dealsnet
03-19 09:03 AM
We need to focus immigration issue rather than talking about 'thali' or 'wali' bans. Some people coming to this forum to have fun and writing non sense. Please concentrate on our goal. ' make every EB based immigration current'. !!!
Guys... can we drop the whole discussion about this guy's name.
It is no advisable to discuss such topics in public forums on the internet. These keywords attract unwarranted attention.
Guys... can we drop the whole discussion about this guy's name.
It is no advisable to discuss such topics in public forums on the internet. These keywords attract unwarranted attention.
wallpaper 2011 sleeve tattoo flash art.
hopefullegalimmigrant
06-12 06:04 PM
Sent
coopheal
04-10 04:56 AM
Visa Bulletin for May 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4805.html)
The biggest surprise is EB3 Mexico. It just turned to U. How is that possible??
Can this happen to EB3-I India as well??
The biggest surprise is EB3 Mexico. It just turned to U. How is that possible??
Can this happen to EB3-I India as well??
2011 sleeve tattoo flash art.
GCKaIntezar
01-30 03:17 PM
I agree with you. No images, KISS.
Do we need images? Can't we just have text on a yellow paper with appropriate text highlighted? We want to emphasize on the text. Not sure what value add an image can have unless we have someone standing in a line outside a gc office with window and we could put something like .. another 5 years... The images has to be in sync with the text. I am not for putting a picture of the capitol hill so much. We have to emphasize on the problem. This is just my opinion.
Thanks,
Varsha
Do we need images? Can't we just have text on a yellow paper with appropriate text highlighted? We want to emphasize on the text. Not sure what value add an image can have unless we have someone standing in a line outside a gc office with window and we could put something like .. another 5 years... The images has to be in sync with the text. I am not for putting a picture of the capitol hill so much. We have to emphasize on the problem. This is just my opinion.
Thanks,
Varsha
more...
Sheetal_MA
03-10 09:55 AM
Both 1A and 2A category for Family Based (sons, daughters, spouse - of citizens and green card holders) has better dates (15th Aug 02, 15th Aug 2004) than EB-2 India, and EB-3 India.
This is so preposterous, words cannot even begin to describe this absurdity.
So those of us who have been in U.S. for almost a decade, have been contributing to this society, and have held our life in constant limbo, are being given a lower priority than those who are still back in their own country and living a happy life and who can now immigrate to U.S. based on family immigration.
Do the lawmakers have no common sense left atall??
Do you fully realize your statement about the 2A category which is for spouses and children of green card holders? That means that if someone got a green card (whether through the family or EB category), they have to wait 5+ years to reunite with their spouse and children. At least those with H1B can bring their spouse into the country right away.
I have been lurking on this forum to understand the plight of EB immigrants and the posts the last few weeks have confirmed my belief that the problem exist because a lot of people came to the US from 1999-2006 and want to stay here permanently. The EB immigration system was fine before then; thus, the problem is supply/demand, not the immigration policies.
This is so preposterous, words cannot even begin to describe this absurdity.
So those of us who have been in U.S. for almost a decade, have been contributing to this society, and have held our life in constant limbo, are being given a lower priority than those who are still back in their own country and living a happy life and who can now immigrate to U.S. based on family immigration.
Do the lawmakers have no common sense left atall??
Do you fully realize your statement about the 2A category which is for spouses and children of green card holders? That means that if someone got a green card (whether through the family or EB category), they have to wait 5+ years to reunite with their spouse and children. At least those with H1B can bring their spouse into the country right away.
I have been lurking on this forum to understand the plight of EB immigrants and the posts the last few weeks have confirmed my belief that the problem exist because a lot of people came to the US from 1999-2006 and want to stay here permanently. The EB immigration system was fine before then; thus, the problem is supply/demand, not the immigration policies.
dealsnet
06-01 09:40 PM
Headed to Canada, Mexico, Bermuda or the Caribbean? Here's a tip: Take your passport to avoid a headache coming home.
U.S. and Canadian citizens must present approved ID at land and sea borders
The rule was scheduled to take effect more than a year ago
Some business and tourism groups fear that regulations will hurt business
U.S. border officials say electronic passport readers should expedite traffic
READ MORE
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/06/01/us.canada.border.rules/index.html
U.S. and Canadian citizens must present approved ID at land and sea borders
The rule was scheduled to take effect more than a year ago
Some business and tourism groups fear that regulations will hurt business
U.S. border officials say electronic passport readers should expedite traffic
READ MORE
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/06/01/us.canada.border.rules/index.html
more...
abhijitp
07-25 01:27 AM
Your lawyers are not adding the employment letter because they are working in the ineterst of your HR department and not in your interest. Your HR thinks that after 180 days you will leave the job. So in order to retain you, they are filing incomplete application to invoke an RFE or rejection and keep things iin their control. Hope you are smart enough to see the games people are playing with your greencard application.
Yes, I have this feeling already. Now, what happens if someone switches jobs using AC-21 and then this RFE is received? You have to submit the NEW employment / offer letter right? So how does this help the current employer to stop you from switching jobs?
Yes, I have this feeling already. Now, what happens if someone switches jobs using AC-21 and then this RFE is received? You have to submit the NEW employment / offer letter right? So how does this help the current employer to stop you from switching jobs?
2010 sleeve tattoo flash art.
bpratap
06-10 06:24 PM
Sent to California Senators
more...
kutra
07-21 10:03 AM
once you get past the I-140, the typical reasons for denial of I-485 are some criminal background, out of status >180 days, mistakes on forms etc.
IMO a simple case would be someone who:
- has never changed employers
- was employed with a large US corporation which is more likely to have paid him his salary every month (as opposed to a 3-4 person company where getting hold of the W-2 is the only way to confirm).
- was never denied any application (change of status / entry to US)
- has clear medical records
- has clear documents related to birth certificate
Complicated cases are when:
- someone has repeatedly changed and employers since entering the US. The IO will need to make sure status was maintained throughout all those transitions.
- some document was not submitted, or not submitted with transalations/affidavits etc. Commonly birth certificate issues.
You are correct. Unfortuantely, they are not looking for these "ripe" or "low hanging fruits" cases in a FIFO order. It can be highly exasperating when a "ripe" case with a March 2006 PD gets approved when "ripe" cases with PDs earlier than 2003 are languishing! That really makes the whole system even more unjust.
IMO a simple case would be someone who:
- has never changed employers
- was employed with a large US corporation which is more likely to have paid him his salary every month (as opposed to a 3-4 person company where getting hold of the W-2 is the only way to confirm).
- was never denied any application (change of status / entry to US)
- has clear medical records
- has clear documents related to birth certificate
Complicated cases are when:
- someone has repeatedly changed and employers since entering the US. The IO will need to make sure status was maintained throughout all those transitions.
- some document was not submitted, or not submitted with transalations/affidavits etc. Commonly birth certificate issues.
You are correct. Unfortuantely, they are not looking for these "ripe" or "low hanging fruits" cases in a FIFO order. It can be highly exasperating when a "ripe" case with a March 2006 PD gets approved when "ripe" cases with PDs earlier than 2003 are languishing! That really makes the whole system even more unjust.
hair sleeve tattoo flash art.
nat23
06-13 08:41 AM
Interesting Article on the revival of the CIR
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_070613.htm
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_070613.htm
more...
pbojja
12-11 10:17 AM
Stop the non-sense . As if USCIS-DOL knows exactly how many portings are going on ..do you think all the movement of this dates make sense ? just check last year movements .. they have no theory no logic or no numbers they just move with no logic ... At the end of year they move to 2006 or 2007and back to 2003 next year ..
I m EB2 2006 and I have no problems with portings ..go for it EB3 folks ..I know it will be a year or more process but worth it , I think EB3 early 2000 folks deserve GC than a 2006-2007 EB2 folks(Dont think you are genious just because you are EB2 ..we know we all do same jobs).
I m ready for reds and dont care a bit .
Some one left a nasty message for this post with a red. I m not even worried about red but your comment made me sick and here is the message for you .
Looks like you are grown up wrong ? either you lived in a environment like the one in your message or completely out of your mind after you grow up .
I m surprsied you are educated and made it to US and waiting for GC ..wow what a sick idiot ..
I m EB2 2006 and I have no problems with portings ..go for it EB3 folks ..I know it will be a year or more process but worth it , I think EB3 early 2000 folks deserve GC than a 2006-2007 EB2 folks(Dont think you are genious just because you are EB2 ..we know we all do same jobs).
I m ready for reds and dont care a bit .
Some one left a nasty message for this post with a red. I m not even worried about red but your comment made me sick and here is the message for you .
Looks like you are grown up wrong ? either you lived in a environment like the one in your message or completely out of your mind after you grow up .
I m surprsied you are educated and made it to US and waiting for GC ..wow what a sick idiot ..
hot sleeve tattoo flash art.
downthedrain
02-03 01:21 PM
Please read my post again.
The letter is for future GC job, not for your current job.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
desi3933, Sorry I am a little confused, I have been working for the same company for last 8 years and I am continuing with them. I substituted on another approved labor when filing I140 from the same company. So there is no future job for me, it is the current job.
Thanks for your advise again
The letter is for future GC job, not for your current job.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
desi3933, Sorry I am a little confused, I have been working for the same company for last 8 years and I am continuing with them. I substituted on another approved labor when filing I140 from the same company. So there is no future job for me, it is the current job.
Thanks for your advise again
more...
house sleeve tattoo flash art. Tattoo Designs Sleeve; Tattoo Designs Sleeve
feedfront
11-03 02:34 AM
In my kids case after one week we got approval notice. In general it takes two / three days.
You replied to old his qs. He already has got green card.
You replied to old his qs. He already has got green card.
tattoo 2010 sleeve tattoo flash art.
eb3retro
03-10 01:40 AM
I am a july 2nd filer and have changed job 2 times in the past one month and I have no intention to let know USCIS because
a) There is no mandatory law that states that we should do it.
b) I personally feel that sending AC21 documents will trigger an RFE for sure,(in the other case, there are chances that u may not get this).
c) Lawyer is asking for $1500 for doing nothing on this.
d) I am prepared to deal with the RFE if it comes thru.
All of the above I did for changing my 7 year old employer who exactly knew that I cannot change job and kept me in the same position for 7 years even though I was exemplary in my job performance.
a) There is no mandatory law that states that we should do it.
b) I personally feel that sending AC21 documents will trigger an RFE for sure,(in the other case, there are chances that u may not get this).
c) Lawyer is asking for $1500 for doing nothing on this.
d) I am prepared to deal with the RFE if it comes thru.
All of the above I did for changing my 7 year old employer who exactly knew that I cannot change job and kept me in the same position for 7 years even though I was exemplary in my job performance.
more...
pictures sleeve tattoo flash art. half
srkamath
07-20 01:32 PM
........ If you look at the data also you see this 'anomaly' where there is a big 'clump' of cases with PD jan/feb/march 2005.....
Might this because, more people than normal reported their numbers on during this period? Most of these folks were surprised by EB2 retrogression...just a thought.
However, i must say that your point sounds plausible.
Might this because, more people than normal reported their numbers on during this period? Most of these folks were surprised by EB2 retrogression...just a thought.
However, i must say that your point sounds plausible.
dresses sleeve tattoo flash art.
GreenLantern
02-15 09:19 PM
Jesus man, that is sick!
I don't think I can keep up with you guys.
I don't think I can keep up with you guys.
more...
makeup sleeve tattoo flash art.
imv116
04-02 03:59 PM
I can put 100 arguments in support of MS students graduating and trying to get into a new job. Similarly you can come up with 100 other arguments that they are all non ethical and lies.
It is more costly for companies big and small to hire a new grad, train and eventually have him work on the business and that process is carried only by a minute percentage of all the companies that do business and also they look at elite schools.
Every MS student has to undergo a vigorous financial crisis situation there by the time they graduate they are left with no choice other than accepting what ever comes there way, at the earliest.
They don't have the liberty financially as well as law wise to sit and try for 1 year to get into a full time job. Given those kind of situations it is nothing wrong in projecting themselves to certain years of experience.
At the same, contracting, consulting is all about this. When no party likes, they can always let go.
-the116
It is more costly for companies big and small to hire a new grad, train and eventually have him work on the business and that process is carried only by a minute percentage of all the companies that do business and also they look at elite schools.
Every MS student has to undergo a vigorous financial crisis situation there by the time they graduate they are left with no choice other than accepting what ever comes there way, at the earliest.
They don't have the liberty financially as well as law wise to sit and try for 1 year to get into a full time job. Given those kind of situations it is nothing wrong in projecting themselves to certain years of experience.
At the same, contracting, consulting is all about this. When no party likes, they can always let go.
-the116
girlfriend sleeve tattoo flash art.
HV000
03-18 09:54 PM
Common Guys. Let's focus on the topic of this thread...
hairstyles sleeve tattoo flash art.
ndbhatt
02-18 07:00 PM
Sorry guys, I misread somewhere.:D
What about illegal immigrants with < 5years. I think these senators will leave the overall problem unsolved.
What about legal immigrants with < 5years :confused:
What about illegal immigrants with < 5years. I think these senators will leave the overall problem unsolved.
What about legal immigrants with < 5years :confused:
vnkpaul
09-15 04:09 PM
I am currently working for company X on L1B visa, my visa is valid till Sep 2009 and My I94 is valid till Apr 2010. I was in India in April 2008 and I had applied for a H1B visa via company Y (in US) in April 2008 and my petition got selected and approved in the lottery and I am eligible to get it stamped from 1st October 2008.
I have been on L1 2 times for about 1 year duration each time.
My questions are:
1. Since I was out of US during the H1B application filing, my H1B will only be valid when I get it stamped by US consulate in Canada? (I had specified that as my port of entry to US knowing that I will be in US at that point of time)
2. Can I continue to work for company X based on my L1 till I get my H1B stamped, which I plan to get done by Dec 08?
3. At the US consulate, at the time of stamping if they reject my H1B application would my existing L1 be still valid or they cancel that also?
Please reply... Thanks in advance...
I have been on L1 2 times for about 1 year duration each time.
My questions are:
1. Since I was out of US during the H1B application filing, my H1B will only be valid when I get it stamped by US consulate in Canada? (I had specified that as my port of entry to US knowing that I will be in US at that point of time)
2. Can I continue to work for company X based on my L1 till I get my H1B stamped, which I plan to get done by Dec 08?
3. At the US consulate, at the time of stamping if they reject my H1B application would my existing L1 be still valid or they cancel that also?
Please reply... Thanks in advance...
pappu
07-01 10:22 PM
Info on the lawsuit by AILA:
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
No comments:
Post a Comment