amitjoey
07-05 05:08 PM
Can you please tell me the senators office you called so that I can call them too ..:) more calls the better
CALL your state senators. State senators are interested in listening from people who reside in their respective states, Cause they technically represent them. So they want to hear what affects their constituents.
Call your state senators first, then call your house reps, (remember logfren is a house rep) and then the others.
CALL your state senators. State senators are interested in listening from people who reside in their respective states, Cause they technically represent them. So they want to hear what affects their constituents.
Call your state senators first, then call your house reps, (remember logfren is a house rep) and then the others.
wallpaper 2011 pictures rbd girls boys
iamreddy1
01-05 06:04 PM
My labour was filed in Dec 2004 With Boston DOL. I got my 45 day letter form philli processing center in aug 2006.
mariusp
04-14 07:05 AM
Nope and I just filed for my first exension.
but my Licences expires on Sept 2008, So I will I be just getting the extension till Sept 2008 and Not 3 year extension.
That just sounds ridiculous... what does your driver's license have to do with your H1B extension?
It's true that the length of your H1 extension determines the validity of your DL i.e. if you get an extension until 2010 the DMV will only issue a DL valid till 2010, but the opposite is not true, unless we're living in the Twilight Zone.
but my Licences expires on Sept 2008, So I will I be just getting the extension till Sept 2008 and Not 3 year extension.
That just sounds ridiculous... what does your driver's license have to do with your H1B extension?
It's true that the length of your H1 extension determines the validity of your DL i.e. if you get an extension until 2010 the DMV will only issue a DL valid till 2010, but the opposite is not true, unless we're living in the Twilight Zone.
2011 2011 scene hairstyle for girls
Milind123
09-12 05:29 PM
Hi IV members,
Thanks for all the work and effort put into making the life of many simple.
Just made a small contribution from my side
Details
$100 from paypal Receipt ID: 0140-0216-9540-2146
Thanks
-Ska
Way to go first post and a contribution.
Thanks for all the work and effort put into making the life of many simple.
Just made a small contribution from my side
Details
$100 from paypal Receipt ID: 0140-0216-9540-2146
Thanks
-Ska
Way to go first post and a contribution.
more...
skv
08-12 05:32 PM
Will do the same Diptam and Lonedesi! If employer asks us later : why did you send the letter, we can address it at that time.
We have to take risk, we if want to some progess our I-140 cases.
Good night and see you later.
We have to take risk, we if want to some progess our I-140 cases.
Good night and see you later.
485Mbe4001
08-04 04:44 PM
i dont understand the point of your discussion. i doubt if you are EB3 or really care about helping with the letter. you wanted to make a point, you made it, no use arguing for arguments sake. Do you think that sending a 'factually correct' letter will make the dates active or get a different response. You imagine that a person at USCIS is sitting with a red pen correcting letters from 'highly skilled' applicants? A letter is an opinion to highlight an issue important and critical to them, let them express it. You can mail them a rebuttal if you want, why are you sowing doubts and ridiculing people who are interested in doing something.
if you want to help us, then why dont you critique the number USA letters, they are certainly not 'factually correct'. You can go there and defend our cause.
if some people want to send letters, let them send.
You havent experienced a long wait, i hope you dont. There are various reasons why people cannot use AC21...when you reach that stage you can weigh the pro's and con's.
If one is lucky enough to get a job of company vice-president then I am sure, in that case, company can do another I-140 and get PD ported.
BTW, I am yet to see any such cases where someone is offered job offer for vice president whereas he/she is working as Programmer.
I wish that he (guy in next cubicle) gets I-140 approved soon.
>> He was considered a EB-3 I. Don't you think he wants to know how many decades it will take for his dates to get current?
If his qualifications does not match with EB-2 job qualification, there is nothing much can be done in that case.
I am sure that many people would like to know when their PD is going to be current, but this can not be answered by anyone. Visa Bulletin dates depends on various input factors and they keep changing every month.
The PD uncertainty is, obviously, a part of GC process and kinda unknown factor.
if you want to help us, then why dont you critique the number USA letters, they are certainly not 'factually correct'. You can go there and defend our cause.
if some people want to send letters, let them send.
You havent experienced a long wait, i hope you dont. There are various reasons why people cannot use AC21...when you reach that stage you can weigh the pro's and con's.
If one is lucky enough to get a job of company vice-president then I am sure, in that case, company can do another I-140 and get PD ported.
BTW, I am yet to see any such cases where someone is offered job offer for vice president whereas he/she is working as Programmer.
I wish that he (guy in next cubicle) gets I-140 approved soon.
>> He was considered a EB-3 I. Don't you think he wants to know how many decades it will take for his dates to get current?
If his qualifications does not match with EB-2 job qualification, there is nothing much can be done in that case.
I am sure that many people would like to know when their PD is going to be current, but this can not be answered by anyone. Visa Bulletin dates depends on various input factors and they keep changing every month.
The PD uncertainty is, obviously, a part of GC process and kinda unknown factor.
more...
sameet
02-18 05:36 PM
I am seeing a lot of folks predicting the EB2 dates. And I believe they are right in doing so since that is their filign category. What I am asking is if there are any prediction regarding EB3-I. The dates are not moving at all which is absolutely frustating.
2010 hairstyles for girls 2011.
Milind123
09-15 10:04 PM
hi! i just contributed $100.00 via paypal transaction id is : 1GE522823P5726434
Thank you dvrao4 for your contribution. I appreciate your help for keeping this drive on. People, just one person left to close this round. Again, if you haven't made a contribution recently please help us give a successful finishing touches to Sept 18th.
Thank you dvrao4 for your contribution. I appreciate your help for keeping this drive on. People, just one person left to close this round. Again, if you haven't made a contribution recently please help us give a successful finishing touches to Sept 18th.
more...
makemygc
10-25 11:59 PM
I've sent the mails and strongly encourage everyone to come out and take an early action before this gets worse. Even if you are not affected right now, support the cause to make sure that you will not be affected in the future.
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
hair wallpaper girl x. sexy girl
pa_arora
06-10 05:22 PM
When do you think would EB2-I hit Feb 2005? Before this year end?
NO ONE knows abut it...no one includes USCIS too. cause they dont work on what will be needed in future.
NO ONE knows abut it...no one includes USCIS too. cause they dont work on what will be needed in future.
more...
GCard_Dream
09-10 01:00 PM
The discrepancy is due to the fact that you are looking at visa bulletin from 2 different month. The bulletin on State department's website is for September and the one on Mumbai consulate's website is supposed to be for October.
Please help me understand this:
The Dept. of State's web site has the visa bulletin for SEpt 2008 as:
EB INDIA
--------------------
1st C
2nd 01AUG06
3rd U
And the US Consulate's web site at Mumbai has:
EB INDIA
------------
E1 Current
E2 1 April 2003
So, how come Consulates got the latest information? Why not post this on the DOS page too by the DOS?
I am so sick and tired of this whole process of GC. I am starting to question myself if this entire process of wait, is worth at all? If you are illegal, you are free in this country, if you are legal they scrutiny your papers with a microscope....I am sick, totally sick. There is a limit to patience, too.:mad::mad::mad:
Please help me understand this:
The Dept. of State's web site has the visa bulletin for SEpt 2008 as:
EB INDIA
--------------------
1st C
2nd 01AUG06
3rd U
And the US Consulate's web site at Mumbai has:
EB INDIA
------------
E1 Current
E2 1 April 2003
So, how come Consulates got the latest information? Why not post this on the DOS page too by the DOS?
I am so sick and tired of this whole process of GC. I am starting to question myself if this entire process of wait, is worth at all? If you are illegal, you are free in this country, if you are legal they scrutiny your papers with a microscope....I am sick, totally sick. There is a limit to patience, too.:mad::mad::mad:
hot hairstyles for girls 2011.
addsf345
11-21 02:49 PM
In addition to my above post, one can be on h1b and keep getting h1b extensions and apply for consular processing instead of AOS.
You know what, my head is going bananas. What you said makes sense too. May be it finally boils down to what IO thinks who is handling your case and LUCK!
You know what, my head is going bananas. What you said makes sense too. May be it finally boils down to what IO thinks who is handling your case and LUCK!
more...
house 2011 calendar wallpaper girl.
mbawa2574
09-13 07:03 PM
With EAD ,can you register a LLC/Inc ? Has anyone tried this ?
tattoo 24 января 2011 в 17:32
India_USA
09-27 08:45 AM
The number of years spent waiting does add to the frustration, but the feeling of being stuck is something we share irrespective of the years... brotherhood/sisterhood!
more...
pictures Short Haircuts For Girls 2011
Green.Tech
05-31 08:10 PM
Keep contributing guys...
dresses 2011 calendar wallpaper girl.
diptam
07-06 12:11 AM
You need to change the SUBJECT also...
/***
FBI fingerprint bumping and checks are IGNORED for IMMIGRANTS - Can not believe it ? This is called HOMELAND SECURITY ???
How come USCIS / DOS can ignore CRITICAL FBI name check steps ?
***/
This is by far the most effective story that highlights the security concerns raised by approving cases that hasn't cleared the background check yet. This could be the big story. It may, however, be the double-edged sword. I think we need to keep this going as much as we can.
Digg .. Digg.. Digg ... keep digging even in your sleep.
/***
FBI fingerprint bumping and checks are IGNORED for IMMIGRANTS - Can not believe it ? This is called HOMELAND SECURITY ???
How come USCIS / DOS can ignore CRITICAL FBI name check steps ?
***/
This is by far the most effective story that highlights the security concerns raised by approving cases that hasn't cleared the background check yet. This could be the big story. It may, however, be the double-edged sword. I think we need to keep this going as much as we can.
Digg .. Digg.. Digg ... keep digging even in your sleep.
more...
makeup tattoos for girls. 2011
knnmbd
04-25 08:38 PM
I agree with this little bit but to implement will be tough. There are people coming into US on h1 and leaving every year from big indian consulting companies. It should be like below.
1. Priority date should be date when the person enters the country.
2. The person should have paid taxes consecutively for n years(n=3.4.5...)
3. This should be applicable only for H1 and not for any other visa categories.
If the above is not possible, then
1. Labor substiution should be allowed only for the person who is in US continiously for n years(n=3.4.5...) and paid taxes. With this approach, a new comer cannot get the exisitng labor. Win Win to all.
I love the clause # 3 "This should be applicable only for H1 and not for any other visa categories".
You probably are not aware but "big Indian consulting" firms are not the largest contributors to the U.S economy that this stand will fly. IT is being outsourced faster than a New York minute, so please don't live in a state of ignorance. When you say "This should be applicable only for H1 and not for any other visa categories", this will exclude PhD�s and post-docs and engineers who spend any where from 2 to 6 years on F1 visas before they even get to work on H1 visas. You probably are not aware but 40% of doctorate degrees are awarded to foreign nationals in the U.S and your proposed amendments would put "employees of big consulting firms" from India ahead all those folks I mentioned earlier. For some reason this is a very difficult concept to digest.
1. Priority date should be date when the person enters the country.
2. The person should have paid taxes consecutively for n years(n=3.4.5...)
3. This should be applicable only for H1 and not for any other visa categories.
If the above is not possible, then
1. Labor substiution should be allowed only for the person who is in US continiously for n years(n=3.4.5...) and paid taxes. With this approach, a new comer cannot get the exisitng labor. Win Win to all.
I love the clause # 3 "This should be applicable only for H1 and not for any other visa categories".
You probably are not aware but "big Indian consulting" firms are not the largest contributors to the U.S economy that this stand will fly. IT is being outsourced faster than a New York minute, so please don't live in a state of ignorance. When you say "This should be applicable only for H1 and not for any other visa categories", this will exclude PhD�s and post-docs and engineers who spend any where from 2 to 6 years on F1 visas before they even get to work on H1 visas. You probably are not aware but 40% of doctorate degrees are awarded to foreign nationals in the U.S and your proposed amendments would put "employees of big consulting firms" from India ahead all those folks I mentioned earlier. For some reason this is a very difficult concept to digest.
girlfriend wallpaper cute girl.
santb1975
05-22 06:13 PM
That is our second contribution for the day
I have made a one time contribution of $100.
Receipt ID: 97J49355KG857603M
Thanks
I have made a one time contribution of $100.
Receipt ID: 97J49355KG857603M
Thanks
hairstyles snsd wallpaper 2011 calendar.
aj_jadeja
03-09 10:12 AM
open real player. and open this URL.
rtsp://video.c-span.org/encoder/dirksen226.rm?mode=compact
rtsp://video.c-span.org/encoder/dirksen226.rm?mode=compact
lonedesi
08-08 09:05 AM
Since we are trying to address I-140 delays in general at TSC and NSC, can we just send a general letter to Ombudsman's office without specifying our case and DHS Form 7001 ?
This way it will turn out to be a letter campaign.
What do you think ?
My understanding is if you send a general letter, you will get a general response (standard template) from the Ombudsman's office. For that matter, you don't even have to send the general letter, because I will provide you with the response you can expect to receive from Ombudsman's office without the DHS Form 7001.
----------------------------------------------------------------
"
Thank you for your recent correspondence to the Office of the
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman (CIS Ombudsman). I
appreciate your comments regarding I-140 processing at the Service
Centers. We are well aware of the processing delays at all of the
Service Centers. Currently the TSC is processing I-140 applications
received in July 2007. USCIS has taken steps to address the processing
delays, but their efforts have not come about swiftly. We are
continuing to review and address this issue.
Under the authority of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the CIS
Ombudsman assists individuals and employers who experience specific
problems during the USCIS benefits seeking process, largely to identify
problems and to formulate recommendations to improve the USCIS service.
Please see our website for more information about the CIS Ombudsman
(www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman/).
I believe that first hand information from individuals like you is the
best source for identifying systemic problems in the immigration
benefits process. My office will consider the information you provided
as we develop recommendations to improve USCIS' practices and
procedures.
Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact my office, and for
giving me the opportunity to serve you. I look forward to the day when I
can report that the work of this office has been accomplished because
our vision of a world-class immigration benefits system has been
achieved. Your contribution takes us a step closer to reaching this
goal.
Office of the Ombudsman
-------------------------------------------------------
Please don't get me wrong. All I am trying to emphasize is the DHS Form 7001 is absolutely necessary if you want them to investigate the problem and see for themselves if what we are complaining about is indeed true. You stand a chance that they may take steps to address this problem. If not, it is just waste of time and effort. There is nothing to fear by providing the case details to Ombudsman's office. There are people who have sued USCIS due to the delays and have won their cases....so why fear when all you are doing is requesting USCIS to process our cases in orderly manner.
So please take the time to mail the letter & the completed DHS Form 7001 to the ombudsman's office.
This way it will turn out to be a letter campaign.
What do you think ?
My understanding is if you send a general letter, you will get a general response (standard template) from the Ombudsman's office. For that matter, you don't even have to send the general letter, because I will provide you with the response you can expect to receive from Ombudsman's office without the DHS Form 7001.
----------------------------------------------------------------
"
Thank you for your recent correspondence to the Office of the
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman (CIS Ombudsman). I
appreciate your comments regarding I-140 processing at the Service
Centers. We are well aware of the processing delays at all of the
Service Centers. Currently the TSC is processing I-140 applications
received in July 2007. USCIS has taken steps to address the processing
delays, but their efforts have not come about swiftly. We are
continuing to review and address this issue.
Under the authority of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the CIS
Ombudsman assists individuals and employers who experience specific
problems during the USCIS benefits seeking process, largely to identify
problems and to formulate recommendations to improve the USCIS service.
Please see our website for more information about the CIS Ombudsman
(www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman/).
I believe that first hand information from individuals like you is the
best source for identifying systemic problems in the immigration
benefits process. My office will consider the information you provided
as we develop recommendations to improve USCIS' practices and
procedures.
Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact my office, and for
giving me the opportunity to serve you. I look forward to the day when I
can report that the work of this office has been accomplished because
our vision of a world-class immigration benefits system has been
achieved. Your contribution takes us a step closer to reaching this
goal.
Office of the Ombudsman
-------------------------------------------------------
Please don't get me wrong. All I am trying to emphasize is the DHS Form 7001 is absolutely necessary if you want them to investigate the problem and see for themselves if what we are complaining about is indeed true. You stand a chance that they may take steps to address this problem. If not, it is just waste of time and effort. There is nothing to fear by providing the case details to Ombudsman's office. There are people who have sued USCIS due to the delays and have won their cases....so why fear when all you are doing is requesting USCIS to process our cases in orderly manner.
So please take the time to mail the letter & the completed DHS Form 7001 to the ombudsman's office.
chanduv23
05-15 11:11 PM
Thanks for your wishes.
I agree with you regarding the timeline and evidence. I have mentioned it to my attorney numerous times. My attorney was insistent that adjudicating officers can see all my info on their computer screens. It is only a matter of looking at the info correctly.
It looks like the first MTR went to the same IO who denied my I-485. I could say it from ID in both the denial letters.
Well - I think it was a dirty little trick where supervisor was convinced that this is not an AC21 case and did not even bother to look up your case information.
This is definitely a slap on the face of honesty and integrity
I agree with you regarding the timeline and evidence. I have mentioned it to my attorney numerous times. My attorney was insistent that adjudicating officers can see all my info on their computer screens. It is only a matter of looking at the info correctly.
It looks like the first MTR went to the same IO who denied my I-485. I could say it from ID in both the denial letters.
Well - I think it was a dirty little trick where supervisor was convinced that this is not an AC21 case and did not even bother to look up your case information.
This is definitely a slap on the face of honesty and integrity
No comments:
Post a Comment