johnwright03
07-01 09:38 AM
06/30/2007: Potential EB Visa Number Exhaution in July and Probable Actions of State Department or USCIS
* By now, people understand that the sources of potential action by the State Department or USCIS are predicated on the two important facts. One was the information from a government source that there were only about 40,000 numbers left for the entire EB visa numbers for the FY 2007 which ends on September 30, 2007. The second important fact was that reportedly the USCIS alone had far more than 40,000 I-485 applications in the backlog queue that were reportedly ready for approval. Considering the fact that the immigrant visa numbers are consumed by the approval of I-485 applications by the USCIS and the approval of immigant visa applications in the consular processing by visa posts througout the world, 40,000 visa numbers could be fairly quickly exhausted in early July 2007. This prediction was exacerbated by the information that the USCIS was apparently picking up the pace of I-485 adjudications lately.
* Obviously the State Department has been in communication with the USCIS and was well aware of the situation. Sources reported that the State Department might revise the July Visa Bulletin either Monday or Tuesday to reflect the situation. However, it is unclear at this point whether this will occur on Monday or Tuesday or, for that matter, some time soon, particulary considering the ongoing uproar in the nation. Assuming that the EB immigrant visa number will be exhausted before the end of July, from the government perspectives, they may have two options to handle this matter. One is the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin based on the newly developed facts and predictions. The other option is that the State Department does not take any action of revising the Visa Bulletin but just notify the USCIS when the visa numbers for certain categories are exhausted. The initial sources of rumor was the former possibility. However, as updated by the AILA afterwards, it might or might not happen.
* Whether the State Department revises the July visa bulletin or not, the fact will remain that 40,000 numbers could indeed be run out in a fairly short period of time in July. It is too obvious that under the statute, when the visa numbers are exhausted, the USCIS will not be able to approve any I-485 applications, and for that reason, the USCIS may wrongly reject the incoming I-485 applications or return I-485 applications which were received after the date when the visa number is exhausted. This happened for the "other worker" category in June when the priority date was current in June for certain other workers. The issue of legality of such action of the USCIS is rooted in the required distinction of the USCIS statutory mandates between its job of adjudication of 485 applications "already in the pipeline" and its job of "accepting new 485 applications." Arguably, when the visa number runs out, there is no question about that the USCIS should not and cannot adjudicate and approve any 485 applications. But there is no legal basis that the USCIS should not and cannot "accept" new 485 applications when the cases fall within the cut-off date of the monthly visa bulletin. If the State Department attempts to revise the July Visa Bulletin, probably they are doing it to overcome the predicament of the USCIS that will face in rejecting the new 485 applications. The problem is the State Department's own legal problem or authority to revise the published Visa Bulletin. Accordingly, either USCIS or State Department will be liable for either abuse of power or arbitrary act depending on who acts. The AILF is planning to sue the USCIS for rejecting "other worker" new 485 applications in June probably on ultra vires or other statutory authority grounds. Should the same thing happen in July, the AILF intends to extend its lawsuit to cover the July 2007 485 applicants, probably in the form of class action. What happens if the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin and the USCIS rejects the new applications based on the new Visa Bulletin? Strictly speaking, there may be no cause of action against the USCIS in that it followed the State Department's Visa Bulletin for the month of July. In this case, probably the lawsuit will have to be directed to the State Department for violation of law in revising the visa bulletin. We will soon find out.
* Where does this leave to the July 485 applicants? Fact remains that all likelihood, the annual limit may reach fairly early in July and they should file their cases before the visa posts and the USCIS exhaust all the numbers. They have to do this probably for the two reasons. One is that should the government take the second option of rejecting new cases after reaching the limit just as we experienced in the other worker cases, those who filed the I-485 application before that date will not be affected. Those who files the application after the date of exhaution and receive rejection of the 485 applications may be entitled to sue the USCIS either in a class action or individually. Secondly, if the government takes the first option of the State Department revising the July Visa Bulletin, they will have to sue the State Department and for that purpose, they should have filed I-485 applications within July 2007. Otherwise, they may have a standing to sue the State Department.
* For the foregoing reasons, we urge the July 485 filers to file the applications as soon as possible. At the same time, we urge the State Department and the USCIS not to take any actions to avoid the lawsuits. They should keep accepting I-485 applications even after the enhaution of the FY 2007 numbers, even though they will not be able to adjudicate these applications until the visa numbers become current again. Again, the agencies should distinguish the requirement for adjudication of 485 applications and the requirement for acceptance of new applications. These are two separate things.
* By now, people understand that the sources of potential action by the State Department or USCIS are predicated on the two important facts. One was the information from a government source that there were only about 40,000 numbers left for the entire EB visa numbers for the FY 2007 which ends on September 30, 2007. The second important fact was that reportedly the USCIS alone had far more than 40,000 I-485 applications in the backlog queue that were reportedly ready for approval. Considering the fact that the immigrant visa numbers are consumed by the approval of I-485 applications by the USCIS and the approval of immigant visa applications in the consular processing by visa posts througout the world, 40,000 visa numbers could be fairly quickly exhausted in early July 2007. This prediction was exacerbated by the information that the USCIS was apparently picking up the pace of I-485 adjudications lately.
* Obviously the State Department has been in communication with the USCIS and was well aware of the situation. Sources reported that the State Department might revise the July Visa Bulletin either Monday or Tuesday to reflect the situation. However, it is unclear at this point whether this will occur on Monday or Tuesday or, for that matter, some time soon, particulary considering the ongoing uproar in the nation. Assuming that the EB immigrant visa number will be exhausted before the end of July, from the government perspectives, they may have two options to handle this matter. One is the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin based on the newly developed facts and predictions. The other option is that the State Department does not take any action of revising the Visa Bulletin but just notify the USCIS when the visa numbers for certain categories are exhausted. The initial sources of rumor was the former possibility. However, as updated by the AILA afterwards, it might or might not happen.
* Whether the State Department revises the July visa bulletin or not, the fact will remain that 40,000 numbers could indeed be run out in a fairly short period of time in July. It is too obvious that under the statute, when the visa numbers are exhausted, the USCIS will not be able to approve any I-485 applications, and for that reason, the USCIS may wrongly reject the incoming I-485 applications or return I-485 applications which were received after the date when the visa number is exhausted. This happened for the "other worker" category in June when the priority date was current in June for certain other workers. The issue of legality of such action of the USCIS is rooted in the required distinction of the USCIS statutory mandates between its job of adjudication of 485 applications "already in the pipeline" and its job of "accepting new 485 applications." Arguably, when the visa number runs out, there is no question about that the USCIS should not and cannot adjudicate and approve any 485 applications. But there is no legal basis that the USCIS should not and cannot "accept" new 485 applications when the cases fall within the cut-off date of the monthly visa bulletin. If the State Department attempts to revise the July Visa Bulletin, probably they are doing it to overcome the predicament of the USCIS that will face in rejecting the new 485 applications. The problem is the State Department's own legal problem or authority to revise the published Visa Bulletin. Accordingly, either USCIS or State Department will be liable for either abuse of power or arbitrary act depending on who acts. The AILF is planning to sue the USCIS for rejecting "other worker" new 485 applications in June probably on ultra vires or other statutory authority grounds. Should the same thing happen in July, the AILF intends to extend its lawsuit to cover the July 2007 485 applicants, probably in the form of class action. What happens if the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin and the USCIS rejects the new applications based on the new Visa Bulletin? Strictly speaking, there may be no cause of action against the USCIS in that it followed the State Department's Visa Bulletin for the month of July. In this case, probably the lawsuit will have to be directed to the State Department for violation of law in revising the visa bulletin. We will soon find out.
* Where does this leave to the July 485 applicants? Fact remains that all likelihood, the annual limit may reach fairly early in July and they should file their cases before the visa posts and the USCIS exhaust all the numbers. They have to do this probably for the two reasons. One is that should the government take the second option of rejecting new cases after reaching the limit just as we experienced in the other worker cases, those who filed the I-485 application before that date will not be affected. Those who files the application after the date of exhaution and receive rejection of the 485 applications may be entitled to sue the USCIS either in a class action or individually. Secondly, if the government takes the first option of the State Department revising the July Visa Bulletin, they will have to sue the State Department and for that purpose, they should have filed I-485 applications within July 2007. Otherwise, they may have a standing to sue the State Department.
* For the foregoing reasons, we urge the July 485 filers to file the applications as soon as possible. At the same time, we urge the State Department and the USCIS not to take any actions to avoid the lawsuits. They should keep accepting I-485 applications even after the enhaution of the FY 2007 numbers, even though they will not be able to adjudicate these applications until the visa numbers become current again. Again, the agencies should distinguish the requirement for adjudication of 485 applications and the requirement for acceptance of new applications. These are two separate things.
wallpaper de amor para facebook.
glus
09-10 03:27 PM
so....recess until 5pm... :-(
Positive
11-11 08:25 AM
At the minimum legal action will force someone to look into what is going on here. I don't think that AILA is going to partner with us in this initiative.
2011 house de amor para facebook.
shaxami
04-05 09:23 AM
has anybody contacted senator office or congress person office on this issue. They are sometimes very helpful in handling matters of red-tape.
more...
ramus
07-02 07:44 PM
Thank you.. Please ask others to contribute.
I put in $100 today to fight for our cause
I put in $100 today to fight for our cause
pappu
12-13 01:58 PM
Thanks Pappu for explaination. Look like this door is already close. Well let me know if I can do anything to help.
Thanks. I appreciate your enthusiasm and seveal other members on this thread. Pls help us in the action items listed by IV so that we can be well prepared to undertake any campaign early next year. Let me tell you, the campaign like last week will happen again because IV will keep pushing through every crack in the door until our goal is achieved. At such times we need to have enough membership muscle, financial capability to sustain and execute the effort. All this is not built in one day but during times like this when DC is quiet.
Thanks. I appreciate your enthusiasm and seveal other members on this thread. Pls help us in the action items listed by IV so that we can be well prepared to undertake any campaign early next year. Let me tell you, the campaign like last week will happen again because IV will keep pushing through every crack in the door until our goal is achieved. At such times we need to have enough membership muscle, financial capability to sustain and execute the effort. All this is not built in one day but during times like this when DC is quiet.
more...
vaishalikumar
08-16 02:18 PM
It Is Too Bad For Eb 3 , Why This Injustice With Eb 3 ?
2010 de amor para facebook.
immigrant2007
07-29 01:35 PM
Add CareFirst - Blue Cross Blue Shield
Legg Meson
All these companies take people on H1 and after an year of year an half they say they have changed policy and they can't file H1. They have big lawyers like M**** and R**** and those lawyers tell employers even if your employee is on 5th year and if you don't file GC (PERM) b4 365 days its alright.... we can send them out and re catpture time and all BS and ultimately employees suffer.... as they r in their 5th or some are in 6th year and are completely screwed up.
We should think of taking some legal actions...
advise forall my friends (ots free)
don't comprise on these things on job here:
GC
Salary
Position
Based on my experience here if you are good you will find your own way. Take everything in written or say no directly (it happens, no word of mouth)
Legg Meson
All these companies take people on H1 and after an year of year an half they say they have changed policy and they can't file H1. They have big lawyers like M**** and R**** and those lawyers tell employers even if your employee is on 5th year and if you don't file GC (PERM) b4 365 days its alright.... we can send them out and re catpture time and all BS and ultimately employees suffer.... as they r in their 5th or some are in 6th year and are completely screwed up.
We should think of taking some legal actions...
advise forall my friends (ots free)
don't comprise on these things on job here:
GC
Salary
Position
Based on my experience here if you are good you will find your own way. Take everything in written or say no directly (it happens, no word of mouth)
more...
sammas
07-12 05:16 PM
Where does it say in the bulletin that it will move in the next bulletin?
QUOTE=sammas;1968386]Sorry to say this but 1st March is not considered. Hopefully your PD will be current in next Sep 2010 bulletin. Good Luck![/QUOTE]
Calgirl,
If you look at my post, I mentioned the word "HOPEFULLY" and also I did not say that it is mentioned in the current bulletin. I was just trying to be OPTIMISTIC.
QUOTE=sammas;1968386]Sorry to say this but 1st March is not considered. Hopefully your PD will be current in next Sep 2010 bulletin. Good Luck![/QUOTE]
Calgirl,
If you look at my post, I mentioned the word "HOPEFULLY" and also I did not say that it is mentioned in the current bulletin. I was just trying to be OPTIMISTIC.
hair imagenes de amor para facebook
belmontboy
05-23 02:28 PM
By computer operator i mean people who try to speak english but sound as if they are speaking telugu.
what the f**k ?
Who taught you this definition idiot?
what the f**k ?
Who taught you this definition idiot?
more...
immigrant2007
03-12 10:59 AM
IV has not failed. If the objective has not been met then it is our fault not Pappu's.
See for yourself how united are you guys are when u know you have been given unfair treatment by USCIS (this crappy backlog). We won't suceed unless all of us work together, if we fail once try again, ..keep trying harder each time till we succeed.
See for yourself how united are you guys are when u know you have been given unfair treatment by USCIS (this crappy backlog). We won't suceed unless all of us work together, if we fail once try again, ..keep trying harder each time till we succeed.
hot Amor para Facebook
senthil1
03-09 12:46 PM
Total H1B from India is around 52k in 2008. But china is less than 10k in 2008. This was the trend for past 5 years. Soon china EB2 and EB3 will be within acceptable waiting time will be less than 4 years and India waiting time will be 9 to 10 years.
China EB3 moved from Oct 02 to Mar 03. In the Jan bulletin, China EB3 was at Jun 02!
India EB3 moved from Oct 01 to Nov 01. In the Jan bulletin, India EB3 was still at Oct 01!
China EB3 is certainly making some progress. Wonder why India EB3 is lagging so far behind and virtually crawling at a snail's pace.
China EB3 moved from Oct 02 to Mar 03. In the Jan bulletin, China EB3 was at Jun 02!
India EB3 moved from Oct 01 to Nov 01. In the Jan bulletin, India EB3 was still at Oct 01!
China EB3 is certainly making some progress. Wonder why India EB3 is lagging so far behind and virtually crawling at a snail's pace.
more...
house imagenes de amor para facebook
japan21
03-10 08:42 PM
To be able to use the AC21, should the I-140 be already approved for 180 days or more?
tattoo de amor para facebook.
go_gc_way
12-29 11:32 AM
Whatever you guys are doing ... its working.
We are seeing higher than usual new registrations on this website in the past week.
Thank you all for posting about Immigration Voice everywhere else.
Thanks logiclife.
I AM SURE , ALL MEMBERS REALIZE THEY HAVE A REASON TO VISIT IMMIGRATIONVOICE.COM AND KNOW EVERY ONE'S CONTRIBUTION IS NEEDED FOR US TO MOVE ALONG , AND WE NEED IT SOON.
ALL TOGETHER CAN WORK MAGICS.
We are seeing higher than usual new registrations on this website in the past week.
Thank you all for posting about Immigration Voice everywhere else.
Thanks logiclife.
I AM SURE , ALL MEMBERS REALIZE THEY HAVE A REASON TO VISIT IMMIGRATIONVOICE.COM AND KNOW EVERY ONE'S CONTRIBUTION IS NEEDED FOR US TO MOVE ALONG , AND WE NEED IT SOON.
ALL TOGETHER CAN WORK MAGICS.
more...
pictures de amor para facebook. aki
mirage
02-03 11:28 AM
The Obama administration is boasting on 'Equality amongst unequals', I am going to ask as many lawmakers I can, where is the equality for us, why immigrants are not eqal, where are our human right ? where is our Liberty ? why a Fijian who reports to me got in the country last year and got his green card and I'm waiting for 6 years now...
dresses Y UN GRAN AMOR PARA SER FELIZ.
coolmanasip
03-07 09:45 AM
you are lucky man.....what you say makes sense.......but here is the reality.......
GC process is 3 step process and the lawyer is representing you (485 stage) as well as the employer (labor and 140 stage)........So, if you leave the employer, most lawyers will refuse to continue to represent you unless they authorized in written by the employer....it is a conflict of interest for them.......hence, I think I will go to some other lawyer for AC 21......and thats why the money.....
It is bit shocking to know that one will have to pay for just AC21 notification. I mean, if you already have lawyer associated with your GC file, which I believe, most of us should have either appointed by our employer OR hired by ourselves (Many companies give a choice to hire "your own" lawyer). I understand that since one change the employment, the general criteria is to assume that the lawyer (If paticularly appointed by past employer) is now no more attached to the case. But in truth it is not. Fulfilling AC21 notification is part of the whole end to end package since case remains same unless you notify USCIS to change your attorney. In my case I was given a choice to hire "My Own lawyer" and once I started to work on EAD, virtually now he is my lawyer not "my employer's lawyer" and hence he will be sending AC21 related paperwork to USCIS though he told me that he would not do it right now as he is busy with H1 filing load. And yes no extra cost involved..
GC process is 3 step process and the lawyer is representing you (485 stage) as well as the employer (labor and 140 stage)........So, if you leave the employer, most lawyers will refuse to continue to represent you unless they authorized in written by the employer....it is a conflict of interest for them.......hence, I think I will go to some other lawyer for AC 21......and thats why the money.....
It is bit shocking to know that one will have to pay for just AC21 notification. I mean, if you already have lawyer associated with your GC file, which I believe, most of us should have either appointed by our employer OR hired by ourselves (Many companies give a choice to hire "your own" lawyer). I understand that since one change the employment, the general criteria is to assume that the lawyer (If paticularly appointed by past employer) is now no more attached to the case. But in truth it is not. Fulfilling AC21 notification is part of the whole end to end package since case remains same unless you notify USCIS to change your attorney. In my case I was given a choice to hire "My Own lawyer" and once I started to work on EAD, virtually now he is my lawyer not "my employer's lawyer" and hence he will be sending AC21 related paperwork to USCIS though he told me that he would not do it right now as he is busy with H1 filing load. And yes no extra cost involved..
more...
makeup imagenes de amor para facebook
chanduv23
07-01 11:58 AM
fyi
http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Oppenheim070606.pdf
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division, Visa Services Office, U.S. Department of State, June 6, 2007.
Any indepth on what is the bigger picture here? Something is happening in the background on the immigration side.
Looks like lot of politics and blame game among agencies.
I think immigration lawyers or AILA etc.. may also not have any say here though they all put up on their website that we will file lawsuit etc.....
http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Oppenheim070606.pdf
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division, Visa Services Office, U.S. Department of State, June 6, 2007.
Any indepth on what is the bigger picture here? Something is happening in the background on the immigration side.
Looks like lot of politics and blame game among agencies.
I think immigration lawyers or AILA etc.. may also not have any say here though they all put up on their website that we will file lawsuit etc.....
girlfriend makeup amor para facebook.
eilsoe
02-16 07:14 PM
:love:
hairstyles de amor para facebook.
singhsa3
03-03 05:54 PM
Just sent a message to David Merkel, inviting him to view this thread david.merkel@gmail.com. Any one that can take our cause is relevan to us.
chanduv23
04-04 09:11 AM
I hope not. If they ban bodyshops the cap will never run out.
And people in Real companies will be able to get the visas.
Actually it is difficult to ascertain to a level to determine if the h1b is filed by a body shop because right from Accenture, PWC to the smaller Cayotes all are offshoring and outsourcing, every company has its own product and inhouse development.
Most of American companies want a pool of talent available at time of need to choose from and these companies always maintain the supply at a premium.
A lot of people come through bodyshops and later move on to permanant jobs.
Something the differentiates research jobs, non IT jobs etc... and protect their interests and have some quota for tthem will be beneficial.
And people in Real companies will be able to get the visas.
Actually it is difficult to ascertain to a level to determine if the h1b is filed by a body shop because right from Accenture, PWC to the smaller Cayotes all are offshoring and outsourcing, every company has its own product and inhouse development.
Most of American companies want a pool of talent available at time of need to choose from and these companies always maintain the supply at a premium.
A lot of people come through bodyshops and later move on to permanant jobs.
Something the differentiates research jobs, non IT jobs etc... and protect their interests and have some quota for tthem will be beneficial.
chanduv23
12-26 04:37 PM
If financial institutions are following govt regulations, does it mean that Govt mandated this against h1b? One of those gimmicks where a H1b is subject to difficulty like obtaining driver lisence etc...is this the same gimmick to legally give hardship to h1b?