ANGEL
07-30 02:04 AM
Icedgin,
I was not married to her when she got her green card.It is even more difficult if we wait for family based petition, so we decided to get it through EB3, which at that time the sched A was very much highlighted.I am also ff any ammendments offered but to our dismay,the battle is even more uphill.She works in ICU and she said that it is undeniably true that shortage of nurses is everywhere.Am sure our wives are also suffering just as bad.Hope none of the lawmakers have to wait in ER becasue the nurse who is suppose to look after her/him is still waiting for his visa. this American dream is just taking its toll on a lot of people.It is very frustrating.
I was not married to her when she got her green card.It is even more difficult if we wait for family based petition, so we decided to get it through EB3, which at that time the sched A was very much highlighted.I am also ff any ammendments offered but to our dismay,the battle is even more uphill.She works in ICU and she said that it is undeniably true that shortage of nurses is everywhere.Am sure our wives are also suffering just as bad.Hope none of the lawmakers have to wait in ER becasue the nurse who is suppose to look after her/him is still waiting for his visa. this American dream is just taking its toll on a lot of people.It is very frustrating.
wallpaper 2001 Skoda Octavia TAXI
Sunx_2004
05-13 11:44 PM
This is strange, They are saying your I 140 get denied on the date it was approved...
What was the result of second MTR, Is that dismissed too...
I have EAD which expires on 07/30/2010. I have AP which expires on 10/29/2009
What was the result of second MTR, Is that dismissed too...
I have EAD which expires on 07/30/2010. I have AP which expires on 10/29/2009
for_gc
08-14 07:02 PM
Guys good news from my side. Just got most awaited Card production Ordered emails for my wife and my son. ...
Congratulations Conchshell !!
You really seem to be a very level headed guy. Hats off to you !
Congratulations Conchshell !!
You really seem to be a very level headed guy. Hats off to you !
2011 2001 Skoda Octavia WRC
bkarnik
04-26 12:43 PM
khnmbd:
Is the SJC convening on 27th to discuss immigration reform? Do you have any more details? The website talks about voting rights?
Is the SJC convening on 27th to discuss immigration reform? Do you have any more details? The website talks about voting rights?
more...
ajit77
09-20 10:45 AM
Hey I was in similar situation. My current H1 is expiring on Sept 30th 2007 and my extension application was filed on Aug 22nd 2007. So I was not expecting my H1 to be approved till way beyond Sept. But then I checked with Local DMV in virginia and they told me I can get a temporary 1 year extension on my DL if I can show them the receipt of my H1 extension application. I got that from my employer and my DL by extended by 1 Yr till Aug 22 2008 ( date when H1 was applied) my state is Virginia if that info helps.
I am in a similar situation. Which DMV office did you visit in VA ?
Thanks
I am in a similar situation. Which DMV office did you visit in VA ?
Thanks
vpadman
01-04 12:06 PM
One my friends got his wife's AP approved by scheduling an appointment with local InfoPass office. but you need a valid reason and proof for that. In his case he got his father in law's medical certificate from India.
Julsun,
When your friend went for INFOPASS, did he get a single copy of the AP, or two copies of the AP ?
I want to know if there is a difference between getting APs through mail or INFOPASS.
Thanks,
-Viju
Julsun,
When your friend went for INFOPASS, did he get a single copy of the AP, or two copies of the AP ?
I want to know if there is a difference between getting APs through mail or INFOPASS.
Thanks,
-Viju
more...
coopheal
10-01 11:52 AM
Yes we all are frustrated, but one thing we can do is contribute to IV. Let IV core have some resources in hand to implement strategies they have thought of for advancement of our cause.
Contributed $100 for this month
Google Order #552474927075339
Contributed $100 for this month
Google Order #552474927075339
2010 2001 Skoda Octavia
jonty_11
07-06 01:55 PM
we are indeed a bunch of smart people..I wonder why we cannot achieve more..
please contribute and participat ein Media Drive.
please contribute and participat ein Media Drive.
more...
Buran
10-13 11:25 AM
For FY2006 (Oct 1st, 2005 - Sep 30, 2006) a total of 30,512 Schedule "A" visas were used.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2006/table07d.xls
Schedule "A" was current from June 1, 2005 till October 31, 2006
According to DHS statistics 5,125 schedule "A" visas were used in FY2005 (June 1st, 2005 - Sep 30, 2006).
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2005/table07.xls
So, from June 1, 2005 till September 30, 2006 only 36,367 Schedule "A" visas were used.
Now if 50,000 were available under schedule "A" what happen to 50,000-36,367=14,363 visas? I doubt very much that so many petitions were filed in October 2006 - the last month when this category was current and for new applicants the only option was AOS, even considering the fact that consulates conducted interviews in October, 2006 and November, 2006 they could not use 14,363 visas! Especially considering the fact that not all applications got approved (because of the Visacreen, etc).
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2006/table07d.xls
Schedule "A" was current from June 1, 2005 till October 31, 2006
According to DHS statistics 5,125 schedule "A" visas were used in FY2005 (June 1st, 2005 - Sep 30, 2006).
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2005/table07.xls
So, from June 1, 2005 till September 30, 2006 only 36,367 Schedule "A" visas were used.
Now if 50,000 were available under schedule "A" what happen to 50,000-36,367=14,363 visas? I doubt very much that so many petitions were filed in October 2006 - the last month when this category was current and for new applicants the only option was AOS, even considering the fact that consulates conducted interviews in October, 2006 and November, 2006 they could not use 14,363 visas! Especially considering the fact that not all applications got approved (because of the Visacreen, etc).
hair 2001-skoda-octavia-tour-
pappu
08-02 11:38 AM
When you have these news articles ready...one of the easiest way to circulate them is using a news wire agency.
I have used http://www.prweb.com/ before for my company news releases. It is free and if you want a broader reach pay $80. It is very effective.
It is a good idea to release it when something related to immigration is going on in senate or house. During this time, all major news network pickup articles from these wires based on keywords like "immigration, border issue etc"
So make sure you add appropriate keywords when you do the release.
Thank you for the suggestion. Having a press release is a good idea when IV does something or any legislative event happens, IV can issue a press release at that time with an opinion.
I have used http://www.prweb.com/ before for my company news releases. It is free and if you want a broader reach pay $80. It is very effective.
It is a good idea to release it when something related to immigration is going on in senate or house. During this time, all major news network pickup articles from these wires based on keywords like "immigration, border issue etc"
So make sure you add appropriate keywords when you do the release.
Thank you for the suggestion. Having a press release is a good idea when IV does something or any legislative event happens, IV can issue a press release at that time with an opinion.
more...
chanduv23
09-15 06:57 PM
hi! i just contributed $100.00 via paypal transaction id is : 1GE522823P5726434
U DA MAN - THANKS - PLEASE MAKE IT TO THE RALLY AND GET OTHERS ALSO
U DA MAN - THANKS - PLEASE MAKE IT TO THE RALLY AND GET OTHERS ALSO
hot 2001 Skoda Octavia Combi PICTURES 2001 Skoda Octavia Combi PICS 2001 Skoda
lonedesi
08-08 09:05 AM
Since we are trying to address I-140 delays in general at TSC and NSC, can we just send a general letter to Ombudsman's office without specifying our case and DHS Form 7001 ?
This way it will turn out to be a letter campaign.
What do you think ?
My understanding is if you send a general letter, you will get a general response (standard template) from the Ombudsman's office. For that matter, you don't even have to send the general letter, because I will provide you with the response you can expect to receive from Ombudsman's office without the DHS Form 7001.
----------------------------------------------------------------
"
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. Currently the TSC is processing I-140 applications
received in July 2007. USCIS has taken steps to address the processing
delays, but their efforts have not come about swiftly. We are
continuing to review and address this issue.
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/).
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
-------------------------------------------------------
Please don't get me wrong. All I am trying to emphasize is the DHS Form 7001 is absolutely necessary if you want them to investigate the problem and see for themselves if what we are complaining about is indeed true. You stand a chance that they may take steps to address this problem. If not, it is just waste of time and effort. There is nothing to fear by providing the case details to Ombudsman's office. There are people who have sued USCIS due to the delays and have won their cases....so why fear when all you are doing is requesting USCIS to process our cases in orderly manner.
So please take the time to mail the letter & the completed DHS Form 7001 to the ombudsman's office.
This way it will turn out to be a letter campaign.
What do you think ?
My understanding is if you send a general letter, you will get a general response (standard template) from the Ombudsman's office. For that matter, you don't even have to send the general letter, because I will provide you with the response you can expect to receive from Ombudsman's office without the DHS Form 7001.
----------------------------------------------------------------
"
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. Currently the TSC is processing I-140 applications
received in July 2007. USCIS has taken steps to address the processing
delays, but their efforts have not come about swiftly. We are
continuing to review and address this issue.
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/).
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
-------------------------------------------------------
Please don't get me wrong. All I am trying to emphasize is the DHS Form 7001 is absolutely necessary if you want them to investigate the problem and see for themselves if what we are complaining about is indeed true. You stand a chance that they may take steps to address this problem. If not, it is just waste of time and effort. There is nothing to fear by providing the case details to Ombudsman's office. There are people who have sued USCIS due to the delays and have won their cases....so why fear when all you are doing is requesting USCIS to process our cases in orderly manner.
So please take the time to mail the letter & the completed DHS Form 7001 to the ombudsman's office.
more...
house 2001 SKODA OCTAVIA
twinbrothers
07-17 11:14 PM
Hi eagerr2i,
Just saw the message. Will send you a PM on this. FYI to other members, I know someone has prepared a list of So. Cal members which is very comprehensive. I will try to send a PM to get their details. If you have any other questions, please feel free to send me a PM or an email at twinbrothers@gmail.com
Dear So Cal members.
nice to see good activity on the forum. Please hold on from holding any rally until you hear from IV core. We have some good synergy amongst or members in So Cal, lets plan a meeting in the coming weeks and decide on an action plan. I would encourage you to start thinking about ideas/specific actions we can take. I have a few ideas and would share it on our so cal email distribution list. Who can take the initiative to organize this meeting? Twinbrothers? any one else? Pls P.M me.
Just saw the message. Will send you a PM on this. FYI to other members, I know someone has prepared a list of So. Cal members which is very comprehensive. I will try to send a PM to get their details. If you have any other questions, please feel free to send me a PM or an email at twinbrothers@gmail.com
Dear So Cal members.
nice to see good activity on the forum. Please hold on from holding any rally until you hear from IV core. We have some good synergy amongst or members in So Cal, lets plan a meeting in the coming weeks and decide on an action plan. I would encourage you to start thinking about ideas/specific actions we can take. I have a few ideas and would share it on our so cal email distribution list. Who can take the initiative to organize this meeting? Twinbrothers? any one else? Pls P.M me.
tattoo 2001 Skoda Octavia RS WRC Limited Edition
seahawks
09-13 01:58 AM
Send emails to TV Stations in WA
KING (NBC-5)
KIRO (CBS-7)
KOMO (ABC-4)
More Newspapers
The News Tribune
Tacoma Weekly
KING (NBC-5)
KIRO (CBS-7)
KOMO (ABC-4)
More Newspapers
The News Tribune
Tacoma Weekly
more...
pictures 2001 Skoda Octavia WRC 1600cc
tinamatthew
07-22 08:29 PM
Tina,
I had started a healthcare thread previously and it got poor response. Eventually we created an iv-physicians chapter to track our issues and work with the core team on the overall goals of ending retrogression.
There are a number of efforts on to help Schedule A applicants, some of these are parts of more comprehensive efforts like Cornyn's recent amendment.
I suggest you organize the Schedule A folks into a group. IV is very happy to work with any group that takes responsibility for their own needs.
See this blogspot we are creating to increase awareness of physician shortages and problems: http://iv-physicians.blogspot.com/
If you do form a group, try to expand it by bringing members in from outside iv as well- this would also expand iv's membership base.
I will be happy to help you with anything you need based on our experience with iv-physicians so far.
All the best!
Paskal
Thank you so much for your encouragement. We are hoping more people will join. If there is anything you can share to help improve us, please pm me and I will be very happy to take it on board.
Schedule A professionals need as much help as possible
I had started a healthcare thread previously and it got poor response. Eventually we created an iv-physicians chapter to track our issues and work with the core team on the overall goals of ending retrogression.
There are a number of efforts on to help Schedule A applicants, some of these are parts of more comprehensive efforts like Cornyn's recent amendment.
I suggest you organize the Schedule A folks into a group. IV is very happy to work with any group that takes responsibility for their own needs.
See this blogspot we are creating to increase awareness of physician shortages and problems: http://iv-physicians.blogspot.com/
If you do form a group, try to expand it by bringing members in from outside iv as well- this would also expand iv's membership base.
I will be happy to help you with anything you need based on our experience with iv-physicians so far.
All the best!
Paskal
Thank you so much for your encouragement. We are hoping more people will join. If there is anything you can share to help improve us, please pm me and I will be very happy to take it on board.
Schedule A professionals need as much help as possible
dresses 2001 Skoda Octavia Combi
makemygc
10-25 11:59 PM
I've sent the mails and strongly encourage everyone to come out and take an early action before this gets worse. Even if you are not affected right now, support the cause to make sure that you will not be affected in the future.
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
more...
makeup 2001 skoda octavia rs wrc
gccube
07-18 05:11 PM
Consider I-485 Processing as a 2 Door Room. Front Door is for people who's PD has been current for the given month and can apply & Back Door is for Adjudicating People who are already applied & still current for that month.
The size of the room depends on what date they retrogress it to. If Cutoff date is say 2002, there are few people in that room who would be ready for adjudication. Instead if cutoff date is say 2006, there will be a huge number of people in the room.
As long as you stay in that room for more month (be current), the more chance you have of getting adjudicated fast, but also depends on how many people are ahead of you per RD.
Assuming that the date is retrogressed from 'C' to 2000 Jan, they start accepting the AOS apps with that PD and then do we assume that they are also working on them or say they donot work on it until the receipt date becomes current.
If the answer to the question above is 'NO' (that is the receipt date has to become current to adjudicate an AOS app, ofcourse PD has to be current too) then why is that USCIS accepting apps with a specified PD cut off date. In this case I am not looking at the people who are already in the room but am wondering why they are letting more people into the room, particularly when there is no room.
If the answer to the question above it 'YES', that means PD does play a significant role in the AOS adjudication process when there is retrogression, in my opinion.
The size of the room depends on what date they retrogress it to. If Cutoff date is say 2002, there are few people in that room who would be ready for adjudication. Instead if cutoff date is say 2006, there will be a huge number of people in the room.
As long as you stay in that room for more month (be current), the more chance you have of getting adjudicated fast, but also depends on how many people are ahead of you per RD.
Assuming that the date is retrogressed from 'C' to 2000 Jan, they start accepting the AOS apps with that PD and then do we assume that they are also working on them or say they donot work on it until the receipt date becomes current.
If the answer to the question above is 'NO' (that is the receipt date has to become current to adjudicate an AOS app, ofcourse PD has to be current too) then why is that USCIS accepting apps with a specified PD cut off date. In this case I am not looking at the people who are already in the room but am wondering why they are letting more people into the room, particularly when there is no room.
If the answer to the question above it 'YES', that means PD does play a significant role in the AOS adjudication process when there is retrogression, in my opinion.
girlfriend new Skoda Octavia design .
p_kumar
08-12 01:09 AM
MESSAGE BOARD Message Board Home
I am seeing this kind of messages on different messageboards. are they pulling our legs or is it really true that people who applied in june 2007 are getting approvals?.:eek:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Happy
05.45 485 approved! (6 replies)
Posted: 8/11/2007 4:57:36 PM
I got my 485 approved yesterday. I applied for my 485 this June 13th I got my approval yesterday I am very happy about it. I hope everyone who applied will get their approval soon. Basically I am in marketing I want to get trained in java to get into IT field. Please let me know you�re thought is this a good move.
I am seeing this kind of messages on different messageboards. are they pulling our legs or is it really true that people who applied in june 2007 are getting approvals?.:eek:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Happy
05.45 485 approved! (6 replies)
Posted: 8/11/2007 4:57:36 PM
I got my 485 approved yesterday. I applied for my 485 this June 13th I got my approval yesterday I am very happy about it. I hope everyone who applied will get their approval soon. Basically I am in marketing I want to get trained in java to get into IT field. Please let me know you�re thought is this a good move.
hairstyles house 2006 Skoda Octavia RS.
imm_pro
07-20 04:35 PM
NUMBERS USA Analysis opposing this bill-
http://www.numbersusa.com/PDFs/Cornyn-skil%20act%20_S.%201083_-summary%20chart.pdf
http://www.numbersusa.com/PDFs/Cornyn-skil%20act%20_S.%201083_-summary%20chart.pdf
hpandey
07-11 11:15 AM
CIR is the Worst thing on the planet for the legals.
Girish - CIR was meant to help the illegals not us folk. I hope we never have to see CIR again . It would just mean millions more ahead in line whereas we who have been waiting for years will be sent to the dustbin.:mad:
Girish - CIR was meant to help the illegals not us folk. I hope we never have to see CIR again . It would just mean millions more ahead in line whereas we who have been waiting for years will be sent to the dustbin.:mad:
reedandbamboo
09-13 07:38 PM
The USCIS!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment