bmoni
09-14 06:29 PM
Jungalee,
Excellent draft. Do we have list of all the email addresses of house committee
I couldn't find it online all i could find is https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtml
If anyone could find or direct us to a link for all the email addresses that could be great. Lets do a email campaign in parallel with calling.
Excellent draft. Do we have list of all the email addresses of house committee
I couldn't find it online all i could find is https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtml
If anyone could find or direct us to a link for all the email addresses that could be great. Lets do a email campaign in parallel with calling.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
ItIsNotFunny
11-10 09:40 AM
Bump ^^^^
noendinsight
09-17 07:52 AM
It seems only few July 2nd filer left. I am one of them.
Nothing, Zilch, Nada....My lawyer said that of the 40 applications they filed on July 2nd. they got RN for only 5 so..... Seems to be a very long wait
Nothing, Zilch, Nada....My lawyer said that of the 40 applications they filed on July 2nd. they got RN for only 5 so..... Seems to be a very long wait
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
SunnySurya
08-07 12:09 PM
No thats not what I am saying. Let me repeat what I am saying and this comes out of the draft I am working with a lawyer
The interpretation of the intent of the law by USCIS is flawed and should be reconsidered given the enormous backlogs in various categories.
1. If the people are allowed to move between the categories it will just move the backlog from one line to another penalizing the ones already in that line.
2. It does not provides an equal opportunity to the people already in that line to move to other category who are patiently waiting for their turn.
3. The porting is subject to gaming and the people who know how to work the system will be the most benefitted by this.
4. It will also eleminate any potential for the spill of visa numbers from Eb2 to Eb3 category as Eb2 itself will be backlogged
It should be noted that the immigration benefits are associated with a job requirements and not a person's qualifications. Changing a GC category should not be allowed except in certain extraordinary circumstances and through appropriate changes in the law.
Mpadap, your arguments are valid but not pertinent to what I am trying to do. If a person becomes elligible , he/she must be allowed to apply for the positions matching his qualifications. Only thing is that he should not benefit from the portability of PD.
U are saying - The person's GC category should be same all through out the GC process, irrespective of the technical advancements the person make during the course of the GC process. A person is porting only because he is qualified for the category, U folks are talking as if there is an open slot and everyone is clamoring for it.
U'r logic should be similar to the below scenario..
A person joins a company as a Jr. Engineer, then based on U'r logic he/she cannot become a Manager (which requires an MBA / equivalent) because he entered the workforce as a Jr. Engg. Even though the fellow would've acquired necessary skills and even MBA (going part-time to school), still he/she cannot become a Manager. U are vouching that an MBA who joined few months earlier can become the Manager but not the home groomed fellow. Wow, U'r logic seems to a ground breaking thought process, please extrapolate U'r lawsuit for the case mentioned above. If you win, this might be the most ground breaking decision in US.
Personally I've reported to folks who joined company as high-school grads and worked their way up to Managerial position ofcoz acquiring the necessary college education while working. They have shown up those experience to move ahead of other folks who joined later with higher degrees.
sunnysurya and rollingflood,
Rather than focusing on divisive efforts why can't you focus on real problem - retrogression. Why don't you work towards IV's goals? You folks joined the forum few months back and have already made great impact. Hope you would channel U'r energy into something positive for the entire community.
The interpretation of the intent of the law by USCIS is flawed and should be reconsidered given the enormous backlogs in various categories.
1. If the people are allowed to move between the categories it will just move the backlog from one line to another penalizing the ones already in that line.
2. It does not provides an equal opportunity to the people already in that line to move to other category who are patiently waiting for their turn.
3. The porting is subject to gaming and the people who know how to work the system will be the most benefitted by this.
4. It will also eleminate any potential for the spill of visa numbers from Eb2 to Eb3 category as Eb2 itself will be backlogged
It should be noted that the immigration benefits are associated with a job requirements and not a person's qualifications. Changing a GC category should not be allowed except in certain extraordinary circumstances and through appropriate changes in the law.
Mpadap, your arguments are valid but not pertinent to what I am trying to do. If a person becomes elligible , he/she must be allowed to apply for the positions matching his qualifications. Only thing is that he should not benefit from the portability of PD.
U are saying - The person's GC category should be same all through out the GC process, irrespective of the technical advancements the person make during the course of the GC process. A person is porting only because he is qualified for the category, U folks are talking as if there is an open slot and everyone is clamoring for it.
U'r logic should be similar to the below scenario..
A person joins a company as a Jr. Engineer, then based on U'r logic he/she cannot become a Manager (which requires an MBA / equivalent) because he entered the workforce as a Jr. Engg. Even though the fellow would've acquired necessary skills and even MBA (going part-time to school), still he/she cannot become a Manager. U are vouching that an MBA who joined few months earlier can become the Manager but not the home groomed fellow. Wow, U'r logic seems to a ground breaking thought process, please extrapolate U'r lawsuit for the case mentioned above. If you win, this might be the most ground breaking decision in US.
Personally I've reported to folks who joined company as high-school grads and worked their way up to Managerial position ofcoz acquiring the necessary college education while working. They have shown up those experience to move ahead of other folks who joined later with higher degrees.
sunnysurya and rollingflood,
Rather than focusing on divisive efforts why can't you focus on real problem - retrogression. Why don't you work towards IV's goals? You folks joined the forum few months back and have already made great impact. Hope you would channel U'r energy into something positive for the entire community.
more...
santa123
06-14 05:46 PM
The OP is great. He has created a new id to discuss L1 fraud. Will he be creating one id per issue... recapture, H1B abuse, outsourcing, backlogs?? wow!!!
Not sure why he wants his/ her identity covered up. This shows how good some of us are in trying to make noises in the dark and not doing anything about issues in hand.
In all, I still don't understand why L1Bs cannot work at Client site. I am sure that the L1 petitions specifically ask for Client site / work location. If Client site address is mentioned, the USCIS does approve the petition. If it is against law, they will not approve the petition. I know this for a fact since some of my friends are on L1.
How many times in this thread I have mentioned that I am getting replaced by one of these L-1B resource, I am a poor Oracle/DB developer who fortunately cannot be replaced by L-1B visa resources (as my skills is a common technical one). So once these violations impact your day to day life you look around for ways to stop this fraud. Its true that if I was a Nuero Surgeon in Phily or a Astro Scientist in Houston I wouldn't be interested in this violation :-) .... tomorrow let this scenario happen to you ... you would be first one to raise the alert.
Regarding 'getting burnt', I don't think there is bigger burn than loosing our jobs (which already is happening) and hope you know that there is something called 'anonymity'... ya lets see whos going to get 'burnt' here. We'll definetly keep you updated regarding the outcome.
Not sure why he wants his/ her identity covered up. This shows how good some of us are in trying to make noises in the dark and not doing anything about issues in hand.
In all, I still don't understand why L1Bs cannot work at Client site. I am sure that the L1 petitions specifically ask for Client site / work location. If Client site address is mentioned, the USCIS does approve the petition. If it is against law, they will not approve the petition. I know this for a fact since some of my friends are on L1.
How many times in this thread I have mentioned that I am getting replaced by one of these L-1B resource, I am a poor Oracle/DB developer who fortunately cannot be replaced by L-1B visa resources (as my skills is a common technical one). So once these violations impact your day to day life you look around for ways to stop this fraud. Its true that if I was a Nuero Surgeon in Phily or a Astro Scientist in Houston I wouldn't be interested in this violation :-) .... tomorrow let this scenario happen to you ... you would be first one to raise the alert.
Regarding 'getting burnt', I don't think there is bigger burn than loosing our jobs (which already is happening) and hope you know that there is something called 'anonymity'... ya lets see whos going to get 'burnt' here. We'll definetly keep you updated regarding the outcome.
seekerofpeace
10-06 01:33 PM
Thanks apb,
You are on the right track....Again no need to thank me....the help in the forum is mutual...I had gained strength from it and I'll reciprocate in every possible way...I am not one to vanish from the forum once I am done and see you guys waiting......well experience with USCIS is like a psychological trauma...it stays long and being a scorpio I can't forget things at all especially injustices....So I'll be there along the way for all you guys....and help you in whatever way I can......
That being said every case is different and gloom and doom scenario should not take over your spirits....I am a cynic by birth and see the glass always half empty but once thing that is different for me is that I never give up......and neither should any of you guys however bad the situation is....be a cynic be a pessimist be a paranoid if you can't help but BE PERSISTENT and UNRELENTING...
SoP
You are on the right track....Again no need to thank me....the help in the forum is mutual...I had gained strength from it and I'll reciprocate in every possible way...I am not one to vanish from the forum once I am done and see you guys waiting......well experience with USCIS is like a psychological trauma...it stays long and being a scorpio I can't forget things at all especially injustices....So I'll be there along the way for all you guys....and help you in whatever way I can......
That being said every case is different and gloom and doom scenario should not take over your spirits....I am a cynic by birth and see the glass always half empty but once thing that is different for me is that I never give up......and neither should any of you guys however bad the situation is....be a cynic be a pessimist be a paranoid if you can't help but BE PERSISTENT and UNRELENTING...
SoP
more...
DSLStart
09-25 04:18 PM
Just a quick question for current Vonage users.
Currently I use Phone Power (VOIP, almost same as Vonage). They give me one nice feature called Remote Click 2 call. What it does is, if I am in office (where there is no long distance calling allowed), I login into my phonepower.com account and click on Remote Click2Call. This asks me to enter the number where I am at, and the destination number. So I get a call at my office phone and it connects me to the destination number. And there is no charge for this call.
Does Vonage offer this kind of feature? and can we make calls to India (under their India unlimited plan) using this feature?
Thanks.
Currently I use Phone Power (VOIP, almost same as Vonage). They give me one nice feature called Remote Click 2 call. What it does is, if I am in office (where there is no long distance calling allowed), I login into my phonepower.com account and click on Remote Click2Call. This asks me to enter the number where I am at, and the destination number. So I get a call at my office phone and it connects me to the destination number. And there is no charge for this call.
Does Vonage offer this kind of feature? and can we make calls to India (under their India unlimited plan) using this feature?
Thanks.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
gsvisu
07-11 12:44 PM
I just spoke with Xiyun Yang from Washington Post and conveyed thanks for covering a detailed article. She expressed that there is attention being drawn by many quarters including political for "Skilled LEGAL Immigrants".
Also we need to emphasize & communicate is the "increased fees" (almost doubled in many cases) for all USCIS services effective end of this month (July 30). Is this the penalty to be legal ?
The rallys and campaigns should emphasize this important detail too. This is huge money and not fair to the amount of service that is being currently provided.
1) http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...te_07Jun29.pdf
2) http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedoc...dule052907.pdf
What are your comments guys ?
Also we need to emphasize & communicate is the "increased fees" (almost doubled in many cases) for all USCIS services effective end of this month (July 30). Is this the penalty to be legal ?
The rallys and campaigns should emphasize this important detail too. This is huge money and not fair to the amount of service that is being currently provided.
1) http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...te_07Jun29.pdf
2) http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedoc...dule052907.pdf
What are your comments guys ?
more...
ashres11
09-25 12:19 PM
I checked my I-140 copy there is no A no. at all.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
bindas74
06-16 01:02 PM
No one can travel on EAD. EAD is for employment authorization. AP is for travel. You cant mix and match the purpose of them.
If you dont need to travel or if you have a valid H1 stamp for travel, dont file for AP. If you want to travel and if your stamp has expired and dont want to apply for new stamp, then file for AP.
If you want to work for your employer and continue there and if you are sure of your job security, then you dont need EAD, and dont apply for EAD. However its a good idea since EAD is a great option of you are suddenly fired or laid off. EAD makes it easy to search for jobs coz the employer doesnt have to file your H1 and you can join them immediately without any hassles.
Hi Logiclife,
Can you please provide me insight on my question?
My company filed for my I485. i didnt file the EAD / AP at that time. I have a valid H1B stamped for multiple entry till 2010.
So, as per your post, I can apply just for EAD, right? That is if I want to switch jobs after 180 days using AC21 and if I start using my EAD, can I go out and come back with my valid H1B stamping? Or do I need to have the AP since I have started using my EAD??
Similarly, can my wife use her H4B even after she starts using the EAD instead of AP when she travels??
Any help is greatly appreciated.
-Thanks
If you dont need to travel or if you have a valid H1 stamp for travel, dont file for AP. If you want to travel and if your stamp has expired and dont want to apply for new stamp, then file for AP.
If you want to work for your employer and continue there and if you are sure of your job security, then you dont need EAD, and dont apply for EAD. However its a good idea since EAD is a great option of you are suddenly fired or laid off. EAD makes it easy to search for jobs coz the employer doesnt have to file your H1 and you can join them immediately without any hassles.
Hi Logiclife,
Can you please provide me insight on my question?
My company filed for my I485. i didnt file the EAD / AP at that time. I have a valid H1B stamped for multiple entry till 2010.
So, as per your post, I can apply just for EAD, right? That is if I want to switch jobs after 180 days using AC21 and if I start using my EAD, can I go out and come back with my valid H1B stamping? Or do I need to have the AP since I have started using my EAD??
Similarly, can my wife use her H4B even after she starts using the EAD instead of AP when she travels??
Any help is greatly appreciated.
-Thanks
more...
va_dude
11-10 11:12 PM
gc4me....
sorry to hear about the problem with your app.
I think at this point it's best you hired a good attorney to help you through this RFE and work with him/her on the best way to present your case.
good luck.
va_dude
sorry to hear about the problem with your app.
I think at this point it's best you hired a good attorney to help you through this RFE and work with him/her on the best way to present your case.
good luck.
va_dude
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
gclessland
08-14 10:21 AM
Finally got the CPO emails/texts today morning for both me and my wife.
...
If there is one thing I learned wrt immigration, it is do things ASAP. Never postpone anything at all. As much as possible get first in the queue.
A general piece of advice: Never reject an option you don't have. [this is more to do with folks who say, "I am only in year 1 in h1..I don't know if I need gc..let me see after 2-3 years.." - guess what einstein, it is easy to give up your gc after you get it, then to get it when you desperately need it.]
...
Congrats!
It is a great piece of advice. I remember being that Einstein long time ago & regretted several times.
...
If there is one thing I learned wrt immigration, it is do things ASAP. Never postpone anything at all. As much as possible get first in the queue.
A general piece of advice: Never reject an option you don't have. [this is more to do with folks who say, "I am only in year 1 in h1..I don't know if I need gc..let me see after 2-3 years.." - guess what einstein, it is easy to give up your gc after you get it, then to get it when you desperately need it.]
...
Congrats!
It is a great piece of advice. I remember being that Einstein long time ago & regretted several times.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
pappu
11-22 07:50 PM
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Tao%2011-7-07.pdf
Plaintiff suggests that the fact that her application
has been pending for nearly three years is patently
unreasonable. She argues that Congress intended
applications to be adjudicated within 180 days. See 8
U.S.C. � 1571(b) ("It is the sense of Congress that the
processing of an immigration benefit application should
be completed not later than 180 days after the initial
filing of the application . . .."). That [*10] 180-day
timetable may provide some guidance here, although the
"sense of Congress" expressed in INA Section 1571(b)
does not necessarily carry the force of law. See Yang v.
California Dep't of Social Servs., 183 F.3d 953, 958-59
(9th Cir. 1999).
Defendants argue that there is no statutory deadline
by which applications must be adjudicated and that, in
any event, the "first-in, first-out" protocol must be given
deference. True, Congress has not established a
mandatory timeframe for the USCIS to adjudicate
applications. Moreover, "'[t]he passage of time alone is
rarely enough to justify a court's intervention in the
administrative process, especially since administrative
efficiency is not a subject particularly suited to judicial
evaluation.'" Yu, 36 F. Supp.2d at 934 (quoting Singh v.
Ilchert, 784 F. Supp. 759, 764-65 (N.D. Cal. 1992)).
However, the court also recognizes that there is no
precise formula for determining whether there has been
an unreasonable delay. Instead, "[w]hat constitutes an
unreasonable delay in the context of immigration
applications depends to a great extent on the facts of the
particular case." Id.
Plaintiff suggests that the fact that her application
has been pending for nearly three years is patently
unreasonable. She argues that Congress intended
applications to be adjudicated within 180 days. See 8
U.S.C. � 1571(b) ("It is the sense of Congress that the
processing of an immigration benefit application should
be completed not later than 180 days after the initial
filing of the application . . .."). That [*10] 180-day
timetable may provide some guidance here, although the
"sense of Congress" expressed in INA Section 1571(b)
does not necessarily carry the force of law. See Yang v.
California Dep't of Social Servs., 183 F.3d 953, 958-59
(9th Cir. 1999).
Defendants argue that there is no statutory deadline
by which applications must be adjudicated and that, in
any event, the "first-in, first-out" protocol must be given
deference. True, Congress has not established a
mandatory timeframe for the USCIS to adjudicate
applications. Moreover, "'[t]he passage of time alone is
rarely enough to justify a court's intervention in the
administrative process, especially since administrative
efficiency is not a subject particularly suited to judicial
evaluation.'" Yu, 36 F. Supp.2d at 934 (quoting Singh v.
Ilchert, 784 F. Supp. 759, 764-65 (N.D. Cal. 1992)).
However, the court also recognizes that there is no
precise formula for determining whether there has been
an unreasonable delay. Instead, "[w]hat constitutes an
unreasonable delay in the context of immigration
applications depends to a great extent on the facts of the
particular case." Id.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
webm
03-26 01:23 PM
My wife recently started working using EAD. The HR folks there are well aware of EAD as there are people already working there on EAD. They did not have any issues with EAD. The only thing that they were saying from the begining is that they cannot sponser H1B and also the only thing they asked is whether she work authorization in this country. When she submmited the I9 form, the HR person just remained her to send the copy of EAD everytime she renews it
Karthik
Its the same situation happened for us too..
Karthik
Its the same situation happened for us too..
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
sjpg
07-12 09:47 PM
Guys,
I come from South Florida (MIAMI / FT LAUDERDALE /WEST PALM BEACH). Sun-Sentinel is a news paper major in this part of the world. We are expected to see a front page coverage about this turn-about by DOS and USCIS on july 07 bulletin.
I come from South Florida (MIAMI / FT LAUDERDALE /WEST PALM BEACH). Sun-Sentinel is a news paper major in this part of the world. We are expected to see a front page coverage about this turn-about by DOS and USCIS on july 07 bulletin.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
gc28262
08-21 12:11 PM
If phone companies resort to misleading advertisements, you can complain to FCC (Federal Communications Commission)
FCC Consumer Complaints (http://esupport.fcc.gov/complaints.htm)
FCC Consumer Complaints (http://esupport.fcc.gov/complaints.htm)
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
cnag
10-30 09:28 PM
I received a response from the ombudsman. I am not sure if our issue is properly understood by his office. When we write about AC21 issues, the response talks about I-140 delays. Gurus, please help me understand the contents of the response below:
Dear xxxxxxxxx:
Thank you for your recent correspondence to the Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman (CIS Ombudsman). I appreciate your comments regarding I-140 processing at the Service Centers. We are well aware of the processing delays at all of the Service Centers and the AC21 issues created by these delays. USCIS has taken steps to address the processing delays, but their efforts have not come about swiftly. We have received several inquiries such as yours and are very concerned. We are currently discussing these issues with USCIS and continuing to review their policies and procedures concerning these petitions. Hopefully we will soon be able to help USCIS with a recommendation to address the I-140 delays and AC21 problems.
Generally, we do not accept case problems presented by emails. Under the authority of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the CIS Ombudsman assists individuals and employers who experience specific problems during the USCIS benefits seeking process, largely to identify problems and to formulate recommendations to improve the USCIS service. Please see our website for more information about the CIS Ombudsman (www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman/). If you have an individual case problem, please follow the instructions outlined at the website.
I believe that first hand information from individuals like you is the best source for identifying systemic problems in the immigration benefits process. My office will consider the information you provided as we develop recommendations to improve USCIS� practices and procedures.
Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact my office, and for giving me the opportunity to serve you. I look forward to the day when I can report that the work of this office has been accomplished because our vision of a world-class immigration benefits system has been achieved. Your contribution takes us a step closer to reaching this goal.
Office of the Ombudsman
Dear xxxxxxxxx:
Thank you for your recent correspondence to the Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman (CIS Ombudsman). I appreciate your comments regarding I-140 processing at the Service Centers. We are well aware of the processing delays at all of the Service Centers and the AC21 issues created by these delays. USCIS has taken steps to address the processing delays, but their efforts have not come about swiftly. We have received several inquiries such as yours and are very concerned. We are currently discussing these issues with USCIS and continuing to review their policies and procedures concerning these petitions. Hopefully we will soon be able to help USCIS with a recommendation to address the I-140 delays and AC21 problems.
Generally, we do not accept case problems presented by emails. Under the authority of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the CIS Ombudsman assists individuals and employers who experience specific problems during the USCIS benefits seeking process, largely to identify problems and to formulate recommendations to improve the USCIS service. Please see our website for more information about the CIS Ombudsman (www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman/). If you have an individual case problem, please follow the instructions outlined at the website.
I believe that first hand information from individuals like you is the best source for identifying systemic problems in the immigration benefits process. My office will consider the information you provided as we develop recommendations to improve USCIS� practices and procedures.
Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact my office, and for giving me the opportunity to serve you. I look forward to the day when I can report that the work of this office has been accomplished because our vision of a world-class immigration benefits system has been achieved. Your contribution takes us a step closer to reaching this goal.
Office of the Ombudsman
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
anura
04-07 10:21 AM
I guess, we need to hire, one octopus for every months' prediction. That will be cheaper, instead of we put our brain in predictions.
I disagree. Octopus will cost money but using the brain costs nothing. Cheers. :)
I disagree. Octopus will cost money but using the brain costs nothing. Cheers. :)
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
cse_us
03-25 04:53 PM
!!!!!
I knew friends in Kaiser who were hired on H1 and got GC through Kaiser..
How the hell can they justify filing new GCs, but not accepting EAD!?
Kaiser stopped hiring on H1 since 2003. They used to hire on EADs until last week.
I knew friends in Kaiser who were hired on H1 and got GC through Kaiser..
How the hell can they justify filing new GCs, but not accepting EAD!?
Kaiser stopped hiring on H1 since 2003. They used to hire on EADs until last week.
gcpain
06-25 03:10 PM
will you guys let me know what is USCIS application fee for following items?
I485 applicatio fee:
I-131 applicatio fee:
I765 applicatio fee:
I485 applicatio fee:
I-131 applicatio fee:
I765 applicatio fee:
mohican
01-02 12:34 AM
Thanks for responding.
The key here is revocation vs. substitution. Per discussions with immi attorneys, AC21 portability is not explicit on what needs to be done if I140 is substituted by previous employer and NOT REVOKED, and the applicant is eligible for changing jobs (same desc and 180 days pending). The fact is that this loophole leads to illogical scenario--2 applicants taking benefit from same I140.
Question to you and other forum members: Is there a thread on this specific topic?
Mohican
As per some opinions, H1 also gets invalidated when 485 is revoked past 6 years limit of H1B. Did you also get your EAD revoked?
To answer your question#3, my lawyer said I should be able to retain PD from earlier approved 140 in such scenario. Check with yours.
The key here is revocation vs. substitution. Per discussions with immi attorneys, AC21 portability is not explicit on what needs to be done if I140 is substituted by previous employer and NOT REVOKED, and the applicant is eligible for changing jobs (same desc and 180 days pending). The fact is that this loophole leads to illogical scenario--2 applicants taking benefit from same I140.
Question to you and other forum members: Is there a thread on this specific topic?
Mohican
As per some opinions, H1 also gets invalidated when 485 is revoked past 6 years limit of H1B. Did you also get your EAD revoked?
To answer your question#3, my lawyer said I should be able to retain PD from earlier approved 140 in such scenario. Check with yours.
No comments:
Post a Comment