in entering data. I wish we had hired him so that I could talk to him more about his job duties there.
I keep hearing that DOL has allocated more resources to entering data. Does it really take so much effort to perform data entry. One of our customer is a large multinational company that has hired a few interns to convert huge stacks of paper files into electronic format by manually entering data into the system. These paper files go back decades, and these 5-6 interns have been making great progress.
In contrast, how long does it take to enter 300K cases into the system? Besides, if they have hired about 100 additional people or so, why are they using case reviewers to enter data? Can't they use interns to perform such low-skill job while continuing to use reviewers to perform their primary task?
My company recently interviewed a fresh computer science college graduate who is working with DOL in entering data. I wish we had hired him so that I could talk to him more about his job duties there.
jasmin45
07-12 07:20 PM
URGENT ACTION ITEM : We need stories from people who suffered damages due to the July Visa bulletin fiasco. This request is coming straight from the office of Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren. Please respond - ESPECIALLY if you live in San Jose, CA (Congresswomans' district).
DO SEND YOUR STORIES ASAP to facilitate Hon. Rep who stood with us during this difficult time. :)
DO SEND YOUR STORIES ASAP to facilitate Hon. Rep who stood with us during this difficult time. :)
more...
she81
07-24 08:33 PM
But it did not help much. Basically, when you call PBEC if you come across the switch board operator, who usually sits in the forenoon sessions, you will not have any luck at all. She would ask you to send any queries/questions thru your attorney. I called both DOL and PBEC numbers several times. DOL people, while souding helpful, always said that they are helpless. As for PBEC, most times, I ran into this operator who gruffly told me to talk to my lawyer. I did talk to someone other than the switch board operator on a few occassions and they did give me some useful information. I then used that information to pester my attorney to take some action. I found it is generally best to call on Wednesdays/Thursdays during afternoon sessions. This is just my personal observation. In your case, there is nothing wrong in trying, is there? It is better to try and fail than not trying at all...
My LC application with a PD of Dec 2002 has been rotting at PBEC and finally ad for my case started appearing on AJE web site last week. My attorney has not received any thing at all. Mind you, in my case the recruitment efforts were completed long before it was forwarded to PBEC. It is precisely for this reason my application was 'unfit' for conversion to RIR. They now insist upon doing recruitment all over again. Neither my employer nor my attorney is ever involved in thid PBEC recruitment. The horror never ends...
Go ahead and call. You might get lucky and actually talk to the analyst. When you start your conversation do not start off with request for information. Say that you found a problem with your case in screenshot or something like that. Any thing that makes your conversation separate from the rest. Goodluck.
fb
Thanks a lot for the heads up. I'm sure your advice will come in handy tomorrow. I've asked my attorney to call, but they simply won't venture into it and recommend waiting until the end of this month. Finally, I'm taking it in my hands.
I'm sorry to hear your saga. It all boils down to sheer good luck, isn't it? Good luck with your case.
My LC application with a PD of Dec 2002 has been rotting at PBEC and finally ad for my case started appearing on AJE web site last week. My attorney has not received any thing at all. Mind you, in my case the recruitment efforts were completed long before it was forwarded to PBEC. It is precisely for this reason my application was 'unfit' for conversion to RIR. They now insist upon doing recruitment all over again. Neither my employer nor my attorney is ever involved in thid PBEC recruitment. The horror never ends...
Go ahead and call. You might get lucky and actually talk to the analyst. When you start your conversation do not start off with request for information. Say that you found a problem with your case in screenshot or something like that. Any thing that makes your conversation separate from the rest. Goodluck.
fb
Thanks a lot for the heads up. I'm sure your advice will come in handy tomorrow. I've asked my attorney to call, but they simply won't venture into it and recommend waiting until the end of this month. Finally, I'm taking it in my hands.
I'm sorry to hear your saga. It all boils down to sheer good luck, isn't it? Good luck with your case.
sracharla
09-04 02:25 PM
Thank you...what is the source of your information?
Presenting your EAD to DMV for verification does not invalidate your H1B status. Only when you present it to your employer and if he fills out form I-9 and if USCIS requests verification of employment then you will need to worry about that.
Presenting your EAD to DMV for verification does not invalidate your H1B status. Only when you present it to your employer and if he fills out form I-9 and if USCIS requests verification of employment then you will need to worry about that.
more...
eb3_nepa
03-15 04:18 PM
Very well summarized.
yabadaba
08-10 01:09 PM
anyone living in lincoln can go to the service center and ask R williams where our apps arE??
this post was a just a joke in case someone actually thinks of doing it.
this post was a just a joke in case someone actually thinks of doing it.
more...
sri1309
03-06 03:10 PM
I agree. EB3-I would go U for rest of the year.
I wish EB3-I and EB2-I go to U in this bulletin. It may be possible then, that people will start acting. Else we keep doing this every month. Look what we did this time last year or 2007. Same dreaming about the bulletin and then wait for next month.
God "make this bulletin U for all folks and , then they will start making some noise atleast"..
Who stopped us to write to senators and President who has even a Website open to take our feedback..
I wish EB3-I and EB2-I go to U in this bulletin. It may be possible then, that people will start acting. Else we keep doing this every month. Look what we did this time last year or 2007. Same dreaming about the bulletin and then wait for next month.
God "make this bulletin U for all folks and , then they will start making some noise atleast"..
Who stopped us to write to senators and President who has even a Website open to take our feedback..
needhelp!
09-10 05:15 PM
raminmd, Miya Maqbool, Guest007, sxm101, nosightofgc, p_aluri, uslegals, krispal
Here's to a strong community of active members!
Here's to a strong community of active members!
more...
indio0617
03-09 10:15 AM
Talking about expedited removal for convictions...
Canadian_Dream
06-02 08:18 PM
You are correct, it only uses I-140 application as a basis of setting the cut-off (Not I-485).
In my opinion:
Date of Introduction: May 15 2007
Effective Date: Oct 01 2008
Scenarios:
Scenario 1: I-140 Filed after Introduction and Approved before effective date. These cases are eligible for Immigrant Visa, whenever available.
Scenario 2: I-140 Filed after Introduction and not approved on the effective date. These cases have to refile.
Scenario 3: I-140 Filed before Introduction and not approved on the effective date. These cases are eligible for Immigrant Visa, whenever available.
Scenario 4: I-140 not filed becasue of backlogged labor. They retain the priority date but have to restart in the new system, whatever that means.
Only bad scenario is 2 and 4. The other bad aspect is reduced supply of immigrant visa 90,000.
Hey Canadian Dream:
I know things might change , i wish this law doesnt pass through at all. But in its form this is interpretation of major members and attorneys in current stage. Please correct me if i am wrong.
I might agree with your conclusion of start date, but Now coming to to cases :
Petetion for an employment based visa = I 140 , that were filed prior to the date of intro ( for our sake its Oct 2008 or May 15 2007 ) that were pending or approved , shall be treated as if such provision remained effective.
An approved petition may server as basis for issuance of an immigrant visa.
and for all people who are still in Labor stage will preserve their priority date.
Now based on this , if you have filed an I140 before the date of enactment what ever it might one should be fine. Once dates becomes current and I140 approved one can file for 485 in previous system.
I dont see any conclusion based on 485 is approved or not its just adjustment of status once PD become current , i think its all 140 that determines you are approved as an immigrant or not.
===========================
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
In my opinion:
Date of Introduction: May 15 2007
Effective Date: Oct 01 2008
Scenarios:
Scenario 1: I-140 Filed after Introduction and Approved before effective date. These cases are eligible for Immigrant Visa, whenever available.
Scenario 2: I-140 Filed after Introduction and not approved on the effective date. These cases have to refile.
Scenario 3: I-140 Filed before Introduction and not approved on the effective date. These cases are eligible for Immigrant Visa, whenever available.
Scenario 4: I-140 not filed becasue of backlogged labor. They retain the priority date but have to restart in the new system, whatever that means.
Only bad scenario is 2 and 4. The other bad aspect is reduced supply of immigrant visa 90,000.
Hey Canadian Dream:
I know things might change , i wish this law doesnt pass through at all. But in its form this is interpretation of major members and attorneys in current stage. Please correct me if i am wrong.
I might agree with your conclusion of start date, but Now coming to to cases :
Petetion for an employment based visa = I 140 , that were filed prior to the date of intro ( for our sake its Oct 2008 or May 15 2007 ) that were pending or approved , shall be treated as if such provision remained effective.
An approved petition may server as basis for issuance of an immigrant visa.
and for all people who are still in Labor stage will preserve their priority date.
Now based on this , if you have filed an I140 before the date of enactment what ever it might one should be fine. Once dates becomes current and I140 approved one can file for 485 in previous system.
I dont see any conclusion based on 485 is approved or not its just adjustment of status once PD become current , i think its all 140 that determines you are approved as an immigrant or not.
===========================
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
more...
cnag
01-07 04:07 PM
I closed on dec 27. Underwriter asked me about green card. I just sent EAD copy front and back as well as AP and explained to him that EAD is like learners driving permit that is issued when your GC is under process. :D
ameryki
01-06 03:56 PM
Hi,
I talked to my lawyer and she didn't mention about any kind of delay so can you please give me some more details about this PIM and how does it affect the whole process and slow things down.
Thanks a lot in advanced
scorion PIM process is a new additional step that is now part of visa stamping process. if you read around here you will find out more about it but in short uscis office in kentucy has to scan and upload all your supporting documents i.e employement letter etc that you might have used to get an H1 approval. The embassy you will visit for visa stamping has to review all the uploaded doc's before stamping your visa. Now I read in one of the thread here that someone in chennai has been stuck for over 3 to 4 weeks after their visa intvw just because the PIM process is not done. Hope this helps. Check out this thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16145
I talked to my lawyer and she didn't mention about any kind of delay so can you please give me some more details about this PIM and how does it affect the whole process and slow things down.
Thanks a lot in advanced
scorion PIM process is a new additional step that is now part of visa stamping process. if you read around here you will find out more about it but in short uscis office in kentucy has to scan and upload all your supporting documents i.e employement letter etc that you might have used to get an H1 approval. The embassy you will visit for visa stamping has to review all the uploaded doc's before stamping your visa. Now I read in one of the thread here that someone in chennai has been stuck for over 3 to 4 weeks after their visa intvw just because the PIM process is not done. Hope this helps. Check out this thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16145
NolaIndian32
03-12 01:42 PM
I fully support a donor-based forum too. I support the concept as put forth by IV Core.
Reddog, if information if free elsewhere, why are you still here at IV? If you are so unhappy with IV, why don't you find another forum where you CAN be happy?
It is very easy to contradict or find errors.
No body is getting paid here to have a tester test it.
Yes I like the idea of donor for paid members. There are 31000 members not even 2500 members are contributing. This is one way of making them pay for the services or the info you get from the forum.
Reddog, if information if free elsewhere, why are you still here at IV? If you are so unhappy with IV, why don't you find another forum where you CAN be happy?
It is very easy to contradict or find errors.
No body is getting paid here to have a tester test it.
Yes I like the idea of donor for paid members. There are 31000 members not even 2500 members are contributing. This is one way of making them pay for the services or the info you get from the forum.
ashutrip
06-22 11:34 AM
If PD means the date you filed your LC then its May 8th, still not over 90 days.
its the day ur LC was filed!!
its the day ur LC was filed!!
nk2006
10-16 04:29 PM
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases – especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer – and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications – ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD’s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to: Ombudsman
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant’s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant’s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases – especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer – and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications – ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD’s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to: Ombudsman
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant’s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant’s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
No comments:
Post a Comment