bkam
01-31 03:04 AM
Dear "colleagues in faith" :-), there is only one way to change the things with this immigration trap - we have to win the public opinion!
Currently 350,000 highly qualified professionals working for this country are in a legal limbo which continues for years. Our current legal status is that of slaves. Yes, slaves! Nowadays it takes anywhere between 5 - 10 years from applying to receiving of a GC. We cannot change our employers within this period, the members of our families cannot work (at least legally) and our spouses lose their professional carrier; if our kids get in college they are treated as "aliens" (full tuition, no student loans, no scholarship); the loans we get are with higher interest rate (for "protection"); at the borders we are treated as "intruders" etc.
The average Americans are honest hardworking people. If they are aware of the immigration problems faced by 350,000 hardworking professionals in this country, they will raise their voice and will help for resolving of this issue. They just need to know that. I believe that in addition to talking to senators etc., we have to find ways our issues to reach the media - newspapers, magazines and so on. An article in Times may lead to a lot of positive changes in the immigration system.
Currently 350,000 highly qualified professionals working for this country are in a legal limbo which continues for years. Our current legal status is that of slaves. Yes, slaves! Nowadays it takes anywhere between 5 - 10 years from applying to receiving of a GC. We cannot change our employers within this period, the members of our families cannot work (at least legally) and our spouses lose their professional carrier; if our kids get in college they are treated as "aliens" (full tuition, no student loans, no scholarship); the loans we get are with higher interest rate (for "protection"); at the borders we are treated as "intruders" etc.
The average Americans are honest hardworking people. If they are aware of the immigration problems faced by 350,000 hardworking professionals in this country, they will raise their voice and will help for resolving of this issue. They just need to know that. I believe that in addition to talking to senators etc., we have to find ways our issues to reach the media - newspapers, magazines and so on. An article in Times may lead to a lot of positive changes in the immigration system.
wallpaper Kansas Jayhawks Basketball
Libra
07-06 12:35 PM
Yeah because we already sent applications before bulletin revised:D
Something is cooking and they try to cover their as.... before the legal action takes its stand....:-)), but it is too late for them..
Something is cooking and they try to cover their as.... before the legal action takes its stand....:-)), but it is too late for them..
belmontboy
09-07 07:50 PM
Came in Aug 1997...
Been on H1b since then...
No EAD.
Stuck in this process... seems forever now ....
PD of Jun 02 in EB3...
why didn't u file 485 in july 2007?
Been on H1b since then...
No EAD.
Stuck in this process... seems forever now ....
PD of Jun 02 in EB3...
why didn't u file 485 in july 2007?
2011 team but Marcus Morris of
imv116
07-15 09:08 PM
We can request participation from other ethnic organizations, but that would be minimal unless they are victims of July VB bulletin.
If the cause was overall legal immigration, certainly we can request/demand such participation.
-imv116
If the cause was overall legal immigration, certainly we can request/demand such participation.
-imv116
more...
ravise
12-10 04:30 PM
till now we have not seen such detailed explanation in visa bulliten. Some thing to be feel good about.
Regarding EB2 spillover; i think their main problem with quarterly spillover is to move both EB2I and EB2C to the same priority date. If the spillover quantity is so less.
From one of the privious pdf from USCS number of EB2I applicants between between 22JAN05 and 01MAY05 were nearly 4K. I don't think there can ever be 4000 splillovers to EB2 in a single quarter. Remember spillover from EB1 to EB2 can only happen during the year end and quarterly spillover only includes intra catogiry.
all personal analysis/openion.
Regarding EB2 spillover; i think their main problem with quarterly spillover is to move both EB2I and EB2C to the same priority date. If the spillover quantity is so less.
From one of the privious pdf from USCS number of EB2I applicants between between 22JAN05 and 01MAY05 were nearly 4K. I don't think there can ever be 4000 splillovers to EB2 in a single quarter. Remember spillover from EB1 to EB2 can only happen during the year end and quarterly spillover only includes intra catogiry.
all personal analysis/openion.
funny
09-11 07:17 PM
I am in too...its not going to harm anything...
more...
bidhanc
03-11 10:51 AM
I guess it's not a VERY GOOD IDEA THEN.
In all the docs that I went thru I could not see a difference between
"I-140 approved/I-485 pending and porting" and "I-140/I-485 pending and porting" (most docs refer to the latter).
I am guessing when it comes to "porting", both are the same in the eyes of USCIS??
(What I mean to ask is there any leniency with an approved I-140 and then trying to port?)
Anyone see otherwise?
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
as per this document, you can port to yourself. (Question #8)
But below are the reasons why I am backing off of opening an LLC on spouse name and porting to that.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=8231099851
also google 'UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf"
http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf
"This suggests, fairly clearly, that any communication to the USCIS per the Cronin Memo that the adjustment applicant intends to become self-employed is likely to trigger an RFE to inquire into the legitimacy of this arrangement. Legitimacy in this context is likely to be gauged by the concrete steps the beneficiary has taken in furtherance of the self-employment arrangement, understanding that only full-time and permanent employment will suffice for immigration purposes. Such steps would include the completion of legal and corporate formalities, the securing of financing, the purchase or lease of business premises and equipment,the development of a detailed business plan, the hiring of employees, and any other measures typically taken in the establishment of a business. Vague aspirational statements, however ambitious, about future plans to develop a business are unlikely, in the absence of tangible proof, to be accepted as probative of the requisite legitimacy of the self-employer and job offer."
Also, one relevant footnote in the document -
"At the AILA National Conference in 2003, a USCIS officer indicated that an attempt to invoke �106(c) in a selfemployment context is likely to raise �a big red flag� for an adjudicator, and that self-employment may be viewed as �an easy alternative� for aliens who are unable to find employment to sustain their adjustment-of-status applications. Schorr & Yale-Loehr, supra note 2, at 499. It should also be noted that the Memos view the possibility of an adjustment applicant becoming a public charge (and thus being inadmissible under INA �212(a)(4)) as being �a relevant inquiry� and that an RFE requesting information about a self-employment arrangement is likely to probe whether or not the applicant has sufficient financial resources to avoid becoming such a public charge."
In all the docs that I went thru I could not see a difference between
"I-140 approved/I-485 pending and porting" and "I-140/I-485 pending and porting" (most docs refer to the latter).
I am guessing when it comes to "porting", both are the same in the eyes of USCIS??
(What I mean to ask is there any leniency with an approved I-140 and then trying to port?)
Anyone see otherwise?
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
as per this document, you can port to yourself. (Question #8)
But below are the reasons why I am backing off of opening an LLC on spouse name and porting to that.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=8231099851
also google 'UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf"
http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf
"This suggests, fairly clearly, that any communication to the USCIS per the Cronin Memo that the adjustment applicant intends to become self-employed is likely to trigger an RFE to inquire into the legitimacy of this arrangement. Legitimacy in this context is likely to be gauged by the concrete steps the beneficiary has taken in furtherance of the self-employment arrangement, understanding that only full-time and permanent employment will suffice for immigration purposes. Such steps would include the completion of legal and corporate formalities, the securing of financing, the purchase or lease of business premises and equipment,the development of a detailed business plan, the hiring of employees, and any other measures typically taken in the establishment of a business. Vague aspirational statements, however ambitious, about future plans to develop a business are unlikely, in the absence of tangible proof, to be accepted as probative of the requisite legitimacy of the self-employer and job offer."
Also, one relevant footnote in the document -
"At the AILA National Conference in 2003, a USCIS officer indicated that an attempt to invoke �106(c) in a selfemployment context is likely to raise �a big red flag� for an adjudicator, and that self-employment may be viewed as �an easy alternative� for aliens who are unable to find employment to sustain their adjustment-of-status applications. Schorr & Yale-Loehr, supra note 2, at 499. It should also be noted that the Memos view the possibility of an adjustment applicant becoming a public charge (and thus being inadmissible under INA �212(a)(4)) as being �a relevant inquiry� and that an RFE requesting information about a self-employment arrangement is likely to probe whether or not the applicant has sufficient financial resources to avoid becoming such a public charge."
2010 27: Marcus Morris #22 and
nixstor
07-06 11:20 AM
People are burying these posts as spam.. can we do something to make sure that doesnt happen?
I guess that tells how much public cares about our GC's. We want to spice up the story by adding other issues that can make our situation worse.
The only way we can get 4000 diggs is by having every info lurker digg it and individual comments.
I guess that tells how much public cares about our GC's. We want to spice up the story by adding other issues that can make our situation worse.
The only way we can get 4000 diggs is by having every info lurker digg it and individual comments.
more...
kumar1
03-12 05:03 PM
Received an email from CRIS yesterday. They have issued a FRE on my I-485. I can not think of anything. My immigration history is clean, no status issues, ever. I remember submitting all the docs during July fiasco. I am waiting for the actual RFE letter to arrive.
Only good part is - there is someone "OUT THERE" who looked at my file.
Only good part is - there is someone "OUT THERE" who looked at my file.
hair Getty Images 2 months ago. SAN
kevinkris
09-12 05:13 PM
Hi All,
Lots of people agreeing.
singhsa3, since you started it, finalize on what we all need to do.
Thanks
Lots of people agreeing.
singhsa3, since you started it, finalize on what we all need to do.
Thanks
more...
pappu
09-12 12:17 AM
Thank you.
hot Marcus Morris crumbled to
kartikiran
12-10 04:59 PM
Ugh, I want to cry right about now. :o
I am with you Almond. After waiting for 12 long years in USA and 8 long years for a GC, the tunnel is still dark.
I am with you Almond. After waiting for 12 long years in USA and 8 long years for a GC, the tunnel is still dark.
more...
house Marcus Morris and Mario
user2005
01-05 05:26 PM
It tracks the statuses of around 1800 people....
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?p=1392408#post1392408
This seems to be very extensive tracker. Based on this data, we can make a close analysis of Philadelphia BPC.
In RIR queue, they are currently certifying applications with PD of Sep 2004. We can find some cases with PD later than Sep 04 with status Certified. Those are either lucky ones or those who already reached from SWA to DOL before ended up in BPC. We can find many cases with PD earlier than Sep 04 with status Letter Received. I do not have strong explanation. Those could be either pending in data review or ones who did not care to update their tracking info after being certified or unlucky ones :confused:
In Regular (TR) queue, they are still certifying ones that came from DOL.:mad:
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?p=1392408#post1392408
This seems to be very extensive tracker. Based on this data, we can make a close analysis of Philadelphia BPC.
In RIR queue, they are currently certifying applications with PD of Sep 2004. We can find some cases with PD later than Sep 04 with status Certified. Those are either lucky ones or those who already reached from SWA to DOL before ended up in BPC. We can find many cases with PD earlier than Sep 04 with status Letter Received. I do not have strong explanation. Those could be either pending in data review or ones who did not care to update their tracking info after being certified or unlucky ones :confused:
In Regular (TR) queue, they are still certifying ones that came from DOL.:mad:
tattoo 20: Marcus Morris #22 and
sheela
07-11 08:29 AM
Yes, you're right, for you it's really great news ! Congratulations !!!
Rita
Thanks, Rita:
You got us this nice news. EB2 was stuck at april 04 for long. We saw this speculative forward move. It is going to stay in 2006 for a while as fewer LC were issued in 05 I donot see it retrogressed in next fiscal year
Rita
Thanks, Rita:
You got us this nice news. EB2 was stuck at april 04 for long. We saw this speculative forward move. It is going to stay in 2006 for a while as fewer LC were issued in 05 I donot see it retrogressed in next fiscal year
more...
pictures Junior forward Marcus Morris
coopheal
03-10 07:05 AM
So EB3-I may move only by 2 months for the rest of the year?
Yes EB3I move is going to be painfully slow.
Yes EB3I move is going to be painfully slow.
dresses This past weekend the number
amit_sp
03-04 10:18 AM
In my case; I was offered a refinancing rate that was 0.5% more than what I would pay if I were a GC holder. The reasoning is the short term validity of H1. Ironically I wasn't discriminated 3 years ago when I bought my house. At that time; I even didn't have my labor cert cleared. Now 3 years down the line; I have cleared first 2 stages and applied to I-485; bank charges me more :) Weird!!!!
more...
makeup Kansas#39; Marcus Morris, left
gcisadawg
02-08 02:39 AM
If the girl is working and earning money, she has all the rights to spend the way she wants, including giving money to her parents. If she is not working, then help should be based only on humanitarian basis because we never know when one's financial situation changes. I can't understand how any girl can force her husband to spend for her parents and siblings especially when she is not earning.
girlfriend 25: Marcus Morris #22 of
gc_on_demand
04-30 03:21 PM
Will there be a voting today to decide to move further in this process ? OR commette chairman will decide based on hearing ...
hairstyles to right) Marcus Morris,
indio0617
03-09 09:52 AM
Here is the link to the full markup. SJC is going in the order of the titles. Our sections are predominantly from Title 5 but some are in 4 too.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=23&d=1140888843
Still talk about illegal aliens... Hope we (legal) dont get drowned amid these arguments
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=23&d=1140888843
Still talk about illegal aliens... Hope we (legal) dont get drowned amid these arguments
vxb2004
08-17 11:03 PM
Congrats!
CADude
07-04 03:18 PM
Contact your Senator regarding unprecedented move by the Department of State.
If you all can then please contact your senator.
Below is the letter I sent to my local senator.
You can find your local senator by using this link (Enter zip code and state) - http://capwiz.com/aila2/officials/congress/?lvl=C&azip=75063&state=TX.
You can also send email from this link.
It does not matter whether this brings any value or not but there is no harm in doing this, in case you are really frustrated, troubled and sad!.
Dear Senator :
This is to bring to your attention regarding an unprecedented move by Department of State with regards to filing of adjustment of status applications.
On June 13, Department of State announced in its Visa Bulletin for July 2007 that all employment-based categories (except for the Other Workers category) for immigrant visas will be "current," (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html) meaning that individuals/businesses going through the lengthy and backlogged immigrant visa or "green card" process can, throughout July, file adjustment of status applications.
The Department Of State regulations at 22 CFR 42.51 (http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_05/22cfr42_05.html) and 8 CFR 245.1(g), allows individuals/businesses to rely on and use such information. Historically, they have relied on such information knowing that when they prepare and file such applications, they will be accepted and adjudicated.
However on July 2, 2007, The Department of State issued a new bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html) with an update on July Visa Availability and USCIS (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) started rejecting adjustment of status applications for several employment-based immigration preference categories (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletin2Jul07.pdf), despite the fact that the published July Visa Bulletin shows that visas for these categories are available thereby violating its long-standing policy and the expectations of thousands of people, without any advance notification to the general public or issuing any notification under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). Such a revision, coming in the same month in which the bulletin is issued, would be contrary to years of practice in which revisions or adjustments to the availability of immigrant visa numbers are made in the following month of before the beginning of the month, not in the same month individuals and businesses have begun preparing and submitting applications for adjustment of status.
By taking this unprecedented mid-month update, the Departments of State and Homeland Security have seriously undermined the stability and predictability of U.S. immigration law. Thousands of individuals and businesses rely on the monthly bulletins to prepare and plan for the submission of applications. In addition, individuals have taken the necessary steps to prepare and file applications for adjustment of status, including thousands of dollars of expenses to engage counsel, flights for employees to quickly obtain necessary documents and medical exams for the applications, cancellation of business and holiday travel, changes in family plans to ensure families are in the proper location, etc. This unprecedented action of the government is shocking and disturbing. It has left many in a state of disbelief, frustration, confusion, and anger.
Pursuant to Department Of State regulations 8 CFR 245.1(g), [i]f the applicant [for adjustment of status] is a preference alien, the current Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Bulletin will be consulted to determine whether an immigrant visa is immediately available.. Thus, when the Visa Bulletin shows that visas for most preference categories are available for applicants with priority dates on or before the listed priority date, the USCIS must accept those adjustment of status applications for adjudication. Under section 245 of the INA, an alien may apply for adjustment of status if, inter alia, (3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed. The question is what the term immediately available means. The regulation at 8 CFR 245.1(g) defines the term and instructs how to determine when an immigrant visa is immediately available under Sec. 245 of the INA.
8 CFR 245.1(g) states, An alien is ineligible for the benefits of section 245 of the Act unless an immigrant visa is immediately available to him or her at the time the application is filed. If the applicant is a preference alien, the current Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Bulletin will be consulted to determine whether an immigrant visa is immediately available. An immigrant visa is considered available for accepting and processing the application Form I-485 i[f] the preference category applicant has a priority date on the waiting list which is earlier than the date shown in the Bulletin (or the Bulletin shows that that numbers for visa applicants in his or her category are current). An immigrant visa is also considered immediately available if the applicant establishes eligibility for the benefits of Public Law 101-238. Information concerning the immediate availability of an immigrant visa may be obtained at any Service Office. (Emphasis added.)
Reliance on the current Visa Bulletin is well-established. In 1994, the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) published a revision to 8 CFR Part 245 in response to enactment of section 245(i) of the Act. In the Supplementary Information provided with that regulation, the INS took the opportunity to revise its definition of immediately available to be consistent with that of the Department of State.
The INS said: All applicants for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Act must have an immediately available immigrant visa number. "Immediately available" for the
purpose of accepting and processing the Form I-485 application filed by a preference alien is defined in 8 CFR 245.1(f) as being not later than the date shown in the current Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Bulletin. The Department of State, however, defines "immediately available" as being earlier than the date shown in the current Visa Bulletin. This rule amends 8 CFR 245.1(f) to bring the adjustment of status provision into accordance with the Department o f State's definition.
I request your prompt attention on this matter asking the Department of State for clarification on this unprecedented change which defies years of established process of individuals/businesses relying on visa bulletin to prepare and file adjustment of status applications.
Sincerely,
If you all can then please contact your senator.
Below is the letter I sent to my local senator.
You can find your local senator by using this link (Enter zip code and state) - http://capwiz.com/aila2/officials/congress/?lvl=C&azip=75063&state=TX.
You can also send email from this link.
It does not matter whether this brings any value or not but there is no harm in doing this, in case you are really frustrated, troubled and sad!.
Dear Senator :
This is to bring to your attention regarding an unprecedented move by Department of State with regards to filing of adjustment of status applications.
On June 13, Department of State announced in its Visa Bulletin for July 2007 that all employment-based categories (except for the Other Workers category) for immigrant visas will be "current," (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html) meaning that individuals/businesses going through the lengthy and backlogged immigrant visa or "green card" process can, throughout July, file adjustment of status applications.
The Department Of State regulations at 22 CFR 42.51 (http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_05/22cfr42_05.html) and 8 CFR 245.1(g), allows individuals/businesses to rely on and use such information. Historically, they have relied on such information knowing that when they prepare and file such applications, they will be accepted and adjudicated.
However on July 2, 2007, The Department of State issued a new bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html) with an update on July Visa Availability and USCIS (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) started rejecting adjustment of status applications for several employment-based immigration preference categories (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletin2Jul07.pdf), despite the fact that the published July Visa Bulletin shows that visas for these categories are available thereby violating its long-standing policy and the expectations of thousands of people, without any advance notification to the general public or issuing any notification under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). Such a revision, coming in the same month in which the bulletin is issued, would be contrary to years of practice in which revisions or adjustments to the availability of immigrant visa numbers are made in the following month of before the beginning of the month, not in the same month individuals and businesses have begun preparing and submitting applications for adjustment of status.
By taking this unprecedented mid-month update, the Departments of State and Homeland Security have seriously undermined the stability and predictability of U.S. immigration law. Thousands of individuals and businesses rely on the monthly bulletins to prepare and plan for the submission of applications. In addition, individuals have taken the necessary steps to prepare and file applications for adjustment of status, including thousands of dollars of expenses to engage counsel, flights for employees to quickly obtain necessary documents and medical exams for the applications, cancellation of business and holiday travel, changes in family plans to ensure families are in the proper location, etc. This unprecedented action of the government is shocking and disturbing. It has left many in a state of disbelief, frustration, confusion, and anger.
Pursuant to Department Of State regulations 8 CFR 245.1(g), [i]f the applicant [for adjustment of status] is a preference alien, the current Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Bulletin will be consulted to determine whether an immigrant visa is immediately available.. Thus, when the Visa Bulletin shows that visas for most preference categories are available for applicants with priority dates on or before the listed priority date, the USCIS must accept those adjustment of status applications for adjudication. Under section 245 of the INA, an alien may apply for adjustment of status if, inter alia, (3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed. The question is what the term immediately available means. The regulation at 8 CFR 245.1(g) defines the term and instructs how to determine when an immigrant visa is immediately available under Sec. 245 of the INA.
8 CFR 245.1(g) states, An alien is ineligible for the benefits of section 245 of the Act unless an immigrant visa is immediately available to him or her at the time the application is filed. If the applicant is a preference alien, the current Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Bulletin will be consulted to determine whether an immigrant visa is immediately available. An immigrant visa is considered available for accepting and processing the application Form I-485 i[f] the preference category applicant has a priority date on the waiting list which is earlier than the date shown in the Bulletin (or the Bulletin shows that that numbers for visa applicants in his or her category are current). An immigrant visa is also considered immediately available if the applicant establishes eligibility for the benefits of Public Law 101-238. Information concerning the immediate availability of an immigrant visa may be obtained at any Service Office. (Emphasis added.)
Reliance on the current Visa Bulletin is well-established. In 1994, the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) published a revision to 8 CFR Part 245 in response to enactment of section 245(i) of the Act. In the Supplementary Information provided with that regulation, the INS took the opportunity to revise its definition of immediately available to be consistent with that of the Department of State.
The INS said: All applicants for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Act must have an immediately available immigrant visa number. "Immediately available" for the
purpose of accepting and processing the Form I-485 application filed by a preference alien is defined in 8 CFR 245.1(f) as being not later than the date shown in the current Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Bulletin. The Department of State, however, defines "immediately available" as being earlier than the date shown in the current Visa Bulletin. This rule amends 8 CFR 245.1(f) to bring the adjustment of status provision into accordance with the Department o f State's definition.
I request your prompt attention on this matter asking the Department of State for clarification on this unprecedented change which defies years of established process of individuals/businesses relying on visa bulletin to prepare and file adjustment of status applications.
Sincerely,
No comments:
Post a Comment