logiclife
06-18 12:03 PM
W2's/tax returns are not part of the initial evidence USCIS requires to process your application but they may ask for it later if required
A lot of lawyers try to preempt a possible RFE by including "AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE" documentation. 3 years of tax returns prove nothing more than what 1 year of tax return would prove.
Also, having a tax return of 2004 doesnt prove that you were in status at all times during 2004. Tax return shows total income that includes salary, bonus, deductions etc, and even Einstein cant figure out the immigration status in 2004 and whether the candidate was in good status at all times just by looking at the tax return.
Some lawyers send many years' tax returns, thinking that it might pre-empt the RFEs. Some lawyers send only whats neccesary. I've heard that one of the lawyers in New York doesnt even send employer's letter. That means, basically nothing from the employer. And he too gets cases approved.
Overloading the USCIS with a heavy file, sending a ton of things in addition to what they expect, may be a good strategy if you believe that it might thwart a RFE (and the delay caused by RFE). However, sending too thick a bunch, would also make your case look like a "difficult" case. (my belief, I dont know but just common sense would indicate that thicker bigger files are complicated cases if you give it a first look). And what that means is that it will get delayed because the CIS ombudsman report has documented that officers tend to work easy cases first (get the low hanging fruit first) and beef up their performance statistics by doing more cases in less time. Therefore, the complicated bigger cases that should be work on first, instead get worked on last.
So think a little before sending USCIS 20 pounds of paperwork. More paperwork and overwhelming USCIS with documentation may not mean faster RFE-free processing. (Again, my belief - something to ponder about. But do what you think is right and what your lawyer tells you. I am not a lawyer).
A lot of lawyers try to preempt a possible RFE by including "AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE" documentation. 3 years of tax returns prove nothing more than what 1 year of tax return would prove.
Also, having a tax return of 2004 doesnt prove that you were in status at all times during 2004. Tax return shows total income that includes salary, bonus, deductions etc, and even Einstein cant figure out the immigration status in 2004 and whether the candidate was in good status at all times just by looking at the tax return.
Some lawyers send many years' tax returns, thinking that it might pre-empt the RFEs. Some lawyers send only whats neccesary. I've heard that one of the lawyers in New York doesnt even send employer's letter. That means, basically nothing from the employer. And he too gets cases approved.
Overloading the USCIS with a heavy file, sending a ton of things in addition to what they expect, may be a good strategy if you believe that it might thwart a RFE (and the delay caused by RFE). However, sending too thick a bunch, would also make your case look like a "difficult" case. (my belief, I dont know but just common sense would indicate that thicker bigger files are complicated cases if you give it a first look). And what that means is that it will get delayed because the CIS ombudsman report has documented that officers tend to work easy cases first (get the low hanging fruit first) and beef up their performance statistics by doing more cases in less time. Therefore, the complicated bigger cases that should be work on first, instead get worked on last.
So think a little before sending USCIS 20 pounds of paperwork. More paperwork and overwhelming USCIS with documentation may not mean faster RFE-free processing. (Again, my belief - something to ponder about. But do what you think is right and what your lawyer tells you. I am not a lawyer).
wallpaper megan fox transformers 2 hot scene. megan fox transformers 2
ncrtpMay2004
08-07 07:47 AM
Best of Luck.
Before you file the law suit consider this,
The system is designed to get GC faster to the smarter (EB1, EB2, EB3 etc) or the rich (Investor). Sometimes circumstances decide in which queue you start the journey, Employer, attorney, how many days left in h1b etc, etc, etc
I do not like to jump queues and resent people who jump queues. But these are the people who look for opportunities and exploit them. These are the smart ones.
System favors people who are skilled (higher the better), By finding (new Labor, new I140) and using an opportunity these people have proved that they are worthy of the faster queue (eb3 to eb2, eb2 to eb1 etc).
What is wrong in rewarding the hardworking smart person with the original PD. After all that PD was established for that person(thank god LC sub is gone). That is the day an employer decided to sponsor GC for that person.
I know you are asking
�What about me, I was working hard in the University (MS/PhD)?�
Your reward is you get to start the journey in EB2, 1 year+ in EAD and 6 years in H1. If you are really smart you would have got your employer to apply for GC with at least 5 years left on your H1 clock.
The system is designed to create conflict.
Having to exit the freeway to change lanes does not make sense to me.
Before you file the law suit consider this,
The system is designed to get GC faster to the smarter (EB1, EB2, EB3 etc) or the rich (Investor). Sometimes circumstances decide in which queue you start the journey, Employer, attorney, how many days left in h1b etc, etc, etc
I do not like to jump queues and resent people who jump queues. But these are the people who look for opportunities and exploit them. These are the smart ones.
System favors people who are skilled (higher the better), By finding (new Labor, new I140) and using an opportunity these people have proved that they are worthy of the faster queue (eb3 to eb2, eb2 to eb1 etc).
What is wrong in rewarding the hardworking smart person with the original PD. After all that PD was established for that person(thank god LC sub is gone). That is the day an employer decided to sponsor GC for that person.
I know you are asking
�What about me, I was working hard in the University (MS/PhD)?�
Your reward is you get to start the journey in EB2, 1 year+ in EAD and 6 years in H1. If you are really smart you would have got your employer to apply for GC with at least 5 years left on your H1 clock.
The system is designed to create conflict.
Having to exit the freeway to change lanes does not make sense to me.
pappu
08-07 03:52 PM
First let me state that I need people like you to proceed and hence I will be happy to answer the points you rasied to the best of my ability:
We all agree that there is severe backlog. Only way the backlog will alleviate is by increasing visa numbers, which not going to happen any time sooner.
So some people (and I know around 10 of them) what they are doing is the following:
They got the chance to file their 485 last July , which is pending. They are now contacting several small desi consulting firms to file for their fresh labor in EB2 category. Once their labor is filled and new I-140 is approved, they plan to attach new I-140 to the original 485 and hence effectively convering to Eb2 category but with priority dates in 2002 and 2003 (because original I-140 had that priority). Worst, they would never join that desi consulting firm...
This how the system is being gamed. If I know 10 such cases, I am sure there must be thousand like that.Now you tell me , isn't that unfair to the people already in Eb2 line as well as the ones who do not know how to game the system
By the way: If any one is interested, I know of three such consulting firms that can do for you for a fee.
First: I appreciate that you have not lost your cool yet despite all the opposition and rude posts against you. Rollingflood on the other hand does not share those qualities with you well. We will not close the thread as long as the discussion remains civil.
While I personally do not support the lawsuit idea because it divides the community in two parts and there are better ways to help the community. You can try to help positively for the greater good for everyone or run a negative campaign that will help some but hurt others who are also like you and are genuinely following the law. I also think it will be expensive and may not have a lifeline. As IV members we need to all work together to fix the system. This was the basis of founding IV. The aim was never to look after our own selfish interests and hurt others who are like us. We never discriminated between different EB categories or country of chargeability. The intent of our fight is not to deny others their greencards and get ours first, but to allow everyone get their greencards. The intent is to have the system be efficient and work the way it was intended. IV core team has never made action items or ask lists in campaigns to suit their own selfish needs.
Now in this post you have raised a serious issue. If a fraud is going on, do collect evidence and file a complaint against it. If consulting companies are making money by gaming the system, drag those companies in your complaint. Help punish such people who are gaming the system. IV community will appreciate that.
There is some wisdom needed here to draw a line between selfishness and working with honest intentions to clean up the system.
We all agree that there is severe backlog. Only way the backlog will alleviate is by increasing visa numbers, which not going to happen any time sooner.
So some people (and I know around 10 of them) what they are doing is the following:
They got the chance to file their 485 last July , which is pending. They are now contacting several small desi consulting firms to file for their fresh labor in EB2 category. Once their labor is filled and new I-140 is approved, they plan to attach new I-140 to the original 485 and hence effectively convering to Eb2 category but with priority dates in 2002 and 2003 (because original I-140 had that priority). Worst, they would never join that desi consulting firm...
This how the system is being gamed. If I know 10 such cases, I am sure there must be thousand like that.Now you tell me , isn't that unfair to the people already in Eb2 line as well as the ones who do not know how to game the system
By the way: If any one is interested, I know of three such consulting firms that can do for you for a fee.
First: I appreciate that you have not lost your cool yet despite all the opposition and rude posts against you. Rollingflood on the other hand does not share those qualities with you well. We will not close the thread as long as the discussion remains civil.
While I personally do not support the lawsuit idea because it divides the community in two parts and there are better ways to help the community. You can try to help positively for the greater good for everyone or run a negative campaign that will help some but hurt others who are also like you and are genuinely following the law. I also think it will be expensive and may not have a lifeline. As IV members we need to all work together to fix the system. This was the basis of founding IV. The aim was never to look after our own selfish interests and hurt others who are like us. We never discriminated between different EB categories or country of chargeability. The intent of our fight is not to deny others their greencards and get ours first, but to allow everyone get their greencards. The intent is to have the system be efficient and work the way it was intended. IV core team has never made action items or ask lists in campaigns to suit their own selfish needs.
Now in this post you have raised a serious issue. If a fraud is going on, do collect evidence and file a complaint against it. If consulting companies are making money by gaming the system, drag those companies in your complaint. Help punish such people who are gaming the system. IV community will appreciate that.
There is some wisdom needed here to draw a line between selfishness and working with honest intentions to clean up the system.
2011 megan fox transformers 2 hot scene. Megan Fox is preparing to get
shekhar10c
06-29 07:15 PM
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.
yeah enjoy ur weekend. if you have filed ur application then chill and if not then ....what r u doing , lazy boy...move ur ass and courier it now.....hahahhhaha.
yeah enjoy ur weekend. if you have filed ur application then chill and if not then ....what r u doing , lazy boy...move ur ass and courier it now.....hahahhhaha.
more...
maine_gc
01-08 09:03 AM
Any Kentucky residents who are interested in meeting the lawmakers. Please email me your details and click on the link in my signature to join the KY State Chapter
anilkumar0902
08-15 12:21 PM
hi Guys
Some one please tell me how to open an SR.. the number on the reciept is 800-375-5283
MY priority date is Feb 2005 (EB2 India) and Notice date is Sep, 04, 2007
The other day I took infopass but it was useless.. Any help in how to open an SR is highly appreciated guys
thanks
After hearing your case details on the automated system..you will have to Press 3 and then you can do it yourself. Explain to the customer service rep that your case is outside of normal processing times..etc. Keep us posted what happened.
Try it .All the best.
My PD is Oct 2005 (EB2-I) and i am also waiting .
Cheers
Some one please tell me how to open an SR.. the number on the reciept is 800-375-5283
MY priority date is Feb 2005 (EB2 India) and Notice date is Sep, 04, 2007
The other day I took infopass but it was useless.. Any help in how to open an SR is highly appreciated guys
thanks
After hearing your case details on the automated system..you will have to Press 3 and then you can do it yourself. Explain to the customer service rep that your case is outside of normal processing times..etc. Keep us posted what happened.
Try it .All the best.
My PD is Oct 2005 (EB2-I) and i am also waiting .
Cheers
more...
ajkastar
01-19 04:38 PM
I'm also in same situation only difference is my visa stamped in PP is expired (Jan06), but has H1 till Jan 2009. I'm planning to visit India in Feb07 and return on AP. As I read in other forums that H1 will be valid and we can file for extension (even Cornin INS Memo (5-16-00)) memo says that. My attorney also confirmed that.
Keep posted your experiences.
Thank you.
ajkastar
Keep posted your experiences.
Thank you.
ajkastar
2010 megan fox transformers 2 hot
mariner5555
01-15 06:29 AM
I have sent the letters today to WH and IV.
I have also sent group emails to my batchmates from my engg college asking them to join IV. I think everyone should do that - this will help IV to Increase its Memberships.
I had one more suggestion too - (this has recd less support in the past).
we need to put in a statement that many legals are not buying a house because of the uncertainity in the GC process. even the congressmen will be more patient with our cause when we mention housing.
I have also sent group emails to my batchmates from my engg college asking them to join IV. I think everyone should do that - this will help IV to Increase its Memberships.
I had one more suggestion too - (this has recd less support in the past).
we need to put in a statement that many legals are not buying a house because of the uncertainity in the GC process. even the congressmen will be more patient with our cause when we mention housing.
more...
ss_col
06-18 12:02 AM
Hi everyone,
I have 2004 W2 but cant seem to find my tax return. I have 2003, 2005, 2006tax returns but not 2004. What can I do to get that return. Please any advice will be nice.
Thanks
I have 2004 W2 but cant seem to find my tax return. I have 2003, 2005, 2006tax returns but not 2004. What can I do to get that return. Please any advice will be nice.
Thanks
hair Megan Fox in Transformers
clove
07-11 10:05 PM
http://www.chalomumbai.com/news/world/2007/july/160705.htm
more...
Macaca
12-05 05:27 PM
AMY GOODMAN: Let me ask you about national sovereignty�
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: �in a moment. But first, I want to turn to an excerpt of your show from August 22nd.
LOU DOBBS: This year?
AMY GOODMAN: This year.
LOU DOBBS: All right!
LOU DOBBS: Just one day after President Bush signed legislation here in Washington to build a border fence, the government of Mexico is threatening the sovereignty and national security of the United States. President Vicente Fox and President-Elect Felipe Calderon are both asserting that the United States has no right to build such a fence along our southern border. At the same time, the White House and its allies in corporate America appear determined to create a new North American Union, incorporating Canada, Mexico and the United States. Such a union would, in effect, create a giant nation.
AMY GOODMAN: Lou Dobbs, August 22, 2007.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: Juan?
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, this concept of a giant nation, could you expand on it?
LOU DOBBS: The North American Union?
JUAN GONZALEZ: Yes.
LOU DOBBS: Well, coming from the 2005 meeting with Stephen Harper, the prime minister of Canada, Vicente Fox, then the president of Mexico, and George W. Bush�I�m sure you�re still delighted to know he�s president of the United States�met and laid out the foundation through the Security and Prosperity Partnership. What has ensued since then, there have been a number of high-level meetings�military, business, and governmental leaders�all of which had been closed to the press and all toward harmonizing, if you will, relations between the two and diminishing the border and the encumbrances to commerce moving straight ahead.
AMY GOODMAN: Just to be clear, it could have been 2006, that report, so I want to be factually accurate. It was either this year or last year.
LOU DOBBS: Well, I forgive you, no matter what it was.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: �in a moment. But first, I want to turn to an excerpt of your show from August 22nd.
LOU DOBBS: This year?
AMY GOODMAN: This year.
LOU DOBBS: All right!
LOU DOBBS: Just one day after President Bush signed legislation here in Washington to build a border fence, the government of Mexico is threatening the sovereignty and national security of the United States. President Vicente Fox and President-Elect Felipe Calderon are both asserting that the United States has no right to build such a fence along our southern border. At the same time, the White House and its allies in corporate America appear determined to create a new North American Union, incorporating Canada, Mexico and the United States. Such a union would, in effect, create a giant nation.
AMY GOODMAN: Lou Dobbs, August 22, 2007.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: Juan?
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, this concept of a giant nation, could you expand on it?
LOU DOBBS: The North American Union?
JUAN GONZALEZ: Yes.
LOU DOBBS: Well, coming from the 2005 meeting with Stephen Harper, the prime minister of Canada, Vicente Fox, then the president of Mexico, and George W. Bush�I�m sure you�re still delighted to know he�s president of the United States�met and laid out the foundation through the Security and Prosperity Partnership. What has ensued since then, there have been a number of high-level meetings�military, business, and governmental leaders�all of which had been closed to the press and all toward harmonizing, if you will, relations between the two and diminishing the border and the encumbrances to commerce moving straight ahead.
AMY GOODMAN: Just to be clear, it could have been 2006, that report, so I want to be factually accurate. It was either this year or last year.
LOU DOBBS: Well, I forgive you, no matter what it was.
hot megan fox transformers 2
shouldIwait
05-10 05:37 PM
Few responses to Mr. Hunter.
I'm not blind to stereotyping in this forum or elsewhere. It's not you vs. them kinda thing. You ARE stereotyping based upon some TRUE things but it is still stereotyping, isn't it.
Also, you understood some of my comments wrong. All I was saying is that due to big ISV's like TCS/INFY/WIPRO and mushrooms of bodyshops the actual worker gets pennies on a dollar and they keep the booty. So it's not the worker who causes wage depression it's the circumvention of the spirit of law that these companies do which causes it. I say "spirit of law" because they still stay within the legal framework. As far as offshoring is concerned it's a big discussion in itself and forces of capitalism and globalization are at work. None of us can prevent that but we can counter it by moving up in the value chain.
The scenario you described about modus operandi of big Indian ISV's is 100% correct but to generally imply that Indians are 1/5th as good as Americans when it comes to IT (50 member team vs. 10-12 member team) is a supremacist attitude and completely untrue.
It is true that the Indian counterparts are usually of much younger age but rarely substandard for the job. Companies realize that IT is no-longer considered rocket-science and they can save a few bucks. Try to think objectively keeping personal impact aside.
Now regarding overall economic input of immigrants there are issues broader and larger than you mentioned. Some of the smaller points you mentioned are true but you are completely missing the big picture. We can discuss that in a different thread :)
When Bill Gates says best-and-brightest it applies to individuals and not a VISA category, he's not lying. Among the 65K every year you'll find people from all skill levels, cream-of-the-cream to just-about-ok, and a few rotten-apples too. The immigration system is not designed to test skill level. Overall it's old, irrelevant and doesn't help anyone. It needs to be re-designed but unfortunately people are divided on fake lines and ignore the real issues or rather real solutions.
Although you have said it differently but you are right that solution to mine and your problems lie at the same spot, a modern, common-sense, immigration system that promotes best-and-the-brightest (Indian and American) and discourages exploitation.
I'm not blind to stereotyping in this forum or elsewhere. It's not you vs. them kinda thing. You ARE stereotyping based upon some TRUE things but it is still stereotyping, isn't it.
Also, you understood some of my comments wrong. All I was saying is that due to big ISV's like TCS/INFY/WIPRO and mushrooms of bodyshops the actual worker gets pennies on a dollar and they keep the booty. So it's not the worker who causes wage depression it's the circumvention of the spirit of law that these companies do which causes it. I say "spirit of law" because they still stay within the legal framework. As far as offshoring is concerned it's a big discussion in itself and forces of capitalism and globalization are at work. None of us can prevent that but we can counter it by moving up in the value chain.
The scenario you described about modus operandi of big Indian ISV's is 100% correct but to generally imply that Indians are 1/5th as good as Americans when it comes to IT (50 member team vs. 10-12 member team) is a supremacist attitude and completely untrue.
It is true that the Indian counterparts are usually of much younger age but rarely substandard for the job. Companies realize that IT is no-longer considered rocket-science and they can save a few bucks. Try to think objectively keeping personal impact aside.
Now regarding overall economic input of immigrants there are issues broader and larger than you mentioned. Some of the smaller points you mentioned are true but you are completely missing the big picture. We can discuss that in a different thread :)
When Bill Gates says best-and-brightest it applies to individuals and not a VISA category, he's not lying. Among the 65K every year you'll find people from all skill levels, cream-of-the-cream to just-about-ok, and a few rotten-apples too. The immigration system is not designed to test skill level. Overall it's old, irrelevant and doesn't help anyone. It needs to be re-designed but unfortunately people are divided on fake lines and ignore the real issues or rather real solutions.
Although you have said it differently but you are right that solution to mine and your problems lie at the same spot, a modern, common-sense, immigration system that promotes best-and-the-brightest (Indian and American) and discourages exploitation.
more...
house house Megan Fox Transformers 2
BharatPremi
09-24 06:24 PM
I completely agree with your last 2 lines. But I don't agree with the even dividing of the number into 5 categories of I,P,C,M,ROW.
Let's take an example. Suppose for some odd coincidence....the first 8000 odd EB3 apps that USCIS processes starting Oct 1.....none are from I,P,C,M. Suppose First 2500 are from Uk, next 2500 from France, next 2500 Germany and the next 508 from Pakistan. Now the number for ROW at this point would be 8008. Now they get another app from UK next. Will they refuse to process that app as the ROW figure had reached? Then they will still process more than 2500 for I,P,C,M. Won't that be unfair to UK applicants.
As I have said a couple of times now, and so have a few others - ROW cannot be capped at X/5. Due to the high demand from I,P,C,M....it likely gets a MINIMUM of (100 - (7 X 4)) X EB3 cap.
That was a ateempt to establish a "fair assumtion" so It may be wrong. But simultaneously you also should not assume FIFO within EB-ROW as you tried to explain as we really do not know whether USCIS follows FIFO.. Bottomline USCIS, by law, can not exceed 9% limit for any ROW based countries (Britain, pakistan,...) as well.
Let's take an example. Suppose for some odd coincidence....the first 8000 odd EB3 apps that USCIS processes starting Oct 1.....none are from I,P,C,M. Suppose First 2500 are from Uk, next 2500 from France, next 2500 Germany and the next 508 from Pakistan. Now the number for ROW at this point would be 8008. Now they get another app from UK next. Will they refuse to process that app as the ROW figure had reached? Then they will still process more than 2500 for I,P,C,M. Won't that be unfair to UK applicants.
As I have said a couple of times now, and so have a few others - ROW cannot be capped at X/5. Due to the high demand from I,P,C,M....it likely gets a MINIMUM of (100 - (7 X 4)) X EB3 cap.
That was a ateempt to establish a "fair assumtion" so It may be wrong. But simultaneously you also should not assume FIFO within EB-ROW as you tried to explain as we really do not know whether USCIS follows FIFO.. Bottomline USCIS, by law, can not exceed 9% limit for any ROW based countries (Britain, pakistan,...) as well.
tattoo megan fox transformers 2
franklin
07-11 03:14 AM
Dear Non-Indian Members,
When Xiyun Yang talked to me yesterday, I did mention that there are more Chinese and Pakistanis and people from other countries
She was very much interested in talking to them. ( I had mentioned this in my previous post, but would have got lost in the barrage of posts in the last few days)
I would suggest, that non-Indians, please contact Xiyun @
email:yangx@washpost.com
office phone: 202 334 6701
Also, please leave a comment on her article in the washington post and mention which country you belong and how this is also your issue, as much as everybody else
We definitely want to make this an universal issue and not just an Indian Issue
Anand Sharma
Done - thanks
When Xiyun Yang talked to me yesterday, I did mention that there are more Chinese and Pakistanis and people from other countries
She was very much interested in talking to them. ( I had mentioned this in my previous post, but would have got lost in the barrage of posts in the last few days)
I would suggest, that non-Indians, please contact Xiyun @
email:yangx@washpost.com
office phone: 202 334 6701
Also, please leave a comment on her article in the washington post and mention which country you belong and how this is also your issue, as much as everybody else
We definitely want to make this an universal issue and not just an Indian Issue
Anand Sharma
Done - thanks
more...
pictures megan fox transformers 2
CADude
11-06 03:40 PM
Wow.. Applicants are waiting since 2002 and Govt Agency know it but don't do anything. Shame on you FBI NNCP :mad:
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.
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.
dresses girlfriend about seeing Megan Fox megan fox transformers 2 hot scene. megan
javaconsultant
01-23 11:28 AM
Guys,
Have we contacted national newspapers New York Times,Washington Post ?
In effort to make legislators and people aware of legal immigration issues, we should take help of media.This would be most effective.
Hiring a lobbying firm to pursue our issues with legislators is a good idea but it should be accompanied with media awareness as well.This is money intensive project and it will take time to reach its target of 100k.We need some other channel of awareness open as well and we need to do that soon so that it has some effect on Feb bills.
People are not aware that we are going thru such long waits to get immigrate legally.This issue needs to be highlighted.
Lawmakers would listen to legal immigration issues if they read in leading newspapers NYT and Washington Post. These newspapers are very influential.
Have we contacted national newspapers New York Times,Washington Post ?
In effort to make legislators and people aware of legal immigration issues, we should take help of media.This would be most effective.
Hiring a lobbying firm to pursue our issues with legislators is a good idea but it should be accompanied with media awareness as well.This is money intensive project and it will take time to reach its target of 100k.We need some other channel of awareness open as well and we need to do that soon so that it has some effect on Feb bills.
People are not aware that we are going thru such long waits to get immigrate legally.This issue needs to be highlighted.
Lawmakers would listen to legal immigration issues if they read in leading newspapers NYT and Washington Post. These newspapers are very influential.
more...
makeup transformers 2 megan fox bike.
inderman
10-15 06:02 PM
Called one more time using the POJ method to NSC... This was probably the most fruitful call to NSC in the last 7-8 odd times i have called them.
Someone called Terry answered the call... Hats off to this lady...If there is a way i would want to recommend this lady for a promotion and make her the project manager for all the rest of the IOs who answer the call!!!
My case PD is 1/15/05, filed at TSC, transferred to NSC in Mar 08, applied AC 21 in Aug 08 and did biometrics in Feb 09.
Information i received on my case from this call:
1. This lady got my receipt#, checked details and history on my case, let me know that the case is preadjudicated (she defined preadjudication before that)
2. and then, told me that the case is NOT in storage area.
3. She mentioned that preadjudicated cases are held in an area called exams area and my case is currently on its way from exams area back to the officer who had preadjudicated my case earlier in Oct 2008.
4. She then checked my wife's file to see if that is also with my case just to make sure that file is not lost etc and confirmed that both files are together.
5. She also mentioned that nothing else needs to be done right now for my case as it is already on its way back to IO.
Thanks to know that there is atleast one person at NSC who understands what we are going thru' and is willing to atleast provide some details...
Someone called Terry answered the call... Hats off to this lady...If there is a way i would want to recommend this lady for a promotion and make her the project manager for all the rest of the IOs who answer the call!!!
My case PD is 1/15/05, filed at TSC, transferred to NSC in Mar 08, applied AC 21 in Aug 08 and did biometrics in Feb 09.
Information i received on my case from this call:
1. This lady got my receipt#, checked details and history on my case, let me know that the case is preadjudicated (she defined preadjudication before that)
2. and then, told me that the case is NOT in storage area.
3. She mentioned that preadjudicated cases are held in an area called exams area and my case is currently on its way from exams area back to the officer who had preadjudicated my case earlier in Oct 2008.
4. She then checked my wife's file to see if that is also with my case just to make sure that file is not lost etc and confirmed that both files are together.
5. She also mentioned that nothing else needs to be done right now for my case as it is already on its way back to IO.
Thanks to know that there is atleast one person at NSC who understands what we are going thru' and is willing to atleast provide some details...
girlfriend 2010 megan fox transformers 2
desi3933
08-07 12:44 PM
...
...
I guess Mr. Sunshine will be out then, he said he is shit scared that he is going to loose his job...Dude, I say go home, NOW, aren't you ashamed about your sorry job....
I strongly disagree with you. No one has right to say to anyone else to go home.
We may not agree with SunnySurya for this lawsuit, but we should keep debate civilized. No personal attacks please.
___________________________
Permanent Resident since 2002
...
I guess Mr. Sunshine will be out then, he said he is shit scared that he is going to loose his job...Dude, I say go home, NOW, aren't you ashamed about your sorry job....
I strongly disagree with you. No one has right to say to anyone else to go home.
We may not agree with SunnySurya for this lawsuit, but we should keep debate civilized. No personal attacks please.
___________________________
Permanent Resident since 2002
hairstyles megan fox transformers 2
mamit
02-26 05:52 AM
Have there been reasons other than Pims for delays? I see a lot of 221g cases in the forums. Are these due to PIMS?
I had my interview for H1-B (first stamping) at N. Delhi consulate on 5th December. I was given a pink 221(g) form, and it's been almost THREE MONTHS and I'm still waiting for my visa stamp. My lawyer contacted DOS and they said it was awaiting a "security clearance" and were not able to say anything about how much time it would take. Hope it helps.
I had my interview for H1-B (first stamping) at N. Delhi consulate on 5th December. I was given a pink 221(g) form, and it's been almost THREE MONTHS and I'm still waiting for my visa stamp. My lawyer contacted DOS and they said it was awaiting a "security clearance" and were not able to say anything about how much time it would take. Hope it helps.
gc_dream07
10-01 02:55 PM
I think if you have I-551 stamped on your passport then you do not need any other document. i-551 is as good as physical green-card. You can carry the approval notice with you. This is my opinion, do no quote on me.
Our cases were approved on Sep 21, 2010. Received approval notices on Sep 25, 2010. But did not get the Cards yet. I am planing to travel next week. So I went to local USCIS office and got the I-551 stamp on my passport. Can you guys suggest me what other documents I need to take along with me if I don't receive the cards by the time I leave. Also pls let me how long will it takes to receive the cards.
Thank you,
Srini
Our cases were approved on Sep 21, 2010. Received approval notices on Sep 25, 2010. But did not get the Cards yet. I am planing to travel next week. So I went to local USCIS office and got the I-551 stamp on my passport. Can you guys suggest me what other documents I need to take along with me if I don't receive the cards by the time I leave. Also pls let me how long will it takes to receive the cards.
Thank you,
Srini
singhsa3
10-02 04:14 PM
I am a july 2nd filer and filed my second application on Aug 15th.
Now that I have got receipts for July 2nd applications, I have put stop payments on the checks on Aug 15th application.
My hope is that my 2nd application will not be processed.
I am seeing people getting multiple #A numbers and delays.
If you have filed multiple I485s, pls share your expiences here.
Now that I have got receipts for July 2nd applications, I have put stop payments on the checks on Aug 15th application.
My hope is that my 2nd application will not be processed.
I am seeing people getting multiple #A numbers and delays.
If you have filed multiple I485s, pls share your expiences here.