Ramba
07-04 07:25 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
wallpaper Arnold Schwarzenegger owes
.jpg "arnold schwarzenegger")
ezee
10-16 04:37 PM
Don't you think we should be more clear in requesting information per specific country instead of lumping China and India together for EB-2 and others for EB-3? Also will it be too much to request pending applications by month/quarter instead of year?
We probably want the report in this format? This is just a suggestion.
|[indent]|EB2 - China |EB-2 India |EB-3 China |EB-3 India |EB-3 Mexico |EB-3 Phillipines |EB-3 Rest|
2001-Q1
2001-Q2
2001-Q3
2001-Q4
2002-Q1
2002-Q2
2002-Q3
2002-Q4
2003-Q1
2003-Q2
2003-Q3
2003-Q4
2004-Q1
2004-Q2
2004-Q3
2004-Q4
2005-Q1
2005-Q2
2005-Q3
2005-Q4
2006-Q1
2006-Q2
2006-Q3
2006-Q4
2007-Q1
2007-Q2
2007-Q3
2007-Q4
2008-Q1
2008-Q2
2008-Q3
2008-Q4
We probably want the report in this format? This is just a suggestion.
|[indent]|EB2 - China |EB-2 India |EB-3 China |EB-3 India |EB-3 Mexico |EB-3 Phillipines |EB-3 Rest|
2001-Q1
2001-Q2
2001-Q3
2001-Q4
2002-Q1
2002-Q2
2002-Q3
2002-Q4
2003-Q1
2003-Q2
2003-Q3
2003-Q4
2004-Q1
2004-Q2
2004-Q3
2004-Q4
2005-Q1
2005-Q2
2005-Q3
2005-Q4
2006-Q1
2006-Q2
2006-Q3
2006-Q4
2007-Q1
2007-Q2
2007-Q3
2007-Q4
2008-Q1
2008-Q2
2008-Q3
2008-Q4
snathan
04-13 11:58 AM
I urge everyone to read the donor forum...we need more people to work on couple of issues and fixes. Please become a donor and take part in this...if you are serious to fix these issues.
2011 arnold schwarzenegger
chakalov
08-17 06:22 PM
Relax. Come Oct VB they will move the dates with about 6months ahead. Look at EB1 and EB2 ROW. They were current all year long and now they are 8 months retrogressed. Also the fact that they retrogressed it back to aug2002 is actually good. It means they approved a lot of applications in June/July so when SEPT VB came they realized they have exhausted a lot of numbers so they had to retrogress it by a lot to guarantee low demand. All this means that Oct. VB will be better than Sept VB. I think in OCT EB3 ROW will be somewhere in early - mid 2003.
I don't get it.
How can:
VB-April07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
VB-MAy07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-03
VB-June07 EB3-ROW PD be June-05
..and then:
VB-Sept-07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
Are you telling me they haven't processed any EB3-ROW 485 during all those months? Why does it go all the way back to Aug-02???
Sometimes i consider seriously giving up:(
Need someone to give me the motivation to keep waiting... something logical i can understand.
I don't get it.
How can:
VB-April07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
VB-MAy07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-03
VB-June07 EB3-ROW PD be June-05
..and then:
VB-Sept-07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
Are you telling me they haven't processed any EB3-ROW 485 during all those months? Why does it go all the way back to Aug-02???
Sometimes i consider seriously giving up:(
Need someone to give me the motivation to keep waiting... something logical i can understand.
more...
coopheal
11-12 11:43 AM
Why should some else follow up on your brilliant ideas. How about you take the lead and contact media in your area with your ideas. If the reporter is interested you can volunteer to be interviewd and also forward the information on the forum so that whoever is interested can also interview.
I see a problem in such postings. We only come up with ideas and expect someone else to work on them. I do not think at your workplace this is all you do-- Just give ideas and ask your managers and VP and CEO to follow up on your ideas.
If lobbying does not work then how come you have a 2 year EAD, You filed AOS in July 2007 due to IV, H1B time is decoupled from H4 time for your wife?
Well said.... A good idea without implementation is just dreaming....
I see a problem in such postings. We only come up with ideas and expect someone else to work on them. I do not think at your workplace this is all you do-- Just give ideas and ask your managers and VP and CEO to follow up on your ideas.
If lobbying does not work then how come you have a 2 year EAD, You filed AOS in July 2007 due to IV, H1B time is decoupled from H4 time for your wife?
Well said.... A good idea without implementation is just dreaming....
chmur
09-11 09:44 AM
The actual backlog at beginning of 2010 is 200K (pending I-485) + all EB2 I/C and EB3 waiting to file I-485 from 2007-2010. The no of folks in EB2I/C and EB3 ROW from 2007-2010 will be about 80-100K. So instead of 2-3 years , overflow will start reaching EB3 in ~ 5 years.
Yes @the beginning of 2010 - 200 K . Now ~@160 K. The flood gates will not open at least for another year. Just like 2009-210, 2010-11 will see significant reduction in backlog , so next year at this time we may be @120 range. That's when it is very close to EB3-I.
Now problem with your analysis is you assume that USCIS will open the flood gates and make EB2-I current letting in all the applications from 2007 -2010 in one shot. That is questionable, especially since they got burnt in 2007 . They will gradually open the gates . And 70-80 K EB2 and EB3-ROW applications between 2007 -2010 sounds little high.
So I do think we will start burning the Eb3-I backlog with 2-3 years, by 5 years all categories will be current.
And one thing that has not got enough press here is , how the EB3-ROW has got significant overflow in the last two months though EB2- I/C are no where near current. Per common understanding , they should not get a single overflow till EB2 is current .
Street Justice ??
Yes @the beginning of 2010 - 200 K . Now ~@160 K. The flood gates will not open at least for another year. Just like 2009-210, 2010-11 will see significant reduction in backlog , so next year at this time we may be @120 range. That's when it is very close to EB3-I.
Now problem with your analysis is you assume that USCIS will open the flood gates and make EB2-I current letting in all the applications from 2007 -2010 in one shot. That is questionable, especially since they got burnt in 2007 . They will gradually open the gates . And 70-80 K EB2 and EB3-ROW applications between 2007 -2010 sounds little high.
So I do think we will start burning the Eb3-I backlog with 2-3 years, by 5 years all categories will be current.
And one thing that has not got enough press here is , how the EB3-ROW has got significant overflow in the last two months though EB2- I/C are no where near current. Per common understanding , they should not get a single overflow till EB2 is current .
Street Justice ??
more...
GCWish
03-09 07:31 PM
It is the right time to do some concrete action to bring out the facts that
1. Approving the EBs would not add to any significant shift in employment demographics, given that all these people are in the US already
2. The benefit that this would bring on the demand side esp.housing market
Let�s start a letter campaign to the attention of the Obama administration and the USCIS secretary Janet Napolitano
1. Approving the EBs would not add to any significant shift in employment demographics, given that all these people are in the US already
2. The benefit that this would bring on the demand side esp.housing market
Let�s start a letter campaign to the attention of the Obama administration and the USCIS secretary Janet Napolitano
2010 From steroid-using odybuilder
reddymjm
10-15 10:23 PM
You will receive one for your request please post here.
more...
johnmcdonald98
07-05 12:19 PM
I go against this idea, because this doesn't work out logistically.
First as others pointed out traffic will be way less as soon as IV charges,
second, what would be the cut-off? $5 or $100? So if person who paid $5 might get the same privileges as guys who paid $1000? Is it fair, then you need to come up with normal, premium membership etc..
Third, as soon as you make people pay, they become more demanding as they need to know where their each cents have been spent. I guess then IV core member needs to answer questions related to this more than actual issues
by the way who and where do they keep the accounting in IV?
First as others pointed out traffic will be way less as soon as IV charges,
second, what would be the cut-off? $5 or $100? So if person who paid $5 might get the same privileges as guys who paid $1000? Is it fair, then you need to come up with normal, premium membership etc..
Third, as soon as you make people pay, they become more demanding as they need to know where their each cents have been spent. I guess then IV core member needs to answer questions related to this more than actual issues
by the way who and where do they keep the accounting in IV?
hair Body Building Tips
CHHAYA
08-16 09:07 PM
Hi Guys,
I got an LUD on 8/14 on mine and my wifes I485s and also on the first EADs filed along with the 485. Anything cooking? I did change my employer in Feb 2010 and yet to file AC21. If any one had similar LUDs please post.
Thanks
I see LUD on 7/10/10 on mine EAD which was filed online in 08. But no LUD on 485 or last EAD which was filed in 09.
I got an LUD on 8/14 on mine and my wifes I485s and also on the first EADs filed along with the 485. Anything cooking? I did change my employer in Feb 2010 and yet to file AC21. If any one had similar LUDs please post.
Thanks
I see LUD on 7/10/10 on mine EAD which was filed online in 08. But no LUD on 485 or last EAD which was filed in 09.
more...
bayarea07
09-10 02:20 PM
I dont think its the Right Link the link that you sent has lot of action going on but
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/calendar.html
has people moving all over the place and no action
I found another link. Not sure if its the right one ?
http://www.c-span.org/Watch/C-SPAN_wm.aspx
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/calendar.html
has people moving all over the place and no action
I found another link. Not sure if its the right one ?
http://www.c-span.org/Watch/C-SPAN_wm.aspx
hot Smash magic arnold
alias
09-10 01:20 PM
Most of you either have a firewall or a proxy server to go out to the internet at your work locations, which allows for only TCP port 80. So if you are unsuccessful in getting the real player to work, try this:
when real player opens do the following:
click on tools->preferences->network transport->
then check the "manually configure connection settings"
click on RTSP settings and uncheck everything except "Attempt to use HTTP for all contents" click OK.
Next
click on PNA settings and uncheck everything except "Attempt to use HTTP for all contents" click OK.
Enjoy!!
when real player opens do the following:
click on tools->preferences->network transport->
then check the "manually configure connection settings"
click on RTSP settings and uncheck everything except "Attempt to use HTTP for all contents" click OK.
Next
click on PNA settings and uncheck everything except "Attempt to use HTTP for all contents" click OK.
Enjoy!!
more...
house Bodybuilding muscle physique
grinch
03-19 02:58 PM
Move this to Completed Battles?
tattoo Arnold Schwarzenegger
logiclife
04-23 04:22 PM
-------------
Northern California members we need volunteers for an event on Wednesday (04/25) in Campbell @ 1:00 p.m. for an hour. This is much more interactive event. No undocumented immigration issues just EB related issues. Please join the yahoo group and get involved. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice/
Lets keep the momentum going.
You may want to start a new thread with an appropriate title, to get more attention from members in Northern CA.
Northern California members we need volunteers for an event on Wednesday (04/25) in Campbell @ 1:00 p.m. for an hour. This is much more interactive event. No undocumented immigration issues just EB related issues. Please join the yahoo group and get involved. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice/
Lets keep the momentum going.
You may want to start a new thread with an appropriate title, to get more attention from members in Northern CA.
more...
pictures Holy Bible of Body Building
ItIsNotFunny
11-06 03:13 PM
Bump ^^^^
dresses arnold schwarzenegger workout
jthomas
05-26 10:39 PM
I was checked by immigration authorities when i was comming from San diego to Los Angeles. Near the check post there were signs to go slow for imigration checks. One border patrol car came besides me and waved his hand to pull towards the curb. I changed my lanes and also helped the border patrol to change his lanes towards the shoulder. He got down from his car and asked me what is my status I told H1B. I showed him my ID card and told him to check my status through my ID card. He returned my ID card and let me go. (I don't know why they let me go maybe my name is spanish and my last name is british)
Just wondering what would the immigration authorities do if they catch a illegal. There are millions of illegals in Los Angeles and they also had rallies almost every year in downtown Los Angeles.
I am not going to carry my immigration document if i am within US. I never have carried during the last 7 years. At the most they would escort me to my residence which is okay for me.
J thomas
I carry my GC, passport etc even if i get out of my house to my lawn.
I also stick them to my body in a water resistant package when i dive into a swimming pool, in case a immigration nut lay waiting there. Law is law. Why can't they collect my finger print/iris scan and determine status ?
Just wondering what would the immigration authorities do if they catch a illegal. There are millions of illegals in Los Angeles and they also had rallies almost every year in downtown Los Angeles.
I am not going to carry my immigration document if i am within US. I never have carried during the last 7 years. At the most they would escort me to my residence which is okay for me.
J thomas
I carry my GC, passport etc even if i get out of my house to my lawn.
I also stick them to my body in a water resistant package when i dive into a swimming pool, in case a immigration nut lay waiting there. Law is law. Why can't they collect my finger print/iris scan and determine status ?
more...
makeup met arnold schwarzenegger
10dulkar
08-15 05:18 PM
Expected news for EB3 folks
girlfriend arnold, schwarzenegger,
alex99
04-08 09:05 AM
Thanks for your response BharatPremi .
hairstyles Arnold Schwarzenegger is
imneedy
05-07 06:31 PM
imneedy, as you very well know USCIS asked for money. Many members received similar letter from USCIS. IV did the campaign to collect $10000 for the USCIS Fees related legal fees. Many members just like you contributed for it. Updates to whats happening with the FOIA is available in donor forum.
Donor forum is available to folks who make financial contributed of $25 or more. If you really trust IV and are looking for next step, then start contributing to IV (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/misc.php?do=donate).
coopheal,
I think it is a good idea, just contributed, thanks!
Donor forum is available to folks who make financial contributed of $25 or more. If you really trust IV and are looking for next step, then start contributing to IV (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/misc.php?do=donate).
coopheal,
I think it is a good idea, just contributed, thanks!
rongha_2000
11-14 05:17 PM
Does this vote gives us an overview of how the PDs might be spread out all over? From this poll, it looks like there are not many applications from Jan 2005 onwards as compared to prior to Jan 2005.
Once that back log is cleared, things wont be as bad for the rest? What do you think?
Once that back log is cleared, things wont be as bad for the rest? What do you think?
prioritydate
12-20 04:08 PM
:D;)
I dont think you need to worry.. for you knwo what I am saying ...:D
May be I need to give a reason. I didn't worked for the whole year because there were no jobs. I just stayed at home depressed.
Not working and there by not getting salary signifies out of status? I am not sure about that. I didn't traveled outside of the country couple of times after that.
I dont think you need to worry.. for you knwo what I am saying ...:D
May be I need to give a reason. I didn't worked for the whole year because there were no jobs. I just stayed at home depressed.
Not working and there by not getting salary signifies out of status? I am not sure about that. I didn't traveled outside of the country couple of times after that.
No comments:
Post a Comment