Here is the Govt's Response to The complaint

Raising awareness -> BBC.COM

Pardon me if I have posted this message in the wrong thread, I could not find any thread dedicated to the discussion on how to raise awareness among the media.

Coming back to the point, BBC website has a section specifically dedicated to the issue of "migration" as a part of their "Have your say" theme. I could not find a single story in this section discussing our issue - "immigration to US the nightmare faced by very highly educated professionals"

However, as I mentioned earlier, since this is a part of "Have it your way" section... they will post the readers comments.

If we all, write to them petioning that they cover our story, we might get somewhere. At the very least, they will post our thoughts, which will be read by millions, raising awareness to the issue.

Here's the link

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/special/migration/default.stm

I have already sent them an email ... I recommend all members of this website do the same.

regards
-BacklogBlues
 
Devils Advocate

Somewhere in the middle of this thread, it annoyed me to see personal attacks on fellow members.

Poong... is actually doing a great job in challenging some aspects of the litigation, sort of Devil's advocate.

Do we realize, it would be much more harsh and tough in Court?

Just because he said something negative or showed weak links doesn't mean he is against it or is trying to prove someone including Rajiv (ji) wrong.

Defendant's attorneys are going to do much more worse and fielding his (and similar) questions now makes us much more prepared. I wish there were more of people who will poke holes in the litiagtion now and prepares us to be well equipped in front of judge.

Even if his intentions were/are wrong (which I doubt), I'd thank him for doing it now and curse for not doing it earlier :) Even if his information/knowledge is wrong, it doesn't hurt us to prepare for such.

I know it is difficult to not take it personally when someone says things which perturbs our very belief in the process to which we have been holding our dear lives (in US), but at the same time I'm glad he is not on the other side.

As he (or someone else said), failure to prepare is preparation to fail.

Last, but not least, let us not forget freedom of speech.

God speed.
 
Out of order processing

Checkout the following thread which discusses out of order processing in CSC:
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?threadid=121262

Originally posted by ngadhia
I talked to the officer again, and he asked me two wac03 #'s as a sample .

Q. WAC0300355036 is the first #. Can you please check why this case was approved even though it was filed after Sep 2002.?

At first he tried to convince me that this case was filed in 2000 and not 2002. I argued saying why is wac number WAC03 .?

A. Ok the case was filed in 2002 and the person was under class of religious worker.


Q. WAC0315153675 is the next #. Please check this last one for me?

A. This case was EB2 class and that is why it was approved.

Q. I know people having EB2 cases filed between Jan 02 and Sept02. why aren't they processed/adjucated first as against wac03.?

A. We get this priority on certain cases from Head Quaters , so we have to process such case.

Q. What are the grounds for such casess? Why would head quarter priority some thing that is out of sequence?

A. I am sorry I don't know, but it is quite possible that this might fall in different category.

Q. What is this different category sir?
A. Well its hard to tell , but surely there is some thing different from other pending cases , and so head quarter prioritized this first.


Q. CSC director promised that many officers would be allocated to EB-I485 cases starting April 01 2004. Have they been allocated?
A. i don't think so, because there priority is for other type of cases. And that after this is completed, many new officers would be given training and after training them , it will take them some time to work on the EB-I485 cases. But there is no definate indications as to when these officers will be allocated.

Finally thanked him for the information..

In conclusion, this looks like a scam to me. I think there is something wrong going on CSC. Its hard to believe the 413 cases of I-485 are approved that were filed after sep 2002. The officer did not have valid justifications and was trying to cover up details by saying these are different category cases.

I think this needs an aggressive political , media push.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Devils Advocate

Originally posted by mendi
Somewhere in the middle of this thread, it annoyed me to see personal attacks on fellow members.

Poong... is actually doing a great job in challenging some aspects of the litigation, sort of Devil's advocate.

Do we realize, it would be much more harsh and tough in Court?

Just because he said something negative or showed weak links doesn't mean he is against it or is trying to prove someone including Rajiv (ji) wrong.

Defendant's attorneys are going to do much more worse and fielding his (and similar) questions now makes us much more prepared. I wish there were more of people who will poke holes in the litiagtion now and prepares us to be well equipped in front of judge.

Even if his intentions were/are wrong (which I doubt), I'd thank him for doing it now and curse for not doing it earlier :) Even if his information/knowledge is wrong, it doesn't hurt us to prepare for such.

I know it is difficult to not take it personally when someone says things which perturbs our very belief in the process to which we have been holding our dear lives (in US), but at the same time I'm glad he is not on the other side.

As he (or someone else said), failure to prepare is preparation to fail.

Last, but not least, let us not forget freedom of speech.

God speed.
Click to expand...


I agree.
 
mendi & Rajivji - Thanks for your kind understanding

I humbly wish to thank you from the bottom of my heart, mendi, because your understanding is perfect. Yes, I actually quoted it, but that quote (Failure to prepare is preparing to fail) was a noetic saying of a famous US Basket-ball coach. And not just in this forum, but, wherever I participate, I attempt to learn more and contribute in return to that forum for a better understanding of others who browse like me to get richer in understanding. Legal Law is gobbledygook to many and I attempt to explain it as much as I can,without claiming I know better. In fact, ala Socrates, I want to repeatedly insist that I know very little and by way of questioning, I learn more and am sure we all learn more and get our own holes plugged in to bolster our own case.

Rajivji - Your receptiveness to difference of opinions really encourages a number of people like me who really want to contribute in whatever small way possible. Thanks, once again.
 
No thanks needed

By the way, an email from a member of our community yesterday suggested a new line of argument that we are looking at. So, to not evaluate suggestions is inane. I look at everything.
 
Movement in USCIS

Current turmoil in most of USCIS to approve 485 cases under different program seems to be effect of petition. Hope to see approval for people who are in que before 140/485 filed in April 2004 or after.
 
Follow-up: Court of Competent Jurisdiction

Follow-up: Off-Topic: Court of Competent Jurisdiction

If you are following the news, you will see that this is one of the crucial questions that will be answered by the Full-Bench of the US Supreme Court on the Guantanamo Bay Detainees -- whether the US Courts will have " jurisdiction" on Gitmo for the relief they have sought. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/21/politics/21SCOT.html?hp

This is not directly related to our case, but, we had debated about the jurisdiction shield that INS had quoted in its rejoinder and the free-views of folks thereof, in this forum.
 
Re: Follow-up: Court of Competent Jurisdiction

Originally posted by poongunranar
Follow-up: Off-Topic: Court of Competent Jurisdiction

If you are following the news, you will see that this is one of the crucial questions that will be answered by the Full-Bench of the US Supreme Court on the Guantanamo Bay Detainees -- whether the US Courts will have " jurisdiction" on Gitmo for the relief they have sought. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/21/politics/21SCOT.html?hp

This is not directly related to our case, but, we had debated about the jurisdiction shield that INS had quoted in its rejoinder and the free-views of folks thereof, in this forum.
Click to expand...

Good one...

-rajum
 
Maybe the CIS needs to explain its process at a high level. Their lawyer does not seem to understand the process nor does he seem competent on its processes.

First this is he kept talking about the different laws and categories to process different types of application. In the interest of law, I think CIS FORGOT the basic purpose of I-485. They seem to have this idea that 485 is completely a new application while they should look at it as a continuation of the process of immigration.

1. 485 is ADJUSTMENT of STATUS. It is not a discovery of facts of the applicant. It is from its name changing the status of the non-immigrant into an immigrant. This has nothing to do with different classes of application etc.

2. Classes of application, qualification of applicant and the capability of sponsor is the task in I-140 (for e-based) stage. They FORGOT why they are doing I-140.
They verify that since a job is present that needs to be filled (certfied by labor) can be filled by the employee and if the employer can in reality satisfy their commitment of paying the employee.

3. Important to the above step is the assigning of the visa number. With this number they try to restrict too many people getting GC. So they can introduce several restrictions like country based, emp category etc.

4. So when all that need to be checked and all different classes (emp type, family type etc) are satisfied and they APPROVE it, what else are you checking in I485. 485 is a security check. They have already decided that the applicant should be getting GC. There is a requirement, he is qualified and also has been assigned a visa number (so they dont have too many from a country etc).

5. Since 485 is mainly an application with an attached 'proof of eligibility' in the form of I-140 etc. The only limitation is the FBI check and there SHOULD BE NO OTHER PROCESS AT THIS PLACE.

So this should mean in the word of law that the 485 should be adjudicated in no more than 2 MONTHS. FBI claims a few days for name check. So 2 months is quite good enough time to adjudicate.
 
I-730 Help

My I730 case was transfered to a local office from Nebraska, almost 2 years now. Since than nothing happend, and my patience runs empty. Nobody talks to me from INS, their answer is:"The case is pending". I don't know the law, and how long can they prolongue this, but if i waited 3 years now to be reunified with my family,I guess that can continue indefinetly.
If somebody knows something,about what can I do, it will be great.Thanx!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top