cliffmacnab
12-03 04:13 PM
FBI Name Checks Latest
Immigration Daily's recent comment (11/30/07 ID) on the status of FBI name check delays resulted in the following response from USCIS Office of Communications Bill Wright:
Immigration Daily's 11/30/07 comment, "FBI Delays to End," is not telling the entire story. USCIS and the FBI are working together to process name checks as quickly as possible without compromising security or public safety. To this end, we have examined the existing name check system and acted to address the problem through two strategies: (1) first, USCIS and the FBI conducted a joint risk assessment which resulted in process improvements that permit us to focus on cases of concern (2) second, USCIS and FBI have allocated additional resources to the process. Over the next year, USCIS is planning to commit a total of $15.5 million to address the backlog of FBI name checks. Please note, however, USCIS continues to require FBI name checks for the same categories of applications and no case will be approved without a cleared name check. We will continue to work with the FBI to reduce waiting times; but, not at the expense of national security and public safety.
Separately, Immigration Daily has learned that USCIS expects a 40% reduction in FBI name check delays by year-end. This reduction will be achieved largely through the allocation of additional resources and a more streamlined process. This information supports DHS Secretary Chertoff's earlier statement that applications that were previously ensnared in the name check delays will be cleared quickly. However, he cautioned that a small number of checks will still be delayed by investigations.
We welcome readers to share their opinion and ideas with us by writing to editor@ilw.com.
Immigration Daily's recent comment (11/30/07 ID) on the status of FBI name check delays resulted in the following response from USCIS Office of Communications Bill Wright:
Immigration Daily's 11/30/07 comment, "FBI Delays to End," is not telling the entire story. USCIS and the FBI are working together to process name checks as quickly as possible without compromising security or public safety. To this end, we have examined the existing name check system and acted to address the problem through two strategies: (1) first, USCIS and the FBI conducted a joint risk assessment which resulted in process improvements that permit us to focus on cases of concern (2) second, USCIS and FBI have allocated additional resources to the process. Over the next year, USCIS is planning to commit a total of $15.5 million to address the backlog of FBI name checks. Please note, however, USCIS continues to require FBI name checks for the same categories of applications and no case will be approved without a cleared name check. We will continue to work with the FBI to reduce waiting times; but, not at the expense of national security and public safety.
Separately, Immigration Daily has learned that USCIS expects a 40% reduction in FBI name check delays by year-end. This reduction will be achieved largely through the allocation of additional resources and a more streamlined process. This information supports DHS Secretary Chertoff's earlier statement that applications that were previously ensnared in the name check delays will be cleared quickly. However, he cautioned that a small number of checks will still be delayed by investigations.
We welcome readers to share their opinion and ideas with us by writing to editor@ilw.com.
wallpaper Dotwork Skull Sleeve in
GCInThisLife
07-19 01:56 PM
I think desi3933 is correct. It is the employees responsibility to maintain the status and all the employee can do is to sue the employer for the pay. Even I am not sure about 30 day rule, but employee should be getting payed on H1B. Also it may only be necessary to prove the legal status since the last entry.
felix31
04-01 03:20 PM
sent fax #10
2011 skull tattoo sleeves. skull
Legal
07-17 08:42 AM
but even with this big announcement tomorrow, we still only have 140,000 visas and keep in mind USCIS has just been averaging about 100,000 per year. (so about 40,000 get wasted every year)
All all this does is to push the bottleneck further down the pipeline.
the only benefit I see is that it helps with filing of AP and EAD which does not help someone like me with my 485 already pending
Sorry I dont share the enthusisam
jasguil
It is still some progress. Since June 13 th these arguments have been repeatedly brought up by people who already have a pending 485. No one ever said the fight is over or everything will be hunky dory.
All all this does is to push the bottleneck further down the pipeline.
the only benefit I see is that it helps with filing of AP and EAD which does not help someone like me with my 485 already pending
Sorry I dont share the enthusisam
jasguil
It is still some progress. Since June 13 th these arguments have been repeatedly brought up by people who already have a pending 485. No one ever said the fight is over or everything will be hunky dory.
more...
paskal
08-24 01:24 AM
if i may interject in this very health constructive and inspirational discussion for a moment- begging all your pardons please!
there are posting guidelines
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/announcement.php?f=90
please read them carefully- everyone.
this is an open forum indeed, rarely do people ever get banned or posts deleted. however, with all rights come some duties and civility is foremost among them.
the person whose posts some are objecting to is not a moderator. he is expressing his own opinions. i'm quite amazed that he has been labeled one or put at par with moderators/administrators by some here.
this is indeed an information sharing forum although that's not all it is. i'm sorry the initial poster never got a reasonable reply. really should have.
as for contribution etc, iv or any moderator is not pushing anyone let alone rudely or being abusive for anything. but lest we all forget, this forum exists because this is a grassroots organization with a commitment to removing retrogression. if that goal gets lost in tourism to the forums, then the forums too will be lost too and very soon. just a gentle reminder for you oh so gentle folks!
lisap- please visit the home page and scroll down a few inches, start reading from "The issue of Immigration Voice, in a nutshell ". If you still do not understand the goals of this organization, please pm me and i will be glad to help. Btw i'm extremely sorry to hear that you cannot be at the rally for personal reasons, we all understand that each person's situation is different and not always easy. However there are ways we may be able to help you attend if you are motivated. let me know- no harm in trying anyways...
there are posting guidelines
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/announcement.php?f=90
please read them carefully- everyone.
this is an open forum indeed, rarely do people ever get banned or posts deleted. however, with all rights come some duties and civility is foremost among them.
the person whose posts some are objecting to is not a moderator. he is expressing his own opinions. i'm quite amazed that he has been labeled one or put at par with moderators/administrators by some here.
this is indeed an information sharing forum although that's not all it is. i'm sorry the initial poster never got a reasonable reply. really should have.
as for contribution etc, iv or any moderator is not pushing anyone let alone rudely or being abusive for anything. but lest we all forget, this forum exists because this is a grassroots organization with a commitment to removing retrogression. if that goal gets lost in tourism to the forums, then the forums too will be lost too and very soon. just a gentle reminder for you oh so gentle folks!
lisap- please visit the home page and scroll down a few inches, start reading from "The issue of Immigration Voice, in a nutshell ". If you still do not understand the goals of this organization, please pm me and i will be glad to help. Btw i'm extremely sorry to hear that you cannot be at the rally for personal reasons, we all understand that each person's situation is different and not always easy. However there are ways we may be able to help you attend if you are motivated. let me know- no harm in trying anyways...
Carlau
01-10 10:05 PM
I wish some group were working on getting attached in some bill a provision that lets the H-4s work. I thought we had a good chance because it is under discussion a bill similar to Bill S.2611 that would let the spouses of the Illegal workers regularized under Blue card status to also work so I assumed that a some point they were going to have a provision for the spouses of H-1Bs. I hope IV and QGA are doing something about this. If no group brings to the senators etc.'s attention that there is a part unattended regading the H-1B spouses right to work, nothing would happen. Here is what I am trying to say:
If S.2611 is going to be discussed in the senate/house, this will allow the spouse of the Blue card status worker (previously illegal worker and now regularized) to work for any employer -while the spouse is in blue card status-, shouldn't it be mentioned in the same law in the parragraph with the H-1B and dependandts provision that that the same applies for the H-1B spouses -that they could work for any employer while the H-1B status of the spouse is valid-? The L-1 spouses can work too so why do we H-4s have to suffer? Why nobody is advocating this?
This is the parragraph:
"... (iii) EMPLOYMENT- The spouse of an alien granted blue card status may apply to the Secretary for a work permit to authorize such spouse to engage in any lawful employment in the United States while such alien maintains blue card status. ..."
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SN02611: then select "Text of legislation" and then select "2 . Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by Senate)[S.2611.ES] " (unfortunately the direct link is temporary so you need to follow these instructions to reach it)
.2611
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by Senate)
________________________________________
TITLE IV--NONIMMIGRANT AND IMMIGRANT VISA REFORM
Subtitle A--Temporary Guest Workers
CHAPTER 1--PILOT PROGRAM FOR EARNED STATUS ADJUSTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL WORKERS
SEC. 613. AGRICULTURAL WORKERS.
(a) Blue Card Program-
(1) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary shall confer blue card status upon an alien who qualifies under this subsection if the Secretary determines that the alien--
(A) has performed agricultural employment in the United States for at least 863 hours or 150 work days during the 24-month period ending on December 31, 2005;
(B) applied for such status during the 18-month application period beginning on the first day of the seventh month that begins after the date of enactment of this Act; and
(C) is otherwise admissible to the United States under section 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182), except as otherwise provided under subsection (e)(2).
(2) AUTHORIZED TRAVEL- An alien in blue card status has the right to travel abroad (including commutation from a residence abroad) in the same manner as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.
(3) AUTHORIZED EMPLOYMENT- An alien in blue card status shall be provided an `employment authorized' endorsement or other appropriate work permit, in the same manner as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.
(4) TERMINATION OF BLUE CARD STATUS-
(A) IN GENERAL- The Secretary may terminate blue card status granted under this subsection only upon a determination under this subtitle that the alien is deportable.
(B) GROUNDS FOR TERMINATION OF BLUE CARD STATUS- ...
(b) Rights of Aliens Granted Blue Card Status-
(1) IN GENERAL- Except as otherwise provided under this subsection, an alien in blue card status shall be considered to be an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence for purposes of any law other than any provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.).
(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall adjust the status of an alien granted blue card status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if the Secretary determines that the following requirements are satisfied:
(i) QUALIFYING EMPLOYMENT- The alien has performed at least--
(I) 5 years of agricultural employment in the United States, for at least 100 work days or 575 hours, but in no case less than 575 hours per year, during the 5-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act; or
(II) 3 years of agricultural employment in the United States, for at least 150 work days or 863 hours, but in no case less than 863 hours per year, during the 5-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(ii) PROOF- An alien may demonstrate compliance with the requirement under clause (i) by submitting--
...
(C) GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL- Any alien granted blue card status who does not apply for adjustment of status under this subsection before the expiration of the application period described in subparagraph (A)(iv), or who fails to meet the other requirements of subparagraph (A) by the end of the applicable period, is deportable and may be removed under section 240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229a).
(D) PAYMENT OF TAXES-
(i) IN GENERAL- Not later than the date on which an alien's status is adjusted under this subsection, the alien shall establish the payment of any applicable Federal tax liability by establishing that--
(I) no such tax liability exists;
(II) all outstanding liabilities have been paid; or
(III) the alien has entered into an agreement for payment of all outstanding liabilities with the Internal Revenue Service.
....
(2) SPOUSES AND MINOR CHILDREN-(A) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary shall confer the status of lawful permanent resident on the spouse and minor child of an alien granted status under paragraph (1), including any individual who was a minor child on the date such alien was granted blue card status, if the spouse or minor child applies for such status, or if the principal alien includes the spouse or minor child in an application for adjustment of status to that of a lawful permanent resident.
(B) TREATMENT OF SPOUSES AND MINOR CHILDREN BEFORE ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS-
(i) REMOVAL- The spouse and any minor child of an alien granted blue card status may not be removed while such alien maintains such status, except as provided in subparagraph (C).
(ii) TRAVEL- The spouse and any minor child of an alien granted blue card status may travel outside the United States in the same manner as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.
(iii) EMPLOYMENT- The spouse of an alien granted blue card status may apply to the Secretary for a work permit to authorize such spouse to engage in any lawful employment in the United States while such alien maintains blue card status.
(C) GROUNDS FOR DENIAL OF ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS AND REMOVAL- The Secretary may deny an alien spouse or child adjustment of status under subparagraph (A) and may remove such spouse or child under section 240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229a) if the spouse or child--
(i) commits an act that makes the alien spouse or child inadmissible to the United States under section 212 of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1182), except as provided under subsection (e)(2);
(ii) is convicted of a felony or 3 or more misdemeanors committed in the United States; or
(iii) is convicted of a single misdemeanor for which the actual sentence served is 6 months or longer.
If S.2611 is going to be discussed in the senate/house, this will allow the spouse of the Blue card status worker (previously illegal worker and now regularized) to work for any employer -while the spouse is in blue card status-, shouldn't it be mentioned in the same law in the parragraph with the H-1B and dependandts provision that that the same applies for the H-1B spouses -that they could work for any employer while the H-1B status of the spouse is valid-? The L-1 spouses can work too so why do we H-4s have to suffer? Why nobody is advocating this?
This is the parragraph:
"... (iii) EMPLOYMENT- The spouse of an alien granted blue card status may apply to the Secretary for a work permit to authorize such spouse to engage in any lawful employment in the United States while such alien maintains blue card status. ..."
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SN02611: then select "Text of legislation" and then select "2 . Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by Senate)[S.2611.ES] " (unfortunately the direct link is temporary so you need to follow these instructions to reach it)
.2611
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by Senate)
________________________________________
TITLE IV--NONIMMIGRANT AND IMMIGRANT VISA REFORM
Subtitle A--Temporary Guest Workers
CHAPTER 1--PILOT PROGRAM FOR EARNED STATUS ADJUSTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL WORKERS
SEC. 613. AGRICULTURAL WORKERS.
(a) Blue Card Program-
(1) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary shall confer blue card status upon an alien who qualifies under this subsection if the Secretary determines that the alien--
(A) has performed agricultural employment in the United States for at least 863 hours or 150 work days during the 24-month period ending on December 31, 2005;
(B) applied for such status during the 18-month application period beginning on the first day of the seventh month that begins after the date of enactment of this Act; and
(C) is otherwise admissible to the United States under section 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182), except as otherwise provided under subsection (e)(2).
(2) AUTHORIZED TRAVEL- An alien in blue card status has the right to travel abroad (including commutation from a residence abroad) in the same manner as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.
(3) AUTHORIZED EMPLOYMENT- An alien in blue card status shall be provided an `employment authorized' endorsement or other appropriate work permit, in the same manner as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.
(4) TERMINATION OF BLUE CARD STATUS-
(A) IN GENERAL- The Secretary may terminate blue card status granted under this subsection only upon a determination under this subtitle that the alien is deportable.
(B) GROUNDS FOR TERMINATION OF BLUE CARD STATUS- ...
(b) Rights of Aliens Granted Blue Card Status-
(1) IN GENERAL- Except as otherwise provided under this subsection, an alien in blue card status shall be considered to be an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence for purposes of any law other than any provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.).
(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall adjust the status of an alien granted blue card status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if the Secretary determines that the following requirements are satisfied:
(i) QUALIFYING EMPLOYMENT- The alien has performed at least--
(I) 5 years of agricultural employment in the United States, for at least 100 work days or 575 hours, but in no case less than 575 hours per year, during the 5-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act; or
(II) 3 years of agricultural employment in the United States, for at least 150 work days or 863 hours, but in no case less than 863 hours per year, during the 5-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(ii) PROOF- An alien may demonstrate compliance with the requirement under clause (i) by submitting--
...
(C) GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL- Any alien granted blue card status who does not apply for adjustment of status under this subsection before the expiration of the application period described in subparagraph (A)(iv), or who fails to meet the other requirements of subparagraph (A) by the end of the applicable period, is deportable and may be removed under section 240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229a).
(D) PAYMENT OF TAXES-
(i) IN GENERAL- Not later than the date on which an alien's status is adjusted under this subsection, the alien shall establish the payment of any applicable Federal tax liability by establishing that--
(I) no such tax liability exists;
(II) all outstanding liabilities have been paid; or
(III) the alien has entered into an agreement for payment of all outstanding liabilities with the Internal Revenue Service.
....
(2) SPOUSES AND MINOR CHILDREN-(A) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary shall confer the status of lawful permanent resident on the spouse and minor child of an alien granted status under paragraph (1), including any individual who was a minor child on the date such alien was granted blue card status, if the spouse or minor child applies for such status, or if the principal alien includes the spouse or minor child in an application for adjustment of status to that of a lawful permanent resident.
(B) TREATMENT OF SPOUSES AND MINOR CHILDREN BEFORE ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS-
(i) REMOVAL- The spouse and any minor child of an alien granted blue card status may not be removed while such alien maintains such status, except as provided in subparagraph (C).
(ii) TRAVEL- The spouse and any minor child of an alien granted blue card status may travel outside the United States in the same manner as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.
(iii) EMPLOYMENT- The spouse of an alien granted blue card status may apply to the Secretary for a work permit to authorize such spouse to engage in any lawful employment in the United States while such alien maintains blue card status.
(C) GROUNDS FOR DENIAL OF ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS AND REMOVAL- The Secretary may deny an alien spouse or child adjustment of status under subparagraph (A) and may remove such spouse or child under section 240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229a) if the spouse or child--
(i) commits an act that makes the alien spouse or child inadmissible to the United States under section 212 of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1182), except as provided under subsection (e)(2);
(ii) is convicted of a felony or 3 or more misdemeanors committed in the United States; or
(iii) is convicted of a single misdemeanor for which the actual sentence served is 6 months or longer.
more...
Pegasus503
02-20 06:46 PM
The damn thing was taken down before I could save it. Did anyone save the file?
The link just worked for me
I saved it as a pdf and doc, but the upload keeps failing so here's the text:
Office of Communications
Questions & Answers
February 20, 2008
FBI NAME CHECK POLICY
Q. How has USCIS changed its national security reporting and adjudication requirements?
A. USCIS has not changed its background check policies as those policies related to naturalization applications. Recently, the agency did modify its existing guidance for applications where the immigration laws allow for the detention and removal of individuals if actionable information from a FBI name check response is received after approval. For these types of applications, including applications for lawful permanent residence, the adjudicators will approve the application if it is otherwise approvable and the FBI name check request has been pending for more than 180 days. No application for lawful permanent residence will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably.
Q. Why is this policy being implemented?
A. This policy change is in response to a 2005 DHS Inspector General recommendation that USCIS align its background check screening policies with those of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Q. Is this policy consistent with the national security priorities of USCIS and the Department of Homeland Security?
A. Yes. No application for lawful permanent residence will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably. In addition, in the unlikely event that DHS receives actionable information after the application is approved, it will initiate removal proceedings. Lastly, in general these individuals have been in the United States for some time and have previously been subjected to DHS background checks.
Q. What applications are affected by this policy change?
A. Applications included in this policy are:
• I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status;
• I-601, Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility;
• I-687, Application for Status as a Temporary Resident Under Section 245A of the Immigration and Nationality Act; and
• I-698, Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of Public Law 99-603).
Q. How many applications for lawful permanent residence are affected by this policy change?
A. USCIS is currently aware of approximately 47,000 applications for permanent residence (I-485) cases that are otherwise approvable but for the fact that an FBI name check is pending. In a subset of these case, the FBI name check request that been pending for more than 180 days. USCIS anticipates that the majority of the cases that are subject to this policy modification will be processed by mid-March 2008.
Q. Does this policy change affect naturalization applications?
A. No. There is no change in the requirement that FBI name check, FBI fingerprint and IBIS check results be obtained and resolved prior to the adjudication of an Application for Naturalization (N-400),
Q. How long will it take for USCIS to work through these cases affected by the policy change?
A. USCIS has begun identifying the cases affected by this policy modification in each field office and service center. Each office will evaluate the pending cases and will adjust their workload accordingly. USCIS anticipates that the majority of the cases that are subject to this policy modification will be processed by mid-March 2008. We recommend that customers wait until mid-March before inquiring about their cases. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate pending cases.
Q. USCIS Director Gonzalez pledged in his January 17, 2008, testimony regarding naturalization backlogs before Congress not to cut corners in the adjudicative process or risk national security in the interest of production? Does this policy comply with the Director’s pledge?
A. Yes. There is no change in the requirement that FBI name check, FBI fingerprint and IBIS check results be obtained and resolved prior to the adjudication of an Application for Naturalization (N-400), For those applications for permanent residence that are affected by this policy modification, no application will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably. USCIS will continue to initiate the FBI name check requests upon receipt of the applications and will review, monitor and track cases approved under this policy until the FBI name check is complete. In the unlikely event that DHS receives actionable information after the application is approved, it will initiate removal proceedings.
Q. The memorandum identifies I-485, I-601, I-687 and I-698 forms. Is there a plan to include other forms, specifically nonimmigrant and naturalization, in this policy?
A. No.
Q. Should customers contact USCIS through the 1-800 customer service number or make an INFOPASS appointment to visit their local office if they believe their application meets the criteria of this new policy?
A. We recommend that customers wait until mid-March before inquiring about cases affected by this policy modification. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate the relevant pending cases. If no action is taken by mid-March, we recommend inquiring with the USCIS customer service line at 1-800-375-5283.
Q10. Will USCIS automatically notify an applicant to appear at an Application Support Center if their fingerprints have expired?
A10. Applicants will be notified through an appointment notice if new/updated fingerprint checks are needed.
in the time it took me to copy and paste it was already posted above
The link just worked for me
I saved it as a pdf and doc, but the upload keeps failing so here's the text:
Office of Communications
Questions & Answers
February 20, 2008
FBI NAME CHECK POLICY
Q. How has USCIS changed its national security reporting and adjudication requirements?
A. USCIS has not changed its background check policies as those policies related to naturalization applications. Recently, the agency did modify its existing guidance for applications where the immigration laws allow for the detention and removal of individuals if actionable information from a FBI name check response is received after approval. For these types of applications, including applications for lawful permanent residence, the adjudicators will approve the application if it is otherwise approvable and the FBI name check request has been pending for more than 180 days. No application for lawful permanent residence will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably.
Q. Why is this policy being implemented?
A. This policy change is in response to a 2005 DHS Inspector General recommendation that USCIS align its background check screening policies with those of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Q. Is this policy consistent with the national security priorities of USCIS and the Department of Homeland Security?
A. Yes. No application for lawful permanent residence will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably. In addition, in the unlikely event that DHS receives actionable information after the application is approved, it will initiate removal proceedings. Lastly, in general these individuals have been in the United States for some time and have previously been subjected to DHS background checks.
Q. What applications are affected by this policy change?
A. Applications included in this policy are:
• I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status;
• I-601, Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility;
• I-687, Application for Status as a Temporary Resident Under Section 245A of the Immigration and Nationality Act; and
• I-698, Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of Public Law 99-603).
Q. How many applications for lawful permanent residence are affected by this policy change?
A. USCIS is currently aware of approximately 47,000 applications for permanent residence (I-485) cases that are otherwise approvable but for the fact that an FBI name check is pending. In a subset of these case, the FBI name check request that been pending for more than 180 days. USCIS anticipates that the majority of the cases that are subject to this policy modification will be processed by mid-March 2008.
Q. Does this policy change affect naturalization applications?
A. No. There is no change in the requirement that FBI name check, FBI fingerprint and IBIS check results be obtained and resolved prior to the adjudication of an Application for Naturalization (N-400),
Q. How long will it take for USCIS to work through these cases affected by the policy change?
A. USCIS has begun identifying the cases affected by this policy modification in each field office and service center. Each office will evaluate the pending cases and will adjust their workload accordingly. USCIS anticipates that the majority of the cases that are subject to this policy modification will be processed by mid-March 2008. We recommend that customers wait until mid-March before inquiring about their cases. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate pending cases.
Q. USCIS Director Gonzalez pledged in his January 17, 2008, testimony regarding naturalization backlogs before Congress not to cut corners in the adjudicative process or risk national security in the interest of production? Does this policy comply with the Director’s pledge?
A. Yes. There is no change in the requirement that FBI name check, FBI fingerprint and IBIS check results be obtained and resolved prior to the adjudication of an Application for Naturalization (N-400), For those applications for permanent residence that are affected by this policy modification, no application will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably. USCIS will continue to initiate the FBI name check requests upon receipt of the applications and will review, monitor and track cases approved under this policy until the FBI name check is complete. In the unlikely event that DHS receives actionable information after the application is approved, it will initiate removal proceedings.
Q. The memorandum identifies I-485, I-601, I-687 and I-698 forms. Is there a plan to include other forms, specifically nonimmigrant and naturalization, in this policy?
A. No.
Q. Should customers contact USCIS through the 1-800 customer service number or make an INFOPASS appointment to visit their local office if they believe their application meets the criteria of this new policy?
A. We recommend that customers wait until mid-March before inquiring about cases affected by this policy modification. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate the relevant pending cases. If no action is taken by mid-March, we recommend inquiring with the USCIS customer service line at 1-800-375-5283.
Q10. Will USCIS automatically notify an applicant to appear at an Application Support Center if their fingerprints have expired?
A10. Applicants will be notified through an appointment notice if new/updated fingerprint checks are needed.
in the time it took me to copy and paste it was already posted above
2010 Snake and Skull leg sleeve
priderock
06-27 05:05 PM
I understand ...................blah....??? any ideas ??
Yes, I have one :
You missed adding another option in the poll.
Option 3: "This idea is a non-starter, It wont work. "
Why do you care if you had already applied ?
Sorry !! Don't mean to beat the dead horse.
Yes, I have one :
You missed adding another option in the poll.
Option 3: "This idea is a non-starter, It wont work. "
Why do you care if you had already applied ?
Sorry !! Don't mean to beat the dead horse.
more...
hydboy77
02-12 10:05 AM
DOS and USCIS are making sure no visas are being wasted in any category whether it is FB or EB category. In this situation we cannot expect any FB visa wastage and spillover of those FB wasted visa in EB category anymore. Without the FB spillover there will not be any forward movement in EB2 during the august-september visa bulletin. Mpadapa analysis seems to be correct and is also backed by facts and numbers. With only 140k visas for EB and without any FB spillover we might actually see dates moving back and staying stagnant for EB2 india. Remember Eb2 india has never managed to move beyond April 1 2004 without the FB spillover in the last quarter.This is a terrible shock to everybody in EB2 India, I have been saying this all along that EB2 will be stagnant or move backward (because of eb3 line cutters).
My document uses similar method as used in 2007 USCIS Ombudsman report.
Here is the link to my document - link (http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=p_liYSUcqZRXA9OjuWUNRag&hl=en)
Similar table can be found in Ombudsman report - link (http://www.aila.org/content/fileviewer.aspx?docid=22650&linkid=162315) Look at Page 34 ( 52 / 145 )
The numbers in my report would be off by < +/- 50 visa's because I am using published data and Ombudsman uses internal DOS data.
The bottom line is EB limit has enjoyed spillover from unused FB visas and this year it is not going to happen. In the past we have been used to EB limits of 154K (2007), 163K (2008), this year we have to get used to the original limit 140K The movement of PD of various categories would take their own coarse based on USCIS interpretation of spillover between categories.
It would be great if members can update their profiles so that IV can do a better job of estimating the forward movement using the tracker.
My document uses similar method as used in 2007 USCIS Ombudsman report.
Here is the link to my document - link (http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=p_liYSUcqZRXA9OjuWUNRag&hl=en)
Similar table can be found in Ombudsman report - link (http://www.aila.org/content/fileviewer.aspx?docid=22650&linkid=162315) Look at Page 34 ( 52 / 145 )
The numbers in my report would be off by < +/- 50 visa's because I am using published data and Ombudsman uses internal DOS data.
The bottom line is EB limit has enjoyed spillover from unused FB visas and this year it is not going to happen. In the past we have been used to EB limits of 154K (2007), 163K (2008), this year we have to get used to the original limit 140K The movement of PD of various categories would take their own coarse based on USCIS interpretation of spillover between categories.
It would be great if members can update their profiles so that IV can do a better job of estimating the forward movement using the tracker.
hair skull tattoo sleeves. skull
ilikekilo
04-19 03:44 PM
I will be sending the following note to my senator and have already posted it to WhiteHouse.gov. I urge all those screwed by the ongoing retrogression to do the same.
"I am writing to inform you of how the country based quotas imposed on Employment Based green cards are unfair and totally illogical. When I immigrated to the US, I believed that this country was a meritocracy where you were judged based on your abilities and qualities. These country based quotas reward people depending on where they or their ancestors were born. This causes people from India and China to wait over a decade to get a green card whereas someone from another country with similar or lesser abilities can obtain permanent residence in half that time.
Since these EB category based green cards are awarded for professional skills, imposing a country based quota just does not make any sense. I urge you to work with Congress and change this discriminatory policy and reinforce that America is truly a society that celebrates meritocracy."
welcome to IV and thanks for your post. Please join our collective efforts starting with sending your lawyer an email to contact IV if they are interested for their banner display. Additionally you could consider contributing to IV, thus becoming a donor and get more updates as well and participate in our attempt to address burning issues we have that affect almost all immigrants like you and me.
any questions just ask someone might try answer...
also please take a moment to update your profile as well as that data will help us all
"I am writing to inform you of how the country based quotas imposed on Employment Based green cards are unfair and totally illogical. When I immigrated to the US, I believed that this country was a meritocracy where you were judged based on your abilities and qualities. These country based quotas reward people depending on where they or their ancestors were born. This causes people from India and China to wait over a decade to get a green card whereas someone from another country with similar or lesser abilities can obtain permanent residence in half that time.
Since these EB category based green cards are awarded for professional skills, imposing a country based quota just does not make any sense. I urge you to work with Congress and change this discriminatory policy and reinforce that America is truly a society that celebrates meritocracy."
welcome to IV and thanks for your post. Please join our collective efforts starting with sending your lawyer an email to contact IV if they are interested for their banner display. Additionally you could consider contributing to IV, thus becoming a donor and get more updates as well and participate in our attempt to address burning issues we have that affect almost all immigrants like you and me.
any questions just ask someone might try answer...
also please take a moment to update your profile as well as that data will help us all
more...
downthedrain
02-18 10:31 PM
Aachoo, downthedrain, jazzbytheway, sushilup, rvr_jcop -
question 1) did both you and your spouse's I485 cases receive the "pending at the location it was transfered to"?
question 2) did both you and your spouses I485 cases receive RFE?
question 3) did both you and your spouses case have an LUD after RFE?
have you guys received the RFE notices and if yes, what is USCIS asking
thanks
Sree
LUD for my wife before RFE. RFE on just mine. got 1HLUD and 3 SLUDs on just mine after RFE received, no transfer on both cases
question 1) did both you and your spouse's I485 cases receive the "pending at the location it was transfered to"?
question 2) did both you and your spouses I485 cases receive RFE?
question 3) did both you and your spouses case have an LUD after RFE?
have you guys received the RFE notices and if yes, what is USCIS asking
thanks
Sree
LUD for my wife before RFE. RFE on just mine. got 1HLUD and 3 SLUDs on just mine after RFE received, no transfer on both cases
hot skull tattoo sleeves. skull
BharatPremi
05-05 04:25 PM
Gurus,
Since EB2-India is current, I am exploring the possibility of interfiling.
Goal: Interfile in such a way that my new application under EB2 (New case
category) get attached with old case (EB3) priority date (07/2003) and
thus enable me to take advantage of EB2 current PD as declared in
April 2008 bulletin.
GC Application/s history:
-----------------------
OLD APPLICATION
Employer: xyz
Category: EB3-RIR Conversion-India
Priority Date: 07/2003
Labor approved
I-140 approved
I-140 approval date: 06/2007
AP and EAD approved
485 receipt date: 07/1*/2007
NEW APPLICATION
Employer: ZAB
Category: EB2-India
Priority Date: 06/2006
PERM LABOR approved
I-140 approved
I-140 approval date:08/2006
No AP/EAD/485 applied under this application
Notes: (1) Currently working for company CDE on EAD.
(2) "A" number on both I-140 are similar and different from "A" number
on 485 file.
(3) Occupation codes for both category are "Close" and matches the
job profile with current employment on EAD
Question: Is my goal achievable? If yes, then what to do and how to
proceed?
Thanks in advance for any help to sort this out.
- BharatPremi
Update: My lawyer just got back to me on this. Since I wanted the interfiling in such a way that I can maintain old PD ( July 2003 based - EB3 filing - 485 filed under this) with new application category EB2 (new application - June 2006 PD), lawyer told me that it is not possible. Once I interfile my new application, end effect will be having my 485 based on EB2- with new priority date (June 2006). So at this moment I have 2 choices...
1) Wait out till July 2003 under EB3-India become current
2) If EB3-India is not moving at all or July 2003 does not become current for EB3 but meanwhile if EB2-India cutoff date crosses June 2006 then file interfiling.
Since EB2-India is current, I am exploring the possibility of interfiling.
Goal: Interfile in such a way that my new application under EB2 (New case
category) get attached with old case (EB3) priority date (07/2003) and
thus enable me to take advantage of EB2 current PD as declared in
April 2008 bulletin.
GC Application/s history:
-----------------------
OLD APPLICATION
Employer: xyz
Category: EB3-RIR Conversion-India
Priority Date: 07/2003
Labor approved
I-140 approved
I-140 approval date: 06/2007
AP and EAD approved
485 receipt date: 07/1*/2007
NEW APPLICATION
Employer: ZAB
Category: EB2-India
Priority Date: 06/2006
PERM LABOR approved
I-140 approved
I-140 approval date:08/2006
No AP/EAD/485 applied under this application
Notes: (1) Currently working for company CDE on EAD.
(2) "A" number on both I-140 are similar and different from "A" number
on 485 file.
(3) Occupation codes for both category are "Close" and matches the
job profile with current employment on EAD
Question: Is my goal achievable? If yes, then what to do and how to
proceed?
Thanks in advance for any help to sort this out.
- BharatPremi
Update: My lawyer just got back to me on this. Since I wanted the interfiling in such a way that I can maintain old PD ( July 2003 based - EB3 filing - 485 filed under this) with new application category EB2 (new application - June 2006 PD), lawyer told me that it is not possible. Once I interfile my new application, end effect will be having my 485 based on EB2- with new priority date (June 2006). So at this moment I have 2 choices...
1) Wait out till July 2003 under EB3-India become current
2) If EB3-India is not moving at all or July 2003 does not become current for EB3 but meanwhile if EB2-India cutoff date crosses June 2006 then file interfiling.
more...
house Skull Tattoo Sleeve Designs.
plassey
08-22 05:48 PM
He has just one option, get the laws changed. Not beating the dead man but folks should understand the importance of IV activities.
Look at the state of affair of Tri State, thousands of people like these but only 25 so far signed up for DC rally. Not enough to fill even one bus WHAT A SHAME!
Give the guy a break...he's just asking around as to what his options are... besides, one can't 'GUARANTEE' for how long a period of time one would have to wait as far as priority dates are concerned. The July Fiasco confirmed that, if anything...I agree that the rally is very important in making further strides, however there's no reason to be so harsh...
abhidos37, unfortunately since your application was received when your priority date wasn't current, you're going to have to wait until your priority date becomes current again.
Good luck!
Wake up! Oct numbers are already out by AILA, it is stuck in 01. You got only one option , which is IV
Mine is EB3 from India. I still hope the next years numbers could be coming out on Oct.
Thats what IV is trying to do. Sitting in your holes will not achieve anything. Speak up
You don't have to be so nasty. I thought everyone on here is supposed to support one another for the cause?
Look at the state of affair of Tri State, thousands of people like these but only 25 so far signed up for DC rally. Not enough to fill even one bus WHAT A SHAME!
Give the guy a break...he's just asking around as to what his options are... besides, one can't 'GUARANTEE' for how long a period of time one would have to wait as far as priority dates are concerned. The July Fiasco confirmed that, if anything...I agree that the rally is very important in making further strides, however there's no reason to be so harsh...
abhidos37, unfortunately since your application was received when your priority date wasn't current, you're going to have to wait until your priority date becomes current again.
Good luck!
Wake up! Oct numbers are already out by AILA, it is stuck in 01. You got only one option , which is IV
Mine is EB3 from India. I still hope the next years numbers could be coming out on Oct.
Thats what IV is trying to do. Sitting in your holes will not achieve anything. Speak up
You don't have to be so nasty. I thought everyone on here is supposed to support one another for the cause?
tattoo skull tattoo sleeve
gcformeornot
08-10 10:55 AM
If you had the opportunity of getting a Substitute labor and potentially get your GC sooner rather than later, wouldn't you grab it with both hands. It is the GC Freedom.
I am also thankful that DOL and USCIS have banned Labor Substitutions but please give those who have used them a break. They are also in the same boat as you and me (people with regular labor). Chasing the American Dream. No offense intended.:o
not in same boat as you and me buddy. They are in a boat ahead of me and you....
I am also thankful that DOL and USCIS have banned Labor Substitutions but please give those who have used them a break. They are also in the same boat as you and me (people with regular labor). Chasing the American Dream. No offense intended.:o
not in same boat as you and me buddy. They are in a boat ahead of me and you....
more...
pictures Snake and Skull leg sleeve
punjabi
08-28 04:15 PM
hey guys...
I read this amazing thread and I am feeling terrible guilty of not going to DC for Rally. I thought contributing $100 was enough.
YES, I GOTTA GO TO RALLY AND BE A PART OF THIS EFFORT. AND I WILL GO.
Guys: If IV wins and we are able to change the law.....and then someone comes across you and ask:
"Did You help?"
What will be your reaction? Will you pump your chest out and scream "YESSSS..."?
I know, I will. How about you?
I read this amazing thread and I am feeling terrible guilty of not going to DC for Rally. I thought contributing $100 was enough.
YES, I GOTTA GO TO RALLY AND BE A PART OF THIS EFFORT. AND I WILL GO.
Guys: If IV wins and we are able to change the law.....and then someone comes across you and ask:
"Did You help?"
What will be your reaction? Will you pump your chest out and scream "YESSSS..."?
I know, I will. How about you?
dresses This full sleeve tattoo
gcseeker2002
08-22 07:38 PM
I was able to successfully port my EB3 to EB2 and received my GC last month. I am working for a mid-size American consulting firm. My background is Bachelors in Computers from India and did Masters in Computers from US.
I filed my EB3 labor in AUG 2005 and got both labor and I140 approved in two months.
Filed 485 in July 2007 & got EAD/AP.
Went to my Employer and requested them to either refile my application for EB2 or I will have to resign. Since I was already working as PM, it was easy for my Employer to file for EB2 for PM position.
Filed EB2 labor in March 2009, Got approved in Jan 2010
Got EB2 I140 approved in March 2010
Late March Case transferred to Local Office.
Personal Interview in May 2010 - IO was not sure why i was called for interview. No Questions asked and told to wait till date gets current.
Date got current in July.
- Call multiple times 800 number only standard response
- Went to local office and request update. IO told to wait for a week. 2 days later on 14th July got my GC approved.
I believe even if you get your GC 6 months early by porting dates, its worth it. I hope my story helps you.
Best Luck!
I am already using my EB3 EAD to work (I invoked AC21 last year to change job) Can I know how much it costs to file EB2 labor+I-140+interfile process , if my current employer says that I have to pay for it myself (I was given this offer because I told them I did not need sponsorship and I had EAD).
I filed my EB3 labor in AUG 2005 and got both labor and I140 approved in two months.
Filed 485 in July 2007 & got EAD/AP.
Went to my Employer and requested them to either refile my application for EB2 or I will have to resign. Since I was already working as PM, it was easy for my Employer to file for EB2 for PM position.
Filed EB2 labor in March 2009, Got approved in Jan 2010
Got EB2 I140 approved in March 2010
Late March Case transferred to Local Office.
Personal Interview in May 2010 - IO was not sure why i was called for interview. No Questions asked and told to wait till date gets current.
Date got current in July.
- Call multiple times 800 number only standard response
- Went to local office and request update. IO told to wait for a week. 2 days later on 14th July got my GC approved.
I believe even if you get your GC 6 months early by porting dates, its worth it. I hope my story helps you.
Best Luck!
I am already using my EB3 EAD to work (I invoked AC21 last year to change job) Can I know how much it costs to file EB2 labor+I-140+interfile process , if my current employer says that I have to pay for it myself (I was given this offer because I told them I did not need sponsorship and I had EAD).
more...
makeup Lower 1/2 sleeve (forearm)
n_2006
10-12 10:48 AM
I do not unterstand why so many people here cry on others. You discuss about your problem and try to find ways to resolve. Everybody has to resolve their own issues first(let it be small or big). People in FP, EAD stage can not cry on people who already got GC or citizenship.
Thats true..everybody are bothered about EAD and FP. I am here for more than 8 years in this country. IV should emphasise this and USICS should allow affected candidates like us to file I-485 and atleast get EAD. we have priority date earlier compared to others.
Thats true..everybody are bothered about EAD and FP. I am here for more than 8 years in this country. IV should emphasise this and USICS should allow affected candidates like us to file I-485 and atleast get EAD. we have priority date earlier compared to others.
girlfriend skull tattoo sleeves. girly
Leo07
06-02 12:02 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~bump~~~~~~~~~~
hairstyles skull tattoo sleeves.
mammoy2k
12-28 03:57 PM
As per the memo if the I-140 petition was approvable at the time of filing, one should be fine even if employer tries to withdraw unapproved I-140.
If there is an RFE, then sure things are messy if employer does not cooperate.
If you try to use AC21 without an approved I-140 your employer can withdraw the I-140 petition ( since it is not approved yet ) . So best wait a few months until it is approved and then merrily go the AC21 way
If there is an RFE, then sure things are messy if employer does not cooperate.
If you try to use AC21 without an approved I-140 your employer can withdraw the I-140 petition ( since it is not approved yet ) . So best wait a few months until it is approved and then merrily go the AC21 way
desi3933
12-22 12:54 PM
I do have very different experience. I never had any issues with the indian consulate. couple of months back I have sent the papers for my daughter's PIO card. With in two weeks I got the PIO in mail.
My experience has been very good, too.
I had family emergency and needed visa to travel to India. Entry Visa (they don't issue Tourist Visa to people of Indian origin) was issued in 1 hour. The staff was very helpful.
________________
Not a legal advice.
My experience has been very good, too.
I had family emergency and needed visa to travel to India. Entry Visa (they don't issue Tourist Visa to people of Indian origin) was issued in 1 hour. The staff was very helpful.
________________
Not a legal advice.
chanduv23
07-10 08:23 AM
The way I look at it is - Loo is a target we must aim. CNN will definitely change its course and path it is taking if we start exposing Loo Dog. Once truth comes out, CNN may be worried about hurting its image and will definitely change courses.
Believe me guys, CNN is still the most powerful media around, every airport, cafe etc. have only CNN running, CNN.com
I am sure it is worth a try
Believe me guys, CNN is still the most powerful media around, every airport, cafe etc. have only CNN running, CNN.com
I am sure it is worth a try