pappu
11-06 03:28 PM
Check this:
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Liang%2010-30-07.pdf
Defendants assert that the background check is a complex
process that must accommodate an extremely large volume of requests
from the USCIS. Given the backlog of name-check requests and the
FBI�s limited resources, they maintain that the delay of two and a
half years in processing Mr. Liang�s background check is not
unreasonable. There is some validity to these points, and the
Court appreciates that the name-check process is indeed complex and
resource-intensive. But limited resources or not, a common-sense
rule of reason dictates that if the FBI was performing background
checks with due diligence, it would not take two and a half years
to process Mr. Liang�s name. While the Court is sympathetic to the
demands placed on the FBI and the limited ability of the USCIS to
control how the FBI allocates its resources, a lack of sufficient
resources devoted to name-check operations is a matter for the
agencies to take up between themselves or with Congress. The
executive branch must decide for itself how best to meet its
statutory duties; this Court can only decide whether or not those
duties have been met.
See Dong, 2007 WL 2601107 at *11 (�[I]t is
not the place of the judicial branch to weigh a plaintiff�s clear
right to administrative action against the agency�s burdens in
complying.�).
Moreover, although there is no Congressionally mandated
timetable for the processing of I-485 applications, Congress has by
statute expressed its view of what a reasonable amount of time is:
�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.� 8 U.S.C. � 1571.
The Court recognizes that this statute was enacted prior to the
events of September 11, 2001, and that the burdens on agencies with
responsibility for immigration matters have since increased.
Nonetheless, Plaintiffs� applications have been pending for five
times the length of the period identified by Congress.
Defendants argue that expediting Mr. Liang�s name check will
prejudice other applicants who have been waiting longer than he -in some cases, since as long as December, 2002.
While this would
be unfortunate, Defendants� failure to fulfill their statutory duty
to other applicants has no bearing on whether they have fulfilled
their statutory duty to Plaintiffs, and thus cannot serve as a
basis for denying Plaintiffs� motion.
While Defendants worry that
granting Plaintiffs relief may reward �the more litigious
applicants� or encourage other applicants to file lawsuits,
�perhaps recognizing this possibility will provide the defendants
with adequate incentive to begin processing [I-485] applications in
a lawful and timely fashion in order to obviate the applicants�
need to resort to the courts for redress.� Dong, 2007 WL 2601107
at *12.
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Liang%2010-30-07.pdf
Defendants assert that the background check is a complex
process that must accommodate an extremely large volume of requests
from the USCIS. Given the backlog of name-check requests and the
FBI�s limited resources, they maintain that the delay of two and a
half years in processing Mr. Liang�s background check is not
unreasonable. There is some validity to these points, and the
Court appreciates that the name-check process is indeed complex and
resource-intensive. But limited resources or not, a common-sense
rule of reason dictates that if the FBI was performing background
checks with due diligence, it would not take two and a half years
to process Mr. Liang�s name. While the Court is sympathetic to the
demands placed on the FBI and the limited ability of the USCIS to
control how the FBI allocates its resources, a lack of sufficient
resources devoted to name-check operations is a matter for the
agencies to take up between themselves or with Congress. The
executive branch must decide for itself how best to meet its
statutory duties; this Court can only decide whether or not those
duties have been met.
See Dong, 2007 WL 2601107 at *11 (�[I]t is
not the place of the judicial branch to weigh a plaintiff�s clear
right to administrative action against the agency�s burdens in
complying.�).
Moreover, although there is no Congressionally mandated
timetable for the processing of I-485 applications, Congress has by
statute expressed its view of what a reasonable amount of time is:
�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.� 8 U.S.C. � 1571.
The Court recognizes that this statute was enacted prior to the
events of September 11, 2001, and that the burdens on agencies with
responsibility for immigration matters have since increased.
Nonetheless, Plaintiffs� applications have been pending for five
times the length of the period identified by Congress.
Defendants argue that expediting Mr. Liang�s name check will
prejudice other applicants who have been waiting longer than he -in some cases, since as long as December, 2002.
While this would
be unfortunate, Defendants� failure to fulfill their statutory duty
to other applicants has no bearing on whether they have fulfilled
their statutory duty to Plaintiffs, and thus cannot serve as a
basis for denying Plaintiffs� motion.
While Defendants worry that
granting Plaintiffs relief may reward �the more litigious
applicants� or encourage other applicants to file lawsuits,
�perhaps recognizing this possibility will provide the defendants
with adequate incentive to begin processing [I-485] applications in
a lawful and timely fashion in order to obviate the applicants�
need to resort to the courts for redress.� Dong, 2007 WL 2601107
at *12.
wallpaper Anna Faris Movie Images and
jkays94
06-15 12:45 PM
Does the letter need to have the same information as the LC. I can get a non I-485 related employment verification letter but here is the catch. The employer is dilly dallying on filing for I-485. The employer can give a letter with my job title which is "XYZ Developer" include salary, length of employment etc. But the "Final Determination" copy that I have says occupation: Computer Software Engineers, 15-1031. Does the letter have to state "Computer Software Engineer" or can it state "XYZ Developer" ? If it has to be the former that will only alert them that I am bypassing their stonewalling and the employer is only likely to refuse to include that as the job title. So which is which ? The job specific title ie "XYZ Developer" or the DOL title per the "Final Determination"
calabor2001
02-12 03:16 PM
Waiting since Jan. 7th 2008.
2011 Anna Faris in comedy movie The
nixstor
07-10 07:58 PM
Guys, Paula John now is going to talk about our issue, stay tuned..........
Is she done?
Is she done?
more...
desi3933
06-17 01:33 PM
......You are NOT supposed to have immigration intent when you apply F1. .....
Correct. You are right.
One must not have immigration intent at the time of applying for F1 visa or entering USA using F1 visa. However, intent can change over time. Please google for 30-60-90 day rule.
In fact, one can file for I-485 after 90 days of F1 visa status, if he/she is otherwise eligible.
.
Correct. You are right.
One must not have immigration intent at the time of applying for F1 visa or entering USA using F1 visa. However, intent can change over time. Please google for 30-60-90 day rule.
In fact, one can file for I-485 after 90 days of F1 visa status, if he/she is otherwise eligible.
.
pappu
01-08 10:31 AM
Everyone that took part in the IV lobby day in September 2007 should get in touch with the lawmaker offices now and request them for letters. If you have met your local lawmaker offices through state chapters or on your own, it is time to visit them again for this request.
more...
chanduv23
09-10 11:31 AM
Got CPO email around 10.45 am today for both me and my wife. Big thanks to IV. Big thanks to Pappu, Jay, Aman, Anu ad all my wonderful IV friends. I will also continue supporting Iv and activities time to time.
*** DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS E-MAIL ***
The last processing action taken on your case
Receipt Number: SRCXXXXXXXXX
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Your Case Status: Card/ Document Production
On September 10, 2010, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service at 1-800-375-5283.
*** DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS E-MAIL ***
The last processing action taken on your case
Receipt Number: SRCXXXXXXXXX
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Your Case Status: Card/ Document Production
On September 10, 2010, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service at 1-800-375-5283.
2010 anna faris movies
old_hat
05-11 12:26 AM
Go f*** yourself with nonsense about logic. Wasn't it your compatriot from India who started writing nonsense about americans here.
This is precisely the problem with Indian mentality that average americans interacted with americans complain about. Unfortunately IDIOTIC indians such as yourself think for some reason you have a monopoly on logic, when you are the one who involve in emotional arguing as can be evidenced in this thread. Read the last 1 page
dude you trying to prove a point. if you get distracted your argument is lost. name calling "fuck you", "idiot", "morons" do not even tingle me. may as well write an auto slang generator.
This is precisely the problem with Indian mentality that average americans interacted with americans complain about. Unfortunately IDIOTIC indians such as yourself think for some reason you have a monopoly on logic, when you are the one who involve in emotional arguing as can be evidenced in this thread. Read the last 1 page
dude you trying to prove a point. if you get distracted your argument is lost. name calling "fuck you", "idiot", "morons" do not even tingle me. may as well write an auto slang generator.
more...
Saralayar
01-07 11:14 PM
Been here since 1998. Filed labor in 01 but was revoked due to tech downturn. Filed again in 05. Fortunately my GC was approved last Aug.
I think the final goal for most folks is citizenship.. including some of those who dont want to stay here permanently. Waiting 15 - 20 years for citizenship makes no sense.. if they are thinking of giving it to illegals in 10 years, whats wrong in asking?
Good. Welcome to the good school of thoughts..
I think the final goal for most folks is citizenship.. including some of those who dont want to stay here permanently. Waiting 15 - 20 years for citizenship makes no sense.. if they are thinking of giving it to illegals in 10 years, whats wrong in asking?
Good. Welcome to the good school of thoughts..
hair ANNA FARIS SCARY MOVIE PICS
msekhargc
01-08 10:25 AM
great idea.
I will send the letters after returing from India
I will send the letters after returing from India
more...
pitha
07-09 09:19 PM
It�s about exposing the evil nature and mean spiritedness of USCIS and Emilio Gonzales in a peaceful manner. He can forward it to whomever but we have exposed uscis evil deeds in a peaseful manner
He will get credit for all these flowers, and we will soung stupid that we just care obout our-slves but USCIS cares abou veterans.
USCIS people...trying to make fun of our misery
He will get credit for all these flowers, and we will soung stupid that we just care obout our-slves but USCIS cares abou veterans.
USCIS people...trying to make fun of our misery
hot anna faris scary movie 2.
transpass
09-29 09:59 AM
CAdude,
can u pls post the link for FAQ?
can u pls post the link for FAQ?
more...
house Anna Faris
reno_john
05-26 06:58 PM
the number in red on your visa, it will be on the right side of the visa page,
tattoo Anna Faris on the red carpet
pani_6
08-21 08:47 PM
current Visa bullettin does not give any info about next months...its talks about other workers..can you point to the sentence where it says it going to be april01-nov 01??..
Besides..you have been waiting very long from 01..just like me..incruiating..wait..
The current visa bulletin says EB3 PDs may go back to the level that was in June 08 visa bulletin or worser. So it is very likely that EB3 will be anywhere between Apr 2001 to Nov 2001. Personally I would be happy if it remained at least beyond May 2001.
I dont see EB3 moving to 2002 unless USCIS wants to agressively move it forward, so that they can continue their unfair trend of procesing some out of order low hanging fruit cases in EB3 category, just because they are sitting on the top of their applications pile, even if they had much later PDs. Just like they are doing with EB2
What will unite people is to fight against the common pain point... *Unfair advantage given to out of order applicants* , whether it be EB2 or EB3, who are much later in the queue, but some how are on the top of application piles, and easily accessible to IOs- who are making DOS move the PDs, just so that they can clear of their tables by approving these cases, rather than trying to access applications in FIFO and follow a fair process.
The whole EB2-EB3 divide arose out of this unfair practice of USCIS. Which just on their whim move PDs forward , be it EB3 or EB2. It just happened, that EB2 date has been moved more aggressively, probably because there is less backlog there. But looking at all the EB2 people still waiting with 2003, 2004 PDs while 2006 are getting approvals, indicates that the real problem is USCIS not doing due diligence to identify the right cases to be processed next and get the exact count of such cases.
Just asking them to recapture visa numbers or cyring foul against wasted numbers etc will still not solve the problem unless we also FORCE them to follow FIFO and process cases FAIRLY. And do their due diligence to spend some time and put their application piles in proper order. Otherwise USCIS will continue to use these recaptured visas and use them to approve FU***&G Out of Order cases and manipulate & play the system to achieve that by jumping around the PD up/down/'U' and what not, just so because it is *convenient* for them to do so.
Besides..you have been waiting very long from 01..just like me..incruiating..wait..
The current visa bulletin says EB3 PDs may go back to the level that was in June 08 visa bulletin or worser. So it is very likely that EB3 will be anywhere between Apr 2001 to Nov 2001. Personally I would be happy if it remained at least beyond May 2001.
I dont see EB3 moving to 2002 unless USCIS wants to agressively move it forward, so that they can continue their unfair trend of procesing some out of order low hanging fruit cases in EB3 category, just because they are sitting on the top of their applications pile, even if they had much later PDs. Just like they are doing with EB2
What will unite people is to fight against the common pain point... *Unfair advantage given to out of order applicants* , whether it be EB2 or EB3, who are much later in the queue, but some how are on the top of application piles, and easily accessible to IOs- who are making DOS move the PDs, just so that they can clear of their tables by approving these cases, rather than trying to access applications in FIFO and follow a fair process.
The whole EB2-EB3 divide arose out of this unfair practice of USCIS. Which just on their whim move PDs forward , be it EB3 or EB2. It just happened, that EB2 date has been moved more aggressively, probably because there is less backlog there. But looking at all the EB2 people still waiting with 2003, 2004 PDs while 2006 are getting approvals, indicates that the real problem is USCIS not doing due diligence to identify the right cases to be processed next and get the exact count of such cases.
Just asking them to recapture visa numbers or cyring foul against wasted numbers etc will still not solve the problem unless we also FORCE them to follow FIFO and process cases FAIRLY. And do their due diligence to spend some time and put their application piles in proper order. Otherwise USCIS will continue to use these recaptured visas and use them to approve FU***&G Out of Order cases and manipulate & play the system to achieve that by jumping around the PD up/down/'U' and what not, just so because it is *convenient* for them to do so.
more...
pictures Anna Faris could have easily
needhelp!
01-22 12:15 PM
Saralayar, if you create a new thread with main topic as action to Vote on Change.gov, it may get more attention, and IV members can also send that link to their GC holder friends.
dresses Rob Schneider and Anna Faris
nkavjs
09-14 02:02 PM
i am waiting too, for the full month of june my attorney was sitting on my case not filing it as they were busy preparing the doc's for the july filers, finally they filed on july 2.
Exactly right. My attorney sat on my completed applications for more than 20 days and decided to file it on 2nd July. And now they refuse to even follow up with USCIS about the fate of my application.. Wish I could take legal actions agst them..
Exactly right. My attorney sat on my completed applications for more than 20 days and decided to file it on 2nd July. And now they refuse to even follow up with USCIS about the fate of my application.. Wish I could take legal actions agst them..
more...
makeup anna faris scary movie 3.
neelu
10-12 07:42 PM
Thank you, FatJoe, for sharing your experience.
Would you mind sharing which state you reside in? I am wondering if anyone contacted Maryland senators/congressmen.
Neelu:
My attr said that uscis does not follow any chrological order to approve cases. Rather, it takes any 485 application filed before Jan 22, 05. So, your point on "giving more time" won't work here.
This is what I did. I did not get GC yet though, but got to know where I'm at.
1. Contacated NCS numerous times and raised two SRs.
2. Took inforpass a couple of times. Infopass IOs have more detailed info about our cases.
3. Contact Senator requesting that my appln be assigned to an IO, and it was done so. It is with an IO now. Hoping and praying that my IO picks up application to approve it this week.
4. Contacted Ombudsman late last week. Hoping to get some good actions taken on my application.
5. You might consider contacting Janet Napolitino as well.
All the best.
Would you mind sharing which state you reside in? I am wondering if anyone contacted Maryland senators/congressmen.
Neelu:
My attr said that uscis does not follow any chrological order to approve cases. Rather, it takes any 485 application filed before Jan 22, 05. So, your point on "giving more time" won't work here.
This is what I did. I did not get GC yet though, but got to know where I'm at.
1. Contacated NCS numerous times and raised two SRs.
2. Took inforpass a couple of times. Infopass IOs have more detailed info about our cases.
3. Contact Senator requesting that my appln be assigned to an IO, and it was done so. It is with an IO now. Hoping and praying that my IO picks up application to approve it this week.
4. Contacted Ombudsman late last week. Hoping to get some good actions taken on my application.
5. You might consider contacting Janet Napolitino as well.
All the best.
girlfriend ANNA FARIS - GQ April 2009
krithi
08-19 04:19 PM
thanks a lot and my wife is in exact situation. This has made it very clear. Then i will suggest her the same ...enter on H4. Thanks a lot.
Best
Its a no brainer (enter on AP) and you definitely have to talk to attorney
Best
Its a no brainer (enter on AP) and you definitely have to talk to attorney
hairstyles Anna Faris began acting at an
kumar4875
03-31 10:10 AM
Looks like this year USCIS understood they need some money and accept some extra applications, which may be the same file I485 when PD is not current. and date might go to end of 2007.
Just a thought
If it is for applications money, they might as well make it current.
There are not many applications between Jan2008 and jan2011
Cumulative
Demand Prior To China India All OtherCountries Grand Total
January 1, 2006 0 0 0 0
January 1, 2007 4,200 13,200 0 17,400
January 1, 2008 9,725 22,950 0 32,675
January 1, 2011 9,800 23,050 100 32,950
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
Just a thought
If it is for applications money, they might as well make it current.
There are not many applications between Jan2008 and jan2011
Cumulative
Demand Prior To China India All OtherCountries Grand Total
January 1, 2006 0 0 0 0
January 1, 2007 4,200 13,200 0 17,400
January 1, 2008 9,725 22,950 0 32,675
January 1, 2011 9,800 23,050 100 32,950
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
Nil
04-08 10:49 PM
Thanks for your support of the idea.
i do not think IV core is on a vacation.
From what i gather, this idea was tried with lawmakers before.
But to change citizenship laws is far more difficult than changing the quota cap of a (GC) process.
Never-the-less, we should not give up.
Say, in the bargain for citizenship after 10 yrs of Legal & crime-free stay we get GC instead, still a deal.
Can we have a plan of action as a consensus?
i do not think IV core is on a vacation.
From what i gather, this idea was tried with lawmakers before.
But to change citizenship laws is far more difficult than changing the quota cap of a (GC) process.
Never-the-less, we should not give up.
Say, in the bargain for citizenship after 10 yrs of Legal & crime-free stay we get GC instead, still a deal.
Can we have a plan of action as a consensus?
rockrocky
10-01 12:35 PM
Since 2004 EB2 is cleared, I am seeing less number of posts being made on IV.Yay I became a senior member, will that mean I will get a green card?
Try becoming a Donor and see if you get GC. :-)
Try becoming a Donor and see if you get GC. :-)
