CADude
07-04 03:18 PM
Contact your Senator regarding unprecedented move by the Department of State.
If you all can then please contact your senator.
Below is the letter I sent to my local senator.
You can find your local senator by using this link (Enter zip code and state) - http://capwiz.com/aila2/officials/congress/?lvl=C&azip=75063&state=TX.
You can also send email from this link.
It does not matter whether this brings any value or not but there is no harm in doing this, in case you are really frustrated, troubled and sad!.
Dear Senator :
This is to bring to your attention regarding an unprecedented move by Department of State with regards to filing of adjustment of status applications.
On June 13, Department of State announced in its Visa Bulletin for July 2007 that all employment-based categories (except for the Other Workers category) for immigrant visas will be "current," (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html) meaning that individuals/businesses going through the lengthy and backlogged immigrant visa or "green card" process can, throughout July, file adjustment of status applications.
The Department Of State regulations at 22 CFR 42.51 (http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_05/22cfr42_05.html) and 8 CFR 245.1(g), allows individuals/businesses to rely on and use such information. Historically, they have relied on such information knowing that when they prepare and file such applications, they will be accepted and adjudicated.
However on July 2, 2007, The Department of State issued a new bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html) with an update on July Visa Availability and USCIS (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) started rejecting adjustment of status applications for several employment-based immigration preference categories (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletin2Jul07.pdf), despite the fact that the published July Visa Bulletin shows that visas for these categories are available thereby violating its long-standing policy and the expectations of thousands of people, without any advance notification to the general public or issuing any notification under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). Such a revision, coming in the same month in which the bulletin is issued, would be contrary to years of practice in which revisions or adjustments to the availability of immigrant visa numbers are made in the following month of before the beginning of the month, not in the same month individuals and businesses have begun preparing and submitting applications for adjustment of status.
By taking this unprecedented mid-month update, the Departments of State and Homeland Security have seriously undermined the stability and predictability of U.S. immigration law. Thousands of individuals and businesses rely on the monthly bulletins to prepare and plan for the submission of applications. In addition, individuals have taken the necessary steps to prepare and file applications for adjustment of status, including thousands of dollars of expenses to engage counsel, flights for employees to quickly obtain necessary documents and medical exams for the applications, cancellation of business and holiday travel, changes in family plans to ensure families are in the proper location, etc. This unprecedented action of the government is shocking and disturbing. It has left many in a state of disbelief, frustration, confusion, and anger.
Pursuant to Department Of State regulations 8 CFR 245.1(g), [i]f the applicant [for adjustment of status] is a preference alien, the current Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Bulletin will be consulted to determine whether an immigrant visa is immediately available.. Thus, when the Visa Bulletin shows that visas for most preference categories are available for applicants with priority dates on or before the listed priority date, the USCIS must accept those adjustment of status applications for adjudication. Under section 245 of the INA, an alien may apply for adjustment of status if, inter alia, (3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed. The question is what the term immediately available means. The regulation at 8 CFR 245.1(g) defines the term and instructs how to determine when an immigrant visa is immediately available under Sec. 245 of the INA.
8 CFR 245.1(g) states, An alien is ineligible for the benefits of section 245 of the Act unless an immigrant visa is immediately available to him or her at the time the application is filed. If the applicant is a preference alien, the current Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Bulletin will be consulted to determine whether an immigrant visa is immediately available. An immigrant visa is considered available for accepting and processing the application Form I-485 i[f] the preference category applicant has a priority date on the waiting list which is earlier than the date shown in the Bulletin (or the Bulletin shows that that numbers for visa applicants in his or her category are current). An immigrant visa is also considered immediately available if the applicant establishes eligibility for the benefits of Public Law 101-238. Information concerning the immediate availability of an immigrant visa may be obtained at any Service Office. (Emphasis added.)
Reliance on the current Visa Bulletin is well-established. In 1994, the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) published a revision to 8 CFR Part 245 in response to enactment of section 245(i) of the Act. In the Supplementary Information provided with that regulation, the INS took the opportunity to revise its definition of immediately available to be consistent with that of the Department of State.
The INS said: All applicants for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Act must have an immediately available immigrant visa number. "Immediately available" for the
purpose of accepting and processing the Form I-485 application filed by a preference alien is defined in 8 CFR 245.1(f) as being not later than the date shown in the current Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Bulletin. The Department of State, however, defines "immediately available" as being earlier than the date shown in the current Visa Bulletin. This rule amends 8 CFR 245.1(f) to bring the adjustment of status provision into accordance with the Department o f State's definition.
I request your prompt attention on this matter asking the Department of State for clarification on this unprecedented change which defies years of established process of individuals/businesses relying on visa bulletin to prepare and file adjustment of status applications.
Sincerely,
If you all can then please contact your senator.
Below is the letter I sent to my local senator.
You can find your local senator by using this link (Enter zip code and state) - http://capwiz.com/aila2/officials/congress/?lvl=C&azip=75063&state=TX.
You can also send email from this link.
It does not matter whether this brings any value or not but there is no harm in doing this, in case you are really frustrated, troubled and sad!.
Dear Senator :
This is to bring to your attention regarding an unprecedented move by Department of State with regards to filing of adjustment of status applications.
On June 13, Department of State announced in its Visa Bulletin for July 2007 that all employment-based categories (except for the Other Workers category) for immigrant visas will be "current," (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html) meaning that individuals/businesses going through the lengthy and backlogged immigrant visa or "green card" process can, throughout July, file adjustment of status applications.
The Department Of State regulations at 22 CFR 42.51 (http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_05/22cfr42_05.html) and 8 CFR 245.1(g), allows individuals/businesses to rely on and use such information. Historically, they have relied on such information knowing that when they prepare and file such applications, they will be accepted and adjudicated.
However on July 2, 2007, The Department of State issued a new bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html) with an update on July Visa Availability and USCIS (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) started rejecting adjustment of status applications for several employment-based immigration preference categories (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletin2Jul07.pdf), despite the fact that the published July Visa Bulletin shows that visas for these categories are available thereby violating its long-standing policy and the expectations of thousands of people, without any advance notification to the general public or issuing any notification under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). Such a revision, coming in the same month in which the bulletin is issued, would be contrary to years of practice in which revisions or adjustments to the availability of immigrant visa numbers are made in the following month of before the beginning of the month, not in the same month individuals and businesses have begun preparing and submitting applications for adjustment of status.
By taking this unprecedented mid-month update, the Departments of State and Homeland Security have seriously undermined the stability and predictability of U.S. immigration law. Thousands of individuals and businesses rely on the monthly bulletins to prepare and plan for the submission of applications. In addition, individuals have taken the necessary steps to prepare and file applications for adjustment of status, including thousands of dollars of expenses to engage counsel, flights for employees to quickly obtain necessary documents and medical exams for the applications, cancellation of business and holiday travel, changes in family plans to ensure families are in the proper location, etc. This unprecedented action of the government is shocking and disturbing. It has left many in a state of disbelief, frustration, confusion, and anger.
Pursuant to Department Of State regulations 8 CFR 245.1(g), [i]f the applicant [for adjustment of status] is a preference alien, the current Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Bulletin will be consulted to determine whether an immigrant visa is immediately available.. Thus, when the Visa Bulletin shows that visas for most preference categories are available for applicants with priority dates on or before the listed priority date, the USCIS must accept those adjustment of status applications for adjudication. Under section 245 of the INA, an alien may apply for adjustment of status if, inter alia, (3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed. The question is what the term immediately available means. The regulation at 8 CFR 245.1(g) defines the term and instructs how to determine when an immigrant visa is immediately available under Sec. 245 of the INA.
8 CFR 245.1(g) states, An alien is ineligible for the benefits of section 245 of the Act unless an immigrant visa is immediately available to him or her at the time the application is filed. If the applicant is a preference alien, the current Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Bulletin will be consulted to determine whether an immigrant visa is immediately available. An immigrant visa is considered available for accepting and processing the application Form I-485 i[f] the preference category applicant has a priority date on the waiting list which is earlier than the date shown in the Bulletin (or the Bulletin shows that that numbers for visa applicants in his or her category are current). An immigrant visa is also considered immediately available if the applicant establishes eligibility for the benefits of Public Law 101-238. Information concerning the immediate availability of an immigrant visa may be obtained at any Service Office. (Emphasis added.)
Reliance on the current Visa Bulletin is well-established. In 1994, the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) published a revision to 8 CFR Part 245 in response to enactment of section 245(i) of the Act. In the Supplementary Information provided with that regulation, the INS took the opportunity to revise its definition of immediately available to be consistent with that of the Department of State.
The INS said: All applicants for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Act must have an immediately available immigrant visa number. "Immediately available" for the
purpose of accepting and processing the Form I-485 application filed by a preference alien is defined in 8 CFR 245.1(f) as being not later than the date shown in the current Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Bulletin. The Department of State, however, defines "immediately available" as being earlier than the date shown in the current Visa Bulletin. This rule amends 8 CFR 245.1(f) to bring the adjustment of status provision into accordance with the Department o f State's definition.
I request your prompt attention on this matter asking the Department of State for clarification on this unprecedented change which defies years of established process of individuals/businesses relying on visa bulletin to prepare and file adjustment of status applications.
Sincerely,
wallpaper Stratocaster Sunburst
priti8888
07-19 12:45 AM
This seems very unfair to people who had earlier PDs (2004 & 2005) and who have waited so many years to file. Now, people with PDs in 2007 will jump ahead of them in the queue just because of this fiasco, juts because they filed earlier. :confused:
dont worry, the above scenario would happen only if pd remaines current.This is highly unlikely. In the next few months PD would retrogress to for instance 2004 , then you'll get your GC first :) Cheer up buddy:)
dont worry, the above scenario would happen only if pd remaines current.This is highly unlikely. In the next few months PD would retrogress to for instance 2004 , then you'll get your GC first :) Cheer up buddy:)
nirenjoshi
03-09 06:14 PM
Added info about April VB to past VBs table.
http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Past_Visa_Bulletin_Data
The way dates are moved doesn't seem to have any fact based intelligent logic.
Pardon my ignorance, but where does the data on the last 2 columns - the one for I-485s - come from? And does that includes Family+EB?
http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Past_Visa_Bulletin_Data
The way dates are moved doesn't seem to have any fact based intelligent logic.
Pardon my ignorance, but where does the data on the last 2 columns - the one for I-485s - come from? And does that includes Family+EB?
2011 Squier 60s vibe strat.
9years
09-13 10:37 AM
Hi All,
My Eb2 Perm Labor Approved. It took 2 months to get approved. It was filed on 07/09/2010 and approved on (email received by HR dept) 09/10/2010. This is just to share with all of you.
Thank you.
My Eb2 Perm Labor Approved. It took 2 months to get approved. It was filed on 07/09/2010 and approved on (email received by HR dept) 09/10/2010. This is just to share with all of you.
Thank you.
more...
ny-nonrir
05-10 04:58 PM
Hi msp1976
Why do you say 2001 folks would get NOF? Im a 2001 Aug but non-rir. Got my 45 DL in Dec 05 but nothing after that. My case was a SWA xfr. Does your analysis only apply to RIR?
ny-nonrir
I have analyzed the tracker from Rajiv Khanna's site. Here are some inputs.
Cases transferred from federal offices :
There is no set trend in processing of these cases. There are a substantial number of approvals.
Cases transferred from SWA offices :
There is clear trend here. The last 3/4 months PBEC has sent out approvals from mid 2002. There are a number of PD June 2002 approvals and some PD July, august, september '02. There is an effort to push mid 2002 cases in PBEC.
The folks left over from 2001 may receive NOF or some query. I am not sure.
If you are a SWA cases from 2001 you should be talking to someone...your lawyer...employer...
Why do you say 2001 folks would get NOF? Im a 2001 Aug but non-rir. Got my 45 DL in Dec 05 but nothing after that. My case was a SWA xfr. Does your analysis only apply to RIR?
ny-nonrir
I have analyzed the tracker from Rajiv Khanna's site. Here are some inputs.
Cases transferred from federal offices :
There is no set trend in processing of these cases. There are a substantial number of approvals.
Cases transferred from SWA offices :
There is clear trend here. The last 3/4 months PBEC has sent out approvals from mid 2002. There are a number of PD June 2002 approvals and some PD July, august, september '02. There is an effort to push mid 2002 cases in PBEC.
The folks left over from 2001 may receive NOF or some query. I am not sure.
If you are a SWA cases from 2001 you should be talking to someone...your lawyer...employer...
kumar1
07-20 02:50 PM
no. of h1b issued in last 4 years 65kX4= 260k
even if you double that (which i m sure is not the case), still it come to 500k.
so ure over estimating it.
thanks
What about L1-A and L1-B? They are a lot too. 192,000-60,000 = L1 number each year.
even if you double that (which i m sure is not the case), still it come to 500k.
so ure over estimating it.
thanks
What about L1-A and L1-B? They are a lot too. 192,000-60,000 = L1 number each year.
more...
makemygc
09-10 02:34 PM
Manish,
Rally is not this tuesday but next tuesday. Will that help you to come?
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Though small, I made my contribution ($100 via Google).
I can't make it to the rally this tuesday but just trying to do whatever I can to support the cause.
Good luck,
Manish Jain.
Rally is not this tuesday but next tuesday. Will that help you to come?
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Though small, I made my contribution ($100 via Google).
I can't make it to the rally this tuesday but just trying to do whatever I can to support the cause.
Good luck,
Manish Jain.
2010 Squier Affinity Stratocaster
akhilmahajan
07-16 11:01 AM
Total So far 1970.00. We are Well short of our target of 2000.00. Let's Go Guys. $5 to IV = Hope for GC.
COME ON FOLKS HELP IV HELP YOURSELF.
COME ON FOLKS HELP IV HELP YOURSELF.
more...
billu
08-05 01:40 PM
hi! i am a physical therapist on h1b...all this news abt retrogression is too scary...i had a few qs:
what is the scenario for someone like me who would file I-140 in the next couple of months?
what are the chances of Schedule A being alloted additional visa numbers in the next 2 years?
how much wait time would be expected under EB 3 category for India for someone whose priority date wud b oct or nov'07???
thanks
what is the scenario for someone like me who would file I-140 in the next couple of months?
what are the chances of Schedule A being alloted additional visa numbers in the next 2 years?
how much wait time would be expected under EB 3 category for India for someone whose priority date wud b oct or nov'07???
thanks
hair Fender Squier Stratocaster
Suva
07-18 02:24 PM
Seems convincing to me.
only those with labor approved by 31st july can apply.
only those with labor approved by 31st july can apply.
more...
santb1975
05-31 09:04 AM
Yes we have to
hot Colour : 2 Tone Sunburst also
bluekayal
08-23 04:54 PM
Rest easy folks:
Mayorkas said he was determined to “get it right and get it fast.” “The community deserves consistency,” he said. “These are our customers, and we are committed to improving customer service.”
The latest example of the changes wrought by Director Mayorkas is an opportunity to allow the public to comment on interim guidance memorandums before they becomes effective in final form. This type of pre-effective-date chance to comment never happened before with the old INS or the pre-Mayorkas USCIS. The early-peek opportunity for comment allows the agency to withdraw with dignity intact from a position that stakeholders may show is contrary to law or legitimate business practices. For example, USCIS is now accepting comments on a guidance memo with a dry title but a topic of great significance to many prospective green-card applicants with high levels of accomplishment: “Evaluation of Evidentiary Criteria in Certain Form I-140 Petitions.”
This particular guidance memo arises from a debunking the agency received from the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115, C.A.9 (Cal.), March 04, 2010 (NO. 07-56774). The Court in Kazarian held that USCIS (in this case the Administrative Appeals Office) may not “unilaterally impose novel substantive or evidentiary requirements” without support in the Immigration and Nationality Act or agency regulations.
While Kazarian dealt with EB-1 (extraordinary ability or achievement) green-card eligibility criteria, the interim agency guidance cited extends this also to the EB-2 immigrant visa category for exceptional ability aliens. In my view, USCIS should have issued a guidance memorandum more broadly. Stakeholder feedback should have been issued on a guidance memorandum (which I’d be happy to craft upon request) entitled “Illegality of Unilaterally Imposing Novel Substantive or Evidentiary Requirements.”
Nation of immigrators - A public policy blog on our dysfunctional immigration system � The Dark Sides of Immigration Fame and Anonymity (http://www.nationofimmigrators.com/?p=349)
Mayorkas said he was determined to “get it right and get it fast.” “The community deserves consistency,” he said. “These are our customers, and we are committed to improving customer service.”
The latest example of the changes wrought by Director Mayorkas is an opportunity to allow the public to comment on interim guidance memorandums before they becomes effective in final form. This type of pre-effective-date chance to comment never happened before with the old INS or the pre-Mayorkas USCIS. The early-peek opportunity for comment allows the agency to withdraw with dignity intact from a position that stakeholders may show is contrary to law or legitimate business practices. For example, USCIS is now accepting comments on a guidance memo with a dry title but a topic of great significance to many prospective green-card applicants with high levels of accomplishment: “Evaluation of Evidentiary Criteria in Certain Form I-140 Petitions.”
This particular guidance memo arises from a debunking the agency received from the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115, C.A.9 (Cal.), March 04, 2010 (NO. 07-56774). The Court in Kazarian held that USCIS (in this case the Administrative Appeals Office) may not “unilaterally impose novel substantive or evidentiary requirements” without support in the Immigration and Nationality Act or agency regulations.
While Kazarian dealt with EB-1 (extraordinary ability or achievement) green-card eligibility criteria, the interim agency guidance cited extends this also to the EB-2 immigrant visa category for exceptional ability aliens. In my view, USCIS should have issued a guidance memorandum more broadly. Stakeholder feedback should have been issued on a guidance memorandum (which I’d be happy to craft upon request) entitled “Illegality of Unilaterally Imposing Novel Substantive or Evidentiary Requirements.”
Nation of immigrators - A public policy blog on our dysfunctional immigration system � The Dark Sides of Immigration Fame and Anonymity (http://www.nationofimmigrators.com/?p=349)
more...
house Affinity Stratocaster Brown
diptam
08-02 04:00 PM
Whenever i read your Post i feel Good - The Rep that i spoke to USCIS told me that July 2nd filers has minimum wait till Aug 15th :D
By the way there is a Prediction for OCT Bulletin in Market >>
EB3 India retrogressed to MAY 2001 and so on , so forth - Enjoy...
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Jan%20P...n%208-2-07.pdf
I had an email conversation with my lawyer regarding 180 day portability. She said that the count for 180 days should begin with notice date for safe side.
However the count begins with Receipt Date which is a day or 2 off from the actual application receive date (mail received date).
This is what i got from my lawyer.
By the way there is a Prediction for OCT Bulletin in Market >>
EB3 India retrogressed to MAY 2001 and so on , so forth - Enjoy...
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Jan%20P...n%208-2-07.pdf
I had an email conversation with my lawyer regarding 180 day portability. She said that the count for 180 days should begin with notice date for safe side.
However the count begins with Receipt Date which is a day or 2 off from the actual application receive date (mail received date).
This is what i got from my lawyer.
tattoo Squier Bullet Stratocaster
ras
07-06 03:39 AM
Why is such a big organization like IV not able to generate funds. Is it that IV members are not worthy to give funding or is there something else that needs to be done to make the members shell out money. An organization with 20K members has a lot of potential generate funds.
I do agree that desi mentality is little different with regard to coming forward or donating money. But that cannot be sole factor for the IV failure. I strongly believe it is not the member contributions that can make IV survive. There should be other mechanisms of getting funding like advertisements, banners, corporate sponsorship, etc. All these are leadership decisions. And apparently we don't see that happening which leads to the notion that we need new blood in the team.
I also dont deny that IV core team has other things in their life. And they cannot devote complete time for this. So as mentioned in one of the posts lets employ a manager to do these things. Lets figure out the expectations for this employee and also the salary for about 6months duration. Lets us assess this employees progress. A full time responsible team members/assistants ( paid or non paid) are required for the organization. There could be non paid executive committee members in parallel.
How are other websites like La raza or similer websites generating money. What are the ways they are following. Analyse them come up with the strategy to get more funding. That is what the leadership team is supposed to do. Not winning on the members to give money always. Lets us accept it the funding that can be got from members can only be minimal. Now having understood that what are the alternatives?
I think we need to come out of the shell. IV core doesn't appear to be transparent as it is supposed to be. Remember am not denying what they have done so far is any less. But my only saying is that we could do much more with the 20-30K memberbase. Lets utilize the brains in the crowd.
Please dont start questioning me if I donated, participated and followed IV suggestions. Yes, I did all of them. The point is not I as an individual we are talking about the system as a whole.
I do agree that desi mentality is little different with regard to coming forward or donating money. But that cannot be sole factor for the IV failure. I strongly believe it is not the member contributions that can make IV survive. There should be other mechanisms of getting funding like advertisements, banners, corporate sponsorship, etc. All these are leadership decisions. And apparently we don't see that happening which leads to the notion that we need new blood in the team.
I also dont deny that IV core team has other things in their life. And they cannot devote complete time for this. So as mentioned in one of the posts lets employ a manager to do these things. Lets figure out the expectations for this employee and also the salary for about 6months duration. Lets us assess this employees progress. A full time responsible team members/assistants ( paid or non paid) are required for the organization. There could be non paid executive committee members in parallel.
How are other websites like La raza or similer websites generating money. What are the ways they are following. Analyse them come up with the strategy to get more funding. That is what the leadership team is supposed to do. Not winning on the members to give money always. Lets us accept it the funding that can be got from members can only be minimal. Now having understood that what are the alternatives?
I think we need to come out of the shell. IV core doesn't appear to be transparent as it is supposed to be. Remember am not denying what they have done so far is any less. But my only saying is that we could do much more with the 20-30K memberbase. Lets utilize the brains in the crowd.
Please dont start questioning me if I donated, participated and followed IV suggestions. Yes, I did all of them. The point is not I as an individual we are talking about the system as a whole.
more...
pictures Highway One Stratocaster
BPforGC
07-18 07:32 PM
Based on what my lawyer said, this is how it happens.
1. LC/I-140 processing is independent from I-485.
2. I-485 RD is critical.
3. When your date comes and when they review your application, they will check if your I-140 is approved or not. Then they will look in the application and if everything is ok (FP, background check - Name check etc) and if VISA number is available, you will get it.
If they don't have VISA numbers available, they will not process any I-485. So, availability of VISA numbers is key when they process I-485.
PD of I-140 comes into play when we have retrogression. Since they opened flood gates, all of us who apply now will go by our I-485 RD. Until substantial numbers of our applications are cleared, there is no chance that future VISA bulletins will be current. Even though future VISA bulletins show PD way earlier than your PD, your I-485 may get approved since you are in the system.
So, who ever gets to apply I-485 are in much better shape than people with PDs in 2002 or 2003 but do not file I-485 now.
REMEMBER, USCIS USUALLY DO NOT FOLLOW ORDER AND YOU HAVE TO BE VERY LUCKY OTHER THAN TURNING ALL THE RIGHT PAPER WORK.
Good luck folks.:p :confused: :rolleyes: :cool: :eek: :mad: :D
1. LC/I-140 processing is independent from I-485.
2. I-485 RD is critical.
3. When your date comes and when they review your application, they will check if your I-140 is approved or not. Then they will look in the application and if everything is ok (FP, background check - Name check etc) and if VISA number is available, you will get it.
If they don't have VISA numbers available, they will not process any I-485. So, availability of VISA numbers is key when they process I-485.
PD of I-140 comes into play when we have retrogression. Since they opened flood gates, all of us who apply now will go by our I-485 RD. Until substantial numbers of our applications are cleared, there is no chance that future VISA bulletins will be current. Even though future VISA bulletins show PD way earlier than your PD, your I-485 may get approved since you are in the system.
So, who ever gets to apply I-485 are in much better shape than people with PDs in 2002 or 2003 but do not file I-485 now.
REMEMBER, USCIS USUALLY DO NOT FOLLOW ORDER AND YOU HAVE TO BE VERY LUCKY OTHER THAN TURNING ALL THE RIGHT PAPER WORK.
Good luck folks.:p :confused: :rolleyes: :cool: :eek: :mad: :D
dresses AB Squier Stratocaster
nixstor
03-07 09:51 PM
Labor approved when I checked the website this afternoon. was in process last week too.
Oct 04, VA EB2 RIR
Oct 04, VA EB2 RIR
more...
makeup Indian made Squier Vintage
Mouns
04-30 03:15 PM
Max waiting country Philippines (family based) = 22 years
if recapture enacted we shortened it for a few months.
Very good analysis by the guy currently speaking. I love it! basically he is laughing at the 'family values as defended by the USCIS and DOS'. What a poor job they are doing!
if recapture enacted we shortened it for a few months.
Very good analysis by the guy currently speaking. I love it! basically he is laughing at the 'family values as defended by the USCIS and DOS'. What a poor job they are doing!
girlfriend Squier® Classic Vibe
Aah_GC
06-11 01:20 PM
You both are right. It is definitely not about quitting or winning, it is making the best decision in cognizance to your career and life goals. For some it might be fighting the EB cause, for some it might just be moving to Cananda or India. Either way, life is as such is supposed to be a rolling stone, most of the mass we carry is just a burden that comes in our way of experiencing true happiness and joy.
Did you ever hear the proverb "quitters never win" and winners never quit.
Quit here go to Canada and then face some problems there and then quit canada. And then you will become the rolling stone which gathers no mass. Your family will be sick of your shifting then and no stabilization will cause more issues.
A friend of mine told me this one evening when I was really frustrated and was planning to quit my dream on being an entrepreneur and here I am now, and I think where I am right now is for the reason that I didn't quit that day and finally my product was liked by a company and they bought the product and offered me a job as well and then one thing lead to another and now I am settled with what I always wanted to do ( kinda not 100%) but its ok.
Did you ever hear the proverb "quitters never win" and winners never quit.
Quit here go to Canada and then face some problems there and then quit canada. And then you will become the rolling stone which gathers no mass. Your family will be sick of your shifting then and no stabilization will cause more issues.
A friend of mine told me this one evening when I was really frustrated and was planning to quit my dream on being an entrepreneur and here I am now, and I think where I am right now is for the reason that I didn't quit that day and finally my product was liked by a company and they bought the product and offered me a job as well and then one thing lead to another and now I am settled with what I always wanted to do ( kinda not 100%) but its ok.
hairstyles Standard Stratocaster Cherry
smisachu
09-11 11:56 AM
IV rocks�.. Just made contribution of 500$
Cannot come to rally because of personal reasons. Feeling terrible about that�.
Order Details - Sep 11, 2007 10:46 AM CDT
Google Order #636002683618849
Thanks, thats really cool. gave you +ve feed back so made ur red dot go away!!
Cannot come to rally because of personal reasons. Feeling terrible about that�.
Order Details - Sep 11, 2007 10:46 AM CDT
Google Order #636002683618849
Thanks, thats really cool. gave you +ve feed back so made ur red dot go away!!
imm_pro
09-11 04:32 PM
wow..what a novel and legal way to humiliate...yes i am in
lonedesi
08-13 02:12 PM
lonedesi,
Any word this ?
You should be fine. Everything we are doing is legal. We are not doing anything illegal by requesting Ombudsman's office to look into this processing delays.
Any word this ?
You should be fine. Everything we are doing is legal. We are not doing anything illegal by requesting Ombudsman's office to look into this processing delays.
No comments:
Post a Comment