jsb
08-15 04:26 PM
What do EB cutoff dates in Sept VB mean? All eligible for filing AOS did in July/Aug. Does it mean that USCIS will be giving visa (approving GC) to those within the new cutoff dates?
wallpaper justin bieber kissing boy on
srini1976
07-11 09:12 PM
I consider this movement of dates a ticket to enter a lucky draw. Whatever visa numbers remain to be used in last two months of the fiscal year is going to be allocated at random to people who have their PD current in this period. So, congratulations to whoever gets lucky.
Well, your luck might be influenced by a variety of reasons like when you sent your application, whether your 140 is already approved, is it a complicated case, pending RFEs, etc. Nevertheless, it still is good news that so many people are now eligible to participate in the draw...
You are absolutely right dude :)
All (whose PD will be current) the Eb2 India folks try your luckkkkkkkkkkkkk..
Well, your luck might be influenced by a variety of reasons like when you sent your application, whether your 140 is already approved, is it a complicated case, pending RFEs, etc. Nevertheless, it still is good news that so many people are now eligible to participate in the draw...
You are absolutely right dude :)
All (whose PD will be current) the Eb2 India folks try your luckkkkkkkkkkkkk..
leoindiano
03-17 10:19 AM
EB2 India PD came only up till April 2004 before it retrogressed. There is no way anybody whose PD is between April to Sept 2004 could have applied before July 2007. They might have applied only in July 2007 when USCIS made EB2 PD current by mistake.
Before retrogression started in "October 2005 Bulletin, Nov 2005 effective", there are quite a few people who applied for I-485 and had PD upto sept 2004. Those cases are approved. I know couple of cases myself.
Before retrogression started in "October 2005 Bulletin, Nov 2005 effective", there are quite a few people who applied for I-485 and had PD upto sept 2004. Those cases are approved. I know couple of cases myself.
2011 pictures justin bieber kissing
pappu
01-10 12:48 PM
Some people are already doing our job.
http://www.zazona.com/NewsArchive/2006-12-26%20Renewed%20Push%20for%20H-1B%20Increase.txt
This shows that we have anti immigrant members and visitors amongst us looking for IV updates and our actionplans. sometimes such people pose as annonymous users and contact IV asking for updates without revealing who they are and doing anything constructive for IV. We try to be cautious in such cases. Its good that they quoted us as it shows that we are a force to recon with.
http://www.zazona.com/NewsArchive/2006-12-26%20Renewed%20Push%20for%20H-1B%20Increase.txt
This shows that we have anti immigrant members and visitors amongst us looking for IV updates and our actionplans. sometimes such people pose as annonymous users and contact IV asking for updates without revealing who they are and doing anything constructive for IV. We try to be cautious in such cases. Its good that they quoted us as it shows that we are a force to recon with.
more...
GCKaMaara
03-12 10:59 AM
It doesn't make sense on either side:
1. IV is not going to change its policy of hiding information. If you are comfortable with the approach then contribute otherwise don't.
2. Shouting and bashing here on website will gain nothing.
Do something creative. I think the basic problem is not hiding information. Basic problem is that as a non-profit organization, we don't have elections. We as a group have no rights to choose who is core. But thats how it is.
1. IV is not going to change its policy of hiding information. If you are comfortable with the approach then contribute otherwise don't.
2. Shouting and bashing here on website will gain nothing.
Do something creative. I think the basic problem is not hiding information. Basic problem is that as a non-profit organization, we don't have elections. We as a group have no rights to choose who is core. But thats how it is.
sri1234
05-27 11:44 AM
I wonder what are the required documents for America born citizens if they don't have passports. Just a driver license? or they have to carry birth certificates always?
I think American Citizens Drivers Licence do not have "Status Check" date where as Non-Immigrants have it.
I think American Citizens Drivers Licence do not have "Status Check" date where as Non-Immigrants have it.
more...
harsh
12-12 02:05 PM
I agree. Who or which department of USCIS has the authority to decide they will disallow concurrent 140/485 filing? If that department has the authority to make such a decision they probably have the authority to
1. allow filing of 485 without visa number availability,
2. allow people to start their name check process once 140 is cleared while everyone is waiting for priority dates to become current.
There should be a way to find out who in USCIS comes up with these new rule suggestions. Where do all the proposed rule changes published? At the USCIS press release? May be the actual press release has some information. There has got be to a way to find out from either press department or someone who or what part of USCIS makes these suggestions and then may be we can make send them our auggestions.
1. allow filing of 485 without visa number availability,
2. allow people to start their name check process once 140 is cleared while everyone is waiting for priority dates to become current.
There should be a way to find out who in USCIS comes up with these new rule suggestions. Where do all the proposed rule changes published? At the USCIS press release? May be the actual press release has some information. There has got be to a way to find out from either press department or someone who or what part of USCIS makes these suggestions and then may be we can make send them our auggestions.
2010 justin bieber kissing boy on
arunmohan
03-17 01:50 PM
Hello group:
This is true that EB3 people are going to stay for longer period( no one knows how long).
I am not sure that how much would be fruitful to port from EB3->EB2. Everone knows that it is not easy.
IV team should think and decide the next course of action for EB3.
I am with them what ever they decide. I am ready to give any kind of support.
Regards
This is true that EB3 people are going to stay for longer period( no one knows how long).
I am not sure that how much would be fruitful to port from EB3->EB2. Everone knows that it is not easy.
IV team should think and decide the next course of action for EB3.
I am with them what ever they decide. I am ready to give any kind of support.
Regards
more...
h1techSlave
03-17 02:04 PM
Including spillover generally EB3-I clears up around 5000 visas per year on average ( Though theoratically stuck at 3300-3500). 3 visas per applicant is at bit high end. I would not assume everybody is married AND have child.. I would put that around 1.75. But, yes, even if select these new parameters than also it would take years..Theoratically, ofcourse:):)
Based on your assumptions, it would take around 2 years to reach Dec 2003 for EB3-India.
# of visas required = 5000 or 6000 * 1.75 = 8750 or 10, 500
# of visas available = 5000
# years of wait until Dec 2003 = 1.75 to 2.1 years.
Based on your assumptions, it would take around 2 years to reach Dec 2003 for EB3-India.
# of visas required = 5000 or 6000 * 1.75 = 8750 or 10, 500
# of visas available = 5000
# years of wait until Dec 2003 = 1.75 to 2.1 years.
hair justin bieber kissing boy for
Openarms
08-11 02:15 PM
Count me in for contribution up to $500 towards lobbying.
I am not against any category ..... just wanna be reasonable.
Couple of years back some organizations pushed / lobbied an idea that software engineers (typically fall into EB2) are more valuable then Programmer Analysts (typically fall into EB3).
In those hay days who knows that they would come up with this unjustifiable idea...That may be true these days.
I am not against any category ..... just wanna be reasonable.
Couple of years back some organizations pushed / lobbied an idea that software engineers (typically fall into EB2) are more valuable then Programmer Analysts (typically fall into EB3).
In those hay days who knows that they would come up with this unjustifiable idea...That may be true these days.
more...
ilamurughu
10-29 07:38 AM
PD Oct 2003
LC approved - Oct 2006
I-140 approved - Oct 2006 (PP)
485 - Pending - RD 08/02/2007
LC approved - Oct 2006
I-140 approved - Oct 2006 (PP)
485 - Pending - RD 08/02/2007
hot images justin bieber kissing
ashkam
01-30 02:54 PM
So, basically anyone laid off on I485 pending without a job is accumulating "out of status" days.That's your opinion?
If you are I-485 pending, you are not out of status regardless of whether you have a job or not.
If you are I-485 pending, you are not out of status regardless of whether you have a job or not.
more...
house Justin Bieber Kissing A Boy On
nojoke
01-22 11:57 AM
Nothing is right or wrong, as meaning of quality of life is a very subjective thing.
In Japan, people work hard, send money/products to the US, and be happy for better quality of life by looking at increasing balances in their bank books each morning, and don't care what homes/cars they have.
In the US, people get happy for better quality of life by looking at their new BMW's, and nicely furnished homes (bought by money borrowed from Japanese investors), and don't care what they owe.
Both are unhappy too, for not having enough what they want more, Japanese want to have bigger balances in their bank books, and American want bigger BMW's and homes.
"Peace of Mind - Do you have" referenced in posts above is just a price for the quaility of life they "enjoy". No enjoyment comes without a price.
My issue is not with the quality of life. Don't we need to consider the risks associated with the quality of life? I see that there is a sense of entitlement that you should live your american dream or whatever at whatever cost.
In Japan, people work hard, send money/products to the US, and be happy for better quality of life by looking at increasing balances in their bank books each morning, and don't care what homes/cars they have.
In the US, people get happy for better quality of life by looking at their new BMW's, and nicely furnished homes (bought by money borrowed from Japanese investors), and don't care what they owe.
Both are unhappy too, for not having enough what they want more, Japanese want to have bigger balances in their bank books, and American want bigger BMW's and homes.
"Peace of Mind - Do you have" referenced in posts above is just a price for the quaility of life they "enjoy". No enjoyment comes without a price.
My issue is not with the quality of life. Don't we need to consider the risks associated with the quality of life? I see that there is a sense of entitlement that you should live your american dream or whatever at whatever cost.
tattoo justin bieber kissing a oy
coopheal
02-19 05:28 PM
Could one of you summarize HR 264 bill on the wiki.
http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php?title=HR_264_(2008-2010)&action=edit
http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php?title=HR_264_(2008-2010)&action=edit
more...
pictures justin bieber kissing a oy on
chintu25
09-10 10:44 AM
I will update here for those who cannot enter chat
Right now they are discussing
H.R. 6598
the "Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2008
I will update here once HR 5882 starts
Right now they are discussing
H.R. 6598
the "Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2008
I will update here once HR 5882 starts
dresses PHOTO: Justin Bieber Kisses
nashim
01-13 02:59 PM
can you please share your views and experiences of Symphony Corp (www.symphony.cc)
more...
makeup justin bieber kissing boy.
.jpg "Justin Bieber Kissing A Boy On")
Buran
02-14 12:30 AM
Dear friends,
I am appalled and disgusted by the mudslinging going on between ROW and India-born applicants. .....
1) Per country quotas in EB immigration cause infighting
I understand your frustration, but the rules are the same for everybody, and if India sends more immigrants to the US then any other country, that\\\'s not the US Government\'s fault.
If there were not per country limits, Indians would consume all those EB visas visas leaving no chance to the applicants from other countries to immigrate to the US legally.
I am appalled and disgusted by the mudslinging going on between ROW and India-born applicants. .....
1) Per country quotas in EB immigration cause infighting
I understand your frustration, but the rules are the same for everybody, and if India sends more immigrants to the US then any other country, that\\\'s not the US Government\'s fault.
If there were not per country limits, Indians would consume all those EB visas visas leaving no chance to the applicants from other countries to immigrate to the US legally.
girlfriend justin bieber kissing boy
nonimmi
03-07 11:17 AM
Someone said it takes about two months for G-28 to take effect. Sometime jobs changes may not allow that much time. So for that duration RFE or other documents may still go to last attorney. Is there a way to do it online or request for immediate transfer?
Also - if we represent self and later for some complex cases we need experienced attorney help do we need to file G-28 again?
Also - if we represent self and later for some complex cases we need experienced attorney help do we need to file G-28 again?
hairstyles justin bieber kissing boy on
vin13
11-12 03:32 PM
Isn't there a limit of 27% of visas per quarter per country per calendar year ? If that limit is there then who will take precedence ? Quarterly Spill over or that limit ?
To me I think DOS is doing 27% quota limit for first 3 quarters then they are doing spill over so there is no quarterly spill. What if they will show us that there is a limit per quarter in law and they have to follow it. Is it something like deadlock. that trying to follow one law breaks another one.
What if we end up getting response that there is some action needed from Lawmakers to correct law..
just random thoughts.
In simple math, spillover happens only when there are left overs. If they were able to allocate visas to fill the quarterly limit(say 27%) then there is no spillovers. But we know that there are leftover visa that can be allocated quarterly not annually.
We are not 100% sure of exactly how they are allocating. At the least, this effort will help us understand the current process.
To me I think DOS is doing 27% quota limit for first 3 quarters then they are doing spill over so there is no quarterly spill. What if they will show us that there is a limit per quarter in law and they have to follow it. Is it something like deadlock. that trying to follow one law breaks another one.
What if we end up getting response that there is some action needed from Lawmakers to correct law..
just random thoughts.
In simple math, spillover happens only when there are left overs. If they were able to allocate visas to fill the quarterly limit(say 27%) then there is no spillovers. But we know that there are leftover visa that can be allocated quarterly not annually.
We are not 100% sure of exactly how they are allocating. At the least, this effort will help us understand the current process.
dvb123
02-03 10:03 AM
I cannot post the company name here because it maybe a copyright issue. A consulting company advertises ROW guys/gals to join their company .It tells a story about a ROW guy who worked in a fortune 500 company for 5 years but they did not file a green card for him. He joined SAGA and got his green card immediately and the whole process from PERM - GC card took less than 9 months.
I think his perm got cleared in less than 3 months and he must have filed i-140/i-485 concurrently. Thus he must have got a GC in 9 months.
Congratulations to XYZ for receiving his Green Card from XYZ as well. XYZ had applied for his labor on 1/30/2007 and received his final Green Card approval on 9/13/2007- that is less than 9 months. His case was filed under the EB2 category. He is a citizen on South America who was working for IBM for 5 years and was no where with his Green Card with the them. He then made a transition to XYZ and we filed his case immediately and today his final stage, I-485, has been approved as well.
I think his perm got cleared in less than 3 months and he must have filed i-140/i-485 concurrently. Thus he must have got a GC in 9 months.
Congratulations to XYZ for receiving his Green Card from XYZ as well. XYZ had applied for his labor on 1/30/2007 and received his final Green Card approval on 9/13/2007- that is less than 9 months. His case was filed under the EB2 category. He is a citizen on South America who was working for IBM for 5 years and was no where with his Green Card with the them. He then made a transition to XYZ and we filed his case immediately and today his final stage, I-485, has been approved as well.
alterego
07-04 08:31 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS’s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment