ArkBird
09-01 03:27 PM
- Came to US in 1997.
- Had Labor + 140 approved in Dec, 99.
- tricked and lured by start-up in silicon valley. Abandoned everything and came to California in Jan, 2000 made the deadly mistake of not taking the copy of approved I-140 (I still slap myself every morning for that mistake ;) )
- Found out they have only one customer
- Founder wasted own 20 Million dollars but never increased the tally for the customer from 1
- "Startup" went under in 2002.
- Joined new company (the only customer of start-up) and filed labor in March, 2003 and enjoying every minute of it... :)
Cheers
ArkBird
- Had Labor + 140 approved in Dec, 99.
- tricked and lured by start-up in silicon valley. Abandoned everything and came to California in Jan, 2000 made the deadly mistake of not taking the copy of approved I-140 (I still slap myself every morning for that mistake ;) )
- Found out they have only one customer
- Founder wasted own 20 Million dollars but never increased the tally for the customer from 1
- "Startup" went under in 2002.
- Joined new company (the only customer of start-up) and filed labor in March, 2003 and enjoying every minute of it... :)
Cheers
ArkBird
wallpaper Funny player cards black ops
ItIsNotFunny
10-21 11:06 AM
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Guys,
This is one of the most serious issue we are facing in current time. Lay offs are happening left and right and on top of that employers learned that AC21 is giving troubles, they started squeezing more (I myself is partially victim of that).
We need sincere efforts sending emails to ombudsman. This will not take more than 5 minutes as NK2006 put efforts on even giving you the email template.
I sincerely urge everyone to send emails to addresses NK2006 mentioned above and even request your collegues, spouse to do so. We need volume to show our presence.
One more request, please take one more minute and make sure that you post here that you sent emails. This will give us real picture and give others motivation too!
I sent my emails (actually twice ;)).
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Guys,
This is one of the most serious issue we are facing in current time. Lay offs are happening left and right and on top of that employers learned that AC21 is giving troubles, they started squeezing more (I myself is partially victim of that).
We need sincere efforts sending emails to ombudsman. This will not take more than 5 minutes as NK2006 put efforts on even giving you the email template.
I sincerely urge everyone to send emails to addresses NK2006 mentioned above and even request your collegues, spouse to do so. We need volume to show our presence.
One more request, please take one more minute and make sure that you post here that you sent emails. This will give us real picture and give others motivation too!
I sent my emails (actually twice ;)).
mzafar125
05-02 09:30 AM
Hello,
Just wanted to let you know that I received my refund yesterday. My wife and I filed a joint return. We both have SSN's. Just relax folks if you filed your taxes you will receive the refund. I had hoped the money could have been put to better use but oh well the politicians know better.
PD Oct 2002 ROW
485 files in June 2007
Still waiting for that darn GC
Just wanted to let you know that I received my refund yesterday. My wife and I filed a joint return. We both have SSN's. Just relax folks if you filed your taxes you will receive the refund. I had hoped the money could have been put to better use but oh well the politicians know better.
PD Oct 2002 ROW
485 files in June 2007
Still waiting for that darn GC
2011 creative lack ops player
mpadapa
07-11 08:40 AM
Great news for EB2 folks.
If EB2-I moves to June 2006 then EB2 C will almost be in the same or better position. So June 2007 bulletin folks aka EB2-C (Jan 2006) will be the main beneficiary. EB2 I folks who are lucky with RD before the current processing dates (mid July) can expect surprise mails. Good luck
If EB2-I moves to June 2006 then EB2 C will almost be in the same or better position. So June 2007 bulletin folks aka EB2-C (Jan 2006) will be the main beneficiary. EB2 I folks who are lucky with RD before the current processing dates (mid July) can expect surprise mails. Good luck
more...
sameet
02-19 11:27 AM
I don't think anybody can predict EB-3 India as it is a lost cause (sorry for being pessimistic). The only way EB-3 India will see any meaningful progress is through legislation.
I don't understand why EB3-I is a lost cause. Isn't the percentage distribution for the various categories taken into account? I don;t think I understand how the percentage distrubution works probably. Can anyone please explain?
I don't understand why EB3-I is a lost cause. Isn't the percentage distribution for the various categories taken into account? I don;t think I understand how the percentage distrubution works probably. Can anyone please explain?
ind_game
05-15 11:04 PM
Thanks for the reply. I hope that this time it gets approved. I think the best approach to this is to show the timeline of your petition and I-485, with accompanying evidence for each point in time.
I guess that the supervisor of the IO processing your case did not even bother to review the MTR. As I understand (correct me if wrong), MTRs go to the same IO who denied your case but it has to be reviewed and approved by the Supervisor.
Thanks for your wishes.
I agree with you regarding the timeline and evidence. I have mentioned it to my attorney numerous times. My attorney was insistent that adjudicating officers can see all my info on their computer screens. It is only a matter of looking at the info correctly.
It looks like the first MTR went to the same IO who denied my I-485. I could say it from ID in both the denial letters.
I guess that the supervisor of the IO processing your case did not even bother to review the MTR. As I understand (correct me if wrong), MTRs go to the same IO who denied your case but it has to be reviewed and approved by the Supervisor.
Thanks for your wishes.
I agree with you regarding the timeline and evidence. I have mentioned it to my attorney numerous times. My attorney was insistent that adjudicating officers can see all my info on their computer screens. It is only a matter of looking at the info correctly.
It looks like the first MTR went to the same IO who denied my I-485. I could say it from ID in both the denial letters.
more...
s_r_e_e
08-10 12:32 PM
I am sorry for posting in here, but I was wondering if someone actually went in person to the Houston Consulate to get their passport renewed. Also, do we need to have any reason to attend in person at the Consulate such as emergency, etc.
I am from India and my passport is expiring on Aug 17. I read before in the forum that it is better to go in person to renew the passport. Any experiences please let me know.
Thanks a bunch
If you are around houston, it would be better to go in person. I think they accept the applications only until noon. They would tell u a Pickup date or u have an option to get it mailed. The passport is ready for pickup in 10 working days or so.
I am from India and my passport is expiring on Aug 17. I read before in the forum that it is better to go in person to renew the passport. Any experiences please let me know.
Thanks a bunch
If you are around houston, it would be better to go in person. I think they accept the applications only until noon. They would tell u a Pickup date or u have an option to get it mailed. The passport is ready for pickup in 10 working days or so.
2010 call of duty lack ops player
Tshelar
06-24 12:55 PM
Hasn't this been discussed already?
It does not make a difference to America, if a few hundred thousand foreign workers get their GCs today or 10 years later. The people America would really be concerned about are outstanding researchers, but then these people fall in the EB1 category which is always current and so they have no cause for complaint. The other category that the US is concerned about is cheap and illegal labor, but that is not related to GCs. So in short, there is nothing about the Eb2/Eb3 GC backlog that America needs to worry about.
The delay causes anxiety & frustration only for us applicants. So the impact is only on us.
Every year H1B quota is getting filled withing few days to a week. Majority of H1B applicants eventually land up applying GC in EB2/EB3 category, so america has nothing to lose as it keeps getting the workforce it needs every year.
Now, in an unlikley scenario in 2009 the H1B quota doesn't get filled then we can say that america is losing.
It does not make a difference to America, if a few hundred thousand foreign workers get their GCs today or 10 years later. The people America would really be concerned about are outstanding researchers, but then these people fall in the EB1 category which is always current and so they have no cause for complaint. The other category that the US is concerned about is cheap and illegal labor, but that is not related to GCs. So in short, there is nothing about the Eb2/Eb3 GC backlog that America needs to worry about.
The delay causes anxiety & frustration only for us applicants. So the impact is only on us.
Every year H1B quota is getting filled withing few days to a week. Majority of H1B applicants eventually land up applying GC in EB2/EB3 category, so america has nothing to lose as it keeps getting the workforce it needs every year.
Now, in an unlikley scenario in 2009 the H1B quota doesn't get filled then we can say that america is losing.
more...
pappu
04-29 02:57 PM
As the CIR bill outline is getting introduced today, we all need to do our share in making our voice heard. Our issues are real and affect about a million people patiently waiting in line for past several years. We are high-skilled immigrants who have followed all the rules and contribute significantly to the innovation and economy of this county. Our strength is our grassroots efforts, so let us all call our lawmakers and ask them to take immediate action on the immigration bill.
Call your Legislators:
Immigration Voice is organizing a nationwide call-the-lawmakers drive. We request members to call each and every senator and congress member. This drive will precede the ‘Advocacy Day(s)’ in Washington, DC and ‘Meet the lawmaker’ drive in local districts. Members can use this phone call conversation with their local lawmaker offices to follow-up with lawmakers when they meet during the break just after the Memorial day.
Don’t miss this opportunity:
This is the perfect time to call the lawmakers. The bill needs a push via support from people like us and all lawmakers needs to be encouraged and urged to help us. There are indications that there will be lot of activity on immigration issues in both House and Senate after the Memorial day. We need to make those activities go in our favor and not die like the CIR bill in 2006 & 2007. Thus it is important to starting calling lawmakers, starting from the Senate members. In order to capitalize on this opportunity, it is very important that everyone calls every lawmaker of this country. The similar next opportunity will be in 2013. We can participate now or we will all have ourselves to blame.
When:
This campaign starts today at 4:00 PM EST on 29th April, 2010) (Today) and will run until the end of next week. All IV members are encouraged to make multiple phone calls whenever they find some time during the day.
Who:
This is the order in which we would prefer that members call. Call all the senators listed here, even if they are not from your state.
This is the list of offices where there is maximum potential to swing votes either because they are new in the US senate or because they may be reconsidering their position on CIR if the bill has stricter provisions in it.
TIER I: LIST OF KEY SENATORS FOR CIR
Senator Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts)
(202) 224-4543
Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire)
(202) 224-3324
Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana)
(202) 224-4814
Senator Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming)
(202) 224-3424
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina)
(202) 224-5972
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada)
(202) 224-6244
Senator Orin Hatch (R-Utah)
(202) 224-5251
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas)
(202) 224-2934
Senator John Kyl (R-Texas)
(202) 224-4521
Senator Mitch Mcconnell (R-Kentuky)
(202) 224-2541
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota)
(202) 224-3244
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri)
(202) 224-6154
Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana)
(202) 224-2644
Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia)
(202) 224-4024
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island)
(202) 224-2921
What you could say to the Senator offices listed above:
When you call:
Be courteous. Tell the lawmaker office that:
--------------------------------------------
I am a high skilled immigrant and a member of Immigration Voice. I fully support the proposed comprehensive immigration reform proposal released a few days back.
I am calling to express my support for the high skilled provisions to resolve the current green card backlogs of the doctors, engineers, research scientist and professors etc. This group of highly skilled immigrants stimulates every part of the economy participating in creating economic prosperity, innovation and entrepreneurship for creating more jobs in America.
I strongly urge the Senator to please support this proposal. If it is possible, could you please share the position of the Senator on the recently released (last week) Comprehensive Immigration Reform proposal?
Thank you and I am counting on the Senator’s support for this very important issue of national importance. Please convey regards to the Senator.
--------------------------------------------
If you belong to the constituency (State) of the lawmaker, then tell them that you belong to their district/state and are calling to seek their help. If you are talking to a Senator office then tell them you are anxiously waiting for a Senators support for the immigration bill.
Then ask: What is the lawmaker’s position on immigration proposal? If the position is
- Supportive: Then thank the lawmaker office for it.
- If they oppose it: Then request them to support the high skilled green card provisions of the bill that will greatly help you. You sincerely hope that the lawmaker will reconsider his/her position and help you.
Be polite and persuasive in your message.
Question What if some Senators say they do not support amnesty. -
Answer "For last 10 years there has been no High-skilled immigration bill passed by the Congress. The world has changed in last 10 years. I understand that the Senator is a champion for creating more jobs in America. Employment based green cards will create jobs in America. I want to start my own company and hire people in America. But I cannot do that if I don't have a green card.
I would sincerely request you to please convey to the Senator if he would consider supporting some version of the immigration
giving more weight to green cards and creating jobs in America, or maybe the Senator could lead the effort for improving the proposal"
TIER II: LIST OF KEY SENATORS SPONSORING OR CO-SPONSORING CIR BILL
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nevada)
(202) 224-3542
Senator Dick Durbin (Illinois)
(202) 224-2152
Senator Chuck Schumer (New York)
(202) 224-6542
Senator Patrick Leahy (Vermont)
(202) 224-4242
Senator Dianne Feinstein (California)
(202) 224-3841
Senator Bob Menendez (New Jersey)
(202) 224-4744
Sen. Ben Cardin (Maryland)
(202) 224-4524
What:
When you call:
Be courteous. Tell the lawmaker office that:
--------------------------------------------
I am a high skilled immigrant and a member of Immigration Voice. I fully support the proposed comprehensive immigration reform proposal due to be introduced later in the day today.
Thank you for the Senator’s leadership on this very important issue of immigration. Please convey my gratitude, full support and regards to the Senator.
--------------------------------------------
Be polite and persuasive in your message.
Stick to the message and you will really make a big difference.
Please post the outcome of your call on this thread. For more information please contact IV.
Thank You,
Immigration Voice
Call your Legislators:
Immigration Voice is organizing a nationwide call-the-lawmakers drive. We request members to call each and every senator and congress member. This drive will precede the ‘Advocacy Day(s)’ in Washington, DC and ‘Meet the lawmaker’ drive in local districts. Members can use this phone call conversation with their local lawmaker offices to follow-up with lawmakers when they meet during the break just after the Memorial day.
Don’t miss this opportunity:
This is the perfect time to call the lawmakers. The bill needs a push via support from people like us and all lawmakers needs to be encouraged and urged to help us. There are indications that there will be lot of activity on immigration issues in both House and Senate after the Memorial day. We need to make those activities go in our favor and not die like the CIR bill in 2006 & 2007. Thus it is important to starting calling lawmakers, starting from the Senate members. In order to capitalize on this opportunity, it is very important that everyone calls every lawmaker of this country. The similar next opportunity will be in 2013. We can participate now or we will all have ourselves to blame.
When:
This campaign starts today at 4:00 PM EST on 29th April, 2010) (Today) and will run until the end of next week. All IV members are encouraged to make multiple phone calls whenever they find some time during the day.
Who:
This is the order in which we would prefer that members call. Call all the senators listed here, even if they are not from your state.
This is the list of offices where there is maximum potential to swing votes either because they are new in the US senate or because they may be reconsidering their position on CIR if the bill has stricter provisions in it.
TIER I: LIST OF KEY SENATORS FOR CIR
Senator Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts)
(202) 224-4543
Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire)
(202) 224-3324
Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana)
(202) 224-4814
Senator Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming)
(202) 224-3424
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina)
(202) 224-5972
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada)
(202) 224-6244
Senator Orin Hatch (R-Utah)
(202) 224-5251
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas)
(202) 224-2934
Senator John Kyl (R-Texas)
(202) 224-4521
Senator Mitch Mcconnell (R-Kentuky)
(202) 224-2541
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota)
(202) 224-3244
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri)
(202) 224-6154
Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana)
(202) 224-2644
Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia)
(202) 224-4024
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island)
(202) 224-2921
What you could say to the Senator offices listed above:
When you call:
Be courteous. Tell the lawmaker office that:
--------------------------------------------
I am a high skilled immigrant and a member of Immigration Voice. I fully support the proposed comprehensive immigration reform proposal released a few days back.
I am calling to express my support for the high skilled provisions to resolve the current green card backlogs of the doctors, engineers, research scientist and professors etc. This group of highly skilled immigrants stimulates every part of the economy participating in creating economic prosperity, innovation and entrepreneurship for creating more jobs in America.
I strongly urge the Senator to please support this proposal. If it is possible, could you please share the position of the Senator on the recently released (last week) Comprehensive Immigration Reform proposal?
Thank you and I am counting on the Senator’s support for this very important issue of national importance. Please convey regards to the Senator.
--------------------------------------------
If you belong to the constituency (State) of the lawmaker, then tell them that you belong to their district/state and are calling to seek their help. If you are talking to a Senator office then tell them you are anxiously waiting for a Senators support for the immigration bill.
Then ask: What is the lawmaker’s position on immigration proposal? If the position is
- Supportive: Then thank the lawmaker office for it.
- If they oppose it: Then request them to support the high skilled green card provisions of the bill that will greatly help you. You sincerely hope that the lawmaker will reconsider his/her position and help you.
Be polite and persuasive in your message.
Question What if some Senators say they do not support amnesty. -
Answer "For last 10 years there has been no High-skilled immigration bill passed by the Congress. The world has changed in last 10 years. I understand that the Senator is a champion for creating more jobs in America. Employment based green cards will create jobs in America. I want to start my own company and hire people in America. But I cannot do that if I don't have a green card.
I would sincerely request you to please convey to the Senator if he would consider supporting some version of the immigration
giving more weight to green cards and creating jobs in America, or maybe the Senator could lead the effort for improving the proposal"
TIER II: LIST OF KEY SENATORS SPONSORING OR CO-SPONSORING CIR BILL
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nevada)
(202) 224-3542
Senator Dick Durbin (Illinois)
(202) 224-2152
Senator Chuck Schumer (New York)
(202) 224-6542
Senator Patrick Leahy (Vermont)
(202) 224-4242
Senator Dianne Feinstein (California)
(202) 224-3841
Senator Bob Menendez (New Jersey)
(202) 224-4744
Sen. Ben Cardin (Maryland)
(202) 224-4524
What:
When you call:
Be courteous. Tell the lawmaker office that:
--------------------------------------------
I am a high skilled immigrant and a member of Immigration Voice. I fully support the proposed comprehensive immigration reform proposal due to be introduced later in the day today.
Thank you for the Senator’s leadership on this very important issue of immigration. Please convey my gratitude, full support and regards to the Senator.
--------------------------------------------
Be polite and persuasive in your message.
Stick to the message and you will really make a big difference.
Please post the outcome of your call on this thread. For more information please contact IV.
Thank You,
Immigration Voice
hair Call of Duty: Black Ops
NKR
04-02 02:57 PM
D.R.D ??
OK It's D.E.D. D.E.D owes us an apology.
OK It's D.E.D. D.E.D owes us an apology.
more...
rajarao
09-10 07:28 AM
Data available in Mumbai consulate website
http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 15 April 2002 15 April 2002
FX 1 May 2001 1 May 2001
F2A 1 January 2004 1 January 2004
F2B 15 December 1999 15 December 1999
F3 22 June 2000 22 June 2000
F4 22 May 1997 22 October 1997
E1 Current Current
E2 1 April 2003 Current
E3 1 July 2001 1 January 2005
EW 1 Janurary 2003 1 Janurary 2003
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
Great Job TSC/NSC and DOS.
One day 2006 applications are approved and next month you go into stone ages. What a wonderful system....
http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 15 April 2002 15 April 2002
FX 1 May 2001 1 May 2001
F2A 1 January 2004 1 January 2004
F2B 15 December 1999 15 December 1999
F3 22 June 2000 22 June 2000
F4 22 May 1997 22 October 1997
E1 Current Current
E2 1 April 2003 Current
E3 1 July 2001 1 January 2005
EW 1 Janurary 2003 1 Janurary 2003
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
Great Job TSC/NSC and DOS.
One day 2006 applications are approved and next month you go into stone ages. What a wonderful system....
hot Player+card+lack+ops+
jonty_11
07-06 01:31 PM
Why USCIS suddenly did this press release? Something fishy?
see now this rumor is taking steam.....this would make james WAtt proud...
I think we are onto something here.
see now this rumor is taking steam.....this would make james WAtt proud...
I think we are onto something here.
more...
house hot Good+player+card+lack+ops
justAnotherFile
07-20 02:57 PM
Revenue = 750K*200 = 150 million dollars.
For that kind of money they should be able to hire more than 30 personnel I think.
And also develop some systems to atomate the process.
For that kind of money they should be able to hire more than 30 personnel I think.
And also develop some systems to atomate the process.
tattoo Good+player+card+lack+ops
farhad
08-19 09:04 AM
I am out of state visa screened nurse after having a hard time passing the cgfns and other reqirment my sponser has filed me I-140 on 31th april 2007, I dont know why but they didnt give me the center name in which they file the petition, or recipt no., my questions are:
how long will it take to recieve the GC?
do you think the condition will improve for RNs in the future?
how can I find my case number without asking my sponser?
how long will it take to recieve the GC?
do you think the condition will improve for RNs in the future?
how can I find my case number without asking my sponser?
more...
pictures cool lack ops player card
Ramba
10-21 04:07 PM
How can USCIS can judge the legitimacy of the intent of the applicant - it can be very subjective and depend a lot on the way visa officer interprets. For example how long after six months is considered a "long wait"?
There will be always some descretionary powers to visa adjudicators but AC21 guidelines and associated memo's are detailed enough to give a clear explanation that once I485 is pending for six months, the applicants underlying I140 is valid (if its revoked or if it is not yet approved) and I485 continue to be processed - as long as the new job is same or similar. One thing that is not clear is the definitions of this same/similar job thing. We all expected some hiccups based on this interpretation. But the rejection of I485 (and subsequent MTR) based on I140 revocation is something that came out of blue and the number of these cases makes it really scary.
It is tricky. The intent can be proved only by how long the employee has worked for sponsor. If he/she worked considerable period (lets say for 2-3 years in non-immigrant visa (H.L,E) before filing 485 and worked for about 1 year after filing 485) then, it is very easy for the employee to prove his/her intent to have a permanent employment relationship with sponser, if employer try to revoke 140 based on the fact that employee does not have intent. The longivity of the employment relationship with sponser is a great proof. Some people are abusing (by misguidence of few lawyers, as they claim GC is for future job) AC21, without even working for single day with sponser, trying to get GC. USCIS may be controlling that kind of abuse.
One historical background reason for AC21 is that, in 2000, even though all catagories are "current", INS was very slow in approving 485. The delay for approval of 485 in year 2000 is caused by USCIS poor customer service. It took atleast 2 years for 485 approval, though the visa numbers were continously available for the entire 2 years. Therefore, the AC21 is an incentive for USCIS delay.
Now, if the visa numbers are continously available (for example EB1, EB2-ROW) USCIS is approving 485 within 6 months, except july 07 fiasco surge. So now AC21 users are only those who suffers in retrogression, not by USCIS administartive delay. That may be the another reason why USCIS becoming hard on AC21.
There will be always some descretionary powers to visa adjudicators but AC21 guidelines and associated memo's are detailed enough to give a clear explanation that once I485 is pending for six months, the applicants underlying I140 is valid (if its revoked or if it is not yet approved) and I485 continue to be processed - as long as the new job is same or similar. One thing that is not clear is the definitions of this same/similar job thing. We all expected some hiccups based on this interpretation. But the rejection of I485 (and subsequent MTR) based on I140 revocation is something that came out of blue and the number of these cases makes it really scary.
It is tricky. The intent can be proved only by how long the employee has worked for sponsor. If he/she worked considerable period (lets say for 2-3 years in non-immigrant visa (H.L,E) before filing 485 and worked for about 1 year after filing 485) then, it is very easy for the employee to prove his/her intent to have a permanent employment relationship with sponser, if employer try to revoke 140 based on the fact that employee does not have intent. The longivity of the employment relationship with sponser is a great proof. Some people are abusing (by misguidence of few lawyers, as they claim GC is for future job) AC21, without even working for single day with sponser, trying to get GC. USCIS may be controlling that kind of abuse.
One historical background reason for AC21 is that, in 2000, even though all catagories are "current", INS was very slow in approving 485. The delay for approval of 485 in year 2000 is caused by USCIS poor customer service. It took atleast 2 years for 485 approval, though the visa numbers were continously available for the entire 2 years. Therefore, the AC21 is an incentive for USCIS delay.
Now, if the visa numbers are continously available (for example EB1, EB2-ROW) USCIS is approving 485 within 6 months, except july 07 fiasco surge. So now AC21 users are only those who suffers in retrogression, not by USCIS administartive delay. That may be the another reason why USCIS becoming hard on AC21.
dresses PLAYER CARD EMBLEMS BLACK OPS
laksmi
02-27 02:38 PM
Fax to Texas
214-962-2632
Providing an covering letter along with a copy of your supporting documents
214-962-2632
Providing an covering letter along with a copy of your supporting documents
more...
makeup Re: Black Ops player cards
dhesha
02-25 05:14 PM
Yes and then they should process in LIFO order so people like you can get their GCs :p :rolleyes:
What do you mean they should???? Are they not already doing so?
What do you mean they should???? Are they not already doing so?
girlfriend cool lack ops player card
leoindiano
09-11 01:55 PM
Paypal Confirmation Number: 7R258466SC5551342.
Just contributed another 100. Notified some freinds about the drive as well.
now or never GC.
I am going to DC.
Just contributed another 100. Notified some freinds about the drive as well.
now or never GC.
I am going to DC.
hairstyles hairstyles player card emblems
andy007
07-05 07:39 PM
Hi Folks-
We (5 People) work for IBM company, SFO, today we went personally to the congress men and we submit the letter which is provided in this forum and after that we called state senator office and we explained about our problem. We faxed and email the letter to the senator office, staff had taken my contact details and they told me that they will inform the solution in 2days.
Thx
Aj
Perfect .. everybody should know how we are suffering .. since monday.. this is not fair at alll for legal Immigrants.......... We will hear good news soon from USCIS/DOS People............
We (5 People) work for IBM company, SFO, today we went personally to the congress men and we submit the letter which is provided in this forum and after that we called state senator office and we explained about our problem. We faxed and email the letter to the senator office, staff had taken my contact details and they told me that they will inform the solution in 2days.
Thx
Aj
Perfect .. everybody should know how we are suffering .. since monday.. this is not fair at alll for legal Immigrants.......... We will hear good news soon from USCIS/DOS People............
ilikekilo
07-23 06:55 PM
I am sure you'll get GC by the end on this year or early next year. I might have called USCIS abt 15-20 times and from what I understand dates would retrogress for eb3 India, but not horribly. My guess in of the total applications in August 30% have older PD 02/03/04. Becuause pf PERM processing majority are 05/06/07.
thanks for ur input and still sticking to IV ..
thanks for ur input and still sticking to IV ..
indyanguy
08-13 04:59 PM
But why should we lose the PD that we've been hanging on to for so long. For all we know, they might retrogress EB2 next - with USCIS, there's no room to take chances. I'm on my 10th yr here and don't want anything to go wrong at this point.
Have you given a thought or spoken to a lawyer about starting EB2 PERM when your EB3 140 is pending? After your EB2 PERM is approved, you have 6 months before interfiling your EB2 140 with your EB3 PD. I think that is long enough for your EB3 140 too be approved.
AFAIK, this can be done with little or no risk to your EB3.
Have you given a thought or spoken to a lawyer about starting EB2 PERM when your EB3 140 is pending? After your EB2 PERM is approved, you have 6 months before interfiling your EB2 140 with your EB3 PD. I think that is long enough for your EB3 140 too be approved.
AFAIK, this can be done with little or no risk to your EB3.
No comments:
Post a Comment