Calling all applicants filed b/f current JIT: time to act! E-Mail Camaign - Ocean #14

[asdffdsa]

It is time to act instead of just sit on our hands and complain. United we stand!

If we don't even get up do something to help ourselves, who would we expect to save us?

See Kashmir's post:

http://www.immigrationportal.com/sho...d.php?p=826368

<quote>

Two E-Mail/Fax Campaigns Next Week

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I propose starting two campaigns next week as follows:

1) E-Mail Camaign to CIS Ombudsman Khatri to claim UNFAIRNESS on I-485 processing at the CSC
We had a great success at our previous campaign #8b Nominate Don Neufeld for Ombudsman's Annual Report to Congress.

2) Fax Campaign to Congresspersons for Appreciation and ...
44 Congressional members wrote to USCIS Director Eduardo Aguirre on 6/15/2004.
http://immigrationportal.com/showth...p=15#post817412

I will take the initiative for #2, so I'd like somebody to take the initiative for #1.



</quote>

[kashmir]

It is time to act instead of just sit on our hands and complain. United we stand!
If we don't even get up do something to help ourselves, who would we expect to save us?

See Kashmir's post:
http://www.immigrationportal.com/sho...d.php?p=826368

Hi, asdffdsa,
It's great that you are taking the initiative.

Even though dsatish is proposing another campaign to Congressional members as ImmigrationPortal.ORG, I think your initiative is a good campaign to claim unfair process at the CSC (to CIS Ombudsman).

[485486]

tell me the email address please, I will do that.

thanks

485486

[kashmir]

tell me the email address please, I will do that.
thanks
485486

CIS Ombdusman's e-mail address is Prakash.Khatri@dhs.gov

Also, please read the thread of our previous successfull campaign #8b.

Please post your letter once you sent to Ombudsman.

[ruxrux]

I have sent an e-mail to Prakash Khatri, where I mentioned the key points from dsatish's draft of a congrassionsl e-mail.

[mango_pickle]

dsatish's draft kinda focusses a little bit more on VSC. People need to make subtle changes in that regard, though the gist would be the same.

[ruxrux]

Dear Ombudsman Khatri,

My name is <my name here> and my family's I-485 case has been pending at CIS California Service Center (CSC) for 29 months. Since CSC claims they are
processing cases as of May 15th 2002 and our case is dated February 5th 2002, I decided to write to you and make you aware of unfairness in I-485 processing at CSC.
I am a member of ImmigrationPortal.org, a non-profit organization formed by members of legal immigrant community, who intend to voice their concerns about and help contribute towards legal immigration reform in the United States of America.
I would like to draw your attention to several problems CSC is showing with backlog reduction. Here are the two major troubles that immigrationportal.org members face:

1. Random Processing
We agree that each application has a unique history and hence there will be some differences in adjudicating times for different applications. But what we are seeing is not just some difference in timelines for applications filed at the same time, but in most of the cases, the difference in adjudicating times are just beyond comprehension. We have several members who have filed their applications in 2001 and still waiting for adjudication where as we started seeing many approvals for people who have filed their applications only in 2003. On any given day, we are seeing the simultaneous adjudications for people who have filed the I485 applications in a range of 18 months.
2. Showing the incorrect Current Processing Date
The CSC is showing the current processing date for I485 applications as 05/15/2002. Daily, through the postings of our members, we have been noticing that the actual adjudication of applications is taking place for applications received any where between January’2002 and October’ 2003. When an applicant who is waiting for more than 1 year for the adjudication, is approaching his/her congress man, then US CIS is getting back to the congress man that they are currently processing application received on or before 05/15/2002 and they can not process the other applications out of turn. This is factually incorrect. Obviously US CIS is using the current processing date as a tool to prevent intervention of congress men to render justice to the suffering applicants.
As an example, my case is dated February 5th 2002. I have sent an inquiry about my case on 5/7/2004 and received no answer from CSC. I sent a 2nd level inquiry on 5/24/2004 and 6/7/2004 and I received a letter from CSC dated 6/12/04 saying "Please allow sufficient time to adjudicate your application". This is a highly frustrating generic answer, especially after seeing 2003 applicants being approved.

I kindly ask you on behalf of me and ImmigrationPortal.org to do what is in your power to inquire why is CSC approving I-485 cases in such unfair manner.

<ruxrux signed here>

[kashmir]

To: Prakash.Khatri@dhs.gov
Subject: Unfair I-485 Process at the CSC

********************************************
ImmigrationPortal.Com
5225 N. Wilson Blvd, Arlington VA 22205
Voice: (703) 908-4800
Community for Information, Action and Reform
********************************************

Dear CIS Ombudsman Prakash Khatri;

In March 20004, more than 30 members at ImmigrationPortal.Com had claimed
you about the extremely bad performance of CSC Director Don Neufeld, and
we recieved your following reply:
> I have received your comments. Please be advised that your input will
> be reviewed during the preparation of my Annual Report to Congress.

I believe that you have adviced directly to Don Neufeld, and actually
the CSC has improved its I-485 process since April 2004 a little bit,
but not significantly as he had promised to Congressional members.

Meanwhile, even though I-485 processing date has been moving forward
by one month biweekly and it has reached 5/15/2002 at the latest report
of 6/23/2004, the CSC has processed only 30 to 40% of I-485 cases filed
in February, March, April, and May 2002. More than a half of those old
applicants have been still waiting for a long time more than two years,
while new applicants filed in 2003 and even in 2004 are getting approved.

Please make Don Neufeld stop such an injustice against innocent long-waiting
applicants, and show us the justice of the United States.

Sincerely,

(my name)
(my address)
(my contact information)

[gutterboy]

I like the tone of Kashmir's email. But I'm not sure I can do the same since my case is not approved yet. I want to kick his butt once my case approved!!!

[kashmir]

Proejct Ocean E-Mail Campaign #14
to CIS Ombudsman Prakash Khatri
Target Number : 30 (tentative)

1. ruxrux
2. kashmir

[greenback]

oh didnt realize you were making a list. Sent my mail this morning using rux's template

[east2west]

Sent email to Prakash Khatri. Covered the same points covered in above letters and included the fact that if random processing is the order, the JIT is meaningless and it paints an incorrect (but rosy) picture.
Earlier JIT >= ND meant that the file was with an officer. Now the definition is NO DEFINITION.

When I spoke to a rep on the 1800 number last week and asked if the file was with an officer, she said 'probably'. Digital logic giving way to fuzzy logic.

The response my lawyer received from USCIS was that if FP has expired for cases beyond 30 days of JIT, these will be "reviewed & rescheduled" and that we have to wait for 60 days (from day of enquiry). Cases which are "fingerprint ready" would be adjudicated first.

WAC 02 138
LUD 6/24/2004. No FP2

[kashmir]

Proejct Ocean E-Mail Campaign #14
to CIS Ombudsman Prakash Khatri
Target Number : 30 (tentative)

1. ruxrux
2. kashmir
3. greenback
4. east2west

[Who cares]

Email sent.
WC

[asdffdsa]

According the USCIS Adjudicator’s Field Manual, Section 10.11, there is a general FIFO (First in First out) rule as to processing, see the manual posted in this thread:

http://www.immigrationportal.com/sho...=132181&page=2

Have this really being followed to the letter?

If they are following the rule and spirit of the guide, there wouldn't be so many past JIT cases while they are approving Jun/July cases today.

[kashmir]

Proejct Ocean E-Mail Campaign #14
to CIS Ombudsman Prakash Khatri
Target Number : 30 (tentative)

1. ruxrux
2. kashmir
3. greenback
4. east2west
5. Who cares

Please post your message here once you sent e-mail.

[mango_pickle]

Email Sent

[Hibuddies]

e.mail sent.

Hibuddies

[kashmir]

Proejct Ocean E-Mail Campaign #14
to CIS Ombudsman Prakash Khatri
Target Number : 30

1. ruxrux
2. kashmir
3. greenback
4. east2west
5. Who cares
6. mango_pickle
7. Hibuddies

Please post your message here once you sent e-mail.

[KKJ]

I sent e-mail to Prakash Khatri
and Dianne Feinstein(senator@feinstein.senate.gov)

[kadamtal]

[howlong2000]

Email was sent

[ruiyu25]

Just sent the email

[asdffdsa]

See this posted fax inquiry reponse:
http://www.immigrationportal.com/sho...d.php?t=132573

But better keep finger crossed now, and keep up with the champion, who knows what are they up to, and how much would they do anyway, we don't see any approval lately.

The more attention we got on this issue the better off for everyone!

[kashmir]

Proejct Ocean E-Mail Campaign #14
to CIS Ombudsman Prakash Khatri
Target Number : 30

1. ruxrux
2. kashmir
3. greenback
4. east2west
5. Who cares
6. mango_pickle
7. Hibuddies
8. KKJ
9. kadamtal
10. howlong2000
11. ruiyu25

Please post your message here once you sent e-mail.

[kashmir]

Don't forget to participate in this campaign before July 4th long weekend.

[kashmir]

Don't forget to participate in this campaign before July 4th long weekend.

Also, join "Ocean" FAX Campaign #15 to 44 Congressional Members.

[kashmir]

It doesn't matter any more !?

[theWarrior]

email sent!

-warrior

[kashmir]

Proejct Ocean E-Mail Campaign #14
to CIS Ombudsman Prakash Khatri
Target Number : 25

1. ruxrux
2. kashmir
3. greenback
4. east2west
5. Who cares
6. mango_pickle
7. Hibuddies
8. KKJ
9. kadamtal
10. howlong2000
11. ruiyu25
12. theWarrior

Please post your message here once you sent e-mail.