DarkChild
02-15 08:17 AM
same here, if i see an example i might jump in, at the moment i have no idea how to start
wallpaper Charlene Wittstock
sapota
08-15 05:39 PM
Surprised by visa bulletin mentioning cutoff dates for EB1, EB2 & EB3 ROW & philipines instead of U.
Does this mean EB1, EB2 & EB3 ROW cases are not backlogged ? (i.e USCIS approved all it could on July1st 2007 but still visa numbers left?)
Or were these cases waiting for FBI check so could not use up visa numbers??
Either way, in a month or so (after all July VB cases are entered into database, USCIS would know its true backlog). Wish it would announce such a backlog number and make realistic predictions for when cases will be approved.
Given the recent announcement from whitehouse regarding expedited FBI checks, maybe there is some light at the end of the tunnel.
But hey, lets keep pushing, we dont want hope to be a mirage do we.
Edit/Delete Message
Does this mean EB1, EB2 & EB3 ROW cases are not backlogged ? (i.e USCIS approved all it could on July1st 2007 but still visa numbers left?)
Or were these cases waiting for FBI check so could not use up visa numbers??
Either way, in a month or so (after all July VB cases are entered into database, USCIS would know its true backlog). Wish it would announce such a backlog number and make realistic predictions for when cases will be approved.
Given the recent announcement from whitehouse regarding expedited FBI checks, maybe there is some light at the end of the tunnel.
But hey, lets keep pushing, we dont want hope to be a mirage do we.
Edit/Delete Message
hsj
05-27 09:14 PM
Rofl :D
these from cbp website:
If the individual being searched has undergone the total transformation, the current gender of that person will dictate whether or not a male or female u.s. Customs and border protection officer performs the search.
If the individual is a natural male becoming a female and has breasts, but still retains male genitalia, a female officer will complete an above the waist search and a male officer will complete a below the waist search.
If the individual is a natural female becoming a male, and still retains female genitalia, a female officer will perform the search.
these from cbp website:
If the individual being searched has undergone the total transformation, the current gender of that person will dictate whether or not a male or female u.s. Customs and border protection officer performs the search.
If the individual is a natural male becoming a female and has breasts, but still retains male genitalia, a female officer will complete an above the waist search and a male officer will complete a below the waist search.
If the individual is a natural female becoming a male, and still retains female genitalia, a female officer will perform the search.
2011 and charlene wittstock
conundrum
11-06 11:56 AM
btw, I didn't notarize my letter. I faxed in the FOIA request.
more...
anju
09-05 11:40 AM
Do you know about new category when booking visa stamping appointment?
It reads Renewing same category visa expired within last 12 months. If you say yes, there is no appointment available as of today. At least not in Chennai consulate? Anyone knows about this?
Anju
It reads Renewing same category visa expired within last 12 months. If you say yes, there is no appointment available as of today. At least not in Chennai consulate? Anyone knows about this?
Anju
tabletpc
12-20 04:10 PM
"...I dont think you need to worry.. for you knwo what I am saying ..."
this is turning out be very hilarious form:):). Good way to get rid of GC frustation.:o
this is turning out be very hilarious form:):). Good way to get rid of GC frustation.:o
more...
Jbpvisa
07-12 11:01 PM
http://www.murthy.com/chertoff_murthy.html
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
It was a pleasure and an honor to meet with you and to share my views during your panel discussion at the Harvard Worldwide Congress June 15, 2007 in Washington, D.C. I understand and appreciate that the responsibility vested in you as the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is no simple task. We applaud your service to our nation. After meeting with you personally and speaking with you, I am more convinced than ever that you will do the right thing for our country and for the people you serve, both in terms of securing our nation and in being the leader of the DHS, with over 20 federal agencies reporting to you, including the USCIS.
Purpose of this Letter
I am writing to you at this time to address recent actions by the USCIS to refuse to accept I-485 adjustment of status filing during July 2007 that are having significant impact upon the reliability of the legal immigration system in this country, as well as impacting legal foreign nationals and the many U.S. businesses that rely upon the work they perform.
USCIS Decision Contradicts its Long Standing Procedure
In contradiction of its own long standing policy and procedure, we understand that the USCIS, through its Director Gonzalez, contacted the U.S. Department of State (DOS) and requested or required the DOS to issue a �revised� Visa Bulletin on July 2, 2007. The USCIS then used the revised Bulletin to refuse to accept I-485 filings. This decision deprives thousands of foreign nationals, and their families, of the rights and privileges that are attendant to the I-485 filing.
These Highly Skilled Professionals Followed All the Rules and Believe in the American Dream
These professionals and their employers have played by our established immigration laws and rules. The vast majority of these thousands of potential applicants has a U.S. employer corporation, university or other business as a sponsor for permanent resident status. The exceptions from an employer are for those who are considered of �extraordinary ability� or whose work is in our �national interest.� Many of these applicants have completed their Bachelor�s, Master�s and/or PhD programs from U.S. universities. They believe in the opportunities of this great nation and strive to achieve the American Dream by following all the rules, working hard, paying taxes, and striving to do the right thing. They believe in this country, and rely upon our systems, our government, and our processes. Unfortunately, on July 2, 2007, we let them down. The USCIS abandoned its own system and long standing practices. This happened through manipulation of the use of visa numbers, insisting upon the issuance of a "revised visa bulletin," and instituting the USCIS policy of rejecting every employment-based I-485 that could have been filed during the month of July 2007.
USCIS Decision Denies Substantive and Procedural Rights to Highly Skilled Workers and Their Employers - Many of Whom Have Already Suffered and Will Suffer Further Harm/ Injury
Not only does the USCIS' action harm the individuals and employers involved, it undermines the reliability of our entire employment-based immigration system. The unexpected decision of the USCIS to refuse to accept any I-485 filings denies both substantive and procedural due process rights to would be applicants across the U.S. All of these applicants are employment based (EB) applicants who are primarily highly skilled professionals or experienced workers, that the U.S. seeks in high demand areas, including: science, technology, medicine, research, business, academia, and education.
The harm in not accepting the filings in July 2007 goes beyond mere delay. In reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin, starting in mid-June 2007, these applicants took the steps necessary to prepare their filings and made decisions in reliance upon the USCIS accepting their filings during July 2007. In order to be present in the U.S., as required for these filings, many applicants and their families canceled travel plans abroad or arranged to return to the U.S. on short notice missing family weddings and other important life events. They undertook medical examinations and paid for the required tests which must accompany the I-485 filings. (The USCIS had refused to waive this requirement even temporarily.) They hired lawyers to process their paperwork; they arranged to obtain documents from abroad on an expedited basis, involving foreign lawyers and foreign governments, all at a significant cost. They made employment and other strategic immigration related decisions to be able to process their I-485s for them and their families. Some canceled visa appointments at the consulates, or withdrew other immigration filings, all in reliance upon the USCIS accepting I-485 filings during July 2007.
The applicants and their employers lose the rights and privileges that accompany the filing of the I-485. These include eligibility for the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and Advanced Parole (AP), thus eliminating the need for the individuals and their employers to make the filings necessary to maintain a non-immigrant, temporary status. These same ancillary benefits also apply to dependant family members. Most importantly, those that have not filed I-485s are not eligible for "portability" benefits under the �American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act� of Oct. 2000 or �AC21� as it is sometimes referred to. This ineligibility for AC21 portability forces career stagnation. This is to the detriment of the individual as well as their sponsoring employer. Under AC21 portability, employers can promote and/or relocate employees to positions that are the same or similar job classifications as the positions for which they were initially sponsored. Individuals can utilize these provisions for career advancement, and for entrepreneurship. Given that the green card process often spans many years, AC21 portability allows the necessary flexibility to permit the case to continue, to accommodate changes in the sponsoring employer's needs as well as opportunities that are specific to the beneficiary.
The list of stories of individuals and families harmed by the USCIS decision is endless. We have for example, many spouses who will now be separated potentially for years on end, as one received a green card during the USCIS' June "rush," while the other is now ineligible to file.
The USCIS decision also created a burden on U.S. employers. Further delays in the green card process mean that, at best, U.S. employers have to continue to file temporary petitions to keep their workforce in the U.S. legally; at worst, it jeopardizes the availability of this needed highly educated and skilled workforce.
USCIS Motive is to Collect Millions of Additional Filing Fees
Many are baffled by the USCIS decision to reject I-485 filings in July, and its use of the �revised� Visa Bulletin as an excuse. The suspected motive is the collection of the substantially higher filing fees that will be generated after July 27, 2007. This entire incident sends the wrong message about our government, our policies and our legal system reeking of greed and inconsistency. Even the appearance of such impropriety undermines our system.
.................
continue
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
It was a pleasure and an honor to meet with you and to share my views during your panel discussion at the Harvard Worldwide Congress June 15, 2007 in Washington, D.C. I understand and appreciate that the responsibility vested in you as the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is no simple task. We applaud your service to our nation. After meeting with you personally and speaking with you, I am more convinced than ever that you will do the right thing for our country and for the people you serve, both in terms of securing our nation and in being the leader of the DHS, with over 20 federal agencies reporting to you, including the USCIS.
Purpose of this Letter
I am writing to you at this time to address recent actions by the USCIS to refuse to accept I-485 adjustment of status filing during July 2007 that are having significant impact upon the reliability of the legal immigration system in this country, as well as impacting legal foreign nationals and the many U.S. businesses that rely upon the work they perform.
USCIS Decision Contradicts its Long Standing Procedure
In contradiction of its own long standing policy and procedure, we understand that the USCIS, through its Director Gonzalez, contacted the U.S. Department of State (DOS) and requested or required the DOS to issue a �revised� Visa Bulletin on July 2, 2007. The USCIS then used the revised Bulletin to refuse to accept I-485 filings. This decision deprives thousands of foreign nationals, and their families, of the rights and privileges that are attendant to the I-485 filing.
These Highly Skilled Professionals Followed All the Rules and Believe in the American Dream
These professionals and their employers have played by our established immigration laws and rules. The vast majority of these thousands of potential applicants has a U.S. employer corporation, university or other business as a sponsor for permanent resident status. The exceptions from an employer are for those who are considered of �extraordinary ability� or whose work is in our �national interest.� Many of these applicants have completed their Bachelor�s, Master�s and/or PhD programs from U.S. universities. They believe in the opportunities of this great nation and strive to achieve the American Dream by following all the rules, working hard, paying taxes, and striving to do the right thing. They believe in this country, and rely upon our systems, our government, and our processes. Unfortunately, on July 2, 2007, we let them down. The USCIS abandoned its own system and long standing practices. This happened through manipulation of the use of visa numbers, insisting upon the issuance of a "revised visa bulletin," and instituting the USCIS policy of rejecting every employment-based I-485 that could have been filed during the month of July 2007.
USCIS Decision Denies Substantive and Procedural Rights to Highly Skilled Workers and Their Employers - Many of Whom Have Already Suffered and Will Suffer Further Harm/ Injury
Not only does the USCIS' action harm the individuals and employers involved, it undermines the reliability of our entire employment-based immigration system. The unexpected decision of the USCIS to refuse to accept any I-485 filings denies both substantive and procedural due process rights to would be applicants across the U.S. All of these applicants are employment based (EB) applicants who are primarily highly skilled professionals or experienced workers, that the U.S. seeks in high demand areas, including: science, technology, medicine, research, business, academia, and education.
The harm in not accepting the filings in July 2007 goes beyond mere delay. In reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin, starting in mid-June 2007, these applicants took the steps necessary to prepare their filings and made decisions in reliance upon the USCIS accepting their filings during July 2007. In order to be present in the U.S., as required for these filings, many applicants and their families canceled travel plans abroad or arranged to return to the U.S. on short notice missing family weddings and other important life events. They undertook medical examinations and paid for the required tests which must accompany the I-485 filings. (The USCIS had refused to waive this requirement even temporarily.) They hired lawyers to process their paperwork; they arranged to obtain documents from abroad on an expedited basis, involving foreign lawyers and foreign governments, all at a significant cost. They made employment and other strategic immigration related decisions to be able to process their I-485s for them and their families. Some canceled visa appointments at the consulates, or withdrew other immigration filings, all in reliance upon the USCIS accepting I-485 filings during July 2007.
The applicants and their employers lose the rights and privileges that accompany the filing of the I-485. These include eligibility for the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and Advanced Parole (AP), thus eliminating the need for the individuals and their employers to make the filings necessary to maintain a non-immigrant, temporary status. These same ancillary benefits also apply to dependant family members. Most importantly, those that have not filed I-485s are not eligible for "portability" benefits under the �American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act� of Oct. 2000 or �AC21� as it is sometimes referred to. This ineligibility for AC21 portability forces career stagnation. This is to the detriment of the individual as well as their sponsoring employer. Under AC21 portability, employers can promote and/or relocate employees to positions that are the same or similar job classifications as the positions for which they were initially sponsored. Individuals can utilize these provisions for career advancement, and for entrepreneurship. Given that the green card process often spans many years, AC21 portability allows the necessary flexibility to permit the case to continue, to accommodate changes in the sponsoring employer's needs as well as opportunities that are specific to the beneficiary.
The list of stories of individuals and families harmed by the USCIS decision is endless. We have for example, many spouses who will now be separated potentially for years on end, as one received a green card during the USCIS' June "rush," while the other is now ineligible to file.
The USCIS decision also created a burden on U.S. employers. Further delays in the green card process mean that, at best, U.S. employers have to continue to file temporary petitions to keep their workforce in the U.S. legally; at worst, it jeopardizes the availability of this needed highly educated and skilled workforce.
USCIS Motive is to Collect Millions of Additional Filing Fees
Many are baffled by the USCIS decision to reject I-485 filings in July, and its use of the �revised� Visa Bulletin as an excuse. The suspected motive is the collection of the substantially higher filing fees that will be generated after July 27, 2007. This entire incident sends the wrong message about our government, our policies and our legal system reeking of greed and inconsistency. Even the appearance of such impropriety undermines our system.
.................
continue
2010 Charlene Wittstock wore this
reddymjm
10-15 01:58 PM
I will mail it today or tomorrow.
more...
RNGC
12-23 09:49 PM
Hello everyone...
IV is doing a great job.....I suggest to send email to the individuals private email about these conference calls and meeting etc in atleast 2-3 in advance, ....We get so busy that we may not be able to check IV daily, but we do check our inbox...Planning to go to the CT meeting tomorrow....Anyone from plainsboro send me a PM
Ranga
Plainsboro, NJ
IV is doing a great job.....I suggest to send email to the individuals private email about these conference calls and meeting etc in atleast 2-3 in advance, ....We get so busy that we may not be able to check IV daily, but we do check our inbox...Planning to go to the CT meeting tomorrow....Anyone from plainsboro send me a PM
Ranga
Plainsboro, NJ
hair Charlène Wittstock
test101
07-18 11:07 PM
what is NSC phone number ? does any one know ? thanks
more...
snathan
02-12 02:21 PM
hold on guys!!! i was the one who started this thread because i was not sure if ron was right or not but i guess seeing desi3933 comments that he is right and ron may not have the proof to justify this time.
it is good if we can get some proof of uscis wasting/not using visa but untill then please dont blame each other..
I feel the arguments desi3933 is giving.... makes most of the sense as compared to the last reply by ron which was like a general response instead of showing root cause of 13k visa lost.
peace V
Most of the time, Ron never gives any proof for his statements. Its only a fantasy or fiction.
it is good if we can get some proof of uscis wasting/not using visa but untill then please dont blame each other..
I feel the arguments desi3933 is giving.... makes most of the sense as compared to the last reply by ron which was like a general response instead of showing root cause of 13k visa lost.
peace V
Most of the time, Ron never gives any proof for his statements. Its only a fantasy or fiction.
hot charlene wittstock hot. cu Charlene Wittstock Joi; cu Charlene Wittstock Joi
GCKaMaara
04-07 10:52 AM
I would not say people are intentionally lying but fact accuracy deters when transferred from one mouth to another. I would only rely on first hand information.
more...
house charlene wittstock hot. Charlene Wittstock 173786 liam
oliTwist
01-17 03:06 PM
Sometime back I had read this book Inscrutable Americans by Anurag Mathur (http://www.amazon.com/Inscrutable-Americans-Anurag-Mathur/dp/1577310241) which is kind of hilarious story of someone like us duriing late 90s. I guess now your (many of our story) would worth another book :)!!
tattoo charlene wittstock hot. Charlene Wittstock; Charlene Wittstock
thirdworldman
03-09 10:56 PM
Oh yeah, I know my bench sucks.
more...
pictures charlene wittstock hot. Charlene Wittstock sat; Charlene Wittstock sat
Dhundhun
10-19 09:46 PM
Folks,
I was just looking at the Obama and McCain websites just to see how they look from design standpoint (I'm a UI designer by profession). I happened to read their views on Immigration. I was surprised to see that Obama's views were extremely vague and offered no solutions to retain or encourage highly skilled immigrant workers. McCain on the other hand has section on highly skilled immigrant workers and talks about retaining them after US education, H1B cap reform, greencard increase to reflect demand etc.
I heard them talking on same issue. Your findings are consistent with what ever I heard from their mouth.
Still it is hard to believe. Specially most of my GC holder friends have blind faith in Obama.
I was just looking at the Obama and McCain websites just to see how they look from design standpoint (I'm a UI designer by profession). I happened to read their views on Immigration. I was surprised to see that Obama's views were extremely vague and offered no solutions to retain or encourage highly skilled immigrant workers. McCain on the other hand has section on highly skilled immigrant workers and talks about retaining them after US education, H1B cap reform, greencard increase to reflect demand etc.
I heard them talking on same issue. Your findings are consistent with what ever I heard from their mouth.
Still it is hard to believe. Specially most of my GC holder friends have blind faith in Obama.
dresses swimmer Charlene Wittstock
jetguy777
07-11 03:20 PM
Why didnt the EB2 ROW number trickle to ROW EB3 first?
Previously, the policy was that all worldwide numbers would fall down into worldwide third and then from there, fall across to the countries impacted by retrogression (i.e. India, China). The policy was recently clarified and today the unused numbers are allocated within the same preference classification.
Previously, the policy was that all worldwide numbers would fall down into worldwide third and then from there, fall across to the countries impacted by retrogression (i.e. India, China). The policy was recently clarified and today the unused numbers are allocated within the same preference classification.
more...
makeup I think Charlene brings as
dummgelauft
08-21 11:40 AM
I am NOT here illegally. I was told BY someone at USCIS when I submitted the first application that as long as I was submitting requested applications and the required fees, I was not considered an illegal alien. If that was the case, why has no one at USCIS ever told me that? They know where I live, who I live with and everything else they need to know, I have no secrets from them, but not once have I received a letter, phone call or anything else to request for me to leave. I guess those of you that are professionals or those who already have a green card, are better than people like myself who are considered blue collar. I don't receive a dime for what I do, room and board is it so therefore I am not taking away anything from Americans who were born in this country.
In 2003 when I arrived here, PASSPORTS WERE NOT REQUIRED. I had a birth certificate and valid driver's license, that is all customs asked for at the Toronto airport and that is all I gave them. IF passports were required, I would have gotten one, but since they were not, what was I to do? I am not from an overseas country and I have visited the US most of my life as a child and as an adult without any trouble and was never asked for a passport. All that changed in 2005 - not my fault.
I came here looking for some assistance but seem to have gotten a bunch of sarcastic comments that are really not helpful and weren't necessary.
It's funny how you make assumptions and you all are here for similar reasons and needed help at some point. As for not criticizing USCIS for doing their job right - I doubt you would say the same thing if you were my shoes. I do not appreciate the criticism or sarcasm, I thought this was supposed to be a place to get some help, I guess I was wrong.
I won't be back.
Okay, Let us assume it is not your fault, but answer a few things for me
(1) Did your Fiancee sponsor you for permanent residence in US? (He has to marry you to do so.
(2) Since 2002, there has been a n K1 visa (fiancee visa), did yo enquire about that?
(3) Do you have a Canadian Citizenship card?
(4) If you have a Canadian birth certificate and a License, why the heck can you not cross back in to Canada, via any of the dozens of land border crossings, and go start the whole process, with a passport in hand and a proper sponsorship for your visa.
In you post you have not mentioned ANYWHERE, as to who filed the immigrant petition for you. You can not just file it yourself, you need a sponsor (which in your case, should be your fiancee/husband).
If, by mis-fortune, you are no longer with your fiancee/husband, the best bet is to go back to Canada and get on with your life.
In 2003 when I arrived here, PASSPORTS WERE NOT REQUIRED. I had a birth certificate and valid driver's license, that is all customs asked for at the Toronto airport and that is all I gave them. IF passports were required, I would have gotten one, but since they were not, what was I to do? I am not from an overseas country and I have visited the US most of my life as a child and as an adult without any trouble and was never asked for a passport. All that changed in 2005 - not my fault.
I came here looking for some assistance but seem to have gotten a bunch of sarcastic comments that are really not helpful and weren't necessary.
It's funny how you make assumptions and you all are here for similar reasons and needed help at some point. As for not criticizing USCIS for doing their job right - I doubt you would say the same thing if you were my shoes. I do not appreciate the criticism or sarcasm, I thought this was supposed to be a place to get some help, I guess I was wrong.
I won't be back.
Okay, Let us assume it is not your fault, but answer a few things for me
(1) Did your Fiancee sponsor you for permanent residence in US? (He has to marry you to do so.
(2) Since 2002, there has been a n K1 visa (fiancee visa), did yo enquire about that?
(3) Do you have a Canadian Citizenship card?
(4) If you have a Canadian birth certificate and a License, why the heck can you not cross back in to Canada, via any of the dozens of land border crossings, and go start the whole process, with a passport in hand and a proper sponsorship for your visa.
In you post you have not mentioned ANYWHERE, as to who filed the immigrant petition for you. You can not just file it yourself, you need a sponsor (which in your case, should be your fiancee/husband).
If, by mis-fortune, you are no longer with your fiancee/husband, the best bet is to go back to Canada and get on with your life.
girlfriend charlene wittstock hot.
nixstor
07-04 09:33 PM
[QUOTE=nixstor]Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
"Essentially, the numbers are spread out during the first three quarters and whatever is left is available during the last quarter"
On reading the Murthy article it appears that the biggest mistake USCIS committed was using up the visa numbers before the 4th qtr began on 7/2/07.
USCIS did it other way around...desparately rushed to use up the numbers before the 4th qtr began....only explanation is to avoid doing additional paperwork for the July filers...
Its not the paper work guys. They will love the money on EAD & AP. Its the huge backlog that will remain for ever on their hump unless a recapture occurs. Due to lack of communication or what ever, DOS made every category current. The only way they can escape from accepting our applications is by using up all numbers. Thats what they essentially did. AFAIK, DOS gets updates from USCIS and CP's across the world about the number of visas they have used in the past month. DOS then prepares the VB. Assuming USCIS told DOS that they have used 80/90K for the fiscal year so far, DOS is left with 60/50K for the last quarter of the fiscal year. How can DOS imagine/understand availability of 50/60k visas to be less demand for EB categories? This is what exactly the initial July VB said and we were all stupefied. They know this in and out and a simple request for pending number of 485's from years, approved & pending 140's since retrogression hit & that do not have a adjoining 485 should come out conservatively to 150-200K. Does DOS ask this as a part of their monthly information gathering process? Yes, they does is the simple answer. Then what led to the making VB current is the esoteric Q here. USCIS will have allocated the numbers at their own pace if the VB was not made current. As the VB was made current, USCIS was forced to use all the numbers and say that there are no numbers. Unless, we hear more stuff from the offices of DOS/USCIS in response to Rep Lofgren, every thing will be speculation.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
"Essentially, the numbers are spread out during the first three quarters and whatever is left is available during the last quarter"
On reading the Murthy article it appears that the biggest mistake USCIS committed was using up the visa numbers before the 4th qtr began on 7/2/07.
USCIS did it other way around...desparately rushed to use up the numbers before the 4th qtr began....only explanation is to avoid doing additional paperwork for the July filers...
Its not the paper work guys. They will love the money on EAD & AP. Its the huge backlog that will remain for ever on their hump unless a recapture occurs. Due to lack of communication or what ever, DOS made every category current. The only way they can escape from accepting our applications is by using up all numbers. Thats what they essentially did. AFAIK, DOS gets updates from USCIS and CP's across the world about the number of visas they have used in the past month. DOS then prepares the VB. Assuming USCIS told DOS that they have used 80/90K for the fiscal year so far, DOS is left with 60/50K for the last quarter of the fiscal year. How can DOS imagine/understand availability of 50/60k visas to be less demand for EB categories? This is what exactly the initial July VB said and we were all stupefied. They know this in and out and a simple request for pending number of 485's from years, approved & pending 140's since retrogression hit & that do not have a adjoining 485 should come out conservatively to 150-200K. Does DOS ask this as a part of their monthly information gathering process? Yes, they does is the simple answer. Then what led to the making VB current is the esoteric Q here. USCIS will have allocated the numbers at their own pace if the VB was not made current. As the VB was made current, USCIS was forced to use all the numbers and say that there are no numbers. Unless, we hear more stuff from the offices of DOS/USCIS in response to Rep Lofgren, every thing will be speculation.
hairstyles charlene wittstock hot.
satysh
07-17 03:59 PM
NumberUSA removed the fax now.
http://numbersusa.com/faxcenter
Our collective effort worked. Knowledge & truth always wins. We need to put collective effort to research and attack the contents of these kinds of groups.
http://numbersusa.com/faxcenter
Our collective effort worked. Knowledge & truth always wins. We need to put collective effort to research and attack the contents of these kinds of groups.
waitnwatch
07-28 01:06 PM
You are one funny guy in this thread with high sense of humor!! I like that!!!
Only thing I don't like about you is - EB2. (Need to say I am EB3?)
LOL.
and he/she forgot to mention the part about taking a hot shower as a convenient replacement for a dip in a holy river!!!!!!!!!:D
Only thing I don't like about you is - EB2. (Need to say I am EB3?)
LOL.
and he/she forgot to mention the part about taking a hot shower as a convenient replacement for a dip in a holy river!!!!!!!!!:D
delhirocks
07-02 10:35 PM
Signed up for $50 monthly contribution today. Contributed since June 1st = $120. Hope this small contribution will be helpful in this endeavor.
