Chandu,
I filed 485 , Ead , Ap on my own... But i want to hire Rajiv/Sheela just for
AC21 package... any idea how much do they charge ?
Thanx
Murthy charges $750 if you are existing client. Not sure how much they will charge, if you hire them just for that.
I filed 485 , Ead , Ap on my own... But i want to hire Rajiv/Sheela just for
AC21 package... any idea how much do they charge ?
Thanx
Murthy charges $750 if you are existing client. Not sure how much they will charge, if you hire them just for that.
wallpaper apple wallpapers for mac hd.
Many of them during the letters campaign, and most are ready to buy a home within a year of getting their green cards!
On ther other hand I personally know a very highly educated guy (IITBombay, MS then PhD in Electrical Eng- with a specialization in wireless tech) who got his EB GC 2-3 years too late... by that time the tech boom was over but the housing boom had already begun... so he decided to wait a few more years. Now he feels bad about the whole thing, and wonders if he should have bought a home when he was on H1B-- even if it would be frought with risk! That way, he would have been a millionaire today-- just like his friends who got their GCs and bought homes well in time.
8 years later, the history is repeating itself.
500,000+ people are patiently waiting in the EB GC queue... and chances are they will helplessly watch as home prices hit the bottom, and then rebound a few years later.
Some of them might decide to take the plunge and buy a home to take advantage of the low prices. However, many of them may be simply denied this chance becasuse their future is tied to a plastic card that has to be renewed every year!
Singhsa, sorry cannot help you right now with the media... maybe you can try getting help from the IV-media team?
On ther other hand I personally know a very highly educated guy (IITBombay, MS then PhD in Electrical Eng- with a specialization in wireless tech) who got his EB GC 2-3 years too late... by that time the tech boom was over but the housing boom had already begun... so he decided to wait a few more years. Now he feels bad about the whole thing, and wonders if he should have bought a home when he was on H1B-- even if it would be frought with risk! That way, he would have been a millionaire today-- just like his friends who got their GCs and bought homes well in time.
8 years later, the history is repeating itself.
500,000+ people are patiently waiting in the EB GC queue... and chances are they will helplessly watch as home prices hit the bottom, and then rebound a few years later.
Some of them might decide to take the plunge and buy a home to take advantage of the low prices. However, many of them may be simply denied this chance becasuse their future is tied to a plastic card that has to be renewed every year!
Singhsa, sorry cannot help you right now with the media... maybe you can try getting help from the IV-media team?
Dude you pay taxes for all the facilities that you are enjoying in this country.... nothing is free here.
Dude, did YOU and 99% of "ALL AMERICAN" FAMILIES not enjoy all the SAME facilities that I enjoy in this country. Why do I pay more than 99% of "ALL AMERICAN" FAMILIES, whatever that means? That's creates entitlement for me. That creates entitlement for EVERYONE in EB category.
.
Dude, did YOU and 99% of "ALL AMERICAN" FAMILIES not enjoy all the SAME facilities that I enjoy in this country. Why do I pay more than 99% of "ALL AMERICAN" FAMILIES, whatever that means? That's creates entitlement for me. That creates entitlement for EVERYONE in EB category.
.
2011 wallpaper mac hd. apple
Hello Everyone,
I have created google group for NJ Chapter and there are four members in this group so far. If you can send me your email ID then I will let you join..
Varsha: I will see if I can change ownership of group to you. It is much easier to communicate through emails then looking at chapter posting..
Thank you
ak27
Dear ak27,
Could you post the groups URL so that I can join?
Best Regards.
I have created google group for NJ Chapter and there are four members in this group so far. If you can send me your email ID then I will let you join..
Varsha: I will see if I can change ownership of group to you. It is much easier to communicate through emails then looking at chapter posting..
Thank you
ak27
Dear ak27,
Could you post the groups URL so that I can join?
Best Regards.
The issue with not filing green card is ,even if it is written in offer letter..The lawyer can always come and say ' We tried our best to apply for your grene card. But we could not demonstrate that we could not find american citizens with minimum requirements.'
A promise is a promise whether verbal or written.
In this matter desi consultancies are far better.
I know you are not going to like my reply...but written is a written issue. Desi consultancies and body shops have thier own issue. Infact they exploited the system and candidates to the core.
Having things documented is the best way. If a company had to play fould it can do it anytime (even on verbal). I also learned the hard way. While writing we can still refere outside lawyers (of our choice)
A promise is a promise whether verbal or written.
In this matter desi consultancies are far better.
I know you are not going to like my reply...but written is a written issue. Desi consultancies and body shops have thier own issue. Infact they exploited the system and candidates to the core.
Having things documented is the best way. If a company had to play fould it can do it anytime (even on verbal). I also learned the hard way. While writing we can still refere outside lawyers (of our choice)
Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
coolmanship, can you please share the format of the letter which we need to send to USCIS asking them of taking the attorney of the case?
I will really appreciate that.
Change of employer does not imply your use of the AC21.....the rule does not require you to notify USCIS....so in many cases, if you do not notify them, it is likely that they will never know and approve your GC. But, if they issue an RFE and if your sponsoring employer gives you the offer for future job you should be okay..........you may only have to work for them for at least a little bit after you got your GC....
I will really appreciate that.
Change of employer does not imply your use of the AC21.....the rule does not require you to notify USCIS....so in many cases, if you do not notify them, it is likely that they will never know and approve your GC. But, if they issue an RFE and if your sponsoring employer gives you the offer for future job you should be okay..........you may only have to work for them for at least a little bit after you got your GC....
2010 mac wallpaper hd 3d. 3.
I think thats AC21 recapture thing...
From sept visa bulletin http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4328.html section E.
We have 22704 FB visa overflow to EB for year 2008.
From sept visa bulletin http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4328.html section E.
We have 22704 FB visa overflow to EB for year 2008.
In the USCIS Ombudsman Report In the USCIS Ombudsman Report http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual_Report_2007.pdf
On page 52 it mentions
"
The Grand Total of Employment Preference Numbers Available for Recapture is shown as 218,759 (not 268,759), since it reflects subtraction of 50,000 numbers already recaptured from FY 01 through FY 04.
"
Also there is a break up of per year unused visa numbers from 1992 till 2006.
On page 52 it mentions
"
The Grand Total of Employment Preference Numbers Available for Recapture is shown as 218,759 (not 268,759), since it reflects subtraction of 50,000 numbers already recaptured from FY 01 through FY 04.
"
Also there is a break up of per year unused visa numbers from 1992 till 2006.
hair top mac wallpapers. apple
let the waiting start for the May bulletin....
It is my fault. I should have explained it better.
The immigration laws are very confusion. Entry on AP is legal entry and it is ok, but it is not considered as lawful entry for I-485 approval process ONLY. For last lawful entry, USCIS looks for last entry on non-immigrant visa.
Hope that helps.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
I agree with the point above, but does this even apply to CrazyGhoda/OP? Because, he already has I485/AOS pending, which is a legal presence in the US in itself. Hence, I don't see him accruing any "out of status/illegal presence" days. He "MIGHT" have to show a future/current employer who is sponsoring his GC, depending on what his RFE asks for.
Please comment.
The immigration laws are very confusion. Entry on AP is legal entry and it is ok, but it is not considered as lawful entry for I-485 approval process ONLY. For last lawful entry, USCIS looks for last entry on non-immigrant visa.
Hope that helps.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
I agree with the point above, but does this even apply to CrazyGhoda/OP? Because, he already has I485/AOS pending, which is a legal presence in the US in itself. Hence, I don't see him accruing any "out of status/illegal presence" days. He "MIGHT" have to show a future/current employer who is sponsoring his GC, depending on what his RFE asks for.
Please comment.
hot mac wallpaper hd 3d. apple mac
lazycis..
yes..the 485 was filed thru ex-employer based on future employment...
so basically we submitted a future empl letter from ex-employer + the current employment letter with the current employer stating that I am working with the current employer with the same skills mentioned in the labor..
the mess up was submitting the current empl.letter alongwith the G325a form which does not mention the current employer(which was prepared in June 07 before i found this job..)
yes..the 485 was filed thru ex-employer based on future employment...
so basically we submitted a future empl letter from ex-employer + the current employment letter with the current employer stating that I am working with the current employer with the same skills mentioned in the labor..
the mess up was submitting the current empl.letter alongwith the G325a form which does not mention the current employer(which was prepared in June 07 before i found this job..)
house Dripping Apple Wallpaper
I have heard that there are desi consultants who sponsor H-1 for people graduating with Masters in US, irrespective of which field they are in. Is this true? Sounds a bit fishy to me.
tattoo apple wallpapers for mac hd.
Kindly download the Attached Doc.
pictures Find more of my HD wallpapers
Plain and simple. From now on just imagine that you are working in one of those persian gulf countries - work on a visa as long as you work. This way its less stressful. If you have immigration intent, then enter illegally. :mad:
dresses Mac Backgrounds Wallpaper HD.
I140 approved 2005
Eb3 priority date Feb 2002
Eb3 priority date Feb 2002
makeup apple wallpaper hd
Sukhwinder is coordinating the efforts on carpool and hosting options.
Members who wish to carpool please post on the thread as well as send an email to Sukhwinder - 2011carpool@gmail.com
Vinay is coordinating the efforts on airmiles, people wishing to donate air miles or request help for using the air miles, please PM vin13.
Thank you.
Members who wish to carpool please post on the thread as well as send an email to Sukhwinder - 2011carpool@gmail.com
Vinay is coordinating the efforts on airmiles, people wishing to donate air miles or request help for using the air miles, please PM vin13.
Thank you.
girlfriend Apple Paint HD Wallpaper
We have to wake-up before same continue while EAD/AP renewal
hairstyles mac hd. apple wallpapers.
85,000 PERM cases certified in 2007. 2007 is a typical heavy filing year still...
One year 140,000 EB based visas available. If some how some of the back logs are eliminated, the future looks good as 140K for a year and less than 100K labor certifications per year. If the USCIS process with maximum visa/year, it is possible.
http://www.usavisanow.com/perm07.pdf
see a chart
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pezNTiCXNupwoSrZGE4kqcg&gid=1
One year 140,000 EB based visas available. If some how some of the back logs are eliminated, the future looks good as 140K for a year and less than 100K labor certifications per year. If the USCIS process with maximum visa/year, it is possible.
http://www.usavisanow.com/perm07.pdf
see a chart
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pezNTiCXNupwoSrZGE4kqcg&gid=1
gurus can you throw light on this please?
I spoke with my ex employer. He never did revoke the 140. He is also willing to provide an EVL. I can join him once I get GC. I felt sorry for having left him earlier.Talk to an attorney soon then.
