TeddyKoochu
10-06 11:50 AM
Many Many congratulations SOP, I have been reading and following your case. Your case is one of the best glowing example that persistence to truth always pays, sometimes the path maybe tough but never give up and never say die. All the best to you and your family, must have been a very special feeling that all the effort finally resulted in success.
wallpaper jeff1 Grease Star Jeff Conaway
factoryman
06-29 08:37 PM
My new theory is the DOS was influenced by politicians who are attorneys (I beleive that there 50% of lawmakers) and it released a huge Visa Numbers. The politicians have strong connections to law firms. The USCIS doesn't want to do it, because it doesn't have 'resources', 'money', 'manpower. So, they are on a near strike mode, not attending routine works like sending receipts., etc in a timely fashion.
If it is any consoling to you, this is what I posted yesterday at a different thread at IV. Looks like I can re-cycle it today for a larger audience. Click the hyperlink and see the video for yourself.
A strong case of moronic president, moronic problems?
...........
................
Many issues are being swept under the carpet. I had written a few times earlier. The backlog and GC issues are not truly a numbers game. It is the neo-con regime and the republican culture that had engulfed Washington, its consequences, that had made things miserable for us; we, the legal immigrants.
4/5ths of the illegal immigrants have been here by the time of Clinton's second term. It was a non-issue then. You should understand why is it an issue now? Why can't it the legal and illegal immigration be addressed and solved. In a democracy, things like this can be solved administratively, legislatively and judicially. Adminstratively, we we hit below the belt, in backlogs, in delays, in sudden rule changes (no concurrent filings of PD is not current). Legislatively, they are stalling and falling apart. What is left for the immigrants?
I had written many times earlier.
Why should you know? Why should you understand? It is in your own interests that you understand things wisely. Failure to know what is happening on the ground, what is happening around us is a sure shot for personal failure.
In this connection, see a counter-point on the immigration bill.
http://www.newscorpse.com/Pix/Caps/cavuto-chong2
See the Entire Video here (http://media2.foxnews.com/062807/062807_cav_chong2_300.wmv)
here is my theory.
DOS and USCIS played a tactical move by making all the visa numbers current in anticipation of the CIR bill so that the legals wont complain to the senators about retrogression.
Once the CIR went down the drain, they are panicking about the outcome of their tactical error and trying to undo that move.
Again, just my theory...:confused:
If it is any consoling to you, this is what I posted yesterday at a different thread at IV. Looks like I can re-cycle it today for a larger audience. Click the hyperlink and see the video for yourself.
A strong case of moronic president, moronic problems?
...........
................
Many issues are being swept under the carpet. I had written a few times earlier. The backlog and GC issues are not truly a numbers game. It is the neo-con regime and the republican culture that had engulfed Washington, its consequences, that had made things miserable for us; we, the legal immigrants.
4/5ths of the illegal immigrants have been here by the time of Clinton's second term. It was a non-issue then. You should understand why is it an issue now? Why can't it the legal and illegal immigration be addressed and solved. In a democracy, things like this can be solved administratively, legislatively and judicially. Adminstratively, we we hit below the belt, in backlogs, in delays, in sudden rule changes (no concurrent filings of PD is not current). Legislatively, they are stalling and falling apart. What is left for the immigrants?
I had written many times earlier.
Why should you know? Why should you understand? It is in your own interests that you understand things wisely. Failure to know what is happening on the ground, what is happening around us is a sure shot for personal failure.
In this connection, see a counter-point on the immigration bill.
http://www.newscorpse.com/Pix/Caps/cavuto-chong2
See the Entire Video here (http://media2.foxnews.com/062807/062807_cav_chong2_300.wmv)
here is my theory.
DOS and USCIS played a tactical move by making all the visa numbers current in anticipation of the CIR bill so that the legals wont complain to the senators about retrogression.
Once the CIR went down the drain, they are panicking about the outcome of their tactical error and trying to undo that move.
Again, just my theory...:confused:
rock
06-22 10:30 PM
I am going for concurrent 140 & 485. Can I apply for EAD and AP now? or do I need to have my 140 cleared before I can apply for EAD and AP?
Hi Guys,
I am also in the same situation. Recently I changed the employer. My new employer is going to file I-140 and I-485 using the Labor substitution.
I also want to file EAD and AP but the company attorney is saying it is safer to file the EAD and AP once the I-140 is approved. Can any one please answer this is true or not? Should I wait for I-140 to be approved or should I try convince the attorney to file EAD and AP also along with I-140 and I-485.
I have one more question which is if We do not file the EAD and AP along with the I-485 and once the priority dates are retrogessed. Can we file
EAD and AP even though the priority dates are not current.
I would appreciate the answers.
Thanks
Hi Guys,
I am also in the same situation. Recently I changed the employer. My new employer is going to file I-140 and I-485 using the Labor substitution.
I also want to file EAD and AP but the company attorney is saying it is safer to file the EAD and AP once the I-140 is approved. Can any one please answer this is true or not? Should I wait for I-140 to be approved or should I try convince the attorney to file EAD and AP also along with I-140 and I-485.
I have one more question which is if We do not file the EAD and AP along with the I-485 and once the priority dates are retrogessed. Can we file
EAD and AP even though the priority dates are not current.
I would appreciate the answers.
Thanks
2011 show Celebrity Rehab with
amitjoey
07-11 02:19 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flower_power
more...
bkn96
11-25 10:52 PM
Ron Gotcher Latest ' ImmInfo Newsletter' states clearly 485 denial is illegal
***********
CIS issuing illegal AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
Recently, the CIS has been issuing denials ofadjustment of status applications in cases where the applicant has an approved I-140, and an AOS application pending for more than 180 days, but the petitioning employer has attempted to revoke the approved I-140.
These denials are patently illegal. They violate both CIS policy and statutory law. Both statutory law and explicit CIS policy are clear on this subject: An employer may not revoke an approved I-140 petition after an adjustment of status application has
been pending for at least 180 days. While we have not seen denials of any of our cases, we have seen a number of such denials by applicants who have contacted our office to assist them with filing motions to reconsider. It is shocking that the CIS
continues to issue denials even after the first MTRs were submitted. They are issuing these denials with full knowledge that there is no legal basis for what they are doing and that their actions violate existing law.
Anyone who receives such a denial must file a motion to reconsider immediately. The CIS has said that they are processing MTRs within 60 days. If the MTR does not result in a reversal of the denial within 60 days, the applicant should proceed in US District Court immediately to see a reversal. Immediate action is necessary to prevent the accumulation of unlawful presence following the denial.
***********
CIS issuing illegal AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
Recently, the CIS has been issuing denials ofadjustment of status applications in cases where the applicant has an approved I-140, and an AOS application pending for more than 180 days, but the petitioning employer has attempted to revoke the approved I-140.
These denials are patently illegal. They violate both CIS policy and statutory law. Both statutory law and explicit CIS policy are clear on this subject: An employer may not revoke an approved I-140 petition after an adjustment of status application has
been pending for at least 180 days. While we have not seen denials of any of our cases, we have seen a number of such denials by applicants who have contacted our office to assist them with filing motions to reconsider. It is shocking that the CIS
continues to issue denials even after the first MTRs were submitted. They are issuing these denials with full knowledge that there is no legal basis for what they are doing and that their actions violate existing law.
Anyone who receives such a denial must file a motion to reconsider immediately. The CIS has said that they are processing MTRs within 60 days. If the MTR does not result in a reversal of the denial within 60 days, the applicant should proceed in US District Court immediately to see a reversal. Immediate action is necessary to prevent the accumulation of unlawful presence following the denial.
QB_man
02-19 07:57 AM
Well its been three and half weeks and waiting.. I am loosing it now. I dont understand what takes them this long to look at a file and put it into this database?
Please let me know if anyone else who went to Chennai on or around 28th Jan has got their passports back. Thanks.
Please let me know if anyone else who went to Chennai on or around 28th Jan has got their passports back. Thanks.
more...
SDdesi
07-10 08:41 PM
Good media coverage on the flower Campaign....Please digg
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1035511020070710
Currently at 18...please digg
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1035511020070710
Currently at 18...please digg
2010 Jeff Conaway Celebrity Rehab
bestofall
08-21 12:40 PM
I dont think it's true, I saw these rates are under international calling plan, so we are not signing up to that plan, so I would strongly believe that all cell phone calls are included to India, the same thing you can see when we click on the 60 countires list.....so find out with the tech support guys and keep update here to get the accurate answer on this...
I just spoke to customer service .they mentioned all cell calls to india are free under this WORLD plan.who ever is signing up , can proceed , can call customer service to confirm this as well to avoid any surprise charges
I just spoke to customer service .they mentioned all cell calls to india are free under this WORLD plan.who ever is signing up , can proceed , can call customer service to confirm this as well to avoid any surprise charges
more...
Ramba
08-21 05:25 PM
. The ambiguity of the law for the preference of vertical vs. horizontal spill-over allowed them to do that.
There is no ambiguity in law. The law is clear. One law (and one rule) should yield one interpretation. If someone interperting the languge of law differently; then that is their mistake. Thats what DOS was doing in between 2001 and 2006. This could be possible for them because no one was going after DOS. Now somehow they realized (or some affected applicants notified DOS). If the old practice is a result of correct interpretation of law, why they should change now? This is very high sensitive area; DOS might have not changed their practice without risk analysis. They should not care about how much retrogression in India; They should only care about implementing the law correctly, as becuase they are executive branch of government not legislative branch to worry about retrogression.
There is no ambiguity in law. The law is clear. One law (and one rule) should yield one interpretation. If someone interperting the languge of law differently; then that is their mistake. Thats what DOS was doing in between 2001 and 2006. This could be possible for them because no one was going after DOS. Now somehow they realized (or some affected applicants notified DOS). If the old practice is a result of correct interpretation of law, why they should change now? This is very high sensitive area; DOS might have not changed their practice without risk analysis. They should not care about how much retrogression in India; They should only care about implementing the law correctly, as becuase they are executive branch of government not legislative branch to worry about retrogression.
hair Jeff Conaway during the high
pdakwala
02-01 10:04 AM
1. Legislation: The Future of Employment-Based Immigration during the next few weeks, Congress is scheduled to decide the future of
employment-based immigration to the United States.
Comprehensive immigration reform proposals by Senators McCain and
Kennedy, Cornyn and Kyl, Hagel and Specter will be considered by the Senate in February.
Each proposal contains a combination of the following elements: (1) a
guest worker program; (2) stricter immigration enforcement; and (3) an
expansion of the employment-based immigration system.
The guest worker program is, by far, the most controversial part of the
package. To President Bush and its Congressional proponents, a guest
worker proposal is simply a way of creating a procedure to allow U.S.
companies to continue to employ millions of foreign-born workers to fill jobs which American choose not to perform.
Opponents of a guest worker program maintain that if employers simply
raise their wages, American workers will do any job. Call me a "doubter".
Our unemployment rate has been hovering around 5% for over a year. Yet,
the Wall Street Journal recently ran an article about lettuce growers who,
unable to harvest their crops, raised their rates to over $10 per hour. A few
Americans applied, but none lasted more than a few hours. How many of the
unemployed are willing and able to perform stoop labor in rural valleys?
The opponents of a guest worker program refuse to vote for any program
which looks like an "amnesty". Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) of the
Subcommittee on Immigration in the House of Representatives puts it
simply: "A guest-worker program that applies to illegal aliens already here is an amnesty." Representative Sensenbrenner and over one hundred Republican Congressman in the House of Representatives are against any "amnesty". Since Chairman Sensenbrenner will be the chief House negotiator in any Senate-House Conference Committee on an immigration reform bill, this spells trouble for any guest worker program.
If the guest worker program does not include the 10 million plus
illegal workers who are presently in the U.S., there is not the slightest
possibility of either regularizing their immigration status or of deporting them.
That is simply a fact, and building a huge fence on Mexico's border (no one
ever suggests doing so along the Canadian border) with the U.S. will simply
discourage illegal workers in the U.S. from returning home to visit
their families. Also, it does nothing to stem the influx of illegal workers
who enter the U.S. with visas and then overstay. Those in Congress who
think that by criminalizing these people the problem is solved are kidding
themselves and their constituents.
The real solution is to look reality square in the face, and fashion a
solution which will penalize illegal workers, but, at the same time, allow them
to participate in a guest worker program that will eventually result in
them becoming permanent residents of the U.S. Unless there is a light at
the end of the tunnel for them, what is the incentive for them to come out of the shadows and register for the program? The McCain-Kennedy bill contains such a program.
At least one ex-INS prosecutor (The one who writes this newsletter)
knows that the government cannot solve the illegal alien problem by wishing it away, or by an enforcement-only approach. Ten years after President Clinton enacted a "get tough" at the border policy, the number of illegal workers in the U.S. has more than doubled. Congress must realize that, in the post-9/11, world, the United States simply cannot afford to have 10 million persons in the U.S. who are unknown to the government. Every citizen should write to his Member of Congress and tell them that he/she wants these people identified, fingerprinted, registered with the government, paying taxes and learning English.
Whether or not the Congress enacts a guest worker program, the United
States has another immigration problem that needs to be solved, and solved
now. Our country is educating less scientists, engineers, doctors and nurses
than we did when I graduated from law school in 1973. In the meantime, countries in Asia are graduating far more of these professional workers than does the U.S. Fortunately, many of these professional workers have been supplementing the U.S. workforce for the past 30 years. Unfortunately, during the past year, huge backlogs in our immigration system have developed, and many of the best and brightest of these professionals are choosing to stay at home. This does not bode well for our security and our industries.
Our country is losing its manufacturing base. For example, the U.S.
automobile industry is firing tens of thousands of U.S. workers and G.M. and Ford are edging ever-closer to bankruptcy. Why? Because the American public is choosing to buy automobiles produced by Japanese and German companies.
Fortunately, thanks to the immigration of tens of thousands of Indian
and Chinese engineers to the U.S., the top software, chip makers and
biotech companies are still located in the U.S. But with our outdated
immigration laws making it increasingly difficult for U.S. employers to hire talented foreign- born scientists and engineers, how long can America maintain its dominance in these industries? U.S. employers can vote with their feet the same as U.S. consumers. Make it impossible to bring a sufficient number of foreign-born engineers to the U.S., and Microsoft and Intel and other top U.S. companies will simply locate their new plants and hire their new engineers not in the U.S., but in India and China.
Most of the bills pending before Congress would increase
employment-based immigration to 290,000 annually. This would help insure that our country maintains its number one position in science and technology.
employment-based immigration to the United States.
Comprehensive immigration reform proposals by Senators McCain and
Kennedy, Cornyn and Kyl, Hagel and Specter will be considered by the Senate in February.
Each proposal contains a combination of the following elements: (1) a
guest worker program; (2) stricter immigration enforcement; and (3) an
expansion of the employment-based immigration system.
The guest worker program is, by far, the most controversial part of the
package. To President Bush and its Congressional proponents, a guest
worker proposal is simply a way of creating a procedure to allow U.S.
companies to continue to employ millions of foreign-born workers to fill jobs which American choose not to perform.
Opponents of a guest worker program maintain that if employers simply
raise their wages, American workers will do any job. Call me a "doubter".
Our unemployment rate has been hovering around 5% for over a year. Yet,
the Wall Street Journal recently ran an article about lettuce growers who,
unable to harvest their crops, raised their rates to over $10 per hour. A few
Americans applied, but none lasted more than a few hours. How many of the
unemployed are willing and able to perform stoop labor in rural valleys?
The opponents of a guest worker program refuse to vote for any program
which looks like an "amnesty". Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) of the
Subcommittee on Immigration in the House of Representatives puts it
simply: "A guest-worker program that applies to illegal aliens already here is an amnesty." Representative Sensenbrenner and over one hundred Republican Congressman in the House of Representatives are against any "amnesty". Since Chairman Sensenbrenner will be the chief House negotiator in any Senate-House Conference Committee on an immigration reform bill, this spells trouble for any guest worker program.
If the guest worker program does not include the 10 million plus
illegal workers who are presently in the U.S., there is not the slightest
possibility of either regularizing their immigration status or of deporting them.
That is simply a fact, and building a huge fence on Mexico's border (no one
ever suggests doing so along the Canadian border) with the U.S. will simply
discourage illegal workers in the U.S. from returning home to visit
their families. Also, it does nothing to stem the influx of illegal workers
who enter the U.S. with visas and then overstay. Those in Congress who
think that by criminalizing these people the problem is solved are kidding
themselves and their constituents.
The real solution is to look reality square in the face, and fashion a
solution which will penalize illegal workers, but, at the same time, allow them
to participate in a guest worker program that will eventually result in
them becoming permanent residents of the U.S. Unless there is a light at
the end of the tunnel for them, what is the incentive for them to come out of the shadows and register for the program? The McCain-Kennedy bill contains such a program.
At least one ex-INS prosecutor (The one who writes this newsletter)
knows that the government cannot solve the illegal alien problem by wishing it away, or by an enforcement-only approach. Ten years after President Clinton enacted a "get tough" at the border policy, the number of illegal workers in the U.S. has more than doubled. Congress must realize that, in the post-9/11, world, the United States simply cannot afford to have 10 million persons in the U.S. who are unknown to the government. Every citizen should write to his Member of Congress and tell them that he/she wants these people identified, fingerprinted, registered with the government, paying taxes and learning English.
Whether or not the Congress enacts a guest worker program, the United
States has another immigration problem that needs to be solved, and solved
now. Our country is educating less scientists, engineers, doctors and nurses
than we did when I graduated from law school in 1973. In the meantime, countries in Asia are graduating far more of these professional workers than does the U.S. Fortunately, many of these professional workers have been supplementing the U.S. workforce for the past 30 years. Unfortunately, during the past year, huge backlogs in our immigration system have developed, and many of the best and brightest of these professionals are choosing to stay at home. This does not bode well for our security and our industries.
Our country is losing its manufacturing base. For example, the U.S.
automobile industry is firing tens of thousands of U.S. workers and G.M. and Ford are edging ever-closer to bankruptcy. Why? Because the American public is choosing to buy automobiles produced by Japanese and German companies.
Fortunately, thanks to the immigration of tens of thousands of Indian
and Chinese engineers to the U.S., the top software, chip makers and
biotech companies are still located in the U.S. But with our outdated
immigration laws making it increasingly difficult for U.S. employers to hire talented foreign- born scientists and engineers, how long can America maintain its dominance in these industries? U.S. employers can vote with their feet the same as U.S. consumers. Make it impossible to bring a sufficient number of foreign-born engineers to the U.S., and Microsoft and Intel and other top U.S. companies will simply locate their new plants and hire their new engineers not in the U.S., but in India and China.
Most of the bills pending before Congress would increase
employment-based immigration to 290,000 annually. This would help insure that our country maintains its number one position in science and technology.
more...
shantak
07-10 10:03 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/washington/politics-usa-immigration-indians.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
hot Jeff Conaway Dead
nkavjs
09-17 12:01 PM
It is told that most of the July 2 filings are waiting, but July 17 filings have received RN. Perhaps it all depends where USCIS folks put bundles of applications initially meant for rejection/return. I am also one of the July 2 filers still waiting
OR MAY be... (just an another option).. that our application (jinxed stack of application recd. on 2nd july 2007) are still lying in the janitorial dept or may be quarantine dept. .. you never know..
I hate to even think about this entire wait.. stress and agony I have to go thru every day
OR MAY be... (just an another option).. that our application (jinxed stack of application recd. on 2nd july 2007) are still lying in the janitorial dept or may be quarantine dept. .. you never know..
I hate to even think about this entire wait.. stress and agony I have to go thru every day
more...
house Jeff Conaway will be back
bajrangbali
06-10 10:23 PM
You are doing the right thing. Fraud should be stopped. On top of that, it is directly affecting you and you have even more compelling reasons to take action against it. Good luck and keep us posted.
Posting the follow-up process you went through would help most other members who have been giving you overwhelming greens :rolleyes: take some action as well...
Posting the follow-up process you went through would help most other members who have been giving you overwhelming greens :rolleyes: take some action as well...
tattoo Celebrity Rehab: Chyna Finally
GCKaMaara
01-09 01:46 PM
There is a rumor that Obama is considering Citizenship for people who have paid Income Tax for a certain period. Core is it possible to dig more on this and find if it is just a rumor?
hmmmmmmmm.
Googled. Found nothing! Can you post the URL?
hmmmmmmmm.
Googled. Found nothing! Can you post the URL?
more...
pictures Did celebrity rehab alumnus
akhilmahajan
11-12 01:02 PM
Seems like they are getting aware of the problem. Folks lets keep on sending letters. It for our betterment and goodwill. The harder we work on this, the more fruitful will it be for the community as a whole.
Thank you for your recent correspondence to the Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman (CIS Ombudsman).
We greatly appreciate your comments regarding issues concerning AC21 processing at the Service Centers. As we have received several inquiries such as yours, we are currently discussing these issues with USCIS and reviewing their policies and procedures regarding these petitions.
If you have evidence of a specific I-485 case that you feel was erroneously denied due to USCIS not adhering to AC21 guidelines, we kindly ask that you please forward us a copy of your denial notice or provide further detail as to the reasons for the immediate denial.
Please submit information via email to cisombudsman@dhs.gov with the subject AC21 Evidence of Immediate Denial. In addition, for protection of privacy we ask that you please omit any personally identifiable information such as names, a-numbers, case numbers, etc.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
CIS Ombudsman
Now, i am waiting response to my letters.
GO IV GO.
Thank you for your recent correspondence to the Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman (CIS Ombudsman).
We greatly appreciate your comments regarding issues concerning AC21 processing at the Service Centers. As we have received several inquiries such as yours, we are currently discussing these issues with USCIS and reviewing their policies and procedures regarding these petitions.
If you have evidence of a specific I-485 case that you feel was erroneously denied due to USCIS not adhering to AC21 guidelines, we kindly ask that you please forward us a copy of your denial notice or provide further detail as to the reasons for the immediate denial.
Please submit information via email to cisombudsman@dhs.gov with the subject AC21 Evidence of Immediate Denial. In addition, for protection of privacy we ask that you please omit any personally identifiable information such as names, a-numbers, case numbers, etc.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
CIS Ombudsman
Now, i am waiting response to my letters.
GO IV GO.
dresses #39;Grease#39; Star Jeff Conaway
Devils_Advocate
03-10 09:27 AM
I strongly support this thread and the message. Lets make an action plan how to pursue this.
Devils_Advocate: I know your type. But you must also understand that unless the line in front of you is cleared, you and I will go down the drain. You are talking about EAD. I dont even have that, yet I support this.
Your thinking appears narrow minded. Wake up.
Dont give me that BS ok, if you know my type then i know your "type" as well. FYI i dont have an EAD as yet either, and Mr YOU need to wake up, if you actually think US Govt will skip your full GC step and give you citizenship in this environment where they are deporting valid H1B holders from the POE then my friend you are nothing less than insane, nobody gives a sh*t about us right now, if you're so over your head and fail to realize that then go ahead i wish you all the best.
I sincerely request you to promise us that you will stand for public office when they give you your "expedited citizenship" and change some rules for the benefit of all of us.:)
Devils_Advocate: I know your type. But you must also understand that unless the line in front of you is cleared, you and I will go down the drain. You are talking about EAD. I dont even have that, yet I support this.
Your thinking appears narrow minded. Wake up.
Dont give me that BS ok, if you know my type then i know your "type" as well. FYI i dont have an EAD as yet either, and Mr YOU need to wake up, if you actually think US Govt will skip your full GC step and give you citizenship in this environment where they are deporting valid H1B holders from the POE then my friend you are nothing less than insane, nobody gives a sh*t about us right now, if you're so over your head and fail to realize that then go ahead i wish you all the best.
I sincerely request you to promise us that you will stand for public office when they give you your "expedited citizenship" and change some rules for the benefit of all of us.:)
more...
makeup Celebrity Rehab 1 amp; 2 star
l1fraud
06-14 09:58 AM
rsharma, l1fraud,
There is nothing wrong in reporting fraud.
However your argument that you are reporting it since you cannot tolerate fraud isn't that convincing.
If you were always against injustice/lawlessness, you will see a lot of it in your daily life. Do you report or take action against each of those ? I don't think so.
After living in India for long and seeing people put up with all injustice and sometimes doing it themselves, it is hard to believe your argument that you are doing it just for the sake of law.
How many times in this thread I have mentioned that I am getting replaced by one of these L-1B resource, I am a poor Oracle/DB developer who fortunately cannot be replaced by L-1B visa resources (as my skills is a common technical one). So once these violations impact your day to day life you look around for ways to stop this fraud. Its true that if I was a Nuero Surgeon in Phily or a Astro Scientist in Houston I wouldn't be interested in this violation :-) .... tomorrow let this scenario happen to you ... you would be first one to raise the alert.
Regarding 'getting burnt', I don't think there is bigger burn than loosing our jobs (which already is happening) and hope you know that there is something called 'anonymity'... ya lets see whos going to get 'burnt' here. We'll definetly keep you updated regarding the outcome.
There is nothing wrong in reporting fraud.
However your argument that you are reporting it since you cannot tolerate fraud isn't that convincing.
If you were always against injustice/lawlessness, you will see a lot of it in your daily life. Do you report or take action against each of those ? I don't think so.
After living in India for long and seeing people put up with all injustice and sometimes doing it themselves, it is hard to believe your argument that you are doing it just for the sake of law.
How many times in this thread I have mentioned that I am getting replaced by one of these L-1B resource, I am a poor Oracle/DB developer who fortunately cannot be replaced by L-1B visa resources (as my skills is a common technical one). So once these violations impact your day to day life you look around for ways to stop this fraud. Its true that if I was a Nuero Surgeon in Phily or a Astro Scientist in Houston I wouldn't be interested in this violation :-) .... tomorrow let this scenario happen to you ... you would be first one to raise the alert.
Regarding 'getting burnt', I don't think there is bigger burn than loosing our jobs (which already is happening) and hope you know that there is something called 'anonymity'... ya lets see whos going to get 'burnt' here. We'll definetly keep you updated regarding the outcome.
girlfriend R.I.P. Jeff Conaway
babu123
06-29 05:16 PM
We wasted lot of time, money and effort with this 485 filing for the last 15 days. I am terribly disappointed with the outcome now.
We need to file a lawsuit against USCIS and Dept of State for the loss that has happened to us.
We need to file a lawsuit against USCIS and Dept of State for the loss that has happened to us.
hairstyles Jeff Conaway, an actor who
chanduv23
01-10 10:26 PM
Chanduv23:
I understand your enthusiasm of spreading +ve ness , but you need to also look at the practical implications on the situation. You are too criticizing and self-centric in what you beleive is the right thing to do.
Things do not work the way you expect at times and backfire. All I am saying is to give it a second thought if you are not getting a huge turn out of people. If you believe you are the smartest ass in the forums, tell me how many people you beleive would come forward and write a letter to the president. It's nothing to do with whether you did it, but are taking off the apprehensions and motivate other people to do it.
I agree with comments from walking_dude as it's inspiring and has a point. Get out of the shell and look at the world from a different perspective.
I am pretty straight forward in my approach and do not know how to "sugarcoat". This is not my own organization, I am not the founder of this organization, I am just a member like you. While it is individual's choice of doing what they want to do, what I have noticed is that the negative energy does have cascading effect, especially when things do not happen, those who spread negative energy seem to influence people. Once again, this is individuals own perspective. The fact that things do not happen easily we have to blow trumphets into the ears of people. Like a member said sometime back "Eagles which never flew - would not dare to fly until they are pushed, and when they are pushed forcefully and dropped into the air - they automatically start flying".
I have done what I can in the best of my capacity and continue to do so, I have considered IV as a self help group and also conducted meetings in the tri state area and continue to motivate people to make them feel a sense for the community.
If you look at IV as YOUR organization - you can see why it is important to feel a sense for the community.
The biggest issue our community faces today is the flow of negative energy. To quote examples, I was able to convince some friends for the rally in DC. Everything was going well, now when these people discussed with their collegues they were reluctant and did not show interest. The negative energy prompted my friends not to attend the rally because they felt that not many people are going for it and they tried to convince me out of IV. Such negative energy flows everywhere in the community and we have to overcome it. We can do it only by example.
Look at all those other immigration forums where people are talking bad about IV including their administrators and their owners - people who follow those websites will hate IV and hinder all our efforts. Such negative energy when it is flowing at a greater level - will cause more and more damage to our community.
It is simple - if you attack me for what I do - you are spreading negative energy - you are making a common man take a back seat and not encourage them to cooperate
If I point at h1bmajdoor's posts - I am doing it just to make sure that the positive energy flows and negativity does not influence the community.
it is a tough battle especially when you have thousands of daggers pointing at you ready to poke you.
Well, you say I am a smartass - so be it.
And if you do not support the community - stay away - why poke at someone who is doing something?
I understand your enthusiasm of spreading +ve ness , but you need to also look at the practical implications on the situation. You are too criticizing and self-centric in what you beleive is the right thing to do.
Things do not work the way you expect at times and backfire. All I am saying is to give it a second thought if you are not getting a huge turn out of people. If you believe you are the smartest ass in the forums, tell me how many people you beleive would come forward and write a letter to the president. It's nothing to do with whether you did it, but are taking off the apprehensions and motivate other people to do it.
I agree with comments from walking_dude as it's inspiring and has a point. Get out of the shell and look at the world from a different perspective.
I am pretty straight forward in my approach and do not know how to "sugarcoat". This is not my own organization, I am not the founder of this organization, I am just a member like you. While it is individual's choice of doing what they want to do, what I have noticed is that the negative energy does have cascading effect, especially when things do not happen, those who spread negative energy seem to influence people. Once again, this is individuals own perspective. The fact that things do not happen easily we have to blow trumphets into the ears of people. Like a member said sometime back "Eagles which never flew - would not dare to fly until they are pushed, and when they are pushed forcefully and dropped into the air - they automatically start flying".
I have done what I can in the best of my capacity and continue to do so, I have considered IV as a self help group and also conducted meetings in the tri state area and continue to motivate people to make them feel a sense for the community.
If you look at IV as YOUR organization - you can see why it is important to feel a sense for the community.
The biggest issue our community faces today is the flow of negative energy. To quote examples, I was able to convince some friends for the rally in DC. Everything was going well, now when these people discussed with their collegues they were reluctant and did not show interest. The negative energy prompted my friends not to attend the rally because they felt that not many people are going for it and they tried to convince me out of IV. Such negative energy flows everywhere in the community and we have to overcome it. We can do it only by example.
Look at all those other immigration forums where people are talking bad about IV including their administrators and their owners - people who follow those websites will hate IV and hinder all our efforts. Such negative energy when it is flowing at a greater level - will cause more and more damage to our community.
It is simple - if you attack me for what I do - you are spreading negative energy - you are making a common man take a back seat and not encourage them to cooperate
If I point at h1bmajdoor's posts - I am doing it just to make sure that the positive energy flows and negativity does not influence the community.
it is a tough battle especially when you have thousands of daggers pointing at you ready to poke you.
Well, you say I am a smartass - so be it.
And if you do not support the community - stay away - why poke at someone who is doing something?
aadimanav
01-03 12:56 AM
Part 2 continued....
USCIS delays have become so excessive in this arena that many foreign nationals have sought relief in federal court. The Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 (APA), which governs federal agency actions and decisions, requires that an agency resolve a matter presented to it within a "reasonable" time frame. See 8 U.S.C. 555(b). Using the APA, foreign nationals have argued that waiting for two or more years for a decision on an immigration application is "unreasonable" under the statute. The cases are divided, but a majority of courts have agreed that making a foreign national wait years and years just for a decision on his or her application is unreasonable. As a result, many judges have ordered the FBI and USCIS to complete pending name check cases within 60 or 90 days where a foreign national has been waiting for two or more years. Some judges have noted that security concerns are not to be taken lightly, but this only reinforces the fact that such issues should be resolved in a matter of weeks as opposed to years.
The success or failure of litigation in this arena ultimately turns on the court's reading of a jurisdiction-stripping provision embedded in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended by the Real ID Act of 2005. The INA precludes judicial review of any "decision or action" of the USCIS that is "specified [under INA] to be in the discretion" of the USCIS. See 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii). In defending challenges to delayed applications, the U.S. Attorney's office has argued that the adjudication of a green card application, including the pace of adjudication, is committed to the sole discretion of the USCIS, because the INA specifies that a decision to approve or deny a green card application is within the discretion of the USCIS. See 8 U.S.C. 1255(a).
None of the circuit courts have ruled on this issue, but the relationship between USCIS delay and the role of the judiciary has become a "national judicial debate" at the district court level. See Saleem v. Keisler , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80044 (W.D. Wis. Oct. 26, 2007). Some courts have bought the government's argument, holding that a discretionary "action" includes every interim action taken along the way leading up to an ultimate decision on an application. See Safadi v. Howard , 466 F.Supp. 2d 696, 699 (E.D. Vir. 2006). Under this theory, a stalled name check is simply action along the way to a final decision. The majority of courts have rejected this reading of the statute, holding that USCIS' discretion only applies to the ultimate decision on an application, not the pace of its adjudication. As one court stated, "it would require Orwellian twisting of the word ["action"] to conclude that it means a failure to adjudicate." Saleem v. Keisler, supra. Similarly, U.S. District Judge Stewart Dalzell recognized that the INA grants discretion to the USCIS to grant or deny a green card application, but "national security does not require that it also have absolute discretion to delay such an application to Dickensian lengths." Cao v. Upchurch , 496 F.Supp. 2d 569, 574 (E.D. Pa 2007). Put simply, "there is a difference between the [USCIS'] discretion over how to resolve an application and the [USCIS'] discretion over whether it resolves an application." Singh v. Still , 470 F. Supp. 2d 1064, 1068 (N.D. Cal. 2007).
The U.S. Attorney's office has also argued that the USCIS is not required to make a decision on green card or naturalization applications since the INA does not specify a time frame for the agency's decision. See Assadzadeh v. Mueller , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80915 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 31, 2007). The government's argument is based on Norton v. So. Utah Wilderness Alliance , 542 U.S. 55 (2004), where the U.S. Supreme Court held that a plaintiff can succeed in compelling an agency to act under the APA if and only if the action sought to be compelled is a "discrete action" that the agency is "legally required" to take. Under the government's theory, the USCIS cannot be compelled to act where its organic statute fails to require it to make a decision. But, under Norton , an agency's regulation with the force of law can create a legal duty. Arguably, the USCIS is legally required to act on applications presented to it, as its own regulations provide that it inform applicants of its decisions. See 8 C.F.R. 245.2(a)(5)(i) (green card applications); 8 C.F.R. 316.14(b)(1) (naturalization applications). Most judges in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania appear to accept this argument. For example, in Kaplan v. Chertoff , 481 F. Supp. 2d 370, 399 (E.D. Pa. 2007), Judge Eduardo Robreno held that the USCIS has a duty to adjudicate green card and naturalization applications, based, in part, on the agency's own regulations.
Once a court determines that its jurisdiction is not stripped under the INA, it usually faces little difficulty finding a cause of action under the APA. Of course, determining whether an agency has acted unreasonably is a fact-intensive inquiry, but the government's position does not look promising where the USCIS has failed to perform three distinct background checks for two or more years without any indication of special circumstances. See, e.g., Saleem v. Keisler, supra . The government has argued that flagging agency resources are to blame, but many courts find little sympathy for such posturing. In addressing the issue of agency resources, one court stated that the USCIS should take its complaints up with Congress. See Liang v. Attorney General , 07-cv-2349-CW (N.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2007). "The executive branch must decide for itself how best to meet its statutory duties; this Court can only decide whether or not those duties have been met." Id . Even factoring in flagging appropriations, the court held that a two-and-a-half-year delay is unreasonable as a matter of law. Id .
With more than 340,000 cases in the name check backlog, it is not clear when some foreign nationals will ever have their cases resolved at the agency level. At least with the advantageous decisions handed down from the federal district courts, foreign nationals have the hope of going into court to request an expeditious resolution to their name checks. In the majority of situations, it appears that litigation is the only option, but at least an option exists.
Please email the author at gforney@wolfblock.com with questions about this article.
USCIS delays have become so excessive in this arena that many foreign nationals have sought relief in federal court. The Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 (APA), which governs federal agency actions and decisions, requires that an agency resolve a matter presented to it within a "reasonable" time frame. See 8 U.S.C. 555(b). Using the APA, foreign nationals have argued that waiting for two or more years for a decision on an immigration application is "unreasonable" under the statute. The cases are divided, but a majority of courts have agreed that making a foreign national wait years and years just for a decision on his or her application is unreasonable. As a result, many judges have ordered the FBI and USCIS to complete pending name check cases within 60 or 90 days where a foreign national has been waiting for two or more years. Some judges have noted that security concerns are not to be taken lightly, but this only reinforces the fact that such issues should be resolved in a matter of weeks as opposed to years.
The success or failure of litigation in this arena ultimately turns on the court's reading of a jurisdiction-stripping provision embedded in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended by the Real ID Act of 2005. The INA precludes judicial review of any "decision or action" of the USCIS that is "specified [under INA] to be in the discretion" of the USCIS. See 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii). In defending challenges to delayed applications, the U.S. Attorney's office has argued that the adjudication of a green card application, including the pace of adjudication, is committed to the sole discretion of the USCIS, because the INA specifies that a decision to approve or deny a green card application is within the discretion of the USCIS. See 8 U.S.C. 1255(a).
None of the circuit courts have ruled on this issue, but the relationship between USCIS delay and the role of the judiciary has become a "national judicial debate" at the district court level. See Saleem v. Keisler , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80044 (W.D. Wis. Oct. 26, 2007). Some courts have bought the government's argument, holding that a discretionary "action" includes every interim action taken along the way leading up to an ultimate decision on an application. See Safadi v. Howard , 466 F.Supp. 2d 696, 699 (E.D. Vir. 2006). Under this theory, a stalled name check is simply action along the way to a final decision. The majority of courts have rejected this reading of the statute, holding that USCIS' discretion only applies to the ultimate decision on an application, not the pace of its adjudication. As one court stated, "it would require Orwellian twisting of the word ["action"] to conclude that it means a failure to adjudicate." Saleem v. Keisler, supra. Similarly, U.S. District Judge Stewart Dalzell recognized that the INA grants discretion to the USCIS to grant or deny a green card application, but "national security does not require that it also have absolute discretion to delay such an application to Dickensian lengths." Cao v. Upchurch , 496 F.Supp. 2d 569, 574 (E.D. Pa 2007). Put simply, "there is a difference between the [USCIS'] discretion over how to resolve an application and the [USCIS'] discretion over whether it resolves an application." Singh v. Still , 470 F. Supp. 2d 1064, 1068 (N.D. Cal. 2007).
The U.S. Attorney's office has also argued that the USCIS is not required to make a decision on green card or naturalization applications since the INA does not specify a time frame for the agency's decision. See Assadzadeh v. Mueller , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80915 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 31, 2007). The government's argument is based on Norton v. So. Utah Wilderness Alliance , 542 U.S. 55 (2004), where the U.S. Supreme Court held that a plaintiff can succeed in compelling an agency to act under the APA if and only if the action sought to be compelled is a "discrete action" that the agency is "legally required" to take. Under the government's theory, the USCIS cannot be compelled to act where its organic statute fails to require it to make a decision. But, under Norton , an agency's regulation with the force of law can create a legal duty. Arguably, the USCIS is legally required to act on applications presented to it, as its own regulations provide that it inform applicants of its decisions. See 8 C.F.R. 245.2(a)(5)(i) (green card applications); 8 C.F.R. 316.14(b)(1) (naturalization applications). Most judges in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania appear to accept this argument. For example, in Kaplan v. Chertoff , 481 F. Supp. 2d 370, 399 (E.D. Pa. 2007), Judge Eduardo Robreno held that the USCIS has a duty to adjudicate green card and naturalization applications, based, in part, on the agency's own regulations.
Once a court determines that its jurisdiction is not stripped under the INA, it usually faces little difficulty finding a cause of action under the APA. Of course, determining whether an agency has acted unreasonably is a fact-intensive inquiry, but the government's position does not look promising where the USCIS has failed to perform three distinct background checks for two or more years without any indication of special circumstances. See, e.g., Saleem v. Keisler, supra . The government has argued that flagging agency resources are to blame, but many courts find little sympathy for such posturing. In addressing the issue of agency resources, one court stated that the USCIS should take its complaints up with Congress. See Liang v. Attorney General , 07-cv-2349-CW (N.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2007). "The executive branch must decide for itself how best to meet its statutory duties; this Court can only decide whether or not those duties have been met." Id . Even factoring in flagging appropriations, the court held that a two-and-a-half-year delay is unreasonable as a matter of law. Id .
With more than 340,000 cases in the name check backlog, it is not clear when some foreign nationals will ever have their cases resolved at the agency level. At least with the advantageous decisions handed down from the federal district courts, foreign nationals have the hope of going into court to request an expeditious resolution to their name checks. In the majority of situations, it appears that litigation is the only option, but at least an option exists.
Please email the author at gforney@wolfblock.com with questions about this article.
senthil1
04-24 02:57 PM
Big companies like TCS cannot split or start another company as everything is associated with Brand name and other stock market regulations. They will be forced to hire citizens/GC holders with H1bs if this bill is passed in same form. USCIS will take care of small Indian bodyshoppers by RFE and asking client letters etc if they start multiple companies. Of course there will be loopholes our Indian companies will find in any law but still it will clean up H1b and L1 atleast for some extent.
They refer to ads on Sulekha and other similar portals
On another note - consulting companies will workaround by creating multiple companies and applying h1b through various companies
They refer to ads on Sulekha and other similar portals
On another note - consulting companies will workaround by creating multiple companies and applying h1b through various companies
No comments:
Post a Comment