EB3_SEP04
09-05 08:13 PM
Congratulation to all EB2 who are getting their approvals. Have a wonderful post-GC life :)
When will, we EB3s (India), see some light at the end of the tunnel.
Looks like (in my case) after waiting for more than 5 years it will still take 3-4 years. I am mad :mad:
I personally love and am proficient in Hindi but I don't think we should make this site look like a Desi forum. Even if your post about India, a lot south/east indian people don't speak/understand hindi.
When will, we EB3s (India), see some light at the end of the tunnel.
Looks like (in my case) after waiting for more than 5 years it will still take 3-4 years. I am mad :mad:
I personally love and am proficient in Hindi but I don't think we should make this site look like a Desi forum. Even if your post about India, a lot south/east indian people don't speak/understand hindi.
trueguy
03-06 01:10 PM
Both are very good point. May be we should send it directly to Obama office and request him to consider.
Can we have a letter that everybody can send out. I am sure sending thousands of letters will have more impact.
Thanks.
Can we have a letter that everybody can send out. I am sure sending thousands of letters will have more impact.
Thanks.
rskanth
08-08 06:19 PM
And you know this how?:confused:
sanjay
12-28 10:01 AM
I have three friends waiting for I - 140 approval whose date are between Feb 16 - 22, 2007 and all are still waiting for approvals. online status show case pending. And dates in NSC shows April 6, 2007.
more...
gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:18 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
styrum
03-14 03:17 PM
You can travel back to India on an expired US VISA also.
As long as you are travelling back to india (Country of citizenship)
I did that last yr
someone posted link to German Cosul in LA, which states this clearly...
http://www.germany.info/relaunch/info/consular_services/visa/transit.html
As long as you are travelling back to india (Country of citizenship)
I did that last yr
someone posted link to German Cosul in LA, which states this clearly...
http://www.germany.info/relaunch/info/consular_services/visa/transit.html
more...
gps001
12-24 07:26 AM
Hi,
I have a question:
- H1-B's I-797 is valid, but visa stamping has expired.
- I use AP document to re-enter.
- I do not use EAD at all
After using AP, can I move to a different company by petitioning for H1-B?
The other question is: Is it worthwhile to go for H1-B stamping when I have an AP?
-----------------
Detailed scenario
-----------------
My only reason for being on H1-B is to have a backup if there is a problem with my I-485 application. I don't want to use EAD, since it will terminate my H1-B status. With the recent retrogression I think its going to be a real long while.
My questions are:
1. If I use the AP (and don't use EAD), I read that I can be on H1-B with the same employer, and get my H1-B renewed with the same company. However, in future can I re-apply for a H1-B through some other company?
2. If I use my AP, I will be on a parolee status (on I-94), so when reapply for H1-B, and I send my I-94 , would my new H1-B be approved? Any such cases? Links, etc. would be helpful
I have a appt. in Chennai in mid january and am wondering if its worthwhile to go there at all. I have seen some messages about delays in visa approvals.
Thanks
I have a question:
- H1-B's I-797 is valid, but visa stamping has expired.
- I use AP document to re-enter.
- I do not use EAD at all
After using AP, can I move to a different company by petitioning for H1-B?
The other question is: Is it worthwhile to go for H1-B stamping when I have an AP?
-----------------
Detailed scenario
-----------------
My only reason for being on H1-B is to have a backup if there is a problem with my I-485 application. I don't want to use EAD, since it will terminate my H1-B status. With the recent retrogression I think its going to be a real long while.
My questions are:
1. If I use the AP (and don't use EAD), I read that I can be on H1-B with the same employer, and get my H1-B renewed with the same company. However, in future can I re-apply for a H1-B through some other company?
2. If I use my AP, I will be on a parolee status (on I-94), so when reapply for H1-B, and I send my I-94 , would my new H1-B be approved? Any such cases? Links, etc. would be helpful
I have a appt. in Chennai in mid january and am wondering if its worthwhile to go there at all. I have seen some messages about delays in visa approvals.
Thanks
mihird
07-20 05:43 PM
But my question is can you have BOTH of them. Some say you can have 2 H1s at the same time for different companies, so hence my question was, can you have an H1 and an L1 at the same time.
Biju, whom did you ask, an immigration attorney or just on forums?
A concurrent H1 and L1 should be doable too...much like two concurrent H1s...
As long as you meet the requirements of the two visa categories, you should be able to hold both concurrently...
My knowledge on L1 is limited, but I thought, unlike H1, L1 was not as much a dual intent visa...it required evidence of some times to the foreign domicile..although, I could be wrong...I faintly remember the laws governing L1 were signficantly changed a couple of years back...
In short, if L1 is not much of a dual intent as H1, you might have trouble getting the two approved concurrently, but if they are equally dual intent, getting them concurrently shouldn't be a problem...
Biju, whom did you ask, an immigration attorney or just on forums?
A concurrent H1 and L1 should be doable too...much like two concurrent H1s...
As long as you meet the requirements of the two visa categories, you should be able to hold both concurrently...
My knowledge on L1 is limited, but I thought, unlike H1, L1 was not as much a dual intent visa...it required evidence of some times to the foreign domicile..although, I could be wrong...I faintly remember the laws governing L1 were signficantly changed a couple of years back...
In short, if L1 is not much of a dual intent as H1, you might have trouble getting the two approved concurrently, but if they are equally dual intent, getting them concurrently shouldn't be a problem...
more...
rabis
04-13 02:00 PM
For a medical REF how many days do we have to reply?
Thanks,
RabiS
Thanks,
RabiS
glus
11-06 02:30 PM
If I renew my H1B can I avoid visa stamping by using the AP travel document.
I still intend to use my H1B as long as I stay with my current employer, but If I want to change employers or take a different job EAD would be the way to go, in that case would my H1B be invalidated?
I am concerned if I use EAD for a future job and 485 gets into trouble can I fall back to my H1B easily?
Thanks to all for the responses.
If you renew your H-1B, you can the U.S. re-enter on AP, but you will not receive I-94 with H-1B status and you will be a "parolee," which is not any nonimmigrant status. It is safer to just get H-1B stamped.
I still intend to use my H1B as long as I stay with my current employer, but If I want to change employers or take a different job EAD would be the way to go, in that case would my H1B be invalidated?
I am concerned if I use EAD for a future job and 485 gets into trouble can I fall back to my H1B easily?
Thanks to all for the responses.
If you renew your H-1B, you can the U.S. re-enter on AP, but you will not receive I-94 with H-1B status and you will be a "parolee," which is not any nonimmigrant status. It is safer to just get H-1B stamped.
more...
TeddyKoochu
09-25 11:34 AM
I won't be surprised if they pull a quick July 07 or something on those lines to collect more money for filing and renewal of EAD/ AP
I hope this happens, looks like in the current atmosphere there is a high likelihood of it happening as well. It will be a great step forward for people who missed Jul 07, it will be an opportunity for us to have EAD / AP and have a peep at the next step!
I hope this happens, looks like in the current atmosphere there is a high likelihood of it happening as well. It will be a great step forward for people who missed Jul 07, it will be an opportunity for us to have EAD / AP and have a peep at the next step!
eb3retro
09-09 05:23 PM
can you show me a single post in IV that states that they have travelled after applying for AP, and come back with an AP. May be I missed it.
the rule states that you have to be present in the country when you apply for AP. It does not say anything on where you need to be when it is approved. There are many cases where the applicant left the US to have the document mailed or taken along with someone to the person out of the US. The applicants on return were not asked anything. It was business as usual.
the rule states that you have to be present in the country when you apply for AP. It does not say anything on where you need to be when it is approved. There are many cases where the applicant left the US to have the document mailed or taken along with someone to the person out of the US. The applicants on return were not asked anything. It was business as usual.
more...
st4rguitar
04-06 01:39 PM
I would definitely be interested to see how your MTR pans out. Please keep us posted. We filed a MTR back in 2005 for a PERM case that was denied because the salary was wrong on a job opening notice - we ended up winning the MTR and the case was approved but not until mid-2007. We have had some erroneous denials recently and are looking to file the motions to reconsider, so I would love to know your experience if you receive a decision.
I am in big need for help. I applied for my first LC based on Skilled employee (Category 3) because my first job financial analyst only required a bachelor degree even though I have a masters degree then I filed for the I-140. a year later, I got a promotion to a senior financial analyst which requires a masters degree (which I already had). so I filed a second LC (EB2) for the new position with the same company however, my LC was denied because the DOL thinks that there is no difference between the 1 job (financial analyst) and the second job (senior financial analyst) with the same company. so I checked with my lawyer and he said that I can file for appeal so the DOL will review their decision and realize that it was wrong. I did file for appeal (within the 30 day window) in Sep 2006 and I ve been waiting since then. MY HR manager sent emails and made many phone calls to Atlanta to find out about the status of my appeal but with no results. finally in Jan 2008, she sent another letter to ask for a status. does anybody know or have any idea how long the appeal normally takes so they can make a decision on my case?? please advise. Thank you
I am in big need for help. I applied for my first LC based on Skilled employee (Category 3) because my first job financial analyst only required a bachelor degree even though I have a masters degree then I filed for the I-140. a year later, I got a promotion to a senior financial analyst which requires a masters degree (which I already had). so I filed a second LC (EB2) for the new position with the same company however, my LC was denied because the DOL thinks that there is no difference between the 1 job (financial analyst) and the second job (senior financial analyst) with the same company. so I checked with my lawyer and he said that I can file for appeal so the DOL will review their decision and realize that it was wrong. I did file for appeal (within the 30 day window) in Sep 2006 and I ve been waiting since then. MY HR manager sent emails and made many phone calls to Atlanta to find out about the status of my appeal but with no results. finally in Jan 2008, she sent another letter to ask for a status. does anybody know or have any idea how long the appeal normally takes so they can make a decision on my case?? please advise. Thank you
EkAurAaya
03-19 09:46 PM
I think you need to talk to the CPA for tax and not lawyer....
This came from a real estate lawyer... usually they know what they are talking about. But you are right, wont be a bad idea to run this by a CPA
This came from a real estate lawyer... usually they know what they are talking about. But you are right, wont be a bad idea to run this by a CPA
more...
seaken75
10-12 03:36 AM
I am scheduling an Infopass appointment at my local USCIS office in the hope of getting an interim EAD. It has been more than 90 days since they received my application.
I have a few questions:
1. What do i need to bring?
2. What should i expect?
3. What kind of questions would they ask?
Your experience in this matter is great appreciated!
Thanks in advance!
I have a few questions:
1. What do i need to bring?
2. What should i expect?
3. What kind of questions would they ask?
Your experience in this matter is great appreciated!
Thanks in advance!
mwin
07-23 11:12 PM
Just to clarify...., the advance parole should be valid when you are entering the country, not while leaving right?
Well, I have a current advance parole that expires on October 12, 2008 and I applied for a renewal. Once my AP gets approved (assuming the new AP starts from October 12, 2008) I am planning to leave the country in September (before start of second AP) and re-enter after October 12 using my second AP. Do you guys see any problem in this? Of-course, I will leave only if my second AP is approved in before I leave.
As as dated Oct 12, 2008, on or after this date.
Well, I have a current advance parole that expires on October 12, 2008 and I applied for a renewal. Once my AP gets approved (assuming the new AP starts from October 12, 2008) I am planning to leave the country in September (before start of second AP) and re-enter after October 12 using my second AP. Do you guys see any problem in this? Of-course, I will leave only if my second AP is approved in before I leave.
As as dated Oct 12, 2008, on or after this date.
more...
amohale
02-26 12:26 AM
Please help me with my case.
I am changing my employment and trying to port my PD.The company I am joining is filing for a new Labor for me. My previous employer (A) with who I worked 5 years in US is not cooperating and is threatening to cancel my I-140. which is not a big deal because my I-140 has been approved for more than 180 days and I can retain the PD.
The problem is with their experience letter. I have a post dated letter from them which they gave recently mentioning 4 years and 11 months of experience out of 5.2 years I have worked with them. It is on company letterhead and lists my title, joining date, responsibilities but does not mention my skills: Java. This is a pure consulting firm with around 50 employees. I don't know any of the other employees except for one who I referred. she was with the company for almost 3 years during my 5 years stay.
the Perm that is getting filed for me required 5 years of experience. Since I cannot get a letter from someone in Company A showing all 5 years, is it ok to have this friend of mine show 3 years during her stay. I will not have a letter from a colleague for other 2 years.
So, it all boils down to, can my ex-colleague's affidavit for partial experience from a previous employer, along with a experience letter on company letterhead do the trick for me in case of a RFE. I will really appreciate your help in determining what is the best way to approach as I have other employment options available and my current employer is using every tactic to keep me back.
I am changing my employment and trying to port my PD.The company I am joining is filing for a new Labor for me. My previous employer (A) with who I worked 5 years in US is not cooperating and is threatening to cancel my I-140. which is not a big deal because my I-140 has been approved for more than 180 days and I can retain the PD.
The problem is with their experience letter. I have a post dated letter from them which they gave recently mentioning 4 years and 11 months of experience out of 5.2 years I have worked with them. It is on company letterhead and lists my title, joining date, responsibilities but does not mention my skills: Java. This is a pure consulting firm with around 50 employees. I don't know any of the other employees except for one who I referred. she was with the company for almost 3 years during my 5 years stay.
the Perm that is getting filed for me required 5 years of experience. Since I cannot get a letter from someone in Company A showing all 5 years, is it ok to have this friend of mine show 3 years during her stay. I will not have a letter from a colleague for other 2 years.
So, it all boils down to, can my ex-colleague's affidavit for partial experience from a previous employer, along with a experience letter on company letterhead do the trick for me in case of a RFE. I will really appreciate your help in determining what is the best way to approach as I have other employment options available and my current employer is using every tactic to keep me back.
telekinesis
10-20 10:53 PM
Hellz yea, I hate those **** start things, beeps work well!
thomachan72
03-07 09:32 AM
Deadline added to this initiative to decide whether to proceed or not.
please see post below for details.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum14-members-forum/1599353-want-to-file-485-when-pd-is-not-current-gather-here-104.html#post2412248
[QUote = ashwin_27]
As suggested by several members on this thread, IV has set a goal of April 30th, 2011 to determine if there is even enough appetite within the EB community to proceed with this USCIS Admin Fix initiative or not.
As we know the initial goal was to use this survey to determine how many members will be benefitted by I-485 filing without current priority date. Rough calculations using PERM data showed that at least 50-70K folks are waiting to file I-485 since July 2007 (around 5K-6K out of this number are those with PDs prior to June/July 2007 missed the July 2007 boat).
So far we have had around 1200 such members respond. We need to see support of at least 5000 members in order for IV to launch the public action items. These action items include, but are not limited to, writing en-masse (i.e. in thousands) over 2-3 weeks to several concerned departments about the need for this USCIS administrative fix. Few other very interesting proposals/ideas are also being considered. All we need is our folks to BELIEVE that this initiative is worth investing in.
The IV forum is the best place for the impacted EB community to gather and that is why the number of votes on the survey is a great indication of our frustration and motivation to work with IV for this important admin fix.
So, we now have a Deadline and an Objective. It is up to our impacted members to decide on whether to still stick to silly excuses (why should I become a member, why should i vote on survey etc etc.) or DO something about getting this admin fix. It is surprising that we are not more desperate for this fix and are not convincing and pushing IV harder and harder to start working with USCIS to allow I485 filing with current PD (and all the benefits like EAD, AP that go with it).
Are we more comfortable with the alternative - Waiting endelesslly to file I-485 (at least 2-5 years for post July 2007 folks from any category), keep depending on H1B extensions in an uncertain immigration scenario where H1B RFE's, rejections, visa denials due to "admin processing" etc are on a steep rise? The choice is ours to make.
As a final reminder - please act and convince your friends/colleagues to participate in this initiative and send ivcoordinator@gmail.com the details requested below.
Please keep following and participating on this thread to show your desperation for this fix.
Good post but we need more information.
How many members does IV have in total?
What % out of that total has not filed 485 yet?
Only if we know these two can we say that you need 5000 to go ahead with this plan.
I think 5000 might be too big a number given the total membership and number of those who have already filed 485.
1200 seems to be a good number.
please see post below for details.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum14-members-forum/1599353-want-to-file-485-when-pd-is-not-current-gather-here-104.html#post2412248
[QUote = ashwin_27]
As suggested by several members on this thread, IV has set a goal of April 30th, 2011 to determine if there is even enough appetite within the EB community to proceed with this USCIS Admin Fix initiative or not.
As we know the initial goal was to use this survey to determine how many members will be benefitted by I-485 filing without current priority date. Rough calculations using PERM data showed that at least 50-70K folks are waiting to file I-485 since July 2007 (around 5K-6K out of this number are those with PDs prior to June/July 2007 missed the July 2007 boat).
So far we have had around 1200 such members respond. We need to see support of at least 5000 members in order for IV to launch the public action items. These action items include, but are not limited to, writing en-masse (i.e. in thousands) over 2-3 weeks to several concerned departments about the need for this USCIS administrative fix. Few other very interesting proposals/ideas are also being considered. All we need is our folks to BELIEVE that this initiative is worth investing in.
The IV forum is the best place for the impacted EB community to gather and that is why the number of votes on the survey is a great indication of our frustration and motivation to work with IV for this important admin fix.
So, we now have a Deadline and an Objective. It is up to our impacted members to decide on whether to still stick to silly excuses (why should I become a member, why should i vote on survey etc etc.) or DO something about getting this admin fix. It is surprising that we are not more desperate for this fix and are not convincing and pushing IV harder and harder to start working with USCIS to allow I485 filing with current PD (and all the benefits like EAD, AP that go with it).
Are we more comfortable with the alternative - Waiting endelesslly to file I-485 (at least 2-5 years for post July 2007 folks from any category), keep depending on H1B extensions in an uncertain immigration scenario where H1B RFE's, rejections, visa denials due to "admin processing" etc are on a steep rise? The choice is ours to make.
As a final reminder - please act and convince your friends/colleagues to participate in this initiative and send ivcoordinator@gmail.com the details requested below.
Please keep following and participating on this thread to show your desperation for this fix.
Good post but we need more information.
How many members does IV have in total?
What % out of that total has not filed 485 yet?
Only if we know these two can we say that you need 5000 to go ahead with this plan.
I think 5000 might be too big a number given the total membership and number of those who have already filed 485.
1200 seems to be a good number.
TEKNMEK
03-02 11:06 AM
How important is it to have a letter from the client for h4 to h1. Though the person has the paystubs till date.
TIA
It is advisable to have the letter just incase if the officer asks for it. Although in my case, the officer did not ask for the letter.
TIA
It is advisable to have the letter just incase if the officer asks for it. Although in my case, the officer did not ask for the letter.
texanguy
05-15 06:17 PM
I would like Representative "Representative Name" to co sponsor bills HR 5882 and HR 5921, sponsored by Zoe Lofgren.
I am confused, are we asking them to "co-sponsor" or to "support"?
Please advice.
I am confused, are we asking them to "co-sponsor" or to "support"?
Please advice.
No comments:
Post a Comment