galacticman
03-05 06:29 PM
Coopheal, what was the filing date for your 485? I take that it went to NSC? I'm a mid July '07 filer and am hoping for LUD's since processing times are current for that month. Offcourse it would be preadjudication like yours since my PD is so far from being current. Luckily my 140 was approved last year prior to 485.
wallpaper Minisha Lamba.
trueguy
12-11 01:43 AM
In a testimony to the House Judiciary Committee back in Apr/May 08, the USCIS clearly stated that it had changed its policy regarding which applications would be adjudicated first.
As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.
The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.
Here is how:
Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.
So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.
When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.
The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.
If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.
As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.
Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.
Very good points. I can't agree with you any more.
The question is how do we raise it as an issue so USCIS follow FIFO.
As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.
The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.
Here is how:
Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.
So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.
When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.
The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.
If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.
As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.
Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.
Very good points. I can't agree with you any more.
The question is how do we raise it as an issue so USCIS follow FIFO.
gcseeker2002
12-15 03:27 PM
Buddy,
Are you trying to create a problem or solve one? If I were from Sri Lanka, why would I send my wife to India? If we start following your advice, soon many husbands would be leading a single life for being laid off.
Read line 2 of this thread, OP says he is EB3-India , so why should he not send his wife to India ??
Are you trying to create a problem or solve one? If I were from Sri Lanka, why would I send my wife to India? If we start following your advice, soon many husbands would be leading a single life for being laid off.
Read line 2 of this thread, OP says he is EB3-India , so why should he not send his wife to India ??
2011 Minissha-Lamba-Wallpaper-003.
Rb_newsletter
07-13 05:31 PM
I am in similar situation but in GC process. My ex-colleagues are afraid to write experience letter for me.
Some colleagues who are still working in the same company doesn't want the company to know about the letter. They are afraid that company would take action if USCIS contacts the company to verify the letter.
Some colleagues who are out of the company are concerned about USCIS process. Basically they don't want to involve in any queries/RFEs from USCIS.
Some colleagues who are still working in the same company doesn't want the company to know about the letter. They are afraid that company would take action if USCIS contacts the company to verify the letter.
Some colleagues who are out of the company are concerned about USCIS process. Basically they don't want to involve in any queries/RFEs from USCIS.
more...
aquarianf
07-19 08:45 AM
my attorney did not ask for w2 or tax return, my company uses berry, appleman and leiden, usabal.com
wonder why different attorneys have different requirements
Even my attorney didn't include any paystub,w2s or tax returns. According to them employment letter is enough.
wonder why different attorneys have different requirements
Even my attorney didn't include any paystub,w2s or tax returns. According to them employment letter is enough.
Illuminae
05-27 06:48 PM
hey... fester, btw, your site totally sux, but.. er... hehe... i kinda like the song (feel free to throw stuff at me) :beam:
more...
inskrish
02-24 10:08 PM
There is another thread where the same topic was discussed earlier: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2095
2010 download MINISSHA LAMBA
ksita48
07-23 09:30 PM
Brief Description of my Case Joined Vision Systems Group INC,(VSGInc), Southplains Field, NJ in the year March 2003. My H1B was transferred to VSG Inc from my previous company which got merged with another company. VSG Inc filed my Labor Certification in 2003 (EB3) on Dec 23,2003 which has gone to Back Log Center, Harrisburg, PA and got approved only in Dec, 2006. In July 2006 VSG Inc, filed PERM under EB2 and got approved and filed I140 under EB2. But when USCIS sent RFE, my company has withdrawn the I140 without responding to RFE. In July 2007, during 2007 visa fiasco, VSG Inc filed I140 electronically, and I485 and other papers concurrently in July 02, 2007. Got the receipt notices for I140 dated 07-02-2007 and for I485 and others on 06-05-2008. Received EAD and travel docs in July 2008. My I140 is still pending at Nebraska Service center as on date. When contacted trough the Local Congress Man, Dept. Of Home land Security replied on Feb 09, 2009 as follows: �The processing of I-140 has been delayed, not yet ready for decision as it has been selected for extended security review, independent of FBI name check and fingerprints. Until the review is completed, we cannot move forward on this case. We will make every effort to make a decision on this case as soon as the review is complete. However, we have contacted the security team POC to see if this case can be reviewed to see if it can be moved for adjudication.� VISION SYSTEMS GROUP, INC., a New Jersey Domestic Profit Corporation, with a branch office in Coon Rapids, Iowa, was also indicted in a ten count federal indictment that included one count of conspiracy, eight counts of mail fraud, and one count of �Notice of Forfeiture� in the amount of $7,400,000. The investigation is being conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in collaboration with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services - Fraud Detection and National Security Division (FDNS); U.S. Department of Labor - Office of Inspector General; U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS); U.S. Department of State; and is supported by the U.S. Attorney�s Office for the Southern District of Iowa. At the out set I am in a complete depressed state an seek your help and know the fate of my AOS applications like I-140, I485 and others and the best possible course of action I may have to take immediately. My concerns and questions: 1. Should I transfer my H1b to another company? 2. What will happen to my pending I-140 and I-485 petitions? 3. Or should I continue with the present company wait for the outcome? 4. How much time it may take to finally conclude this process normally? 5. If the company is proved guilty and be closed by the Govt. or blacklisted what will happen to the Employees like me who are absolutely not concern, nor involved and go by Rules and in the project working If you can throw some light on these matters, It would be of great relief to me who has spent in this country for 11 years legally paying all the taxes.:confused:
more...
amitjoey
07-13 05:24 PM
That means you have no reputation at all :D :D :D .. kidding.
I think all that means is that no one has given you any reputation point yet.
Man, this is so funny, Somebody give me some good or atleast some bad reputation :D :D :D :D
I think all that means is that no one has given you any reputation point yet.
Man, this is so funny, Somebody give me some good or atleast some bad reputation :D :D :D :D
hair Minissha Lamba Wallpaper
reddymjm
09-30 10:11 AM
I was wondering what one would see in the online case status if an RFE/NOID is issued. Anyone has any text that would appear on the Case status application?
r u from NBKRIST?
r u from NBKRIST?
more...
kaisersose
05-22 12:01 PM
I think it would be best if they allow us to apply for 485 regardless of priority date once 140 is approved .
I think the chances of that happening are very slim.
The general opinion is, EAD + AP is really not very different from the green card, especially after the introduction of AC21. This is why there is a "qualifying factor" for 485 applications - the PD should be current to just get into the queue.
Allowing 485 applications when PDs are not current is dangerously close in effect to removing the GC Quota and for this reason, it is unlikely to happen.
I think the chances of that happening are very slim.
The general opinion is, EAD + AP is really not very different from the green card, especially after the introduction of AC21. This is why there is a "qualifying factor" for 485 applications - the PD should be current to just get into the queue.
Allowing 485 applications when PDs are not current is dangerously close in effect to removing the GC Quota and for this reason, it is unlikely to happen.
hot Minissha Lamba Wallpaper
desi3933
07-20 04:26 PM
AP is a must. If you travel out of the country and your GC gets approved while you're away... your H1 becomes invalid and you cannot use it enter US. The only way to return then is AP.
Incorrect.
One is allowed to enter on H1 under deferred inspection if the I-485 is approved while applicant is not in US. Of course, one can enter on AP as well.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
Incorrect.
One is allowed to enter on H1 under deferred inspection if the I-485 is approved while applicant is not in US. Of course, one can enter on AP as well.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
house Minissha Lamba
seahawks
07-21 09:52 AM
I still can't imagine Sen Hillary Clinton did not support legal immigrations..hmm, may be when we send it to Obama, he can take it up with his opponent to get her support too.. who knows, it is all a tricky issue
tattoo Minissha Lamba Wallpaper : Hot
Libra
10-24 10:08 AM
yeah it took almost a year to send an RFE that too after repeated calls to CIS.
Libra,
Congrats!!! Did it take an year for the RFE itself???
Romesh and naresh,
Any updates?
thanks,
Sampath
Libra,
Congrats!!! Did it take an year for the RFE itself???
Romesh and naresh,
Any updates?
thanks,
Sampath
more...
pictures Wallpapers, Manisha Lamba
sromil99
03-26 03:16 AM
Which Consulate you went for renewal?
It looks like case of establishing Employee - employer relationship and RFE is requested for the same.
You work for comp A which has contract with Comp B and Comp B makes you work for Comp C.
You need contract between Comp B and Comp C as well.
Search for Employer Employee memo, which was issued in Jan 2010 y USICS, that should clear the picture for you.
Note: I am not a professional, these comments are FYI only, pls seek professional advice for details.
It looks like case of establishing Employee - employer relationship and RFE is requested for the same.
You work for comp A which has contract with Comp B and Comp B makes you work for Comp C.
You need contract between Comp B and Comp C as well.
Search for Employer Employee memo, which was issued in Jan 2010 y USICS, that should clear the picture for you.
Note: I am not a professional, these comments are FYI only, pls seek professional advice for details.
dresses Minissha Lamba
jediknight
09-16 02:05 PM
It's time to tell CNN not to give a platform for racists.
Drop Dobbs: Halt the Hate (http://www.dropdobbs.com/)
Please sign the petition
Take Action (http://www.dropdobbs.com/take-action/)
"Drop Dobbs": CNN Pressured To Give Up Controversial Host (VIDEO) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/16/drop-dobbs-cnn-pressured_n_288506.html)
Please also post this to other web forums, facebook, twitter and send emails to your friends and colleagues asking them to sign the petition.
- JK
Drop Dobbs: Halt the Hate (http://www.dropdobbs.com/)
Please sign the petition
Take Action (http://www.dropdobbs.com/take-action/)
"Drop Dobbs": CNN Pressured To Give Up Controversial Host (VIDEO) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/16/drop-dobbs-cnn-pressured_n_288506.html)
Please also post this to other web forums, facebook, twitter and send emails to your friends and colleagues asking them to sign the petition.
- JK
more...
makeup Minissha Lamba Cleavage Show,
gk_2000
01-26 07:05 PM
US needs EB1 and Ph.Ds
Others not contribute as much
You are talking about needs? Then US needs all EB's over illegals by much, much more than US needs EB1 over EBn (n>1). So let's not talk of who contributes and who does not. It doesn't matter, all have same raw deal
Others not contribute as much
You are talking about needs? Then US needs all EB's over illegals by much, much more than US needs EB1 over EBn (n>1). So let's not talk of who contributes and who does not. It doesn't matter, all have same raw deal
girlfriend Wallpaper Info. Minissha Lamba
FUNTIMES
08-25 02:17 PM
I am still waiting.
hairstyles Minissha-Lamba-Wallpaper-010
jvs_annapurna
05-07 11:23 PM
sorry guys i was moving to new place. it was with i-94
bfadlia
02-21 12:11 PM
https://egov.immigration.gov/cris/jsps/ptimes.jsp
nixstor
11-04 02:27 PM
Here's my exact situation:
- My employer is company A
- I am assigned by Company A to Company B (corp-to-corp)
- Company B assigned me to Client X
- I want to move to Company Z
- Company Z would assign me to the same Client X
My non-compete clause says something like... Employee(I) cannot work to client of Company A within 1 year of leaving Company A
Now, is client X considered as client of company A? I'm thinking that company B is the client of company A. Thus, it should be okay if I move to company Z and be assigned to client X.
Any thoughts?
It depends on how big the company is. Companies like Bearingpoint, Accenture will take them seriously some times. If this is just yet another staffing firm, they are not going to waste their money for a lawyer and time on you. As others said, these contract papers have no value. (unless they spent like 10K on training you outside of the company).
- My employer is company A
- I am assigned by Company A to Company B (corp-to-corp)
- Company B assigned me to Client X
- I want to move to Company Z
- Company Z would assign me to the same Client X
My non-compete clause says something like... Employee(I) cannot work to client of Company A within 1 year of leaving Company A
Now, is client X considered as client of company A? I'm thinking that company B is the client of company A. Thus, it should be okay if I move to company Z and be assigned to client X.
Any thoughts?
It depends on how big the company is. Companies like Bearingpoint, Accenture will take them seriously some times. If this is just yet another staffing firm, they are not going to waste their money for a lawyer and time on you. As others said, these contract papers have no value. (unless they spent like 10K on training you outside of the company).
No comments:
Post a Comment