GCAmigo
01-31 03:27 PM
What if the H4 candidate recieves H1 but decides not to start a job at all. What will be his/her status in that case? H4 or H1?
H1-B without paystub...
H1-B without paystub...
wallpaper Tiara+crown+clipart
anurakt
12-27 10:56 AM
France
US Passport Holders: Not required
Indian Passport Holders: Required*
*Exemptions
If your transit time is less then 6 hours and you hold a valid US VISA or Green card, you do not require a transit VISA.
* No airport transit VISA is required, if your tranit time is less than 6 hours and you are holder of USA Permanent Resident Card (Green Card) or a valid permanent resident permit in any of the countries of the European Union or a residence permit in Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland, Monaco, Andorra, the Holy See, San-Marino, Canada or Japan. (if your layover is more than 6 hours, you need a transit VISA even if you have the permanent residence permit for any of the countries mentioned above).
* No Airport Transit Visa is required if your transit time is less than 6 hours and you hold a valid USA visa in the passport and confirmed airline tickets (no open tickets) for these nationalities only (if your layover is more than 6 hours you need a transit VISA even if you have valid US VISA).
For more information on VISA / transit VISA requirements, please visit the official website of French consulate/embassy.
http://www.consulfrance-newyork.org/us/visas/airporttransit.htm
Germany
US Passport Holders: Not required
Indian Passport Holders: Required*
*Exemptions
If you hold
a residence title of a member state of the European Union or a member state of the European Economic Area (EEA, i.e. Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway) or
a residence permit of Andorra, Japan, Canada, Monaco, San Marino, Switzerland or the USA you do not need a transit visa.
Airport transit travelers who are holding a valid visa for the USA (an approval notice is not sufficient), Canada or Switzerland, are not obliged to obtain an airport transit visa prior to departure. Until further notice for these travelers a "visa on arrival" will be issued by the competent authorities at the respective airport in Germany and no specific action is required from them to obtain an airport transit visa.
If you are still in doubt whether you need an airport transit visa, do not hesitate to call the German mission which serves your place of residence in the US.
For more information on VISA / transit VISA requirements, please visit the official website of German consulate/embassy.
http://www.germany-info.org/relaunch/info/consular_services/visa/countrylist.html#except1
Address / Contact numbers in USA
There are many offices spread across different states in USA. To check the address, contact numbers, email address, working hours, etc., please click the below given URL.
http://www.germany-info.org/relaunch/info/consular_services/visa.html
Italy
US Passport Holders: Not required
Indian Passport Holders: Not Required
For more information on VISA / transit VISA requirements, please visit the official website of Italian consulate/embassy. http://www.italconschicago.org
Address / Contact numbers in USA
CHICAGO - Consolato Generale d'Italia Tel.: 312 467 1550
500 North Michigan Ave - Suite 1850 Fax : 312 467 1335
CHICAGO IL 60611
e-mail: chicago.visa@itwash.org
DENVER - Vice Consolato Onorario Tel.: 303 224 9927
7325 So. Jackson St. Fax : 303 224 9930
Centennial, CO 80122
Vice Console Onorario - Maria Elisabetta ALLEN
e-mail: italyconsulcolo@email.msn.com
KANSAS CITY - Vice Consolato Onorario Tel.: 913 281 2222
New Brotherhood Building Fax : 913 321 6525
753 State Avenue, Suite 102
KANSAS CITY KS 66101
Vice Console Onorario- Roberto L. SERRA
e-mail: RSerra@wycokck.org
ST. PAUL - Consolato Onorario Tel./Fax: 651- 641- 0207
1844 Portland Avenue
ST PAUL MN 55104
Console Onorario - Jane Calabria McPeak
e-mail: jcm4@comcast.net
ST. LOUIS - Vice Consolato Onorario Tel.: 314 259 2413
Bryan Cave LLP Voice Mail: 314 259 2008
One Metropolitan Square , Suite 3600
211 North Broadway
ST. LOUIS MO 63102
Vice Console Onorario - Joseph COLAGIOVANNI
e-mail: jcolagiovanni@bryancavellp.com
Consular Correspondents:
MILWAUKEE - Dominic H. FRINZI
2825 North Colonial Drive
MILWAUKEE WI 53208
Tel. (414) 475-5120
IOWA - Nicholas CRITELLI
317 Sixth Avenue, suite 500
DES MOINES IA
Tel. (515) 243-3122
Fax (515) 243-3121
ILLINOIS - John BUCARI
500 E. Monroe St.
Springfield, IL 62701-1509
Tel. (217) 782-3000
Fax (217) 558-4297
email: JBucari@bre.state.il.us
* It is the responsibility of all travelers to obtain any required visas and travel permissions. I recommend all travelers check with the airline they are flying regarding applicable Transit and Visa Rules for the country they are transiting through. Immigrationvoice or myslef will NOT be responsible for any traveler being denied boarding on account of incorrect documentation.
US Passport Holders: Not required
Indian Passport Holders: Required*
*Exemptions
If your transit time is less then 6 hours and you hold a valid US VISA or Green card, you do not require a transit VISA.
* No airport transit VISA is required, if your tranit time is less than 6 hours and you are holder of USA Permanent Resident Card (Green Card) or a valid permanent resident permit in any of the countries of the European Union or a residence permit in Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland, Monaco, Andorra, the Holy See, San-Marino, Canada or Japan. (if your layover is more than 6 hours, you need a transit VISA even if you have the permanent residence permit for any of the countries mentioned above).
* No Airport Transit Visa is required if your transit time is less than 6 hours and you hold a valid USA visa in the passport and confirmed airline tickets (no open tickets) for these nationalities only (if your layover is more than 6 hours you need a transit VISA even if you have valid US VISA).
For more information on VISA / transit VISA requirements, please visit the official website of French consulate/embassy.
http://www.consulfrance-newyork.org/us/visas/airporttransit.htm
Germany
US Passport Holders: Not required
Indian Passport Holders: Required*
*Exemptions
If you hold
a residence title of a member state of the European Union or a member state of the European Economic Area (EEA, i.e. Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway) or
a residence permit of Andorra, Japan, Canada, Monaco, San Marino, Switzerland or the USA you do not need a transit visa.
Airport transit travelers who are holding a valid visa for the USA (an approval notice is not sufficient), Canada or Switzerland, are not obliged to obtain an airport transit visa prior to departure. Until further notice for these travelers a "visa on arrival" will be issued by the competent authorities at the respective airport in Germany and no specific action is required from them to obtain an airport transit visa.
If you are still in doubt whether you need an airport transit visa, do not hesitate to call the German mission which serves your place of residence in the US.
For more information on VISA / transit VISA requirements, please visit the official website of German consulate/embassy.
http://www.germany-info.org/relaunch/info/consular_services/visa/countrylist.html#except1
Address / Contact numbers in USA
There are many offices spread across different states in USA. To check the address, contact numbers, email address, working hours, etc., please click the below given URL.
http://www.germany-info.org/relaunch/info/consular_services/visa.html
Italy
US Passport Holders: Not required
Indian Passport Holders: Not Required
For more information on VISA / transit VISA requirements, please visit the official website of Italian consulate/embassy. http://www.italconschicago.org
Address / Contact numbers in USA
CHICAGO - Consolato Generale d'Italia Tel.: 312 467 1550
500 North Michigan Ave - Suite 1850 Fax : 312 467 1335
CHICAGO IL 60611
e-mail: chicago.visa@itwash.org
DENVER - Vice Consolato Onorario Tel.: 303 224 9927
7325 So. Jackson St. Fax : 303 224 9930
Centennial, CO 80122
Vice Console Onorario - Maria Elisabetta ALLEN
e-mail: italyconsulcolo@email.msn.com
KANSAS CITY - Vice Consolato Onorario Tel.: 913 281 2222
New Brotherhood Building Fax : 913 321 6525
753 State Avenue, Suite 102
KANSAS CITY KS 66101
Vice Console Onorario- Roberto L. SERRA
e-mail: RSerra@wycokck.org
ST. PAUL - Consolato Onorario Tel./Fax: 651- 641- 0207
1844 Portland Avenue
ST PAUL MN 55104
Console Onorario - Jane Calabria McPeak
e-mail: jcm4@comcast.net
ST. LOUIS - Vice Consolato Onorario Tel.: 314 259 2413
Bryan Cave LLP Voice Mail: 314 259 2008
One Metropolitan Square , Suite 3600
211 North Broadway
ST. LOUIS MO 63102
Vice Console Onorario - Joseph COLAGIOVANNI
e-mail: jcolagiovanni@bryancavellp.com
Consular Correspondents:
MILWAUKEE - Dominic H. FRINZI
2825 North Colonial Drive
MILWAUKEE WI 53208
Tel. (414) 475-5120
IOWA - Nicholas CRITELLI
317 Sixth Avenue, suite 500
DES MOINES IA
Tel. (515) 243-3122
Fax (515) 243-3121
ILLINOIS - John BUCARI
500 E. Monroe St.
Springfield, IL 62701-1509
Tel. (217) 782-3000
Fax (217) 558-4297
email: JBucari@bre.state.il.us
* It is the responsibility of all travelers to obtain any required visas and travel permissions. I recommend all travelers check with the airline they are flying regarding applicable Transit and Visa Rules for the country they are transiting through. Immigrationvoice or myslef will NOT be responsible for any traveler being denied boarding on account of incorrect documentation.
chanduv23
02-17 11:17 AM
I am volunteering to coordinate the collection and redemption of airline miles.
Those who would like to donate or in need please PM me with your Name and Phone number along with a good time to reach.
if you are donating miles, please also provide the airlines and the number of miles you wish to donate and contact info (name and phone number)
Please do not forget to put your phone number when you send me the PM.
Thanks
Great Vin. I would be glad to see you there. I am also reaching out to some old members who did this earlier and see if they can do any help in any possible way.
Those who would like to donate or in need please PM me with your Name and Phone number along with a good time to reach.
if you are donating miles, please also provide the airlines and the number of miles you wish to donate and contact info (name and phone number)
Please do not forget to put your phone number when you send me the PM.
Thanks
Great Vin. I would be glad to see you there. I am also reaching out to some old members who did this earlier and see if they can do any help in any possible way.
2011 Play: King Lear - QUEEN
sc3
10-16 04:45 PM
Read your above sentence, then read your below sentence. If I try to find a relation between these two sentences I do not know what you are talking.
I think you know pretty well what I am talking about. USCIS has not "reacted" in any malicious way against the immigrant community wrt. to July 07 actions. If you find they have done so they will be severely answerable to various laws in the country. Do you think the lawyers will keep quite when they sense blood in the water? There has been no "reaction" by USCIS, except as a figment of imagination in the minds of this community.
Again I am not sure what you are saying but MY PD is in early 2004 and RD was in Aug, they moved my application to another centre and my new RD is Oct. then I saw 2006 and 2007 cases getting approved. This is not right, why are they going by RD and not on PD?.
USCIS has always gone by RD, not PD to a large extent (there have been deviations here and there, but none of them are due to policy issues). It is unfortunate that due to your application movement to another center you got a bad "RD" -- you should probably work with them to get the RD fixed.
PD based processing is not sustainable as I had highlighted before. If you applied for 485 before someone else, you should be approved first. Now I am saying applied for 485, not Labor/Perm. Now dont come back with a post saying I applied July 2 00:01, but someone with July 3rd 23:55 is getting approved before I am. Afford some granularity of a week or so.
Exactly dude, there should be some synchronization between DOL and USCIS. Just saying that USCIS is not responsible for DOL’s actions does not solve the problem, they can conveniently blame each other and take till eternity to process applications and you will keep saying the same thing that USCIS is not to be blamed.
No, you did not say that, all you said was USCIS is not doing anything wrong.
I did not say USCIS is "doodh ka dula", but DoL and USCIS are two different entities. You cant blame one for the problems of the other. USCIS has its share of blames, but to blame everything on USCIS just shows that you have lost your objectivity. You don't want to be blamed for the actions of your colleague, so why do you blame USCIS for things which are not their doing??
If you keep blaming USCIS for everything (I am sure some of you want to blame the economic crisis, the Darfur issue etc. on USCIS too, come on!, you know you wanted to ;) ), the community's credibility comes into question.
End of the day, you (and/or others) are distracting the OP's idea with FUD. If you have constructive ideas to channel OPs enthusiasm you should suggest alternatives. Not make her/him fearful with untenable accusations of retribution from USCIS.
I think you know pretty well what I am talking about. USCIS has not "reacted" in any malicious way against the immigrant community wrt. to July 07 actions. If you find they have done so they will be severely answerable to various laws in the country. Do you think the lawyers will keep quite when they sense blood in the water? There has been no "reaction" by USCIS, except as a figment of imagination in the minds of this community.
Again I am not sure what you are saying but MY PD is in early 2004 and RD was in Aug, they moved my application to another centre and my new RD is Oct. then I saw 2006 and 2007 cases getting approved. This is not right, why are they going by RD and not on PD?.
USCIS has always gone by RD, not PD to a large extent (there have been deviations here and there, but none of them are due to policy issues). It is unfortunate that due to your application movement to another center you got a bad "RD" -- you should probably work with them to get the RD fixed.
PD based processing is not sustainable as I had highlighted before. If you applied for 485 before someone else, you should be approved first. Now I am saying applied for 485, not Labor/Perm. Now dont come back with a post saying I applied July 2 00:01, but someone with July 3rd 23:55 is getting approved before I am. Afford some granularity of a week or so.
Exactly dude, there should be some synchronization between DOL and USCIS. Just saying that USCIS is not responsible for DOL’s actions does not solve the problem, they can conveniently blame each other and take till eternity to process applications and you will keep saying the same thing that USCIS is not to be blamed.
No, you did not say that, all you said was USCIS is not doing anything wrong.
I did not say USCIS is "doodh ka dula", but DoL and USCIS are two different entities. You cant blame one for the problems of the other. USCIS has its share of blames, but to blame everything on USCIS just shows that you have lost your objectivity. You don't want to be blamed for the actions of your colleague, so why do you blame USCIS for things which are not their doing??
If you keep blaming USCIS for everything (I am sure some of you want to blame the economic crisis, the Darfur issue etc. on USCIS too, come on!, you know you wanted to ;) ), the community's credibility comes into question.
End of the day, you (and/or others) are distracting the OP's idea with FUD. If you have constructive ideas to channel OPs enthusiasm you should suggest alternatives. Not make her/him fearful with untenable accusations of retribution from USCIS.
more...
andycool
09-10 02:33 PM
What are the hopes for EB3-I?
ZERO
Till we spend our time in predictions and tracking, till the time we stop jumping the gun in calling for lawsuits, till the time we stop interpreting the INA to find a smoking gun, till the time we stop calling names for USCIS and DOS, till the time we stop blaming 245(i), till the time we stop engaging in eb2 v/s eb3 fight, till the time we stop fighting with each other over irrelevant things, till the time we stop creating these stupid polls, till the time we stop engaging in "number crunching" whatever that means, until that time there is ZERO hope for Eb3-I. Once we stop wasting our time on all these irrelevant things, we will then start spending our time on more meaningful things like speaking with the members of Congress. Then, and only then, there will be a chance of anything good happening for EB3-I.
Port to EB-2 ......
ZERO
Till we spend our time in predictions and tracking, till the time we stop jumping the gun in calling for lawsuits, till the time we stop interpreting the INA to find a smoking gun, till the time we stop calling names for USCIS and DOS, till the time we stop blaming 245(i), till the time we stop engaging in eb2 v/s eb3 fight, till the time we stop fighting with each other over irrelevant things, till the time we stop creating these stupid polls, till the time we stop engaging in "number crunching" whatever that means, until that time there is ZERO hope for Eb3-I. Once we stop wasting our time on all these irrelevant things, we will then start spending our time on more meaningful things like speaking with the members of Congress. Then, and only then, there will be a chance of anything good happening for EB3-I.
Port to EB-2 ......
ak_2006
09-09 02:37 PM
I feel like there will be no special help from anybody including IV. I am not blaming IV for this as they have to fight for all. We (EBI) need lead the fight to do something.
But many of us not willing to do spend time/money for this cause. If a person can't do those, switch jobs, and find jobs where we can start processing in EB2, or ask current employers to apply in EB2.
But many of us not willing to do spend time/money for this cause. If a person can't do those, switch jobs, and find jobs where we can start processing in EB2, or ask current employers to apply in EB2.
more...
psam
02-03 10:52 AM
While your concern is genuine, our experience says it is not that easy to remove country quota with a 2 line bill. IV will advocate for it, but understand that it will not happen in isolation and it is not feasible in an isolated bill.
In the current economic environment, removing country quota seems like the only argument that can fly, since it does not increase actual visas.
In the current economic environment, removing country quota seems like the only argument that can fly, since it does not increase actual visas.
2010 and king promenade clipart
newuser
04-21 11:45 PM
Thanks for the updates.
more...
GCStatus
09-18 12:20 AM
I will take it easy if you weren't intentionally insulting.
Woohoo, we have a winner
Woohoo, we have a winner
hair Rufus King (1755–1827) Gilbert
StarSun
02-18 11:04 AM
Sukhwinder is coordinating the efforts on carpool and hosting options.
Members who wish to carpool please post on the thread as well as send an email to Sukhwinder - 2011carpool@gmail.com
Vinay is coordinating the efforts on airmiles, people wishing to donate air miles or request help for using the air miles, please PM vin13.
Thank you.
Members who wish to carpool please post on the thread as well as send an email to Sukhwinder - 2011carpool@gmail.com
Vinay is coordinating the efforts on airmiles, people wishing to donate air miles or request help for using the air miles, please PM vin13.
Thank you.
more...
singhsa3
03-04 01:30 PM
Done, thanks for your comments
perhaps you want to make it even simpler?
- Remove all the LC/I-140 details, just say that we are at the last stage of a long and arduous process, and are stuck waiting because of very small immigration quota's that were set decades ago which are completely out of line with real supply-demand for the size of todays high-tech workforce. In addition USCIS inefficiency has resulted in them not utilizing even this tiny quota fully, in the past few years.
- instead of EAD and validity just say getting a mortage is a lot easier if your immigration status is permanent. In this final stage of immigration most of us have work authorization that needs to be renewed every year, and mortgage companies dont accept that.
copy paste the suggested fixes there (or add a link to the administrative fixes campaign post)
perhaps you want to make it even simpler?
- Remove all the LC/I-140 details, just say that we are at the last stage of a long and arduous process, and are stuck waiting because of very small immigration quota's that were set decades ago which are completely out of line with real supply-demand for the size of todays high-tech workforce. In addition USCIS inefficiency has resulted in them not utilizing even this tiny quota fully, in the past few years.
- instead of EAD and validity just say getting a mortage is a lot easier if your immigration status is permanent. In this final stage of immigration most of us have work authorization that needs to be renewed every year, and mortgage companies dont accept that.
copy paste the suggested fixes there (or add a link to the administrative fixes campaign post)
hot building construction clip art
satysh
07-17 03:59 PM
NumberUSA removed the fax now.
http://numbersusa.com/faxcenter
Our collective effort worked. Knowledge & truth always wins. We need to put collective effort to research and attack the contents of these kinds of groups.
http://numbersusa.com/faxcenter
Our collective effort worked. Knowledge & truth always wins. We need to put collective effort to research and attack the contents of these kinds of groups.
more...
house King Size Bed clip art
varshadas
01-30 03:15 PM
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
Thanks,
Varsha
tattoo free clipart picture king
oliTwist
01-17 03:06 PM
Sometime back I had read this book Inscrutable Americans by Anurag Mathur (http://www.amazon.com/Inscrutable-Americans-Anurag-Mathur/dp/1577310241) which is kind of hilarious story of someone like us duriing late 90s. I guess now your (many of our story) would worth another book :)!!
more...
pictures Music, King and Queen.
yabadaba
02-21 03:46 PM
pitha...while i bear the frustration of the doors slamming on my face in october 2005 (eb2 was current prior to that) for the sheer fact that i had an incompetent attorney during the initial days when my LC process started.....i would not go far as saying that the porters have "cheated" the system.
The law via Chintakuntla provided that a person with a bachelors degree and 5 years experience is equal to an advanced degree holder.
All the porters are doing is following the law. Its frustrating to people like you and me, but its their right. If i was in their position and the law allowed me to take advantage of a provision of this nature, I would gladly take it.
The law via Chintakuntla provided that a person with a bachelors degree and 5 years experience is equal to an advanced degree holder.
All the porters are doing is following the law. Its frustrating to people like you and me, but its their right. If i was in their position and the law allowed me to take advantage of a provision of this nature, I would gladly take it.
dresses QUEEN AND KING PROMENADE CLIPART. networks king magazines
paskal
07-03 01:56 PM
AFAIK, this does not work for people who are already in the US. One has to work in their native or different county to be eligible for the EB1 managerial position here. Some one might have sneaked away this way at some time. But this is definitely not happening on a large scale as EB1 is current for all countries for quite some time. If a lot of folks are getting away, EB1 cannot be current for long time.
this does happen- for people in the US already. larger companies find it convenient to simply send the employee out for exactly 365 days and then transfer them back. and Voila! you are in the front of the line!
all legal...but one of the various problems that cause the system to be clogged.
this does happen- for people in the US already. larger companies find it convenient to simply send the employee out for exactly 365 days and then transfer them back. and Voila! you are in the front of the line!
all legal...but one of the various problems that cause the system to be clogged.
more...
makeup q is for queen bee card queen and king promenade clipart
chanduv23
05-26 04:40 PM
There is a rule that you are suppossed to carry your passport all the times if you are on a visa.
Border patrol has the right to ask you for documents.
Fines are like $100 or so - not quite sure.
I was once driving on Adirondocks and was stopped by the border patrol. I showed my dirver's license but they wanted to see the visa. We waited there for sometime as they validated us on their computer and then let us go - they were friendly and suggested that it is always good to carry documents.
Border patrol has the right to ask you for documents.
Fines are like $100 or so - not quite sure.
I was once driving on Adirondocks and was stopped by the border patrol. I showed my dirver's license but they wanted to see the visa. We waited there for sometime as they validated us on their computer and then let us go - they were friendly and suggested that it is always good to carry documents.
girlfriend queen clip art images
desi3933
07-09 04:42 PM
Certainty is related to belief not reality. It still means the name check was not completed. The law does not say they "when you are certain that the FBI name check can be cleared..please allot a visa."
Would you mind quoting the actual law then?
Does every I-485 need FBI approval or just background check? How do you know that it needs FBI Name Check for all cases. Quote the law please.
Would you mind quoting the actual law then?
Does every I-485 need FBI approval or just background check? How do you know that it needs FBI Name Check for all cases. Quote the law please.
hairstyles clipart QUEEN AND KING
walking_dude
11-03 11:16 AM
We need more IV members to send FOIA request. Just 100-200 is insufficient. We need at least 1000 FOIA requests in queue to make our case.
If you haven't, send ASAP. If you have get your friends, relatives, coworkers, neighbors etc to send the requests as well. Anyone can send it, it's not limited to 485 applicants.
If you haven't, send ASAP. If you have get your friends, relatives, coworkers, neighbors etc to send the requests as well. Anyone can send it, it's not limited to 485 applicants.
DesiGuy
09-13 10:59 AM
YES...good idea, we need it (gave u a green).
but (there's always one;)) at the moment, since time is short,
lets be FOCUSsed on calling the REPs.
Energy flows where Focus goes
but (there's always one;)) at the moment, since time is short,
lets be FOCUSsed on calling the REPs.
Energy flows where Focus goes
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