retrohatao
02-07 10:32 AM
Admin,
I beg to differ. As far as USCIS is concerned, it just forwards the security clearance request to FBI/Homeland security. It does not follow up unless you sue USCIS. As far as they are concerned, the "ball is in FBI's court" ( exact words of the representative). So NameCheck need to be a separate issue.
I beg to differ. As far as USCIS is concerned, it just forwards the security clearance request to FBI/Homeland security. It does not follow up unless you sue USCIS. As far as they are concerned, the "ball is in FBI's court" ( exact words of the representative). So NameCheck need to be a separate issue.
wallpaper Blue Bubble Wallpaper,Very
admin
03-20 06:38 PM
Hi,
Any new development on FBI name check process? How can one address this issue?
We're definitely pursuing this problem also through our lobbyist, but for now given the drastic changes in the Comprehensive Immigration Bills, all the effort is going into that. Once that cools down a bit, we will concentrate on the procedural issues like FBI name check as we do realize that a large number of us are likely to get stuck there.
Any new development on FBI name check process? How can one address this issue?
We're definitely pursuing this problem also through our lobbyist, but for now given the drastic changes in the Comprehensive Immigration Bills, all the effort is going into that. Once that cools down a bit, we will concentrate on the procedural issues like FBI name check as we do realize that a large number of us are likely to get stuck there.
msgrewal81
02-19 03:08 PM
:D No more arguing by me :D
2011 Blue Bubble Wallpaper,Very
looivy
02-14 03:23 AM
However, the immigration policy has been Europe friendly. They allowed free flow of white Europeans during 19th and a good part of 20th century. No doubt that these Europeans who came also struggled initially.
The recent policy is to block non-English speaking Mexicans. Why shoudl language and to some extent race be a factor?
The recent policy is to block non-English speaking Mexicans. Why shoudl language and to some extent race be a factor?
more...
joydiptac
06-08 08:31 PM
Thanks Deepak for clearing the uncertainty. At least now I know my wait is 10 more years.
Wonder how many more years I will be able to keep my EB3 Job and job description. :(
This sort of slow torture is nothing less than "Curry Bashing" openly happening in Australia.
(Source : http://bkhush.com/dev/content/lets-go-curry-bashing )
The rate at which USCIS is denying H1B, L1 Extensions it EB 3- PD 2001 - Wait till 2015
EB 3- PD 2002 - Wait till 2019
EB 3- PD 2003 - Wait till 2024
Wonder how many more years I will be able to keep my EB3 Job and job description. :(
This sort of slow torture is nothing less than "Curry Bashing" openly happening in Australia.
(Source : http://bkhush.com/dev/content/lets-go-curry-bashing )
The rate at which USCIS is denying H1B, L1 Extensions it EB 3- PD 2001 - Wait till 2015
EB 3- PD 2002 - Wait till 2019
EB 3- PD 2003 - Wait till 2024
rajuram
11-10 10:09 PM
bump
more...
mirage
02-07 06:17 PM
If you remove country quota, the system should work in FIFO order, First in First out, it will not differentiate if you are from India, China or Nepal.
I support country quota otherwise all the greencards will be taken by Indians and Chinese and the people from small countries will not even get a chance. I am sorry but of you are born on one of these countries then you have to wait before everyone who filed earlier.
I support country quota otherwise all the greencards will be taken by Indians and Chinese and the people from small countries will not even get a chance. I am sorry but of you are born on one of these countries then you have to wait before everyone who filed earlier.
2010 Soap Bubbles wallpaper
pappu
07-01 10:09 AM
fyi
http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Oppenheim070606.pdf
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division, Visa Services Office, U.S. Department of State, June 6, 2007.
http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Oppenheim070606.pdf
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division, Visa Services Office, U.S. Department of State, June 6, 2007.
more...
styrum
01-18 04:05 PM
Looks like if you already have EAD that can be considered a "certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him pursuant to subsection (d) of this section". Then you don't need the passport or other forms. Those still on H1B but without EAD then must carry a passport with a valid I-94 detached from I797 and stapled to the passport or the entire I797 with I-94 still attached, or the I485 receipt.
Interesting: Neither I-140 approval nor 485 receipt contain a new I-94. Moreover, I485 receipt explicitly says: "This notice does not grant any immigration status or benefit. it is not even evidence that this case is still pending. It only shows that the application or petition was filed on the date shown." So, if you have filed 485 but don't have an EAD (you haven't requested it or it has not arrived yet) and your H1B I-94 has expired already you can't prove your status! So, EAD is the one and only proof of status! Moreover, even with an EAD but without valid I-94 you may have problem proving your legal immigration status to those oficers who believe a non-resident alien must always have a valid I-94. Any experience proving your legal immigration status in this situation: previous I-94 (most likely H1B) expired, never entered on AP, but have a valid EAD?
Interesting: Neither I-140 approval nor 485 receipt contain a new I-94. Moreover, I485 receipt explicitly says: "This notice does not grant any immigration status or benefit. it is not even evidence that this case is still pending. It only shows that the application or petition was filed on the date shown." So, if you have filed 485 but don't have an EAD (you haven't requested it or it has not arrived yet) and your H1B I-94 has expired already you can't prove your status! So, EAD is the one and only proof of status! Moreover, even with an EAD but without valid I-94 you may have problem proving your legal immigration status to those oficers who believe a non-resident alien must always have a valid I-94. Any experience proving your legal immigration status in this situation: previous I-94 (most likely H1B) expired, never entered on AP, but have a valid EAD?
hair Bubbles
Administrator2
04-20 03:11 PM
------------------------------------------------
URGENT
------------------------------------------------
We need 4-5 volunteers to make phone calls to IV members in CA. The purpose of the call is to inform and invite IV members in CA about this event so that we all could be well represented at this event. Please post a message or send a private message if you would like to voluneer for this effort. We will provide you with all the information required to make the phone calls to IV members. This task involves volunteering 30-45 minutes of your time. Please help this cause to help us all.
Thanks,
URGENT
------------------------------------------------
We need 4-5 volunteers to make phone calls to IV members in CA. The purpose of the call is to inform and invite IV members in CA about this event so that we all could be well represented at this event. Please post a message or send a private message if you would like to voluneer for this effort. We will provide you with all the information required to make the phone calls to IV members. This task involves volunteering 30-45 minutes of your time. Please help this cause to help us all.
Thanks,
more...
sanju
04-04 03:43 PM
You are confused on this. IEEE is against increase of H1B visas. They have never said anything about GCs. If they have, show me where.
That is a good question. And here is a reply to that.
Why does IEEE oppose H1? Because its members do not like competition from people whose profile match IV members i.e. people on H1B. If IEEE would be in love with green card and people waiting on green card, they would not support John Miano and his testimony. IEEE-USA's memberships consist of middle aged racist engineers who cannot keep up with the competition from mostly Asian younger workers. In the 80s and 90s, they were talking about globalization and its benefits as they got a jump start to get most of the global work. Now, other people in other nations have caught up and same globalization is causing them to pee in their pants. They understand that globalization is good for the country and the society. But what is good for the nation is not always good for each and every individual. So to save their lazy ass, they now want protection from their government, without realizing that if they get the protection they are seeking, they will not be able to enjoy that protection for very long as the companies will be compelled to look for more efficient and cost effective ways to do work.
Anyways, answer to your question is in your question i.e. How could someone be against H1b and for green card?
That is a good question. And here is a reply to that.
Why does IEEE oppose H1? Because its members do not like competition from people whose profile match IV members i.e. people on H1B. If IEEE would be in love with green card and people waiting on green card, they would not support John Miano and his testimony. IEEE-USA's memberships consist of middle aged racist engineers who cannot keep up with the competition from mostly Asian younger workers. In the 80s and 90s, they were talking about globalization and its benefits as they got a jump start to get most of the global work. Now, other people in other nations have caught up and same globalization is causing them to pee in their pants. They understand that globalization is good for the country and the society. But what is good for the nation is not always good for each and every individual. So to save their lazy ass, they now want protection from their government, without realizing that if they get the protection they are seeking, they will not be able to enjoy that protection for very long as the companies will be compelled to look for more efficient and cost effective ways to do work.
Anyways, answer to your question is in your question i.e. How could someone be against H1b and for green card?
hot Ocean Bubbles Wallpaper,
pitha
06-12 02:17 PM
So what is your point, you say only CIR can bring any relief to eb immigrants and no other bill like skil will be considered, but cir will not gives us any relief at all, so you would prefer a cir without any relief for us rather than not having any bill?
all this talk about cantwell amendment, what does cantwell amendment offer us, it offers us nothing that we dont already have. Canwell amendment is the best amednment we have so far, that should give you an idea of the pathetic situation we are in. Please start opposing this bill. If not, can somebody enlighten me what is the "good stuff" i am missing in this bill.
Pitha (Shree)
I see what you are thinking, but EB3india is correct. In CIR or never.
I agree with him that we need to get a new stratergy to handle this.
I do not know why IV core has not spoken after this bill died. When CIR came to the Senate floor with all these restrictions, Logiclife mentioned something
like we should become illegals.
He must have been kidding but one could see the fact that the illegals were the ones who were getting the benefits.
I want to hear a similar statement from them, let us see........
all this talk about cantwell amendment, what does cantwell amendment offer us, it offers us nothing that we dont already have. Canwell amendment is the best amednment we have so far, that should give you an idea of the pathetic situation we are in. Please start opposing this bill. If not, can somebody enlighten me what is the "good stuff" i am missing in this bill.
Pitha (Shree)
I see what you are thinking, but EB3india is correct. In CIR or never.
I agree with him that we need to get a new stratergy to handle this.
I do not know why IV core has not spoken after this bill died. When CIR came to the Senate floor with all these restrictions, Logiclife mentioned something
like we should become illegals.
He must have been kidding but one could see the fact that the illegals were the ones who were getting the benefits.
I want to hear a similar statement from them, let us see........
more...
house Bubbles Wallpaper by
abd
09-21 04:01 PM
How many days it took you to receive physical RFE after Online status update?
Thanks
I got RFE status change on September 2nd and my attorney recieved it on 7th Tuesday. It was long weekend.
Thanks
I got RFE status change on September 2nd and my attorney recieved it on 7th Tuesday. It was long weekend.
tattoo Caroma ubbles wallpaper
sunny1000
01-19 10:40 PM
Well, this is NOT a cooked up story. This happened to me yesterday at Harlingen (HRL) Texas airport.
On January 16, 2008, I went to Mexico for H1-B visa stamping at Matamoras US consulate. I got my H1-B visa stamped and returned to Brownville, Texas.
On January 17, 2008, I was at Harlingen (HRL), Texas airport for my final destination.
One of the TSA security personnel’s is in process of verifying my ticket before proceeding to security check. As every one knows, we must present one of the government issued PHOTO-ID to them to clear the security check. I have shown my driver license and he has cleared the security check (name check).
I was about to proceed further for security screening; mean while, a Police Officer came to me and asked me following questions.
Sir, are you a US citizen?
I said, No
Then, he asked me, can I see your immigration documents.
I have shown my passport to the police officer.
He looked at H1-B visa and I-94 and asked me; who do you work for?
I said my employer’s name.
Later, he gave me my passport back.
Now,
I have asked the Police Officer few questions
1. Sir, I’m in domestic traveling, is it mandatory to carry my immigration documents at all times?
Police Officer said, as per the US LAW, all non-immigrants must carry immigration documents and passport at all times.
2. What would you have done to me, if I had failed to present my passport?
Police office said, I could have DEPORTED you.
3. Sir, it is not possible for any one to carry passport at all times. Could the LAW allow me to carry photo copies of my passport and immigrations documents?
Police office said, No. Technically, you must carry original documents at all times.
I would advice you to carry Passport at all times.
I did not know this until Police Officer told me about this LAW.
P.S: BTW, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) level is in “ORGANE”.
Are you sure that it was a police officer and not a CBP inspector? The reason I ask is that the fact that you mentioned that he said that he could have deported you. Also, it was after the security check where CBP inspectors are present usually.
I was stopped by a cop for allegedly speeding in Vermont. The second question after asking "do you know why I stopped you" was that "what nationality I was" and "am I a U.S citizen"? I answered him and he asked what was my profession. After that, he just took my drivers license and issued a ticket. He also gave me a break and reduced the speed reading by 5 miles in order for me to pay lesser fine. He did not ask for my passport or immigration papers.
I flew into JFK last week from India and there was a CBP inspector standing at the yellow line where I usually wait for the next available inspector. He asked for my passport to see the visa and then, he let me go to the immigration counter for processing by another inspector. This is pretty new as I flew back to JFK from India in Nov and I was not screened before getting to the immigration counter.
On January 16, 2008, I went to Mexico for H1-B visa stamping at Matamoras US consulate. I got my H1-B visa stamped and returned to Brownville, Texas.
On January 17, 2008, I was at Harlingen (HRL), Texas airport for my final destination.
One of the TSA security personnel’s is in process of verifying my ticket before proceeding to security check. As every one knows, we must present one of the government issued PHOTO-ID to them to clear the security check. I have shown my driver license and he has cleared the security check (name check).
I was about to proceed further for security screening; mean while, a Police Officer came to me and asked me following questions.
Sir, are you a US citizen?
I said, No
Then, he asked me, can I see your immigration documents.
I have shown my passport to the police officer.
He looked at H1-B visa and I-94 and asked me; who do you work for?
I said my employer’s name.
Later, he gave me my passport back.
Now,
I have asked the Police Officer few questions
1. Sir, I’m in domestic traveling, is it mandatory to carry my immigration documents at all times?
Police Officer said, as per the US LAW, all non-immigrants must carry immigration documents and passport at all times.
2. What would you have done to me, if I had failed to present my passport?
Police office said, I could have DEPORTED you.
3. Sir, it is not possible for any one to carry passport at all times. Could the LAW allow me to carry photo copies of my passport and immigrations documents?
Police office said, No. Technically, you must carry original documents at all times.
I would advice you to carry Passport at all times.
I did not know this until Police Officer told me about this LAW.
P.S: BTW, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) level is in “ORGANE”.
Are you sure that it was a police officer and not a CBP inspector? The reason I ask is that the fact that you mentioned that he said that he could have deported you. Also, it was after the security check where CBP inspectors are present usually.
I was stopped by a cop for allegedly speeding in Vermont. The second question after asking "do you know why I stopped you" was that "what nationality I was" and "am I a U.S citizen"? I answered him and he asked what was my profession. After that, he just took my drivers license and issued a ticket. He also gave me a break and reduced the speed reading by 5 miles in order for me to pay lesser fine. He did not ask for my passport or immigration papers.
I flew into JFK last week from India and there was a CBP inspector standing at the yellow line where I usually wait for the next available inspector. He asked for my passport to see the visa and then, he let me go to the immigration counter for processing by another inspector. This is pretty new as I flew back to JFK from India in Nov and I was not screened before getting to the immigration counter.
more...
pictures Bubbles Wallpaper clip art
go_gc_way
01-03 03:24 PM
bump !
dresses 3D Bubbles Live Wallpaper for
vgayalu
10-05 01:02 PM
Just today mine and Spouse cases ( I 485) got approved after RFE ( RFE response reached to USCIS on Sep 30).
Still waiting for my kids approval.
Good luck to each and every one.
Still waiting for my kids approval.
Good luck to each and every one.
more...
makeup Colourful ubbles Wallpaper
chmur
09-12 10:46 AM
Demand data:
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
Thanks. Looking at the demand data (as of Sept 08 as it states ) we may or may not have "net" backlog reduction of 40K for 2009-2010.
EB2 - net has come down by ~30 K but Eb3 has a net add of "10K"..Hmm unless they really approve a ton of them in September, we may be looking net reduction of 30K.
I really hope they get cranking on EB3 -ROW , they have ~44K pending . Expecting USCIS to work through this backlog in a year or two is reasonable or even next year .
At that point, EB3-I would be primed to receive overflow but the question is will they open up the flood gates and receive all new Eb2 applications or let them in a phased manner .
If they let them in a phased manner , some of the pre approved EB3-I applicants in 2002-2003 will get there GC . Even otherwise , new EB2 applications need processing time so few lucky Eb3-I (If you can call them that) may get their GC's.
Another thing is when will they let new EB2 applicants , if it is early in the yearly cycle say Oct-feb , then processing on such new application will be complete by June and EB3-I will continue starve.
So basically lot depends on how and when they will open up the gates for new EB2 applicants.
If they do it at the end of the year and they do not want to loose visa numbers , then there are ton of EB3 application in a pre approved stage for them.
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
Thanks. Looking at the demand data (as of Sept 08 as it states ) we may or may not have "net" backlog reduction of 40K for 2009-2010.
EB2 - net has come down by ~30 K but Eb3 has a net add of "10K"..Hmm unless they really approve a ton of them in September, we may be looking net reduction of 30K.
I really hope they get cranking on EB3 -ROW , they have ~44K pending . Expecting USCIS to work through this backlog in a year or two is reasonable or even next year .
At that point, EB3-I would be primed to receive overflow but the question is will they open up the flood gates and receive all new Eb2 applications or let them in a phased manner .
If they let them in a phased manner , some of the pre approved EB3-I applicants in 2002-2003 will get there GC . Even otherwise , new EB2 applications need processing time so few lucky Eb3-I (If you can call them that) may get their GC's.
Another thing is when will they let new EB2 applicants , if it is early in the yearly cycle say Oct-feb , then processing on such new application will be complete by June and EB3-I will continue starve.
So basically lot depends on how and when they will open up the gates for new EB2 applicants.
If they do it at the end of the year and they do not want to loose visa numbers , then there are ton of EB3 application in a pre approved stage for them.
girlfriend Colorful Bubbles Wallpaper
gc_maine2
07-13 09:37 AM
JbpVisa,
Can you please take a moment to change the SPELLING to 'MURTHY", Please its misleading to members, and thanks for posting the information.
Can you please take a moment to change the SPELLING to 'MURTHY", Please its misleading to members, and thanks for posting the information.
hairstyles COLORFUL BUBBLES WALLPAPER
sathyaraj
03-12 06:20 PM
Hi BharatPremi:
Thank you so much for your reply. I do not have any speeding tickets also. I have clean history so far. I am hoping that this will be cleared by this week so that I can join them by 03/24
Regards
SathyaRaj
I am assuming here that you referred Background Check done by future employer as a part of employment offer before granting you the final offer. In that case mostly your employer might have contracted that to third party. And if that would have been the case then it solely depends upon where you resides now and how many states you have moved so far from the date of first entry in uSA and what kind of new implementation all those states may have. Some states even gives "Red Flag" for traffic violation such as speeding. What happens is that, that third party would see only "red flag" and would not come to know about underlying cause of the "red flag". So as a process that third party first come to your future employer notifying about this " red flag". Then your employer decides to query that further having signature from you and would notify third party to dig further and then third party will go to state police to know the underlying cause and state police will work on that by taking fee and and some point of time it will say " hey he had traffic violation". So it may eat up 3 to 4 months to finish the whole cycle and ball is in your employer's court whether to hire you or wait to hire till then. Most companies hire without wasting time and afterwards if something really serious feedback comes in will boot you otherwise you will be fine.
Thank you so much for your reply. I do not have any speeding tickets also. I have clean history so far. I am hoping that this will be cleared by this week so that I can join them by 03/24
Regards
SathyaRaj
I am assuming here that you referred Background Check done by future employer as a part of employment offer before granting you the final offer. In that case mostly your employer might have contracted that to third party. And if that would have been the case then it solely depends upon where you resides now and how many states you have moved so far from the date of first entry in uSA and what kind of new implementation all those states may have. Some states even gives "Red Flag" for traffic violation such as speeding. What happens is that, that third party would see only "red flag" and would not come to know about underlying cause of the "red flag". So as a process that third party first come to your future employer notifying about this " red flag". Then your employer decides to query that further having signature from you and would notify third party to dig further and then third party will go to state police to know the underlying cause and state police will work on that by taking fee and and some point of time it will say " hey he had traffic violation". So it may eat up 3 to 4 months to finish the whole cycle and ball is in your employer's court whether to hire you or wait to hire till then. Most companies hire without wasting time and afterwards if something really serious feedback comes in will boot you otherwise you will be fine.
nixstor
07-04 09:44 PM
Please stop posting this on every thread. In one line you are just spamming. We all visit Attorney Oh's website often. He does not need any publicity
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
pbuckeye
02-12 08:54 AM
Folks,
lets put the "you said .. I said" aside and just evaluate the definition of "assigned" and "used" visa numbers.
- correct me if I am wrong but I think Ron implies - "some numbers are assigned but then not used. These numbers still show up as used in the data report (since they were assigned)".
We have established that there is no document to support this but can we find out if this assumption can be true?
lets put the "you said .. I said" aside and just evaluate the definition of "assigned" and "used" visa numbers.
- correct me if I am wrong but I think Ron implies - "some numbers are assigned but then not used. These numbers still show up as used in the data report (since they were assigned)".
We have established that there is no document to support this but can we find out if this assumption can be true?
No comments:
Post a Comment