EB2IndianGC
09-23 01:57 PM
Thanks Abd. That was really quick. Our mail was received on Tuesday morning, and I have not seen any change as review yet. I will keep my fingers crossed for some quick action.
wallpaper Alpine skiing Wallpaper
nixstor
10-16 05:30 PM
Don't you think we should be more clear in requesting information per specific country instead of lumping China and India together for EB-2 and others for EB-3? Also will it be too much to request pending applications by month/quarter instead of year?
We probably want the report in this format? This is just a suggestion.
This is what is in the letter.
>>>> I request you to provide me with the number of pending employment based AOS applications, (excluding approved/denied) sorted by priority date from 2001 on a yearly basis broken down for each of the following country and category. (Not the combined total of pending EB AOS applications altogether) <<<<
I clearly mentioned each of the following country and category. To make sure, I also mentioned that we do not need combined total of pending AOS applications. If the request is ambiguous or means different things to different people,please let us know and we can make needed modifications asap. Are you recommending to hand out a blank tabular format .to USCIS FOIA?
As far as the year vs quarter thing is concerned, we felt that its best to get some thing out of this rather than tossed around. Most of the data from 2005/post perm can be found on the flcdatacenter and we can sort these ourselves. This leaves with pre perm applications and I believe DOS will have a better handle in moving the PD's a lot better in the last Q, if they have a handle on the number of applications by year. I agree that if info available on a monthly/quarterly basis, it would be even better. But I feel that we will get tossed around
We probably want the report in this format? This is just a suggestion.
This is what is in the letter.
>>>> I request you to provide me with the number of pending employment based AOS applications, (excluding approved/denied) sorted by priority date from 2001 on a yearly basis broken down for each of the following country and category. (Not the combined total of pending EB AOS applications altogether) <<<<
I clearly mentioned each of the following country and category. To make sure, I also mentioned that we do not need combined total of pending AOS applications. If the request is ambiguous or means different things to different people,please let us know and we can make needed modifications asap. Are you recommending to hand out a blank tabular format .to USCIS FOIA?
As far as the year vs quarter thing is concerned, we felt that its best to get some thing out of this rather than tossed around. Most of the data from 2005/post perm can be found on the flcdatacenter and we can sort these ourselves. This leaves with pre perm applications and I believe DOS will have a better handle in moving the PD's a lot better in the last Q, if they have a handle on the number of applications by year. I agree that if info available on a monthly/quarterly basis, it would be even better. But I feel that we will get tossed around
andy garcia
01-26 09:40 AM
I had trouble sifting through all that data and figuring out what that was all about.
Could you give the specific report that you used for these numbers. And, if possible, any hints on how you arrived at the data below. I would appreciate that.
Thanks....
FISCAL ------ Employment ------- EB3
YEAR ----- Total ---- INDIA | Total --- India
2000 ----- 111,024 | 15888 | 51,711 | -5567 :IV FY 2000 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2000%20table%20V.pdf)
2001 ----- 186,536 | 41720 | 90,274 | 16405 :IV FY 2001 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2001%20table%20V.pdf)
2002 ----- 171,583 | 41919 | 87,574 | 17428 :IV FY 2002 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2002%20table%20V.pdf)
2003 ----- -83,020 | 20818 | 47,354 | 10680 :IV FY 2003 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20table%20V.pdf)
2004 ----- 157,107 | 39496 | 88,114 | 19962 :IV FY 2004 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY04tableV.pdf)
2005 ----- 242,335 | 47160 |122,130 | 23399 :IV FY 2005 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY05tableV.pdf)
6 yr total - 951,605| 207001| 487,157| 93441
Annual Avg --------- 34500 | -------- 15574
If this trend would have continued. There should not be any MAJOR retrogression problem, but if you remember from the Nov 05 VB. The warning was very clear:
During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
If you plug this number into your analysis the result might be a couple of years of advance for your predictions.
andy
Could you give the specific report that you used for these numbers. And, if possible, any hints on how you arrived at the data below. I would appreciate that.
Thanks....
FISCAL ------ Employment ------- EB3
YEAR ----- Total ---- INDIA | Total --- India
2000 ----- 111,024 | 15888 | 51,711 | -5567 :IV FY 2000 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2000%20table%20V.pdf)
2001 ----- 186,536 | 41720 | 90,274 | 16405 :IV FY 2001 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2001%20table%20V.pdf)
2002 ----- 171,583 | 41919 | 87,574 | 17428 :IV FY 2002 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2002%20table%20V.pdf)
2003 ----- -83,020 | 20818 | 47,354 | 10680 :IV FY 2003 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20table%20V.pdf)
2004 ----- 157,107 | 39496 | 88,114 | 19962 :IV FY 2004 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY04tableV.pdf)
2005 ----- 242,335 | 47160 |122,130 | 23399 :IV FY 2005 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY05tableV.pdf)
6 yr total - 951,605| 207001| 487,157| 93441
Annual Avg --------- 34500 | -------- 15574
If this trend would have continued. There should not be any MAJOR retrogression problem, but if you remember from the Nov 05 VB. The warning was very clear:
During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
If you plug this number into your analysis the result might be a couple of years of advance for your predictions.
andy
2011 Bode Miller Wallpaper
jgh_res
07-05 12:38 PM
My background: I am a desi. I contributed around 300$ or so. I filed my 485 couple of years ago. So I am not that desperate.
Onething about desi's I figured out over a long time, they dont mind spending zillion dollars for attorney fees, USCIS fees, whatever fees. But they really mind paying 20$/month towards IV or anything, if there is a way they can get it for free.
What an epitome of hypocrisy? Non Profit org working towards GC alleviatoon and needs resources for lobbying. Yeah! The Blue skies are showering green on IV every day. How about us working for a Non profit org or EDU for free? They all serve noble causes. Dont they?
Onething about desi's I figured out over a long time, they dont mind spending zillion dollars for attorney fees, USCIS fees, whatever fees. But they really mind paying 20$/month towards IV or anything, if there is a way they can get it for free.
What an epitome of hypocrisy? Non Profit org working towards GC alleviatoon and needs resources for lobbying. Yeah! The Blue skies are showering green on IV every day. How about us working for a Non profit org or EDU for free? They all serve noble causes. Dont they?
more...
chanduv23
02-17 10:18 AM
for the update, StarRun.
We should have done it early (by 2 weeks before and continue the same for every 2weeks) so that people who need to get air ticket & Accommodation can get it @ better pricing. Also we will start getting contribution from silent member which can help to understand the level of participation bit early so that we plan for the event perfectly (or close to perfection).
I agree. Flight tickets are discounted till the last 3 weeks, but if someone wnts to book at a later stage, they become expensive.
On another note, I think we must urge locals, and those in driving distance to really make it. People must take this very seriously.
Most EB3 have no clue whatsoever when the backlog clears. Everyone wants to just wait and discuss visa bulletins, but will not do anything. This includes EB3 ROW also.
People must step up and do some PR work.
We should have done it early (by 2 weeks before and continue the same for every 2weeks) so that people who need to get air ticket & Accommodation can get it @ better pricing. Also we will start getting contribution from silent member which can help to understand the level of participation bit early so that we plan for the event perfectly (or close to perfection).
I agree. Flight tickets are discounted till the last 3 weeks, but if someone wnts to book at a later stage, they become expensive.
On another note, I think we must urge locals, and those in driving distance to really make it. People must take this very seriously.
Most EB3 have no clue whatsoever when the backlog clears. Everyone wants to just wait and discuss visa bulletins, but will not do anything. This includes EB3 ROW also.
People must step up and do some PR work.
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.
more...
desi3933
03-10 01:43 PM
This is turning out to be TRUE.
Past week, I made this comment and some people made fun of it. But, it's turning out to be true. They are now fully focusing on EB3 and I think they will continue to do untill they finish all Eb3. Once they reached last quarter then they will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB. They don't have to make EB3-ROW current to give some spill-over to EB3-I. What ever will be left at the end of quarter will be spilled across EB's.
I am expecting lot of REDs on this one.
Thanks,
MDix
>> Once they reached last quarter then they will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB.
Would you mind explaining two "they" here? Whom you are referring to?
Hint: This is a trap question.
Past week, I made this comment and some people made fun of it. But, it's turning out to be true. They are now fully focusing on EB3 and I think they will continue to do untill they finish all Eb3. Once they reached last quarter then they will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB. They don't have to make EB3-ROW current to give some spill-over to EB3-I. What ever will be left at the end of quarter will be spilled across EB's.
I am expecting lot of REDs on this one.
Thanks,
MDix
>> Once they reached last quarter then they will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB.
Would you mind explaining two "they" here? Whom you are referring to?
Hint: This is a trap question.
2010 Downhill+bikers
gkrish
04-27 03:10 PM
Would like to post my experience at the point of entry recently.
Just got back from an India vacation trip and entered thru SEA airport. Am still on a H1B(8 years running) and was a bit concerned about the posts saying that H1B are being questioned at the POE. In fact, before leaving I got a chance to speak to someone who runs a small consulting firm and his advice was to cancel my trip and avoid any Interntional travel.
But I went anyways went ahead since I had the confidence/hope due to working for a huge American organization; a name which will anyone will recognize.
I have a AP as well and was prepared to use it if faced with issues on re-entering with H1.
To my pleasant surprise, the immigration process took less than 2 mts, the fastest in my personal experience ever. Just 2 questions were asked by the officer who was very polite and friendly -- where do I work and for how long. Thats it.
Will conclude that if one if you work for a fairly reputable/well known orgn, then travelling on H1B should not be an issue.
Cheers
Just got back from an India vacation trip and entered thru SEA airport. Am still on a H1B(8 years running) and was a bit concerned about the posts saying that H1B are being questioned at the POE. In fact, before leaving I got a chance to speak to someone who runs a small consulting firm and his advice was to cancel my trip and avoid any Interntional travel.
But I went anyways went ahead since I had the confidence/hope due to working for a huge American organization; a name which will anyone will recognize.
I have a AP as well and was prepared to use it if faced with issues on re-entering with H1.
To my pleasant surprise, the immigration process took less than 2 mts, the fastest in my personal experience ever. Just 2 questions were asked by the officer who was very polite and friendly -- where do I work and for how long. Thats it.
Will conclude that if one if you work for a fairly reputable/well known orgn, then travelling on H1B should not be an issue.
Cheers
more...
sanju
04-04 03:32 PM
keep dreaming ,
1) H1B based on market ( will never happen ) , how ever hiking it to some
rational number like 100K to 130K is a good possibility.
2) reform GC process so that after working for 5 years, with one company
one should be able to get green card without delay, this would be more
meanigful as it will demonstrate that the poners really has a full time job
as oppose to somebody just buying green card without ever
working for a company.
thanks
And why are we disucssing H1b increase/decrease issue again?????
1) H1B based on market ( will never happen ) , how ever hiking it to some
rational number like 100K to 130K is a good possibility.
2) reform GC process so that after working for 5 years, with one company
one should be able to get green card without delay, this would be more
meanigful as it will demonstrate that the poners really has a full time job
as oppose to somebody just buying green card without ever
working for a company.
thanks
And why are we disucssing H1b increase/decrease issue again?????
hair Alpine skiing wallpaper
kate123
02-04 11:28 AM
well said.
Some questions to those who are supporting country cap.
Why not put a country cap on foreign students’ visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on H1B visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on labor certifications?
Why not put a country cap on I-140s?
Why not impose a country cap at the port of entry?
Why not put a country cap on visitors’ visas?
Why not put a country cap on business visas?
Why not put a country cap on US trade with other countries?
Why not put a country cap on amount of US $ reserves that each country can have?
Why not put a country cap on children that foreigners in the US can bear?
Why not put a country cap on the foreigners’ earnings in the US?
.
.
.
And the list can go on.
Putting country cap on greens cards serves a hidden racist agenda of not letting the people of one particular ethnic group grow in number and become strong.
Some questions to those who are supporting country cap.
Why not put a country cap on foreign students’ visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on H1B visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on labor certifications?
Why not put a country cap on I-140s?
Why not impose a country cap at the port of entry?
Why not put a country cap on visitors’ visas?
Why not put a country cap on business visas?
Why not put a country cap on US trade with other countries?
Why not put a country cap on amount of US $ reserves that each country can have?
Why not put a country cap on children that foreigners in the US can bear?
Why not put a country cap on the foreigners’ earnings in the US?
.
.
.
And the list can go on.
Putting country cap on greens cards serves a hidden racist agenda of not letting the people of one particular ethnic group grow in number and become strong.
more...
pappu
04-10 11:09 PM
Brain less Ganguteli,
Looks like you are a pest in this community. All the time I hear from you update your profile. What the heck are you goign to do with that other than just saying something. Chillout dude.
You are driving people away from this site. Sanju is another guy talks like a moron.
With your PD and category, how were you able to file your I485 in 2006?
I do agree that these guys get a bit irritating at times. I have warned Sanju once when he crossed the line.
But I do request everyone to fill in the correct profile data. This data is very useful to us. Pls check IV wiki for an explanation of this.
Looks like you are a pest in this community. All the time I hear from you update your profile. What the heck are you goign to do with that other than just saying something. Chillout dude.
You are driving people away from this site. Sanju is another guy talks like a moron.
With your PD and category, how were you able to file your I485 in 2006?
I do agree that these guys get a bit irritating at times. I have warned Sanju once when he crossed the line.
But I do request everyone to fill in the correct profile data. This data is very useful to us. Pls check IV wiki for an explanation of this.
hot Concept Wallpaper Picture
spicy_guy
07-13 06:38 PM
August 2010 Visa Bulletin – EB-2 and EB-3 Substantial Forward Movement (http://www.cilawgroup.com/news/2010/07/13/august-2010-visa-bulletin-%E2%80%93-eb-2-and-eb-3-substantial-forward-movement/)
"
Forward Movement Is Temporary
Note that the substantial forward movement does not indicate a trend; instead, the last two visa bulletins� forward movement was to ensure that no available visa numbers remain unused due to poor allocation of the unused numbers. We expect that there be some retrogression over the next 1-3 months.
Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or if we can help you prepare and file your I-485 adjustment application, should your priority date become current.
"
"
Forward Movement Is Temporary
Note that the substantial forward movement does not indicate a trend; instead, the last two visa bulletins� forward movement was to ensure that no available visa numbers remain unused due to poor allocation of the unused numbers. We expect that there be some retrogression over the next 1-3 months.
Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or if we can help you prepare and file your I-485 adjustment application, should your priority date become current.
"
more...
house Features with wallpapers
-wallpaper.jpg "of sailing Series downhill")
aquarianf
08-03 02:42 PM
According to the person I spoke to:
1. I will be issued an RFE if my AOS packet did not contain the EVL
2. Once the A# is issued, that means the application has been accepted, so no outright rejection can happen, however RFEs can be issued at a later date.
Did you ask if you can send EVE separately by quoting receipt number or A# well before they issue any RFE on this?
1. I will be issued an RFE if my AOS packet did not contain the EVL
2. Once the A# is issued, that means the application has been accepted, so no outright rejection can happen, however RFEs can be issued at a later date.
Did you ask if you can send EVE separately by quoting receipt number or A# well before they issue any RFE on this?
tattoo Downhill - Live to Ride
immi_enthu
08-15 04:35 PM
yes but they will start processing the applications based on the receipt dates. so if a guy applied last year, he gets priority over last month's people. (that is assuming that his priority dates were current last year from him to apply!)
also they will need to do fingerprinting etc. and shall pass the FBI check before they get to final stage of adjudication. that would take 6 more months. so they should look at the bulletin at that time to see if they are eligible. dont get excited about these dates - they are not that helpful for the last month filers.
some people who applied in June may get approved if their PDs are current. July/ Aug filers unlikely
also they will need to do fingerprinting etc. and shall pass the FBI check before they get to final stage of adjudication. that would take 6 more months. so they should look at the bulletin at that time to see if they are eligible. dont get excited about these dates - they are not that helpful for the last month filers.
some people who applied in June may get approved if their PDs are current. July/ Aug filers unlikely
more...
pictures Tim Ferry Wallpaper
truthinspector
04-08 07:10 AM
I don't understand the IO calling Client part. What if (like most of us do) the person was traveling on a weekend? Is the client supposed to be on call for the IO?Besides, even if it is so, answering NO to that question implies fraud on behalf of the Client too.
I know a person who was sent back; IO called the end client to verify his employment and asked if they could hire american worker instead, when the employer said they could, IO sent him back. I think they are only going after H1's working for smaller consulting companies.
You may write it off as a rumor, so be it, but IV needs to step in and take necessary action.
I know a person who was sent back; IO called the end client to verify his employment and asked if they could hire american worker instead, when the employer said they could, IO sent him back. I think they are only going after H1's working for smaller consulting companies.
You may write it off as a rumor, so be it, but IV needs to step in and take necessary action.
dresses +wallpaper Having downhill
Macaca
09-26 11:06 AM
The email should have info so that recipient can verify that rally was for EB GC issues and not H1B issues.
Say rally was organized by IV.
Put link to IV so they can check IV agenda.
Put link to Washington Post/NY Times article that correctly reported the rally.
Say rally was organized by IV.
Put link to IV so they can check IV agenda.
Put link to Washington Post/NY Times article that correctly reported the rally.
more...
makeup This downhill longboard deck
sukhwinderd
03-07 09:04 AM
i need to accomodate people coming from NJ, CA, FL.
if anyone wants to offer place at their home please let me know.
if anyone wants to offer place at their home please let me know.
girlfriend longboarding wallpaper
bkarnik
07-25 06:46 PM
Thanks a lot, please keep us posted about the outcome, even if we have one percent of hope, there is no harm trying that.
Guys,
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Anyways, I sent the following email to my lawyer, the entire chain with names deleted is reproduced here for your reading pleasure. This exchange highlights the apathy with which the legal community (at least my lawyer) view the issue and their knowledge of the law.... enjoy.. :(
From: Attorney
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
I see your point. You should contact the American Immigration Lawyers Association with your question. If the issue has not already been addressed by this organization, I'm sure they will readily champion your cause.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:49 AM
To: attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
Thank you for your time and the quick turnaround. However, the question still remains. If you notice in the link sent by you below, the USCIS refers to the US 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c) According to the USCIS, the CFR is the interpretation made by the agencies of the INA as passed and amended by Congress. The INA itself does not seem to have any clause relating to EAD for employment based categories because I believe the Congress never foresaw a situation where it will take up to 5-6 years for the process to complete.
I know that the USCIS has on many occasions by using the Federal Register or by Memorandums modified the CFR or changed the regulations governing the validity of the EAD, and I am wondering if something similar can be achieved in this case, wherein an appeal is made to the USCIS to change the rules governing eligibility for issuing an EAD.
Thanks once again.
Bkarnik.
-----Original Message-----
From: AttorneySent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
Hello BKarnik,
Your argument is sound, however, U.S. Immigration does indeed adjudicate
I-765 EAD applications based upon eligibility for filing. Please click this
link: http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/i-765.htm. It will take you to the USCIS web site where you can download form I-765. Included with the form is an instruction sheet. In the section entitled "Eligibility Categories", U.S. Immigration spells out the categories for which form I-765 may be filed. For example, under the "Foreign Students" title, you can see that an F-1 OPT student is eligible to obtain EAD work authorization pursuant to subsection (c)(3)(i). Your eligibility for EAD work authorization will fall under the "EAD Applicants Who Have Filed for Adjustment of Status" title under subsection (c)(9). Unfortunately, there is no eligibility category for I-140 IVP applicants or for IVP approval notice holders.
I hope this answers your questions.
Attorney
________________________________
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 2:16 PM
To: Attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
I had a question for you (actually, it is a series of sub questions).
However, this has nothing to with my employer or my GC, so if you feel that replying to this question will take up an inordinate amount of time or of you think that this is something that is worthwhile in pursuing, please let me know what your charges will be and I will let you know if I can afford them :)) With that out of the way, here goes:
The question is about getting an EAD before filing the I-485. I was perusing the INA as posted on the USCIS website. I did not find any applicable law that directs the USCIS when it can issue EADs. It is quite likely that I missed the section as I am not a student of laws as you are.
If so, can you let me know where to find it? As you know, the EAD issue is mentioned in the US 8 CFR sec. 274a. Now, the USCIS website explains that the CFR thus: The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies.
These
regulations apply the law to daily situations. Thus, the CFR is the interpretation of the law by the USCIS for application in daily life.
If
that is the case, what prevents the USCIS from issuing EADs upon the approval of Form I-140? Especially, since as you very well know, the Form I-140 is an application made by the employer to the USCIS to petition for an alien worker to become a permanent resident in the United States.
Therefore,
the form requires the employer to fill in all the pertinent information about the alien and his dependents. An approval of the Form I-140 indicates (at least to me) that the USCIS has agreed with the employee that the labor certification is good and the alien is approvable as a permanent employee.
I guess that is one of the reasons, the USCIS allows concurrent filing of the I-140/I-485.
With the current retrogression concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 is not possible, if the USCIS were to be agreeable to issue EADs to persons with approved I-140 it would make life a lot easier for all while at the same time not impacting the green card process itself. All we are asking is that the EAD be issued after I-140 approval, because it does not make sense to tell an employer that the alien is approved for permanent employment, but at the same time asking the employer to keep the employee in a H1B (i.e.
temporary status) at no fault of the employer/employee. Can you let me know if my argument is flawed? If not, do you think we have a way by which we can ask the USCIS for its interpretation or opinion on the issue? If we can, and you are willing to take the matter, can you let me know your fees?
I know that you are very busy, and may not be able to take on the matter even if you find merit in it. In that case, would know of a competent person willing to take it up?
Thank you for your time and patience,
Sincerely,
Bkarnik
Guys,
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Anyways, I sent the following email to my lawyer, the entire chain with names deleted is reproduced here for your reading pleasure. This exchange highlights the apathy with which the legal community (at least my lawyer) view the issue and their knowledge of the law.... enjoy.. :(
From: Attorney
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
I see your point. You should contact the American Immigration Lawyers Association with your question. If the issue has not already been addressed by this organization, I'm sure they will readily champion your cause.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:49 AM
To: attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
Thank you for your time and the quick turnaround. However, the question still remains. If you notice in the link sent by you below, the USCIS refers to the US 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c) According to the USCIS, the CFR is the interpretation made by the agencies of the INA as passed and amended by Congress. The INA itself does not seem to have any clause relating to EAD for employment based categories because I believe the Congress never foresaw a situation where it will take up to 5-6 years for the process to complete.
I know that the USCIS has on many occasions by using the Federal Register or by Memorandums modified the CFR or changed the regulations governing the validity of the EAD, and I am wondering if something similar can be achieved in this case, wherein an appeal is made to the USCIS to change the rules governing eligibility for issuing an EAD.
Thanks once again.
Bkarnik.
-----Original Message-----
From: AttorneySent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
Hello BKarnik,
Your argument is sound, however, U.S. Immigration does indeed adjudicate
I-765 EAD applications based upon eligibility for filing. Please click this
link: http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/i-765.htm. It will take you to the USCIS web site where you can download form I-765. Included with the form is an instruction sheet. In the section entitled "Eligibility Categories", U.S. Immigration spells out the categories for which form I-765 may be filed. For example, under the "Foreign Students" title, you can see that an F-1 OPT student is eligible to obtain EAD work authorization pursuant to subsection (c)(3)(i). Your eligibility for EAD work authorization will fall under the "EAD Applicants Who Have Filed for Adjustment of Status" title under subsection (c)(9). Unfortunately, there is no eligibility category for I-140 IVP applicants or for IVP approval notice holders.
I hope this answers your questions.
Attorney
________________________________
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 2:16 PM
To: Attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
I had a question for you (actually, it is a series of sub questions).
However, this has nothing to with my employer or my GC, so if you feel that replying to this question will take up an inordinate amount of time or of you think that this is something that is worthwhile in pursuing, please let me know what your charges will be and I will let you know if I can afford them :)) With that out of the way, here goes:
The question is about getting an EAD before filing the I-485. I was perusing the INA as posted on the USCIS website. I did not find any applicable law that directs the USCIS when it can issue EADs. It is quite likely that I missed the section as I am not a student of laws as you are.
If so, can you let me know where to find it? As you know, the EAD issue is mentioned in the US 8 CFR sec. 274a. Now, the USCIS website explains that the CFR thus: The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies.
These
regulations apply the law to daily situations. Thus, the CFR is the interpretation of the law by the USCIS for application in daily life.
If
that is the case, what prevents the USCIS from issuing EADs upon the approval of Form I-140? Especially, since as you very well know, the Form I-140 is an application made by the employer to the USCIS to petition for an alien worker to become a permanent resident in the United States.
Therefore,
the form requires the employer to fill in all the pertinent information about the alien and his dependents. An approval of the Form I-140 indicates (at least to me) that the USCIS has agreed with the employee that the labor certification is good and the alien is approvable as a permanent employee.
I guess that is one of the reasons, the USCIS allows concurrent filing of the I-140/I-485.
With the current retrogression concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 is not possible, if the USCIS were to be agreeable to issue EADs to persons with approved I-140 it would make life a lot easier for all while at the same time not impacting the green card process itself. All we are asking is that the EAD be issued after I-140 approval, because it does not make sense to tell an employer that the alien is approved for permanent employment, but at the same time asking the employer to keep the employee in a H1B (i.e.
temporary status) at no fault of the employer/employee. Can you let me know if my argument is flawed? If not, do you think we have a way by which we can ask the USCIS for its interpretation or opinion on the issue? If we can, and you are willing to take the matter, can you let me know your fees?
I know that you are very busy, and may not be able to take on the matter even if you find merit in it. In that case, would know of a competent person willing to take it up?
Thank you for your time and patience,
Sincerely,
Bkarnik
hairstyles /downhill-jump-wallpaper-
sunty
11-13 03:10 PM
A couple of documents about the
Immigrant Visa Allocation Management System (IVAMS)
This is the system that performs the analysis for the Visa demands/allocations etc...
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/109134.pdf
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87963.pdf
Just on a side note, maybe to address the quarterly-spillover issue, this system needs to be updated/changed and since it will be "a decade long task" for the DOS to do it, we might not see the spillover for a while...:confused:..
Hope thats not the case though..
Immigrant Visa Allocation Management System (IVAMS)
This is the system that performs the analysis for the Visa demands/allocations etc...
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/109134.pdf
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87963.pdf
Just on a side note, maybe to address the quarterly-spillover issue, this system needs to be updated/changed and since it will be "a decade long task" for the DOS to do it, we might not see the spillover for a while...:confused:..
Hope thats not the case though..
jjava100
09-10 01:40 PM
50, it said on the log in screen.
or more reputation points.. how to increase them to get to chat?? Thanks
or more reputation points.. how to increase them to get to chat?? Thanks
ZigZag
07-12 05:51 PM
Sorry to say this but 1st March is not considered. Hopefully your PD will be current in next Sep 2010 bulletin. Good Luck!
That may not be true. I had read somewhere (in this forum) that DOS sets up cut-off dates as 01, 08, 14, and 22, and 01 includes from 1st to 7th, 08 includes 8th to 13th, and so on and so forth.
Come August 1st, who knows, (strange are the ways USCIS works) his file may be the first one to be picked up and approved before those of March 05 guys, some of whom are still waiting, like Pitha etal.
That may not be true. I had read somewhere (in this forum) that DOS sets up cut-off dates as 01, 08, 14, and 22, and 01 includes from 1st to 7th, 08 includes 8th to 13th, and so on and so forth.
Come August 1st, who knows, (strange are the ways USCIS works) his file may be the first one to be picked up and approved before those of March 05 guys, some of whom are still waiting, like Pitha etal.
