greencardfever2007
06-23 11:58 AM
I have filed I-485 under EB2 category using EB3 priority date along with copy of approved EB3 I-140 approval notice. Now my employer is considering reusing my approved EB3 labor for someone else, thinking that my EB2 I-485 application will not be impacted as it is now filed with CIS. Can the employer reuse the EB3 labor without impacting my case? :confused:
Please advice.
Thank you.
Please advice.
Thank you.
wallpaper Hilary Duff walking Post
GCwaitforever
11-06 11:59 AM
Concurrent H-1Bs are always non-cap.:)
EB3_SEP04
08-22 11:24 AM
I applied on June 12 (paper file) at TSC , Notice date June 18th , RD June 13th and received EAD cards on Aug 18th (CPO mail on Aug 15th).
Hope this info helps.
My RD is 7/2/08, still waiting for approval, not even an LUD after notice date. I see EB2 folks getting renewals within 30 days or so. Isn't this descrimination?
Hope this info helps.
My RD is 7/2/08, still waiting for approval, not even an LUD after notice date. I see EB2 folks getting renewals within 30 days or so. Isn't this descrimination?
2011 Hilary+duff+photoshoot+
intheyan
08-14 06:42 PM
Congrads. Did your dependent got approved I-485?
more...
mugwump
03-13 10:17 AM
I apologize in advance if people think my post is inappropriate for this thread, but I couldn�t find the older thread I was looking for.
I was wondering what happened with the discussion about the potential impacts of Canadian Immigration on US GC process. I had read before that UCSIC might consider it as an abandonment of the 485 application.
I had applied for canadian immig as a back up and got a medical request form from Canadian Consul. I am planning to go ahead with it. Was hoping to find out if people have been landing in Canada in this post 485 filing world??
Responses will be appreciated.
I was wondering what happened with the discussion about the potential impacts of Canadian Immigration on US GC process. I had read before that UCSIC might consider it as an abandonment of the 485 application.
I had applied for canadian immig as a back up and got a medical request form from Canadian Consul. I am planning to go ahead with it. Was hoping to find out if people have been landing in Canada in this post 485 filing world??
Responses will be appreciated.
saimrathi
07-03 09:21 AM
Sorry if you find it offensive, but I dont think its going to prove anything to the USCIS and I am not even sure they will notice it.
Why is no one talking about a public demonstartion in New York or something along those lines that is bound to get TV reporters attention and having a spokesperson who can speak on our behalf in front of a national audience and talk about the discrimintaion that US shows against legal workers
If Illegal Immigrants have the courage to pursue their agenda on the streets what is stopping us from doing it.
What are we afraid of? its not the lack of issues, its the lack of resolve
Lets see if thread swells to dewcent levels we can organize a protest against USCIS infront of NBC studios
I hope you get a day off from work for doing that..
Why is no one talking about a public demonstartion in New York or something along those lines that is bound to get TV reporters attention and having a spokesperson who can speak on our behalf in front of a national audience and talk about the discrimintaion that US shows against legal workers
If Illegal Immigrants have the courage to pursue their agenda on the streets what is stopping us from doing it.
What are we afraid of? its not the lack of issues, its the lack of resolve
Lets see if thread swells to dewcent levels we can organize a protest against USCIS infront of NBC studios
I hope you get a day off from work for doing that..
more...
ppt.b
09-11 10:08 AM
Our checks were cashed on 09/04 and our lawyer has still not received our recipts.However we received FP yesterday by mail and our appointment date is 09/25.
We are waiting for our receipts and EAD.
So expect your FP notices anytime.
My 485 application was filed on July 1st, 2007. Yesterday I received an email from my lawyer indicating that they have received the receipts for 485, 765 & 131 for all the applicants in my family.
I understand that it takes 3 to 4 weeks after receiving the receipt notices to hear about the fingerprinting appointment.
1. Considering the number of AOS applications filed in July, when can I expect the fingerprinting appointment?
2. Also how will that correspondence occur: mail or telephone ? Will I hear about this directly or will my lawyer hear about it?
3. Can few of you who have received the appointment for fingerprinting after filing AOS application in May 07 - Aug 07 timeframe post some details:
a) When did you receive the AOS receipts?
b) When did you hear about the fingerprinting and how?
c) When are you expecting EAD or if you have received it, how long did it take? I am aware that it takes 90 to 120 days from the date of filing and this was answered in one of my questions posted on this forum but wanted to know these stats in the current conditions.
Thanks,
We are waiting for our receipts and EAD.
So expect your FP notices anytime.
My 485 application was filed on July 1st, 2007. Yesterday I received an email from my lawyer indicating that they have received the receipts for 485, 765 & 131 for all the applicants in my family.
I understand that it takes 3 to 4 weeks after receiving the receipt notices to hear about the fingerprinting appointment.
1. Considering the number of AOS applications filed in July, when can I expect the fingerprinting appointment?
2. Also how will that correspondence occur: mail or telephone ? Will I hear about this directly or will my lawyer hear about it?
3. Can few of you who have received the appointment for fingerprinting after filing AOS application in May 07 - Aug 07 timeframe post some details:
a) When did you receive the AOS receipts?
b) When did you hear about the fingerprinting and how?
c) When are you expecting EAD or if you have received it, how long did it take? I am aware that it takes 90 to 120 days from the date of filing and this was answered in one of my questions posted on this forum but wanted to know these stats in the current conditions.
Thanks,
2010 Hilary Duff quot;Let It Bequot; foot
lostinbeta
10-20 10:56 PM
Oh... yeah that makes sense. I just change the spelling so it still shows, it is just grammatically incorrect :P
more...
alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
hair Hilary Duff makes me regret my
jnraajan
03-20 10:04 AM
Ok move over Prez elections..what happens in 09 after the Prez election..the current senate is the same..which refuses to pass any immi bill..just because the Prez elections will get over this year..why are we expecting that next year any bill will pass??..
So Lobby , more lobbying and extreme lobbying..is the way to go..!!I dont see any other way out;)
Why we are expecting that something next year? One Word. Politics. The current congress will not do anything now, because, they dont want to alienate 1 particular group during an election year. Now, I am not saying that they will do anything in '09. But, with more lobbying, we might see some success.
So Lobby , more lobbying and extreme lobbying..is the way to go..!!I dont see any other way out;)
Why we are expecting that something next year? One Word. Politics. The current congress will not do anything now, because, they dont want to alienate 1 particular group during an election year. Now, I am not saying that they will do anything in '09. But, with more lobbying, we might see some success.
more...
somma
10-25 03:41 PM
My EAD status shows "card production ordered" and my spouse is showing as pending. This has been like this for the past 4 days.
Looks like they don't want to update the secondary information online.
:confused:
Looks like they don't want to update the secondary information online.
:confused:
hot Hilary Duff in Hilary Duff
arunmohan
11-16 12:35 PM
bump
more...
house hilary duff 2011 album.
jonty_11
03-02 02:25 PM
Exception 4 - have a question around this statement: For German transit VISA
- are holding a valid visa or other residence permit for the USA (this includes advance paroles, but not approval notices), Canada or Switzerland and travel to the country which issued that visa or residence permit
do not need transit VISA.
Does that mean if you are travelling from India to US (with valid US Visitor VISA) u need a transit VISA.
Above exception seem to appy only if u are travelling to country that issued u the VISA (india), but in this case we are travelling from that Country to US.
- are holding a valid visa or other residence permit for the USA (this includes advance paroles, but not approval notices), Canada or Switzerland and travel to the country which issued that visa or residence permit
do not need transit VISA.
Does that mean if you are travelling from India to US (with valid US Visitor VISA) u need a transit VISA.
Above exception seem to appy only if u are travelling to country that issued u the VISA (india), but in this case we are travelling from that Country to US.
tattoo Hilary Duff proves that women
ItIsNotFunny
11-17 11:41 AM
Don't need to be hard on him. There could be genuine friend or there are reasons why people don't want say its them.
Why are you so scared of posting by saying that this problem is with you. Why do you have to bring your friend in. If it is really for your friend, then why cant he come and ask himself.
I wish I had a friend like you who will find answers to my immigration problems ....
Why are you so scared of posting by saying that this problem is with you. Why do you have to bring your friend in. If it is really for your friend, then why cant he come and ask himself.
I wish I had a friend like you who will find answers to my immigration problems ....
more...
pictures Hilary Duff tattoo sweats
sunny
10-02 02:13 PM
I am not sure if the I-94 you receive along with your H1 approval means anything.
Also it’s your responsibility to hand over your stamped I-94 while leaving the country at the airport. When you arrive the new one you get in the plane will be stamped and should be used.
Also it’s your responsibility to hand over your stamped I-94 while leaving the country at the airport. When you arrive the new one you get in the plane will be stamped and should be used.
dresses hilary duff
satishku_2000
06-03 04:32 AM
Keith Ellison, Congressman from MN was in Milwaukee, WI today.
I had a chance to meet with him on a small gathering for his fund raiser.
He is a member of Judiciary commitee.
We asked him questions on how to become more active in Politics, how Congress works etc etc.
He gave a good example:
He said politicians are like a mom with many kids..one kid is labor union asking for help for their issues, other is teachers union etc etc.
And if one kid is shy and does not say anything then he is not going to get anything.
Point is very simple, Congress needs to heard like crazy from legal Immigrants about issues. So please on Mon during lunch call your congressman every day for next week. Send them faxes, emails etc.
So when they vote they know that what are issues for legal immigrants.
If you don't then you won't get anything. It is that simple.
thanks,
engineer
Hey
buddy nice post , did u get a chance to discuss any of our issues with the congressman?
I had a chance to meet with him on a small gathering for his fund raiser.
He is a member of Judiciary commitee.
We asked him questions on how to become more active in Politics, how Congress works etc etc.
He gave a good example:
He said politicians are like a mom with many kids..one kid is labor union asking for help for their issues, other is teachers union etc etc.
And if one kid is shy and does not say anything then he is not going to get anything.
Point is very simple, Congress needs to heard like crazy from legal Immigrants about issues. So please on Mon during lunch call your congressman every day for next week. Send them faxes, emails etc.
So when they vote they know that what are issues for legal immigrants.
If you don't then you won't get anything. It is that simple.
thanks,
engineer
Hey
buddy nice post , did u get a chance to discuss any of our issues with the congressman?
more...
makeup Hilary Duff quot;Let It Bequot; foot
Amma
10-09 05:38 PM
I am in.
girlfriend Re: Hilary Duff#39;s Side Tattoo:
krishmunn
01-20 09:36 AM
We are expecting, so I do not think it is possible to change insurance. We still tried and got rejected. So that we will leave us with COBRA in case my wife chooses to quit or something happens to her job. And does H4 visa affect COBRA coverage? If you can answer this question that will be very helpful.
She should be eligible for COBRA ... no issues.
And I guess she is also eligible for the discount/economic stimulus on COBRA. I did not see anything that suggest one must be a Citizen/LPR for that discount
She should be eligible for COBRA ... no issues.
And I guess she is also eligible for the discount/economic stimulus on COBRA. I did not see anything that suggest one must be a Citizen/LPR for that discount
hairstyles hilary duff hairstyle.
gcnirvana
07-17 02:34 PM
IV is a public forum and recently its under the radar from various different organizations. So please do not use profanity in your language. You never know how it might come back and bite us. Please...please...please...
Murthy is a she...and I would but I'm not single. ;)
Murthy is a she...and I would but I'm not single. ;)
RandyK
10-02 03:06 PM
If the employer is in good financially, then somehow it was not proved to th USCIS when you submitted the docs for the RFE.
If you can prove the company is in good fin cond. applealing probably is the best option than starting all over
If you can prove the company is in good fin cond. applealing probably is the best option than starting all over
ram_ram
10-01 09:43 AM
The backlogs at DOLS's found a solution..PERM. Similarly premium processing was introduced for I-140's. I think now it's time to move the Departments and courts to find a more efficient Security/Name check process. If not USCIS will continue to loose tons of visa numbers every year. Though USCIS has 26 k cases that has the visa number available,
many of them are struck with FBI. Any movements or actions?
Successfully Challenging USCIS Delays in Federal Court
On September 10, the Los Angeles Times featured an article about how FBI name checks have been slowing down the process of gaining immigration benefits for hundreds of thousands of applicants.
The article revealed that "nearly 320,000 people were waiting for their name checks to be completed as of August 7, including more than 152,000 who had been waiting for more than six months, according to the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. More than 61,000 had been waiting for more than two years."
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed a lawsuit in federal court regarding this issue. The Times article quotes an ACLU attorney who stated that "there is nothing in immigration law that says that a citizenship application should take two, three, four years. That's absurd. People who have not been any sort of threat ... have been caught up in this dragnet."
Applicants for adjustment of status, citizenship, extensions of stay and many other immigration benefits have taken days off work to visit USCIS offices only to be told that the USCIS can do nothing since the name check process is in the hands of the FBI.
Nor do letters and meetings with Senators and Members of Congress yield results. They receive polite letters from the USCIS' Congressional Liaison Unit to the effect that "Sorry, but this is FBI's problem, not ours."
DHS Secretary Chertoff announced that his Department is meeting with the FBI (which is part of the Department of Justice) to work out a more efficient system of processing these name checks, but so far, the number of people waiting for results from the FBI continues to grow and grow.
The problem exists for applicants from a wide variety of countries and affects Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, etc.
Our solution is to sue both the USCIS and the FBI in Federal Court. Most Federal Judges are not reluctant to order the FBI and the USCIS to complete their name checks and application processing by a date certain.
Many applicants have turned to litigation as the one and only method of solving the name check problem. The numbers of such lawsuits have increased from just 680 in 2005 to 2,650 in 2006 to over 4,100 this year. Although there is no guarantee of success, our law firm has yet to lose one of these cases in Federal Court.
The Times article concludes with a quote from me:
"There is only one thing that works, and that is suing them in federal court."
We link to the Times article, "Caught in a Bureaucratic Black Hole" from
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091107P.shtml
We also link to AILF's new practice advisory entitled "Mandamus Jurisdiction over Delayed Applications: Responding to the Government's Motion to Dismiss" from
http://shusterman.com/toc-dpt.html#A1
many of them are struck with FBI. Any movements or actions?
Successfully Challenging USCIS Delays in Federal Court
On September 10, the Los Angeles Times featured an article about how FBI name checks have been slowing down the process of gaining immigration benefits for hundreds of thousands of applicants.
The article revealed that "nearly 320,000 people were waiting for their name checks to be completed as of August 7, including more than 152,000 who had been waiting for more than six months, according to the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. More than 61,000 had been waiting for more than two years."
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed a lawsuit in federal court regarding this issue. The Times article quotes an ACLU attorney who stated that "there is nothing in immigration law that says that a citizenship application should take two, three, four years. That's absurd. People who have not been any sort of threat ... have been caught up in this dragnet."
Applicants for adjustment of status, citizenship, extensions of stay and many other immigration benefits have taken days off work to visit USCIS offices only to be told that the USCIS can do nothing since the name check process is in the hands of the FBI.
Nor do letters and meetings with Senators and Members of Congress yield results. They receive polite letters from the USCIS' Congressional Liaison Unit to the effect that "Sorry, but this is FBI's problem, not ours."
DHS Secretary Chertoff announced that his Department is meeting with the FBI (which is part of the Department of Justice) to work out a more efficient system of processing these name checks, but so far, the number of people waiting for results from the FBI continues to grow and grow.
The problem exists for applicants from a wide variety of countries and affects Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, etc.
Our solution is to sue both the USCIS and the FBI in Federal Court. Most Federal Judges are not reluctant to order the FBI and the USCIS to complete their name checks and application processing by a date certain.
Many applicants have turned to litigation as the one and only method of solving the name check problem. The numbers of such lawsuits have increased from just 680 in 2005 to 2,650 in 2006 to over 4,100 this year. Although there is no guarantee of success, our law firm has yet to lose one of these cases in Federal Court.
The Times article concludes with a quote from me:
"There is only one thing that works, and that is suing them in federal court."
We link to the Times article, "Caught in a Bureaucratic Black Hole" from
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091107P.shtml
We also link to AILF's new practice advisory entitled "Mandamus Jurisdiction over Delayed Applications: Responding to the Government's Motion to Dismiss" from
http://shusterman.com/toc-dpt.html#A1
No comments:
Post a Comment