immique
07-13 02:03 AM
the date is July 8th 2008 and NOT 2007 as you mentioned. July 8th 2008 is when USCIS submitted the list to the State Department regarding the demand for visa numbers. please do not confuse this with July visa bulletin developments of last year.
This part is self-explanatory. It seems that USCIS made a list of all the applicants to Jul 08, 2007 by setting PD to Jun 01, 2006.
Documentarily Qualified might possibly imply:
.. Medically OK
.. FP and Name Check OK
.. Everything in application is consistent (e.g. DOB, Name, Kids, Spouse)
.. Requires No RFE
.. Requires no interview
.. Just requires GC (Visa) Number
My 2 cents input
This part is self-explanatory. It seems that USCIS made a list of all the applicants to Jul 08, 2007 by setting PD to Jun 01, 2006.
Documentarily Qualified might possibly imply:
.. Medically OK
.. FP and Name Check OK
.. Everything in application is consistent (e.g. DOB, Name, Kids, Spouse)
.. Requires No RFE
.. Requires no interview
.. Just requires GC (Visa) Number
My 2 cents input
wallpaper Hairstyles, kris kardashian
pappu
07-01 10:22 PM
Info on the lawsuit by AILA:
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
GC_ki_daud
10-16 09:55 AM
At the risk of sounding Naive.....Want to clarify...:confused:
Who and how do we get the letter notarized .
Does the letter need to have any of our personal case details i.e reciept number etc.
Who and how do we get the letter notarized .
Does the letter need to have any of our personal case details i.e reciept number etc.
2011 Kris Kardashian Haircut:
stucklabor
07-24 12:42 PM
It all depend how we interpret the law.
Here is the arguement by stuck labor
"INA: ACT 245 - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF NONIMMIGRANT TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
(a) The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States 1/ or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification under subparagraph (A)(iii), (A)(iv), (B)(ii), or (B)(iii) of section 204(a)(1) or may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed."
BUT
The above is applicable for adjustment of status only not for filing of 485.
Here the case in point is to argue for filing 485, not for adjusting of status even VISA numbers are not available. It is not mentioned anywhere in the act that the 485 petition cannot be filed. It is worth to give a try with USCIS. The present law does not mention anything about filing and we can take advantage of that.
The law is the law, there is no room for interpretation. We cannot file for Adjustment of Status using form I-485 without visa number availability. Remember that I-485 is the form name that you use to apply for Adjustment of Status. When you file I-485, you are filing for Adjustment of Status.
Please think through your ideas before posting them.
Just as a FYI and anticipating arguments that may arise, EAD is available by law to Adjustment of Status applicants and others - such as students on OPT etc - and the law specifically says who may get EAD.
I will not respond to any further arguments on this thread that are on the lines of "Let us get USCIS to reinterpret the law, let us file I-485 and not call it an Adjustment of Status application, let us lobby USCIS to get EADs without filing for Adjustment of Status etc".
In response to the posts by rpatel, valabor etc - there is ZERO potential in pursuing this directly with USCIS. IV will not and should not waste any time in this effort.
Here is the arguement by stuck labor
"INA: ACT 245 - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF NONIMMIGRANT TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
(a) The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States 1/ or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification under subparagraph (A)(iii), (A)(iv), (B)(ii), or (B)(iii) of section 204(a)(1) or may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed."
BUT
The above is applicable for adjustment of status only not for filing of 485.
Here the case in point is to argue for filing 485, not for adjusting of status even VISA numbers are not available. It is not mentioned anywhere in the act that the 485 petition cannot be filed. It is worth to give a try with USCIS. The present law does not mention anything about filing and we can take advantage of that.
The law is the law, there is no room for interpretation. We cannot file for Adjustment of Status using form I-485 without visa number availability. Remember that I-485 is the form name that you use to apply for Adjustment of Status. When you file I-485, you are filing for Adjustment of Status.
Please think through your ideas before posting them.
Just as a FYI and anticipating arguments that may arise, EAD is available by law to Adjustment of Status applicants and others - such as students on OPT etc - and the law specifically says who may get EAD.
I will not respond to any further arguments on this thread that are on the lines of "Let us get USCIS to reinterpret the law, let us file I-485 and not call it an Adjustment of Status application, let us lobby USCIS to get EADs without filing for Adjustment of Status etc".
In response to the posts by rpatel, valabor etc - there is ZERO potential in pursuing this directly with USCIS. IV will not and should not waste any time in this effort.
more...
makemygc
07-05 11:29 AM
http://digg.com/politics/Reversal_Fr...ard_Applicants
thank you
URL Incorrect. Plz repost
thank you
URL Incorrect. Plz repost
looneytunezez
06-11 12:49 PM
Sent message to my senators (CA).
more...
delax
07-13 11:39 AM
I am not saying my lawyer is any better, all these lawyers are nothing but blood suckers just like the employers. I'm just disgusted that people can stoop so low. The objective might be the same, but the intentions are far from it. I hope you understand that my friend and stop being a PR rep for murthy or any lawyer. :)
You have the option to leave the country if you think all employers and lawyers are blood suckers - I cannot comment on anybodys intention - I dont think you and me know the complete facts to pass a value judgement and that includes your comment about me being a PR for murthy or any lawyer. I enjoy a healthy debate on issues not on people and you seem to completely miss that from my postings.:)
You have the option to leave the country if you think all employers and lawyers are blood suckers - I cannot comment on anybodys intention - I dont think you and me know the complete facts to pass a value judgement and that includes your comment about me being a PR for murthy or any lawyer. I enjoy a healthy debate on issues not on people and you seem to completely miss that from my postings.:)
2010 Kris Kardashian Haircut: ray j
vnkpaul
09-15 04:09 PM
I am currently working for company X on L1B visa, my visa is valid till Sep 2009 and My I94 is valid till Apr 2010. I was in India in April 2008 and I had applied for a H1B visa via company Y (in US) in April 2008 and my petition got selected and approved in the lottery and I am eligible to get it stamped from 1st October 2008.
I have been on L1 2 times for about 1 year duration each time.
My questions are:
1. Since I was out of US during the H1B application filing, my H1B will only be valid when I get it stamped by US consulate in Canada? (I had specified that as my port of entry to US knowing that I will be in US at that point of time)
2. Can I continue to work for company X based on my L1 till I get my H1B stamped, which I plan to get done by Dec 08?
3. At the US consulate, at the time of stamping if they reject my H1B application would my existing L1 be still valid or they cancel that also?
Please reply... Thanks in advance...
I have been on L1 2 times for about 1 year duration each time.
My questions are:
1. Since I was out of US during the H1B application filing, my H1B will only be valid when I get it stamped by US consulate in Canada? (I had specified that as my port of entry to US knowing that I will be in US at that point of time)
2. Can I continue to work for company X based on my L1 till I get my H1B stamped, which I plan to get done by Dec 08?
3. At the US consulate, at the time of stamping if they reject my H1B application would my existing L1 be still valid or they cancel that also?
Please reply... Thanks in advance...
more...
tampacoolie
07-13 10:51 PM
I have a gut feeling that he does not have right to revise visa bulletin.
hair Short Kris Kardashian Hair
vagish
04-04 03:03 PM
This bill would affect all of us if they apply these same rules when we try to exend or transfer out existing H1s. Does it(the bill) say anything about that?
sometimes they say don't wish, your wish might come true, we are fighting for retrogression thinking that it is the worst possible thing of our lifetime,
guess what if they pass a bill to reduce retrogression along with other provisions,
like the one's mentioned by Durbin's bill and then many would become ineligible for GC at the first place.
Once thing is sure, if the GC or H1B numbers are increased, it will come with some good enforcement measures and some other provisions which would tighten this whole process.
there won't be any free riders any more , many in america are becomming aware of this day by day.
thanks
sometimes they say don't wish, your wish might come true, we are fighting for retrogression thinking that it is the worst possible thing of our lifetime,
guess what if they pass a bill to reduce retrogression along with other provisions,
like the one's mentioned by Durbin's bill and then many would become ineligible for GC at the first place.
Once thing is sure, if the GC or H1B numbers are increased, it will come with some good enforcement measures and some other provisions which would tighten this whole process.
there won't be any free riders any more , many in america are becomming aware of this day by day.
thanks
more...
nagesh75
10-12 09:15 PM
EB3 - Feb 2004
485,EAD,AP : RD July3107 at NSC
485,EAD,AP : ND Oct0307 at CSC
EAD,AP approved : Oct10 at CSC
485,EAD,AP : RD July3107 at NSC
485,EAD,AP : ND Oct0307 at CSC
EAD,AP approved : Oct10 at CSC
hot kris kardashian jenner
gimme_GC2006
07-15 11:12 AM
Is your case still @ Local Office
I think so..atleast there were no LUDs
Thats actually a good question..now I am thinking :confused:
I think so..atleast there were no LUDs
Thats actually a good question..now I am thinking :confused:
more...
house hair stylekris gt; gt; kardashian
feedfront
10-05 03:07 PM
My attorney will be sending it today via USPS overnight mail.
tattoo Red straplesskhloe kardashian long hairstylejan , peoples choice awards
tucker
03-14 07:14 PM
Id be up for a character modeling battle :) Then i can overcome my fear of battles :X
more...
pictures Short Kris Kardashian Hair
manderson
12-11 02:42 PM
reply from a previous thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2424&highlight=file+current (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2424&highlight=file+current)
The core team has alrady addressed this issue before : try doing a search. The summary goes something like this - First, EAD cards cannot be given out arbitrarily. Apparently, the law mandates very specific circumstances for which an work authorization (EAD) can be given out : for example, a student on OPT. We wouldn't meet this criteria before a visa number is available for adjustment of status to permanent resident - not unless the law is changed by congress. Secondly, EAD, as it stands now, is meant to be a strictly interim permit. The USCIS ombudsman's report has already objected strongly to the phenomenon of people who are ultimately found ineligible for permanent residence enjoying the benefits of an EAD for extended periods due to processing delays. In such circumstances, it is not realistic to expect that USCIS, on its own accord, will start doling out EADs like seasons' greetings cards.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2424&highlight=file+current (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2424&highlight=file+current)
The core team has alrady addressed this issue before : try doing a search. The summary goes something like this - First, EAD cards cannot be given out arbitrarily. Apparently, the law mandates very specific circumstances for which an work authorization (EAD) can be given out : for example, a student on OPT. We wouldn't meet this criteria before a visa number is available for adjustment of status to permanent resident - not unless the law is changed by congress. Secondly, EAD, as it stands now, is meant to be a strictly interim permit. The USCIS ombudsman's report has already objected strongly to the phenomenon of people who are ultimately found ineligible for permanent residence enjoying the benefits of an EAD for extended periods due to processing delays. In such circumstances, it is not realistic to expect that USCIS, on its own accord, will start doling out EADs like seasons' greetings cards.
dresses Kris Kardashian Haircut: Kris
acecupid
07-03 12:50 PM
I remember there was a proposal to give one Green Card per family to eliminate the retrogression for EB categories. I don't know what happen to that. It was like one year ago or so.
Thats a wonderful idea. Amen to that!
Thats a wonderful idea. Amen to that!
more...
makeup cute prom hairstyles for curly
mallu
06-20 02:54 PM
PD Nov.2002 India EB2( original labor ).
I-485 RD Jul 2006 . AD : June 2008.
Waiting for actual card...:D
I-485 RD Jul 2006 . AD : June 2008.
Waiting for actual card...:D
girlfriend Kris Kardashian Haircut: Kris
gc_lover
07-18 09:19 AM
some applications have already been rejected, mostly on July 2nd but a very few.
Do you know if these applications were send back right away or they are still holding it?
Where did you get this information, can you please post the source?
Do you know if these applications were send back right away or they are still holding it?
Where did you get this information, can you please post the source?
hairstyles kris kardashian jenner
NKR
07-03 11:09 PM
May I suggest the following reservations:
20% Other Backward Countries (OBC)
15% Scheduled Countries (SC)
15% Scheduled Territories (ST)
5% Kins of the armed forces
Remaining 55% for Highly Skilled people
Notfunny dude..
20% Other Backward Countries (OBC)
15% Scheduled Countries (SC)
15% Scheduled Territories (ST)
5% Kins of the armed forces
Remaining 55% for Highly Skilled people
Notfunny dude..
bondgoli007
02-15 07:55 PM
wow!!! Among the most divisive debate if ever I have seen one on IV.
Without offering my opinion on the topic at hand (divide and rule), I think "some" (not all or even most) of the members posting need to take a step back and see how hurtful their posts on this topic are getting to be. Some posts seem to have subtle racial bias and the ones in response seem to read too much into them too.
Guys, try not to post reactive or even respond to posts that are purely personal. I for one feel that this thread really doesn't do anyone any good and though Canuck's reason might have been more noble, it clearly is inducing normally clear headed individuals to get angry :-)
We all agree in general that EB process is a mess and working together we are trying to fix it. Certainly each of us have our preference in 'how' it should be fixed. However the IV core has goals based on broadly accepted potential fixes...lets support those and keep the infighting to a minimum...
GO IV
Without offering my opinion on the topic at hand (divide and rule), I think "some" (not all or even most) of the members posting need to take a step back and see how hurtful their posts on this topic are getting to be. Some posts seem to have subtle racial bias and the ones in response seem to read too much into them too.
Guys, try not to post reactive or even respond to posts that are purely personal. I for one feel that this thread really doesn't do anyone any good and though Canuck's reason might have been more noble, it clearly is inducing normally clear headed individuals to get angry :-)
We all agree in general that EB process is a mess and working together we are trying to fix it. Certainly each of us have our preference in 'how' it should be fixed. However the IV core has goals based on broadly accepted potential fixes...lets support those and keep the infighting to a minimum...
GO IV
imh1b
12-23 03:51 PM
Anyone filed a lawsuit yet? Someone please update.
There was one guy who was planning to do hunger strike some time back. Did he actually do it?
Or are we all waiting for the next visa bulletin?
There was one guy who was planning to do hunger strike some time back. Did he actually do it?
Or are we all waiting for the next visa bulletin?
No comments:
Post a Comment