funny
09-11 04:40 PM
Thats the only thing hadn't happened so far......and now we have it...People are blaming IV now...I hope this is not true.
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/124475663/last-page/
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/124475663/last-page/
wallpaper BALDWIN OHIO STATE BASKETBALL
chanduv23
09-12 11:20 AM
Chandrakanth,
I agree with you 100% but it is a separate issue and must be done. What USCIS suggested to DOS that has resulted in visa bulletin is unacceaptle.
They practically said to DOS, Big Brother, "I don't know" .
How can they not know how many people are standing in line. When you and I take infopass, they can tell your category and priority date and whether you name check is passed or not. How come they are having difficulties in collecting the data.
Well - what I say is - there is an issue and we have to fix it. But do you think such a tangential effort work?
It is also known/unknown that USCIS simply does not have a system in place to locate files with old PDs - constant changes to system may have resulted in poor record keeping. I do agree that this issue has to be brought to limelight.
I personally feel that any effort must be effective and not a half hearted effort - what I am trying to say is opening a thread and running 10 pages of messages and doing nothing? Does that work for us? Can that be effective?
I agree with you 100% but it is a separate issue and must be done. What USCIS suggested to DOS that has resulted in visa bulletin is unacceaptle.
They practically said to DOS, Big Brother, "I don't know" .
How can they not know how many people are standing in line. When you and I take infopass, they can tell your category and priority date and whether you name check is passed or not. How come they are having difficulties in collecting the data.
Well - what I say is - there is an issue and we have to fix it. But do you think such a tangential effort work?
It is also known/unknown that USCIS simply does not have a system in place to locate files with old PDs - constant changes to system may have resulted in poor record keeping. I do agree that this issue has to be brought to limelight.
I personally feel that any effort must be effective and not a half hearted effort - what I am trying to say is opening a thread and running 10 pages of messages and doing nothing? Does that work for us? Can that be effective?
AK_GC
03-04 01:51 PM
I got a RFE for I-693 (Medical Exam) on Jan 27 and we responded in Feb. Our case is being processed in NSC. My husband is the primary applicant. It does seem like something is cooking there...
2011 With one win between The Ohio
pcs
07-05 10:50 AM
All NJ guys can meet Congressman Pallone, without any problem. You guys are always driving around these addresses.....
CENTRAL NJ
67/69 Church St.
Kilmer Square
New Brunswick, N.J. 08901
Phone: (732) 249-8892 MONMOUTH
504 Broadway
Long Branch, N.J. 07740
Phone: (732) 571-1140
(888) 423-1140
CENTRAL NJ
67/69 Church St.
Kilmer Square
New Brunswick, N.J. 08901
Phone: (732) 249-8892 MONMOUTH
504 Broadway
Long Branch, N.J. 07740
Phone: (732) 571-1140
(888) 423-1140
more...
wandmaker
05-24 01:44 PM
^^^
ashutrip
06-21 11:53 AM
process, thanks to Cohen & Grisby PERM presentation at the recent AILA conference.
So, things might slow down for PERMs due to this. Of course it will. See my posts about C & G elsewhere.
thats more bad news
So, things might slow down for PERMs due to this. Of course it will. See my posts about C & G elsewhere.
thats more bad news
more...
andy007
07-18 12:00 AM
Receipt date is not the date when the application reaches the service center. It is infact the date when your application is entered into their internal system which could be several days after the application has reached the service center.
And all application they enter into the system.. then give us a Receipt Date Right ... from that time we can apply for EAD / AP (will take time again)
And all application they enter into the system.. then give us a Receipt Date Right ... from that time we can apply for EAD / AP (will take time again)
2010 Ohio State Women#39;s Basketball
franklin
07-21 04:39 PM
Thank you for the clarification cpolisetti and others :)
I find it somewhat suspicious that someone who has joined IV this month and posted only on this issue, without any input from the core team who I know work closely with those on the hill, is trying to rally our community efforts.
I find it somewhat suspicious that someone who has joined IV this month and posted only on this issue, without any input from the core team who I know work closely with those on the hill, is trying to rally our community efforts.
more...
kshitijnt
05-09 04:44 AM
People who are on H4 ITIN couples, should seriously consider discrimination based litigation. I am fully sympathetic to their situation. Not long ago I was in the same boat. Make it harder for the government to make dimes on your money. They wont make it harder for you then.
hair Ohio State Buckeyes Basketball
kumhyd2
07-13 02:50 PM
Count me in for san diego. Is a meeting already planned should we have one. How about a meeting near the beach/mission
more...
ramus
06-03 03:44 PM
If you are eligible to file I-140/485 now then how come you are stuck?
Remember nothing has become law yet..
My labor was approved 8 months ago. Although i submitted all the documents to my attorney 5 months ago My employer is yet to file. the fact is i am eligible to file for 140/485/ead/ap. So now i am stuck. Will this affect me.Thanks in advance.:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
Remember nothing has become law yet..
My labor was approved 8 months ago. Although i submitted all the documents to my attorney 5 months ago My employer is yet to file. the fact is i am eligible to file for 140/485/ead/ap. So now i am stuck. Will this affect me.Thanks in advance.:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
hot Nike Ohio State Buckeyes
wellwishergc
07-06 10:22 AM
I agree with this posting by nixstor 100%; Instead of utilizing this issue for contacting congressmen/senators and urging them to work towards more benefits for legal immigration like recapturing 180,000 unused visas in the past years, we are unnecessarily focussing our attention towards security lapses in approvals and inefficiences of USCIS.
What the hell on earth is this? Do you know for sure they have ignored it? Do not add masala to the existing crap. Do you understand the consequences of these kind of spiced up stuff? We all would be sulking in the security check for ever, if DHS gets pissed off or gets a congressional hearing and the authorities get lambasted over this. You are seeing how doctors are being implicated in UK and all over. Security is the most important thing right now on this planet and western world is agog over security. I dont know from where Greg Siskind and Jay Solomon got the tip off. They tipped each of their hats off and put the story in our brains to run the show. Security is not a Joke. Do not make it a bigger issue unless you dont know whether it really has happened. The consequences can be pretty dangerous to the extent of revoking all the issued GC's in the past 20 days, if congress gets high on this. I dont know what lawyers want, but my understanding is none of us want to have negative consequences of this issue.
No matter who screwed up, we should be conveying the following message after we say that USCIS/DOS goofed up.
"The root cause of the situation is the inability of
a) DOS/USCIS to recapture the visa numbers from previous years
b) to carry forward the unused numbers for atleast one year
If congress makes the needed legislative changes to solve the above two issues, USCIS/DOS will not be in the ugliest predicaments like they are in right now"
Its our choice to make USCIS/DOS our enemies or we get compassionate to the situation considering how arcane the current laws are. We agree or not, we have to work with them going forward. Just that they are down and we are on a bashing spree right now doesnt mean that it will be situation for ever.
What the hell on earth is this? Do you know for sure they have ignored it? Do not add masala to the existing crap. Do you understand the consequences of these kind of spiced up stuff? We all would be sulking in the security check for ever, if DHS gets pissed off or gets a congressional hearing and the authorities get lambasted over this. You are seeing how doctors are being implicated in UK and all over. Security is the most important thing right now on this planet and western world is agog over security. I dont know from where Greg Siskind and Jay Solomon got the tip off. They tipped each of their hats off and put the story in our brains to run the show. Security is not a Joke. Do not make it a bigger issue unless you dont know whether it really has happened. The consequences can be pretty dangerous to the extent of revoking all the issued GC's in the past 20 days, if congress gets high on this. I dont know what lawyers want, but my understanding is none of us want to have negative consequences of this issue.
No matter who screwed up, we should be conveying the following message after we say that USCIS/DOS goofed up.
"The root cause of the situation is the inability of
a) DOS/USCIS to recapture the visa numbers from previous years
b) to carry forward the unused numbers for atleast one year
If congress makes the needed legislative changes to solve the above two issues, USCIS/DOS will not be in the ugliest predicaments like they are in right now"
Its our choice to make USCIS/DOS our enemies or we get compassionate to the situation considering how arcane the current laws are. We agree or not, we have to work with them going forward. Just that they are down and we are on a bashing spree right now doesnt mean that it will be situation for ever.
more...
house Ohio State Buckeyes Basketball
black_logs
01-11 11:39 AM
1 point we should make to the lawmakers is to make an administraive change to give 3 years extensions and abolish 1 year extensions. As 1 year extensions are not suffecient a very solid case can be presented for that case.
1) Driver license, lit of state doesn't give DLs if you have less than 1 year left on Visa
2) H1B Extension is taking 4-6 months
3) No Visa stamping in U.S.
The problem are just too many we need a proper channel to raise our voice to them
1) Driver license, lit of state doesn't give DLs if you have less than 1 year left on Visa
2) H1B Extension is taking 4-6 months
3) No Visa stamping in U.S.
The problem are just too many we need a proper channel to raise our voice to them
tattoo Ohio State vs Minnesota -Watch
gccube
07-19 02:29 AM
I personally believe that PD is more significant than the RD but it makes sense to me that RD may take precedence if the PD is current (as suggested by some members of the forum).
But if we think that at all times RD is the order they process them what would happen in this scenario
1. A guy with 2001 PD filed later and was 750,000 th guy in the queue of AOS applications.
2. After accepting all the apps USCIS retrogressed the dates to 2002 Jan. That means that USCIS is asking for AOS apps which satisfy this PD. That means that a visa no is available as of that date for adjudication so the first new application received(after they are retrogressed) will be 750,001 th application.
3. If RD is the only processing order at all times then 750,001th application will not be sent to an officer for review until all other 750,000 th applications with a better RD are processed.
4. Assuming that this takes 3 years (for example) then they are accepting an application today which they are not going to even look at in the next three years and this is not making sense to me.
5. If they are accepting the 750,001 th application because that application qualifies for a visa no then that should be processed before the other applications(barring for special cases FBi name check issues, RFEs etc). This means PD comes into picture when there is retrogression. So then they have to apply the same rule for the I-485 applications which are pending with them. They some how have to order them on the PD and I assume this should not be rocket science for them as that data is part of our AOS applications.
Thanks everyone for your inputs.
But if we think that at all times RD is the order they process them what would happen in this scenario
1. A guy with 2001 PD filed later and was 750,000 th guy in the queue of AOS applications.
2. After accepting all the apps USCIS retrogressed the dates to 2002 Jan. That means that USCIS is asking for AOS apps which satisfy this PD. That means that a visa no is available as of that date for adjudication so the first new application received(after they are retrogressed) will be 750,001 th application.
3. If RD is the only processing order at all times then 750,001th application will not be sent to an officer for review until all other 750,000 th applications with a better RD are processed.
4. Assuming that this takes 3 years (for example) then they are accepting an application today which they are not going to even look at in the next three years and this is not making sense to me.
5. If they are accepting the 750,001 th application because that application qualifies for a visa no then that should be processed before the other applications(barring for special cases FBi name check issues, RFEs etc). This means PD comes into picture when there is retrogression. So then they have to apply the same rule for the I-485 applications which are pending with them. They some how have to order them on the PD and I assume this should not be rocket science for them as that data is part of our AOS applications.
Thanks everyone for your inputs.
more...
pictures Take your Ohio State
lonedesi
08-04 04:15 PM
Letter to be sent for an I-140 petition pending at NSC:
From,
First Name, Last Name
Address,
To,
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
Department of Homeland Security
Attention: Case Problems
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Dear Mr. Ombudsman:
Re: I-140 processing delays at NSC for June - August 2007 non-concurrent petitioners
I submitted an I-140 petition for an employment based green card to NSC during the July 07. I have been waiting for little more than a year now and still there have been no updates on my case. While the processing times on USCIS website shows that NSC is processing cases filed around August 3 2007, we have been consistently observing (on multiple tracker websites online and from friends who recently received their approvals) that NSC has been processing & approving cases filed post August 2007 and some as recent as this year. While people like us are still waiting, people who applied recently are getting approval notices. This fact can be confirmed by Ombudsman's office requesting NSC to provide with the receipt dates for all the I-140 cases approved in the last few months. It's only fair that people who filed earlier are given preference following the FIFO policy of USCIS.
This delay in processing and ignoring our cases at the expense of recently filed cases is causing us undue hardship. Some of members who are in similar situation who contacted NSC have received responses that our cases will not be picked for processing until our priority dates are current. But there are several hundred cases like mine, who have an earlier approved I-140 and have filed a new I-140 petition(based on a new PERM labor) after we joined a new employer and were intending to port our old priority date which is current per the latest visa bulletin. At the same time, NSC has been approving I-140 petitions and whose PD's are not current.
Also some of the members, who contacted NSC, have received responses like "We are waiting for FBI name check to clear before we can process I-140 petition". It is clearly known that there is no need for FBI name check for processing I-140 petitions. Also, now that there is a new memo stating that if FBI name check has been pending over 180 days, then I-485 can be conditionally approved without having to wait for clearance from FBI. In spite of this memo, NSC has been consistently ignoring our petitions.
Some of members who have contacted USCIS Ombudsman regarding this delay have received responses from the Ombudsman's office stating that they are aware of the delays in processing I-140 petitions. But till date, we have not seen any action on part of USCIS to address this issue in-spite of many members raising this issue during Ombudsman's conference calls and sending letters to your office.
Lack of I-140 processing for non-concurrent filers has prevented us from receiving some of the interim benefits (EAD/AP valid for 2 years, possibility of using AC21 in these uncertain economic conditions) that come with an I-140 approval. This has resulted in us applying for EAD/AP's multiple times and paying for expenses associated with it.
I seek your assistance in investigating in this matter with NSC and impress upon the center to complete processing I-140 petitions for the non-concurrently filed cases during July 2007. I also urge you to request USCIS to re-instate the premium processing service for all categories of I-140 petitions with no pre-conditions to qualify.
Please feel free to contact me if you need additional information. I would appreciate your response and assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please post a comment on this thread so that we can track how many members actually participated in this campaign.
From,
First Name, Last Name
Address,
To,
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
Department of Homeland Security
Attention: Case Problems
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Dear Mr. Ombudsman:
Re: I-140 processing delays at NSC for June - August 2007 non-concurrent petitioners
I submitted an I-140 petition for an employment based green card to NSC during the July 07. I have been waiting for little more than a year now and still there have been no updates on my case. While the processing times on USCIS website shows that NSC is processing cases filed around August 3 2007, we have been consistently observing (on multiple tracker websites online and from friends who recently received their approvals) that NSC has been processing & approving cases filed post August 2007 and some as recent as this year. While people like us are still waiting, people who applied recently are getting approval notices. This fact can be confirmed by Ombudsman's office requesting NSC to provide with the receipt dates for all the I-140 cases approved in the last few months. It's only fair that people who filed earlier are given preference following the FIFO policy of USCIS.
This delay in processing and ignoring our cases at the expense of recently filed cases is causing us undue hardship. Some of members who are in similar situation who contacted NSC have received responses that our cases will not be picked for processing until our priority dates are current. But there are several hundred cases like mine, who have an earlier approved I-140 and have filed a new I-140 petition(based on a new PERM labor) after we joined a new employer and were intending to port our old priority date which is current per the latest visa bulletin. At the same time, NSC has been approving I-140 petitions and whose PD's are not current.
Also some of the members, who contacted NSC, have received responses like "We are waiting for FBI name check to clear before we can process I-140 petition". It is clearly known that there is no need for FBI name check for processing I-140 petitions. Also, now that there is a new memo stating that if FBI name check has been pending over 180 days, then I-485 can be conditionally approved without having to wait for clearance from FBI. In spite of this memo, NSC has been consistently ignoring our petitions.
Some of members who have contacted USCIS Ombudsman regarding this delay have received responses from the Ombudsman's office stating that they are aware of the delays in processing I-140 petitions. But till date, we have not seen any action on part of USCIS to address this issue in-spite of many members raising this issue during Ombudsman's conference calls and sending letters to your office.
Lack of I-140 processing for non-concurrent filers has prevented us from receiving some of the interim benefits (EAD/AP valid for 2 years, possibility of using AC21 in these uncertain economic conditions) that come with an I-140 approval. This has resulted in us applying for EAD/AP's multiple times and paying for expenses associated with it.
I seek your assistance in investigating in this matter with NSC and impress upon the center to complete processing I-140 petitions for the non-concurrently filed cases during July 2007. I also urge you to request USCIS to re-instate the premium processing service for all categories of I-140 petitions with no pre-conditions to qualify.
Please feel free to contact me if you need additional information. I would appreciate your response and assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please post a comment on this thread so that we can track how many members actually participated in this campaign.
dresses at Ohio State - Basketball
indio0617
03-16 10:11 AM
I just called the number. No answer. Will try again...
more...
makeup Ohio State
akilaakka
12-10 03:31 PM
Please see link below
Visa Bulletin for January 2010 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4597.html)
Visa Bulletin for January 2010 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4597.html)
girlfriend Ohio State Buckeyes Basketball
sdrk
07-24 05:40 PM
In VA can we extend Driving License with receipt notice of h1 extension .
I couldn't get a learners permit for my son based on the receipt notice
I couldn't get a learners permit for my son based on the receipt notice
hairstyles Ohio State
Ram_C
09-28 06:52 PM
not that it makes a huge difference, are they atleast trying to use some of the visa numbers by working over this weekend???
manderson
09-18 09:58 PM
thanks for answering.
i am not married. i have explored the possibility of doing this with friend(s) but decided that would like to do this independently. so i guess i have to figure out this owner/employee dual role problem.
any experience on this?
Easy way out... if you are married then your spouse could be the president (owner) and you could be a SW dev or whast so ever it states in 140/ labor.
you need a bank account for your company, you could run your payroll by buying quicken business and issue check for you as employee... Mind your business is separate from you employment... that you cannot take all the earning as salary, some as salary, some as profits is possible
i am not married. i have explored the possibility of doing this with friend(s) but decided that would like to do this independently. so i guess i have to figure out this owner/employee dual role problem.
any experience on this?
Easy way out... if you are married then your spouse could be the president (owner) and you could be a SW dev or whast so ever it states in 140/ labor.
you need a bank account for your company, you could run your payroll by buying quicken business and issue check for you as employee... Mind your business is separate from you employment... that you cannot take all the earning as salary, some as salary, some as profits is possible
9years
10-29 11:13 AM
NO LUD on I-485 yet.
Thanks.
Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment