vandanaverdia
09-12 07:08 PM
23 members & growing...
Wake up Washingtonians & Oregonians....
Wake up Washingtonians & Oregonians....
wallpaper LeBron James gave his
veni001
06-04 10:34 AM
If this is old then why did i see it on THOMAS as
=====================================
S.1348
Title: A bill to provide for comprehensive immigration reform and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Reid, Harry [NV] (introduced 5/9/2007) Cosponsors (4)
Latest Major Action: 5/25/2007 Senate floor actions. Status: Considered by Senate.
======================================
:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused::confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:
======================================
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s.01348:
=====================================
S.1348
Title: A bill to provide for comprehensive immigration reform and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Reid, Harry [NV] (introduced 5/9/2007) Cosponsors (4)
Latest Major Action: 5/25/2007 Senate floor actions. Status: Considered by Senate.
======================================
:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused::confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:
======================================
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s.01348:
gc_buddy
01-20 06:15 PM
I think you should be fine. My understanding is that USCIS would look at your pay stubs to determine if you have a gap. As you will have continuous pay stubs before and after the HI transfer, you should fine...
I will let other senior people comment too...
I will let other senior people comment too...
2011 lebron james mom delonte
RedHat
08-30 05:01 PM
What is Sub-Labor?
I field my GC thru Very good company.
I am not understanding why its happend
I field my GC thru Very good company.
I am not understanding why its happend
more...
simple1
05-12 12:41 PM
Thanks a lot for the thoughts. The same logic will nullify the ebdependent to qualify for ebquota. How come a 5 year old dependent becomes eligible for ebquota (sec 203 clearly lists the quota size and qualifications).
Take an example:
H1 primary gets H1 visa, H1 derivative gets H4 visa( and is not counted in H1 quota). Same with L1 (dependent gets L2) the quota doesnt apply in L1.
If you don't agree with me then ask any attorney and post the response here. Hopefully that will make you see the reasoning.
Yes, I don’t agree with you on the interpretation linking ebdependents with ebquota.
Please note: My primary argument here is "ebdependents out of ebquota". I really don’t care where ebdependents belong as long as they are not counted in ebquota.
I am already in "Ask an Attorney" forum and want to hear attorney’s thoughts.
Please comment only in the member and donor threads and Let us keep this for Attorney only.
Take an example:
H1 primary gets H1 visa, H1 derivative gets H4 visa( and is not counted in H1 quota). Same with L1 (dependent gets L2) the quota doesnt apply in L1.
If you don't agree with me then ask any attorney and post the response here. Hopefully that will make you see the reasoning.
Yes, I don’t agree with you on the interpretation linking ebdependents with ebquota.
Please note: My primary argument here is "ebdependents out of ebquota". I really don’t care where ebdependents belong as long as they are not counted in ebquota.
I am already in "Ask an Attorney" forum and want to hear attorney’s thoughts.
Please comment only in the member and donor threads and Let us keep this for Attorney only.
sundeep14
10-29 01:00 PM
I checked my current labor certification. it has the following details :
ETA FORM 9089
A) PREVAILING WAGE INFORMATION
SOC/O*NET(OES) CODE
15-1031.00
OCCUPATONAL TITLE
COMPUTER SOFTWARE ENGINEER
B) JOB OPPORTUNITY INFORMATION
JOB TITLE: SOFTWARE ENGINEER(THIS IS CURRENT)
C) IDENTIFY THE JOB TITLE OF THE ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATE OCCUPATION:
PROGRAMMER ANALYST OR SYSTEMS ANALYST
D) JOB DUTIES
CREATE TEST PLANS, TEST CASES AND ANALYZE USER NEEDS AND CREATE AND
MODIFY APPLICATION SOFTWARE USING VARIOUS SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES
My question is based on the above can i switch to another field like SAP for example. I am not sure if companies will be ready to give me a offer letter with the above text for a SAP job.
Any ideas friends?
ETA FORM 9089
A) PREVAILING WAGE INFORMATION
SOC/O*NET(OES) CODE
15-1031.00
OCCUPATONAL TITLE
COMPUTER SOFTWARE ENGINEER
B) JOB OPPORTUNITY INFORMATION
JOB TITLE: SOFTWARE ENGINEER(THIS IS CURRENT)
C) IDENTIFY THE JOB TITLE OF THE ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATE OCCUPATION:
PROGRAMMER ANALYST OR SYSTEMS ANALYST
D) JOB DUTIES
CREATE TEST PLANS, TEST CASES AND ANALYZE USER NEEDS AND CREATE AND
MODIFY APPLICATION SOFTWARE USING VARIOUS SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES
My question is based on the above can i switch to another field like SAP for example. I am not sure if companies will be ready to give me a offer letter with the above text for a SAP job.
Any ideas friends?
more...
perseus
07-17 01:04 AM
here is a brief account of my, and my spouse's, arduous but successful journey toward the coveted green cards. i hope this account helps you somehow.
(note: what you read below is all of what i am willing to share. i have spent a lot of time in typing it. i will not have the time or inclination for any elaborations or explanations!)
1. landed in the united states on f-1 visa -- september 2000.
2. arrested on misdemeanor shoplifting charge after prank went awry -- june 2001; judge dropped charge in july 2001 and also sealed and expunged the record.
3. changed from f-1 to h-1b upon accepting job offer from employer A, via about two months of c.p.t. in september 2003 (never used o.p.t.)
4. obtained labor certification in may 2004, and approval of i-140 (via eb-2) in march 2005, both via employer A. (priority date was, hence, may 2004).
5. got married in home country in june 2006; spouse landed in the united states on h-4 in november 2006.
6. graduated with advanced degree (and high academic honors) in december 2006.
7. transferred h-1b from employer A to employer B in september 2007; abandoned employer A's i-140 approval.
8. spouse, who had been on h-4 since november 2006, changed to f-1 in september 2007 to pursue advanced degree; spouse graduated in may 2009.
9. arrested in april 2008 for driving while visually impaired; convicted and punished by judge with three-month driving probation and fine.
10. obtained new labor certification in march 2008 and obtained new i-140 approval (again via eb-2) in september 2008; both via employer B.
11. mailed i-485s for self and spouse in october 2008; did not realize while mailing that the priority date had recently retrogressed (had no attorney assistance); but uscis accepted petitions, cashed checks, and processed the i-485s by sending self and spouse biometric appointments and an r.f.e. (for spouse).
12. transferred h-1b again, from employer B to employer C, in june 2009, more than 180 days after i-485s had been pending; spouse simultaneously applied for change of status from f-1 to h-4.
13. self and spouse invited for i-485 interviews in october 2009 based on self's i-140 approval obtained through employer B; i-485 petitions denied because priority date had not been current when filed; self and spouse shocked and in near-panic! self began to consider restarting green card process from i-140 stage, this time via eb-1.
14. h-1b extended in december 2010 for a year, via employer C's petition; at time of extension approval, self's original six years on h-1b had elapsed.
15. re-filed i-485s in january 2010, this time with attorney's help (mainly to write cover letter).
16. self and spouse invited for i-485 interviews again in june 2010, based on second i-485 petitions (based on self's i-140 approval obtained via employer B, even though at this time self was with employer C with previously denied -- for a technicality -- i-485s); i-485 petitions approved at the interview -- jai siyaram!
17. self and spouse received approval notices and "card production ordered" emails, all dated 13 days after interview.
18. received green cards and "welcome to the united states" fliers, both in july 2010, 29 days after i-485 interviews -- jai shri krishna!
notes in conclusion:
1. the green card process via employment, from h-1b through i-485, with possible multiple approvals/denials of each, is daunting due to the time and expense involved (including possible cost of attorney)
2. uscis's emphasis on technicalities can be frustrating; in our experience, approval of a i-485 is ultimately a discretion exercised by a single reviewing officer.
3. overall, applicant and any spouse/kids (a) must have maintained legal status throughout the h1b through i-485 process, and (b) must never have been convicted of felonious assault or moral turpitude.
4. in the end, applicant would find that the immigration system works, slow though it is because of congressional quotas and a somewhat slothful or myopic uscis.
5. i offer my best wishes to all that are reading this, regardless of citizenship. as a proud (and relieved!) new permanent resident of the united states, i say to you, "good luck and an advance welcome!"
reminder: what you read above is all of what i am willing to share. i spent a lot of time in typing it. i won't have the time or inclination for elaborations or explanations but, most sincerely, i wish you well!
(note: what you read below is all of what i am willing to share. i have spent a lot of time in typing it. i will not have the time or inclination for any elaborations or explanations!)
1. landed in the united states on f-1 visa -- september 2000.
2. arrested on misdemeanor shoplifting charge after prank went awry -- june 2001; judge dropped charge in july 2001 and also sealed and expunged the record.
3. changed from f-1 to h-1b upon accepting job offer from employer A, via about two months of c.p.t. in september 2003 (never used o.p.t.)
4. obtained labor certification in may 2004, and approval of i-140 (via eb-2) in march 2005, both via employer A. (priority date was, hence, may 2004).
5. got married in home country in june 2006; spouse landed in the united states on h-4 in november 2006.
6. graduated with advanced degree (and high academic honors) in december 2006.
7. transferred h-1b from employer A to employer B in september 2007; abandoned employer A's i-140 approval.
8. spouse, who had been on h-4 since november 2006, changed to f-1 in september 2007 to pursue advanced degree; spouse graduated in may 2009.
9. arrested in april 2008 for driving while visually impaired; convicted and punished by judge with three-month driving probation and fine.
10. obtained new labor certification in march 2008 and obtained new i-140 approval (again via eb-2) in september 2008; both via employer B.
11. mailed i-485s for self and spouse in october 2008; did not realize while mailing that the priority date had recently retrogressed (had no attorney assistance); but uscis accepted petitions, cashed checks, and processed the i-485s by sending self and spouse biometric appointments and an r.f.e. (for spouse).
12. transferred h-1b again, from employer B to employer C, in june 2009, more than 180 days after i-485s had been pending; spouse simultaneously applied for change of status from f-1 to h-4.
13. self and spouse invited for i-485 interviews in october 2009 based on self's i-140 approval obtained through employer B; i-485 petitions denied because priority date had not been current when filed; self and spouse shocked and in near-panic! self began to consider restarting green card process from i-140 stage, this time via eb-1.
14. h-1b extended in december 2010 for a year, via employer C's petition; at time of extension approval, self's original six years on h-1b had elapsed.
15. re-filed i-485s in january 2010, this time with attorney's help (mainly to write cover letter).
16. self and spouse invited for i-485 interviews again in june 2010, based on second i-485 petitions (based on self's i-140 approval obtained via employer B, even though at this time self was with employer C with previously denied -- for a technicality -- i-485s); i-485 petitions approved at the interview -- jai siyaram!
17. self and spouse received approval notices and "card production ordered" emails, all dated 13 days after interview.
18. received green cards and "welcome to the united states" fliers, both in july 2010, 29 days after i-485 interviews -- jai shri krishna!
notes in conclusion:
1. the green card process via employment, from h-1b through i-485, with possible multiple approvals/denials of each, is daunting due to the time and expense involved (including possible cost of attorney)
2. uscis's emphasis on technicalities can be frustrating; in our experience, approval of a i-485 is ultimately a discretion exercised by a single reviewing officer.
3. overall, applicant and any spouse/kids (a) must have maintained legal status throughout the h1b through i-485 process, and (b) must never have been convicted of felonious assault or moral turpitude.
4. in the end, applicant would find that the immigration system works, slow though it is because of congressional quotas and a somewhat slothful or myopic uscis.
5. i offer my best wishes to all that are reading this, regardless of citizenship. as a proud (and relieved!) new permanent resident of the united states, i say to you, "good luck and an advance welcome!"
reminder: what you read above is all of what i am willing to share. i spent a lot of time in typing it. i won't have the time or inclination for elaborations or explanations but, most sincerely, i wish you well!
2010 james mom delonte west.
anilsal
01-18 04:49 PM
People need to wake up to reality.
more...
pappu
05-11 01:09 PM
http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=3
has some other story
NPR Program Stream
link on http://www.npr.org/
plays something else rt now
has some other story
NPR Program Stream
link on http://www.npr.org/
plays something else rt now
hair LeBron James#39; teammate
sledge_hammer
12-03 04:59 PM
Per the exerpt below, the spouse and children of a legal alien are eligible for benefits, and it will NOT effect the GC process of the primary applicant -
http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/public_cqa.pdf
Q21: If a member of an alien's family is receiving or has received public benefits, but the individual alien hasn’t, will INS or State hold this against the alien for public charge purposes?
A21: In most cases, no. As a general rule, receipt of benefits by a member of an alien’s family is not attributed to the alien who is applying to INS or State for admission or to INS for adjustment of status to determine whether he or she is likely to become a public charge. The only time this general rule would not apply would be if the family were reliant on their family member’s cash public benefits as its sole means of support.
In particular, alien parents do not have to worry that the INS or State will consider them to be public charges if they enroll their children in programs for which they are eligible, unless these are cash programs which provide the sole financial support for the family. This is true whether the children are U.S. citizens or non-citizens.
If a parent enrolls in TANF for cash benefits for the “child only,” this could be used by INS or State for a public charge determination concerning the parent if this cash is the sole support for the family. However, if there are other sources of support or a parent is working, then the cash assistance would not represent the family's sole source of support.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/public_cqa.pdf
Q21: If a member of an alien's family is receiving or has received public benefits, but the individual alien hasn’t, will INS or State hold this against the alien for public charge purposes?
A21: In most cases, no. As a general rule, receipt of benefits by a member of an alien’s family is not attributed to the alien who is applying to INS or State for admission or to INS for adjustment of status to determine whether he or she is likely to become a public charge. The only time this general rule would not apply would be if the family were reliant on their family member’s cash public benefits as its sole means of support.
In particular, alien parents do not have to worry that the INS or State will consider them to be public charges if they enroll their children in programs for which they are eligible, unless these are cash programs which provide the sole financial support for the family. This is true whether the children are U.S. citizens or non-citizens.
If a parent enrolls in TANF for cash benefits for the “child only,” this could be used by INS or State for a public charge determination concerning the parent if this cash is the sole support for the family. However, if there are other sources of support or a parent is working, then the cash assistance would not represent the family's sole source of support.
more...
Almond
07-04 06:50 PM
Firstly, congrats!! BTW, when did you get the fingerprinting completed in your case? Want to get an idea as to how fast the whole process was done. Lets hope it is this way when our turn comes ;)
All the info on his case is in his sig.
All the info on his case is in his sig.
hot no way lebron james#39; momma
GCard_Dream
09-03 08:14 PM
I think I know which memo you are talking about but I can't access it when I click on it because it is password protected. Is there a way you could just post the content of the memo here for those of us who can't access? It would be helpful.
AILA is collecting information in an effort to work with USCIS to identify adjustment of status applications that may be approvable as of October 1, 2008, when new visa numbers become available. The focus of this effort is those adjustment of status cases, which are approvable under the February 4, 2008, security check memo by Michael Aytes. (See http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=24522)
This information is being gathered for liaison purposes only in an attempt to identify and improve processing of cases covered by the February Aytes memo, and though the information will be provided to the USCIS for analysis, neither the AILA-USCIS Liaison Committee nor the USCIS will be contacting the attorney of record or the parties in direct response to information provided.
If your client has an adjustment of status pending over one year and is currently subject to a backlog but was current under the June 2008 Visa Bulletin, we would like to hear from you. Please fill out the following survey.
------------------------------------------
http://aila.org/RecentPosting/RecentPostingList.aspx
AILA is collecting information in an effort to work with USCIS to identify adjustment of status applications that may be approvable as of October 1, 2008, when new visa numbers become available. The focus of this effort is those adjustment of status cases, which are approvable under the February 4, 2008, security check memo by Michael Aytes. (See http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=24522)
This information is being gathered for liaison purposes only in an attempt to identify and improve processing of cases covered by the February Aytes memo, and though the information will be provided to the USCIS for analysis, neither the AILA-USCIS Liaison Committee nor the USCIS will be contacting the attorney of record or the parties in direct response to information provided.
If your client has an adjustment of status pending over one year and is currently subject to a backlog but was current under the June 2008 Visa Bulletin, we would like to hear from you. Please fill out the following survey.
------------------------------------------
http://aila.org/RecentPosting/RecentPostingList.aspx
more...
house LeBron James, Mom
bsbawa10
12-10 04:50 PM
I insist that the name of the person who used profane language on IV website be revealed. It is a serious and urgent issue. Such people must be exposed for the public good.
I fully think that if IV is serious for the dignity of its members and wants this not to happen again, then the person should be revealed and banned. I know this has happened in the past also but not taking this kind of action has given courage to such kind of people to attempt it again.
I fully think that if IV is serious for the dignity of its members and wants this not to happen again, then the person should be revealed and banned. I know this has happened in the past also but not taking this kind of action has given courage to such kind of people to attempt it again.
tattoo KG and Lebron#39;s mom were
TheCanadian
10-22 06:38 PM
You eat dinner on tables, so why not use them for websites?
You don't use DIVs to build houses, so why use them for websites?
You don't use DIVs to build houses, so why use them for websites?
more...
pictures delonte west lebron james mom
ashkam
09-25 11:12 AM
Good find - shows the plight of legal immigrants.
A bit of nitpicking - actually the chart is underestimating the time for EmploymentBased / skilled immigrants wait - says 11-16 years to get citizenship sort of suggesting 16 years is the worst case scenario to get citizenship. Its a bit underestimate especially for people coming from India/China. I have seen many people (including me) on these forums who entered US "legally" ten years ago and still waiting for GC with no idea when they would finally get it. Some of them might finally get citizenship 20 years after entering the country "legally".
On the whole it shows the reality of legal immigration and its waiting times.
They are counting the time from when the green card process is started. Doesn't matter when you entered the US.
A bit of nitpicking - actually the chart is underestimating the time for EmploymentBased / skilled immigrants wait - says 11-16 years to get citizenship sort of suggesting 16 years is the worst case scenario to get citizenship. Its a bit underestimate especially for people coming from India/China. I have seen many people (including me) on these forums who entered US "legally" ten years ago and still waiting for GC with no idea when they would finally get it. Some of them might finally get citizenship 20 years after entering the country "legally".
On the whole it shows the reality of legal immigration and its waiting times.
They are counting the time from when the green card process is started. Doesn't matter when you entered the US.
dresses lebron james mother delonte west affair. 2010 For the most part,
burgernfries
August 22nd, 2005, 09:49 AM
I read in interesting piece by Bjorn Rorslett on this very subject of stacked polarizers.
Bjorn says it is possible to achieve a sort of false color IR by stacking a Circular and Linear polarizing filters.
As an ND this is really not effective because it is anything but neutral IMO.
Bjorn says it is possible to achieve a sort of false color IR by stacking a Circular and Linear polarizing filters.
As an ND this is really not effective because it is anything but neutral IMO.
more...
makeup that LeBron James#39; mother,
jayleno
08-05 09:24 AM
Hmm....and you think the world is Crazy? Interesting stuff ..bud.
I've applied for EAD/AP renewal for both myself and my wife. I spent $1,290 for this.
Say I got my GC approved and then I call USCIS and withdraw my pending EAD/AP application. Will I get a refund for pending EAD/AP application, if I get my GC approved before EAD/AP approval?
Thanks,
India EB2; PD - Nov 05
I-140 - Filed Mar '06; Approved Jun '06
I-485 - Reached NSC July 26'07;
I've applied for EAD/AP renewal for both myself and my wife. I spent $1,290 for this.
Say I got my GC approved and then I call USCIS and withdraw my pending EAD/AP application. Will I get a refund for pending EAD/AP application, if I get my GC approved before EAD/AP approval?
Thanks,
India EB2; PD - Nov 05
I-140 - Filed Mar '06; Approved Jun '06
I-485 - Reached NSC July 26'07;
girlfriend LeBron#39;s mom slept with one of
prdgl
07-07 09:56 PM
Very good, shabaash!!
Because of A. Holes like you, H1B visa holders get a bad name. And look at your gall, you are publicly announcing an intent to commit deciet.
IV Core and company: Please remove this thread - we do not want to provide more fodder to anti-immigrants.
And as for you moron, yes, you will get into trouble if you think you can dick around with govt. agencies.
Grow up!!!!!!!!
yes yes, its not that 10million illegal immigrants are considered for amnesty and was about to given direct path to citizenship or that's not enough, there is LC subsitution Fraud.
yes yes this is the one that brings bad name for H1B holders and not the above said things.
I am just trying to meet my ad requirement. If its not then i will change my ad. I am trying out different options here. That's it. For now you relax pal !
Because of A. Holes like you, H1B visa holders get a bad name. And look at your gall, you are publicly announcing an intent to commit deciet.
IV Core and company: Please remove this thread - we do not want to provide more fodder to anti-immigrants.
And as for you moron, yes, you will get into trouble if you think you can dick around with govt. agencies.
Grow up!!!!!!!!
yes yes, its not that 10million illegal immigrants are considered for amnesty and was about to given direct path to citizenship or that's not enough, there is LC subsitution Fraud.
yes yes this is the one that brings bad name for H1B holders and not the above said things.
I am just trying to meet my ad requirement. If its not then i will change my ad. I am trying out different options here. That's it. For now you relax pal !
hairstyles Lebron James Is Really Salty
Googler
07-20 12:53 AM
But this won't be easy "Do you want us to compromise on national security", will be the first question asked . They will acknowledge the applicants pain and won't budge . "We know thousands like you are getting screwed for many years, but national security is foremost'.
Man, these forums are getting chaotic -- we need a reorganization so that duplicative threads are avoided. Namecheck probably needs its own subforum.
I didn't want to re-post what I said in the name check sticky thread, so here is a link http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=126248&postcount=351.
As for the argument that the name check process enhances national security that is not really true.
(a) how is national security enhanced by having someone sit around renewing their EAD hanging out in the country year after year -- they should really be hurrying if they are so worried about the risk we pose.
(b) there is considerable internal debate about the usefulness of the "reference file" part of the check; the part that causes these huge delays. Read the name check section of the Ombudsmans 2007 report.
(c) if national security is being preserved by this process why isn't it fully funded through appropriations?? Surely catching a terrorist is worth more than the $2 per application that USCIS pays FBI.
(d) if national security is being preserved by this process, then why is FBI complaining (see recent press reports) that only 30 analysts are available for this reference file part of the analysis?
(e) Sec. Chertoff is always yammering on about "risk based" national security policy -- the FBI namecheck process is the opposite of risk based policy. See Ombudsman's 2007 report again.
Also note that 8 USC 1571 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001571----000-.html) states very clearly that "It is the sense of Congress that the processing of an immigration benefit application should be completed not later than 180 days after the initial filing of the application". Congress did not intend that the process should stretch on for years upon years. 8 USC 1571 was not stricken after the new name check guidelines were put into place.
These are all points that we have to hammer on -- to the press, to congress to absolutely everyone who says hi to us.
This should be a campaign as large as the one for the visa bulletin fiasco because the effect of the FBI Name Check is as devastating if not more devastating than the visa bulletin fiasco.
All these years we had no choice but to believe the BS that was trotted out by FBI (google Cannon, Garrity testimony) about how most records were done by the time you made your morning coffee, what are you thowing a tantrum about my lovely etc. I really sat up when I read the 2007 Ombudsmans report which finally provided data to support what so many people had been complaining about for years. Now no one can deny that the scale of the problem is unpardonably large.
Man, these forums are getting chaotic -- we need a reorganization so that duplicative threads are avoided. Namecheck probably needs its own subforum.
I didn't want to re-post what I said in the name check sticky thread, so here is a link http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=126248&postcount=351.
As for the argument that the name check process enhances national security that is not really true.
(a) how is national security enhanced by having someone sit around renewing their EAD hanging out in the country year after year -- they should really be hurrying if they are so worried about the risk we pose.
(b) there is considerable internal debate about the usefulness of the "reference file" part of the check; the part that causes these huge delays. Read the name check section of the Ombudsmans 2007 report.
(c) if national security is being preserved by this process why isn't it fully funded through appropriations?? Surely catching a terrorist is worth more than the $2 per application that USCIS pays FBI.
(d) if national security is being preserved by this process, then why is FBI complaining (see recent press reports) that only 30 analysts are available for this reference file part of the analysis?
(e) Sec. Chertoff is always yammering on about "risk based" national security policy -- the FBI namecheck process is the opposite of risk based policy. See Ombudsman's 2007 report again.
Also note that 8 USC 1571 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001571----000-.html) states very clearly that "It is the sense of Congress that the processing of an immigration benefit application should be completed not later than 180 days after the initial filing of the application". Congress did not intend that the process should stretch on for years upon years. 8 USC 1571 was not stricken after the new name check guidelines were put into place.
These are all points that we have to hammer on -- to the press, to congress to absolutely everyone who says hi to us.
This should be a campaign as large as the one for the visa bulletin fiasco because the effect of the FBI Name Check is as devastating if not more devastating than the visa bulletin fiasco.
All these years we had no choice but to believe the BS that was trotted out by FBI (google Cannon, Garrity testimony) about how most records were done by the time you made your morning coffee, what are you thowing a tantrum about my lovely etc. I really sat up when I read the 2007 Ombudsmans report which finally provided data to support what so many people had been complaining about for years. Now no one can deny that the scale of the problem is unpardonably large.
vikramy
11-19 07:00 PM
Today there was LUD on my 140 application which was approved 1 year back. What does this mean? I received my EAD and AP is approved.
Sorry to ask this question on this thread, but i think i don't have ability to create new thread?
Can some one help please?
My PD is Feb 2006 and I am EB3 India
Sorry to ask this question on this thread, but i think i don't have ability to create new thread?
Can some one help please?
My PD is Feb 2006 and I am EB3 India
a1b2c3
09-23 06:07 PM
same issue nsc rejected one time second time accepted
No comments:
Post a Comment