skamma
05-17 01:22 PM
Admin,
Can you pl. comment on this issue, since it is a potential and growing problem, we need to do something about it.
Thanks
skamma
Can you pl. comment on this issue, since it is a potential and growing problem, we need to do something about it.
Thanks
skamma
wallpaper I#39;m diggin#39; the red hair.
drirshad
07-04 09:35 PM
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.
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.
Jaime
09-10 11:38 AM
EVERY IV member should be planning to attend the rally!!! This is a historic opportunity. There is already buzz in the news and our past actions have made people take notice! Congress will be able to do something this Fall, but not after that due to the presidential campaigns. THEY WILL ONLY ACT IF WE SPEAK UP! That is the American way! If you really want to remain in America then you need to act like an American! We will act American by attending the rally and SPEAK UP! We have the most important thing on our side: TRUTH! And remember the millennia-proven phrase: TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE
2011 Rihanna#39;s quot;Only Girlquot; and
zen
04-06 09:33 PM
good post ek_bechara!
ppl, think for yourself. don't believe in the rumor unless it happens to YOU!
!
The problem with what you say is that if it happens to you then it is too LATE !!
but I agree we need to wait for verification ....I guess if this is very common or becomes common ..they you will see such reports on lawyers websites saying that this is happening to their clients
ppl, think for yourself. don't believe in the rumor unless it happens to YOU!
!
The problem with what you say is that if it happens to you then it is too LATE !!
but I agree we need to wait for verification ....I guess if this is very common or becomes common ..they you will see such reports on lawyers websites saying that this is happening to their clients
more...
hoolahoous
03-16 12:37 AM
And, please, gimme a break. H1B = high skilled? .....Most H1Bs, according to PUBLISHED research, earn less than $50,000.
Dude, IT and software are low skill jobs..........wake up and smell the coffee. Your saying "highly skilled" and holding up a placard won't change that reality. No one wants any more low skilled EB3 types in this country anymore. They are found dime a dozen.
wow.. u disciple of lou dobb ?? 50k !!!! in our company average salary of h1b is 125k (meaning some get much more than that, including me)!!
IT and software is low skill ?? now I am not sure what YOU are smelling . h1b requires minimum 4 year engg. degree (what do u have ?? maybe you got it using some non academic skills)
Yes i AM selfish..........
exactly.. i agree
Dude, IT and software are low skill jobs..........wake up and smell the coffee. Your saying "highly skilled" and holding up a placard won't change that reality. No one wants any more low skilled EB3 types in this country anymore. They are found dime a dozen.
wow.. u disciple of lou dobb ?? 50k !!!! in our company average salary of h1b is 125k (meaning some get much more than that, including me)!!
IT and software is low skill ?? now I am not sure what YOU are smelling . h1b requires minimum 4 year engg. degree (what do u have ?? maybe you got it using some non academic skills)
Yes i AM selfish..........
exactly.. i agree
Jerrome
07-12 05:28 PM
I feel this move is to benefit EB-2 China, Since the EB1 and EB2 overflow are evenly distributed across china and india, keeping PD with 2004 would be a loss for china and gain for India. So by keeping 2006 June, USCIS will have enough visa numbers for China . India's share will be consumed by 2004 and 2005 applicants.
Even if India's PD is going to be in 2006 mid, this would result some adhoc or lucky one in 2006 getting GC than a majority of applicants. PD for india would move back to 2004 or 2005 by october 08.
If USCIS follows the same rule again then by next year end the PD for India will move.
This is my guess.
Even if India's PD is going to be in 2006 mid, this would result some adhoc or lucky one in 2006 getting GC than a majority of applicants. PD for india would move back to 2004 or 2005 by october 08.
If USCIS follows the same rule again then by next year end the PD for India will move.
This is my guess.
more...
perm2gc
12-27 12:23 AM
Here is the link i posted
http://www.viaindia.com/apps/forums/open.aspx?ID=742957&mid=19
http://www.viaindia.com/apps/forums/open.aspx?ID=742957&mid=19
2010 Lady gaga beyonc -only girl in
meridiani.planum
09-10 11:25 AM
I will update here for those who cannot enter chat
Right now they are discussing
H.R. 6598
the "Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2008
I will update here once HR 5882 starts
ouch that is so ironic.... 'Equine Cruelty'?? What about 'immigrant cruelty'?
some of the priorities in this country are all screwed up...
Right now they are discussing
H.R. 6598
the "Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2008
I will update here once HR 5882 starts
ouch that is so ironic.... 'Equine Cruelty'?? What about 'immigrant cruelty'?
some of the priorities in this country are all screwed up...
more...
%2BMade%2Bby%2Bsltchocum.jpg "05 Rihanna - Only Girl (In The")
HOPE_GC_SOON
08-02 03:13 PM
Folks,
This is a good beginning for a cause which gives us some relief in these retrogressed life.
We can atleast propose to USCIS, to accept 485 (if not approval), for those case, where I140 is approved, and the approval can be given in the normal PD schema.
This would lessen the burden on USCIS and facilitate the GC applicant to avail of AC21 PROVISION.
Also, we can highlight here that EAD renewal could be a great source of revenue for USCIS.
Please start this movement.
best wishes and thanks for all the great Volunteers.
No doubt if, IV wish, it can achieve... No Wonders
thanks
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
This is a good beginning for a cause which gives us some relief in these retrogressed life.
We can atleast propose to USCIS, to accept 485 (if not approval), for those case, where I140 is approved, and the approval can be given in the normal PD schema.
This would lessen the burden on USCIS and facilitate the GC applicant to avail of AC21 PROVISION.
Also, we can highlight here that EAD renewal could be a great source of revenue for USCIS.
Please start this movement.
best wishes and thanks for all the great Volunteers.
No doubt if, IV wish, it can achieve... No Wonders
thanks
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
hair “Only Girl (in the World)
shantanup
02-12 05:46 AM
Just a friendly thought from a co-member, If you are motivated to attend the advocacy event, why dont you consider sponsoring your travel? We should try to keep the donated miles/hotel points for on-the-edge members who we will have to try convince at the last moment when we closer to April.
Motivated members who believe in this event should come forward and sponsor themselves and consider it as a contribution to the event. We are not doing anyone else a favor by travelling to DC - this is for our own good.
-Attending the advocacy day.
I see and agree with what you say. I sponsored myself the last 2 times I went for advocacy days but this time the situation is different - I've got my green card already and therefore finding it difficult to justify the expenses to my wife.
Motivated members who believe in this event should come forward and sponsor themselves and consider it as a contribution to the event. We are not doing anyone else a favor by travelling to DC - this is for our own good.
-Attending the advocacy day.
I see and agree with what you say. I sponsored myself the last 2 times I went for advocacy days but this time the situation is different - I've got my green card already and therefore finding it difficult to justify the expenses to my wife.
more...
sri1309
09-10 08:45 PM
Personally for me, why do I need the citizenship?
1) My parents don't want to come and live here.
2) How do I tell my future children that this country is the best country for them when it screwed their dad or gave him secondary treatment for 8-10 yrs when I spent here.
3) How do I "love" this country with a true mind knowing it did not give me the same opportunity it gave to immigrants from other countries? How do I digest the fact that europeans, mexicans, filipinos etc are getting preferential work related immigrant visas ahead of me? and I would still pledge my allegiance to this country knowing I have not been treated fairly?
You see there are more moral and ethical questions to be answered. I have made my money here. I could almost retire in India with this much money in next 5-10 years.
Hi,
I agree and disagree with you. We came here for the good things this country has to offer. And we may have got, as you mentioned some of them.. money etc., for some people its quality eductaion, for some more research etc etc.. And we dont like some unfortunate things like the one we are all upset about. Its the department thats broken we are all upset about and not the country as such. I know how you feel, but I am sure we all agree we are frustrated with the immigration department. We must do something to fix it. Cant just sit quite, when illegals come in millions and ask for citizenship again and get it too. I think that happened in 86 or sometime around. We must highlight ourselves before its too late.
1) My parents don't want to come and live here.
2) How do I tell my future children that this country is the best country for them when it screwed their dad or gave him secondary treatment for 8-10 yrs when I spent here.
3) How do I "love" this country with a true mind knowing it did not give me the same opportunity it gave to immigrants from other countries? How do I digest the fact that europeans, mexicans, filipinos etc are getting preferential work related immigrant visas ahead of me? and I would still pledge my allegiance to this country knowing I have not been treated fairly?
You see there are more moral and ethical questions to be answered. I have made my money here. I could almost retire in India with this much money in next 5-10 years.
Hi,
I agree and disagree with you. We came here for the good things this country has to offer. And we may have got, as you mentioned some of them.. money etc., for some people its quality eductaion, for some more research etc etc.. And we dont like some unfortunate things like the one we are all upset about. Its the department thats broken we are all upset about and not the country as such. I know how you feel, but I am sure we all agree we are frustrated with the immigration department. We must do something to fix it. Cant just sit quite, when illegals come in millions and ask for citizenship again and get it too. I think that happened in 86 or sometime around. We must highlight ourselves before its too late.
hot “Only Girl (in the World)
Pineapple
06-13 12:03 PM
Impact of rule 2 will be minimal and that rule will be really used not to displace
US workers if that is the purpose. If companies are not really displacing US workers why should they bother about this rule? This rule will certainly minimise the outsourcing by laying off people as H1b persons are required for offshore co-ordination.
Rule 3 is putting ad that is just like a Labor process in green card. It will delay h1b hiring for a month and really impact will be minimal
Those 2 rules are worth if companies can get best people in the world(that was the intention of H1b program. That is what Google and Microsoft are arguing)
Correct me if my understanding is wrong.
What exactly is your point Senthil?
If by reiterating (over and over) the "evilness" of "desi" companies insofar as impacting American workers is concerned and justifying absurdly and obviously restrictionist bills on the fond hope that it would have minimal impact on the "good" American companies who hire H1s in the exception, you wish to make it clear that you are an employee of the latter set of companies, you have certainly made your point, and do not need 364 posts to hammer it it.
Ladies and gentlemen, Senthil is a genuine, bona fide high skilled person working for an honest American company which has high ethical standards, and is not, repeat, NOT displacing any son of the soil American.
There - you can relax now.
US workers if that is the purpose. If companies are not really displacing US workers why should they bother about this rule? This rule will certainly minimise the outsourcing by laying off people as H1b persons are required for offshore co-ordination.
Rule 3 is putting ad that is just like a Labor process in green card. It will delay h1b hiring for a month and really impact will be minimal
Those 2 rules are worth if companies can get best people in the world(that was the intention of H1b program. That is what Google and Microsoft are arguing)
Correct me if my understanding is wrong.
What exactly is your point Senthil?
If by reiterating (over and over) the "evilness" of "desi" companies insofar as impacting American workers is concerned and justifying absurdly and obviously restrictionist bills on the fond hope that it would have minimal impact on the "good" American companies who hire H1s in the exception, you wish to make it clear that you are an employee of the latter set of companies, you have certainly made your point, and do not need 364 posts to hammer it it.
Ladies and gentlemen, Senthil is a genuine, bona fide high skilled person working for an honest American company which has high ethical standards, and is not, repeat, NOT displacing any son of the soil American.
There - you can relax now.
more...
house The “Only Girl(In The World)”
desi3933
02-11 01:57 PM
You rock dude!
Am I the only one to remember how visa numbers spill between FB and EB every other year? (or) Am I hallucinating?
Thanks so much for your kind words.
I don't blame readers who start making noise without basic verification. Most people have difficulty understanding the difference between cap and quota Or Permanent job vs W2 job.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
Am I the only one to remember how visa numbers spill between FB and EB every other year? (or) Am I hallucinating?
Thanks so much for your kind words.
I don't blame readers who start making noise without basic verification. Most people have difficulty understanding the difference between cap and quota Or Permanent job vs W2 job.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
tattoo #39;Only Girl in the World,#39;
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
more...
pictures like Rihanna#39;s quot;Only Girl
gcbeku
08-10 03:35 PM
I think this is a brilliant idea and might even fly esp because it still preserves USCIS/DOS EB caste system while providin some relief to the EB3s.
While porting is still an option, it is in EB3 filers' interest to push forward on this idea.
I feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that EB3 needs IV's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for EB3, as INS merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
While porting is still an option, it is in EB3 filers' interest to push forward on this idea.
I feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that EB3 needs IV's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for EB3, as INS merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
dresses Rihanna sang Samp;M, Only Girl
spsrini
11-18 07:22 AM
My receipt number is NRC2008065342
more...
makeup 05 Rihanna - Only Girl (In The
thirdworldman
02-17 10:20 PM
I've never used it, but Blender 3d is free, and from what I've seen, there's a pretty nice set of tools there...blender3d.com
girlfriend Rihanna#39;s quot;Only Girl (In
a_yaja
12-28 03:25 PM
Please excuse my ignorance,,but what is 529
529 is a college savings program that lets you put in money for your children's education. All contributions to the 529 account grow tax free, as long as they are used for higher education (bachelor's and above). Currently, the contribution is not exempt from Federal Income tax, but in Ohio, the first $2000 is exempt from state income tax. If the money is used for anything else other than higher education, there is a 10% penalty and the withdrawal is taxed as ordinary income. I think you can get away with the 10% penalty if the designated child gets a scholarship.
529 is a college savings program that lets you put in money for your children's education. All contributions to the 529 account grow tax free, as long as they are used for higher education (bachelor's and above). Currently, the contribution is not exempt from Federal Income tax, but in Ohio, the first $2000 is exempt from state income tax. If the money is used for anything else other than higher education, there is a 10% penalty and the withdrawal is taxed as ordinary income. I think you can get away with the 10% penalty if the designated child gets a scholarship.
hairstyles “Only Girl (In The World)”
abc
11-20 11:40 AM
5+ yrs, no promotion, pennies as salary hike(once reduced in 2001).
I have decided to break this GC CHAKRAVYUHU.
I have decided to break this GC CHAKRAVYUHU.
RNGC
09-19 01:37 PM
I am in a IDEA mood today!
In our website there is space for 5-6 lines where we have the picture of a cloud now...
We should pick top 10 best slogans and display it there.....like each slogan should appear for 10 seconds and change it to next.....
We should put a poll to select the top 10 slogans
I personally like these ones....forgot the exact words..
1."we keep your systems up and running...please help us keep our lives up and running...
2. "we rollover cell phone minutes...why not visa numbers"
3. "waiting for so long my hair is turning grey ....
4. "GC delay....keeps doctors away"
In our website there is space for 5-6 lines where we have the picture of a cloud now...
We should pick top 10 best slogans and display it there.....like each slogan should appear for 10 seconds and change it to next.....
We should put a poll to select the top 10 slogans
I personally like these ones....forgot the exact words..
1."we keep your systems up and running...please help us keep our lives up and running...
2. "we rollover cell phone minutes...why not visa numbers"
3. "waiting for so long my hair is turning grey ....
4. "GC delay....keeps doctors away"
vaishalikumar
08-17 12:46 PM
It is bad visa bulletin for EB 3 .