amitjoey
07-11 12:33 PM
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data/theworld/2007/July/theworld_July281.xml§ion=theworld&col=
wallpaper Nike Air Force 1 Low Gold
prashantkh
07-09 07:03 PM
We should send emails to Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Jay Leno, David Letterman, Conan O'Brian, Jimmy Kimmel etc.
They have tremendous amount of viewership and seems like a perfect material for these shows. I will send email to these guys but if more and more peple can make them aware of this development, this news can potentially snowball. :D
They have tremendous amount of viewership and seems like a perfect material for these shows. I will send email to these guys but if more and more peple can make them aware of this development, this news can potentially snowball. :D
jung.lee
01-30 02:34 PM
GLUS,
Can you tell us more about communicating to ALIF? Is it via email?
I think all the folks who visit this thread must send out a complaint.
Also please contact your attorneys and tell them to complain on this half baked PIMS implementation.
My wife received her approval email from Mumbai consulate yesterday. When I contacted my attorney, he asked that after she returns to the US, to send him more details and he will lodge a complaint with the DOS through his liaison.
Can you tell us more about communicating to ALIF? Is it via email?
I think all the folks who visit this thread must send out a complaint.
Also please contact your attorneys and tell them to complain on this half baked PIMS implementation.
My wife received her approval email from Mumbai consulate yesterday. When I contacted my attorney, he asked that after she returns to the US, to send him more details and he will lodge a complaint with the DOS through his liaison.
2011 Certification Gold (RIAA) 6
willwin
08-08 10:20 AM
Here's a very good recent example
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyId=13&articleId=9111963&intsrc=hm_topic
It would be interesting to see how many of the 'Yes' are going to remain 'Yes' when it comes to having their names on a lawsuit filed against USCIS (the whole list will be going to USCIS). Good luck guys.
And happy nightmares whenver your cases get (not so) Soft LUDs. Is it because you joined the case? you never know.
Good luck once more
Any way they don't really care about their own GC. All that they want is stop EB3 from moving over to EB2. Well, what's that, justice!
Probably, once you let them go, they won't go. lol.
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyId=13&articleId=9111963&intsrc=hm_topic
It would be interesting to see how many of the 'Yes' are going to remain 'Yes' when it comes to having their names on a lawsuit filed against USCIS (the whole list will be going to USCIS). Good luck guys.
And happy nightmares whenver your cases get (not so) Soft LUDs. Is it because you joined the case? you never know.
Good luck once more
Any way they don't really care about their own GC. All that they want is stop EB3 from moving over to EB2. Well, what's that, justice!
Probably, once you let them go, they won't go. lol.
more...
sammyb
01-03 10:37 AM
VO doesnt keep your passport if a via not issued at the time of the interview . He gives it back after the interview. Once you receive the email , you have to go the VFS office and then had in the passport.
I guess this is specific to Mumbai only .. for all other post in India, the consulate/embassy keeps the PP ...
Am planning to visit India during Apr-May time and wondering how to take care of the situation ... seems DHS/DOS/DOL/USCIS/Who ever implemented a process without having the proper infrastructure in place ... and again they take us for granted ... with limited number of vacation days in hand if we stuck because of the PIMS, this will be a difficult situation to handle ..
How the Kolkata consulate doing on this aspect ... can anyway share their experience there ...
Happy new year friends ...
I guess this is specific to Mumbai only .. for all other post in India, the consulate/embassy keeps the PP ...
Am planning to visit India during Apr-May time and wondering how to take care of the situation ... seems DHS/DOS/DOL/USCIS/Who ever implemented a process without having the proper infrastructure in place ... and again they take us for granted ... with limited number of vacation days in hand if we stuck because of the PIMS, this will be a difficult situation to handle ..
How the Kolkata consulate doing on this aspect ... can anyway share their experience there ...
Happy new year friends ...
storm
08-13 07:09 PM
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOmbudsman_AnnualReport_2006_II-F-Name_Checks.pdf
more...
anotherone
01-29 04:41 PM
I had already mentioned my EAD status when they had the interview. But after acceptiing it I mentioned it again in the conext of I9 form. Then they said they cant offer me emp;oyment due to my being on EAD.
This is a pretty big company. I understand that H1B is not protected under anti-discrimination for employment, but EAD holders, specifically those with AOS pending, are a protected against employment discrimination.
Does anyone have any links to the above conclusion ? I am so tired of this BS. I have spent long enough in this immigration c**p that if I have leave, might as well leave with a fight.
regards
just anotherone of the expendable non-citizens
This is a pretty big company. I understand that H1B is not protected under anti-discrimination for employment, but EAD holders, specifically those with AOS pending, are a protected against employment discrimination.
Does anyone have any links to the above conclusion ? I am so tired of this BS. I have spent long enough in this immigration c**p that if I have leave, might as well leave with a fight.
regards
just anotherone of the expendable non-citizens
2010 18quot; Gold plated Chain and
addsf345
01-08 06:40 PM
I found this forum after my I 485 denied as I applied for AOS under AC21 at texas center on 12/31/2008. The first thing I did after joining IV is sent the four letters.
I know its a stressful time. Please follow this thread carefully, read it completely and contact ombudsman with correct form. It would be easier for all of us if CIS can see number of genuine cases which are denied wrongfully. This way, CIS may would act faster to again put your case on file and in future will not do this again.
I know its a stressful time. Please follow this thread carefully, read it completely and contact ombudsman with correct form. It would be easier for all of us if CIS can see number of genuine cases which are denied wrongfully. This way, CIS may would act faster to again put your case on file and in future will not do this again.
more...
sheela
09-11 09:27 PM
I will call as many
hair my poor new star specs
waitnwatch
08-21 05:40 PM
In my opinion it is very naive to think that USCIS/DOL just realized that they had 'misinterpreted' the law. ..... The ambiguity of the law for the preference of vertical vs. horizontal spill-over allowed them to do that.
In a couple of my previous posts I copied the relevant Sections (Sec. 202 and 203) of the INA which specifically states that distribution should be preferentially horizontal. Both Sections should be read together.
Please note that there is no ambiguity in the law and DOS may just have taken too long to change the US Code or other relevant section of their rules.
I will definitely be willing to change my interpretation if you can show where the ambiguity in the law lies. I'm definitely not a lawyer so it's quite possible that I'm missing some clause in the law.
In a couple of my previous posts I copied the relevant Sections (Sec. 202 and 203) of the INA which specifically states that distribution should be preferentially horizontal. Both Sections should be read together.
Please note that there is no ambiguity in the law and DOS may just have taken too long to change the US Code or other relevant section of their rules.
I will definitely be willing to change my interpretation if you can show where the ambiguity in the law lies. I'm definitely not a lawyer so it's quite possible that I'm missing some clause in the law.
more...
l1fraud
06-16 09:38 PM
OP Do you know how many L1 visa types are there???
Who said L1 can't be at claient place? Who said L1 can't do programming?
:mad:
Don't spit on other community becoz you are loosing some thing...
L-1A
L-1B
Blanket L1s
L-1A - Managers (lucky ones eligible for EB1), offlate not abused much as L-1A visa petitions are scrutinized well by USCIS (lot of RFEs).
L-1B - Speciality Skilled ones.. MOST ABUSED category of L visa... petition for these resources would be for a internal tool / custom product and they tell the same during consulate interviews BUT mostly gets deployed to consulting assignments. For Eg. A java programmer would have a petition which talks about a custom product / internal tool where programming language would be java once the visa is stamped these resource would be placed on Java project which has nothing to do with his petition and HENCE THE VIOLATION.
Blanket L1s - Blanket petition for a large group of resources from a company ... now a days USCIS & consulate doesn't allow these companies to use this category as they found this was one of the most abused category. Once again the process of sending these resources to other projects remains the same once the visa is stamped.
ALL THE ABOVE VISA categories are banned from either
1. Working on a client managed project (staff augmentation purpose).
2. On any technical skilled projects other than the specific internal tools/products mentioned in their petitions (both when client/their own company manages the project).
PLEASE REFER L1 REFORM ACT OF 2004.
Approved L1 petition is the final word in deciding what kind of work the resource can do here in US... not outsourcing companies greed.
Hope your doubt regarding the L1 visa categories is cleared.. I'll give the details of how these outsourcing companies work and how to bust them by reporting to ICE/USCIS in the next post.
Who said L1 can't be at claient place? Who said L1 can't do programming?
:mad:
Don't spit on other community becoz you are loosing some thing...
L-1A
L-1B
Blanket L1s
L-1A - Managers (lucky ones eligible for EB1), offlate not abused much as L-1A visa petitions are scrutinized well by USCIS (lot of RFEs).
L-1B - Speciality Skilled ones.. MOST ABUSED category of L visa... petition for these resources would be for a internal tool / custom product and they tell the same during consulate interviews BUT mostly gets deployed to consulting assignments. For Eg. A java programmer would have a petition which talks about a custom product / internal tool where programming language would be java once the visa is stamped these resource would be placed on Java project which has nothing to do with his petition and HENCE THE VIOLATION.
Blanket L1s - Blanket petition for a large group of resources from a company ... now a days USCIS & consulate doesn't allow these companies to use this category as they found this was one of the most abused category. Once again the process of sending these resources to other projects remains the same once the visa is stamped.
ALL THE ABOVE VISA categories are banned from either
1. Working on a client managed project (staff augmentation purpose).
2. On any technical skilled projects other than the specific internal tools/products mentioned in their petitions (both when client/their own company manages the project).
PLEASE REFER L1 REFORM ACT OF 2004.
Approved L1 petition is the final word in deciding what kind of work the resource can do here in US... not outsourcing companies greed.
Hope your doubt regarding the L1 visa categories is cleared.. I'll give the details of how these outsourcing companies work and how to bust them by reporting to ICE/USCIS in the next post.
hot Lone Star 2
amitjoey
07-11 12:32 PM
http://www.thnt.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070711/NEWS/707110343/1001
more...
house Gold Star of Excellence Award
drona
07-09 07:08 PM
At this moment it is on the USCIS front page.
The message no longer appears on USCIS portal now.
I think they are reading our portals:)
The message no longer appears on USCIS portal now.
I think they are reading our portals:)
tattoo washington capitals star
guyfromsg
01-07 10:47 PM
Let's start working on this campaign. If you are in Georgia and not part of GA google group, please send me an email with your name and phone number. Click the link below to join the group.
more...
pictures star in a TV new movie,
Robert Kumar
04-04 06:32 AM
Getting any sort of data out of any of the immigration agencies is often frustrating. Especially something like how many eb2 I-140 did they accept, approve, deny... However, they do randomly throw number out and we can scavenge through them for `clues'. Here is one such link.
USCIS: National Processing Volumes and Trends (http://dashboard.uscis.gov/index.cfm?formtype=7&office=5&charttype=1)
I agree, thanks.
USCIS: National Processing Volumes and Trends (http://dashboard.uscis.gov/index.cfm?formtype=7&office=5&charttype=1)
I agree, thanks.
dresses 14K Solid Gold Flight I
greencardvow
06-26 02:26 PM
What is the Period of Stay Form. Is there a format for this form.
more...
makeup in the All Star 3-point
anjans
09-20 08:00 PM
July 2nd
girlfriend GOLD NOTES: Style List #4
gc_wow
09-24 08:50 PM
Rose Ball,
What do you think will EB2 I will get stuck in March 2005 for the rest of USCIS year untill September? I think Quarterly spill over is the name of the game now.
What do you think will EB2 I will get stuck in March 2005 for the rest of USCIS year untill September? I think Quarterly spill over is the name of the game now.
hairstyles Health amp; Beauty
pbuckeye
04-01 03:41 PM
Ron posted similar message:
Process after NVC receives the checklist (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/family-based-immigration-10/process-after-nvc-receives-the-checklist-13802/)
Re: Process after NVC receives the checklist
They generally request payment for cases that are within a certain interval of being current. For example, yesterday, we received a fee bill for an India EB2 case with a September, 2007 priority date that has been pending at the NVC for several years.
Wait a minute, how was this India EB2 case even allowed to file I-485 when that PD has never been current? The lawyer alleges that it has been pending for several years.
Does this "fee bill" have nothing to do with 485 filing? Is it just plain wrong or am I missing something obvious here?
Perhaps he meant September 2006.
Process after NVC receives the checklist (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/family-based-immigration-10/process-after-nvc-receives-the-checklist-13802/)
Re: Process after NVC receives the checklist
They generally request payment for cases that are within a certain interval of being current. For example, yesterday, we received a fee bill for an India EB2 case with a September, 2007 priority date that has been pending at the NVC for several years.
Wait a minute, how was this India EB2 case even allowed to file I-485 when that PD has never been current? The lawyer alleges that it has been pending for several years.
Does this "fee bill" have nothing to do with 485 filing? Is it just plain wrong or am I missing something obvious here?
Perhaps he meant September 2006.
gc28262
08-25 04:29 PM
Vonage was just responding to the competition.
Lingo has a world plan which included unlimited calling to 30 countries( India not included)
India calls were just 2 cents per minute. I switched to Lingo from Vonage 2 months back. Sensing this mass exodus, vonage came up with an even more aggressive plan.
Competition is good !
Lingo has a world plan which included unlimited calling to 30 countries( India not included)
India calls were just 2 cents per minute. I switched to Lingo from Vonage 2 months back. Sensing this mass exodus, vonage came up with an even more aggressive plan.
Competition is good !
aadimanav
01-03 12:55 AM
Source:
http://www.metrocorpcounsel.com/current.php?artType=view&artMonth=January&artYear=2008&EntryNo=7723
Delay In The Age Of Security - Employee Green Card Woes
Geoffrey Forney
WolfBlock
Geoffrey Forney is an Associate in WolfBlock's Employment Services Practice Group and is a member of the group's Immigration Services Team. Geoffrey handles all aspects of immigration and nationality law, including employment- and family-based immigration, removal (deportation) defense and asylum.
Many human resources representatives who handle immigration matters are well aware that dealing with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) can be confusing and at times frustrating. The agency has volumes of regulations, policies, decisions and guidelines governing the admission and employment of foreign nationals. Understanding the agency's requirements can be an overwhelming task. In addition, the agency's decision process is often obscure, leaving employers and foreign nationals guessing about the procedures that affect them directly.
Added to the confusion is the baffling situation of the excessively long-delayed adjudication of green card and naturalization applications. Employers spend a lot of time and money to sponsor valued foreign national employees only to find that the last stage of the process (adjustment of status or "green" card) is bogged down within a quagmire of endless and seemingly unexplainable delay. Applicants for green cards can face delays up to seven years or more. From an HR perspective, the situation is frustrating: all of the employee's appropriate paperwork has been filed, but the USCIS simply refuses to act on the application. Employers and foreign nationals make inquires with the USCIS only to be told that their applications are being held up because of "security" issues.
What "security" issues? Many foreign nationals are upset by this response, because they know that they have never had any contacts with law enforcement. Just because a foreign national is caught in security clearance delays does not necessarily mean that the person has had problems with law enforcement authorities. In the vast majority of cases, it simply means that the foreign national's name matches in some way a name in an FBI administrative file. Only after the USCIS confirms that the foreign national is not the same individual who is listed in the FBI administrative file will the USCIS proceed with the adjudication of the green card or naturalization application. It sounds simple enough, so why does this process take so long?
Congress requires the USCIS to perform criminal background checks on foreign nationals applying to become permanent residents (green card holders) or naturalized citizens of the United States. In addition to the Congressionally mandated criminal background check, DHS performs two other background checks on foreign nationals applying for green cards or citizenship. The criminal background check is a relatively easy and fast check: the USCIS obtains a fingerprint impression from the foreign national and checks this fingerprint image against the FBI's Criminal Master File. This check is usually completed within 48 hours, as it is largely a computer automated system. The second type of check, the Interagency Border Inspection System (IBIS) check, is also very quick. The IBIS check is based on a database containing information from 26 different federal agencies that includes information on persons of "interest" to law enforcement. This check is usually completed immediately upon entering the foreign national's name into a computer database.
The problem arises with the third and final background check, known as the "name check." Although Congress does not require name checks, in 2002 legacy INS began requesting name checks for all green card and citizenship applications as part of its post-9/11 heightening of security. A "name check" is performed by taking every permutation of the foreign national's full name and comparing those various permutations against the FBI's "Universal Index," which references the FBI's Central Records System, a voluminous archive of administrative, personnel and investigative files. Of course, foreign nationals with common names will usually "match" an FBI file. In addition, a foreign national's name need not necessarily match a "main" file name, containing, for example, a suspect's name, but may match "reference" names, including informants and witnesses. Hence, the universe of possible matches is very large.
Although the FBI usually responds to a USCIS request for a name check within two weeks, if there is a "hit" or match between one or more permutations of the foreign national's name, a more extensive search must be completed. If a secondary search does not clear the foreign national's name, the USCIS requests a manual investigation of the relevant FBI case files. Since a "match" ultimately leads to a manual inspection of physical files. The process is time and labor intensive. One of the main reasons for the excessive delays in this arena is the lack of resources devoted to the manual inspection of files. To date, the USCIS and FBI currently have more than 340,000 cases in the name check backlog, according to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman.
As a result, a foreign national stuck in the name check backlog can expect to wait a very long time - a matter of years - before expecting a final adjudication of his or her application for a green card or citizenship. In some cases, a final resolution never occurs. It is not unusual to find applicants with unresolved cases that are more than five years old.
Recently, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman cited "name check" delays as a major problem for the agency in his 2007 annual report. The Ombudsman questioned the utility and effectiveness of the name check process, noting that "[n]ame check[s] are not conducted by the FBI as part of an ongoing investigation or from a need to learn more about an individual because of any threat or risk perceived by the FBI." Furthermore, the Ombudsman suggested that the name check program does not comply with DHS Secretary Chertoff's risk management modeling, because the cost of name checks far outweighs the purported national security benefit: "Considering the protection the FBI name check provides, the cost of government resources used, and mental and actual hardships to applicants and their families, USCIS should reassess the continuation of its policy to require FBI name checks in their current form." Notwithstanding the Ombudsman's criticism of the name check program, other high-level USCIS officials continue to support the process, so it appears that name checks will remain a part of green card and naturalization applications.
(Part 2 in the next post below)
http://www.metrocorpcounsel.com/current.php?artType=view&artMonth=January&artYear=2008&EntryNo=7723
Delay In The Age Of Security - Employee Green Card Woes
Geoffrey Forney
WolfBlock
Geoffrey Forney is an Associate in WolfBlock's Employment Services Practice Group and is a member of the group's Immigration Services Team. Geoffrey handles all aspects of immigration and nationality law, including employment- and family-based immigration, removal (deportation) defense and asylum.
Many human resources representatives who handle immigration matters are well aware that dealing with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) can be confusing and at times frustrating. The agency has volumes of regulations, policies, decisions and guidelines governing the admission and employment of foreign nationals. Understanding the agency's requirements can be an overwhelming task. In addition, the agency's decision process is often obscure, leaving employers and foreign nationals guessing about the procedures that affect them directly.
Added to the confusion is the baffling situation of the excessively long-delayed adjudication of green card and naturalization applications. Employers spend a lot of time and money to sponsor valued foreign national employees only to find that the last stage of the process (adjustment of status or "green" card) is bogged down within a quagmire of endless and seemingly unexplainable delay. Applicants for green cards can face delays up to seven years or more. From an HR perspective, the situation is frustrating: all of the employee's appropriate paperwork has been filed, but the USCIS simply refuses to act on the application. Employers and foreign nationals make inquires with the USCIS only to be told that their applications are being held up because of "security" issues.
What "security" issues? Many foreign nationals are upset by this response, because they know that they have never had any contacts with law enforcement. Just because a foreign national is caught in security clearance delays does not necessarily mean that the person has had problems with law enforcement authorities. In the vast majority of cases, it simply means that the foreign national's name matches in some way a name in an FBI administrative file. Only after the USCIS confirms that the foreign national is not the same individual who is listed in the FBI administrative file will the USCIS proceed with the adjudication of the green card or naturalization application. It sounds simple enough, so why does this process take so long?
Congress requires the USCIS to perform criminal background checks on foreign nationals applying to become permanent residents (green card holders) or naturalized citizens of the United States. In addition to the Congressionally mandated criminal background check, DHS performs two other background checks on foreign nationals applying for green cards or citizenship. The criminal background check is a relatively easy and fast check: the USCIS obtains a fingerprint impression from the foreign national and checks this fingerprint image against the FBI's Criminal Master File. This check is usually completed within 48 hours, as it is largely a computer automated system. The second type of check, the Interagency Border Inspection System (IBIS) check, is also very quick. The IBIS check is based on a database containing information from 26 different federal agencies that includes information on persons of "interest" to law enforcement. This check is usually completed immediately upon entering the foreign national's name into a computer database.
The problem arises with the third and final background check, known as the "name check." Although Congress does not require name checks, in 2002 legacy INS began requesting name checks for all green card and citizenship applications as part of its post-9/11 heightening of security. A "name check" is performed by taking every permutation of the foreign national's full name and comparing those various permutations against the FBI's "Universal Index," which references the FBI's Central Records System, a voluminous archive of administrative, personnel and investigative files. Of course, foreign nationals with common names will usually "match" an FBI file. In addition, a foreign national's name need not necessarily match a "main" file name, containing, for example, a suspect's name, but may match "reference" names, including informants and witnesses. Hence, the universe of possible matches is very large.
Although the FBI usually responds to a USCIS request for a name check within two weeks, if there is a "hit" or match between one or more permutations of the foreign national's name, a more extensive search must be completed. If a secondary search does not clear the foreign national's name, the USCIS requests a manual investigation of the relevant FBI case files. Since a "match" ultimately leads to a manual inspection of physical files. The process is time and labor intensive. One of the main reasons for the excessive delays in this arena is the lack of resources devoted to the manual inspection of files. To date, the USCIS and FBI currently have more than 340,000 cases in the name check backlog, according to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman.
As a result, a foreign national stuck in the name check backlog can expect to wait a very long time - a matter of years - before expecting a final adjudication of his or her application for a green card or citizenship. In some cases, a final resolution never occurs. It is not unusual to find applicants with unresolved cases that are more than five years old.
Recently, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman cited "name check" delays as a major problem for the agency in his 2007 annual report. The Ombudsman questioned the utility and effectiveness of the name check process, noting that "[n]ame check[s] are not conducted by the FBI as part of an ongoing investigation or from a need to learn more about an individual because of any threat or risk perceived by the FBI." Furthermore, the Ombudsman suggested that the name check program does not comply with DHS Secretary Chertoff's risk management modeling, because the cost of name checks far outweighs the purported national security benefit: "Considering the protection the FBI name check provides, the cost of government resources used, and mental and actual hardships to applicants and their families, USCIS should reassess the continuation of its policy to require FBI name checks in their current form." Notwithstanding the Ombudsman's criticism of the name check program, other high-level USCIS officials continue to support the process, so it appears that name checks will remain a part of green card and naturalization applications.
(Part 2 in the next post below)
No comments:
Post a Comment