pani_6
08-21 03:48 PM
I believe they already answered the question: they claimed the previous allocation scheme was wrong and the current is correct. There is nothing more you can possibly get by questioning on this issue. Even if there is anything behind the curtain, that explanation covers everything perfectly and there is nothing you can do about it.
I saw that Ron told one "so depressed" in his Forum..that we can launch a law suit..against this new interpretation..however..I dont know its worth the time and effort..although uscis learns only by law suits..
Lets see next months Visa allocation for the new year and see where it starts from..I am hoping from Mid of 03..lets see..besides..only quick solution so far is the Visa capture ..dont know where it stands...
we got 20 more days to influence people about EB-3 numbers..what is the most effective thing to do collectively before he new Visa bull comes out..
Any idea Pappu..??.
I saw that Ron told one "so depressed" in his Forum..that we can launch a law suit..against this new interpretation..however..I dont know its worth the time and effort..although uscis learns only by law suits..
Lets see next months Visa allocation for the new year and see where it starts from..I am hoping from Mid of 03..lets see..besides..only quick solution so far is the Visa capture ..dont know where it stands...
we got 20 more days to influence people about EB-3 numbers..what is the most effective thing to do collectively before he new Visa bull comes out..
Any idea Pappu..??.
wallpaper wallpaper lady gaga judas
supers789
09-24 07:31 PM
will be current before on or Sept 2010.
Rayyan
08-19 10:49 AM
Hi All, I had a quick question.
My I-485 got approved earlier this week from NSC and I received the approval/welcome letter by USPS.
My online status is at post-decision activity and not at CPO.
Though my welcome notice says that I should receive the card in 3 weeks, I am wondering if I need to be at CPO status before that happens....also I read somewhere they may require another FP before CPO (that was talking more abt transfer cases, but mine has always been at NSC).....but nowhere in my approval notice does it ask for an FP.
I was wondering if I should just sit tight and wait for the physical card or try to find out more information.
Thanks so much.
My Status remains on Post Desecion activity and I got Green card within a week after it changed from CPO to Post decision activity.....
My I-485 got approved earlier this week from NSC and I received the approval/welcome letter by USPS.
My online status is at post-decision activity and not at CPO.
Though my welcome notice says that I should receive the card in 3 weeks, I am wondering if I need to be at CPO status before that happens....also I read somewhere they may require another FP before CPO (that was talking more abt transfer cases, but mine has always been at NSC).....but nowhere in my approval notice does it ask for an FP.
I was wondering if I should just sit tight and wait for the physical card or try to find out more information.
Thanks so much.
My Status remains on Post Desecion activity and I got Green card within a week after it changed from CPO to Post decision activity.....
2011 lady gaga judas wallpaper.
smsthss
09-30 02:57 PM
Thus you can use your cell phone to call a vonage # here in US and have it forwarded to india cell #. Works for me.
This is what i am doing to call a cell phone or any land line in india. Vonage has a call forwarding feature. Simply log in to your vonage account and go to features and configure the call forwarding feature.Configure such that the call is forwarded after 20 sec's. Intially vonage rings and after that it is forwarded to the india cell or landline forwarding number. Its free of charge as calling from vonage to india #'s is free. Hope this puts the debate to rest.
This is what i am doing to call a cell phone or any land line in india. Vonage has a call forwarding feature. Simply log in to your vonage account and go to features and configure the call forwarding feature.Configure such that the call is forwarded after 20 sec's. Intially vonage rings and after that it is forwarded to the india cell or landline forwarding number. Its free of charge as calling from vonage to india #'s is free. Hope this puts the debate to rest.
more...
chanduv23
07-09 08:58 PM
Just google Gandhigiri + USCIS and see the result - lot of blog sites have picked this up
GC_ASP
04-06 08:12 AM
EB-2 Movement in May
April 5
Will EB-2 India will advance "substantially" in May?
There are 18,000 persons with EB-2 priority dates in 2006 who are waiting for green cards, 13,000 of them from India.
Given the 7% country quota, we expect the India EB-2 to move forward in May between 2 weeks and 2 months.
* This is seems to be completely different from what they claimed "substantial" before.....:confused:
April 5
Will EB-2 India will advance "substantially" in May?
There are 18,000 persons with EB-2 priority dates in 2006 who are waiting for green cards, 13,000 of them from India.
Given the 7% country quota, we expect the India EB-2 to move forward in May between 2 weeks and 2 months.
* This is seems to be completely different from what they claimed "substantial" before.....:confused:
more...
rodnyb
04-01 01:00 PM
OK, DOS buffer issue.
A. LAW. If there is no inventory in EB2 I/C (meaning demand). Theoretically DOS should make EB2 I/C CURRENT. DOS/CIS are not that dumb, or at least as dumb as before. I would say, they are very competent now and we should appreciate their work, pre-adjudicate, publish demand data (DOS), inventory data (CIS) processing time (DOS). THEY know, from PERM, I-140, there are at least 2K demand permonth from EB2 I/C. SO they will just safely move a couple of month of PD to make sure there is demand >2800 for India/China, so they don't have to make it CURRENT (per law)
B. LOGISTICS. There could be denials, RFEs, although most (I believe almost all 100% pre-07/2007 EB2 I/C) should be pre-adjudicated now (THANK DOS CIS specifically did this so no processing time, and no waster numbers hopefully). That is why DOS has to consider that in their demand, and CIS has to consider that in inventory numbers
C TIMING. Charles is shooting a moving target as well (his job is not easy as he cannot predicate future 100% and has to follow law, and use all visa numbers, we should appreciate that). Charles has no control on CIS number accuracy (I am sure CIS is trying hard as well), how fast EB1/EB2ROW/EB2I-c pre-072007 could come in, hey even some CIS employees need vacation in summer. So he has to make sure things can be done before August, so August could be only a month for fine tuning, not massive approvals, new applications (CIS wont look at them any way but takes man power), to use up all numbers and have some new applicants to keep the inventory (demand) at decent level.
I am July 2007 PD, and we all have hopes, dreams, life, etc, can can distort our judgement. We can discuss, but may to suppoert each other, and those warriors in DC. But hey, things could happen against our best intentions, wishes, anything can happen. SO life it short, live once, enjoy the ride, love people, appreciate love, and HAVE a great weekend, have fun.
I too had similar thoughts.. why would CIS/DOS stop keeping buffers? Is there any particular reason? Once they complete all 7/2007 applications I think it makes sense to move the date for a few months so they can accept applications. Also, remember there will be new monthly quota getting allocated to all categories. So to use those numbers should they not be progressing dates?
[QUOTE=cbpds;2494204]Rodnyb,
The below number is depressing, however dont you think DOS/USCIS always believe in keeping buffer and they may push the dates somewhere into 2009 just to accept 485 filings?
Why do think they will stop keeping any buffer?
A. LAW. If there is no inventory in EB2 I/C (meaning demand). Theoretically DOS should make EB2 I/C CURRENT. DOS/CIS are not that dumb, or at least as dumb as before. I would say, they are very competent now and we should appreciate their work, pre-adjudicate, publish demand data (DOS), inventory data (CIS) processing time (DOS). THEY know, from PERM, I-140, there are at least 2K demand permonth from EB2 I/C. SO they will just safely move a couple of month of PD to make sure there is demand >2800 for India/China, so they don't have to make it CURRENT (per law)
B. LOGISTICS. There could be denials, RFEs, although most (I believe almost all 100% pre-07/2007 EB2 I/C) should be pre-adjudicated now (THANK DOS CIS specifically did this so no processing time, and no waster numbers hopefully). That is why DOS has to consider that in their demand, and CIS has to consider that in inventory numbers
C TIMING. Charles is shooting a moving target as well (his job is not easy as he cannot predicate future 100% and has to follow law, and use all visa numbers, we should appreciate that). Charles has no control on CIS number accuracy (I am sure CIS is trying hard as well), how fast EB1/EB2ROW/EB2I-c pre-072007 could come in, hey even some CIS employees need vacation in summer. So he has to make sure things can be done before August, so August could be only a month for fine tuning, not massive approvals, new applications (CIS wont look at them any way but takes man power), to use up all numbers and have some new applicants to keep the inventory (demand) at decent level.
I am July 2007 PD, and we all have hopes, dreams, life, etc, can can distort our judgement. We can discuss, but may to suppoert each other, and those warriors in DC. But hey, things could happen against our best intentions, wishes, anything can happen. SO life it short, live once, enjoy the ride, love people, appreciate love, and HAVE a great weekend, have fun.
I too had similar thoughts.. why would CIS/DOS stop keeping buffers? Is there any particular reason? Once they complete all 7/2007 applications I think it makes sense to move the date for a few months so they can accept applications. Also, remember there will be new monthly quota getting allocated to all categories. So to use those numbers should they not be progressing dates?
[QUOTE=cbpds;2494204]Rodnyb,
The below number is depressing, however dont you think DOS/USCIS always believe in keeping buffer and they may push the dates somewhere into 2009 just to accept 485 filings?
Why do think they will stop keeping any buffer?
2010 2010 wallpaper lady gaga judas
summitpointe
01-24 12:45 PM
I was told if you are going back to your home country, even if you don't have valid US Visa stamped, you don't need a transit visa. When you come back ofcourse you will have a vaild US visa
more...
drona
07-11 01:30 AM
Posted on Khabrein.info and NewsPost India
'Gandhigiri' by Indian green card seekers in US by Arun Kumar
Washington, July 11 (IANS) In an eloquent display of 'Gandhigiri', unhappy Indian green card seekers sent hundreds of flowers to the US immigration agency to protest a last minute reversal in policy that would impede their way to permanent residency.
Inspired by the hit Hindi movie "Lage Raho Munnabhai" that extolled Gandhian ways of non-violent protest, the green card applicants plan to send around a thousand flower deliveries to US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Emilio Gonzalez in a three-day campaign that started Tuesday.
The protest followed the abrupt reversal last week of a June announcement offering expedited processing of green card petitions for thousands of skilled foreign professionals working under H1-B visas - reserved for skilled workers in computing, engineering and other special professions.
Thousands of such visa holders scrambled and spent money on lawyers and medical exams to beat the July 1 deadline for green card applications. The abrupt change sent them back to the queue for 2008.
Besides India, skilled workers from China, Poland and many other countries will now have to spend more time and money to get the coveted green cards - a halfway house to US citizenship.
"The idea is to push them to honour their earlier notification," said Aman Kapoor, founder of Immigration Voice, a forum that inspired the unusual protest.
Indians are the worst hit by country quota caps for immigration visas, which treat a billion strong India, boasting a highly skilled workforce, on par with a country like Trinidad and Tobago of one million souls, he said.
On its part, the USCIS response was equally pacific. It plans to forward the flowers to Walter Reed Army Medical Centre and Bethesda Naval Hospital in Washington, the main facilities treating US soldiers wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan, said Gonzales in a statement on the agency website.
http://www.khabrein.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2103&Itemid=88
http://newspostindia.com/report-6897
'Gandhigiri' by Indian green card seekers in US by Arun Kumar
Washington, July 11 (IANS) In an eloquent display of 'Gandhigiri', unhappy Indian green card seekers sent hundreds of flowers to the US immigration agency to protest a last minute reversal in policy that would impede their way to permanent residency.
Inspired by the hit Hindi movie "Lage Raho Munnabhai" that extolled Gandhian ways of non-violent protest, the green card applicants plan to send around a thousand flower deliveries to US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Emilio Gonzalez in a three-day campaign that started Tuesday.
The protest followed the abrupt reversal last week of a June announcement offering expedited processing of green card petitions for thousands of skilled foreign professionals working under H1-B visas - reserved for skilled workers in computing, engineering and other special professions.
Thousands of such visa holders scrambled and spent money on lawyers and medical exams to beat the July 1 deadline for green card applications. The abrupt change sent them back to the queue for 2008.
Besides India, skilled workers from China, Poland and many other countries will now have to spend more time and money to get the coveted green cards - a halfway house to US citizenship.
"The idea is to push them to honour their earlier notification," said Aman Kapoor, founder of Immigration Voice, a forum that inspired the unusual protest.
Indians are the worst hit by country quota caps for immigration visas, which treat a billion strong India, boasting a highly skilled workforce, on par with a country like Trinidad and Tobago of one million souls, he said.
On its part, the USCIS response was equally pacific. It plans to forward the flowers to Walter Reed Army Medical Centre and Bethesda Naval Hospital in Washington, the main facilities treating US soldiers wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan, said Gonzales in a statement on the agency website.
http://www.khabrein.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2103&Itemid=88
http://newspostindia.com/report-6897
hair house Lady Gaga Judas Cover:
apb
10-02 02:45 PM
Awaiting interview call when the dates are current.
more...
Leo07
09-10 10:07 AM
^^^^^^^^^^^^bump^^^^^^^
hot lady gaga judas wallpaper.
Nil
03-10 08:44 PM
BTW guys,
Thanks for those who think the idea has merit.
i suddenly see a red dot against my username for trying to think out of the box:
"please dont be foolish and waste everyones time with ur insane proposal? thanks"
It is OK - whoever wanted to go this length. FYI, 'have been a member of IV and a donor since inception. Is anyone from the core who thinks this idea is insane?
Like-minded folks - let us work on it
How about having a list of action items and getting an opinion from the IV core on them?
Thanks for those who think the idea has merit.
i suddenly see a red dot against my username for trying to think out of the box:
"please dont be foolish and waste everyones time with ur insane proposal? thanks"
It is OK - whoever wanted to go this length. FYI, 'have been a member of IV and a donor since inception. Is anyone from the core who thinks this idea is insane?
Like-minded folks - let us work on it
How about having a list of action items and getting an opinion from the IV core on them?
more...
house tattoo wallpaper Lady Gaga
polapragada
09-10 11:23 PM
I just read DICE
http://seeker.dice.com/olc/thread.jspa?threadID=9965&tstart=0
They are very active when compared to us to stop this bill
I think we need to act more. Rather than calling then again and again and irritate them,
I think we should start the flowers campain again
1. Where ever possible we need to educate our american fellow workes and people in these forums that this bill is about
a. People already working in US
b. They is no possibility to they will loose their jobs
c. We already live here
d. By increasing H1B is the real trouble for the American Citizens not GC
http://seeker.dice.com/olc/thread.jspa?threadID=9965&tstart=0
They are very active when compared to us to stop this bill
I think we need to act more. Rather than calling then again and again and irritate them,
I think we should start the flowers campain again
1. Where ever possible we need to educate our american fellow workes and people in these forums that this bill is about
a. People already working in US
b. They is no possibility to they will loose their jobs
c. We already live here
d. By increasing H1B is the real trouble for the American Citizens not GC
tattoo lady gaga judas wallpaper.
optimystic
03-24 03:43 PM
-------------------------------------
Based on the criteria above I dont see how it is illegal to ask what type of work authorization one has, and if EAD , how long it is valid. It may be illegal to disqualify a candidate who has EAD with validity for the required amount of time. But I sure can ask about the details within legal limits, can't I?
-------------------------------------
It is illegal... On I-9 it clearly says that an employer can not deny employment because of an expiry date on a valid work authorization document. This makes sense, since the employer does not have any authority to check for this candidate's ability to renew the authorization, neither the candidate is obligated to share that information. Per DHS & DOL once you have valid EAD, you are good to go! I am curious though who should be responsible for educating these employers!:confused:
Good to know. As to who should be responsible to educate the employers....there's no doubt in my mind ! It should be us - prospective employees - applying for job. If we don't raise the issue, then who else will do it for us !!!
People can follow a polite plan of action for such questions...
- Be aware of the law
- Be prepared to respond back politely - giving the bare minimum info that would be sufficient
- Point politely to the law during interviews if pressed hard to divulge details.
- If you see the interview going no where, without having to divulge the details, then at that point its a matter of consience....If you had EAD with enough validity, and you think/guess, that the employer is only concerned with people with soon expiring EADs, and if you want the job bad, then may be you can give it a shot and divulge your details. But as much as possible one should shirk the issue politely until you pass the interview process and they are ready to hire... Divulging at that point is beneficial since you know if you get rejected at the point, it was purely because of EAD issue and can take them for a task. If you divulged too early then they could hide behind other reasons for not hiring you.....(unless the employer is CapitolOne, and the HR guy sends out an email blatantly providing proof of discrimination and leaving themselves at your mercy to be sued :) )
Based on the criteria above I dont see how it is illegal to ask what type of work authorization one has, and if EAD , how long it is valid. It may be illegal to disqualify a candidate who has EAD with validity for the required amount of time. But I sure can ask about the details within legal limits, can't I?
-------------------------------------
It is illegal... On I-9 it clearly says that an employer can not deny employment because of an expiry date on a valid work authorization document. This makes sense, since the employer does not have any authority to check for this candidate's ability to renew the authorization, neither the candidate is obligated to share that information. Per DHS & DOL once you have valid EAD, you are good to go! I am curious though who should be responsible for educating these employers!:confused:
Good to know. As to who should be responsible to educate the employers....there's no doubt in my mind ! It should be us - prospective employees - applying for job. If we don't raise the issue, then who else will do it for us !!!
People can follow a polite plan of action for such questions...
- Be aware of the law
- Be prepared to respond back politely - giving the bare minimum info that would be sufficient
- Point politely to the law during interviews if pressed hard to divulge details.
- If you see the interview going no where, without having to divulge the details, then at that point its a matter of consience....If you had EAD with enough validity, and you think/guess, that the employer is only concerned with people with soon expiring EADs, and if you want the job bad, then may be you can give it a shot and divulge your details. But as much as possible one should shirk the issue politely until you pass the interview process and they are ready to hire... Divulging at that point is beneficial since you know if you get rejected at the point, it was purely because of EAD issue and can take them for a task. If you divulged too early then they could hide behind other reasons for not hiring you.....(unless the employer is CapitolOne, and the HR guy sends out an email blatantly providing proof of discrimination and leaving themselves at your mercy to be sued :) )
more...
pictures hair wallpaper lady gaga judas
danu2007
07-09 07:44 PM
For those who interested in sending email to media:-
mcuban@hd.net,
wnelson@hd.net,
nytnews@nytimes.com,
news-tips@nytimes.com,
washington@nytimes.com,
AmericasNewsroom@foxnews.com,
satya.prakash@hindustantimes.com,
pmagazine@hindustantimes.com,
aditya.ghosh@hindustantimes.com,
Fatherjonathan@foxnews.com,
Drmanny@foxnews.com,
Beltway@foxnews.com,
Myword@foxnews.com,
Bigstory-weekend@foxnews.com,
Bigstoryweekend@foxnews.com,
Bullsandbears@foxnews.com,
Cash@foxnews.com,
Cavuto@foxnews.com,
Fncimag@foxnews.com,
Forbes@foxnews.com,
Friends@foxnews.com,
Feedback@foxnews.com,
Jamie@foxnews.com,
Fncspecials@foxnews.com,
FNS@foxnews.com,
Newswatch@foxnews.com,
Foxreport@foxnews.com,
Atlarge@foxnews.com,
Heartland@foxnews.com,
JER@foxnews.com,
Lineup@foxnews.com,
Ontherecord@foxnews.com,
Oreilly@foxnews.com,
Redeye@foxnews.com,
Special@foxnews.com,
Studiob@foxnews.com,
Hemmer@foxnews.com,
Colonelscorner@foxnews.com,
Housecall@foxnews.com,
Hannity@foxnews.com,
Colmes@foxnews.com,
Letters@newsweek.com,
Customer.Care@newsweek.com,
viewerservices@msnbc.com,
today@nbc.com,
wt@nbc.com,
mtp@nbc.com,
abc.news.magazines@abc.com,
letters@msnbc.com
mcuban@hd.net,
wnelson@hd.net,
nytnews@nytimes.com,
news-tips@nytimes.com,
washington@nytimes.com,
AmericasNewsroom@foxnews.com,
satya.prakash@hindustantimes.com,
pmagazine@hindustantimes.com,
aditya.ghosh@hindustantimes.com,
Fatherjonathan@foxnews.com,
Drmanny@foxnews.com,
Beltway@foxnews.com,
Myword@foxnews.com,
Bigstory-weekend@foxnews.com,
Bigstoryweekend@foxnews.com,
Bullsandbears@foxnews.com,
Cash@foxnews.com,
Cavuto@foxnews.com,
Fncimag@foxnews.com,
Forbes@foxnews.com,
Friends@foxnews.com,
Feedback@foxnews.com,
Jamie@foxnews.com,
Fncspecials@foxnews.com,
FNS@foxnews.com,
Newswatch@foxnews.com,
Foxreport@foxnews.com,
Atlarge@foxnews.com,
Heartland@foxnews.com,
JER@foxnews.com,
Lineup@foxnews.com,
Ontherecord@foxnews.com,
Oreilly@foxnews.com,
Redeye@foxnews.com,
Special@foxnews.com,
Studiob@foxnews.com,
Hemmer@foxnews.com,
Colonelscorner@foxnews.com,
Housecall@foxnews.com,
Hannity@foxnews.com,
Colmes@foxnews.com,
Letters@newsweek.com,
Customer.Care@newsweek.com,
viewerservices@msnbc.com,
today@nbc.com,
wt@nbc.com,
mtp@nbc.com,
abc.news.magazines@abc.com,
letters@msnbc.com
dresses makeup lady gaga judas video
immi2006
06-27 10:52 AM
Husband Files for 140+ 485 +EAD+AP
Adds Spouse's name
Wife FIles - 1485+ I140 (No EAD, NO AP) and adds husband's name
Adds Spouse's name
Wife FIles - 1485+ I140 (No EAD, NO AP) and adds husband's name
more...
makeup tattoo lady gaga judas art.
radhay
06-29 04:08 PM
same thing from my law firrm..
"I have received the following update from the American Immigration
Lawyers Assoc. regarding the July quota:
Update on July Visa Availability
We are hearing from multiple sources that, on Monday or Tuesday of next
week, State Department plans to issue a revised Visa Bulletin for July
2007. This revised Bulletin would retrogress some or all of the
employment-based categories, very likely to the point of unavailable.
Reports from AILA members about unusual levels and types of activities
by USCIS indicate a particular push to adjudicate employment-based
adjustments currently in the pipeline so as to exhaust visa numbers for
fiscal year 2007.
This follows the actions of USCIS in June, when it began rejecting EB-3
"Other Worker" adjustment applications even though the Visa Bulletin
showed an October 2001 cut-off date, on the basis that the "Other
Worker" numbers for the year had been exhausted."
What the heck?????
"I have received the following update from the American Immigration
Lawyers Assoc. regarding the July quota:
Update on July Visa Availability
We are hearing from multiple sources that, on Monday or Tuesday of next
week, State Department plans to issue a revised Visa Bulletin for July
2007. This revised Bulletin would retrogress some or all of the
employment-based categories, very likely to the point of unavailable.
Reports from AILA members about unusual levels and types of activities
by USCIS indicate a particular push to adjudicate employment-based
adjustments currently in the pipeline so as to exhaust visa numbers for
fiscal year 2007.
This follows the actions of USCIS in June, when it began rejecting EB-3
"Other Worker" adjustment applications even though the Visa Bulletin
showed an October 2001 cut-off date, on the basis that the "Other
Worker" numbers for the year had been exhausted."
What the heck?????
girlfriend 2010 Lady Gaga Judas Cover:
chanduv23
09-15 10:29 AM
Thanks folks for your wishes. I had not been active on the volunteering side due to multiple reasons and other day to day challenges and career.
I agree with a lot of people in the community that it is a challenge to balance a challenging personal life, especially in a country like America where regular day to day life poses many challenges.
In the green card process, the challenge is just not about one needing a job to fulfill day to day needs but to secure a future for him/her and family.
A lot of people I have come across through IV have been absolutely amazing in stepping up and doing what they do and this platform provided by IV (Aman, Pappu, Jay etc..) has been a blessing for all of us.
I have written to IV core that I will continue to support IV and its activities.
I agree with a lot of people in the community that it is a challenge to balance a challenging personal life, especially in a country like America where regular day to day life poses many challenges.
In the green card process, the challenge is just not about one needing a job to fulfill day to day needs but to secure a future for him/her and family.
A lot of people I have come across through IV have been absolutely amazing in stepping up and doing what they do and this platform provided by IV (Aman, Pappu, Jay etc..) has been a blessing for all of us.
I have written to IV core that I will continue to support IV and its activities.
hairstyles Lady Gaga Judas Cover: Amrita
ilikekilo
01-24 01:08 PM
Patience :). Air India, Jet and Kingfisher have plenty of long range airliners on order with Boeing (http://active.boeing.com/commercial/orders/index.cfm?content=timeperiodselection.cfm&pageid=m15523) and Airbus (http://www.airbus.com/en/corporate/orders_and_deliveries/).
Jet airways from Chennai is also decent... CHennai - Brussels - Newark
U dont need a transit visa
Jet airways from Chennai is also decent... CHennai - Brussels - Newark
U dont need a transit visa
pappu
08-04 06:43 PM
FBI Name Check
Copyright � Triceiver.com
All applicants for immigration benefits must undergo background security checks, and one of them is the FBI name check. It is conducted by the FBI National Name Check Program Section (NNCPS). Since 2003, many green card (I-485) and naturalization applications have been significantly delayed by this process, sometimes by several years! More importantly, immigrants affected by this processing delay are often left in complete darkness. USCIS has adopted a policy that it will not release any information regarding name checks to applicants. Similarly, the FBI has practically shut down all email and phone communications previously available to immigrants.
How FBI name check works?
FBI name check, in short, is to compare a person's name against the Central Records System and see if there is a matching record. However, this seemingly simple process can be quite complicated in some cases.
1. The Central Records System (CRS) is huge
The CRS contains all information which the FBI has acquired during many years of law enforcement activities. It has numerous administrative, applicant, criminal, personnel, and other types of files, related to not only individuals, but companies and foreign intelligence matters also. Certain records are stored in the FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C., while others are maintained by field offices across the United States.
When a name check request is received, the FBI conducts a search of the individual's name in the CRS' General Indices. In addition to the person's full name, the FBI will also use different combinations and variations of the same name.
The General Indices have two types of entries according to the FBI:
A "main" entry - an entry that carries the name corresponding with the subject of a file contained in the CRS. A main file name thus refers to an individual who is the subject of an FBI investigaton.
A "reference" entry - an entry, sometimes called a "cross-reference," that generally only mentions or references an individual, organization, etc., contained in a document located in another "main" file. So a reference is someone whose name only appears in an investigation.
The FBI name check will search both "main" files and "reference" files. In comparison, the FBI Privacy Act request searches main files only. The Privacy Act request is sometimes referred to as FOIPA request, Freedom of Information and Privacy Act. So when an I-485 filer receives a "No Record" letter from the FBI in response to their FOIPA request, it only means that his or her name doesn't match any "main" entry.
During a name search, the FBI first checks the person's name electronically against the Universal Index contained in a database called Automated Case Support (ACS) system. For most people (68% according to the FBI), the results come back with "No Record" within 48 hours, meaning that their name checks are considered cleared. If there is a match, called a "hit," an agent must manually review the file or entry. This secondary name search usually identifies additional people as having "No Record." According to the FBI, about 10% of name check requests must go through yet a third level of review, during which the matching record must be retrieved from the source. But there is a problem:
2. Not all records are digitized and many are still paper documents
If the matching record has a digital copy in the ACS, it can be reviewed quickly. Otherwise paper documents must be transported to the reviewer from one of the FBI field offices which are located all over the country. This could cause significant delays. The name check result after this review will be forwarded to the requesting agency such as the USCIS.
3. Sheer volume of name check requests from multiple agencies
Although the name check itself could take a long time in some cases, it is not the bottle neck. The more serious problem is the time it takes for an analyst to actually get to a case after a "hit," due to backlogs. This is probably the No.1 reason for a lot of cases that are stuck in FBI name checks.
The FBI name check backlog may have several causes, and one of them is the sheer volume of requests. In addition to USCIS, many other Federal agencies, congressional committees, as well as state and local law enforcement agencies, all request name checks as part of their background investigation or clearance processes. According to Michael Cannon, Section Chief of NNCP, the FBI processed 3.7 million name checks in 2005, compared to about 2.5 million/year before September 11, 2001. In 2006, the USCIS alone sends more than 27,700 requests on a weekly basis.
Moreover, it is not clear how strictly the FBI follows the order of first-in, first-out. It is particular difficult to find out exactly how the FBI would queue cases that have returned with potential matching records. From the simple fact that some name-check cases can be pending for several years, and not all of them are that complicated, the FBI's queuing method may need a review of its own.
4. Lengthy name check process and national security
Although conducting name checks is an essential step in identifying national security and public safety concerns, the current process may not achieve its intended objectives. The reason is that in almost all cases, a person whose name check is pending is currently present in the United States. So the lengthy process actually extends an individual's stay in the US. If it takes years to come to a conclusion that the person is indeed a security threat, what will happen during those years? In this sense, timely processing of name checks is not only a relief to legal immigrants, but a must for national security reasons.
5. It is difficult to expedite FBI name checks
In 2007, the USCIS established new policies on expediting FBI name checks and the criteria are very limited. The USCIS may demand expedited handling only if the case involves military deployment, age-out or sunset provisions, loss of certain benefits, or other compelling reasons such as critical medical conditions. It specifically stated that Writ of Mandamus (WOM) - a lawsuit forcing the government to act quickly after an unreasonable delay - would no longer qualify as one.
Writing to Senators, Congressmen, or even the First Lady, have not shown as much success as many were hoping for. In fact, most Congressional inquires are now simply coming back with "case pending" responses. Some offices have stated that they will no longer contact the FBI for cases pending less than a year, citing an increasing number of letters asking for assistance. However, for most poeple, contacting congressional representives is one of very few channels still available to receive any information regarding their pending cases.
6. The name check situation may get even worse, before it improves
According to the USCIS Ombudsman, there is a staggering 329,160 FBI name check cases pending as of May 2007. Among them, 211,341 (64%) have been pending more than 90 days and approximately 32 percent (106,738) pending more than one year. Now with the biggest fee increase in decades, taking effect July 30th, 2007, The USCIS has proposed to allocate more funds toward the name check process. And the FBI indicated that additional funding would allow them to add more staff to speed up the process and reduce backlogs. Many are skeptical, but we certainly hope that they will achieve some of the goals this time.
Copyright � Triceiver.com
All applicants for immigration benefits must undergo background security checks, and one of them is the FBI name check. It is conducted by the FBI National Name Check Program Section (NNCPS). Since 2003, many green card (I-485) and naturalization applications have been significantly delayed by this process, sometimes by several years! More importantly, immigrants affected by this processing delay are often left in complete darkness. USCIS has adopted a policy that it will not release any information regarding name checks to applicants. Similarly, the FBI has practically shut down all email and phone communications previously available to immigrants.
How FBI name check works?
FBI name check, in short, is to compare a person's name against the Central Records System and see if there is a matching record. However, this seemingly simple process can be quite complicated in some cases.
1. The Central Records System (CRS) is huge
The CRS contains all information which the FBI has acquired during many years of law enforcement activities. It has numerous administrative, applicant, criminal, personnel, and other types of files, related to not only individuals, but companies and foreign intelligence matters also. Certain records are stored in the FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C., while others are maintained by field offices across the United States.
When a name check request is received, the FBI conducts a search of the individual's name in the CRS' General Indices. In addition to the person's full name, the FBI will also use different combinations and variations of the same name.
The General Indices have two types of entries according to the FBI:
A "main" entry - an entry that carries the name corresponding with the subject of a file contained in the CRS. A main file name thus refers to an individual who is the subject of an FBI investigaton.
A "reference" entry - an entry, sometimes called a "cross-reference," that generally only mentions or references an individual, organization, etc., contained in a document located in another "main" file. So a reference is someone whose name only appears in an investigation.
The FBI name check will search both "main" files and "reference" files. In comparison, the FBI Privacy Act request searches main files only. The Privacy Act request is sometimes referred to as FOIPA request, Freedom of Information and Privacy Act. So when an I-485 filer receives a "No Record" letter from the FBI in response to their FOIPA request, it only means that his or her name doesn't match any "main" entry.
During a name search, the FBI first checks the person's name electronically against the Universal Index contained in a database called Automated Case Support (ACS) system. For most people (68% according to the FBI), the results come back with "No Record" within 48 hours, meaning that their name checks are considered cleared. If there is a match, called a "hit," an agent must manually review the file or entry. This secondary name search usually identifies additional people as having "No Record." According to the FBI, about 10% of name check requests must go through yet a third level of review, during which the matching record must be retrieved from the source. But there is a problem:
2. Not all records are digitized and many are still paper documents
If the matching record has a digital copy in the ACS, it can be reviewed quickly. Otherwise paper documents must be transported to the reviewer from one of the FBI field offices which are located all over the country. This could cause significant delays. The name check result after this review will be forwarded to the requesting agency such as the USCIS.
3. Sheer volume of name check requests from multiple agencies
Although the name check itself could take a long time in some cases, it is not the bottle neck. The more serious problem is the time it takes for an analyst to actually get to a case after a "hit," due to backlogs. This is probably the No.1 reason for a lot of cases that are stuck in FBI name checks.
The FBI name check backlog may have several causes, and one of them is the sheer volume of requests. In addition to USCIS, many other Federal agencies, congressional committees, as well as state and local law enforcement agencies, all request name checks as part of their background investigation or clearance processes. According to Michael Cannon, Section Chief of NNCP, the FBI processed 3.7 million name checks in 2005, compared to about 2.5 million/year before September 11, 2001. In 2006, the USCIS alone sends more than 27,700 requests on a weekly basis.
Moreover, it is not clear how strictly the FBI follows the order of first-in, first-out. It is particular difficult to find out exactly how the FBI would queue cases that have returned with potential matching records. From the simple fact that some name-check cases can be pending for several years, and not all of them are that complicated, the FBI's queuing method may need a review of its own.
4. Lengthy name check process and national security
Although conducting name checks is an essential step in identifying national security and public safety concerns, the current process may not achieve its intended objectives. The reason is that in almost all cases, a person whose name check is pending is currently present in the United States. So the lengthy process actually extends an individual's stay in the US. If it takes years to come to a conclusion that the person is indeed a security threat, what will happen during those years? In this sense, timely processing of name checks is not only a relief to legal immigrants, but a must for national security reasons.
5. It is difficult to expedite FBI name checks
In 2007, the USCIS established new policies on expediting FBI name checks and the criteria are very limited. The USCIS may demand expedited handling only if the case involves military deployment, age-out or sunset provisions, loss of certain benefits, or other compelling reasons such as critical medical conditions. It specifically stated that Writ of Mandamus (WOM) - a lawsuit forcing the government to act quickly after an unreasonable delay - would no longer qualify as one.
Writing to Senators, Congressmen, or even the First Lady, have not shown as much success as many were hoping for. In fact, most Congressional inquires are now simply coming back with "case pending" responses. Some offices have stated that they will no longer contact the FBI for cases pending less than a year, citing an increasing number of letters asking for assistance. However, for most poeple, contacting congressional representives is one of very few channels still available to receive any information regarding their pending cases.
6. The name check situation may get even worse, before it improves
According to the USCIS Ombudsman, there is a staggering 329,160 FBI name check cases pending as of May 2007. Among them, 211,341 (64%) have been pending more than 90 days and approximately 32 percent (106,738) pending more than one year. Now with the biggest fee increase in decades, taking effect July 30th, 2007, The USCIS has proposed to allocate more funds toward the name check process. And the FBI indicated that additional funding would allow them to add more staff to speed up the process and reduce backlogs. Many are skeptical, but we certainly hope that they will achieve some of the goals this time.
gc_on_demand
04-01 03:59 PM
When you say "according the our calculations", and you can only come up with years (& not 1 year, 2 year), you have obviously not done a very accurate calculation/guestimation.
I wouldn't put too much stock into it.
There are two years (2006 and 2007 ) from 2006 to 2007 and you know language of all lawyers, so he is not wrong here too. I bet you if you can convince him to say 1-2 or 3 years.
I wouldn't put too much stock into it.
There are two years (2006 and 2007 ) from 2006 to 2007 and you know language of all lawyers, so he is not wrong here too. I bet you if you can convince him to say 1-2 or 3 years.
No comments:
Post a Comment