Immi_Chant
02-28 12:26 PM
We can make it at 9:00 if it helps our friends from West coast.
Thanks QASlueth, Newbie2020 and others for the update on the schedule.
-Immi_Chant
Thanks QASlueth, Newbie2020 and others for the update on the schedule.
-Immi_Chant
wallpaper tattoo judas album art, lady
Niranjan
03-09 09:07 PM
Subscription Payment Sent (Unique Transaction ID #5W6543254******)
acecupid
08-11 05:47 PM
I see so many posts about people correcting names in passports. Just wondering once you change your name in passport, doesnt it get inconsistent with the name in visa and other US documents ? Did anyone get US documents corrected based on name change in passport ? I believe once you make correction in passport, to make any changes to name in visa or US documents you need a US court order for name change otherwise there will be problems in H1/ EAD/ AP extensions. Anyone with experience please advice.
2011 lady-gaga-judas-single-cover
delhikadesi
07-17 10:53 PM
It is a feeling of oneness, this site and members rock, people maintained calm and fun side across the tense moments.
cherish all moments..!!! :)
cherish all moments..!!! :)
more...
fatjoe
08-25 07:36 PM
People we have a question, throw us some light now that our application officailly falls under current dates....
Our service center is Texas Center and the dates -
Priority Date - Oct 18 2004
485 Received Date - Aug 17th 2007
485 Notice Date - Oct 16th 2007
The current processing time for Texas Service Center is August 23rd 2007. Do they process based on reciept date or notice date? From the past experience we know that they donot process based on priority dates (We have been current for 3 times in the past and saw approvals for PD's in 2006 with earlier notice and receipt dates)
I called uscis a couple of weeks agoand again today, I was told (by two different resp) that they go by Receipt date.
Our service center is Texas Center and the dates -
Priority Date - Oct 18 2004
485 Received Date - Aug 17th 2007
485 Notice Date - Oct 16th 2007
The current processing time for Texas Service Center is August 23rd 2007. Do they process based on reciept date or notice date? From the past experience we know that they donot process based on priority dates (We have been current for 3 times in the past and saw approvals for PD's in 2006 with earlier notice and receipt dates)
I called uscis a couple of weeks agoand again today, I was told (by two different resp) that they go by Receipt date.
amitjoey
12-19 04:33 PM
Common folks, we are so close to the half mark of $60K, let's wrap up by tonight and then set ourselves to next target, by the time new year starts up we need all available cycles to work on calling lawmakers to bring out agenda to forefront...
so, $30K by tonight, I see anurakt pulling his check book out or probably verifying the 3 digit number in his cc....
let's do it...team !
Yes, we can do it
so, $30K by tonight, I see anurakt pulling his check book out or probably verifying the 3 digit number in his cc....
let's do it...team !
Yes, we can do it
more...
sparky_jones
08-14 01:44 PM
Hi
I have a profile made my LUD hasn't changed, I do not know where my I140 was approved from... HOW can I find that?
Thanks!
I guess if your receipt number starts with SRC, it was processed at TSC.
I have a profile made my LUD hasn't changed, I do not know where my I140 was approved from... HOW can I find that?
Thanks!
I guess if your receipt number starts with SRC, it was processed at TSC.
2010 pictures art, lady gaga judas
srkamath
07-09 11:04 PM
According to DHS statistics there are around 50,000 EB2 lndia Labors in 2004 and 2005 each. So ppl with 2005, 2006 priority dates you can wait around 6-7 years for ur priority dates to be current with annual limit of around 5000 for EB2 India.
The lawsuit can be filed by your American Civil Liberties Union Member or ur aunt or uncle or mistress who is a US citizen. U guys and gals with 485's will not be there in the lawsuit but will benefit if the lawsuit wins.
I looked at the links you have provided and I'm still not sure where your "50,000 EB2 India Labors...." came from. These numbers do not seem trustworthy or reliable.
Here's data directly from the DOL ETA website.....
3/28/2005 to 10/28/2005 there were a total of 15973 Labor certifications approved - that includes EB1, 2, 3, 4 for all countries, and 3734 cases for Indian nationals in EB1, 2, 3, 4. Of course a part of EB1 and all of EB5 don't need labor certs.
If you download the database from the DOL website, apply filters for India, approved cases, then filter out all Level I in all non-managerial occupations, followed by non EB2 job descriptions - you end up with ~ 8 - 9% approvals for EB2-IN which is approx 1300 - 1400 primary applicants.
In my estimates, i removed most computer programmer level occupations as the USCIS has been very reluctant to approve EB2 for these cases - i could be wrong here.
As you see, it is IMPOSSIBLE for EB2 IN cases between 3/28/2005 to 10/28/2005 to be much more than 3800 (that is approx 3800 x 2 visas incl dep).
A total of nearly 50000 EB2 IN applicants (including dep) for 2004 and 2005 may be possible.
The massive retrogressions we are seeing is mainly because of the fact that only 15439 EB2 visas were issued in 2003, and 32532 i 2004 thanks to DOL backlogs and mis-interpretations of the law by DOS !!!! compare that with an average of 43,000 in most other years since the 1990s.
I'm pretty confident that your numbers are incorrect
The lawsuit can be filed by your American Civil Liberties Union Member or ur aunt or uncle or mistress who is a US citizen. U guys and gals with 485's will not be there in the lawsuit but will benefit if the lawsuit wins.
I looked at the links you have provided and I'm still not sure where your "50,000 EB2 India Labors...." came from. These numbers do not seem trustworthy or reliable.
Here's data directly from the DOL ETA website.....
3/28/2005 to 10/28/2005 there were a total of 15973 Labor certifications approved - that includes EB1, 2, 3, 4 for all countries, and 3734 cases for Indian nationals in EB1, 2, 3, 4. Of course a part of EB1 and all of EB5 don't need labor certs.
If you download the database from the DOL website, apply filters for India, approved cases, then filter out all Level I in all non-managerial occupations, followed by non EB2 job descriptions - you end up with ~ 8 - 9% approvals for EB2-IN which is approx 1300 - 1400 primary applicants.
In my estimates, i removed most computer programmer level occupations as the USCIS has been very reluctant to approve EB2 for these cases - i could be wrong here.
As you see, it is IMPOSSIBLE for EB2 IN cases between 3/28/2005 to 10/28/2005 to be much more than 3800 (that is approx 3800 x 2 visas incl dep).
A total of nearly 50000 EB2 IN applicants (including dep) for 2004 and 2005 may be possible.
The massive retrogressions we are seeing is mainly because of the fact that only 15439 EB2 visas were issued in 2003, and 32532 i 2004 thanks to DOL backlogs and mis-interpretations of the law by DOS !!!! compare that with an average of 43,000 in most other years since the 1990s.
I'm pretty confident that your numbers are incorrect
more...
Leo07
12-01 01:25 PM
$$$$.....Please....$$$$$$$$
hair LADY GAGA. JUDAS CD
snvlgopal
03-09 02:45 PM
Unique Transaction ID #5M177817S0983154D
Thanks
Thanks
more...
gcisadawg
04-14 12:43 AM
Labor substitution may be legal but it is unethical. When everything depends on when you join the queue, how can one cut the line?
Whereas EB3 to EB2 porting is both legal and ethical. When you have a EB3 applicant that is waiting in line for 8 years, he/she had already gathered that much experience based on his long wait. Also, if you look at EB2, it is one of the highly abused category. The EB3 applicant who started in 2001 has joined the line half a decade before the one with 2006 Eb2 PD. One can't really accuse him/her for cutting the line just like one can about substitutes! If the EB3 porting case deserves merit, then I strongly support it!
My intention is not to to start a fight. But we need to see the true picture. Without acknowledging the problem how can we fix it?
Bottom line, GC abuses need to stop and we should fight for it as much as we fight for our rights to get GC!
As expected,I got a red dot on my post. And as usual, it was anonymous!
Pls. come out in open to share your views!
Whereas EB3 to EB2 porting is both legal and ethical. When you have a EB3 applicant that is waiting in line for 8 years, he/she had already gathered that much experience based on his long wait. Also, if you look at EB2, it is one of the highly abused category. The EB3 applicant who started in 2001 has joined the line half a decade before the one with 2006 Eb2 PD. One can't really accuse him/her for cutting the line just like one can about substitutes! If the EB3 porting case deserves merit, then I strongly support it!
My intention is not to to start a fight. But we need to see the true picture. Without acknowledging the problem how can we fix it?
Bottom line, GC abuses need to stop and we should fight for it as much as we fight for our rights to get GC!
As expected,I got a red dot on my post. And as usual, it was anonymous!
Pls. come out in open to share your views!
hot Judas by Lady Gaga album cover
Niranjan
03-09 09:07 PM
Subscription Payment Sent (Unique Transaction ID #5W6543254******)
more...
house lady-gaga-judas-single-cover
Sherman_tribiani
09-07 11:39 PM
In that case make it 10,000 + 11,724 , as we all will be directly or indirectly watching you.
Make that 10,001 ( the 1 is you). You will be present to watch the numbers. Right?
Make that 10,001 ( the 1 is you). You will be present to watch the numbers. Right?
tattoo lady gaga judas album. lady
needhelp!
11-21 02:43 PM
Santhi.. can you edit your first post to add this info:
To contribute amounts other than those shown in contributions page, please paypal your contribution to
To contribute amounts other than those shown in contributions page, please paypal your contribution to
more...
pictures lady gaga hair album artwork.
Tortoise
08-12 02:42 PM
On October 4, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case.
Mine is with TSC.
Mine is with TSC.
dresses lady gaga judas album cover.
sathweb
02-25 04:50 PM
I read the beginning of the thread, did not read all the posts.
I have been thinking something similar. Instead of targeting one Senator/Congressman we have to present our case to as many as Senators/ Congressman. Lets prepare a good power point or some other presentable document.
I am ready to take appointment with my local Senator/Congressman and present our case. I am positive I can get appointment with my local congresswoman. Please lets create a plan.
I have been thinking something similar. Instead of targeting one Senator/Congressman we have to present our case to as many as Senators/ Congressman. Lets prepare a good power point or some other presentable document.
I am ready to take appointment with my local Senator/Congressman and present our case. I am positive I can get appointment with my local congresswoman. Please lets create a plan.
more...
makeup quot;Judasquot; - Currently scheduled
alias
11-11 01:21 PM
I have a one year old; I went through nanny shopping and finally decided to keep our baby in the daycare. I would tell you on top of my voice - go to the cops immediately, this is simply unacceptable. I can't imagine how someone can hit a 8 months old. I can't imagine how someone can hit a 8 months old. I'm sitting here, my hand is shaking with anger. If I were you, i would not worry anything about her status, you saw an advertisement and you hired, you can argue that if it comes to that. Point here is screw her up so bad so she doesn't think of doing it again.....
Hello guys,
Sorry for this non-immigration related post. We have this sudden, tragic situation that I wanted all of your advice on. Thank you for your time in reading this long post.
We had hired an Indian nanny in NJ who, we learnt after hiring her, is here on a tourist visa. We were paying her $350 per week cash, which is the standard rate around here for nannies (incl. citizens and people on GC). We had liked her when we met her in response to an ad on Sulekha, and we thought an Indian nanny would be good for our first child. She has been with us for about 3 months, and we were intermittently not getting a good feeling with her for some reason. We finally bought a small security camera and installed it yesterday. On the very first day with the camera, we came home and saw the recorded video to find that she is violently hitting the baby on two separate occasions. Needless to say, it has shocked, angered and extremely saddened us. I showed the video to a couple of friends and even they say it is unbearable to watch. This was just the first day of recording and it pains us tremendously to think what all may have happened previously.
She is of course not going to stay with the baby alone anymore, but I want to know what legal options I have to penalize her to the fullest extent, so that she does not do this to anybody else�s small babies. She it seems had come here last year and taken care of someone else�s baby in Hoboken, and I can imagine that their baby also went through this. (This woman and her husband are a ~ 35 year old couple, who have a multiple entry ten year tourist visa; both come here for 6 months every year and work odd jobs like this. They apparently got a (unsponsored) tourist visa after showing a lot of landed property in India).
I specifically want to know if I will have potential problems if I go to law enforcement about this- regarding have employed her (both of us are on H1B visas). I know we have made mistakes and should have done better due diligence in this, and there cannot be any more punishment for us than seeing our 8 month old � who cannot tell us about it when we come home- being beaten on the tapes. We saw this yesterday and have not told her yet. We want to weigh all options before we proceed, but from today onwards one of us is home all the time till Friday. Any advice or opinion is sincerely appreciated. Thanks for reading this long post. And, to all who are thinking of nannies or have one, please learn from our mistakes and closely monitor your child�s safety every day.
Hello guys,
Sorry for this non-immigration related post. We have this sudden, tragic situation that I wanted all of your advice on. Thank you for your time in reading this long post.
We had hired an Indian nanny in NJ who, we learnt after hiring her, is here on a tourist visa. We were paying her $350 per week cash, which is the standard rate around here for nannies (incl. citizens and people on GC). We had liked her when we met her in response to an ad on Sulekha, and we thought an Indian nanny would be good for our first child. She has been with us for about 3 months, and we were intermittently not getting a good feeling with her for some reason. We finally bought a small security camera and installed it yesterday. On the very first day with the camera, we came home and saw the recorded video to find that she is violently hitting the baby on two separate occasions. Needless to say, it has shocked, angered and extremely saddened us. I showed the video to a couple of friends and even they say it is unbearable to watch. This was just the first day of recording and it pains us tremendously to think what all may have happened previously.
She is of course not going to stay with the baby alone anymore, but I want to know what legal options I have to penalize her to the fullest extent, so that she does not do this to anybody else�s small babies. She it seems had come here last year and taken care of someone else�s baby in Hoboken, and I can imagine that their baby also went through this. (This woman and her husband are a ~ 35 year old couple, who have a multiple entry ten year tourist visa; both come here for 6 months every year and work odd jobs like this. They apparently got a (unsponsored) tourist visa after showing a lot of landed property in India).
I specifically want to know if I will have potential problems if I go to law enforcement about this- regarding have employed her (both of us are on H1B visas). I know we have made mistakes and should have done better due diligence in this, and there cannot be any more punishment for us than seeing our 8 month old � who cannot tell us about it when we come home- being beaten on the tapes. We saw this yesterday and have not told her yet. We want to weigh all options before we proceed, but from today onwards one of us is home all the time till Friday. Any advice or opinion is sincerely appreciated. Thanks for reading this long post. And, to all who are thinking of nannies or have one, please learn from our mistakes and closely monitor your child�s safety every day.
girlfriend girlfriend Lady Gaga – Judas
andy_traps
05-24 01:34 PM
Hi,
We filed for my wife's H-1B under Masters Quota on April 30th and sent the application packet to Vermont Service Center. But on May 3rd UCSIS sent back the packet which we received on May 11th. They also sent a letter saying that the application be sent to Laguna Niguel (CA Service Center) instead.
Do you know if we can resend the application to Laguna Niguel now -- i.e., after the H-1B Master Cap is reached? If we can, then from which H-1B pool will USCIS issue the H-1B approval?
Has this happened to anyone before?
Thanks
Andy
We filed for my wife's H-1B under Masters Quota on April 30th and sent the application packet to Vermont Service Center. But on May 3rd UCSIS sent back the packet which we received on May 11th. They also sent a letter saying that the application be sent to Laguna Niguel (CA Service Center) instead.
Do you know if we can resend the application to Laguna Niguel now -- i.e., after the H-1B Master Cap is reached? If we can, then from which H-1B pool will USCIS issue the H-1B approval?
Has this happened to anyone before?
Thanks
Andy
hairstyles lady gaga judas single cover
abhijitp
11-19 01:46 PM
In my opinion keeping donation options from $25/- upwards to whatever max value within One time and recurring categories would be inclusive startegy.
Currently we are turning away the members who want to donate but who can not afford and/or do not want to donate $ 100/- and upwards.
My personal theory is that who is really willing to donate $ 100/- and upwards and can afford is going to donate that handsome amount even if we keep $ 25/- option.
Now Ball is in court of core.
I beg to differ. IV is not turning away anyone. What stops someone from contributing $100 once every 10 months?
The issue is something else.
In order to contribute even $10, you need to:
1) be convinced about the cause of IV
2) be convinced this organization means business!
3) give up the "penny wise pound foolish" attitude
(1) This should be easy for those who were unable to file their AOS applications in July/August 2007, because one of IV's primary goals (abolish retrogression) should then be your goal.
This is also easy for those who filed their AOS, if only they realize that "working on AC21/EAD" is not as much fun as it seems, you really need the Green Card to live and work the way you want!
(2) is a proven fact, and most of us are already enjoying the benefits of this!
(3) Finally, people feel overwhelmed by the thought of donating $50 or $100 to IV but they are happy to spend much more on gasoline, phone-calls, and drinks. You make no difference to your quality of life when you spend $50 on gas and $100 on food when you go sight seeing on a weekend. But when you donate that money to IV, you are supporting the one and only grass roots organization that means business when it comes to fighting for your own quality of life!
It's like investing in a "credit score" monitoring product for a year before you actually apply for a loan!
If that analogy makes sense, please please realize you need a similar strategy for your green card, and contribute to IV.
Preferably, sign up for recurring contributions, as this is the one thing that will help IV in forecasting and planning.
If nothing else, write to a core team member and let them know you will pay $N1 over N2 number of months.
Thanks!
Currently we are turning away the members who want to donate but who can not afford and/or do not want to donate $ 100/- and upwards.
My personal theory is that who is really willing to donate $ 100/- and upwards and can afford is going to donate that handsome amount even if we keep $ 25/- option.
Now Ball is in court of core.
I beg to differ. IV is not turning away anyone. What stops someone from contributing $100 once every 10 months?
The issue is something else.
In order to contribute even $10, you need to:
1) be convinced about the cause of IV
2) be convinced this organization means business!
3) give up the "penny wise pound foolish" attitude
(1) This should be easy for those who were unable to file their AOS applications in July/August 2007, because one of IV's primary goals (abolish retrogression) should then be your goal.
This is also easy for those who filed their AOS, if only they realize that "working on AC21/EAD" is not as much fun as it seems, you really need the Green Card to live and work the way you want!
(2) is a proven fact, and most of us are already enjoying the benefits of this!
(3) Finally, people feel overwhelmed by the thought of donating $50 or $100 to IV but they are happy to spend much more on gasoline, phone-calls, and drinks. You make no difference to your quality of life when you spend $50 on gas and $100 on food when you go sight seeing on a weekend. But when you donate that money to IV, you are supporting the one and only grass roots organization that means business when it comes to fighting for your own quality of life!
It's like investing in a "credit score" monitoring product for a year before you actually apply for a loan!
If that analogy makes sense, please please realize you need a similar strategy for your green card, and contribute to IV.
Preferably, sign up for recurring contributions, as this is the one thing that will help IV in forecasting and planning.
If nothing else, write to a core team member and let them know you will pay $N1 over N2 number of months.
Thanks!
nixstor
12-19 10:15 AM
made another contribution to keep the thread going. will send email to others I know.
reedandbamboo
09-13 12:48 AM
Folks,
I edited the letter so please take a look at this version. Some of you'll have suggested I condense the letter to a series of questions alone - I think this is a good idea and will be more effective in capturing attention. I will prepare something in this format (but it will have to wait for the weekend).
For now, my intent with this letter is to ask that the ARBITRARY nature of the visa bulletin be put to an end. I am exhausted by the cycle of raised and dashed hopes when the visa bulletin moves forward and backward.
To those of you'll who brought up the issue of schisms between EB2 and EB3, please read paragraph two above. Let us correct this randomness before we tackle each of the issues that are making life so difficult for us. You could start by gathering your friends, co-workers and other EB3 applicants and put together your list of issues to be addressed along with solutions. My view is that if USCIS is incapable of taking care of the matter then we have to pitch in and suggest/prod/request/demand it of/from them.
Together we can do it!
And here's the letter:
The Ombudsman
USCIS
September xx, 2008
Sir/Madam,
On behalf of the employment-based legal immigrant community in the United States of America, I am writing to highlight the ongoing egregious inefficiencies in the immigration “services” provided by the USCIS and the DOS. There have been numerous occasions when there have been erratic movements in the DOS published visa bulletin dates. This, as we understand it, is owing to USCIS under- or over-estimating the number of applicants available for adjustment of status. And in the rare instances when the date finally moves forward by a substantial window, USCIS tends to approve the more recent applications as opposed to the ones that were filed earlier. Let me explain with an example: in the July 2008 visa bulletin, the cut-off date for the India EB2 category was 01 April 2004. A month later, the cut-off date for Indian EB2 applicants abruptly moved forward two years and was set at 01 June 2006. Instead of approving applicants who applied in 2004 and 2005, USCIS approved applicants from 2006. Where is the justice in that??? Why bother publishing the cut-off date if approvals are to be randomly allocated???
We understand we have to stand in line and wait our turn. Each applicant is assigned a priority date which chronologically determines his/her turn for approval. To further complicate matters, once the I-485 is filed, a crop of other dates are issued by the USCIS – a receipt date, a notice date and a processing date. USCIS then takes the liberty to throw random rules at us – “Case adjudication is based on receipt date” “No, we process applications based on notice date”, “Actually, it’s the processing date that determines which applications are adjusted.” !!!
Please take a moment to consider how these conflicting statements and arbitrary decisions wreak havoc on our morale and psyches? No one, NOT even the USCIS, has a clue as to what exactly is happening in their processing centers. The USCIS has never been able to clearly state the exact number of applications languishing, excuse us, we meant pending, in their “service” centers! We, employment-based immigrants, are tax-paying, law-abiding, educated individuals contributing to America’s knowledge economy - yet we have been subjected to the worst aspects of the US employment-based immigration system. These include:
1) Extended wait times at each step of the immigration process.
2) Lack of transparency on the part of USCIS (re: priority date, receipt date, notice date).
3) Lack of USCIS customer service – once applications are submitted to USCIS they disappear into a black hole. Barring a website where one nominally can check one’s case status (but which in reality remains static for months, even years!) there is no concept of updating an applicant on where his case stands. And this is despite the applicant paying immigration fees that often run into thousands of dollars over the years. We are simply expected to wait in a complete void of information, for however long it may take, until approval.
4) Lost opportunities owing to the lack of job portability during the process (a time period spanning an average of five years, whereas an applicant from any country besides India gets his/her PR card in under two years).
While we are grateful for the opportunity to partake in the American dream, it is ironic that we arrive in America and find that our freedom is shackled – we are bound to our sponsoring employer from the start to the end of the extremely lengthy process. Although legal immigration reform is our ongoing aim, for now, we sincerely request you to investigate the process whereby the monthly visa bulletin is set and to ensure FIFO (first in, first out) adjustment so that those of us who have been waiting longer receive attention prior to those who have applied later. We want USCIS to be accountable to us, its paying customers.
We request you to lend us your ear and address these issues so that we are not subjected to them in the future.
Thanking you,
I edited the letter so please take a look at this version. Some of you'll have suggested I condense the letter to a series of questions alone - I think this is a good idea and will be more effective in capturing attention. I will prepare something in this format (but it will have to wait for the weekend).
For now, my intent with this letter is to ask that the ARBITRARY nature of the visa bulletin be put to an end. I am exhausted by the cycle of raised and dashed hopes when the visa bulletin moves forward and backward.
To those of you'll who brought up the issue of schisms between EB2 and EB3, please read paragraph two above. Let us correct this randomness before we tackle each of the issues that are making life so difficult for us. You could start by gathering your friends, co-workers and other EB3 applicants and put together your list of issues to be addressed along with solutions. My view is that if USCIS is incapable of taking care of the matter then we have to pitch in and suggest/prod/request/demand it of/from them.
Together we can do it!
And here's the letter:
The Ombudsman
USCIS
September xx, 2008
Sir/Madam,
On behalf of the employment-based legal immigrant community in the United States of America, I am writing to highlight the ongoing egregious inefficiencies in the immigration “services” provided by the USCIS and the DOS. There have been numerous occasions when there have been erratic movements in the DOS published visa bulletin dates. This, as we understand it, is owing to USCIS under- or over-estimating the number of applicants available for adjustment of status. And in the rare instances when the date finally moves forward by a substantial window, USCIS tends to approve the more recent applications as opposed to the ones that were filed earlier. Let me explain with an example: in the July 2008 visa bulletin, the cut-off date for the India EB2 category was 01 April 2004. A month later, the cut-off date for Indian EB2 applicants abruptly moved forward two years and was set at 01 June 2006. Instead of approving applicants who applied in 2004 and 2005, USCIS approved applicants from 2006. Where is the justice in that??? Why bother publishing the cut-off date if approvals are to be randomly allocated???
We understand we have to stand in line and wait our turn. Each applicant is assigned a priority date which chronologically determines his/her turn for approval. To further complicate matters, once the I-485 is filed, a crop of other dates are issued by the USCIS – a receipt date, a notice date and a processing date. USCIS then takes the liberty to throw random rules at us – “Case adjudication is based on receipt date” “No, we process applications based on notice date”, “Actually, it’s the processing date that determines which applications are adjusted.” !!!
Please take a moment to consider how these conflicting statements and arbitrary decisions wreak havoc on our morale and psyches? No one, NOT even the USCIS, has a clue as to what exactly is happening in their processing centers. The USCIS has never been able to clearly state the exact number of applications languishing, excuse us, we meant pending, in their “service” centers! We, employment-based immigrants, are tax-paying, law-abiding, educated individuals contributing to America’s knowledge economy - yet we have been subjected to the worst aspects of the US employment-based immigration system. These include:
1) Extended wait times at each step of the immigration process.
2) Lack of transparency on the part of USCIS (re: priority date, receipt date, notice date).
3) Lack of USCIS customer service – once applications are submitted to USCIS they disappear into a black hole. Barring a website where one nominally can check one’s case status (but which in reality remains static for months, even years!) there is no concept of updating an applicant on where his case stands. And this is despite the applicant paying immigration fees that often run into thousands of dollars over the years. We are simply expected to wait in a complete void of information, for however long it may take, until approval.
4) Lost opportunities owing to the lack of job portability during the process (a time period spanning an average of five years, whereas an applicant from any country besides India gets his/her PR card in under two years).
While we are grateful for the opportunity to partake in the American dream, it is ironic that we arrive in America and find that our freedom is shackled – we are bound to our sponsoring employer from the start to the end of the extremely lengthy process. Although legal immigration reform is our ongoing aim, for now, we sincerely request you to investigate the process whereby the monthly visa bulletin is set and to ensure FIFO (first in, first out) adjustment so that those of us who have been waiting longer receive attention prior to those who have applied later. We want USCIS to be accountable to us, its paying customers.
We request you to lend us your ear and address these issues so that we are not subjected to them in the future.
Thanking you,
