partha_vus
10-26 11:35 AM
PD Jan 2001(ported priority Date)
I-140 Approed June 2007
I485 Applied RD:July 2, 2007
EAD cards received
thanks
I-140 Approed June 2007
I485 Applied RD:July 2, 2007
EAD cards received
thanks
wallpaper derrick rose espn magazine
eastindia
09-09 01:30 PM
did any one did math...
EB1 - all current
|
|
\/
EB2 - World current
|
|
\/
EB2 - India / China
|
| ( When above EB2 India/China gets current 2-3years? )
\/
EB3 All
|
|
\/
EB3 I/C ( When EB1 , EB2 is Current , all visa numbers will flood to EB3 right ? so may be in 4-5 years EB3 may get current ? )
This is a big fantasy.
EB3 is not going to get current in the next 4-5 years you said.
Backlog posted by USCIS and DOS is a lot more than posted. Their data is not totally right.
The only way EB3 India can be current if all Indians on H1B, EAD are deported by a law. Such law is likely in 4-5 years if outsourcing increase and anti-immigrants blame immigrants for their unemployment. Then EB3 I will get current. But there will be no EB3I to take advantage of it.
I say we stop dreaming and do a rally in DC.
EB1 - all current
|
|
\/
EB2 - World current
|
|
\/
EB2 - India / China
|
| ( When above EB2 India/China gets current 2-3years? )
\/
EB3 All
|
|
\/
EB3 I/C ( When EB1 , EB2 is Current , all visa numbers will flood to EB3 right ? so may be in 4-5 years EB3 may get current ? )
This is a big fantasy.
EB3 is not going to get current in the next 4-5 years you said.
Backlog posted by USCIS and DOS is a lot more than posted. Their data is not totally right.
The only way EB3 India can be current if all Indians on H1B, EAD are deported by a law. Such law is likely in 4-5 years if outsourcing increase and anti-immigrants blame immigrants for their unemployment. Then EB3 I will get current. But there will be no EB3I to take advantage of it.
I say we stop dreaming and do a rally in DC.
anilsal
12-10 09:48 AM
A movement of 15 days in EB3-I is a good movement. Big movement in EB3 without law change is not possible.
You are correct. In fact, without some legislation or a bill for recapture getting passed, large movement in dates in not possible.
You are correct. In fact, without some legislation or a bill for recapture getting passed, large movement in dates in not possible.
2011 Derrick Rose pounds his chest
chanduv23
09-28 03:36 PM
Good point Jaime... currency strengthening has nothing to do with general career opportunities in that particular country. In short term it is because of interest rate differentials and in long run it is because of multiple factors primarily being inflation and trade balance. Therefore moving to Europe or India (best performing Asian currency this year) because of appreciating local currency does not mean anything as far as your career opportunities are concerned.
By the time you are settled in Europe (5-10 years), the currency rates may reverse because US would have started exporting more goods to Europe as US goods would be getting cheaper. Euro and dollar zones are mature market based currencies so we can say something about them.
However, same is not true for India largely because of intervention of RBI. However, look at Japanese currency, over 3 decades it has risen from 600 yen to 115 yen even after intervention of Japanese central bank. This is because of strength of exports from Japan. So it is possible that INR may end up somewhere near Rs. 8-15 if we go by PPP or somewhere in between depending upon trade balance and inflation. However recent reports suggest that Rs. 32-35 is breaking point and Indian software exports will become costlier than simply offshoring to Arkansas or Illinois. Therefore, most likely Indian govt. will step in and avoid dollar free fall against rupee.
Very good analysis.
On another note people discuss about excessive war spending and lack of funding for technology and research and innovation and offcourse, lack of motivation to fix the legal immigration mess and protectionistic policy appproach as part of vote bank politics.
So we have two different perspectives here.
By the time you are settled in Europe (5-10 years), the currency rates may reverse because US would have started exporting more goods to Europe as US goods would be getting cheaper. Euro and dollar zones are mature market based currencies so we can say something about them.
However, same is not true for India largely because of intervention of RBI. However, look at Japanese currency, over 3 decades it has risen from 600 yen to 115 yen even after intervention of Japanese central bank. This is because of strength of exports from Japan. So it is possible that INR may end up somewhere near Rs. 8-15 if we go by PPP or somewhere in between depending upon trade balance and inflation. However recent reports suggest that Rs. 32-35 is breaking point and Indian software exports will become costlier than simply offshoring to Arkansas or Illinois. Therefore, most likely Indian govt. will step in and avoid dollar free fall against rupee.
Very good analysis.
On another note people discuss about excessive war spending and lack of funding for technology and research and innovation and offcourse, lack of motivation to fix the legal immigration mess and protectionistic policy appproach as part of vote bank politics.
So we have two different perspectives here.
more...
ajju
03-19 11:40 AM
Urgh.. Here come the red squares...Why do I even bother posting comments!
Same here...
Same here...
retrohatao
02-07 10:32 AM
Admin,
I beg to differ. As far as USCIS is concerned, it just forwards the security clearance request to FBI/Homeland security. It does not follow up unless you sue USCIS. As far as they are concerned, the "ball is in FBI's court" ( exact words of the representative). So NameCheck need to be a separate issue.
I beg to differ. As far as USCIS is concerned, it just forwards the security clearance request to FBI/Homeland security. It does not follow up unless you sue USCIS. As far as they are concerned, the "ball is in FBI's court" ( exact words of the representative). So NameCheck need to be a separate issue.
more...
Jaime
09-10 04:04 PM
Letter for Intl Student Associations
Dear International Student Friend:
You have put yourself through a lot over the past few years: traveled to a new country, put yourself through school, worked long hours in the lab, took on multiple on-campus jobs and loans, so that
you could make a better life for yourself. Now, you are getting ready to graduate and join other high-skilled people like you who make this country one of the leaders when it comes to innovation and technological breakthroughs. We are proud of your accomplishments
and look forward to welcoming you in the real world as your friends and
colleagues.
However, we wanted to make you aware of a grim reality that you will surely
face in the coming months. Immigration visas (commonly referred to as �Green Cards�) are currently severely backlogged across multiple categories and countries. You might be vaguely aware of this and may have
heard rumors, but the truth of the matter is that most likely you will have to
face years of waiting for an immigrant visa to be approved. This in turn will
restrict your growth within an organization and at the same time prevent you
from reaching your true potential. Even if you are finishing up your course of study from the topmost university in your field, it is more than likely that you will be impacted by the current immigration backlog. We write this letter because thousands of our members are in exactly the same place. We write this because we are in process
of developing one of the most comprehensive grassroots organizations dedicated
to helping skilled immigrants achieve their American dream and at the same time help in keeping this country competitive in the global markets.
Our organization cuts across nationalities, job categories and pay scales. Even
if you are finishing up your MBA from Harvard, it is likely that you will be
impacted by the current immigration backlog. We are completely committed to
securing a more transparent, predictable and fair immigration system. We ask you
to visit our website at http://www.immigrationvoice.org and attend a rally on September 18th at Washington DC. We are running buses from your city to DC. All you need to do is visit the Immigration Voice website and sign up for where you are coming from.
Regards,
Your friends at
Immigration Voice
Great letter! Have we sent it yet??? The only thing I would change is "Immigration" visas to "Immigrant" visas
Dear International Student Friend:
You have put yourself through a lot over the past few years: traveled to a new country, put yourself through school, worked long hours in the lab, took on multiple on-campus jobs and loans, so that
you could make a better life for yourself. Now, you are getting ready to graduate and join other high-skilled people like you who make this country one of the leaders when it comes to innovation and technological breakthroughs. We are proud of your accomplishments
and look forward to welcoming you in the real world as your friends and
colleagues.
However, we wanted to make you aware of a grim reality that you will surely
face in the coming months. Immigration visas (commonly referred to as �Green Cards�) are currently severely backlogged across multiple categories and countries. You might be vaguely aware of this and may have
heard rumors, but the truth of the matter is that most likely you will have to
face years of waiting for an immigrant visa to be approved. This in turn will
restrict your growth within an organization and at the same time prevent you
from reaching your true potential. Even if you are finishing up your course of study from the topmost university in your field, it is more than likely that you will be impacted by the current immigration backlog. We write this letter because thousands of our members are in exactly the same place. We write this because we are in process
of developing one of the most comprehensive grassroots organizations dedicated
to helping skilled immigrants achieve their American dream and at the same time help in keeping this country competitive in the global markets.
Our organization cuts across nationalities, job categories and pay scales. Even
if you are finishing up your MBA from Harvard, it is likely that you will be
impacted by the current immigration backlog. We are completely committed to
securing a more transparent, predictable and fair immigration system. We ask you
to visit our website at http://www.immigrationvoice.org and attend a rally on September 18th at Washington DC. We are running buses from your city to DC. All you need to do is visit the Immigration Voice website and sign up for where you are coming from.
Regards,
Your friends at
Immigration Voice
Great letter! Have we sent it yet??? The only thing I would change is "Immigration" visas to "Immigrant" visas
2010 Chicago Bulls hottie Derrick
vavs16
12-28 07:18 PM
Hi guys
If anyone here is enrolling at ONLINE program in U of South Dakota,please let me know
I am enrolling in there soon - it is accredited :)
Thanks a ton
If anyone here is enrolling at ONLINE program in U of South Dakota,please let me know
I am enrolling in there soon - it is accredited :)
Thanks a ton
more...
sirinme
11-04 11:37 AM
Nrc2008063524
hair Derrick Rose Covers ESPN
webr
07-12 07:09 PM
cut-off dates are equal for both India & china. Does that mean that both are going to jump in August bulletin? Hope they move it further to atleast Dec 2006.
Stop being selfish first , you will get automatically then.... You wanted to move dates , since your PD Is Dec 2006 ... There are tons waiting after your dates. Just consider others.
Stop being selfish first , you will get automatically then.... You wanted to move dates , since your PD Is Dec 2006 ... There are tons waiting after your dates. Just consider others.
more...
Canadian_Dream
04-10 05:56 PM
the fact that reform is needed does not mean this is the best way.
and btw i wonder what happens to true consulting companies- BCG, Oracle etc whose business is to provide these services. They are not some abusive offshore operation....how is it fair to them? Seems a bit radical to me...not that i oppose the need for reform.
My only point was: the way H1B was set-up there was too much leverage to the corporations. This led to abuse by them at your and my cost. End result was wage depression, Green Card Backlogs and now H1B crisis. No matter how you argue it, the abusers have been a clear winner as an end result. Look no further than mushrooming of recruiting companies, and growing profit margins of TCS, Infosys and Wipro.
In the end the reform has to come, unfortunately it came again at our cost. I agree it is not the best way to reform it, because it isn't in the best interest of H1B holders, but I guess the intention here is to stop the abuse at any cost. The best way probably would have been making H1B independent of the employer but again me and you are not kept in mind when a law like this is being written. What happens to BCG, Oracle etc, perhaps law should provide a way to separate wheat from chaff. If you take a closer look at it, these corporations do provide consulting services but consultants are still "Permanent Employees" with a fix wages and benefits but body shoppers have a different model with unpaid bench period and what not. In fact you can find
Permanent Residents and US Citizens wanting to work or working with BCG, Oracle etc, but you don't see that with bodyshoppers and that's why I guess the 50% US Citizen clause in the proposed law. Please don't confuse this with the notion that I support or oppose this law. I am just trying to argue that if off shoring companies (Infosys, TCS etc) with 90% H1B's and local body shopping firms 100% H1B are getting punished I have no sympathy for them. These are the same people who refuse to give people copy I-140 approval notice and file for 59 Green Cards out of 20,000 H1B's they bring.
How about sending back all H1Bs ? If there is no cheap labor around , the salaries for all others (Citizens and GC holders) go up. I so want to see 250 an hour rates.
Applying your logic , you should get a job in your home country if you are smart enough.
You should first read the original post that I responded to understand the context. As far as wages are concerned it is because of these corporations that hourly rates however high look meager when H1B statistics are collected by DOL, because a large cut is added to profit margins. That's why opponents of H1B program can point finger and say prevailing wages are not market wages. Do you support this practice of making profit by eating away a huge chunk of your pay just because they sponsor H1B (a Green Card the retention benefit to continue doing this for atleast 3-4 years) ? If you are then you are doing it at your own peril.
Check out some of the prevailing wages and see for yourself if these are real market wages:
System Analyst in San Jose California $64K
http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/cda/doc/content/032807_systmsanaly_sanfranciscoCA.pdf
Consultant in San Francisco 55K
http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/cda/doc/content/032807_taxconsII_sanjoseCA.pdf
and btw i wonder what happens to true consulting companies- BCG, Oracle etc whose business is to provide these services. They are not some abusive offshore operation....how is it fair to them? Seems a bit radical to me...not that i oppose the need for reform.
My only point was: the way H1B was set-up there was too much leverage to the corporations. This led to abuse by them at your and my cost. End result was wage depression, Green Card Backlogs and now H1B crisis. No matter how you argue it, the abusers have been a clear winner as an end result. Look no further than mushrooming of recruiting companies, and growing profit margins of TCS, Infosys and Wipro.
In the end the reform has to come, unfortunately it came again at our cost. I agree it is not the best way to reform it, because it isn't in the best interest of H1B holders, but I guess the intention here is to stop the abuse at any cost. The best way probably would have been making H1B independent of the employer but again me and you are not kept in mind when a law like this is being written. What happens to BCG, Oracle etc, perhaps law should provide a way to separate wheat from chaff. If you take a closer look at it, these corporations do provide consulting services but consultants are still "Permanent Employees" with a fix wages and benefits but body shoppers have a different model with unpaid bench period and what not. In fact you can find
Permanent Residents and US Citizens wanting to work or working with BCG, Oracle etc, but you don't see that with bodyshoppers and that's why I guess the 50% US Citizen clause in the proposed law. Please don't confuse this with the notion that I support or oppose this law. I am just trying to argue that if off shoring companies (Infosys, TCS etc) with 90% H1B's and local body shopping firms 100% H1B are getting punished I have no sympathy for them. These are the same people who refuse to give people copy I-140 approval notice and file for 59 Green Cards out of 20,000 H1B's they bring.
How about sending back all H1Bs ? If there is no cheap labor around , the salaries for all others (Citizens and GC holders) go up. I so want to see 250 an hour rates.
Applying your logic , you should get a job in your home country if you are smart enough.
You should first read the original post that I responded to understand the context. As far as wages are concerned it is because of these corporations that hourly rates however high look meager when H1B statistics are collected by DOL, because a large cut is added to profit margins. That's why opponents of H1B program can point finger and say prevailing wages are not market wages. Do you support this practice of making profit by eating away a huge chunk of your pay just because they sponsor H1B (a Green Card the retention benefit to continue doing this for atleast 3-4 years) ? If you are then you are doing it at your own peril.
Check out some of the prevailing wages and see for yourself if these are real market wages:
System Analyst in San Jose California $64K
http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/cda/doc/content/032807_systmsanaly_sanfranciscoCA.pdf
Consultant in San Francisco 55K
http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/cda/doc/content/032807_taxconsII_sanjoseCA.pdf
hot for ESPN Magazine Cover
pappu
07-01 10:22 PM
Info on the lawsuit by AILA:
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
more...
house Office ESPN Magazine
santa123
02-24 03:45 PM
Can an approved I-140 from Company A (future employer) be used to obtain an extension for H1 with company B (Current employer)?
Pls provide your inputs
Pls provide your inputs
tattoo Derrick Rose Covers ESPN
ajay
11-10 05:20 PM
I will send.
more...
pictures derrick rose gq magazine. a
jjava100
09-10 01:40 PM
50, it said on the log in screen.
or more reputation points.. how to increase them to get to chat?? Thanks
or more reputation points.. how to increase them to get to chat?? Thanks
dresses derrick rose cover of espn
dealsnet
03-18 07:50 AM
According to attorney Ron Gotcher Eb2 India will move up in coming months and EB3 ROW (Rest Of the World) will be current very soon. In that case, the excess EB3 ROW numbers will go to heavily retrogressed countries. This attorney's prediction is 100% correct for the April VB.
See the link.http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=24
See the link.http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=24
more...
makeup 2010 derrick rose mvp 2011
tikka
06-12 10:21 AM
Here is a link ...that does talk about issues related to legal immigration ...IV is also mentioned in this article
http://www.ibnlive.com/news/world/06_2007/bush-gives-indian-immigrants-hope-42746.html
Thank you
http://www.ibnlive.com/news/world/06_2007/bush-gives-indian-immigrants-hope-42746.html
Thank you
girlfriend Derrick Rose is learning how
kaisersose
02-20 05:31 PM
I had done some calculations long ago, it guestimated that 5~6% of people are registered with traciitt.
One guy recently posted on that out of 30 AOS applicants in his company only 2 had entered their info on .
That would be 6.67% Which is close to the results of your calculations.
One guy recently posted on that out of 30 AOS applicants in his company only 2 had entered their info on .
That would be 6.67% Which is close to the results of your calculations.
hairstyles 2011 Derrick Rose on the cover of derrick rose espn magazine cover. derrick
SunnySurya
07-28 12:18 PM
To all other readers,
Just to let every one know, I am a Hindu to the very root, but I am also the following:
a) A human, who would prefer peace over violence
b) An Indian, who loves the fact that it is country of Buddha and Gandhi
c) An immigrant, who associate with other immigrants on this forum to be treated in fairness.
d) A would be American, who would like provide the best values of this country to my kids.
I am all that.....And I am proud of them all..
Just to let every one know, I am a Hindu to the very root, but I am also the following:
a) A human, who would prefer peace over violence
b) An Indian, who loves the fact that it is country of Buddha and Gandhi
c) An immigrant, who associate with other immigrants on this forum to be treated in fairness.
d) A would be American, who would like provide the best values of this country to my kids.
I am all that.....And I am proud of them all..
styrum
01-18 04:05 PM
Looks like if you already have EAD that can be considered a "certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him pursuant to subsection (d) of this section". Then you don't need the passport or other forms. Those still on H1B but without EAD then must carry a passport with a valid I-94 detached from I797 and stapled to the passport or the entire I797 with I-94 still attached, or the I485 receipt.
Interesting: Neither I-140 approval nor 485 receipt contain a new I-94. Moreover, I485 receipt explicitly says: "This notice does not grant any immigration status or benefit. it is not even evidence that this case is still pending. It only shows that the application or petition was filed on the date shown." So, if you have filed 485 but don't have an EAD (you haven't requested it or it has not arrived yet) and your H1B I-94 has expired already you can't prove your status! So, EAD is the one and only proof of status! Moreover, even with an EAD but without valid I-94 you may have problem proving your legal immigration status to those oficers who believe a non-resident alien must always have a valid I-94. Any experience proving your legal immigration status in this situation: previous I-94 (most likely H1B) expired, never entered on AP, but have a valid EAD?
Interesting: Neither I-140 approval nor 485 receipt contain a new I-94. Moreover, I485 receipt explicitly says: "This notice does not grant any immigration status or benefit. it is not even evidence that this case is still pending. It only shows that the application or petition was filed on the date shown." So, if you have filed 485 but don't have an EAD (you haven't requested it or it has not arrived yet) and your H1B I-94 has expired already you can't prove your status! So, EAD is the one and only proof of status! Moreover, even with an EAD but without valid I-94 you may have problem proving your legal immigration status to those oficers who believe a non-resident alien must always have a valid I-94. Any experience proving your legal immigration status in this situation: previous I-94 (most likely H1B) expired, never entered on AP, but have a valid EAD?
ashwin_27
06-10 01:02 PM
Track the status of this bill -
S. 2804: Employ America Act (GovTrack.us) (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-2804)
We can read between the lines and be as optimistic as we want..but I do not see anything in the text that excludes EADs.
As per pappu's initial email, everyone - H1B, EAD, L1 etc etc (except GC holders and citizens) are impacted by this bill.
What is the guidance to IV members? Start contacting the senators in the senate committee that deliberating on it and impress upon them to oppose this draconian bill?
S. 2804: Employ America Act (GovTrack.us) (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-2804)
We can read between the lines and be as optimistic as we want..but I do not see anything in the text that excludes EADs.
As per pappu's initial email, everyone - H1B, EAD, L1 etc etc (except GC holders and citizens) are impacted by this bill.
What is the guidance to IV members? Start contacting the senators in the senate committee that deliberating on it and impress upon them to oppose this draconian bill?
