digital2k
09-09 04:19 PM
I called Everyone
and is a great response
more calls, more calls, more calls ...
friends, let us all do it...
its for everyone
I am surprised that all other threads are getting updated quite frequently. People are posting question related to their RFE and as usual once they get answer to their problems, they vanish. People are posting jokes on IV, but when it is their turn to call, we've to "bump" this thread and send e-mails to members. So pathetic.
I felt very sad when I read 30000+ members donated some 4000 dollars in last two months. I felt my donation of about 1000 dollars since 2006 is being wasted to answer questions of or to solve the problems of these free riders &/or one question members.
Please call all Numbers except co-sponsors ...
Find people And ask everyone else also to call ...
and is a great response
more calls, more calls, more calls ...
friends, let us all do it...
its for everyone
I am surprised that all other threads are getting updated quite frequently. People are posting question related to their RFE and as usual once they get answer to their problems, they vanish. People are posting jokes on IV, but when it is their turn to call, we've to "bump" this thread and send e-mails to members. So pathetic.
I felt very sad when I read 30000+ members donated some 4000 dollars in last two months. I felt my donation of about 1000 dollars since 2006 is being wasted to answer questions of or to solve the problems of these free riders &/or one question members.
Please call all Numbers except co-sponsors ...
Find people And ask everyone else also to call ...
wallpaper Kelly Rowland heats up the
pmpforgc
01-07 11:46 PM
I am surprised to see this thread active this long. Earlier I have with help of Saralayar and other members have bring this point to attention. But at that time no one was supporting Idea.
I see increasing support for the Idea as GC journey become longer and longer.
Earlier I have pointed following points that I want to bring to remind if we want to get real support for this idea of early CITIZENSHIP AFTER GREEN CARD
(1) I-140 and I-485 must be approved.
(@) Time should be considered only after getting GC
(3) For getting closer for political support our proposal should be close to Existing laws for FAMILY BASED and MARRIAGE BASED CITIZENSHIPS
So we should argur that if YOU HAVE MASTER AND ABOVE IN STEM FILEDS YOu can get CITIZEN SHIP 5 yrs from date of Approval of I-140 ( which make it closer to fmaily based) and THREE YEARS from Date of Approval of I-485 (closer to marriage based citizens). You can get earlier of two . But when you get Citizenship your I-485 must be approved for ATLEAST 1 year.
The above requirements can get closer to Marriage and family based and also help 90% of IV members.
Adding the clause for the EDUCATIONAL THING might be able to get more political support also
Thanks
I see increasing support for the Idea as GC journey become longer and longer.
Earlier I have pointed following points that I want to bring to remind if we want to get real support for this idea of early CITIZENSHIP AFTER GREEN CARD
(1) I-140 and I-485 must be approved.
(@) Time should be considered only after getting GC
(3) For getting closer for political support our proposal should be close to Existing laws for FAMILY BASED and MARRIAGE BASED CITIZENSHIPS
So we should argur that if YOU HAVE MASTER AND ABOVE IN STEM FILEDS YOu can get CITIZEN SHIP 5 yrs from date of Approval of I-140 ( which make it closer to fmaily based) and THREE YEARS from Date of Approval of I-485 (closer to marriage based citizens). You can get earlier of two . But when you get Citizenship your I-485 must be approved for ATLEAST 1 year.
The above requirements can get closer to Marriage and family based and also help 90% of IV members.
Adding the clause for the EDUCATIONAL THING might be able to get more political support also
Thanks
nk2006
11-18 12:38 PM
I received a phone call (WOW!) from a sweet lady from CIS Ombudsman's office. I sent letters to his office and in the letter I mentioned my cell #. Anyway she wants a real person who got deniel. I told her that my friend got deniel (IVens are my fried). Anyway, she sent an email too after I asked her to give her info so that my friend can send her his case details. Unfortunately, the email I received shortly after the conversation, looks like general and does not have her ID. Please PM me if you like to hear more about the phone call.
==================
Thank you for your correspondence to the Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman (CIS Ombudsman).
We greatly appreciate your comments regarding issues concerning the American Competitiveness Act in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (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 adjudication of these petitions.
If you have evidence of a specific I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status case that you feel was erroneously denied due to USCIS not adhering to AC21 guidelines, we kindly ask that you please immediately forward us a case problem request, including a copy of your denial notice, detailed information as to the reasons for the immediate denial, and, if appropriate, evidence that you have submitted a Motion to Reopen or Reconsider.
Instructions for completing a DHS Form 7001 (case problem) can be found on our website: http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/programs/editorial_0497.shtm#10.
Please submit your case problem and supporting documents via email to cisombudsman@dhs.gov or via facsimile to 202-357-0042 with the subject AC21 Evidence of Immediate Denial.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
CIS Ombudsman
(cmp)
Thank you gc4me for sharing info.
Its very good that they are taking notice of the issue. It would have been great if their follow-up email had some more details but in any case please share any info (like phone number your received call from) with pd_recapturing - he is culling info together from the people who are really affected.
If anyone else receive similar call - please try to get their direct contact details (it might help in our next steps being co-ordinated by chanduv, pd_recapturing, itsnotfunny and a bunch of other volunteers).
==================
Thank you for your correspondence to the Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman (CIS Ombudsman).
We greatly appreciate your comments regarding issues concerning the American Competitiveness Act in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (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 adjudication of these petitions.
If you have evidence of a specific I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status case that you feel was erroneously denied due to USCIS not adhering to AC21 guidelines, we kindly ask that you please immediately forward us a case problem request, including a copy of your denial notice, detailed information as to the reasons for the immediate denial, and, if appropriate, evidence that you have submitted a Motion to Reopen or Reconsider.
Instructions for completing a DHS Form 7001 (case problem) can be found on our website: http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/programs/editorial_0497.shtm#10.
Please submit your case problem and supporting documents via email to cisombudsman@dhs.gov or via facsimile to 202-357-0042 with the subject AC21 Evidence of Immediate Denial.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
CIS Ombudsman
(cmp)
Thank you gc4me for sharing info.
Its very good that they are taking notice of the issue. It would have been great if their follow-up email had some more details but in any case please share any info (like phone number your received call from) with pd_recapturing - he is culling info together from the people who are really affected.
If anyone else receive similar call - please try to get their direct contact details (it might help in our next steps being co-ordinated by chanduv, pd_recapturing, itsnotfunny and a bunch of other volunteers).
2011 Kelly Rowland - Forever And A
unseenguy
06-18 06:41 PM
divide and rule! Last I know thats how Britain ruled India! and got control of India
more...
pappu
11-06 03:28 PM
Check this:
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Liang%2010-30-07.pdf
Defendants assert that the background check is a complex
process that must accommodate an extremely large volume of requests
from the USCIS. Given the backlog of name-check requests and the
FBI�s limited resources, they maintain that the delay of two and a
half years in processing Mr. Liang�s background check is not
unreasonable. There is some validity to these points, and the
Court appreciates that the name-check process is indeed complex and
resource-intensive. But limited resources or not, a common-sense
rule of reason dictates that if the FBI was performing background
checks with due diligence, it would not take two and a half years
to process Mr. Liang�s name. While the Court is sympathetic to the
demands placed on the FBI and the limited ability of the USCIS to
control how the FBI allocates its resources, a lack of sufficient
resources devoted to name-check operations is a matter for the
agencies to take up between themselves or with Congress. 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.
See Dong, 2007 WL 2601107 at *11 (�[I]t is
not the place of the judicial branch to weigh a plaintiff�s clear
right to administrative action against the agency�s burdens in
complying.�).
Moreover, although there is no Congressionally mandated
timetable for the processing of I-485 applications, Congress has by
statute expressed its view of what a reasonable amount of time is:
�It is the sense of Congress that the processing of an immigration benefit application should be completed not later than 180 days
after the initial filing of the application.� 8 U.S.C. � 1571.
The Court recognizes that this statute was enacted prior to the
events of September 11, 2001, and that the burdens on agencies with
responsibility for immigration matters have since increased.
Nonetheless, Plaintiffs� applications have been pending for five
times the length of the period identified by Congress.
Defendants argue that expediting Mr. Liang�s name check will
prejudice other applicants who have been waiting longer than he -in some cases, since as long as December, 2002.
While this would
be unfortunate, Defendants� failure to fulfill their statutory duty
to other applicants has no bearing on whether they have fulfilled
their statutory duty to Plaintiffs, and thus cannot serve as a
basis for denying Plaintiffs� motion.
While Defendants worry that
granting Plaintiffs relief may reward �the more litigious
applicants� or encourage other applicants to file lawsuits,
�perhaps recognizing this possibility will provide the defendants
with adequate incentive to begin processing [I-485] applications in
a lawful and timely fashion in order to obviate the applicants�
need to resort to the courts for redress.� Dong, 2007 WL 2601107
at *12.
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Liang%2010-30-07.pdf
Defendants assert that the background check is a complex
process that must accommodate an extremely large volume of requests
from the USCIS. Given the backlog of name-check requests and the
FBI�s limited resources, they maintain that the delay of two and a
half years in processing Mr. Liang�s background check is not
unreasonable. There is some validity to these points, and the
Court appreciates that the name-check process is indeed complex and
resource-intensive. But limited resources or not, a common-sense
rule of reason dictates that if the FBI was performing background
checks with due diligence, it would not take two and a half years
to process Mr. Liang�s name. While the Court is sympathetic to the
demands placed on the FBI and the limited ability of the USCIS to
control how the FBI allocates its resources, a lack of sufficient
resources devoted to name-check operations is a matter for the
agencies to take up between themselves or with Congress. 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.
See Dong, 2007 WL 2601107 at *11 (�[I]t is
not the place of the judicial branch to weigh a plaintiff�s clear
right to administrative action against the agency�s burdens in
complying.�).
Moreover, although there is no Congressionally mandated
timetable for the processing of I-485 applications, Congress has by
statute expressed its view of what a reasonable amount of time is:
�It is the sense of Congress that the processing of an immigration benefit application should be completed not later than 180 days
after the initial filing of the application.� 8 U.S.C. � 1571.
The Court recognizes that this statute was enacted prior to the
events of September 11, 2001, and that the burdens on agencies with
responsibility for immigration matters have since increased.
Nonetheless, Plaintiffs� applications have been pending for five
times the length of the period identified by Congress.
Defendants argue that expediting Mr. Liang�s name check will
prejudice other applicants who have been waiting longer than he -in some cases, since as long as December, 2002.
While this would
be unfortunate, Defendants� failure to fulfill their statutory duty
to other applicants has no bearing on whether they have fulfilled
their statutory duty to Plaintiffs, and thus cannot serve as a
basis for denying Plaintiffs� motion.
While Defendants worry that
granting Plaintiffs relief may reward �the more litigious
applicants� or encourage other applicants to file lawsuits,
�perhaps recognizing this possibility will provide the defendants
with adequate incentive to begin processing [I-485] applications in
a lawful and timely fashion in order to obviate the applicants�
need to resort to the courts for redress.� Dong, 2007 WL 2601107
at *12.
mallu
08-16 11:46 PM
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOmbudsman_AnnualReport_2006_II-F-Name_Checks.pdf
Has anything happened so far by recommendation of USCIS Ombudsman ? The position looks like a 'toothless tiger' .
Has anything happened so far by recommendation of USCIS Ombudsman ? The position looks like a 'toothless tiger' .
more...
leoindiano
10-07 01:52 PM
USCIS decided to take our $604 and give me an my wife APs in 9 days! They seem really efficient when they have to take money from us. But really slow when they have to approve GC applications (EB2, PD of Dec 2004). USCIS just seems to be interested in 'extortion' payments to employ USCIS staff - more a lawless mafia than a organization upholding the law!
BPositive, Sorry to hear that, I am about to apply for AP. My PD is nov 2004, EB2 -I . I am next in line to loose the money. Did you apply online?
BPositive, Sorry to hear that, I am about to apply for AP. My PD is nov 2004, EB2 -I . I am next in line to loose the money. Did you apply online?
2010 hot (Chart) Kelly Rowland#39;s
desitechie
08-26 05:51 PM
Hi Desitechi,
Thanks for your question. At Vonage we�re continually focused on enhancing our customer experience. As such, we�ve now got more ways than ever for our customers to reach us beyond our traditional customer care line - you can now find us on our new Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/vonage) page and on our Twitter (http://twitter.com/Vonage_Voice)handle!
Best,
Michael
Why do vonage CS act weird when customers cancel?
Thanks for your question. At Vonage we�re continually focused on enhancing our customer experience. As such, we�ve now got more ways than ever for our customers to reach us beyond our traditional customer care line - you can now find us on our new Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/vonage) page and on our Twitter (http://twitter.com/Vonage_Voice)handle!
Best,
Michael
Why do vonage CS act weird when customers cancel?
more...
gcdreamer05
11-03 03:34 PM
Not going anywhere, just providing the updates. We got what we wanted but a the same time did not like the way we got it.
How much did you spend for getting this done ? And are you really happy with what this has resulted in to, now all those in computer information manager - lc will get in to trouble, more audits.
Was this really needed?
How much did you spend for getting this done ? And are you really happy with what this has resulted in to, now all those in computer information manager - lc will get in to trouble, more audits.
Was this really needed?
hair Kelly Rowland- Motivation
Hunter
05-09 05:30 AM
I guess the genuine companies will move the H1/L1 staff abroad along with positions to meet this requirements if at all this becomes law. What that means is more job loss in US. (Whether US has 50% of total "high skilled" work force necessary to run the operations of all the companies is another important question... I do not think so, may be the senators are considering highschool dropouts to handle the "high skilled" jobs :), I read somewhere about a recent survey and only 27% of 25-45 age group of population has a college degree in all discipline. I will try to find the link)
Over all, I see this move by senators as short sited and will prove disastrus to America in long run given the fact that no other country in the world is as dependent on technology / research and development as US.
I also saw a quote from one of the Indian offshoring company CEOs that only 25% of Indian engineers are employable. May be highschool dropouts in US may not be that bad when contrasted against that statistics, after all Bill Gates was also a dropout. Also the dime-a-dozen so-called "engineering colleges" in India that feed Indian offshoring companies are known for QUANTITY and not QUALITY. Indian students go for (or their parents pay for) those courses offered in those colleges precisely because they offer a better future - i.e. they feel they get a good ROI on their investment, even if they don't have the interest or aptitude for Computer Science or engineering. These days, these facts are known to a lot of americans working in IT.
If H1/L1 visa is restricted, that will give an incentive for americans to acquire a degree in science/engineering, just like the indian students taking courses in india offering a better ROI, as they get the feeling that they won't be discriminated in a job and investing $$$ in education is not going to be wasted. This is what President Obama also emphasized today about the need for fundamental change in unemployment allowances helping to retrain the laid-off workers.
It will no doubt cut into the obscene profit margins of TCS/INFY etc., as they will be forced to play by the rules.
Over all, I see this move by senators as short sited and will prove disastrus to America in long run given the fact that no other country in the world is as dependent on technology / research and development as US.
I also saw a quote from one of the Indian offshoring company CEOs that only 25% of Indian engineers are employable. May be highschool dropouts in US may not be that bad when contrasted against that statistics, after all Bill Gates was also a dropout. Also the dime-a-dozen so-called "engineering colleges" in India that feed Indian offshoring companies are known for QUANTITY and not QUALITY. Indian students go for (or their parents pay for) those courses offered in those colleges precisely because they offer a better future - i.e. they feel they get a good ROI on their investment, even if they don't have the interest or aptitude for Computer Science or engineering. These days, these facts are known to a lot of americans working in IT.
If H1/L1 visa is restricted, that will give an incentive for americans to acquire a degree in science/engineering, just like the indian students taking courses in india offering a better ROI, as they get the feeling that they won't be discriminated in a job and investing $$$ in education is not going to be wasted. This is what President Obama also emphasized today about the need for fundamental change in unemployment allowances helping to retrain the laid-off workers.
It will no doubt cut into the obscene profit margins of TCS/INFY etc., as they will be forced to play by the rules.
more...
jonty_11
06-25 05:55 PM
Posting my case, in case someone in similar situation is interested.
Self : PD July 2002 -EB3
Spouse : PD Feb 2006 - EB3.
Suggested by our lawyers.
File my I-485 with spouse as dependent,
File my spouse's I-485 with me as dependent mentioning receipt notice of first I-485.
File for only one set of EAD and AP docs. Doesn't matter with which.
Filing both in July '07.
Yes, that seems to be the safest...
only pitfall seems to be as Pappu mentioned - when u enquire abt one case, INS may not be sure which one to respond for, as u will have 2 applications under 1 alien Number. This may hold true for adjudication also, and may delay ur case.
Self : PD July 2002 -EB3
Spouse : PD Feb 2006 - EB3.
Suggested by our lawyers.
File my I-485 with spouse as dependent,
File my spouse's I-485 with me as dependent mentioning receipt notice of first I-485.
File for only one set of EAD and AP docs. Doesn't matter with which.
Filing both in July '07.
Yes, that seems to be the safest...
only pitfall seems to be as Pappu mentioned - when u enquire abt one case, INS may not be sure which one to respond for, as u will have 2 applications under 1 alien Number. This may hold true for adjudication also, and may delay ur case.
hot Kelly Rowland may have an
pop
01-19 10:57 PM
Godbless, I am sure you can get your post 6 years H-1B extension based on the Cornin and new Aytes memo of 12-5-2006. Can you ask your lawyer whether it is possible to file your H-1B extension after 01/26/2007 but BEFORE June 2007 or it must be filed before the expiry of your parolee I-94? Also, you said the Immigration Officer at the POE did not let you use your H visa but the AP. Is it because you showed him both of your H-1B visa and AP? If you did not show the AP, he would probably let you enter with the H-1B visa, right?
more...
house Kelly Rowland makes us sweat
hope_4_best
05-26 06:23 PM
Hi Friends,
I am in the process of filling I-485 form and got the following question, can you please help?
My stamped visa expired 1 year back and I am currently with H1B approval notice. In the 2nd page of I-485 form, under Part 3. Processing Information, I am wondering what I need to fill for the following columns.
1. Nonimmigrant visa number: Is this the EAC number of my current I797 or the visa number from my expired visa?. If it is from the expired visa, there are multiple numbers in the visa stamp, which one is the visa number?
2.Consulate where visa was issued: Is it the name of the consulate issued my last visa or Department?
3.Date visa isssued: Is this is the date of last visa issued or the approval date of my current I797
Thanks advance for all your valuable suggestions.
I am in the process of filling I-485 form and got the following question, can you please help?
My stamped visa expired 1 year back and I am currently with H1B approval notice. In the 2nd page of I-485 form, under Part 3. Processing Information, I am wondering what I need to fill for the following columns.
1. Nonimmigrant visa number: Is this the EAC number of my current I797 or the visa number from my expired visa?. If it is from the expired visa, there are multiple numbers in the visa stamp, which one is the visa number?
2.Consulate where visa was issued: Is it the name of the consulate issued my last visa or Department?
3.Date visa isssued: Is this is the date of last visa issued or the approval date of my current I797
Thanks advance for all your valuable suggestions.
tattoo Ms. Kelly finally premiered
bomber
06-29 07:15 PM
WEDNESDAY - Suspended I-140 PPS anticipating huge demand from people
for whom the visa numbers would be available - FACT!!
FRIDAY - Allowed doctors from "any area" - FACT!!
MONDAY - We won't accept any applications?????? ----RUMOUR
they don't add up
I was thinking on the same line. Why to wait at the last moment and that too when today they allowed the medical examinations to be done outside the local area. I guess, time to chill out, have some beer (i'm already having) and worry on monday. We anyway can't do anything about it on sat-sun.
for whom the visa numbers would be available - FACT!!
FRIDAY - Allowed doctors from "any area" - FACT!!
MONDAY - We won't accept any applications?????? ----RUMOUR
they don't add up
I was thinking on the same line. Why to wait at the last moment and that too when today they allowed the medical examinations to be done outside the local area. I guess, time to chill out, have some beer (i'm already having) and worry on monday. We anyway can't do anything about it on sat-sun.
more...
pictures Kid Sister x Kelly Rowland
gcformeornot
01-08 08:09 PM
sending letters.
dresses Singer Kelly Rowland appeared
coolpal
11-10 12:41 PM
I will send the letters this week....
thanks,
pal :)
thanks,
pal :)
more...
makeup Kelly Rowland quot;Motivationquot;
srinivasj
04-06 01:53 PM
Hi,
I am a one time donor of $50 and not able to view the donor threads. If there is some extra step to be done by Admin for my User ID to grant permission or i don't qualify to view this thread. if i am not qualified what is the minimum qualification?
IV changed the policy....you can get donor access only if you sign up for recurring donation..hope that helps..
I am a one time donor of $50 and not able to view the donor threads. If there is some extra step to be done by Admin for my User ID to grant permission or i don't qualify to view this thread. if i am not qualified what is the minimum qualification?
IV changed the policy....you can get donor access only if you sign up for recurring donation..hope that helps..
girlfriend Kelly Rowland ft.
trueguy
08-21 12:26 PM
We need some numbers to back this up. I think you are saying EB2 will not become current even with the recaptured number. There is another thread for requesting numbers from USCIS about pending applications per category, per country. So, participate in that campaign as well.
We need the numbers. I would have guessed roughly 50% of pending 500K applications are from India, 50% of that is EB2, so recapture of 200K visas should help.
I am saying Recapture will only help EB2 and not EB3. Bcoz all the recaptured numbers will be used by EB2 first. So EB2 dates will move forward and then people with PD in 2007 and 2008 in EB2 will use up captured numbers and EB3 will still be waiting to get any leftovers.
We need the numbers. I would have guessed roughly 50% of pending 500K applications are from India, 50% of that is EB2, so recapture of 200K visas should help.
I am saying Recapture will only help EB2 and not EB3. Bcoz all the recaptured numbers will be used by EB2 first. So EB2 dates will move forward and then people with PD in 2007 and 2008 in EB2 will use up captured numbers and EB3 will still be waiting to get any leftovers.
hairstyles The Kelly Rowland “What A
sachug22
09-24 06:02 PM
In reality How USCIS divide 28.6% among countires - That is unknown mystery and nobody surely know that. And that is why I had to assume "equal shares - 5 part" in my analysis assuming USCIS works fairly but we all know that is a bullshit too :)
Look at histrocial approval you will know your assumption is incorrect. ROW gets more than half the numbers in any category.
Look at histrocial approval you will know your assumption is incorrect. ROW gets more than half the numbers in any category.
chanduv23
11-04 10:22 AM
Lets this stay on top
nkavjs
09-25 12:39 PM
Ok my dumb lawyer changed the website on me.. and all the image files of our application made are done.. null. huh.. something else to worry about now.
