decipher
04-23 04:16 PM
To be fair, inability to get educated (linked to career progression) deserves some attention.
I was in gautamagg's situation earlier (I am still kind of ). I believe there are several others in the same situation. GC delay is an serious hindrance when age is a factor for getting education. However, there are alternatives - part-time education and studying in another country. Have friends who have taken both the approaches. You can come back to the U.S (if you really need to) after your education/experience through H1 again.
As far as the U.S loosing talent, U.S legislators/administrators are the ones who should be worried and try to stop it. The coveted trying to convince them seems contradictory and doesn't gel well.
Personally, I think expecting a quick solution for the mired immigration issue to get an education is expecting a little too much when there are alternatives. This is a wrong forum to do it too.
I was in gautamagg's situation earlier (I am still kind of ). I believe there are several others in the same situation. GC delay is an serious hindrance when age is a factor for getting education. However, there are alternatives - part-time education and studying in another country. Have friends who have taken both the approaches. You can come back to the U.S (if you really need to) after your education/experience through H1 again.
As far as the U.S loosing talent, U.S legislators/administrators are the ones who should be worried and try to stop it. The coveted trying to convince them seems contradictory and doesn't gel well.
Personally, I think expecting a quick solution for the mired immigration issue to get an education is expecting a little too much when there are alternatives. This is a wrong forum to do it too.
wallpaper Makeup Ideas for Brides!
gcformeornot
03-16 12:54 PM
dude, you don't know jack.........there is no "eligibility" when it comes to EB2 or EB3.
The FUC@#NG job has to demand a Master's for EB2.
It's not like the monkey-jobs that you fools do for fuc@#ng two-bit desi employers who are anywhere from 5-100 people strong NEED an EB2 !!!!
any monkey can do 99% of the jobs that desi EB3 people do on the West Coast and the East Coast...........that's reality. It's YOUR problem if you cannot stomach this reality.
And all these folks have the audacity to call themselves "highly skilled"!!! hahahahahaha..............errr, by the way, what school did most of these people go to? Lemme guess..........some SDNMDFDF Institute of Tech in some freakin village in India??
If they did not qualify for EB2, then they should have FU@#%NG worked HARDER when they could.............should have gotten a good degree........and landed a respectable job in a BIG company....
And don't preach what you have no knowledge about, ok buddy?
For the record, i have NEVER used any legal shortcut ever.
that's the best way to get rid of such fools......
The FUC@#NG job has to demand a Master's for EB2.
It's not like the monkey-jobs that you fools do for fuc@#ng two-bit desi employers who are anywhere from 5-100 people strong NEED an EB2 !!!!
any monkey can do 99% of the jobs that desi EB3 people do on the West Coast and the East Coast...........that's reality. It's YOUR problem if you cannot stomach this reality.
And all these folks have the audacity to call themselves "highly skilled"!!! hahahahahaha..............errr, by the way, what school did most of these people go to? Lemme guess..........some SDNMDFDF Institute of Tech in some freakin village in India??
If they did not qualify for EB2, then they should have FU@#%NG worked HARDER when they could.............should have gotten a good degree........and landed a respectable job in a BIG company....
And don't preach what you have no knowledge about, ok buddy?
For the record, i have NEVER used any legal shortcut ever.
that's the best way to get rid of such fools......
chmur
09-10 06:53 PM
It is a given that Demand is not stagnant . If it were , backlog would have been reduced by 140K this year alone.
Each year the new quota is 140K , as long as the new demand each year ~100K - the remaining 40K goes towards backlog elimination . We will know in the next inventory report what is "net" reduction for 2010. One can do rough math of latest inventory report and the current priority dates to arrive at ~approximate figure of 35-40K.
I think EB3 should get cleared in next 5 years - I think flood of new EB2 applications are overblown.
I think "peak demand" was between 2003 and 2007 . Good news is USCIS is no more wasting numbers .
Given that change to laws is almost impossible. We should sit tight and wait for 3-5 years.
Each year the new quota is 140K , as long as the new demand each year ~100K - the remaining 40K goes towards backlog elimination . We will know in the next inventory report what is "net" reduction for 2010. One can do rough math of latest inventory report and the current priority dates to arrive at ~approximate figure of 35-40K.
I think EB3 should get cleared in next 5 years - I think flood of new EB2 applications are overblown.
I think "peak demand" was between 2003 and 2007 . Good news is USCIS is no more wasting numbers .
Given that change to laws is almost impossible. We should sit tight and wait for 3-5 years.
2011 Online Makeup Tips
battineni
08-12 09:47 AM
How come a person with EB2 category applied GC in 2006 doing the same thing that a EB3 person does who applied GC in 2002 gets their Green Cards approved?? Again not against any category...What in the world of kinda rationale is this is??
not even 2002, it's just 01Jan2002, means only 2001.
EB2 person who applied for greencard in 2006 getting the GC wth the person who applied in EB2 - 2006.
This gap between EB2 and EB3 is keep on increasing....
EB2 move is in Months....EB3 move not even in Days...
I'm not against EB2... but just comparing.:(
not even 2002, it's just 01Jan2002, means only 2001.
EB2 person who applied for greencard in 2006 getting the GC wth the person who applied in EB2 - 2006.
This gap between EB2 and EB3 is keep on increasing....
EB2 move is in Months....EB3 move not even in Days...
I'm not against EB2... but just comparing.:(
more...
bayarea07
08-06 07:46 PM
Read Post above yours and you will have the answer.
Hello Gurus.
My wife's and my I-485 status changed to 'Card Production' . PD Jan 2006.
My wife is in India and scheduled to return on 25th of August on Valid AP. My question is if my can still use to AP to enter USA ?
Appreciate your inputs.
Thanks
Mo
Hello Gurus.
My wife's and my I-485 status changed to 'Card Production' . PD Jan 2006.
My wife is in India and scheduled to return on 25th of August on Valid AP. My question is if my can still use to AP to enter USA ?
Appreciate your inputs.
Thanks
Mo
drirshad
08-07 07:26 AM
Guys does RD change every time we get a I-485 notice. The first receipt I got shows correct RD as July 02, 2007 then the second notice that was send Oct 07 to say my case has been transferred to Lincoln has an RD of Sep 08, 2007 does this RD change every time the receipt notice is sent. Does it matter if it changes.
more...
desi3933
02-11 01:03 PM
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
2010 Leopard Makeup Ideas
srikondoji
11-19 10:39 AM
My H1-B expires in another 8 months. I got my Labor cleared (EB-2) in 2 months through Perm and just finished applying for I-140. Before february, if i don't get my I-140 cleared i will go through Premium and apply for H1-B 3 year extension.
Getting my H1-B extended for 3 years is my goal. Once this happens, i will look elsewhere for a new job and start over GC process again hoping thta by then labor laws improve.
I have not dreamed/hoped to get GC. I am only hoping to stay in this country as long as possible.
I still don't understand why people are frustrated with delays in GC?
Why should you even stress yourself too much about this GC. Just enjoy the life and move on.
thanks
Getting my H1-B extended for 3 years is my goal. Once this happens, i will look elsewhere for a new job and start over GC process again hoping thta by then labor laws improve.
I have not dreamed/hoped to get GC. I am only hoping to stay in this country as long as possible.
I still don't understand why people are frustrated with delays in GC?
Why should you even stress yourself too much about this GC. Just enjoy the life and move on.
thanks
more...
PD_Dec2002
07-05 12:22 PM
Just my $0.02:
I understand the frustration for IV to gather funds when it has so many members. But it's possible that IV has that many members because it is a free site.
If this becomes a paid site, you might see the number of members dwindle, and that's not a good idea because even if members don't financially contribute to IV, they do offer their perspectives/opinions/feedback/critique and help others. Those who want to financially contribute to IV will do so whether IV is a free or a paid site.
IMHO, it would be a mistake to make IV a paid site thinking that this will force members to financially contribute. Sure IV forums helped a lot with finding information about I-485 applications, but people have been filing I-485s on their own even before IV was in existence. Which is not to say, IV has no value, but I hope you see where I am going with this....if members don't want to contribute, then they won't. They will go to other forums like they used to before IV was in existence...which will be a step down, but at least they are holding on to their $20 or howmuchever.
Before replying to this, please read my disclaimer below. I have to add it given the fact how hot-headed/short-tempered members have been in the last few days where they will flame someone just because their opinions differ.
Thanks,
Jayant
Disclaimer: These are my opinions. You don't have to agree with them. If you disagree, just ignore them. I am not interested in justifying myself about anything that you might have to say. I would, however, welcome a civil and a healthy discussion.
I understand the frustration for IV to gather funds when it has so many members. But it's possible that IV has that many members because it is a free site.
If this becomes a paid site, you might see the number of members dwindle, and that's not a good idea because even if members don't financially contribute to IV, they do offer their perspectives/opinions/feedback/critique and help others. Those who want to financially contribute to IV will do so whether IV is a free or a paid site.
IMHO, it would be a mistake to make IV a paid site thinking that this will force members to financially contribute. Sure IV forums helped a lot with finding information about I-485 applications, but people have been filing I-485s on their own even before IV was in existence. Which is not to say, IV has no value, but I hope you see where I am going with this....if members don't want to contribute, then they won't. They will go to other forums like they used to before IV was in existence...which will be a step down, but at least they are holding on to their $20 or howmuchever.
Before replying to this, please read my disclaimer below. I have to add it given the fact how hot-headed/short-tempered members have been in the last few days where they will flame someone just because their opinions differ.
Thanks,
Jayant
Disclaimer: These are my opinions. You don't have to agree with them. If you disagree, just ignore them. I am not interested in justifying myself about anything that you might have to say. I would, however, welcome a civil and a healthy discussion.
hair Make Up Ideas For Black Women
GCard_Dream
01-16 12:54 PM
Just signed up for $20 recurring payments through Paypal. Subscription#S-91A48116HP955223R
Let's make this a 100 page thread with messages filled with new contributions.
Let's make this a 100 page thread with messages filled with new contributions.
more...
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.
hot Eye Makeup Tips For Asian Eyes
TeddyKoochu
09-10 01:45 PM
If USCIS wants to do another JULY 2007 they never learnt their lession. With the Quarterly/annual quota I dont think USCIS legally can make EB2 current. I hate another JULY 2007 for sure.
I would welcome another Jul 07 atleast it gives all EB2 / EB3 to be able to file for their 485's. This may not be very likely I agree with you. I can feel your pain with your PD but as Sumggymba has also said that it is extremely beneficial to be able to file for 485 and have EAD / AP.
I believe that what may happen when EB2-I/C preadjudicated numbers get exhausted is Option # 2) Keep accepting applications in a controlled manner so as to approve in quarter or year because this is what happened for EB2 ROW; again this is my personal guess / assumption, Iam not an expert on the INA or the law. Also those who have not been able to file for I485 cannot be kept in a endless denial with the preadjudicated numbers exhausted I think the chance will come for EB2 I/C either by Sep 2011 or latest by Jul 2012.
I would welcome another Jul 07 atleast it gives all EB2 / EB3 to be able to file for their 485's. This may not be very likely I agree with you. I can feel your pain with your PD but as Sumggymba has also said that it is extremely beneficial to be able to file for 485 and have EAD / AP.
I believe that what may happen when EB2-I/C preadjudicated numbers get exhausted is Option # 2) Keep accepting applications in a controlled manner so as to approve in quarter or year because this is what happened for EB2 ROW; again this is my personal guess / assumption, Iam not an expert on the INA or the law. Also those who have not been able to file for I485 cannot be kept in a endless denial with the preadjudicated numbers exhausted I think the chance will come for EB2 I/C either by Sep 2011 or latest by Jul 2012.
more...
house makeup ideas for redheads.
Ramba
07-14 06:01 PM
Consult an attorney because if you applied for I-485 in July 2007 and quit employer in August, you might not be covered under AC21 since 6 months did not pass since adjucation request (I-485) was files with USCIS.
This is aboslutly incorrect. Dont spread false information.
Here is the Q&A in USCIS memo abot changing employer before 180 days
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate
This is aboslutly incorrect. Dont spread false information.
Here is the Q&A in USCIS memo abot changing employer before 180 days
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate
tattoo Asian Eye Makeup Tips – for A
ski_dude12
03-09 02:23 PM
No change for EB2-I.
more...
pictures Eye Makeup Ideas!
HV000
03-18 06:18 PM
Please see the last sentece which says "Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country".
When they use this spill over, only PD is imp not the country.
This will make prediction difficult since we do not know how many PDs are eligible in either country. Am i right?
When they use this spill over, only PD is imp not the country.
This will make prediction difficult since we do not know how many PDs are eligible in either country. Am i right?
dresses wedding makeup ideas,
pappu
07-02 05:18 PM
Thanks Ramus. Yes this is important for us in order to proceed with our action plan for protest against this insane visa bulletin. We need everyone's help and contributions.
more...
makeup eye makeup tips Stylehive
feedfront
09-14 04:04 PM
Please share your EVL, if possible.
girlfriend hair of Witch Makeup Ideas
nixstor
07-03 12:26 PM
I admit, it seems discriminatory to say you can't get your GC now because you're from this country or that country but these "high volume" countries have created the current back log through their sheer numbers and sometimes multiple applications, not the system. The system is fair to ALL and for some group to say that it isn't fair because all of that group isn't getting what they want is unjust to the rest of us. I knew I would be pounced upon when I submitted my original post and it only proves my point of personal agendas; sometimes I wonder what the "I" in "IV" really stands for? Don't be so arrogant as to believe that your higher education should give you more rights than others - that doesn't fly with me! I am frustrated with this forum because of this arrogance and I may not visit too much longer!
I do have one question for all of you who are in favor of eliminating the per country limit; do you support an eventual road to citizenship for the large group of people who dominate the "other side" of immigration? If you don't, some may think you hipocritical to want the rules changed for yourselves!
Sheer number of applications from the high volume countries has created the backlog?? Are you saying/wishing that these people should not have come in the first place to avoid the backlog?? My friend, backlogs did not happen completely because of the sheer number of applications and gaming. Backlogs happened primarily because of wasted visa numbers and issues surrounding it. If there was no visa number wastage the priority dates would have been around 2-3 years behind as opposed to 7 or 8 years. There are gamers in every system. If a system does not work for people as it is supposed to, gamers do so to get out of the system. Not that IV condones such things but it happens in any system, when the system is broken.
The I in IV definitely does not stand for me only or for any one only. I along with V only makes sense. I by itself does not get IV any where.
So removing the per country limit would remove the "bias" off these countries and move it to the ones with lower populations; so, in essence the discrimination would be reversed?
On one hand you are saying that there is a bias towards lower population countries now and you are ok with it, just because you happen to benefit from it. Is that what you mean?
If retrogressed countries are asking for 75% of the numbers reserved to them rather than having one line for all, You have a good point in saying that the bias is shifting towards retrogressed countries. There is no such provision like that. The provision creates one line depending on when you entered the line. You enter the line ahead, you get it first.
So keeping the limits intact is NOT a bias to you? You can't have it both ways. What do you think is a solution? The point system you referred to came with the same 10% limit on the retrogressed countries. What difference does it make to a retrogressed person with 96 out of 100 points, but still needs to wait for 4 years, while some one from Krakozhia walks away in 6 months with 60 points. B T W , you also said that higher education deserves more does not fly with you. I am not sure how you want points to be assigned, other than education and experience. Don't let the fear and protectionist thought take over the logical and rational thought.
The "other side" of immigration is an entirely different topic. Their issues and our issues, their path to the end line and ours are entirely different. We can't simply compare apples and oranges and call people hypocrites. That said, I personally support it and feel that it will happen at some point depending on the majority in both houses and one party will suffer for the decisions it made. As a by stander, I sympathize with the situation the "other side" has been in. I have a full plate to work on.
I do have one question for all of you who are in favor of eliminating the per country limit; do you support an eventual road to citizenship for the large group of people who dominate the "other side" of immigration? If you don't, some may think you hipocritical to want the rules changed for yourselves!
Sheer number of applications from the high volume countries has created the backlog?? Are you saying/wishing that these people should not have come in the first place to avoid the backlog?? My friend, backlogs did not happen completely because of the sheer number of applications and gaming. Backlogs happened primarily because of wasted visa numbers and issues surrounding it. If there was no visa number wastage the priority dates would have been around 2-3 years behind as opposed to 7 or 8 years. There are gamers in every system. If a system does not work for people as it is supposed to, gamers do so to get out of the system. Not that IV condones such things but it happens in any system, when the system is broken.
The I in IV definitely does not stand for me only or for any one only. I along with V only makes sense. I by itself does not get IV any where.
So removing the per country limit would remove the "bias" off these countries and move it to the ones with lower populations; so, in essence the discrimination would be reversed?
On one hand you are saying that there is a bias towards lower population countries now and you are ok with it, just because you happen to benefit from it. Is that what you mean?
If retrogressed countries are asking for 75% of the numbers reserved to them rather than having one line for all, You have a good point in saying that the bias is shifting towards retrogressed countries. There is no such provision like that. The provision creates one line depending on when you entered the line. You enter the line ahead, you get it first.
So keeping the limits intact is NOT a bias to you? You can't have it both ways. What do you think is a solution? The point system you referred to came with the same 10% limit on the retrogressed countries. What difference does it make to a retrogressed person with 96 out of 100 points, but still needs to wait for 4 years, while some one from Krakozhia walks away in 6 months with 60 points. B T W , you also said that higher education deserves more does not fly with you. I am not sure how you want points to be assigned, other than education and experience. Don't let the fear and protectionist thought take over the logical and rational thought.
The "other side" of immigration is an entirely different topic. Their issues and our issues, their path to the end line and ours are entirely different. We can't simply compare apples and oranges and call people hypocrites. That said, I personally support it and feel that it will happen at some point depending on the majority in both houses and one party will suffer for the decisions it made. As a by stander, I sympathize with the situation the "other side" has been in. I have a full plate to work on.
hairstyles exotic makeup ideas.
tooclose
07-12 06:59 PM
That may not be true. I had read somewhere (in this forum) that DOS sets up cut-off dates as 01, 08, 14, and 22, and 01 includes from 1st to 7th, 08 includes 8th to 13th, and so on and so forth.
Come August 1st, who knows, (strange are the ways USCIS works) his file may be the first one to be picked up and approved before those of March 05 guys, some of whom are still waiting, like Pitha etal.
You deserve a happy hour if thats true, since my PD falls within that window :)
Come August 1st, who knows, (strange are the ways USCIS works) his file may be the first one to be picked up and approved before those of March 05 guys, some of whom are still waiting, like Pitha etal.
You deserve a happy hour if thats true, since my PD falls within that window :)
immigrationmatters30
09-19 02:25 PM
What if 485 was not filed but have an approved 140? Economy is taking big hits on the all the consulting firms even the big ones.I know this because I work for one and I was told budget spending on IT is going to be really tight moving forward for another couple of years espcially in financial sector.
delhiguy
07-04 08:03 PM
Excellent
I agree with you 100 % , I believe having excessive media coverage and lawsuits , would bring the GC number and process in the open , and most americans would oppose the GC as they oppose H1B.
If i was a american i would surely be happy with USCIS/DOS creating so much trouble for the immigrants to my country , who i believe are taking my job.
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
I agree with you 100 % , I believe having excessive media coverage and lawsuits , would bring the GC number and process in the open , and most americans would oppose the GC as they oppose H1B.
If i was a american i would surely be happy with USCIS/DOS creating so much trouble for the immigrants to my country , who i believe are taking my job.
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
No comments:
Post a Comment