images Brad, 46 
GCanyMinute
08-02 02:42 PM
Hey BumbleBee ! Thanks a lot!!
Now I clearly understand even though it is not good news :( since people from the backlogs centers are getting their LC approved with a PD prior than mine !!!
Anyways I can't complain right? i still can renew my EAD and travel documents so I guess my turn will come soon...hopefully!! :D
Thanks for helping me.
Now I clearly understand even though it is not good news :( since people from the backlogs centers are getting their LC approved with a PD prior than mine !!!
Anyways I can't complain right? i still can renew my EAD and travel documents so I guess my turn will come soon...hopefully!! :D
Thanks for helping me.
wallpaper Brad Pitt
arnab221
09-10 05:15 PM
Are they back yet . The link is not working any more .
ndbhatt
06-10 08:19 PM
Guys,
Don't fire up on my comments given below.
I agree that ALL of us irrespective of EB category will be impacted if this proposed bill becomes a law.
Just step back and think for a minute, what is the impact on the US companies due to inability of his bright workers to continue working in US? Will US businesses sit tight without raising any concerns? No way...
This is just an eyewash to get political mileage. No matter what degree of love-hate relationship exists between voters and politicians. Certainly, political power cannot, and never will, have a brazen bill such as this, that will hurt American economy more than anything.
Let's assume for a moment that hypothetically this becomes law...
What will we do? Some of common options:
- Move to immigrant friendly country, OR
- Return to mother land, OR
- Company will move its operation, and you, to continue its operations, OR
- look at alternate legal ways to stay in this country until situation changes, OR
- Become undocumented alien :D
Guys, we still have options but US of A has too much at stake to make this text into a law.
Please don't get me wrong, I am in the same boat as all of you. It's just my 2 cents.
bhattji
Don't fire up on my comments given below.
I agree that ALL of us irrespective of EB category will be impacted if this proposed bill becomes a law.
Just step back and think for a minute, what is the impact on the US companies due to inability of his bright workers to continue working in US? Will US businesses sit tight without raising any concerns? No way...
This is just an eyewash to get political mileage. No matter what degree of love-hate relationship exists between voters and politicians. Certainly, political power cannot, and never will, have a brazen bill such as this, that will hurt American economy more than anything.
Let's assume for a moment that hypothetically this becomes law...
What will we do? Some of common options:
- Move to immigrant friendly country, OR
- Return to mother land, OR
- Company will move its operation, and you, to continue its operations, OR
- look at alternate legal ways to stay in this country until situation changes, OR
- Become undocumented alien :D
Guys, we still have options but US of A has too much at stake to make this text into a law.
Please don't get me wrong, I am in the same boat as all of you. It's just my 2 cents.
bhattji
2011 Brad Pitt
trueguy
08-27 12:44 PM
As per this link and comments by the Director of USCIS-
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21175
Though we still have challenges to overcome, USCIS is currently showing improvements as a result of process improvements. As of April 25, 2008, USCIS had adjudicated over 65 percent of its FY 2008 target for employment-based visas. With five months to go in FY 2008, this is a strong start. We plan to continue implementing process improvements and new reporting mechanisms for managing these important applications.
I485 Receipt I485 Pending I485-processed FB I-485 EB I-485
Oct-07 237915 842231 50548 42500 8048
Nov-07 51773 845691 48313 42500 5813
Dec-07 35020 833141 47570 42500 5070
Jan-08 35771 813238 55674 42500 13174
Feb-08 38210 787516 63932 42500 21432
Mar-08 43548 762938 68126 42500 25626
Apr-08 50951 742597 71292 42500 28792
May-08 45357 739934 48020 42500 5520
* Data from USCIS months processing report
** Oct 07 Receipt number changed from 137915 to 237915 (just looked incorrect)
** FB is flat (730k-220k CP / 12 months)
We have 113475 EB I-485 processed until May 08 (in 8 months), if we take 80% acceptance rate the number of visa used will be 90780 and if we use 90% acceptance rate USCIS may have used 102127 visas.
June processing numbers are available
I485 Receipt I485 Pending I485-processed FB I-485 EB I-485
June-08 46024 740969 44989 42500 2489
It seems that in FY-2008-Total number of Employment Visas approved were-
Till April 2008=>8048 (Oct'07) + 5813(Nov'07) + 5070(Dec'07) +13174(Jan'08) + 21432(Feb'08) + 25626(Mar'08) + 28792(Apr'08) + 5520(May'08) + 2489(Jun'08) = 115964 (till Jun'08) out of 162704 for 2008.
Also, till April 2008, they had used=> 107955 which is 66% of 162,794.
So, the above comment by the Director of USCIS that till April 08, they had used 65% of the Fiscal 2008 quota is correct.
My guess in July and August is that they have used around 11000.
So liberally there are still 35000 unused visas for Sept. 08 and conservatively around 22000 for Sept. 08.
Do you have this statistics for Jul'2007, Aug'2007,Sep'2007. It will be interesting to know how many I-485 they recieved during Jul'2007 fiasco.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21175
Though we still have challenges to overcome, USCIS is currently showing improvements as a result of process improvements. As of April 25, 2008, USCIS had adjudicated over 65 percent of its FY 2008 target for employment-based visas. With five months to go in FY 2008, this is a strong start. We plan to continue implementing process improvements and new reporting mechanisms for managing these important applications.
I485 Receipt I485 Pending I485-processed FB I-485 EB I-485
Oct-07 237915 842231 50548 42500 8048
Nov-07 51773 845691 48313 42500 5813
Dec-07 35020 833141 47570 42500 5070
Jan-08 35771 813238 55674 42500 13174
Feb-08 38210 787516 63932 42500 21432
Mar-08 43548 762938 68126 42500 25626
Apr-08 50951 742597 71292 42500 28792
May-08 45357 739934 48020 42500 5520
* Data from USCIS months processing report
** Oct 07 Receipt number changed from 137915 to 237915 (just looked incorrect)
** FB is flat (730k-220k CP / 12 months)
We have 113475 EB I-485 processed until May 08 (in 8 months), if we take 80% acceptance rate the number of visa used will be 90780 and if we use 90% acceptance rate USCIS may have used 102127 visas.
June processing numbers are available
I485 Receipt I485 Pending I485-processed FB I-485 EB I-485
June-08 46024 740969 44989 42500 2489
It seems that in FY-2008-Total number of Employment Visas approved were-
Till April 2008=>8048 (Oct'07) + 5813(Nov'07) + 5070(Dec'07) +13174(Jan'08) + 21432(Feb'08) + 25626(Mar'08) + 28792(Apr'08) + 5520(May'08) + 2489(Jun'08) = 115964 (till Jun'08) out of 162704 for 2008.
Also, till April 2008, they had used=> 107955 which is 66% of 162,794.
So, the above comment by the Director of USCIS that till April 08, they had used 65% of the Fiscal 2008 quota is correct.
My guess in July and August is that they have used around 11000.
So liberally there are still 35000 unused visas for Sept. 08 and conservatively around 22000 for Sept. 08.
Do you have this statistics for Jul'2007, Aug'2007,Sep'2007. It will be interesting to know how many I-485 they recieved during Jul'2007 fiasco.
more...
johnwright03
07-01 09:38 AM
06/30/2007: Potential EB Visa Number Exhaution in July and Probable Actions of State Department or USCIS
* By now, people understand that the sources of potential action by the State Department or USCIS are predicated on the two important facts. One was the information from a government source that there were only about 40,000 numbers left for the entire EB visa numbers for the FY 2007 which ends on September 30, 2007. The second important fact was that reportedly the USCIS alone had far more than 40,000 I-485 applications in the backlog queue that were reportedly ready for approval. Considering the fact that the immigrant visa numbers are consumed by the approval of I-485 applications by the USCIS and the approval of immigant visa applications in the consular processing by visa posts througout the world, 40,000 visa numbers could be fairly quickly exhausted in early July 2007. This prediction was exacerbated by the information that the USCIS was apparently picking up the pace of I-485 adjudications lately.
* Obviously the State Department has been in communication with the USCIS and was well aware of the situation. Sources reported that the State Department might revise the July Visa Bulletin either Monday or Tuesday to reflect the situation. However, it is unclear at this point whether this will occur on Monday or Tuesday or, for that matter, some time soon, particulary considering the ongoing uproar in the nation. Assuming that the EB immigrant visa number will be exhausted before the end of July, from the government perspectives, they may have two options to handle this matter. One is the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin based on the newly developed facts and predictions. The other option is that the State Department does not take any action of revising the Visa Bulletin but just notify the USCIS when the visa numbers for certain categories are exhausted. The initial sources of rumor was the former possibility. However, as updated by the AILA afterwards, it might or might not happen.
* Whether the State Department revises the July visa bulletin or not, the fact will remain that 40,000 numbers could indeed be run out in a fairly short period of time in July. It is too obvious that under the statute, when the visa numbers are exhausted, the USCIS will not be able to approve any I-485 applications, and for that reason, the USCIS may wrongly reject the incoming I-485 applications or return I-485 applications which were received after the date when the visa number is exhausted. This happened for the "other worker" category in June when the priority date was current in June for certain other workers. The issue of legality of such action of the USCIS is rooted in the required distinction of the USCIS statutory mandates between its job of adjudication of 485 applications "already in the pipeline" and its job of "accepting new 485 applications." Arguably, when the visa number runs out, there is no question about that the USCIS should not and cannot adjudicate and approve any 485 applications. But there is no legal basis that the USCIS should not and cannot "accept" new 485 applications when the cases fall within the cut-off date of the monthly visa bulletin. If the State Department attempts to revise the July Visa Bulletin, probably they are doing it to overcome the predicament of the USCIS that will face in rejecting the new 485 applications. The problem is the State Department's own legal problem or authority to revise the published Visa Bulletin. Accordingly, either USCIS or State Department will be liable for either abuse of power or arbitrary act depending on who acts. The AILF is planning to sue the USCIS for rejecting "other worker" new 485 applications in June probably on ultra vires or other statutory authority grounds. Should the same thing happen in July, the AILF intends to extend its lawsuit to cover the July 2007 485 applicants, probably in the form of class action. What happens if the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin and the USCIS rejects the new applications based on the new Visa Bulletin? Strictly speaking, there may be no cause of action against the USCIS in that it followed the State Department's Visa Bulletin for the month of July. In this case, probably the lawsuit will have to be directed to the State Department for violation of law in revising the visa bulletin. We will soon find out.
* Where does this leave to the July 485 applicants? Fact remains that all likelihood, the annual limit may reach fairly early in July and they should file their cases before the visa posts and the USCIS exhaust all the numbers. They have to do this probably for the two reasons. One is that should the government take the second option of rejecting new cases after reaching the limit just as we experienced in the other worker cases, those who filed the I-485 application before that date will not be affected. Those who files the application after the date of exhaution and receive rejection of the 485 applications may be entitled to sue the USCIS either in a class action or individually. Secondly, if the government takes the first option of the State Department revising the July Visa Bulletin, they will have to sue the State Department and for that purpose, they should have filed I-485 applications within July 2007. Otherwise, they may have a standing to sue the State Department.
* For the foregoing reasons, we urge the July 485 filers to file the applications as soon as possible. At the same time, we urge the State Department and the USCIS not to take any actions to avoid the lawsuits. They should keep accepting I-485 applications even after the enhaution of the FY 2007 numbers, even though they will not be able to adjudicate these applications until the visa numbers become current again. Again, the agencies should distinguish the requirement for adjudication of 485 applications and the requirement for acceptance of new applications. These are two separate things.
* By now, people understand that the sources of potential action by the State Department or USCIS are predicated on the two important facts. One was the information from a government source that there were only about 40,000 numbers left for the entire EB visa numbers for the FY 2007 which ends on September 30, 2007. The second important fact was that reportedly the USCIS alone had far more than 40,000 I-485 applications in the backlog queue that were reportedly ready for approval. Considering the fact that the immigrant visa numbers are consumed by the approval of I-485 applications by the USCIS and the approval of immigant visa applications in the consular processing by visa posts througout the world, 40,000 visa numbers could be fairly quickly exhausted in early July 2007. This prediction was exacerbated by the information that the USCIS was apparently picking up the pace of I-485 adjudications lately.
* Obviously the State Department has been in communication with the USCIS and was well aware of the situation. Sources reported that the State Department might revise the July Visa Bulletin either Monday or Tuesday to reflect the situation. However, it is unclear at this point whether this will occur on Monday or Tuesday or, for that matter, some time soon, particulary considering the ongoing uproar in the nation. Assuming that the EB immigrant visa number will be exhausted before the end of July, from the government perspectives, they may have two options to handle this matter. One is the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin based on the newly developed facts and predictions. The other option is that the State Department does not take any action of revising the Visa Bulletin but just notify the USCIS when the visa numbers for certain categories are exhausted. The initial sources of rumor was the former possibility. However, as updated by the AILA afterwards, it might or might not happen.
* Whether the State Department revises the July visa bulletin or not, the fact will remain that 40,000 numbers could indeed be run out in a fairly short period of time in July. It is too obvious that under the statute, when the visa numbers are exhausted, the USCIS will not be able to approve any I-485 applications, and for that reason, the USCIS may wrongly reject the incoming I-485 applications or return I-485 applications which were received after the date when the visa number is exhausted. This happened for the "other worker" category in June when the priority date was current in June for certain other workers. The issue of legality of such action of the USCIS is rooted in the required distinction of the USCIS statutory mandates between its job of adjudication of 485 applications "already in the pipeline" and its job of "accepting new 485 applications." Arguably, when the visa number runs out, there is no question about that the USCIS should not and cannot adjudicate and approve any 485 applications. But there is no legal basis that the USCIS should not and cannot "accept" new 485 applications when the cases fall within the cut-off date of the monthly visa bulletin. If the State Department attempts to revise the July Visa Bulletin, probably they are doing it to overcome the predicament of the USCIS that will face in rejecting the new 485 applications. The problem is the State Department's own legal problem or authority to revise the published Visa Bulletin. Accordingly, either USCIS or State Department will be liable for either abuse of power or arbitrary act depending on who acts. The AILF is planning to sue the USCIS for rejecting "other worker" new 485 applications in June probably on ultra vires or other statutory authority grounds. Should the same thing happen in July, the AILF intends to extend its lawsuit to cover the July 2007 485 applicants, probably in the form of class action. What happens if the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin and the USCIS rejects the new applications based on the new Visa Bulletin? Strictly speaking, there may be no cause of action against the USCIS in that it followed the State Department's Visa Bulletin for the month of July. In this case, probably the lawsuit will have to be directed to the State Department for violation of law in revising the visa bulletin. We will soon find out.
* Where does this leave to the July 485 applicants? Fact remains that all likelihood, the annual limit may reach fairly early in July and they should file their cases before the visa posts and the USCIS exhaust all the numbers. They have to do this probably for the two reasons. One is that should the government take the second option of rejecting new cases after reaching the limit just as we experienced in the other worker cases, those who filed the I-485 application before that date will not be affected. Those who files the application after the date of exhaution and receive rejection of the 485 applications may be entitled to sue the USCIS either in a class action or individually. Secondly, if the government takes the first option of the State Department revising the July Visa Bulletin, they will have to sue the State Department and for that purpose, they should have filed I-485 applications within July 2007. Otherwise, they may have a standing to sue the State Department.
* For the foregoing reasons, we urge the July 485 filers to file the applications as soon as possible. At the same time, we urge the State Department and the USCIS not to take any actions to avoid the lawsuits. They should keep accepting I-485 applications even after the enhaution of the FY 2007 numbers, even though they will not be able to adjudicate these applications until the visa numbers become current again. Again, the agencies should distinguish the requirement for adjudication of 485 applications and the requirement for acceptance of new applications. These are two separate things.
gg_ny
08-16 01:13 PM
Hi, do you know how long it took them to clear name check? which EB category /country are you? Mine is stuck in name check and am trying to find some pattern and if possible, some solace.. thanks.
All my security check are cleared as per information from IO (by calling 4 times in last 4 months).
I am hoping that I will get GC by the end of this year.
All my security check are cleared as per information from IO (by calling 4 times in last 4 months).
I am hoping that I will get GC by the end of this year.
more...
chanduv23
04-09 10:40 PM
We are not saying that they are not doing their job well. We just want better visibility to plan our future. I want to buy Hose which has substancial investment, can I buy during this uncertainity, may be.
Buying a hose is not substantial investment. It may cost $20 to $50 based on the length you need
Buying a hose is not substantial investment. It may cost $20 to $50 based on the length you need
2010 Brad Pitt Biography (part 1)
cnag
09-10 10:55 AM
How many posts are required to access chat feature?
I guess, getting 30 green dots is tougher than getting GC itself:D
Restricting chat access based on dots earned is probably the most idiotic thing IV has done. Folks who have contributed hundreds of dollars should be allowed access irrespective of posts or stupid dots.
I guess, getting 30 green dots is tougher than getting GC itself:D
Restricting chat access based on dots earned is probably the most idiotic thing IV has done. Folks who have contributed hundreds of dollars should be allowed access irrespective of posts or stupid dots.
more...
Ramba
02-21 03:00 PM
Assuming you are right then,
average visa issued for EB1 ROW+Non ROW over the last 5 years have been 26K,
Now assuming this year the demand would be close to average then. It leaves 14K for EB2
Implying 12/2003 dates movement is very likely as 14k>5k (your number)
Dont rely on tracitt. no one knows how many report there. It is not scientific or true. For right numbers, anlyse the DOS report for each year, if you hva more time.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
average visa issued for EB1 ROW+Non ROW over the last 5 years have been 26K,
Now assuming this year the demand would be close to average then. It leaves 14K for EB2
Implying 12/2003 dates movement is very likely as 14k>5k (your number)
Dont rely on tracitt. no one knows how many report there. It is not scientific or true. For right numbers, anlyse the DOS report for each year, if you hva more time.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
hair Brad Pitt - Photos of Brad
aps
08-09 12:20 AM
:rolleyes:I mailed my I-485 application on July30 and it is delivered on next day.
My lawyer send me the I-485 froms before the july 30, 07 y revision and i used those forms for filing. But, FAQ3 released by uscis today states that we have to use the form version dated �7/30/07 Y�. . WHAT IS THIS? Do i have to resend the application again? More over i do not see difference between these two forms.
I have copied the question from faq3. It is the first question.
Q33: When filing an EB I-485 using the old fee, what version of the I-485 form do we use?
A33: The current I-485 form version dated �7/30/07 Y� should be used.
Please explain if you have any idea about this.
My lawyer send me the I-485 froms before the july 30, 07 y revision and i used those forms for filing. But, FAQ3 released by uscis today states that we have to use the form version dated �7/30/07 Y�. . WHAT IS THIS? Do i have to resend the application again? More over i do not see difference between these two forms.
I have copied the question from faq3. It is the first question.
Q33: When filing an EB I-485 using the old fee, what version of the I-485 form do we use?
A33: The current I-485 form version dated �7/30/07 Y� should be used.
Please explain if you have any idea about this.
more...
senthil1
06-13 11:43 AM
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)
With the restrictions we are getting 115 to 180k H1bs. If there is some plan for clearing backlog for gc then we can very well support CIR
Correct me if my understanding is wrong.
Hi, Senthil and Bugmenot
You said :They will allow some form of consulting and they may ban subcontracting in H1b.
Now you agree that consulting will be there. So the bill have to be tweeked or else even small american companies will shut down.
ex bearing point....
Rule 2 of restriction - Company cannot hire 6 months before or after it has laid of a person.
Impossible to be applied.
(Big companies will be affected with this, small companies like CDI, ABC.. who might hire a H1-B on their pay roll but they let them go when they are not able to find a new client that they can place that person).
Rule 3 - You have to advertise before you get an H1-B might be allowed but ignored like L1 is ignored now.
I will show you how the merit based system have to change for EB in my next post.
Got to go...
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)
With the restrictions we are getting 115 to 180k H1bs. If there is some plan for clearing backlog for gc then we can very well support CIR
Correct me if my understanding is wrong.
Hi, Senthil and Bugmenot
You said :They will allow some form of consulting and they may ban subcontracting in H1b.
Now you agree that consulting will be there. So the bill have to be tweeked or else even small american companies will shut down.
ex bearing point....
Rule 2 of restriction - Company cannot hire 6 months before or after it has laid of a person.
Impossible to be applied.
(Big companies will be affected with this, small companies like CDI, ABC.. who might hire a H1-B on their pay roll but they let them go when they are not able to find a new client that they can place that person).
Rule 3 - You have to advertise before you get an H1-B might be allowed but ignored like L1 is ignored now.
I will show you how the merit based system have to change for EB in my next post.
Got to go...
hot Brad Pitt Upset Of Not
franklin
09-19 11:40 PM
Whilst in general a name change does sound like a good idea, we have spent a lot of time and money making sure that Immigration Voice as an organization is known.
It makes no sense to through that away
It makes no sense to through that away
more...
house Brad Pitt Sound Clips
amitjoey
07-18 12:45 AM
Applications already properly filed will be accepted, means all applications from the 2nd July to 16th July will be accepted if properly filed (Means: If they have the proper documents and are otherwise eligible, meaning filing fees and certified labor)
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletinUpdate17Jul07.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletinUpdate17Jul07.pdf
tattoo Posted in Brad Pitt,Celebrity
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 Brad Pitt
neverbefore
07-29 02:23 AM
Hi all,
I am not sure whether I should add this over here or not but I could not resist and I don't know any other way.
I went to a wine shop and was shocked to see cartoon of Ganesha used on the bottle of India Pale Beer. I am not a religious person but this thing made me nervous. Please let me know how this can be protested.
Thanks
Please desist from such irrelevant postings here. If you have a personal problem, at least display the intelligence to find the proper forum for it.
To answer your irrelevant question, such a thing can be protested best by not consuming the beer and most of all, to not give it publicity by laying bare your intellect at the wrong fora.
I am not sure whether I should add this over here or not but I could not resist and I don't know any other way.
I went to a wine shop and was shocked to see cartoon of Ganesha used on the bottle of India Pale Beer. I am not a religious person but this thing made me nervous. Please let me know how this can be protested.
Thanks
Please desist from such irrelevant postings here. If you have a personal problem, at least display the intelligence to find the proper forum for it.
To answer your irrelevant question, such a thing can be protested best by not consuming the beer and most of all, to not give it publicity by laying bare your intellect at the wrong fora.
dresses Brad Pitt
TexDBoy
09-10 11:00 AM
They r into recess now ... lunch at 11:00 ... I guess its bit early .. :)
more...
makeup rad pitt hair
sundar61982
08-06 04:52 PM
Got email approvals on our I485 with PD of Mar10 2006 on EB-2.. Was at NSC.. Looks like they are processing beyond the Mar1st cutoff date..
girlfriend Brad Pitt Wants To Make A
gk_2000
08-11 05:08 PM
Guys,
I have thought of one more idea..
We know very well that by current interpretation EB3 is permanently fixed to the back of the line. NO EB3 will get processed until the last EB2 who files in the year 2013 gets approved, (counting out the regular quota).
And why are we here? Many believe (or know) that it is because of the 245(i) amnesty signed by Clinton and Bush.
Isn't it ironic that the illegals that were put in the line are not being moved back as the line expands? Why only we legals? Maybe there is some scope to challenge the 245(i) visa number allocation and point out that legal immigrants are waiting in line then how can you admit illegals in front
Anyone having the facts and numbers of 245(i)?
I have thought of one more idea..
We know very well that by current interpretation EB3 is permanently fixed to the back of the line. NO EB3 will get processed until the last EB2 who files in the year 2013 gets approved, (counting out the regular quota).
And why are we here? Many believe (or know) that it is because of the 245(i) amnesty signed by Clinton and Bush.
Isn't it ironic that the illegals that were put in the line are not being moved back as the line expands? Why only we legals? Maybe there is some scope to challenge the 245(i) visa number allocation and point out that legal immigrants are waiting in line then how can you admit illegals in front
Anyone having the facts and numbers of 245(i)?
hairstyles filme de rad pitt
deepakjain
08-10 04:36 PM
Dude,
now a days predictions have become more like weather forecasting saying that past few years we had rains around this time hence forth it may rain. :p
2010, all those who filed 485 by 2006 will be cleared up and will be given GC, 2010 end there will be another wave of 485 filers who will continue as cash cows for next 5 years for EAD and AP, 2007 july filers will be cleared up by 2012. Do not ask the source of information it is more of stock market and weather forecast were in stocks falls and gains every 5th year and 6th of June is the first day of monsoon in mumbai....:D
No point in giving stess to your grey cells, all are predictive cycle &, process
now a days predictions have become more like weather forecasting saying that past few years we had rains around this time hence forth it may rain. :p
2010, all those who filed 485 by 2006 will be cleared up and will be given GC, 2010 end there will be another wave of 485 filers who will continue as cash cows for next 5 years for EAD and AP, 2007 july filers will be cleared up by 2012. Do not ask the source of information it is more of stock market and weather forecast were in stocks falls and gains every 5th year and 6th of June is the first day of monsoon in mumbai....:D
No point in giving stess to your grey cells, all are predictive cycle &, process
ryan
08-21 12:12 PM
I did not marry the man I was engaged to. .
Sorry to hear. We can debate on this form till the cows come home, however, I think it is best you contact an experienced / skilled immigration lawyer ASAP. Often there are alternatives and solutions an immigration lawyer can evaluate and put forth to you. IMO that is the best option at this point. I hope things work out for you, good luck.
Sorry to hear. We can debate on this form till the cows come home, however, I think it is best you contact an experienced / skilled immigration lawyer ASAP. Often there are alternatives and solutions an immigration lawyer can evaluate and put forth to you. IMO that is the best option at this point. I hope things work out for you, good luck.
qasleuth
01-25 10:54 AM
It is time for new ideas and creative solutions. Here are my ideas:
1. We cannot make this an Indians only campaign:
Get get participation from folks of other countries. This is extremely important. I understand people from India are probably the highest number waiting to get a GC but we HAVE TO make this a broader effort.
How?: Contact 'leaders' from other countries. Not on these forums but through personal contacts. There are too many immature kids on these forums for any meaningful dialog.
2. MAke IV a membership only website (Forums atleast):
This gaurantees steady flow of funds. What do members get in return ? Access to forums, updates, action items/progress, bi-weekly Newsletter etc. Membership can be as low as $5 a month.
3. Funding Drives:
Fantastic efforts were made from many IVians. Get more creative (Dinner where you pay for your seat - $20 per head?), get people from other nationalities involved (Indian Sub-continent, China, Philiphines, Indonesia etc).
4. Make this effort more than getting a green card:
This is perhaps the most important if we can pull it off. Get green card holders and naturalized Citizens involved. This will give 'bite' to our effort (imagine going to your congressman with leading members of the local immigration population). Advantage: Funds, publicity, connections to politicians etc. Members will get the advantage of a platform and derive benefit from numbers.
How?: IV should become a platform for 'immigration issues' in general. Charity, cultural assimilation, job board, getting involved in local politics etc.
5. Clean up forums/discussion board:
Get rid of politics, religion discussions, period. Do not allow divisive nonsense.
1. We cannot make this an Indians only campaign:
Get get participation from folks of other countries. This is extremely important. I understand people from India are probably the highest number waiting to get a GC but we HAVE TO make this a broader effort.
How?: Contact 'leaders' from other countries. Not on these forums but through personal contacts. There are too many immature kids on these forums for any meaningful dialog.
2. MAke IV a membership only website (Forums atleast):
This gaurantees steady flow of funds. What do members get in return ? Access to forums, updates, action items/progress, bi-weekly Newsletter etc. Membership can be as low as $5 a month.
3. Funding Drives:
Fantastic efforts were made from many IVians. Get more creative (Dinner where you pay for your seat - $20 per head?), get people from other nationalities involved (Indian Sub-continent, China, Philiphines, Indonesia etc).
4. Make this effort more than getting a green card:
This is perhaps the most important if we can pull it off. Get green card holders and naturalized Citizens involved. This will give 'bite' to our effort (imagine going to your congressman with leading members of the local immigration population). Advantage: Funds, publicity, connections to politicians etc. Members will get the advantage of a platform and derive benefit from numbers.
How?: IV should become a platform for 'immigration issues' in general. Charity, cultural assimilation, job board, getting involved in local politics etc.
5. Clean up forums/discussion board:
Get rid of politics, religion discussions, period. Do not allow divisive nonsense.
