crazyghoda
01-30 03:17 PM
Ok now I am very very confused :confused:
Your statement mentions that the 485 does not cover out of status from last non-immigrant visa entry to 485 filing. I have always been working during that time. No issues. After filing 485, I exited and reentered twice using my H1. Last entry was in March 2008 I think. After that, I changed employers using AC21 and got my H1 transferred so I was still on an H1 status. Finally I departed the US in Dec 2008 for vacation while still on H1 status with an active job. I got laid off while I was out of the US.
Now, at that time I had a stamped H1 as well as an AP. I could have used either. However, I felt that using the H1 would be wrong as I no longer had a job with the H1 employer. So I decided to brave the secondary inspections and entered on AP. Since then I have been looking for a job.
My question is - Is the time I havent been working considered as Out of Status?
Your statement mentions that the 485 does not cover out of status from last non-immigrant visa entry to 485 filing. I have always been working during that time. No issues. After filing 485, I exited and reentered twice using my H1. Last entry was in March 2008 I think. After that, I changed employers using AC21 and got my H1 transferred so I was still on an H1 status. Finally I departed the US in Dec 2008 for vacation while still on H1 status with an active job. I got laid off while I was out of the US.
Now, at that time I had a stamped H1 as well as an AP. I could have used either. However, I felt that using the H1 would be wrong as I no longer had a job with the H1 employer. So I decided to brave the secondary inspections and entered on AP. Since then I have been looking for a job.
My question is - Is the time I havent been working considered as Out of Status?
wallpaper them with Banksy#39;s own
eeezzz
02-15 02:57 PM
Why are you in favour of per country quotas, having been born in an oversubscribed country? Are you a glutton for punishment? Do you enjoy waiting 6 years more than an equally qualified counterpart from another country who moves onto bigger and better jobs while you rot in the same position and pay grade for years?
Per country rationing is discriminatory for EB migration. The best jobs should go to the best people, regardless of national origin, race, or religion - this basic principle is enshrined in employment law, but when it comes to EB migration, it is disregarded! It is not about "giving everyone an equal chance" - this is not a charity, this is a business, and in business, only the best and the brightest get those jobs.
I believe HV000 is either favor of per country quotas, nor is he a glutton for punishment. He sees the concept and current rule of this country, not just himself.
Your the other post said you just want GC in a shorter time. Can I ask you who want GC in a longer time or who doesn't want it in a shorter time?
Who determine the best jobs are? and who determine the best people are?
The "Equal Opportunity" word is really for Americans to read. Until you get your GC, that is not really for you.
Think about this, if the annual limit is 100, the country limit is 7%. Because it has processed 7 people so it closes the door and you think that is not fair. Do you take a look at the others who have to wait in line because 100 limit is hit even thought there's not one single case is approved for his country? USCIS is not processing one for each country at a time. Do you know your line is actually might already taken advanatge on other lines?
State this is not for fight something, but want to remind you the fair you think might not be fair to others. If you want to play the game, you have to follow the rules. If the rules are not clear, we fight for making clear rule. If you fight for rules to benefit you, that is taking advantage on others.
Increase the annual limit and recapture unused Visa from the past years are what we should push right now. But it is just a solution for only resolve problem for people who are currently stuck in I-485. After run out of recaptured Visa, the pipe will get stuck again.
I personally think the country limit will not change and if country limit is the policy, it should start at PERM, not just at I-485.
Per country rationing is discriminatory for EB migration. The best jobs should go to the best people, regardless of national origin, race, or religion - this basic principle is enshrined in employment law, but when it comes to EB migration, it is disregarded! It is not about "giving everyone an equal chance" - this is not a charity, this is a business, and in business, only the best and the brightest get those jobs.
I believe HV000 is either favor of per country quotas, nor is he a glutton for punishment. He sees the concept and current rule of this country, not just himself.
Your the other post said you just want GC in a shorter time. Can I ask you who want GC in a longer time or who doesn't want it in a shorter time?
Who determine the best jobs are? and who determine the best people are?
The "Equal Opportunity" word is really for Americans to read. Until you get your GC, that is not really for you.
Think about this, if the annual limit is 100, the country limit is 7%. Because it has processed 7 people so it closes the door and you think that is not fair. Do you take a look at the others who have to wait in line because 100 limit is hit even thought there's not one single case is approved for his country? USCIS is not processing one for each country at a time. Do you know your line is actually might already taken advanatge on other lines?
State this is not for fight something, but want to remind you the fair you think might not be fair to others. If you want to play the game, you have to follow the rules. If the rules are not clear, we fight for making clear rule. If you fight for rules to benefit you, that is taking advantage on others.
Increase the annual limit and recapture unused Visa from the past years are what we should push right now. But it is just a solution for only resolve problem for people who are currently stuck in I-485. After run out of recaptured Visa, the pipe will get stuck again.
I personally think the country limit will not change and if country limit is the policy, it should start at PERM, not just at I-485.
sunty
11-11 09:37 AM
vin13,
This just beats me..Why was the conference call idea for such an important issue floated only in the Donor Forum. Fine, the Donors pay and they deserve to have some information. But if you need bigger participation from IV members, the conf. call idea should have been in the General Forum as well....
Anyways, can this still be arranged ? I would love to be a part of that in any possible way. Please let me and all the other members know.
This just beats me..Why was the conference call idea for such an important issue floated only in the Donor Forum. Fine, the Donors pay and they deserve to have some information. But if you need bigger participation from IV members, the conf. call idea should have been in the General Forum as well....
Anyways, can this still be arranged ? I would love to be a part of that in any possible way. Please let me and all the other members know.
2011 street artist Banksy.
speddi
07-18 10:01 AM
my application reached texas center on july 2nd at 10.23am .. I called USCIS today and the rep said they didnt enter the information into the system..he said it might take upto 30 days to start giving receipt notices because of the load of applications
more...
Suva
06-11 11:29 AM
Sent to NJ lawmakers.
DallasBlue
09-11 10:29 PM
The Govenors are on our side! There's thousands of us with may reasons why to attend, but here's a very important one:
This is for YOU! Only for YOU! YOU deserve this! That's why we want to see YOU in Washington! Help yourself!!! YOU have earned the right!!!!
Thank you Governor(s)!!
Congressmen/Senators please do what the nation's leaders are are asking you for a long time.
Jaime, Guess we may have to organize a walk to Crawford ? what do you think ?
This is for YOU! Only for YOU! YOU deserve this! That's why we want to see YOU in Washington! Help yourself!!! YOU have earned the right!!!!
Thank you Governor(s)!!
Congressmen/Senators please do what the nation's leaders are are asking you for a long time.
Jaime, Guess we may have to organize a walk to Crawford ? what do you think ?
more...
NKR
07-29 12:06 AM
Time for a chill beer, anybody wants to join? If yes, wherever you are, cheers :cool:
Cheers dude, working on an assignment...
hick. gueesa i hadf twoo machs beor.. hick ...goodsnightsss
Cheers dude, working on an assignment...
hick. gueesa i hadf twoo machs beor.. hick ...goodsnightsss
2010 Artist Signature Banksy Mug
solraj
03-12 05:55 AM
Good to see some progress on Eb3. Something is moving atleast. I am pleased.
more...
GCaspirations
10-12 09:21 PM
EB3 - Feb 2004
485,EAD,AP : RD July3107 at NSC
485,EAD,AP : ND Oct0307 at CSC
EAD,AP approved : Oct10 at CSC
I would like to know if your case has been transferred back to NSC. Also have you received FP notice yet.
485,EAD,AP : RD July3107 at NSC
485,EAD,AP : ND Oct0307 at CSC
EAD,AP approved : Oct10 at CSC
I would like to know if your case has been transferred back to NSC. Also have you received FP notice yet.
hair anksy nob artist graffiti art
akred
06-12 11:52 AM
CIR needs to die for the simple reason that the processing workload for the illegals on the USCIS will add another 3 years of wait for everybody. Simple fact of the matter is that the system has not finished recovering from the last 245(i) amnesty that ended in 2001. That was when the DOL received 6 years of applications in one week and everybody ended up waiting 3 years or more.
more...
kate123
02-04 11:28 AM
well said.
Some questions to those who are supporting country cap.
Why not put a country cap on foreign students’ visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on H1B visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on labor certifications?
Why not put a country cap on I-140s?
Why not impose a country cap at the port of entry?
Why not put a country cap on visitors’ visas?
Why not put a country cap on business visas?
Why not put a country cap on US trade with other countries?
Why not put a country cap on amount of US $ reserves that each country can have?
Why not put a country cap on children that foreigners in the US can bear?
Why not put a country cap on the foreigners’ earnings in the US?
.
.
.
And the list can go on.
Putting country cap on greens cards serves a hidden racist agenda of not letting the people of one particular ethnic group grow in number and become strong.
Some questions to those who are supporting country cap.
Why not put a country cap on foreign students’ visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on H1B visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on labor certifications?
Why not put a country cap on I-140s?
Why not impose a country cap at the port of entry?
Why not put a country cap on visitors’ visas?
Why not put a country cap on business visas?
Why not put a country cap on US trade with other countries?
Why not put a country cap on amount of US $ reserves that each country can have?
Why not put a country cap on children that foreigners in the US can bear?
Why not put a country cap on the foreigners’ earnings in the US?
.
.
.
And the list can go on.
Putting country cap on greens cards serves a hidden racist agenda of not letting the people of one particular ethnic group grow in number and become strong.
hot Graffiti artist Banksy
karanp25
07-11 01:50 PM
I agree 100%.
again no one can explain the ridiculous date movements by DOS...so there can be no reason for this..Its just that someone saw numbers being wasted...and they randomly applied them to EB2...Now as for getting approvals for all those that are current now...forget it ...since that is USCIS and that is a whole different Animal (a lazy one!!)
again no one can explain the ridiculous date movements by DOS...so there can be no reason for this..Its just that someone saw numbers being wasted...and they randomly applied them to EB2...Now as for getting approvals for all those that are current now...forget it ...since that is USCIS and that is a whole different Animal (a lazy one!!)
more...
house artist Banksy bombed the
pappu
07-05 11:22 AM
Core is putting their time and mmoney and doing this all for everybody
Pray please tell me what the core did for people stuck in BEC's.
Even these people contributed and once the dates were made current everybody and I'm sorry to say including the core forgot about them.
I know I'll be bashed for wrting this and pls dont get offended but I just had to ask.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6084
Pray please tell me what the core did for people stuck in BEC's.
Even these people contributed and once the dates were made current everybody and I'm sorry to say including the core forgot about them.
I know I'll be bashed for wrting this and pls dont get offended but I just had to ask.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6084
tattoo Banksy in Alabama
mbawa2574
02-18 06:19 PM
Sorry guys, I misread somewhere.:D
What about illegal immigrants with < 5years. I think these senators will leave the overall problem unsolved.
Whenever you talk with any politician , illegal immigration pops in. They just love it...
I am not sure any of these people understand immigration laws.
Hmm Is this different from India or any other country ? ...no
Politician preach what majority vote bank likes...I have no hopes from this anti-business, anti-innovation congress and an inexperienced President. When they started their gig with voting against Skilled Immigrants, I am not sure what else is coming.
On the other hand- Watch out Obama's economic recovery plans, they punish every person who is successful by virtue of his hardwork and will add debt on US books.. I am sure Obama would be driving out innovation from this country by joining hands with Anti-Captalist and Anti-business lobby.
What about illegal immigrants with < 5years. I think these senators will leave the overall problem unsolved.
Whenever you talk with any politician , illegal immigration pops in. They just love it...
I am not sure any of these people understand immigration laws.
Hmm Is this different from India or any other country ? ...no
Politician preach what majority vote bank likes...I have no hopes from this anti-business, anti-innovation congress and an inexperienced President. When they started their gig with voting against Skilled Immigrants, I am not sure what else is coming.
On the other hand- Watch out Obama's economic recovery plans, they punish every person who is successful by virtue of his hardwork and will add debt on US books.. I am sure Obama would be driving out innovation from this country by joining hands with Anti-Captalist and Anti-business lobby.
more...
pictures of the artists critics,
sanju
04-04 03:30 PM
Your argument may be true only some extent. If you keep on asking more H1b and GC without meaningful reform of H1b then it won't sell in the congress and they will try to keep staus quo and you have to wait years to get gc. How do you resolve the problem of Cap reached within few days? Will congress accept unlimited H1bs? What is the solution for this?
Your posts seem to suggest that because we (collectively all of us on the forum) have not yet agreed to a �meaningful reform� of H-1b,that has prevented fixes to the green card process? Is that what has truly delayed fixing the current green card backlog?
Secondly, we do not have to choose between the one and the other i.e. we do not have to choose between supporting Durbin-Grassley bill and delay with the green card. Do you think that supporting Durbin-Grassley bill that contains absolutely nothing to fix green card delays will somehow speed up the green card process?
We (all of us when calling lawmakers) HAVE to differentiate between increase/decrease in H-1b and green card delays. H-1b is not our issue and we will be better of staying as far away from that issue as possible. If we have to call, then we should call in to support a bill that has our provisions, rather than a bill that has nothing for us or maybe stuff that would hurt us.
Your posts seem to suggest that because we (collectively all of us on the forum) have not yet agreed to a �meaningful reform� of H-1b,that has prevented fixes to the green card process? Is that what has truly delayed fixing the current green card backlog?
Secondly, we do not have to choose between the one and the other i.e. we do not have to choose between supporting Durbin-Grassley bill and delay with the green card. Do you think that supporting Durbin-Grassley bill that contains absolutely nothing to fix green card delays will somehow speed up the green card process?
We (all of us when calling lawmakers) HAVE to differentiate between increase/decrease in H-1b and green card delays. H-1b is not our issue and we will be better of staying as far away from that issue as possible. If we have to call, then we should call in to support a bill that has our provisions, rather than a bill that has nothing for us or maybe stuff that would hurt us.
dresses been abuzz with Banksy,
madhu345
12-27 06:51 AM
As many Airlines startes Non Stop services to India, why do we care abiut Transit visa.
I travelled American in May the service is pretty good, also Continental is pretty good.
-Madhu
I travelled American in May the service is pretty good, also Continental is pretty good.
-Madhu
more...
makeup graffiti artist banksy.
Rajeev
01-31 04:28 PM
This is what I have come up with so far. Please everyone, feel free to modify this:
Have you been following at the snails pace movement of the priority dates? If not, here are some reminders
EB3 moved 2 weeks in 10 months!
EB2 hardly moved in 10 months!
If this is the rate at which things move, you will get your Green Card in anywhere from 5 to 15 years based on your priority dates.
Do you know how this affects you?
� Frustration of sticking to the same employer and no career growth.
� Children not being able to get state benefits.
� Spouses unable to work.
� The feeling of unsettlement.
� Above all, tons of mental stress.
Do you want be in this mess for ever. I am sure you don�t. We deserve better.
We all have to fight together to fix this broken immigration system and achieve IV�s goals to
� Remove retrogression
� Remove backlogs in labor certification
� Remove backlogs in I-140 and I-485 processing
� Revise the way visa quotas for highly skilled workers are determined
Register FREE to become a member today!
www.immigrationvoice.org
Excellent job Varsha. I would like to modify one line.
Children not being able to get scholarships, cannot work or get state tuition benefits instead of 'Children not being able to get state benefits.'
Have you been following at the snails pace movement of the priority dates? If not, here are some reminders
EB3 moved 2 weeks in 10 months!
EB2 hardly moved in 10 months!
If this is the rate at which things move, you will get your Green Card in anywhere from 5 to 15 years based on your priority dates.
Do you know how this affects you?
� Frustration of sticking to the same employer and no career growth.
� Children not being able to get state benefits.
� Spouses unable to work.
� The feeling of unsettlement.
� Above all, tons of mental stress.
Do you want be in this mess for ever. I am sure you don�t. We deserve better.
We all have to fight together to fix this broken immigration system and achieve IV�s goals to
� Remove retrogression
� Remove backlogs in labor certification
� Remove backlogs in I-140 and I-485 processing
� Revise the way visa quotas for highly skilled workers are determined
Register FREE to become a member today!
www.immigrationvoice.org
Excellent job Varsha. I would like to modify one line.
Children not being able to get scholarships, cannot work or get state tuition benefits instead of 'Children not being able to get state benefits.'
girlfriend The stencil artist Banksy has
obviously
07-16 08:03 PM
Folks, as someone with a background in public policy, permit me to remind us all that the MAJORITY of the lawmakers' inputs and influence comes from their staffers. Most lawmakers have dedicated staffers who focus on immigration. I would urge EVERYONE who reads this to send a message addressed to:
Staffers and Aides on Immigration Policy
c/o Office of the {Insert respective lawmaker's name and address}
with a PROFESSIONAL, easy to ready, point-by-point, clear outlining of TOP MYTHS promoted around high skilled legal immigration.
In order to be effective, we should have an efficient and sustained mechanism in messaging out.
Also, in speaking with a few lawmakers' aides (and former aides), a repeated refrain was a suggestion that we NOT PREACH to them, because many of them are well aware of the facts and circumstances. What they ask for is easy to read and digest FACTS, *not* our opinions and emotions on how to fix the problem. They get paid to address matters of public policy.
So, I will ask everyone if they can take a few moments to send such a note and eventually build a relation with each of their respective immigration aides so that they can get to send them such factual information.
EMPATHIZE with those who lose jobs in the US, but RECOGNIZE that outsourcing etc is a function of Wall Street, not immigrants squatting on Main Street!
Cheers!
Staffers and Aides on Immigration Policy
c/o Office of the {Insert respective lawmaker's name and address}
with a PROFESSIONAL, easy to ready, point-by-point, clear outlining of TOP MYTHS promoted around high skilled legal immigration.
In order to be effective, we should have an efficient and sustained mechanism in messaging out.
Also, in speaking with a few lawmakers' aides (and former aides), a repeated refrain was a suggestion that we NOT PREACH to them, because many of them are well aware of the facts and circumstances. What they ask for is easy to read and digest FACTS, *not* our opinions and emotions on how to fix the problem. They get paid to address matters of public policy.
So, I will ask everyone if they can take a few moments to send such a note and eventually build a relation with each of their respective immigration aides so that they can get to send them such factual information.
EMPATHIZE with those who lose jobs in the US, but RECOGNIZE that outsourcing etc is a function of Wall Street, not immigrants squatting on Main Street!
Cheers!
hairstyles Flowering artist: Banksy#39;s
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!
===============
feedfront
10-07 02:53 PM
My packet delivered to mailroom today morning at 9:07 by UPS. And just now at 2:48 got page and checked online status and its says they issued RFE again?
�On October 7, 2010, we mailed a notice requesting additional evidence or information in this case�
Not sure whether it�s their system glitch or it�s my luck... :confused:
Is it happen to anyone else or it�s me?
I hope it is just system/human glitch.
�On October 7, 2010, we mailed a notice requesting additional evidence or information in this case�
Not sure whether it�s their system glitch or it�s my luck... :confused:
Is it happen to anyone else or it�s me?
I hope it is just system/human glitch.
WillIBLucky
11-22 01:23 PM
I dont think that is correct - as per my lawyer this is what she says -
In order to move to a new employer and still continue with the same gc applications, you must meet all of the following conditions under AC21:
1. Your I-140 must be approved
2. Your I-485 must be filed and pending for at least 180 days
3. Your new job classification must be the same as in the old job
If you are missing any of the 3 conditions at the time you move to an employer, you will lose your gc application and you will need to start a new one.
So guys please make sure you give correct information. Also, I would suggest people who are asking various questions over here in IV should also talk to their own lawyers and take a decision. Please do not take decision based on comments given over here. So "LOOK BEFORE YOU LEAP".
In order to move to a new employer and still continue with the same gc applications, you must meet all of the following conditions under AC21:
1. Your I-140 must be approved
2. Your I-485 must be filed and pending for at least 180 days
3. Your new job classification must be the same as in the old job
If you are missing any of the 3 conditions at the time you move to an employer, you will lose your gc application and you will need to start a new one.
So guys please make sure you give correct information. Also, I would suggest people who are asking various questions over here in IV should also talk to their own lawyers and take a decision. Please do not take decision based on comments given over here. So "LOOK BEFORE YOU LEAP".
No comments:
Post a Comment