Jerrome
08-08 10:09 PM
EAD (Renewal)
Service center: TSC
Mail Date - 31st Jul
Received - 4th Aug
Check cashed & LUD - 7th Aug
EAD Expiring - 25th Oct
Work Auth - EAD
I also filled G-28 for and sent AC21 with EAD renewal. The LUD is updated for all applications (i.e. I-485, I-140, previous I765 and I-131). Does this mean they changed the attorney representation in all previously approved cases?
I think your assumption is correct. Even i sent G28 recently with AC21, i got SoftLUD on all my cases including the previous approved ones.
Service center: TSC
Mail Date - 31st Jul
Received - 4th Aug
Check cashed & LUD - 7th Aug
EAD Expiring - 25th Oct
Work Auth - EAD
I also filled G-28 for and sent AC21 with EAD renewal. The LUD is updated for all applications (i.e. I-485, I-140, previous I765 and I-131). Does this mean they changed the attorney representation in all previously approved cases?
I think your assumption is correct. Even i sent G28 recently with AC21, i got SoftLUD on all my cases including the previous approved ones.
wallpaper makeup terrell owens.
venkygct
08-18 10:15 PM
My wife has got her EAD approval email today...We applied on July 22....
EB2, TSC
PD - 10/2006
Applied on - July 17, 2008
Receipt Date - July 22,2008
No LUD
Card Production Ordered on - Aug 18th, 2008
EB2, TSC
PD - 10/2006
Applied on - July 17, 2008
Receipt Date - July 22,2008
No LUD
Card Production Ordered on - Aug 18th, 2008
prince_waiting
08-13 11:58 PM
I filed concurrently for I140 and AOS by sending in the application packet today. My lawyer suggested that even though the USCIS receives the packet tomorrow but are not able to receipt it before the 17th they can reject the it. I am a little confused about his advice, can anyone please provide a clue and sooth my nerves? It would be a tremendous obligation.
2011 terrell owens girlfriend
JunRN
08-27 05:35 AM
Mine was filed on July 31 as per FEDEX tracking number was received by C. Houge....I am hoping to receive my RNs on the first week of September based on the rate as per USCIS Receipt Processing Notice....
more...
chmur
07-28 12:23 AM
I never said we should keep quiet about it. I was only responding to an earlier post reagarding 'EB2 - elitist protectionism'. Just like you are within your rights to look after yourself, so is everybody else - welcome to capitalism. I have always maintained that going down the road of EB3 versus EB2 is detrimental to this group. Your post only adds to this.
In anycase I dont know how splitting visas equally between EB2I and EB3I can pass the smell test even if DOS were to implement it - there is a categorization that is already established AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. The split completely negates it - at least to the extent any EB2ROW spill over is directed to EB3 when EB2 I and C are already retrogressed.
Lets not swear by capitalism but selectively resort to socialism.
Yes, you quoted Visa bulletin which says DOS "may" not to adhere to country limits in distributing spill overs .
is there anything that says that distribution further has to be done in a particular way ??
I have not found any . Probably there is none otherwise DOS could not have gotten away with "vertical" and "Horizontal" flip flops.
In that light every comment about EB*->EB? , failing smell tests are speculative at best.
You are yet to respond to my question of why EB3-I and recapture lobbying efforts cannot proceed simultaneously and How EB3-I lobbying undermines recapture effort.
In anycase I dont know how splitting visas equally between EB2I and EB3I can pass the smell test even if DOS were to implement it - there is a categorization that is already established AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. The split completely negates it - at least to the extent any EB2ROW spill over is directed to EB3 when EB2 I and C are already retrogressed.
Lets not swear by capitalism but selectively resort to socialism.
Yes, you quoted Visa bulletin which says DOS "may" not to adhere to country limits in distributing spill overs .
is there anything that says that distribution further has to be done in a particular way ??
I have not found any . Probably there is none otherwise DOS could not have gotten away with "vertical" and "Horizontal" flip flops.
In that light every comment about EB*->EB? , failing smell tests are speculative at best.
You are yet to respond to my question of why EB3-I and recapture lobbying efforts cannot proceed simultaneously and How EB3-I lobbying undermines recapture effort.
desi3933
07-12 06:43 PM
.....
If AC21 memo is non-binding, which immigartion law is binding? We can go with only current rules/laws; the rest is speculation.
USCIS memoranda articulate internal guidelines for agency personnel; they do not establish judicially enforceable standards.
http://www.uscis.gov/err/D7%20-%20Intracompany%20Transferees%20(L-1A%20and%20L-1B)/Decisions_Issued_in_2008/Nov032008_17D7101.pdf (http://www.uscis.gov/err/D7%20-%20Intracompany%20Transferees%20%28L-1A%20and%20L-1B%29/Decisions_Issued_in_2008/Nov032008_17D7101.pdf)
CIS memoranda articulate internal guidelines for agency personnel; they do not establish judicially enforceable standards. Agency interpretations that are not arrived at through precedent decision or notice and comment rule making such as those in opinion letters, policy statements, agency manuals, and lack the force of law
.
If AC21 memo is non-binding, which immigartion law is binding? We can go with only current rules/laws; the rest is speculation.
USCIS memoranda articulate internal guidelines for agency personnel; they do not establish judicially enforceable standards.
http://www.uscis.gov/err/D7%20-%20Intracompany%20Transferees%20(L-1A%20and%20L-1B)/Decisions_Issued_in_2008/Nov032008_17D7101.pdf (http://www.uscis.gov/err/D7%20-%20Intracompany%20Transferees%20%28L-1A%20and%20L-1B%29/Decisions_Issued_in_2008/Nov032008_17D7101.pdf)
CIS memoranda articulate internal guidelines for agency personnel; they do not establish judicially enforceable standards. Agency interpretations that are not arrived at through precedent decision or notice and comment rule making such as those in opinion letters, policy statements, agency manuals, and lack the force of law
.
more...
nat23
02-05 03:40 PM
"Naitik, you just completed your payment.
Your receipt number for this payment is: 1607-9931-0030-0509."
Donated $50
Your receipt number for this payment is: 1607-9931-0030-0509."
Donated $50
2010 Terrell Owens who is on
Googler
07-08 05:41 PM
no it will not be voilation of the law at all. consider this scenario thats been going on for the last 30+ years. For example July 2006 visa bulletin for EB2 india was jan 2003 and the August 2006 visa bulletin for EB2 india was unavailable. EB2 india visa numbers might have already been used up when the August 2006 visa bulletin was released but they still accepted the AOS petitions filed until the end of July 2006, they did not issue an updated visa bulletin or a revised visa bulletin saying eb2 india numbers are used up and they will not accept eb2 india aos applications, they continued accpeting AOS applications until the end of july 2006.
Pitha -- you forget one very important thing -- they still wasted 10K visas in 2006. So in Aug and July they had not actually consumed all the visas -- they just expected to in August and didn't manage to.
Pitha -- you forget one very important thing -- they still wasted 10K visas in 2006. So in Aug and July they had not actually consumed all the visas -- they just expected to in August and didn't manage to.
more...
sanju
10-09 05:00 PM
"Sorry, we are closed now." ???
Heck, no !!! I want fries with that !!!
For that you will have to come from the drive-through.... then say 'pardon me' 3 times pretending that you were not able to hear the person on the other side, drive to the window with your wallet still in your back pocket, and ask for fries to be handed to you before handing over the money.
BTW, don't forget to ask for ketchup otherwise you will not get it.
Heck, no !!! I want fries with that !!!
For that you will have to come from the drive-through.... then say 'pardon me' 3 times pretending that you were not able to hear the person on the other side, drive to the window with your wallet still in your back pocket, and ask for fries to be handed to you before handing over the money.
BTW, don't forget to ask for ketchup otherwise you will not get it.
hair Sep 13 2008 4:59 PM
here4gc
03-18 11:52 AM
I opened SR in Jan...in Feb they sent letter that security checks are pending..so I took INFOPASS after talking with attorney...went to INFOPASS and was rudely told that it could take a long time because Namecheck is pending..no idea how long it will take...i was like..if security check is pending do my FP and check everything...but no...they want to do name check..okay..then attorney said to wait 1 more month...he called last week to USCIS and they said...oh we responded on FEB..to the original SR..the response was..its still pending..hell..i know that already..what the hell are u doing about it ?? i thought they were supposed to work on an SR and get it out of the way in 60 days..now lawyer is asking to wait 1 more month because he is saying 60 days from Feb...GOSH..and i am waiting for 140 also...filed in July went to NSC-TSC blackhole..God knows what will happen...
more...
Leo07
11-17 03:23 PM
and BUMP...
Thanks for the initiative
Done!!!
Thanks for the initiative
Done!!!
hot Related posts:
samrat_bhargava_vihari
06-12 01:21 PM
It takes 90 days MINIMUM to get EAD? I've heard that it takes at most 90 days to get EAD. Does anyone know?
No it shouldn't take that long... some of my friends got it in 2 weeks couple of months back. First time we should get it soon .. renewal only takes time.... I am not sure how long it will take for us, it dependes on their work load also.
No it shouldn't take that long... some of my friends got it in 2 weeks couple of months back. First time we should get it soon .. renewal only takes time.... I am not sure how long it will take for us, it dependes on their work load also.
more...
house Has Begun: Terrell Owens
caydee
05-23 07:25 PM
I like this as it gives a personal touch.
Dear Senator ____;
Subject: Treating the currently backlogged legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants and family-based applicants in the Immigration Reform bill S. 1348.
I am a member of Immigration Voice (www.immigrationvoice.org). Immigration Voice represents the interest of 500,000 legal skilled immigrants in the United States on the path to green cards who have been stuck in enormous backlogs and delays in immigration process.
The career growth, job mobility and quality of life of a half a million legal skilled immigrants is subverted by the bill in its current form.
Specifically, the restrictions on employment mobility of current applicants affected by this bill, limit improvements in all wage rates. This is because when the market for highly skilled staff improves (as it is doing today), we have significant bureaucratic barriers placed that prevent us from changing jobs. This creates a mis-allocation of scarce talent and limits the growth of the high tech industry as a whole.
The permanent residency process currently takes a great many years, but technologies change fast. Staying in the same job can make a tech career stagnant. Few Americans in the technology field are willing to stay in the same position within their current company for that many years. So, Again, this limits growth in the technology industry because scarce skills are being miss-allocated.
It is not just about changing jobs: I also get requests from friends that want me to improve their website or even join a start-up. They are dumbfounded when I tell them I may not because it is illegal for me to do so. Nor may I volunteer my time. Nor may I start my own company because I may not work for myself. The economic cost of a half-million highly skilled people not being able to start a business must be staggering.
Personally, since moving to the "land of the free", I find it ironic that I lost my economic freedom. It is also heartbreaking to see the rug pulled out from beneath us when we've been such law-abiding and dedicated participants in the current system all these years. In terms of years, in terms of opportunity lost, and in terms of money wasted on lawyers, we humbly request an equitable solution for all skilled, law-abiding immigrants.
Here are some specific reasons why the current CIR bill fails us, and fails the US economy. Also suggestions on improvements that can be made:
1. Section 501(b) reduces the number of green cards to legal skilled immigrants from the current 140,000/year to 90,000/year and diverts the major portion of those green cards to future low-skills guest workers under the Y visa program. Instead of increasing that number to reduce the backlogs this section take a step backwards and would exacerbate the backlogs. On the other hand, 503(f)(2) of this act would allocate an estimated 11 million green cards over a time frame of 5 years � 2.2 million a year � to undocumented immigrants. Immigration Voice requests congress to treat legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants and increase the number of green cards to at least 250,000 for 5 years for currently backlogged applicants defined under Sec. 502(d)(2) in order to reduce to current backlog before the untested points based merit system is functional.
2. Immigration Voice requests congress to waive per-country ceilings on backlogged petitions to be processed under Sec. 502(d)(2) in order to make the backlog reduction more efficient. The bill provides a very similar waiver from per-country ceilings to family based pending petitions in section 508(b).
3. Immigration Voice requests congress to allow legal skilled immigrants to file for adjustment of status for those applicants who have been certified by DOL to be doing jobs no US citizen is willing, qualified or able to do. This would be at parity with provisions for undocumented immigrants who would qualify for instant work permit (probationary card) that allows them to work without employer sponsor and without department of labor�s certification simply by registering.
We at Immigration Voice strongly opposes the bill S 1348 in its current form and requests congress to amend this bill and treat the legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants, future guest-workers and pending family-based applicants.
Sincerely,
David Chappel
Dear Senator ____;
Subject: Treating the currently backlogged legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants and family-based applicants in the Immigration Reform bill S. 1348.
I am a member of Immigration Voice (www.immigrationvoice.org). Immigration Voice represents the interest of 500,000 legal skilled immigrants in the United States on the path to green cards who have been stuck in enormous backlogs and delays in immigration process.
The career growth, job mobility and quality of life of a half a million legal skilled immigrants is subverted by the bill in its current form.
Specifically, the restrictions on employment mobility of current applicants affected by this bill, limit improvements in all wage rates. This is because when the market for highly skilled staff improves (as it is doing today), we have significant bureaucratic barriers placed that prevent us from changing jobs. This creates a mis-allocation of scarce talent and limits the growth of the high tech industry as a whole.
The permanent residency process currently takes a great many years, but technologies change fast. Staying in the same job can make a tech career stagnant. Few Americans in the technology field are willing to stay in the same position within their current company for that many years. So, Again, this limits growth in the technology industry because scarce skills are being miss-allocated.
It is not just about changing jobs: I also get requests from friends that want me to improve their website or even join a start-up. They are dumbfounded when I tell them I may not because it is illegal for me to do so. Nor may I volunteer my time. Nor may I start my own company because I may not work for myself. The economic cost of a half-million highly skilled people not being able to start a business must be staggering.
Personally, since moving to the "land of the free", I find it ironic that I lost my economic freedom. It is also heartbreaking to see the rug pulled out from beneath us when we've been such law-abiding and dedicated participants in the current system all these years. In terms of years, in terms of opportunity lost, and in terms of money wasted on lawyers, we humbly request an equitable solution for all skilled, law-abiding immigrants.
Here are some specific reasons why the current CIR bill fails us, and fails the US economy. Also suggestions on improvements that can be made:
1. Section 501(b) reduces the number of green cards to legal skilled immigrants from the current 140,000/year to 90,000/year and diverts the major portion of those green cards to future low-skills guest workers under the Y visa program. Instead of increasing that number to reduce the backlogs this section take a step backwards and would exacerbate the backlogs. On the other hand, 503(f)(2) of this act would allocate an estimated 11 million green cards over a time frame of 5 years � 2.2 million a year � to undocumented immigrants. Immigration Voice requests congress to treat legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants and increase the number of green cards to at least 250,000 for 5 years for currently backlogged applicants defined under Sec. 502(d)(2) in order to reduce to current backlog before the untested points based merit system is functional.
2. Immigration Voice requests congress to waive per-country ceilings on backlogged petitions to be processed under Sec. 502(d)(2) in order to make the backlog reduction more efficient. The bill provides a very similar waiver from per-country ceilings to family based pending petitions in section 508(b).
3. Immigration Voice requests congress to allow legal skilled immigrants to file for adjustment of status for those applicants who have been certified by DOL to be doing jobs no US citizen is willing, qualified or able to do. This would be at parity with provisions for undocumented immigrants who would qualify for instant work permit (probationary card) that allows them to work without employer sponsor and without department of labor�s certification simply by registering.
We at Immigration Voice strongly opposes the bill S 1348 in its current form and requests congress to amend this bill and treat the legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants, future guest-workers and pending family-based applicants.
Sincerely,
David Chappel
tattoo hair terrell owens girlfriend
h1techSlave
02-24 02:15 PM
[I]One suggestion to admins, is it possible to send a simple one paragraph email to all IV users requesting for contribution?
The newsletter mentioned above was sent out to all members yesterday afternoon. Maybe some have turned off emails from IV, or it went to the spam folder.
I have received the news letter and it is pretty neat. But you know, many people are busy. So my suggestion was to send out another simple version with only the Advocacy day link with a request for contribution.
The newsletter mentioned above was sent out to all members yesterday afternoon. Maybe some have turned off emails from IV, or it went to the spam folder.
I have received the news letter and it is pretty neat. But you know, many people are busy. So my suggestion was to send out another simple version with only the Advocacy day link with a request for contribution.
more...
pictures As much as Terrell Owens has
sri1309
03-16 10:56 AM
There is very simple reason for this, during 1999-2002 H1B cap was raised to 190,000 even if you make a guess on the lower side more than 50% of these H1Bs went to Indians, so atleast 200,000 Indians entered US between 1999 when these people filed their Green Cards most of them filed under EB-3, b'cause retrogression wasn't there and everthing was current, lot of people, who were in the states where labor took less time, kept getting their green cards, in the meantime a huge chunk of people from states like NJ, NY, TX, CA got stuck at the labor stage with PD in 2000 and up. So basically lot of 2002 & above got cleared but these people with older PDs were stuck. Now when these Labors are cleared, with just 3300 Green Card numbers every year, it'll take 20 years or more for EB-3 cut-off dates to move to 2009.
Good discussion.
But even if it was 65000, from India, I'm sure most of them took a big slice, lets say 30%= 20,000 H1 visas. And did the 7% quota formula might have existed at that time too. If so, even then there must be quite a big line. Why were things current at any point. Were they just processing very fast without any attention to quota formula and then they woke up?
Good discussion.
But even if it was 65000, from India, I'm sure most of them took a big slice, lets say 30%= 20,000 H1 visas. And did the 7% quota formula might have existed at that time too. If so, even then there must be quite a big line. Why were things current at any point. Were they just processing very fast without any attention to quota formula and then they woke up?
dresses terrell owens kids. terrell
mariner5555
04-30 03:41 PM
I can tell you there are roughly 100,000 labor applications filed (50,000 EB3) between Aug 2003 and Dec 2003 for EB India category. The reason was everybody wanted to clear thru regular process before PERM takes over. Those Labors filed after Aug 2003 and before PERM started are moved into backlog and are fully cleary last 4 th quarter. And so 90% of those EB3s may be still there (45,000) hanging. EB2s could have been cleared substantially till Dec 2003. It is all my guess work and not sceintific or factual. also ..this looks very inaccurate ..because I know lot of indians who got H1 during the peak (when h1 was 195k) have gone back. i.e either they got better oppurtunities back home or just went back as they were not getting jobs. I did stay in one of the guest house which had lots of consultants ..none of them are here anymore !!
more...
makeup Surprised no one is throwing
doshhar
07-07 05:33 PM
Can we finalize the date for rally? Is July 14th ok with everyone of you? We have one full week to work on spreading this to different groups.
girlfriend Terrell Owens Professional
NKR
04-25 11:16 AM
the point here is not how long its gonna take. Its sure that they r gonna work if not immediately may be in 3-4 months. and once they see all the proofs(i do have proofs) whole company will be audited rock bottom, all the gc filing will be verified and single loophole is just enough to cause irriparable damage to the company. not only the reputation but i heard they will have a high penalty of 100's of thousands dollars. I have contacted one of the top lawfirms.for the matter of $4000 if the company chooses to do it, its their foolishness. also if they genuinely wanted to enforce non compete they wouldn't have used it as a threat agiainst payments they owe me.
Its not that I haven't made any efforts to reconcile with my ex-employer. I have tried and still trying to get them to have a civil conversation and settle this. But the more I try, i beleive, they r thinking the more scared i am and are being arrogant by not replying to any of my emails or phone calls. My reconciling efforts are giving them wrong hints i beleive. I am definetly stressed about this,thats true, but i am not scared because of all the info i gathered, I know even they do file a suit, I will be on the winning side. though i have option to go directly to DOL or USCIS and can show all the proofs i have regarding the deductions they have made, i haven't made till today just because of the kind of relationship we had earlier and also concerned about other h1bs who r with the company right now. I dont want their GC's to be in jeopardy. but if employer doesn't make the effort from his side, and pulls the thread till it breaks, i can't help it.
.
Dude, I do not know who has given you red dot, you certainly deserve more green dots. I too think the same, if the company had to sue you for violating non-compete, they could have done it anytime, why are they threatening you when you ask for your salary. Either they do not have a non-compete agreement that they say you have signed (since you are not sure about it) or the non-compete has become invalid over a period of time or it does not hold water.
Its not that I haven't made any efforts to reconcile with my ex-employer. I have tried and still trying to get them to have a civil conversation and settle this. But the more I try, i beleive, they r thinking the more scared i am and are being arrogant by not replying to any of my emails or phone calls. My reconciling efforts are giving them wrong hints i beleive. I am definetly stressed about this,thats true, but i am not scared because of all the info i gathered, I know even they do file a suit, I will be on the winning side. though i have option to go directly to DOL or USCIS and can show all the proofs i have regarding the deductions they have made, i haven't made till today just because of the kind of relationship we had earlier and also concerned about other h1bs who r with the company right now. I dont want their GC's to be in jeopardy. but if employer doesn't make the effort from his side, and pulls the thread till it breaks, i can't help it.
.
Dude, I do not know who has given you red dot, you certainly deserve more green dots. I too think the same, if the company had to sue you for violating non-compete, they could have done it anytime, why are they threatening you when you ask for your salary. Either they do not have a non-compete agreement that they say you have signed (since you are not sure about it) or the non-compete has become invalid over a period of time or it does not hold water.
hairstyles NFL player Terrell Owens
GC08
09-12 07:44 PM
Isn't that they have completed input and receipt issuance for cases received by certain date (late Aug.?) according to their update? How come so many July filers still have not received receipts? Weird!
No, it seems as per the latest USCIS update (on Sept 7, 2007) the NSC has completed issuing receipt notices till July 28, 2007, and TSC till July 2, 2007.
Do you have any other updates?
Thanks.
I probably did not remember the date correctly. Anyway, it does not sound so promising.
No, it seems as per the latest USCIS update (on Sept 7, 2007) the NSC has completed issuing receipt notices till July 28, 2007, and TSC till July 2, 2007.
Do you have any other updates?
Thanks.
I probably did not remember the date correctly. Anyway, it does not sound so promising.
abhijitp
11-21 02:49 PM
Reply to a very insensitive post
And what should the person/family do right now?
Return to their country like nothing happened? What about the primary applicant's present job?
Just live here in the USA, as if nothing happened? What happens to the family if they go out of status all of a sudden?
There is no need to make the GC your only goal in life, but please don't be insensitive... there is much more to the issue than meets the eye!
And what should the person/family do right now?
Return to their country like nothing happened? What about the primary applicant's present job?
Just live here in the USA, as if nothing happened? What happens to the family if they go out of status all of a sudden?
There is no need to make the GC your only goal in life, but please don't be insensitive... there is much more to the issue than meets the eye!
desi3933
07-09 11:01 AM
The above documents should have Condi's (and USCISs) LAW. Googler's last link appears to be the main source for all other links.
Please note very carefully that we are looking for a LAW that specifies when AOSs will (not) be accepted from GC applicants. We are NOT looking for a law for allocating GC #s to approved AOSs (which is explained in the above links).
This LAW should explain the following cases (which may not be a complete list).
Oct 1 2005 & Oct 1 2006 when 140K GCs were available but ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
May 14 (??) when 60K GCs were available but many more AOSs were acceptable and were accepted from June 1-30.
June 12 when < 40K GCs were available but ALL AOSs were acceptable.
July 2 when 0 GCs were available and ANY AOS was not acceptable.
Months in 2005, 2006 and 2007 when ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
Months in 2005 and 2006 when ANY AOS was not acceptable.
INA: ACT 245 - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF NONIMMIGRANT TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
Sec. 245. [8 U.S.C. 1255]
(a) The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States 1/ or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification as a VAWA self-petitioner may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if
(1) the alien makes an application for such adjustment,
(2) the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed.
============================
My points -
a. 140k GCs are NOT available on Oct 1st. Only 27% (37,800) are available and are subject to 7% country cap. DoS estimated the PD based on the number of I-485 applications pending and other related factors.
b. A person can file I-485 as long as his PD is before PD mentioned in the visa bulletin. This is how "immediately available" is defined.
c. Since revised visa bulletin update states that no visa number is available for FY USCIS, by law, can not accept new I-485 applications.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
Please note very carefully that we are looking for a LAW that specifies when AOSs will (not) be accepted from GC applicants. We are NOT looking for a law for allocating GC #s to approved AOSs (which is explained in the above links).
This LAW should explain the following cases (which may not be a complete list).
Oct 1 2005 & Oct 1 2006 when 140K GCs were available but ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
May 14 (??) when 60K GCs were available but many more AOSs were acceptable and were accepted from June 1-30.
June 12 when < 40K GCs were available but ALL AOSs were acceptable.
July 2 when 0 GCs were available and ANY AOS was not acceptable.
Months in 2005, 2006 and 2007 when ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
Months in 2005 and 2006 when ANY AOS was not acceptable.
INA: ACT 245 - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF NONIMMIGRANT TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
Sec. 245. [8 U.S.C. 1255]
(a) The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States 1/ or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification as a VAWA self-petitioner may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if
(1) the alien makes an application for such adjustment,
(2) the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed.
============================
My points -
a. 140k GCs are NOT available on Oct 1st. Only 27% (37,800) are available and are subject to 7% country cap. DoS estimated the PD based on the number of I-485 applications pending and other related factors.
b. A person can file I-485 as long as his PD is before PD mentioned in the visa bulletin. This is how "immediately available" is defined.
c. Since revised visa bulletin update states that no visa number is available for FY USCIS, by law, can not accept new I-485 applications.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
No comments:
Post a Comment