shantanup
09-22 07:26 AM
Is IV switching sides now?
Let me give you an example and you would understand my point. USCIS Customer Services Directorate received 16 million calls from the public and 300,000 from Members of Congress. Add to it, all other items people do to get attention for their case and think that by sending an email or a phone call from Senator or by a lawyer, the officer will realize his mistake and quickly open the file and approve it. If you look at the responses people post to their inquiries, you would see that most responses are standard. USCIS is not just approving 140K greencards but more than a million greencards, hundreds of thousands of H1 and other visa types, EADs etc...every year. Greencards do not get issued on the day date gets current. It is not a automatic process. There is lot of human work involved and many people do not understand that or spend time understanding it. They would rather waste their time either on useless task of tracking or calling customer service every single day.
Let me give you an example and you would understand my point. USCIS Customer Services Directorate received 16 million calls from the public and 300,000 from Members of Congress. Add to it, all other items people do to get attention for their case and think that by sending an email or a phone call from Senator or by a lawyer, the officer will realize his mistake and quickly open the file and approve it. If you look at the responses people post to their inquiries, you would see that most responses are standard. USCIS is not just approving 140K greencards but more than a million greencards, hundreds of thousands of H1 and other visa types, EADs etc...every year. Greencards do not get issued on the day date gets current. It is not a automatic process. There is lot of human work involved and many people do not understand that or spend time understanding it. They would rather waste their time either on useless task of tracking or calling customer service every single day.
wallpaper Magic Sam Blues Band#39;s #39;Black
srgadi
09-10 07:22 PM
Do you get emails when you get soft LUDs ?
No, you don't e-mails or SMS for soft LUDs
No, you don't e-mails or SMS for soft LUDs
sodh
07-11 02:10 AM
Thankyou IV for the flower campaign GET WELL LUCKY AKA EMILIO.
2011 parodied Album Covers.
pmb76
07-09 07:26 PM
What you guys are talking about ... Walter reed is the best place for the flowers to go, with all what is going on in there ... the media will eat this news . DO not Cancel whatever you Do do not cancel instead call the media and let them know........... This is even better.
Can we do a blood drive next as protest! seriously. Donate blood as protest and for media attention.
I totally agree with this. A blood drive is a WONDERFUL idea. If we can get enough media outlets to cover this story it will send the right message to the Federal government. I think this will be HUGE. test101 - you are a genius !!
IV core - please consider this.
Can we do a blood drive next as protest! seriously. Donate blood as protest and for media attention.
I totally agree with this. A blood drive is a WONDERFUL idea. If we can get enough media outlets to cover this story it will send the right message to the Federal government. I think this will be HUGE. test101 - you are a genius !!
IV core - please consider this.
more...
eyeswe
09-24 02:55 PM
Yes , I did see that, but at what point do they consider this as "inventory" -- waiting for visa having pre-adjudicated (gosh, I hope not!) or as we all are thinking -- applications that have reached the agency...
Inventory and related QA is available on right habd side of this link,
USCIS - Green Card (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=ae853ad15c673210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=ae853ad15c673210VgnVCM100000082ca60a RCRD)
Go to USCIS.gov --> Green card and on right hand top side Inventory and Q&A posted.
Inventory means total Number of Employment based Pending Approvals.
Inventory and related QA is available on right habd side of this link,
USCIS - Green Card (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=ae853ad15c673210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=ae853ad15c673210VgnVCM100000082ca60a RCRD)
Go to USCIS.gov --> Green card and on right hand top side Inventory and Q&A posted.
Inventory means total Number of Employment based Pending Approvals.
snathan
09-24 06:23 PM
Here is my chart
EB1 EB2 EB3 EB4 EB5 EBOther TOT
India 718 47728 62607 123 13 107
China 607 19333 6343 384 13 30
Mexixo 174 211 7878 62 0 90
Phil 74 510 11563 70 0 264
ROW 2477 7150 62840 1378 40 1029
__________________________________________________ ______________
Total 4050 74932 151231 2017 66 1520
================================================== ===
Total EB1+EB4+EB5 + Ebother = 7653
_______________________________________
EB2- MEX+PHIL+ROW = 7871
________________________________________
Assuming new cases in ROW Category = 4476 (Random number makes total visa number
being used to round 20,000)
__________________________________________________ ___________
TOT Visa that would surely be used = EB1ALL+ EB4ALL+EB5ALL+EBothersALL+EB2ROW=
7653+7871+4476 = 20000
__________________________________________________ _____________________
Visa Numbers Available for both AOS & CP after using sure shot cases (140,000-20,000) = 120,000
Additional Visa numbers will be available for categories (EB2 I/C + EB3 I/C/M/P/ROW)
Because there are 62,840 EB3 pending for the rest of the world I doubt any numbers would
be given EB3I/C/P/M ???? Correct me if I am wrong
Of the additional visa numbers available after EB3 ROW uses it, max how many can be allocated to India and China EB2 is the question.......? Can someone answer this based on the max limit per country and per category???
Spill over does not have any country limit. they will allocate it untill it becomes current or numbers running out.
EB1 EB2 EB3 EB4 EB5 EBOther TOT
India 718 47728 62607 123 13 107
China 607 19333 6343 384 13 30
Mexixo 174 211 7878 62 0 90
Phil 74 510 11563 70 0 264
ROW 2477 7150 62840 1378 40 1029
__________________________________________________ ______________
Total 4050 74932 151231 2017 66 1520
================================================== ===
Total EB1+EB4+EB5 + Ebother = 7653
_______________________________________
EB2- MEX+PHIL+ROW = 7871
________________________________________
Assuming new cases in ROW Category = 4476 (Random number makes total visa number
being used to round 20,000)
__________________________________________________ ___________
TOT Visa that would surely be used = EB1ALL+ EB4ALL+EB5ALL+EBothersALL+EB2ROW=
7653+7871+4476 = 20000
__________________________________________________ _____________________
Visa Numbers Available for both AOS & CP after using sure shot cases (140,000-20,000) = 120,000
Additional Visa numbers will be available for categories (EB2 I/C + EB3 I/C/M/P/ROW)
Because there are 62,840 EB3 pending for the rest of the world I doubt any numbers would
be given EB3I/C/P/M ???? Correct me if I am wrong
Of the additional visa numbers available after EB3 ROW uses it, max how many can be allocated to India and China EB2 is the question.......? Can someone answer this based on the max limit per country and per category???
Spill over does not have any country limit. they will allocate it untill it becomes current or numbers running out.
more...
ujjwal_p
09-23 07:51 PM
It is economy. DOL vitually halted PERM approvals. Companies are not sponsering GCs as they used. If you give an Ad today, you will get 10 times resumes. So there is no easy way to get an approval.
I think we are assuming that this will continue to be the case through Oct 2010. What if DOL changes policies with PERM approval tomorrow or the economy starts improving by March? EB2 ROW is current and there will be quite a few PERM's from them which will be adjusted immediately. We'll have to wait till the Sep results are in and the data is adjusted with 2005 EB2 numbers. Hopefully all < 2005 should be taken care of for EB2.
I think we are assuming that this will continue to be the case through Oct 2010. What if DOL changes policies with PERM approval tomorrow or the economy starts improving by March? EB2 ROW is current and there will be quite a few PERM's from them which will be adjusted immediately. We'll have to wait till the Sep results are in and the data is adjusted with 2005 EB2 numbers. Hopefully all < 2005 should be taken care of for EB2.
2010 Bruce Springsteen#39;s Magic Album Cover Tee (BSP41837)
p_aluri
06-25 08:07 PM
I need some help from you guys..
What would be the answer for :
Were you inspected by Immigration officer under part # 3 on I-485 application?
I really appreciate your input..
Thanks,
My spouse and I live in different cities - each will file their I-485/EAD/AP. She as dependent.
What should the spouse write for her address? Her current address, or mine?
Please advise.
Thanks
Ams
What would be the answer for :
Were you inspected by Immigration officer under part # 3 on I-485 application?
I really appreciate your input..
Thanks,
My spouse and I live in different cities - each will file their I-485/EAD/AP. She as dependent.
What should the spouse write for her address? Her current address, or mine?
Please advise.
Thanks
Ams
more...
sri1309
08-22 07:31 AM
Flower campaign, I said this one week back and did not do anything on that but was requesting others to join. I did send letters twice to 6 address and sending cards again today.
How do we organize this flower camaign or anything . Shouldnt a core member start the initiative by listing the action on the headlines.
I am sure people are waiting to see Oct bulletin. But based on information we have, please be assured nothing good can be seen, unless a miracle. Wait for the next bulletin may not be as pleasant in case you are looking for a job (No I am not). Lets all shoot emails to CORE IV now, to request them to start a campaign. I think from our end that shoudl be the 1st step. Unless they get the group together, we will be headless chicken as someone said, writing in doifferent threads,
EB3-India needs to move atleast 3-4 years.
Sri,
$100.00
How do we organize this flower camaign or anything . Shouldnt a core member start the initiative by listing the action on the headlines.
I am sure people are waiting to see Oct bulletin. But based on information we have, please be assured nothing good can be seen, unless a miracle. Wait for the next bulletin may not be as pleasant in case you are looking for a job (No I am not). Lets all shoot emails to CORE IV now, to request them to start a campaign. I think from our end that shoudl be the 1st step. Unless they get the group together, we will be headless chicken as someone said, writing in doifferent threads,
EB3-India needs to move atleast 3-4 years.
Sri,
$100.00
hair Magic, Bruce Springsteen#39;s
caliguy
10-22 03:31 PM
@ fatjoe
I have contacted Napolatino also, like a month back and nothing has happened on my case. I saw LUDs on my case on 09/24 and 09/25 and since then I have not seen any updates. I have tried all methods that are on that link, except for contacting the first lady but I am not sure if that will help. They simply might throw the package in the trash, without even seeing what it has. I posted the link so that everyone knows different ways of contacting USCIS, atleast you feel good if you try everything from your end.
Where is your case at, is it in TSC or NSC?
I have contacted Napolatino also, like a month back and nothing has happened on my case. I saw LUDs on my case on 09/24 and 09/25 and since then I have not seen any updates. I have tried all methods that are on that link, except for contacting the first lady but I am not sure if that will help. They simply might throw the package in the trash, without even seeing what it has. I posted the link so that everyone knows different ways of contacting USCIS, atleast you feel good if you try everything from your end.
Where is your case at, is it in TSC or NSC?
more...
pappu
10-08 12:31 PM
Here is another case of a person I came across recently. This person was stuck for the past 5 years in Namechecks . He applied for GC in 2001. He got his GC just recently after a long wait and struggle.
hot The name Bruce Springsteen is
jsb
09-21 11:30 AM
JSB ! You are just one very optimistic one.. aren't you ? :)
Let me tell you I am as anxious and frustrated as you all "July 2 filers, no action yet" are. But I am thinking about it a bit calmly, rather than thinking of doing something so that I feel that I have done something (i.e. complain, write to congressman, etc.). Expressing my anger by saying they should have done this or that, does not change the situation. I believe USCIS is working, as expected, with the capability/attitude of a government worker, treating our filings (which are so important to us) just another government office paper work. Best is just to wait for another 10 days, and if nothing is heard by then, take action as per procedures.
Let me tell you I am as anxious and frustrated as you all "July 2 filers, no action yet" are. But I am thinking about it a bit calmly, rather than thinking of doing something so that I feel that I have done something (i.e. complain, write to congressman, etc.). Expressing my anger by saying they should have done this or that, does not change the situation. I believe USCIS is working, as expected, with the capability/attitude of a government worker, treating our filings (which are so important to us) just another government office paper work. Best is just to wait for another 10 days, and if nothing is heard by then, take action as per procedures.
more...
house Bruce Springsteen Magic Album.
coopheal
07-09 07:15 PM
Yes I think flower campaign is our great success. Hopefully media and politicians will pay some attention to our issues.
tattoo Bruce Springsteen:Magic Tour
gg_ny
08-09 02:30 PM
Once again the petition protesting against namecheck delays misses the point. It is unreasonable to ask the FBI to "speed up" the process, they should be allowed to take as much time as they want.
I want to recycle all the negative adjectives you have used in your mail on your statements ;-). Please read about NNCP, FBI and related congressional hearings and statements; about the GC for a muslim known to have Hezbollah connections but missed by FBI background checks and the kind of reactions in evoked in 2002; subsequent modifications in the name check process. Also, try to understand (!) that name checks are done for ALL APPLICANTS including for Soccer Spicegirl and her hubby Bechkam when they would apply under extraordinarily talented category. FBI does not look for visa category the applicant comes under; it is not their job. CIS is mandated to have the "background" check (of which namecheck is just one of the processes) cleared for ALL gc applicants. Then how can this be independent of gc process? What if the uncleared person gets gc and then becomes persona non granta (unavailable) for deportation if the checks fail? how about the benefits (SSN etc) and immi benefits (sponsorship etc.)? what if that person becomes an elected offcier (state governor?) and then the name check fails?
The request to speed up the name checks is truly ridiculous. Stupidity like this is what harms legal H1-B immigrants the most.
Do you understand the reasons for the delay? Read Pappu's postings carefully: the delay is not because of namechecks not cleared; delay is mainly because the FBI analysts DO NOT GET TO YOUR FILE for many years! They claim they could not keep up with demand for name checks from gc applicatns, naturalization applicants, sometimes other visa applicants, whitehouse visitors, political appointees to less prominent positions, would-be employees of coast guard and other sensitive defense establishments etc. etc. If that is the case what is wrong in asking FBI (I dont know who is doing it though) to speed up the process for legal immigratns? $100 X 500,000 = $50M; Even if one analyst costs ~100K per year (with benefits), then do the math!
Stupidity in any form is harmful to H1Bs. Asking for expediting namecheck (even with a fat fee) is not one of them. But putting the mouths first where the minds should have been really harms anyone!
I want to recycle all the negative adjectives you have used in your mail on your statements ;-). Please read about NNCP, FBI and related congressional hearings and statements; about the GC for a muslim known to have Hezbollah connections but missed by FBI background checks and the kind of reactions in evoked in 2002; subsequent modifications in the name check process. Also, try to understand (!) that name checks are done for ALL APPLICANTS including for Soccer Spicegirl and her hubby Bechkam when they would apply under extraordinarily talented category. FBI does not look for visa category the applicant comes under; it is not their job. CIS is mandated to have the "background" check (of which namecheck is just one of the processes) cleared for ALL gc applicants. Then how can this be independent of gc process? What if the uncleared person gets gc and then becomes persona non granta (unavailable) for deportation if the checks fail? how about the benefits (SSN etc) and immi benefits (sponsorship etc.)? what if that person becomes an elected offcier (state governor?) and then the name check fails?
The request to speed up the name checks is truly ridiculous. Stupidity like this is what harms legal H1-B immigrants the most.
Do you understand the reasons for the delay? Read Pappu's postings carefully: the delay is not because of namechecks not cleared; delay is mainly because the FBI analysts DO NOT GET TO YOUR FILE for many years! They claim they could not keep up with demand for name checks from gc applicatns, naturalization applicants, sometimes other visa applicants, whitehouse visitors, political appointees to less prominent positions, would-be employees of coast guard and other sensitive defense establishments etc. etc. If that is the case what is wrong in asking FBI (I dont know who is doing it though) to speed up the process for legal immigratns? $100 X 500,000 = $50M; Even if one analyst costs ~100K per year (with benefits), then do the math!
Stupidity in any form is harmful to H1Bs. Asking for expediting namecheck (even with a fat fee) is not one of them. But putting the mouths first where the minds should have been really harms anyone!
more...
pictures a Bruce Springsteen album
pappu
10-08 12:31 PM
Here is another case of a person I came across recently. This person was stuck for the past 5 years in Namechecks . He applied for GC in 2001. He got his GC just recently after a long wait and struggle.
dresses tattoo Bruce Springsteen is
dhirajs98
06-21 08:42 AM
I have two labors
PERM EB2
Labor: Certified
PD: Dec 06
I-140: Filed in Premium Processing on May last week
RFE Received: June 1st
RFE Response Sent: June 6th
Status: No updates from USCIS
I-485: I can file based on the pending I-140
========
RIR EB3
PD: Jan 2004
Labor: Noy yet Certified. Based on my case analyst at DBEC it should be certified by June 30th.
==========
Question:
1. If I file I-485 with EB2 labor. Can I use EB3 PD later for getting GC faster?
2. Does PD matters once I-485 is filed?
3. If I file I-485 with EB2 and then due to some reason my I-140 gets rejected what options I have?
PERM EB2
Labor: Certified
PD: Dec 06
I-140: Filed in Premium Processing on May last week
RFE Received: June 1st
RFE Response Sent: June 6th
Status: No updates from USCIS
I-485: I can file based on the pending I-140
========
RIR EB3
PD: Jan 2004
Labor: Noy yet Certified. Based on my case analyst at DBEC it should be certified by June 30th.
==========
Question:
1. If I file I-485 with EB2 labor. Can I use EB3 PD later for getting GC faster?
2. Does PD matters once I-485 is filed?
3. If I file I-485 with EB2 and then due to some reason my I-140 gets rejected what options I have?
more...
makeup Bruce Springsteen - Magic
atlfp
10-17 09:03 AM
These people are asxxx but they are smart people. They say what they got to say, not what the believe. Lou Dobb wants to appeal to certain people and immigration provided one of the best opportunities. If you wish to take them on, take them on along with a major media. Otherwise it's useless to try to "persuade" him. He would be launghing as if you are a clown.
girlfriend album bruce springsteen magic.
vkrishn
08-16 04:59 PM
Here is reponse from Ombudsman.
Dear Sir/Madam:
We have received your case problem. We will initiate a formal inquiry with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).
We appreciate your continued patience and understanding.
Sincerely,
Office of the CIS Ombudsman
Department of Homeland Security
Did anybody get the reponse the same way?
I got the same reply last week. Yet to hear anything from them.
Dear Sir/Madam:
We have received your case problem. We will initiate a formal inquiry with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).
We appreciate your continued patience and understanding.
Sincerely,
Office of the CIS Ombudsman
Department of Homeland Security
Did anybody get the reponse the same way?
I got the same reply last week. Yet to hear anything from them.
hairstyles hot ruce springsteen magic.
vdlrao
03-31 11:33 AM
(1) - (2) - (3) gives the spill over from EB2 ROW to EB2 (I&C), which is 1,426Which means EB2 ROW to EB2 I&C spill over is mere 1,426 ???? Hope we are wrong... this looks scary...
53,872 ( EB2 Total allocation in 2010 ) = Some X (EB2 ROW usage is say X) + 19,961 ( Total India received in 2010) + 6,505( Total China's received in 2010)
==>> X =[B] 53,872 -19,961-6,505 ==> X= 27406
==>> So Total EB2 ROW usage in 2010 is = 27,406
-----------------
1)EB2 I & C Usage = 19,961+ 6,505 = 26466.
2)Visas due to Spill Over for EB2 I & C = 26466 - 5,604 (EB2 (I&C) Regular quota {2*(40,040*7%)} ) = 20,862
3) Visas due to spill over for EB2 India only in 2010 = 26,466 (EB2 I & C Usage ) - 2,802(EB2-I Regular quota {40,040*7%} ) - 6,505 (EB2 China Total Usage) = 17,159.
-------------------
1) In 2011 according the USCIS statement we are getting 12,000 spill over visas in MAY.
Out of that about 10,000 will be allocated to India.
Reason: India PD based on April bulletin = 08 May 2006,
China PD Based on April bulletin = 22 Jul 2006
India has to get cleared 3 months (May Jun and Jul) before the spill over allocated to China.
The average demand for EB2 India is about 1.5k/Month.
which takes 3*1.5 = 4.5 K visas.
The remaining Visas = 7.5 K
The average demand for EB2 China is about 700/ Monnth.
The Total demand for EB2 India & China together from Aug 2006 will be about 2.2k/Month.
So 7.5K will clear about 3.5 months of EB2 I&C from Aug 2006.
So The May bulletin takes the EB2 I & C to November 2006 Or December 2006 as we also get the regular monthly quota of 2*(40,040*7%)
-------
Just my assumption. God only knows how USCIS moves the dates in May.
.
53,872 ( EB2 Total allocation in 2010 ) = Some X (EB2 ROW usage is say X) + 19,961 ( Total India received in 2010) + 6,505( Total China's received in 2010)
==>> X =[B] 53,872 -19,961-6,505 ==> X= 27406
==>> So Total EB2 ROW usage in 2010 is = 27,406
-----------------
1)EB2 I & C Usage = 19,961+ 6,505 = 26466.
2)Visas due to Spill Over for EB2 I & C = 26466 - 5,604 (EB2 (I&C) Regular quota {2*(40,040*7%)} ) = 20,862
3) Visas due to spill over for EB2 India only in 2010 = 26,466 (EB2 I & C Usage ) - 2,802(EB2-I Regular quota {40,040*7%} ) - 6,505 (EB2 China Total Usage) = 17,159.
-------------------
1) In 2011 according the USCIS statement we are getting 12,000 spill over visas in MAY.
Out of that about 10,000 will be allocated to India.
Reason: India PD based on April bulletin = 08 May 2006,
China PD Based on April bulletin = 22 Jul 2006
India has to get cleared 3 months (May Jun and Jul) before the spill over allocated to China.
The average demand for EB2 India is about 1.5k/Month.
which takes 3*1.5 = 4.5 K visas.
The remaining Visas = 7.5 K
The average demand for EB2 China is about 700/ Monnth.
The Total demand for EB2 India & China together from Aug 2006 will be about 2.2k/Month.
So 7.5K will clear about 3.5 months of EB2 I&C from Aug 2006.
So The May bulletin takes the EB2 I & C to November 2006 Or December 2006 as we also get the regular monthly quota of 2*(40,040*7%)
-------
Just my assumption. God only knows how USCIS moves the dates in May.
.
pappu
08-04 06:43 PM
FBI Name Check
Copyright � Triceiver.com
All applicants for immigration benefits must undergo background security checks, and one of them is the FBI name check. It is conducted by the FBI National Name Check Program Section (NNCPS). Since 2003, many green card (I-485) and naturalization applications have been significantly delayed by this process, sometimes by several years! More importantly, immigrants affected by this processing delay are often left in complete darkness. USCIS has adopted a policy that it will not release any information regarding name checks to applicants. Similarly, the FBI has practically shut down all email and phone communications previously available to immigrants.
How FBI name check works?
FBI name check, in short, is to compare a person's name against the Central Records System and see if there is a matching record. However, this seemingly simple process can be quite complicated in some cases.
1. The Central Records System (CRS) is huge
The CRS contains all information which the FBI has acquired during many years of law enforcement activities. It has numerous administrative, applicant, criminal, personnel, and other types of files, related to not only individuals, but companies and foreign intelligence matters also. Certain records are stored in the FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C., while others are maintained by field offices across the United States.
When a name check request is received, the FBI conducts a search of the individual's name in the CRS' General Indices. In addition to the person's full name, the FBI will also use different combinations and variations of the same name.
The General Indices have two types of entries according to the FBI:
A "main" entry - an entry that carries the name corresponding with the subject of a file contained in the CRS. A main file name thus refers to an individual who is the subject of an FBI investigaton.
A "reference" entry - an entry, sometimes called a "cross-reference," that generally only mentions or references an individual, organization, etc., contained in a document located in another "main" file. So a reference is someone whose name only appears in an investigation.
The FBI name check will search both "main" files and "reference" files. In comparison, the FBI Privacy Act request searches main files only. The Privacy Act request is sometimes referred to as FOIPA request, Freedom of Information and Privacy Act. So when an I-485 filer receives a "No Record" letter from the FBI in response to their FOIPA request, it only means that his or her name doesn't match any "main" entry.
During a name search, the FBI first checks the person's name electronically against the Universal Index contained in a database called Automated Case Support (ACS) system. For most people (68% according to the FBI), the results come back with "No Record" within 48 hours, meaning that their name checks are considered cleared. If there is a match, called a "hit," an agent must manually review the file or entry. This secondary name search usually identifies additional people as having "No Record." According to the FBI, about 10% of name check requests must go through yet a third level of review, during which the matching record must be retrieved from the source. But there is a problem:
2. Not all records are digitized and many are still paper documents
If the matching record has a digital copy in the ACS, it can be reviewed quickly. Otherwise paper documents must be transported to the reviewer from one of the FBI field offices which are located all over the country. This could cause significant delays. The name check result after this review will be forwarded to the requesting agency such as the USCIS.
3. Sheer volume of name check requests from multiple agencies
Although the name check itself could take a long time in some cases, it is not the bottle neck. The more serious problem is the time it takes for an analyst to actually get to a case after a "hit," due to backlogs. This is probably the No.1 reason for a lot of cases that are stuck in FBI name checks.
The FBI name check backlog may have several causes, and one of them is the sheer volume of requests. In addition to USCIS, many other Federal agencies, congressional committees, as well as state and local law enforcement agencies, all request name checks as part of their background investigation or clearance processes. According to Michael Cannon, Section Chief of NNCP, the FBI processed 3.7 million name checks in 2005, compared to about 2.5 million/year before September 11, 2001. In 2006, the USCIS alone sends more than 27,700 requests on a weekly basis.
Moreover, it is not clear how strictly the FBI follows the order of first-in, first-out. It is particular difficult to find out exactly how the FBI would queue cases that have returned with potential matching records. From the simple fact that some name-check cases can be pending for several years, and not all of them are that complicated, the FBI's queuing method may need a review of its own.
4. Lengthy name check process and national security
Although conducting name checks is an essential step in identifying national security and public safety concerns, the current process may not achieve its intended objectives. The reason is that in almost all cases, a person whose name check is pending is currently present in the United States. So the lengthy process actually extends an individual's stay in the US. If it takes years to come to a conclusion that the person is indeed a security threat, what will happen during those years? In this sense, timely processing of name checks is not only a relief to legal immigrants, but a must for national security reasons.
5. It is difficult to expedite FBI name checks
In 2007, the USCIS established new policies on expediting FBI name checks and the criteria are very limited. The USCIS may demand expedited handling only if the case involves military deployment, age-out or sunset provisions, loss of certain benefits, or other compelling reasons such as critical medical conditions. It specifically stated that Writ of Mandamus (WOM) - a lawsuit forcing the government to act quickly after an unreasonable delay - would no longer qualify as one.
Writing to Senators, Congressmen, or even the First Lady, have not shown as much success as many were hoping for. In fact, most Congressional inquires are now simply coming back with "case pending" responses. Some offices have stated that they will no longer contact the FBI for cases pending less than a year, citing an increasing number of letters asking for assistance. However, for most poeple, contacting congressional representives is one of very few channels still available to receive any information regarding their pending cases.
6. The name check situation may get even worse, before it improves
According to the USCIS Ombudsman, there is a staggering 329,160 FBI name check cases pending as of May 2007. Among them, 211,341 (64%) have been pending more than 90 days and approximately 32 percent (106,738) pending more than one year. Now with the biggest fee increase in decades, taking effect July 30th, 2007, The USCIS has proposed to allocate more funds toward the name check process. And the FBI indicated that additional funding would allow them to add more staff to speed up the process and reduce backlogs. Many are skeptical, but we certainly hope that they will achieve some of the goals this time.
Copyright � Triceiver.com
All applicants for immigration benefits must undergo background security checks, and one of them is the FBI name check. It is conducted by the FBI National Name Check Program Section (NNCPS). Since 2003, many green card (I-485) and naturalization applications have been significantly delayed by this process, sometimes by several years! More importantly, immigrants affected by this processing delay are often left in complete darkness. USCIS has adopted a policy that it will not release any information regarding name checks to applicants. Similarly, the FBI has practically shut down all email and phone communications previously available to immigrants.
How FBI name check works?
FBI name check, in short, is to compare a person's name against the Central Records System and see if there is a matching record. However, this seemingly simple process can be quite complicated in some cases.
1. The Central Records System (CRS) is huge
The CRS contains all information which the FBI has acquired during many years of law enforcement activities. It has numerous administrative, applicant, criminal, personnel, and other types of files, related to not only individuals, but companies and foreign intelligence matters also. Certain records are stored in the FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C., while others are maintained by field offices across the United States.
When a name check request is received, the FBI conducts a search of the individual's name in the CRS' General Indices. In addition to the person's full name, the FBI will also use different combinations and variations of the same name.
The General Indices have two types of entries according to the FBI:
A "main" entry - an entry that carries the name corresponding with the subject of a file contained in the CRS. A main file name thus refers to an individual who is the subject of an FBI investigaton.
A "reference" entry - an entry, sometimes called a "cross-reference," that generally only mentions or references an individual, organization, etc., contained in a document located in another "main" file. So a reference is someone whose name only appears in an investigation.
The FBI name check will search both "main" files and "reference" files. In comparison, the FBI Privacy Act request searches main files only. The Privacy Act request is sometimes referred to as FOIPA request, Freedom of Information and Privacy Act. So when an I-485 filer receives a "No Record" letter from the FBI in response to their FOIPA request, it only means that his or her name doesn't match any "main" entry.
During a name search, the FBI first checks the person's name electronically against the Universal Index contained in a database called Automated Case Support (ACS) system. For most people (68% according to the FBI), the results come back with "No Record" within 48 hours, meaning that their name checks are considered cleared. If there is a match, called a "hit," an agent must manually review the file or entry. This secondary name search usually identifies additional people as having "No Record." According to the FBI, about 10% of name check requests must go through yet a third level of review, during which the matching record must be retrieved from the source. But there is a problem:
2. Not all records are digitized and many are still paper documents
If the matching record has a digital copy in the ACS, it can be reviewed quickly. Otherwise paper documents must be transported to the reviewer from one of the FBI field offices which are located all over the country. This could cause significant delays. The name check result after this review will be forwarded to the requesting agency such as the USCIS.
3. Sheer volume of name check requests from multiple agencies
Although the name check itself could take a long time in some cases, it is not the bottle neck. The more serious problem is the time it takes for an analyst to actually get to a case after a "hit," due to backlogs. This is probably the No.1 reason for a lot of cases that are stuck in FBI name checks.
The FBI name check backlog may have several causes, and one of them is the sheer volume of requests. In addition to USCIS, many other Federal agencies, congressional committees, as well as state and local law enforcement agencies, all request name checks as part of their background investigation or clearance processes. According to Michael Cannon, Section Chief of NNCP, the FBI processed 3.7 million name checks in 2005, compared to about 2.5 million/year before September 11, 2001. In 2006, the USCIS alone sends more than 27,700 requests on a weekly basis.
Moreover, it is not clear how strictly the FBI follows the order of first-in, first-out. It is particular difficult to find out exactly how the FBI would queue cases that have returned with potential matching records. From the simple fact that some name-check cases can be pending for several years, and not all of them are that complicated, the FBI's queuing method may need a review of its own.
4. Lengthy name check process and national security
Although conducting name checks is an essential step in identifying national security and public safety concerns, the current process may not achieve its intended objectives. The reason is that in almost all cases, a person whose name check is pending is currently present in the United States. So the lengthy process actually extends an individual's stay in the US. If it takes years to come to a conclusion that the person is indeed a security threat, what will happen during those years? In this sense, timely processing of name checks is not only a relief to legal immigrants, but a must for national security reasons.
5. It is difficult to expedite FBI name checks
In 2007, the USCIS established new policies on expediting FBI name checks and the criteria are very limited. The USCIS may demand expedited handling only if the case involves military deployment, age-out or sunset provisions, loss of certain benefits, or other compelling reasons such as critical medical conditions. It specifically stated that Writ of Mandamus (WOM) - a lawsuit forcing the government to act quickly after an unreasonable delay - would no longer qualify as one.
Writing to Senators, Congressmen, or even the First Lady, have not shown as much success as many were hoping for. In fact, most Congressional inquires are now simply coming back with "case pending" responses. Some offices have stated that they will no longer contact the FBI for cases pending less than a year, citing an increasing number of letters asking for assistance. However, for most poeple, contacting congressional representives is one of very few channels still available to receive any information regarding their pending cases.
6. The name check situation may get even worse, before it improves
According to the USCIS Ombudsman, there is a staggering 329,160 FBI name check cases pending as of May 2007. Among them, 211,341 (64%) have been pending more than 90 days and approximately 32 percent (106,738) pending more than one year. Now with the biggest fee increase in decades, taking effect July 30th, 2007, The USCIS has proposed to allocate more funds toward the name check process. And the FBI indicated that additional funding would allow them to add more staff to speed up the process and reduce backlogs. Many are skeptical, but we certainly hope that they will achieve some of the goals this time.
rangaswamy
06-29 07:27 PM
I really think, second July is the D day here. They can't stop accepting new applications becuase of mere speculation that lot of folks can apply. If indeed thousands of people apply on the second, the numbers will become U on the 3rd. I still think if your applications gets in on the 2nd, you will squeeze in..
Its all about being at the right place at the right time..:cool:
For the nth time.. numbers are reduced only after approval and not based on receipt of application. So if you can submit it on July 2nd you submit it on 3rd and so on.
Its all about being at the right place at the right time..:cool:
For the nth time.. numbers are reduced only after approval and not based on receipt of application. So if you can submit it on July 2nd you submit it on 3rd and so on.
