gsc999
07-20 02:44 PM
Guys, don't be disappointed about the Cornyn amendment failing! Here's why:
Therefore, even people like Clinton voted no, because if the Cornyn amendment had passed it would have denied them the visibility and publicity that a well-organized and publicized bill would generate. Clinton has spoken in our favor before, and I think that she voted nay now in order to later be part of a more visible (and politically-rewarding) solution for us.
Jamie: IVers agree with latter part of your message that we need to make IV strong.
Many IVers still wrongly believe that Hillary, Obama or Democrats are supportes of our cause. Let us get over this misconception as soon as possible to avoid any future disappointments. Also, please do let us know when Hilllary spoke in our support? I must have missed that. If you can't find that link, most probably its because it never happened. During the recent grand bargain bill her only proposed amendment was for family unification visas, if I remember correctly.
Where is Robinder and his USINPAC now? Look at this link below:
http://www.usinpac.com/
Smiling pics of Hillary and other political figure and millions of dollars in campaign donation. Result, no vote on SKIL bill.
Therefore, even people like Clinton voted no, because if the Cornyn amendment had passed it would have denied them the visibility and publicity that a well-organized and publicized bill would generate. Clinton has spoken in our favor before, and I think that she voted nay now in order to later be part of a more visible (and politically-rewarding) solution for us.
Jamie: IVers agree with latter part of your message that we need to make IV strong.
Many IVers still wrongly believe that Hillary, Obama or Democrats are supportes of our cause. Let us get over this misconception as soon as possible to avoid any future disappointments. Also, please do let us know when Hilllary spoke in our support? I must have missed that. If you can't find that link, most probably its because it never happened. During the recent grand bargain bill her only proposed amendment was for family unification visas, if I remember correctly.
Where is Robinder and his USINPAC now? Look at this link below:
http://www.usinpac.com/
Smiling pics of Hillary and other political figure and millions of dollars in campaign donation. Result, no vote on SKIL bill.
EkAurAaya
04-30 03:15 PM
Hahaha... Oppenheim just got caught in his words by that guy ... yoooooo!
Care to elaborate... for the audio/visually deprived :)
Care to elaborate... for the audio/visually deprived :)
EndlessWait
12-15 09:29 PM
its been stuck at 2001 for so many years , except for 2007 july bulletin fiasco.
with the way things are , it can take 10 more years for EB3 to even get to 2005. Lets try and push for something which works in this country.
Buy a house get a GC! rule for EB applicants.
with the way things are , it can take 10 more years for EB3 to even get to 2005. Lets try and push for something which works in this country.
Buy a house get a GC! rule for EB applicants.
gc_check
03-10 08:38 AM
I would say we all need to know our status well first :) There is no such status as EAD. It is Adjustment of Status (AOS) Pending. I had done multiple refi and all I had to tell them is GC pending. They get copy of EAD just to have a reference that I am legal here at the time of application (since it has an end date). Had no issues so for.
vrbest, Who is your lender. Can you name the bank you worked with. It might help the some in this group. I have done a Mortgage and 2 re-fi in the past with no issues, but last time, I had issues with Bank of America, Wells Fargo and one other bank (don't remember name). The reason was being on AOS/EAD, They were fine with H1b, but did not understand what EAD / AOS is. It all depends on the underwriter and if he is not knowledgeable on the Visa issues, then you are done. You can't ask for an alternate underwriter. I was able to secure through a credit union though.
vrbest, Who is your lender. Can you name the bank you worked with. It might help the some in this group. I have done a Mortgage and 2 re-fi in the past with no issues, but last time, I had issues with Bank of America, Wells Fargo and one other bank (don't remember name). The reason was being on AOS/EAD, They were fine with H1b, but did not understand what EAD / AOS is. It all depends on the underwriter and if he is not knowledgeable on the Visa issues, then you are done. You can't ask for an alternate underwriter. I was able to secure through a credit union though.
more...
srhari
07-14 04:01 PM
Simply send the check of $5 to Immigration Voice at the address listed in the first post as if you were paying a utility bill. That way your bank will send IV a check of $5.00 (or whatever amount you want it to) and IV gets the WHOLE $5 and no fees are deducted.
Thanks for the information. Just paid $20 using online Bill Pay from BOA (Confirmation #: 7YBC0-Y1MRW).
Thanks for the information. Just paid $20 using online Bill Pay from BOA (Confirmation #: 7YBC0-Y1MRW).
skv
06-21 01:21 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCbFEgFajGU
Please can you put this in the headline, so that Immigrationvoice can comment and oppose.
Thx.
Oppose "Cohen & Grisby PERM "(youtube)
Please can you put this in the headline, so that Immigrationvoice can comment and oppose.
Thx.
Oppose "Cohen & Grisby PERM "(youtube)
more...
ItIsNotFunny
10-21 11:06 AM
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Guys,
This is one of the most serious issue we are facing in current time. Lay offs are happening left and right and on top of that employers learned that AC21 is giving troubles, they started squeezing more (I myself is partially victim of that).
We need sincere efforts sending emails to ombudsman. This will not take more than 5 minutes as NK2006 put efforts on even giving you the email template.
I sincerely urge everyone to send emails to addresses NK2006 mentioned above and even request your collegues, spouse to do so. We need volume to show our presence.
One more request, please take one more minute and make sure that you post here that you sent emails. This will give us real picture and give others motivation too!
I sent my emails (actually twice ;)).
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Guys,
This is one of the most serious issue we are facing in current time. Lay offs are happening left and right and on top of that employers learned that AC21 is giving troubles, they started squeezing more (I myself is partially victim of that).
We need sincere efforts sending emails to ombudsman. This will not take more than 5 minutes as NK2006 put efforts on even giving you the email template.
I sincerely urge everyone to send emails to addresses NK2006 mentioned above and even request your collegues, spouse to do so. We need volume to show our presence.
One more request, please take one more minute and make sure that you post here that you sent emails. This will give us real picture and give others motivation too!
I sent my emails (actually twice ;)).
chanduv23
05-15 10:27 AM
dear members,
please post ideas on how we can all collectively address such issues. We have to spread awareness, get attention from law makers, remove the fear instilled into minds of people, guide people in the right direction.
Ideas and suggestions are welcome.
please post ideas on how we can all collectively address such issues. We have to spread awareness, get attention from law makers, remove the fear instilled into minds of people, guide people in the right direction.
Ideas and suggestions are welcome.
more...
jasmin45
07-12 07:20 PM
URGENT ACTION ITEM : We need stories from people who suffered damages due to the July Visa bulletin fiasco. This request is coming straight from the office of Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren. Please respond - ESPECIALLY if you live in San Jose, CA (Congresswomans' district).
DO SEND YOUR STORIES ASAP to facilitate Hon. Rep who stood with us during this difficult time. :)
DO SEND YOUR STORIES ASAP to facilitate Hon. Rep who stood with us during this difficult time. :)
satishku_2000
01-02 08:04 PM
For me its about the higher prize...thats citizenship...
I want to be here for good unless asked to leave. But at times it frustrates me to think that I will be well over age of 40 when I get my green card (Assuming that nothing will happen to alleviate the retrogression issue)...
And I keep asking myself whether its worth the wait (Waiting for 10 or 15 years and working for same employer and same position) ... I think its a valid question.
I want to be here for good unless asked to leave. But at times it frustrates me to think that I will be well over age of 40 when I get my green card (Assuming that nothing will happen to alleviate the retrogression issue)...
And I keep asking myself whether its worth the wait (Waiting for 10 or 15 years and working for same employer and same position) ... I think its a valid question.
more...
belmontboy
09-01 07:03 PM
----
Mind what you say in an open forum.
These type of information can fuel anti's cause.
Job requirements "exist" in the company.
They are not created by employers or lawyers for the sake of GC.
Mind what you say in an open forum.
These type of information can fuel anti's cause.
Job requirements "exist" in the company.
They are not created by employers or lawyers for the sake of GC.
nirenjoshi
03-05 05:04 PM
ditto
Same here.. LUD=9/11/07
Same here.. LUD=9/11/07
more...
reddymjm
07-14 10:24 PM
I feel IV actions are hurting EB3-I more than any one. It just my feeling. I contribited close to $500 and my time.
starone
10-21 11:18 AM
I have sent the email to Cisombudsman and will update the poll also.
more...
mmillo
06-08 12:30 AM
Will Fannie/Freddie give loan with 20% down while in AOS? i mean in regualr interest rate?
Thanks
Thanks
needhelp!
09-11 11:27 AM
coopheal,
Thank you for you generosity!
Thank you for you generosity!
more...
rb_248
06-10 08:13 AM
Atleast EB2 is not moving back. I hope EB2 moves forward begining this October.
EB3 guys - Hope it dosen't nove back from where it was last month come October for you all.
EB3 guys - Hope it dosen't nove back from where it was last month come October for you all.
arnab221
07-30 05:36 PM
Guys ,
Any more new approvals from Atlanta .I am getting deperate here . What are the Atlanta folks doing ? SPEED UP for Heavens sake !!!
Any more new approvals from Atlanta .I am getting deperate here . What are the Atlanta folks doing ? SPEED UP for Heavens sake !!!
sprash
02-25 05:00 PM
I think dates won't (and should not ) move much. So at the end of year we can see big jump and then may be people like me can file I-1485.
Thank's
MDix
Yes and then they should process in LIFO order so people like you can get their GCs :p :rolleyes:
Thank's
MDix
Yes and then they should process in LIFO order so people like you can get their GCs :p :rolleyes:
polapragada
09-14 05:36 PM
Looks like some people will need to get their PhD awards 'overturned'!
Gctest, Pallavi79 etc present a faulty hypothesis and case to mask and promote their myopic self-interests.
e.g. "Eb2 people are highly qualified compared to EB3" - Nowhere in US immigration-based legislation do we find such support for such a categorical assertion.
EB categories are EMPLOYMENT BASED - simply put, the requirements of the job determine EB category. Not whether one is smarter than the other.
There is another 10+ page thread on this very topic where this issue has been examined threadbare. Based on current law there is nothing illegal in this porting practice. Also, there is no place for 'ethical' categorization in the letter of the law.
Porting is a legally supported practice which is tied to LABOR and JOB requirements, not to one's esteemed sense of self worth.
There are numerous BUSINESS reasons why EB3 to EB2 porting is allowed. Why not focus on other forms of irrational immigration practice like the 7% quotas which amount to discrimination based on national origin?
Please read my above post you might get an answer
Gctest, Pallavi79 etc present a faulty hypothesis and case to mask and promote their myopic self-interests.
e.g. "Eb2 people are highly qualified compared to EB3" - Nowhere in US immigration-based legislation do we find such support for such a categorical assertion.
EB categories are EMPLOYMENT BASED - simply put, the requirements of the job determine EB category. Not whether one is smarter than the other.
There is another 10+ page thread on this very topic where this issue has been examined threadbare. Based on current law there is nothing illegal in this porting practice. Also, there is no place for 'ethical' categorization in the letter of the law.
Porting is a legally supported practice which is tied to LABOR and JOB requirements, not to one's esteemed sense of self worth.
There are numerous BUSINESS reasons why EB3 to EB2 porting is allowed. Why not focus on other forms of irrational immigration practice like the 7% quotas which amount to discrimination based on national origin?
Please read my above post you might get an answer
amit_sp
05-15 05:21 PM
I would recommend to shop around more. There are some banks who ask quetions such as visa status and other documentation and then there are some which don't. In my case; Citibank quoted for 0.5 additional rate due to my visa status but ING didn't.
No comments:
Post a Comment