smuggymba
05-11 10:11 AM
What nonsense is this.
Isn't this supposed to be a public forum that people can join and share updates. There is no disclaimer that one needs to donate to participate in discussions on this forum.
If donations are mandatory - this would have been a paid only website and access to all should have been restricted. I bet the participation and visibility of a useful site like this would be detrimental in this case.
I said contribution, not donation. Money is not the only way to contribute.
last week I spent 4 dollars in sending letters abt EB1 fraud - I did not spend much money but contributed; that's what i'm looking for.
Isn't this supposed to be a public forum that people can join and share updates. There is no disclaimer that one needs to donate to participate in discussions on this forum.
If donations are mandatory - this would have been a paid only website and access to all should have been restricted. I bet the participation and visibility of a useful site like this would be detrimental in this case.
I said contribution, not donation. Money is not the only way to contribute.
last week I spent 4 dollars in sending letters abt EB1 fraud - I did not spend much money but contributed; that's what i'm looking for.
wallpaper from around the world.
Pallavi79
01-25 12:21 PM
Great discussion guys. we(atleast I) need lots and lots of these to enlighen me.
hats off to everyone.
hats off to everyone.
NolaIndian32
04-13 07:57 PM
Team IV is looking for NorCal members to join our fold! The San Francisco 5K is August 17, 2008 and it would be a great opportunity for y'all to come out and support IV's long term lobbying efforts!!
Lets Go NorCal Members!!
Lets Go NorCal Members!!
2011 round flat reads and then
rnednur
09-03 03:22 PM
How do we open an SR?
more...
zram1977
09-02 09:39 PM
It is good to see lot of peopel of EB2 India are greened in the last 48 hours. However there is no single approval of people having PD earlier to 2004.
What it means?
Either one of the following should be true.
a) IV Tracker data of 65 pages ( 65*50=3250 approx) is wrong or Not updated
(Filtered by EB2 India Pending)
or
b) USCIS is processing I-485 randomly as usual , ignoring earlier PDs
IV Gurus / Seniors / Experts / Critical thinkers can comment on this.
Thanks
What it means?
Either one of the following should be true.
a) IV Tracker data of 65 pages ( 65*50=3250 approx) is wrong or Not updated
(Filtered by EB2 India Pending)
or
b) USCIS is processing I-485 randomly as usual , ignoring earlier PDs
IV Gurus / Seniors / Experts / Critical thinkers can comment on this.
Thanks
gupta432
05-10 12:13 AM
Hi guys, Just wanted to post an update here. Me and My wife got our GC's in mail today. Our PD was May 19th 2006. Interestingly there is no update on my case online. I was very anxious and refreshing the case status page every few mins for the past few days but to my surprise, my case was approved on 5th of May and i have the cards in hand now.
Keep your hopes high and have patience. It could just be that USCIS has stopped updating the online status and started working on our cases(Wishful thinking :))
Good luck to all who are still waiting and congratulations to all who got greened!
Keep your hopes high and have patience. It could just be that USCIS has stopped updating the online status and started working on our cases(Wishful thinking :))
Good luck to all who are still waiting and congratulations to all who got greened!
more...
reddymjm
06-26 08:16 AM
The situation is the same. In my case and of course in most of others too, what he/she said is correct. Waiting for Eb3 to cross 2001 has become a difficult thing. If I started an EB2 app rather than hoping positively, I would have finished my wait for GC.
Ever since retrogression started the dates have not crossed 2001. 245i or not, the backlog is a fact. Sad part, when there is action items from IV, trying to talk to my state members, I have realized and been told that IV does not cater to EB3 anymore. It is disheartening how much ever I try to explain, occasional members look at IV threads like EB2-EB3 predictions and say there is no hope for EB3 and also IV has no answer to it.
I tried my part...too bad I was not able to participate in the IV advocacy day due to family emergency. anyway, let us hope IV's persistence yields us the results. My heart goes for a lot of EB3s who may automatically qualify for EB2 just due to their experience.
Best of luck to all.
You might be greened in SEP 2010.
Ever since retrogression started the dates have not crossed 2001. 245i or not, the backlog is a fact. Sad part, when there is action items from IV, trying to talk to my state members, I have realized and been told that IV does not cater to EB3 anymore. It is disheartening how much ever I try to explain, occasional members look at IV threads like EB2-EB3 predictions and say there is no hope for EB3 and also IV has no answer to it.
I tried my part...too bad I was not able to participate in the IV advocacy day due to family emergency. anyway, let us hope IV's persistence yields us the results. My heart goes for a lot of EB3s who may automatically qualify for EB2 just due to their experience.
Best of luck to all.
You might be greened in SEP 2010.
2010 to bake reads from around
Saralayar
04-14 12:46 PM
I guess we have enough people convinced and for those short sighted ones will have an option whether they want to get naturalized or live on their dear GCs so by that time if they educate themselves they will be convinced too.
Now what are the next steps in chanelling this effort through IV Core?
IV Core, please go through this thread and consolidate all the valid and genuine points and consider this for the phase 2 campaign...
Now what are the next steps in chanelling this effort through IV Core?
IV Core, please go through this thread and consolidate all the valid and genuine points and consider this for the phase 2 campaign...
more...
for_gc
06-12 09:19 AM
I think it made a lot of sense to me ... Here is the article in its entirely. It kind of matches with sobers and nyte_crawlers descriptions above ...
"President Bush has set out his goals on immigration reform to the American people. "There is," he said, "a rational middle ground between granting an automatic path to citizenship for every illegal immigrant, and a program of mass deportation." I agree that a rational middle ground can be found -- but amnesty is not the middle ground.
Instead, I will soon be introducing legislation, the Border Integrity and Immigration Reform Act. This bill is tough on border security and tough on employers who hire illegal aliens. It will include a guest worker program -- but it will not include an amnesty (nor require a huge new government bureaucracy to administer the program). I believe this legislation is a strong alternative to the amnesty plan passed by the Senate; and I hope that it will serve as an attractive alternative to my colleagues in the House of Representatives.
Since immigration reform must begin by securing our border, my plan incorporates the Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act, already passed by the House, in its entirety, with only minor changes. Thus my plan will add port-of-entry inspectors, end the policy of "catch and release," put to use American technology such as unmanned aerial vehicles, require a security fence to be built across our southern border, and require the Secretary of Homeland Security to certify that all these border security measures are substantially completed before any new guest worker program would begin.
But my bill does not include a so-called path to citizenship, i.e., an amnesty, for the some 12 million illegal aliens in this country. Instead, it insists that they leave and come back legally if they have a job opportunity in the U.S. They will be allowed to do so under the terms of a guest-worker program that will be implemented by firms in the private sector, not by a new government bureaucracy.
Private worker-placement agencies -- "Ellis Island Centers" -- would be licensed by the federal government to match guest workers with jobs that employers cannot fill with American workers. These agencies will match guest workers with jobs, perform health screening, fingerprint them, and convey the appropriate information to the FBI and Homeland Security so that a background check can be performed. Once this is done, the guest worker would be provided with a visa issued by the State Department. The whole process will take a matter of one week, or less.
My immigration reform plan does not favor illegal immigrants. Anyone may apply for a guest-worker visa at the new Ellis Island Centers; indeed, the plan may actually work to the advantage of applicants who have never violated our immigration laws, since guest-worker visas will be issued only outside the U.S.
There will initially be no cap on the number of visas that can be issued; for the first three years, the market and the needs of U.S. employers will set the limit on the number of guest workers. This is necessary in order to provide the incentive for illegal aliens in this country to self-deport and come back legally. After three years, however, a reasonable limit on the number of these "W" visas will be determined by the Department of Labor, based on employment statistics, employer needs and other research.
Nevertheless, there will be a limit on the amount of time guest workers can spend in this country. They would be allowed to renew their visas, but only for a period of up to six years. And in order to receive their first renewal, they would be required to study English and pass an English proficiency class.
After six years, a guest worker must decide whether to return home or seek citizenship. But he will do so under the normal rules and regulations of our naturalization laws. There is no path to citizenship in my bill.
Lastly, my immigration bill includes strict employer enforcement. It does so by incorporating the employer-enforcement provisions contained in the House-passed Border Protection bill. Thus, there will be established a nationwide electronic employment-verification system through which employers will confirm the legality of each prospective and current employee.
Employers who choose to operate outside the system would face stiff fines. Once the new enforcement system is in place, jobs for illegal aliens will dry up.
As the grandson of an Irish immigrant, I believe in the ideals enshrined on the Statue of Liberty in New York Harbor. America always has been, and always will be, a welcoming nation, welcoming under the law any and all with courage enough to come here. But a nation without borders is not a nation, and across this country Americans are anxious about our borders.
Every night Americans see news images of people crossing the border illegally. They hear of people paying thousands of dollars to "coyotes" to smuggle them into the country; they worry that drugs will make their way into the hands of their children more readily. And they rightly fear that our porous borders make it more likely that terrorists will cross with deadly intentions against our families.
I believe that my Border Integrity and Immigration Reform Act is a solution that those opposed to amnesty and those who propose a guest-worker program can both support. It offers a solution that those calling for the humane treatment of illegal immigrants can embrace.
And I believe that this solution is one the American people can embrace. This is the real rational middle ground."
"President Bush has set out his goals on immigration reform to the American people. "There is," he said, "a rational middle ground between granting an automatic path to citizenship for every illegal immigrant, and a program of mass deportation." I agree that a rational middle ground can be found -- but amnesty is not the middle ground.
Instead, I will soon be introducing legislation, the Border Integrity and Immigration Reform Act. This bill is tough on border security and tough on employers who hire illegal aliens. It will include a guest worker program -- but it will not include an amnesty (nor require a huge new government bureaucracy to administer the program). I believe this legislation is a strong alternative to the amnesty plan passed by the Senate; and I hope that it will serve as an attractive alternative to my colleagues in the House of Representatives.
Since immigration reform must begin by securing our border, my plan incorporates the Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act, already passed by the House, in its entirety, with only minor changes. Thus my plan will add port-of-entry inspectors, end the policy of "catch and release," put to use American technology such as unmanned aerial vehicles, require a security fence to be built across our southern border, and require the Secretary of Homeland Security to certify that all these border security measures are substantially completed before any new guest worker program would begin.
But my bill does not include a so-called path to citizenship, i.e., an amnesty, for the some 12 million illegal aliens in this country. Instead, it insists that they leave and come back legally if they have a job opportunity in the U.S. They will be allowed to do so under the terms of a guest-worker program that will be implemented by firms in the private sector, not by a new government bureaucracy.
Private worker-placement agencies -- "Ellis Island Centers" -- would be licensed by the federal government to match guest workers with jobs that employers cannot fill with American workers. These agencies will match guest workers with jobs, perform health screening, fingerprint them, and convey the appropriate information to the FBI and Homeland Security so that a background check can be performed. Once this is done, the guest worker would be provided with a visa issued by the State Department. The whole process will take a matter of one week, or less.
My immigration reform plan does not favor illegal immigrants. Anyone may apply for a guest-worker visa at the new Ellis Island Centers; indeed, the plan may actually work to the advantage of applicants who have never violated our immigration laws, since guest-worker visas will be issued only outside the U.S.
There will initially be no cap on the number of visas that can be issued; for the first three years, the market and the needs of U.S. employers will set the limit on the number of guest workers. This is necessary in order to provide the incentive for illegal aliens in this country to self-deport and come back legally. After three years, however, a reasonable limit on the number of these "W" visas will be determined by the Department of Labor, based on employment statistics, employer needs and other research.
Nevertheless, there will be a limit on the amount of time guest workers can spend in this country. They would be allowed to renew their visas, but only for a period of up to six years. And in order to receive their first renewal, they would be required to study English and pass an English proficiency class.
After six years, a guest worker must decide whether to return home or seek citizenship. But he will do so under the normal rules and regulations of our naturalization laws. There is no path to citizenship in my bill.
Lastly, my immigration bill includes strict employer enforcement. It does so by incorporating the employer-enforcement provisions contained in the House-passed Border Protection bill. Thus, there will be established a nationwide electronic employment-verification system through which employers will confirm the legality of each prospective and current employee.
Employers who choose to operate outside the system would face stiff fines. Once the new enforcement system is in place, jobs for illegal aliens will dry up.
As the grandson of an Irish immigrant, I believe in the ideals enshrined on the Statue of Liberty in New York Harbor. America always has been, and always will be, a welcoming nation, welcoming under the law any and all with courage enough to come here. But a nation without borders is not a nation, and across this country Americans are anxious about our borders.
Every night Americans see news images of people crossing the border illegally. They hear of people paying thousands of dollars to "coyotes" to smuggle them into the country; they worry that drugs will make their way into the hands of their children more readily. And they rightly fear that our porous borders make it more likely that terrorists will cross with deadly intentions against our families.
I believe that my Border Integrity and Immigration Reform Act is a solution that those opposed to amnesty and those who propose a guest-worker program can both support. It offers a solution that those calling for the humane treatment of illegal immigrants can embrace.
And I believe that this solution is one the American people can embrace. This is the real rational middle ground."
hair from around the world to
indian111
08-11 11:14 AM
E-filed May 22 for EAD renewal to TSC
FP done on 07/16
No updates and its getting close to 90 days .
FP done on 07/16
No updates and its getting close to 90 days .
more...
InTheQueue05
05-11 10:02 AM
don't join IV just to declare your GC.
u leeched here and never contributed and now joining to tell everyone that u have GC now. Get lost.
What nonsense is this.
Isn't this supposed to be a public forum that people can join and share updates. There is no disclaimer that one needs to donate to participate in discussions on this forum.
If donations are mandatory - this would have been a paid only website and access to all should have been restricted. I bet the participation and visibility of a useful site like this would be detrimental in this case.
u leeched here and never contributed and now joining to tell everyone that u have GC now. Get lost.
What nonsense is this.
Isn't this supposed to be a public forum that people can join and share updates. There is no disclaimer that one needs to donate to participate in discussions on this forum.
If donations are mandatory - this would have been a paid only website and access to all should have been restricted. I bet the participation and visibility of a useful site like this would be detrimental in this case.
hot of reads from around the
sdrblr
09-01 12:53 PM
I dont think it is as simple as that. I feel they have a bunch of pre-adj files and they take a "one last look" at it before approving.
If cases are preadjudicated and approval is just matter of of running script to identify probable applicants then we should see all(Based on number VISA availability) the Approvals today only.
But that seems not the case.
So what is their Process to handle Preadjudicated cases?
If cases are preadjudicated and approval is just matter of of running script to identify probable applicants then we should see all(Based on number VISA availability) the Approvals today only.
But that seems not the case.
So what is their Process to handle Preadjudicated cases?
more...
house Breads from around the world,
xela
07-15 08:14 AM
I don t give you red, but I am tired of your attitude. Guess what I have a masters degree, however in my field the jobs do not require one. Look again EB3 is not based on what peoaple have but what the job requires.
Granted even in my field they prefer to hire Masters and yes after 10 years I am a manager and a leader in my field, none of that helps me converting to Eb2 if the general impression is that Bach suffices for this as well.
Or maybe my lawyers are not as creative as yours. Either way stop trying to sound like you are so much better than EB3 people cus you are not. On the contrary I have yet to see you post something positive. Go back to bed and get some sleep maybe tomorrow you wont get up on the wrong side of bed, and finally have some more friendly attitude.
Employment based immigration was created to invite bright minds from the world and also fill the needs of companies who could not find good skills in USA citizens. It was not created to give green cards immediately to everyone who applied for one. The system works based on priority given to the top minds first who are in EB1. Then they give to EB2. There are other categories like asylum or family based created for their specific purpose.
If we are claiming to be best and the brightest having high skills and inventing then it is EB1 and EB2 mostly. By law EB3 is mostly for people who have Bachelor degree and hardly any experience in their field to claim as EB2. It does not matter you are masters from Harvard but by law, if your job requires just a bachelor degree then you are doing basic work at lower management. Legally EB3 have no case if they claim to be best and the brightest inventors. All doctors get EB2 or EB1. All managers with advanced degrees get EB2. All Scientists and PhD holders get EB1 and EB2. So EB3 is mostly people who are low skilled programmers, people in professions doing lower line work or people who despite having higher degrees are doing jobs that do not need advanced skills to be the brightest folks immigrating in USA. There are some exceptions of people who are screwed by their lawyers and employers by forcing them in EB3. These people should fight with their lawyers and employers or change their jobs to EB2. EB3 do not have a strong legal case to fight for EB3 if they claim to be best and the brightest. It is very humiliating but you like it or not EB3 is grouped with EB3 Other Workers that are waiters, janitors, construction workers, Farm workers etc.
You can give more reds. It does not matter. But if we need to fight the system, we need to understand the system and look at our strategy to fight it.
Granted even in my field they prefer to hire Masters and yes after 10 years I am a manager and a leader in my field, none of that helps me converting to Eb2 if the general impression is that Bach suffices for this as well.
Or maybe my lawyers are not as creative as yours. Either way stop trying to sound like you are so much better than EB3 people cus you are not. On the contrary I have yet to see you post something positive. Go back to bed and get some sleep maybe tomorrow you wont get up on the wrong side of bed, and finally have some more friendly attitude.
Employment based immigration was created to invite bright minds from the world and also fill the needs of companies who could not find good skills in USA citizens. It was not created to give green cards immediately to everyone who applied for one. The system works based on priority given to the top minds first who are in EB1. Then they give to EB2. There are other categories like asylum or family based created for their specific purpose.
If we are claiming to be best and the brightest having high skills and inventing then it is EB1 and EB2 mostly. By law EB3 is mostly for people who have Bachelor degree and hardly any experience in their field to claim as EB2. It does not matter you are masters from Harvard but by law, if your job requires just a bachelor degree then you are doing basic work at lower management. Legally EB3 have no case if they claim to be best and the brightest inventors. All doctors get EB2 or EB1. All managers with advanced degrees get EB2. All Scientists and PhD holders get EB1 and EB2. So EB3 is mostly people who are low skilled programmers, people in professions doing lower line work or people who despite having higher degrees are doing jobs that do not need advanced skills to be the brightest folks immigrating in USA. There are some exceptions of people who are screwed by their lawyers and employers by forcing them in EB3. These people should fight with their lawyers and employers or change their jobs to EB2. EB3 do not have a strong legal case to fight for EB3 if they claim to be best and the brightest. It is very humiliating but you like it or not EB3 is grouped with EB3 Other Workers that are waiters, janitors, construction workers, Farm workers etc.
You can give more reds. It does not matter. But if we need to fight the system, we need to understand the system and look at our strategy to fight it.
tattoo from around the world,
_medium_tcm8-19062.jpg "Analysis of reads around the")
chanduv23
07-11 09:06 PM
Congresswoman Lofgren on Visa Bulletin Debacle
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 07071165 (posted Jul. 11, 2007)"
For Immediate Release: July 11, 2007
CONTACT: Pedro Ribeiro
202-225-3072, pedro.ribeiro@mail.house.gov
Rep. Lofgren Requests Written Response to Questions on Updated Visa Bulletin
Washington, D.C. - Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose) today sent a letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Chertoff requesting "all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance" of the "Update to July Visa Availability" on July 2, 2007. The letter contains thirteen separate questions and requests for information relevant to the issuance of the updated Visa Bulletin.
"The Department's unprecedented decision to reject adjustment of status applications has caused needless hardship and disruption to countless immigrants," noted Rep. Zoe Lofgren. "It has also come to my attention that USCIS began returning visa numbers to the State Department as early as Thursday, July 5, 2007, due to their inability to review applications effectively. The Department of Homeland Security has once again demonstrated its inability to complete even its core missions. This debacle demonstrates the need for more transparency and oversight of the department's operations and procedures."
The full text of the letter is included below:
July 11, 2007
The Honorable Michael Chertoff
Secretary
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528
Dear Secretary Chertoff:
On July 2, 2007, the Department of State (DOS) issued an "Update to July Visa Availability," which the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) apparently relied on to suspend its acceptance of adjustment of status applications based on employment-based immigrant petitions. DOS and DHS acted on these matters despite my request that the agencies provide the Subcommittee with certain information before taking such actions.
At no point since my letter to you dated July 2, 2007, have I received any information in writing from the Department. Given this failure, I am now requesting that you provide to me, within three days of the date of this letter, the following information:
1. All correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the July Visa Bulletin, which made all employment-based immigrant visa categories (except the "other worker" category) current. The term "Department of Homeland Security" includes DHS or any component thereof.
2. All e-mails, correspondence, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the "Update to July Visa Availability" issued on July 2, 2007. The term "Department of Homeland Security" includes DHS or any component thereof.
3. All correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation between the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of State, the Department of Justice and/or the Federal Bureau of Investigation relating to the availability of visa numbers for the month of July 2007, the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the "Update to July Visa Availability" issued on July 2, 2007, the processing of security or name checks in connection with visa number requests through the end of FY 2007, and/or the determination to suspend or reject the acceptance of adjustment of status applications. The terms "Department of Homeland Security," "Department of State," "Department of Justice" and "Federal Bureau of Investigation" include DHS, DOS, DOJ, FBI or any components of those agencies.
4. A detailed description of any existing or proposed understanding, arrangement and/or agreement between DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) and the FBI (or any component thereof) relating to name checks or other security checks conducted with respect to immigration applications or petitions.
5. A detailed description of how DHS and/or the FBI expect the processes for such name or security checks to change through the end of FY 2007, and, in particular, within the month of July 2007.
6. A detailed description, including, but not limited to, a statistical tallying, of all employment-based immigration cases, petitions, applications or other files for which DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to USCIS) requested a visa number between May 2007 and July 2, 2007, inclusive, for which any name or security check was pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action on a security or name check. (Hereinafter, such cases will be referred to as cases for which visa numbers were "pre-requested.")
7. The specific legal authority on which DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to, USCIS) relied to "pre-request" visa numbers for cases, applications, petitions or other files for which security or name checks were pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action. The response to this question shall include copies of the specific legal authority, including statutory provisions, regulations, field manuals, policy memoranda, policy guidance or other documentation relied upon, as well as the date or dates on which such authority was last revised or issued, the substance of any revision and the original text that was revised.
8. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, field guidance, notes or other documentation discussing or referencing the agency's decision to "pre-request" visa numbers for which security or name checks were pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action.
9. Any and all field guidance, e-mails, correspondence, memoranda, notes or other documentation discussing or referencing the agency's plans, policies or other proposed or expected actions in the event security or name checks for cases, applications, petitions or other files for which the agency "pre-requested" visa numbers are not or do not get completed during July 2007 or the remainder of FY 2007, including, but not limited to, whether the agency has proposed or intends to return, or has discussed returning, visa numbers for such cases to DOS.
10. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes or other documentation between DHS (including any component thereof, including, but not limited to, USCIS) and DOS regarding the availability of visa numbers for June 2007, July 2007, or any remaining month of FY 2007, including, but not limited to, the anticipated numbers available during such months, the expected or anticipated usage of or requests for such numbers and/or the update, revision, restatement or alteration of the July Visa Bulletin.
11. Any and all records or other documentation (with a summary for ease of analysis) regarding historic patterns of overtime ordered for work on weekends, including specifically the weekend leading up to July 2, 2007, and the reasons in each case that prompted the overtime, for the past three years.
12. Any and all records or other documentation (with a summary for ease of analysis) regarding historic patterns of adjudication of adjustment of status cases, including a breakout for adjustment of status cases based on employment-based immigrant petitions, on a monthly basis for the past three years.
13. Any and all records, analyses, spreadsheets, related e-mails, memoranda, correspondence or other documentation evaluating the potential financial effects to DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to USCIS) if adjustment of status cases eligible for filing under the initial July 2007 Visa Bulletin were filed before, on or after July 30, 2007.
Thank you for your immediate consideration of this very important matter.
Sincerely,
Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security & International Law
cc: Secretary Condoleezza Rice, U.S. Department of State
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren is serving her seventh term in Congress representing most of the City of San Jose and Santa Clara County. She serves as Chair of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law. She also Chairs the House Administration Subcommittee on Elections and serves on the House Homeland Security Committee. Congresswoman Lofgren is Chair of the California Democratic Congressional Delegation consisting of 34 Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives from California.
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 07071165 (posted Jul. 11, 2007)"
For Immediate Release: July 11, 2007
CONTACT: Pedro Ribeiro
202-225-3072, pedro.ribeiro@mail.house.gov
Rep. Lofgren Requests Written Response to Questions on Updated Visa Bulletin
Washington, D.C. - Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose) today sent a letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Chertoff requesting "all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance" of the "Update to July Visa Availability" on July 2, 2007. The letter contains thirteen separate questions and requests for information relevant to the issuance of the updated Visa Bulletin.
"The Department's unprecedented decision to reject adjustment of status applications has caused needless hardship and disruption to countless immigrants," noted Rep. Zoe Lofgren. "It has also come to my attention that USCIS began returning visa numbers to the State Department as early as Thursday, July 5, 2007, due to their inability to review applications effectively. The Department of Homeland Security has once again demonstrated its inability to complete even its core missions. This debacle demonstrates the need for more transparency and oversight of the department's operations and procedures."
The full text of the letter is included below:
July 11, 2007
The Honorable Michael Chertoff
Secretary
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528
Dear Secretary Chertoff:
On July 2, 2007, the Department of State (DOS) issued an "Update to July Visa Availability," which the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) apparently relied on to suspend its acceptance of adjustment of status applications based on employment-based immigrant petitions. DOS and DHS acted on these matters despite my request that the agencies provide the Subcommittee with certain information before taking such actions.
At no point since my letter to you dated July 2, 2007, have I received any information in writing from the Department. Given this failure, I am now requesting that you provide to me, within three days of the date of this letter, the following information:
1. All correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the July Visa Bulletin, which made all employment-based immigrant visa categories (except the "other worker" category) current. The term "Department of Homeland Security" includes DHS or any component thereof.
2. All e-mails, correspondence, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the "Update to July Visa Availability" issued on July 2, 2007. The term "Department of Homeland Security" includes DHS or any component thereof.
3. All correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation between the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of State, the Department of Justice and/or the Federal Bureau of Investigation relating to the availability of visa numbers for the month of July 2007, the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the "Update to July Visa Availability" issued on July 2, 2007, the processing of security or name checks in connection with visa number requests through the end of FY 2007, and/or the determination to suspend or reject the acceptance of adjustment of status applications. The terms "Department of Homeland Security," "Department of State," "Department of Justice" and "Federal Bureau of Investigation" include DHS, DOS, DOJ, FBI or any components of those agencies.
4. A detailed description of any existing or proposed understanding, arrangement and/or agreement between DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) and the FBI (or any component thereof) relating to name checks or other security checks conducted with respect to immigration applications or petitions.
5. A detailed description of how DHS and/or the FBI expect the processes for such name or security checks to change through the end of FY 2007, and, in particular, within the month of July 2007.
6. A detailed description, including, but not limited to, a statistical tallying, of all employment-based immigration cases, petitions, applications or other files for which DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to USCIS) requested a visa number between May 2007 and July 2, 2007, inclusive, for which any name or security check was pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action on a security or name check. (Hereinafter, such cases will be referred to as cases for which visa numbers were "pre-requested.")
7. The specific legal authority on which DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to, USCIS) relied to "pre-request" visa numbers for cases, applications, petitions or other files for which security or name checks were pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action. The response to this question shall include copies of the specific legal authority, including statutory provisions, regulations, field manuals, policy memoranda, policy guidance or other documentation relied upon, as well as the date or dates on which such authority was last revised or issued, the substance of any revision and the original text that was revised.
8. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, field guidance, notes or other documentation discussing or referencing the agency's decision to "pre-request" visa numbers for which security or name checks were pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action.
9. Any and all field guidance, e-mails, correspondence, memoranda, notes or other documentation discussing or referencing the agency's plans, policies or other proposed or expected actions in the event security or name checks for cases, applications, petitions or other files for which the agency "pre-requested" visa numbers are not or do not get completed during July 2007 or the remainder of FY 2007, including, but not limited to, whether the agency has proposed or intends to return, or has discussed returning, visa numbers for such cases to DOS.
10. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes or other documentation between DHS (including any component thereof, including, but not limited to, USCIS) and DOS regarding the availability of visa numbers for June 2007, July 2007, or any remaining month of FY 2007, including, but not limited to, the anticipated numbers available during such months, the expected or anticipated usage of or requests for such numbers and/or the update, revision, restatement or alteration of the July Visa Bulletin.
11. Any and all records or other documentation (with a summary for ease of analysis) regarding historic patterns of overtime ordered for work on weekends, including specifically the weekend leading up to July 2, 2007, and the reasons in each case that prompted the overtime, for the past three years.
12. Any and all records or other documentation (with a summary for ease of analysis) regarding historic patterns of adjudication of adjustment of status cases, including a breakout for adjustment of status cases based on employment-based immigrant petitions, on a monthly basis for the past three years.
13. Any and all records, analyses, spreadsheets, related e-mails, memoranda, correspondence or other documentation evaluating the potential financial effects to DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to USCIS) if adjustment of status cases eligible for filing under the initial July 2007 Visa Bulletin were filed before, on or after July 30, 2007.
Thank you for your immediate consideration of this very important matter.
Sincerely,
Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security & International Law
cc: Secretary Condoleezza Rice, U.S. Department of State
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren is serving her seventh term in Congress representing most of the City of San Jose and Santa Clara County. She serves as Chair of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law. She also Chairs the House Administration Subcommittee on Elections and serves on the House Homeland Security Committee. Congresswoman Lofgren is Chair of the California Democratic Congressional Delegation consisting of 34 Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives from California.
more...
pictures Bread baked around the world
tonyHK12
02-24 09:30 AM
...just wondering if it got sent already but not received it (checked my spam box also) because of any issue/settings.
I got it yesterday noon. Anyways, we can just paste the text from Pappu's message. The links have to be manually copied though for the 3 options
I got it yesterday noon. Anyways, we can just paste the text from Pappu's message. The links have to be manually copied though for the 3 options
dresses Easter Breads From Around the
alex99
10-12 11:24 AM
BharatPremi. It looks good.
more...
makeup all around the world.
factoryman
06-13 11:21 PM
My PD is Nov 2001. It became current last month. Filed 485 this month. Now I see people with 2007 PDs eligible to file. Can't complain. Take it as it comes and proceed. You are not a player in these. You are only a spectator.
All will be fine. Good luck.
Years we have been told priority date establishes your place in the queue.
We have spurned job offers and declined the new PERM process to hold on to the priority dates.
Many are still awaiting labor certifications from the backlog elimination centers. Out comes USCIS and says everyone with a LC can file I140 & I485.
People still waiting for LC with priority dates in 2003-2004 are seeing applicants who have priority dates as late as 2007 but with approved LCs through PERM walk through to I485.
Net result, USCIS is going to be flooded with applicants enough to retrogress the priority dates 3-4 years back as early as september. (Everybody with a LC will be able to file for I485 in July). So applicants with priority dates of 2007 are going to get EAD and GC, while LC backlogged 2003 applicants to have to wait for another 3-4 years before they can even file I485.
Aint fair. Aint fair at all. How can this be. How can rules be changed in the middle of the game.
All will be fine. Good luck.
Years we have been told priority date establishes your place in the queue.
We have spurned job offers and declined the new PERM process to hold on to the priority dates.
Many are still awaiting labor certifications from the backlog elimination centers. Out comes USCIS and says everyone with a LC can file I140 & I485.
People still waiting for LC with priority dates in 2003-2004 are seeing applicants who have priority dates as late as 2007 but with approved LCs through PERM walk through to I485.
Net result, USCIS is going to be flooded with applicants enough to retrogress the priority dates 3-4 years back as early as september. (Everybody with a LC will be able to file for I485 in July). So applicants with priority dates of 2007 are going to get EAD and GC, while LC backlogged 2003 applicants to have to wait for another 3-4 years before they can even file I485.
Aint fair. Aint fair at all. How can this be. How can rules be changed in the middle of the game.
girlfriend Analysis of reads around the
naidu2543
05-01 04:08 PM
Guys,
Again, post your field of work. I somehow see reluctance here on the part of posters. 2 to 3 have done so, but the rest have not. If it is only IT for the major part, we have to analyse and see why IT is being targeted for audits... ?
thanks!
I think all the fields are getting targeted. I am not from IT. As per my attorney, current situation is that PERMS for EB2's are getting 100% audited.
Again, post your field of work. I somehow see reluctance here on the part of posters. 2 to 3 have done so, but the rest have not. If it is only IT for the major part, we have to analyse and see why IT is being targeted for audits... ?
thanks!
I think all the fields are getting targeted. I am not from IT. As per my attorney, current situation is that PERMS for EB2's are getting 100% audited.
hairstyles hunger around the world.
neelu
03-24 12:05 AM
Thank you, Ashok and PMPForGC!!!
We need more guys like you. Also please contribute as much as can in cash and kind!
We have 9807 members now. That is less than 200 members short of the magic number!
Now that we have the STRIVE Act introduced in congress, we need all the numbers we can. And we need dollars more than ever!
It is now or never, do or die.
Please help add members and contribute.
Together we can!
We need more guys like you. Also please contribute as much as can in cash and kind!
We have 9807 members now. That is less than 200 members short of the magic number!
Now that we have the STRIVE Act introduced in congress, we need all the numbers we can. And we need dollars more than ever!
It is now or never, do or die.
Please help add members and contribute.
Together we can!
santb1975
04-15 12:33 AM
I will be at all three events as well
I have it in me, and I will be running all of the Team IV events to show my dedication and support for this cause.
I have it in me, and I will be running all of the Team IV events to show my dedication and support for this cause.
smuggymba
05-11 09:10 AM
Join Date: Aug 2010; Posts: 1
Just received SMS/email that my application is approved (PD June 23, 2006, NSC)
Best luck to all, I am sure you will get approval email/SMS soon.
don't join IV just to declare your GC.
u leeched here and never contributed and now joining to tell everyone that u have GC now. Get lost.
Just received SMS/email that my application is approved (PD June 23, 2006, NSC)
Best luck to all, I am sure you will get approval email/SMS soon.
don't join IV just to declare your GC.
u leeched here and never contributed and now joining to tell everyone that u have GC now. Get lost.