Googler
02-14 04:24 PM
"Based on a review of the facts and bedrock principles of administrative agency law, the Court finds that USCIS�s name check requirement has
(1) never been authorized by Congress;
(2) is not mentioned or contemplated by any fair reading of the current USCIS regulations; and
(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions..."
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%202-8-08.pdf
What a fabulous ruling this is.
One question for Lazycis:
# (3) actually reads "(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions for naturalization, particularly because Plaintiffs have already undergone a name check in order to achieve LPR status and will clear the �fingerprint check� described in the Memorandum of January 25, 2008.10 The fingerprint check will show whether an LPR who is applying for naturalization has had any contact with the criminal justice system that would warrant denial of the petition."
As far as I can tell even (1) and (2) only apply to Naturalization applicants.
So the question of the hour is: are (1) and (2) true for AOS cases? I am asking this question because to argue a case for compelling recapture you need an AOS version of Baylson's ruling + the Galvez-Howerton decision (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=223315&postcount=121). Only then can you say that there was affirmative misconduct in 2003 and hence compel recapture.
(1) never been authorized by Congress;
(2) is not mentioned or contemplated by any fair reading of the current USCIS regulations; and
(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions..."
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%202-8-08.pdf
What a fabulous ruling this is.
One question for Lazycis:
# (3) actually reads "(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions for naturalization, particularly because Plaintiffs have already undergone a name check in order to achieve LPR status and will clear the �fingerprint check� described in the Memorandum of January 25, 2008.10 The fingerprint check will show whether an LPR who is applying for naturalization has had any contact with the criminal justice system that would warrant denial of the petition."
As far as I can tell even (1) and (2) only apply to Naturalization applicants.
So the question of the hour is: are (1) and (2) true for AOS cases? I am asking this question because to argue a case for compelling recapture you need an AOS version of Baylson's ruling + the Galvez-Howerton decision (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=223315&postcount=121). Only then can you say that there was affirmative misconduct in 2003 and hence compel recapture.
wallpaper Vintage Art Deco Inspired
EkAurAaya
06-19 11:11 AM
Your mom had GC in 80s? Why are you in EB queue? You should have gotten your GC by now. Just kidding:D
Story of my life :D
Hindsight is 20-20, she regrets sometimes because its so difficult now (back then in the 70's they had given her a GC when she landed at the airport with all sponsorship documents), but I tell her whats done is done... they did what they thought was best at that point in time :) so no regrets!
Story of my life :D
Hindsight is 20-20, she regrets sometimes because its so difficult now (back then in the 70's they had given her a GC when she landed at the airport with all sponsorship documents), but I tell her whats done is done... they did what they thought was best at that point in time :) so no regrets!
krishnam70
05-05 01:47 PM
Hi All,
Recently I received an RFE on my Wife's 485 application asking to prove that we both are still married. My lawyer is asking for around $400 to respond to this RFE, We have already paid the lawyer about $7500 until now for our GC process and she is no longer the preferred lawyer for the company that I am working for, but I had to keep my case with her as she has processed all of my applications until now. My questions are:
1. Can we ourselves respond to the RFE and save the $400.00,
2. If so, What's the process and what documents that we need to send to prove that we are still married.
Appreciate all of your help in this regard.
Thanks
http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/US_I-485_RFE_Bonafide_Marriage
-cheers
kris
Recently I received an RFE on my Wife's 485 application asking to prove that we both are still married. My lawyer is asking for around $400 to respond to this RFE, We have already paid the lawyer about $7500 until now for our GC process and she is no longer the preferred lawyer for the company that I am working for, but I had to keep my case with her as she has processed all of my applications until now. My questions are:
1. Can we ourselves respond to the RFE and save the $400.00,
2. If so, What's the process and what documents that we need to send to prove that we are still married.
Appreciate all of your help in this regard.
Thanks
http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/US_I-485_RFE_Bonafide_Marriage
-cheers
kris
2011 Pictorial Review Patterns
GCJinx
03-21 03:47 PM
Thanks to all of you for your help
more...
reddymjm
05-15 11:06 AM
Here is my $100
Paypal Receipt ID: 8D5173328S121125D
Come on everyone... donate a small percentage of your stimulus package.
Good Job elaiyam.
Paypal Receipt ID: 8D5173328S121125D
Come on everyone... donate a small percentage of your stimulus package.
Good Job elaiyam.
MetteBB
05-11 01:20 PM
Hey thx!
Guess what -The appel (know I miss-spelled it) I accedently deleted... I'm such an as$ :whistle:
/mette
Guess what -The appel (know I miss-spelled it) I accedently deleted... I'm such an as$ :whistle:
/mette
more...
Sakthisagar
11-09 01:21 PM
Good Media trick indeed,...infosys is giving money for this too???
If you see the cribbing happening just a visit from The US President to India.
If you see the cribbing happening just a visit from The US President to India.
2010 Art Deco is characterized by
chanduv23
02-26 12:37 PM
Congressman - things can move quick and you can get personalized attention.
Senator - things may be a bit slow because they handle the entire state.
How your case can be treated - there is a trick that I would like to share.
For any politician it is in their best duties to help their constituent and that too a law abiding tax paying constituent.
For any staffer at their office, it is best for them to be of help to the constituent because they get brownie points.
You must present yourself and your case with a lot of humility, clarity, easy language, proof of documents, and words of praise and humble request for help - then you can actually see that things do work.
USCIS has an internal liason called congressional liason and all congressional enquiries are routed carefully through that liason. It is in best interest of the liason to make sure they do everything right and come back with a responsible answer. Most times thei entire process is made visible to you via emails copied to you or printouts of conversation or sometimes the liason asks you to come to their office and talks to CIS in your presence.
This is not like Infopass where you can expect only luck to help you.
Another option is to approach the Ombudsman. Ombudsman's office is slow, but it is effective too.
Senator - things may be a bit slow because they handle the entire state.
How your case can be treated - there is a trick that I would like to share.
For any politician it is in their best duties to help their constituent and that too a law abiding tax paying constituent.
For any staffer at their office, it is best for them to be of help to the constituent because they get brownie points.
You must present yourself and your case with a lot of humility, clarity, easy language, proof of documents, and words of praise and humble request for help - then you can actually see that things do work.
USCIS has an internal liason called congressional liason and all congressional enquiries are routed carefully through that liason. It is in best interest of the liason to make sure they do everything right and come back with a responsible answer. Most times thei entire process is made visible to you via emails copied to you or printouts of conversation or sometimes the liason asks you to come to their office and talks to CIS in your presence.
This is not like Infopass where you can expect only luck to help you.
Another option is to approach the Ombudsman. Ombudsman's office is slow, but it is effective too.
more...
nixstor
09-20 05:37 PM
Just wondering how many souls are out there in the country with EB-2 India PD of 2004 and earlier but are not here on IV.
Even with a 1% representation ( assuming that 2004 folks such as us are NOT tired to participate in poll), the total number should be some thing like 8000-9000. 1.5 dependents makes it 20K-25Knumbers.
Also I noticed that a lot of people who voted here has their profile listed as EB-3. Did those guys took the wrong poll or did interfiling?
I feel that OCT EB-2 I & C reversal of DOS was a knee jerk reaction to USCIS's random approvals and we should see a good jump's in next few months.
Even with a 1% representation ( assuming that 2004 folks such as us are NOT tired to participate in poll), the total number should be some thing like 8000-9000. 1.5 dependents makes it 20K-25Knumbers.
Also I noticed that a lot of people who voted here has their profile listed as EB-3. Did those guys took the wrong poll or did interfiling?
I feel that OCT EB-2 I & C reversal of DOS was a knee jerk reaction to USCIS's random approvals and we should see a good jump's in next few months.
hair Art-Deco.jpg
chanduv23
03-15 06:26 PM
Thats is the law. They have to provide no matter how much blood suckers they are. Of course it depends on how you make them realize that.
I was offered one when i was in that situation way back in 99.
Its as per law. But in practice, we do not see it happening much. maybe I am not aware. Anyway getting a flight ticket back to home country is not an issue for a great discussion :)
I was offered one when i was in that situation way back in 99.
Its as per law. But in practice, we do not see it happening much. maybe I am not aware. Anyway getting a flight ticket back to home country is not an issue for a great discussion :)
more...
shukla77
06-29 10:36 AM
it seems there is one Poll for every little thing.....is someone doing statistical analysis of all these..??:D :D
hot art deco patterns free. Authentic Art Deco Patterns in
devikas81
07-05 09:58 AM
I am on the similar situation. can i have your email add..
Thanks,
Thanks,
more...
house is an art deco pattern
njboy
01-18 01:38 PM
I didnt mean 485 denial even though the subject of post says so, I meant LCA denial, or 140 denial, but most of you are seeing from your own narrow perspective where you have EAD, and have i-140 approved and have already gone through labor cert. But what about people who are just starting the PERM process..? Comeon they are part of our community too..
tattoo art deco matchbox
chintu25
09-22 04:50 PM
Spoke to Aide of John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman
He is in Favor of the bill so do not call him
And yes I gave Green all those who got Red dots for motivating people :)
He is in Favor of the bill so do not call him
And yes I gave Green all those who got Red dots for motivating people :)
more...
pictures Stock Photo titled: Art Deco
niklshah
01-06 08:58 AM
change the title of thread buddy its misleading. change to something like guessing on feb visa bulletin.. or time waste on feb visa bulettin..
dresses Wholesale Patterns
krishnam70
05-06 11:52 AM
Here is my story, Immigration experts are requested to suggest.......
My H1 started from Oct 05 with Employer A.
Applied Labor in Feb 07, Approved in Feb 07.
I-140 approved in May 07.
Applied I-485 in July 07, still pending.
EAD, AP received in Oct 07 - Expired in Oct 08 (Never Used)
Renewed EAD in Oct 08, valid till Oct 2010.
In Oct 08 H1 expired (3 years), Employer A filed for extension in Sep 08.
The project with Employer A finished on Nov 22, 08. (on H1)
Started new project with Employer B on EAD from Nov 24, 08.
(AC21 was not filed)
Employer A responded an RFE for H1 extension in Jan 09. (3years of Tax
Returns, W2, etc)
Due to miscommunication between me and Employer A, he was notified of my
new job on EAD with Employer B in march 09.
H1 Extension with Employer A got REJECTED on April 26, 09. Reason - End client
contract not submitted. (It was not mentioned in RFE)
Never filed an AC21.
What should I do now ? Will this H1 extension rejection become an
obstable in getting I-485 approved ? Will there be any problem in getting
third extension of EAD if I-485 is still pending ?
Should I appeal this case by submitting all the end client contracts ? But I have
used EAD ...........I have good relation with Employer A and am assuming he will
not revoke my I-140.
Experts please suggest........
Here is my observation
1. Since your H1 with your original employer A was rejected the next step from your employer would be to revoke the H1 petition ( i am not sure if rejection means automatic revocation)
2. You implicitly used AC21 by moving to a new employer and working on an EAD
3. You could have an issue if, employer A revokes your I140. There is some evidence to suggest that lot of such cases are getting NOID and getting rejected. This is based on readings on this forum in other threads.
4. On the contrary if employer A is not withdrawing your I140 which means he is still willing to support your GC ( implicit meaning is that you will work for him in future). You might get an RFE next time you apply for some renewal or just like that on your 485 asking you for 'proof of employment'. In which case you submit the necessary documentation.
The key here really is to make sure your Employer A does not revoke your I140. I know the advocates of AC21 have been arguing in the other threads that it beats the purpose of Ac21 if USCIS is rejecting such cases but its a grey area and certainly a cause for concern.
- cheers
kris
My H1 started from Oct 05 with Employer A.
Applied Labor in Feb 07, Approved in Feb 07.
I-140 approved in May 07.
Applied I-485 in July 07, still pending.
EAD, AP received in Oct 07 - Expired in Oct 08 (Never Used)
Renewed EAD in Oct 08, valid till Oct 2010.
In Oct 08 H1 expired (3 years), Employer A filed for extension in Sep 08.
The project with Employer A finished on Nov 22, 08. (on H1)
Started new project with Employer B on EAD from Nov 24, 08.
(AC21 was not filed)
Employer A responded an RFE for H1 extension in Jan 09. (3years of Tax
Returns, W2, etc)
Due to miscommunication between me and Employer A, he was notified of my
new job on EAD with Employer B in march 09.
H1 Extension with Employer A got REJECTED on April 26, 09. Reason - End client
contract not submitted. (It was not mentioned in RFE)
Never filed an AC21.
What should I do now ? Will this H1 extension rejection become an
obstable in getting I-485 approved ? Will there be any problem in getting
third extension of EAD if I-485 is still pending ?
Should I appeal this case by submitting all the end client contracts ? But I have
used EAD ...........I have good relation with Employer A and am assuming he will
not revoke my I-140.
Experts please suggest........
Here is my observation
1. Since your H1 with your original employer A was rejected the next step from your employer would be to revoke the H1 petition ( i am not sure if rejection means automatic revocation)
2. You implicitly used AC21 by moving to a new employer and working on an EAD
3. You could have an issue if, employer A revokes your I140. There is some evidence to suggest that lot of such cases are getting NOID and getting rejected. This is based on readings on this forum in other threads.
4. On the contrary if employer A is not withdrawing your I140 which means he is still willing to support your GC ( implicit meaning is that you will work for him in future). You might get an RFE next time you apply for some renewal or just like that on your 485 asking you for 'proof of employment'. In which case you submit the necessary documentation.
The key here really is to make sure your Employer A does not revoke your I140. I know the advocates of AC21 have been arguing in the other threads that it beats the purpose of Ac21 if USCIS is rejecting such cases but its a grey area and certainly a cause for concern.
- cheers
kris
more...
makeup Art Nouveau Tile Pattern clip
kk_123
09-25 03:07 PM
hi,
my brother is also seeing the same status for his case. he too really getting confused.
if you get your GC , pls update it.so it will help others too.
my brother is also seeing the same status for his case. he too really getting confused.
if you get your GC , pls update it.so it will help others too.
girlfriend 1924 Black amp; White Art Deco
rpulipati
09-07 05:01 PM
I believe in IV and its efforts.
I understand rally will help IV to demonstrate the people support.
I understand, in rally and after rally IV requests/lobbys law-makers to fix the broken immigration system system.
But can someone clarify me, what exactly IV is requesting law-makers?
1) Are we asking to re-capture visa numbers? (150K may not be sufficient for 750K applicants)
2) Remove country limit (still have to 5 years)
3) Increase the EB quota?
4) Clear all current pending Backlog labor/I-140/I-485/etc applications by 2009? This is temporary solution, but will solve the problem for now.
5) Another Immigration Reform bill for legal?
Having clear answers will help to gain support from my friends, colleagues and more and more people will be willing to join.
Thanks
I understand rally will help IV to demonstrate the people support.
I understand, in rally and after rally IV requests/lobbys law-makers to fix the broken immigration system system.
But can someone clarify me, what exactly IV is requesting law-makers?
1) Are we asking to re-capture visa numbers? (150K may not be sufficient for 750K applicants)
2) Remove country limit (still have to 5 years)
3) Increase the EB quota?
4) Clear all current pending Backlog labor/I-140/I-485/etc applications by 2009? This is temporary solution, but will solve the problem for now.
5) Another Immigration Reform bill for legal?
Having clear answers will help to gain support from my friends, colleagues and more and more people will be willing to join.
Thanks
hairstyles Art Deco chevron patterns:
arnab221
04-29 12:30 PM
Doing smart things like this may get you deported from the US without any chance of return for 5 years . Be honest and follow the law .It against the law to work in one country and get paid in another .
JunRN
06-02 06:18 PM
What happens when a new I-140 was filed but was denied, will USCIS consider the previously approved i-140 for the AOS (i-485)?
purgan
10-14 08:17 PM
Another recent story on Canadian Skilled Immigration...
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=752a2097-a21f-42d1-b9c4-d15bab949d9f&k=9534
Geoffrey Scotton, Calgary Herald
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
gscotton@theherald.canwest.com
CALGARY - Alberta and the rest of Canada need to move quickly to boost immigration and take better advantage of skills so many new Canadians bring to their chosen home or risk being left behind in a global race for talent, says the head of Canada's largest bank.
''We must significantly increase these efforts and others if Canada is going to have the necessary human resources to compete in today's global economy,'' Royal Bank of Canada president/chief executive Gordon Nixon said to a dinner of the Immigrant Access Fund in Calgary Tuesday evening.
''Make no mistake, Canada is in a global war for talent. We must be a destination of choice for skilled immigrants and professionals or we will not succeed ... If we do, we will have a unrivaled advantage. If we don't, we will face an uphill battle just to maintain our quality of life.''
David Baxter, a demographer and economist with the Vancouver-based Urban Futures Institute Society, agrees with Nixon's analysis, suggesting Canada faces a ''perfect storm'' of demographic labour force pressures. Those factors include a declining birthrate, a massive number of Canadians approaching retirement and relatively fewer Canadians entering the workforce as they reach working age.
''You don't need a robust economy to be able to say there's going to be a problem here. We're probably now at the point now that without immigration our labour force stops growing,'' he said. ''This is a long-term issue, let's regularize it. We've got to move away from this talk of temporary (workers).
''What I would look for is young, healthy, intelligent, honest energetic people, preferably with an entrepreneurial spirit - and more employee sponsorship.''
Nixon argued that nowhere is the potential of immigrant expertise and contribution more evident than in Calgary, which is suffering labour shortages across the board, in all industries, from the unskilled worker to the skilled professional.
''Calgary is facing a shortfall of as many as 90,000 workers over the next five years ... by 2025 the shortage across the province will be well through 300,000,'' said Nixon. ''Alberta is at the cusp of a trend we're seeing nationwide.''
Nixon argued that immigration must be viewed by policymakers as a strategic economic development tool that will help to define 21st century Canada. He noted the country has in the past used immigration as a tool of industrial policy, particularly around the settlement and development of the West.
That kind of approach is needed again, Nixon asserted, as is better utilization of under-employed immigrants already in Canada, a phenomenon that RBC economists has estimated costs Canada $13 billion annually.
''We can no longer view immigration as a temporary employment agency,'' said Nixon. ''We need to start looking at immigration as a blueprint for nation-building, and we must find the right balance between social justice and economic need.''
Baxter believes that Alberta is making the strongest effort of any of the Canadian provinces to attract and efficaciously absorb new Canadians. However, he noted that while immigration policy remains largely the purview of the federal government, questions of professional accreditation and other determinants limiting immigrants' entry into the Canadian workforce rest in provincial hands.
''Alberta is at the forefront of this. The provincial government recognizes this (the need for more workers) and so does industry,'' said Baxter, referring to Alberta's Labour Force Strategy, released in July.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=752a2097-a21f-42d1-b9c4-d15bab949d9f&k=9534
Geoffrey Scotton, Calgary Herald
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
gscotton@theherald.canwest.com
CALGARY - Alberta and the rest of Canada need to move quickly to boost immigration and take better advantage of skills so many new Canadians bring to their chosen home or risk being left behind in a global race for talent, says the head of Canada's largest bank.
''We must significantly increase these efforts and others if Canada is going to have the necessary human resources to compete in today's global economy,'' Royal Bank of Canada president/chief executive Gordon Nixon said to a dinner of the Immigrant Access Fund in Calgary Tuesday evening.
''Make no mistake, Canada is in a global war for talent. We must be a destination of choice for skilled immigrants and professionals or we will not succeed ... If we do, we will have a unrivaled advantage. If we don't, we will face an uphill battle just to maintain our quality of life.''
David Baxter, a demographer and economist with the Vancouver-based Urban Futures Institute Society, agrees with Nixon's analysis, suggesting Canada faces a ''perfect storm'' of demographic labour force pressures. Those factors include a declining birthrate, a massive number of Canadians approaching retirement and relatively fewer Canadians entering the workforce as they reach working age.
''You don't need a robust economy to be able to say there's going to be a problem here. We're probably now at the point now that without immigration our labour force stops growing,'' he said. ''This is a long-term issue, let's regularize it. We've got to move away from this talk of temporary (workers).
''What I would look for is young, healthy, intelligent, honest energetic people, preferably with an entrepreneurial spirit - and more employee sponsorship.''
Nixon argued that nowhere is the potential of immigrant expertise and contribution more evident than in Calgary, which is suffering labour shortages across the board, in all industries, from the unskilled worker to the skilled professional.
''Calgary is facing a shortfall of as many as 90,000 workers over the next five years ... by 2025 the shortage across the province will be well through 300,000,'' said Nixon. ''Alberta is at the cusp of a trend we're seeing nationwide.''
Nixon argued that immigration must be viewed by policymakers as a strategic economic development tool that will help to define 21st century Canada. He noted the country has in the past used immigration as a tool of industrial policy, particularly around the settlement and development of the West.
That kind of approach is needed again, Nixon asserted, as is better utilization of under-employed immigrants already in Canada, a phenomenon that RBC economists has estimated costs Canada $13 billion annually.
''We can no longer view immigration as a temporary employment agency,'' said Nixon. ''We need to start looking at immigration as a blueprint for nation-building, and we must find the right balance between social justice and economic need.''
Baxter believes that Alberta is making the strongest effort of any of the Canadian provinces to attract and efficaciously absorb new Canadians. However, he noted that while immigration policy remains largely the purview of the federal government, questions of professional accreditation and other determinants limiting immigrants' entry into the Canadian workforce rest in provincial hands.
''Alberta is at the forefront of this. The provincial government recognizes this (the need for more workers) and so does industry,'' said Baxter, referring to Alberta's Labour Force Strategy, released in July.