***********So, Is our I-485 Litigation Over?*************

[hidden_dragon]

What about people on EAD based on 485 already filed. I don't see how could they refile.
Another question is where did they say how fast should these "new" concurrent filing should be adj ( a couple of month according to some)? what stop them from slowing on the "new" category.

Originally posted by kashmir
http://immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=122654#post758163

The USCIS will attempt to succeed new program even adding all available resources.
If old applicants see new applicants get approved within a couple of months, most of old applicants may file new I-140 and I-485 applications, except those who is too poor to pay increased filing fees or who has a special reason.
If all old applicants move to new program, the USCIS can assert that the backlog is less than a year, even though the number of pending cases is the same.
Also, USCIS can save money that has to use for old pending cases.
It's really a great backlog reduction plan for USCIS, isn't it ?

 

[hidden_dragon]

It's definitely a very good revenge plan. On the face, they are "reducing" the backlog, the new filers will be happy. Only we who have fought for all these will continue to "enjoy" the delay. Of course I am the first to say no! Let's continue the lawsuit on "current" backlog.

Originally posted by dynobuoy

All it means is that USCIS has a master plan to screw all the old applicants. Is this their way of taking revenge? Is this the reason why 140 application filed between Sep 2002 and Apr 2003 are held back. These guys would be struck there as they can't execise their AC21... poor souls.

I am curious as to what Rajiv has to say about this? All I could see is that Fujie is not very happy about the litigation!


dyno

 

[hidden_dragon]

This just comes to me, is their strategy to null our class certification, since they can argue, the backlog won't be reocurring in the future!

Forgive me that I posted severl message. I am so upset that I want to punch someone's face.

 

[dynobuoy]

I think Fujie and his team would have taken a count of all concurrent applications filed. My guesstimate is that more than 75% of the applications filed before Mar 31, 2003 would have been concurrent. Though he cannot pick the individuals who had started / supported the litigation, he might have concluded that by introducing this new rule he can punish atleast this 75%.

Now the litigation talks only about 485... it has no word about concurrent filing. Here is my guess...

[a] People who had filed 485 after 140 approval... These are the lucky 25%... your file will be adjudicated in the usual processing time frame.

People who filed 140 and after sometime filed 485 before 140 got approved... the so-called semi-concurrent. Bad luck guys. Even if your 140 is approved... your case will fall into the new adjudicating basket.

[c] Concurrent filers - 140 and 485 together (even if 140 is approved after that) Again same as (b) screwed. Into the new basket... wait till hell breaks down.

[d] New filers. Buy a damn lottery. Atleast your application will be cleared in a years time... and yes don't file CONCURRENT!


Solution:
Beg... Yes you read it right B E G!

We need to contact the senators in our area and may be ask AILA (Do these guys do anything else beyond selling stupid T-shirts?) to contact Fujie and get a face-to-face to reconsider the decision. Well one more thing it is going to benefit the lawyers because they get out of trouble sooner... meaning the new cases will get approved in a years time, so quick money and gets rid of the pestering client faster. So who will care about the 'old-filers'? Heaven only knows!

And since a body like AILA haven't done anything useful these years, our only option now is to ask like minded lawyers like Rajiv to be our ambassador and express our feelings to USCIS and Fujie!

 

[zyu]

Originally posted by dynobuoy

I think Fujie and his team would have taken a count of all concurrent applications filed. My guesstimate is that more than 75% of the applications filed before Mar 31, 2003 would have been concurrent. Though he cannot pick the individuals who had started / supported the litigation, he might have concluded that by introducing this new rule he can punish atleast this 75%.

Now the litigation talks only about 485... it has no word about concurrent filing. Here is my guess...

[a] People who had filed 485 after 140 approval... These are the lucky 25%... your file will be adjudicated in the usual processing time frame.

People who filed 140 and after sometime filed 485 before 140 got approved... the so-called semi-concurrent. Bad luck guys. Even if your 140 is approved... your case will fall into the new adjudicating basket.

[c] Concurrent filers - 140 and 485 together (even if 140 is approved after that) Again same as (b) screwed. Into the new basket... wait till hell breaks down.

[d] New filers. Buy a damn lottery. Atleast your application will be cleared in a years time... and yes don't file CONCURRENT!


Solution:
Beg... Yes you read it right B E G!

We need to contact the senators in our area and may be ask AILA (Do these guys do anything else beyond selling stupid T-shirts?) to contact Fujie and get a face-to-face to reconsider the decision. Well one more thing it is going to benefit the lawyers because they get out of trouble sooner... meaning the new cases will get approved in a years time, so quick money and gets rid of the pestering client faster. So who will care about the 'old-filers'? Heaven only knows!

And since a body like AILA haven't done anything useful these years, our only option now is to ask like minded lawyers like Rajiv to be our ambassador and express our feelings to USCIS and Fujie!

Can't agree more. i was completely frustrated by CIS' stupid policies. they have to clear the current backlogs FIRST. it is as simple as that. why not AILA just tell the hell CIS that Pls, clear the current backlogs before talking about anything else!!! do these CIS hogs have brains??? why do they keep coming up with stupid ideas without touching on the real issue: the backlogs???

 

[rajum]

Originally posted by I140_2003
Thinking from the process point of view, the only way you can reduce backlog is by reducing the amount of time an officer spends on a case. So in a given time frame, say a month, an officer can work on more number of cases, resulting in more case processed, eventually reducing the backlog.

I would say, this is an excellent strategy CIS have taken, hope it works as planned. Sad it does not help people waiting for a long time.

I agree with RajuM it will probably increase the I140 processing time.

Cinta, I do not think this is a dirty trick. I also do not think they are doing this to help the applicants. They are doing this to reduce the backlog, period.

I gave some statistics to stress that I-140 may take more time but overall it might take less time( 1 yr 8 months instead of more than 2 years). On serious thinking, from my basic understanding of process management, I am now veering to the idea that it will take more time than the present one....

I may be overkilling in emphasising my point. I want to give two examples:

Consider the following case of a restraurant. Now you got three cooks, ten waiters, two helpers and one manager.Assume for simplicity sake that all are equally talented and everyone can do others job...
Consider the various possibilities....

i) Waiters bring water, takes the order , goes inside the kitchen, cleanses the utensils, prepares food and serves the customer. There is no special category as Cooks...cooks also serve customer just like waiters.No one has any specialization.

ii) Waiters brings water, takes the order and passes this order to cook. Suppose a customer has ordered 10 menu items. One cook will be assigned. This assigned cook will clean the utensils, makes all the 10 menu items and waitress is served back.

iii) or we can have some combination where inside the kitchen, one person might be specially assigned for cleaning the utensils, one person might be assigned to a particular set of menu items and some person might be assigned to manage the inventory and a particular person will be monitoring the status of 10 items in a specific order...

Think which is the best combination of processing...I think everyone doing specialized things i.e. iii) ...This has been scientifically proven ...

For more clarity I want to give one more example I can think of giving... suppose one has to post 400 envelopes...you got four people...
the following thing has to be done for each envelope
i) Address has to be written
ii) Place the letter in the envelope
iii) Stamp the envelope
iv) Seal the envelope

Assume that all four individual items take same time...

For simplicity sake consider two scenarios...
i) All the four persons sitting in order and process in some kind of factory method...

ii) Assigning 100 envelopes to each individual.
Now imagine how individuals processing that...
a) Take the first case,write the address then place the letter in the envelope , stamp the envelope and then seal the envelope and complete the first case and start the second case
or
b) Second strategy of that individual ...first, write all the 100 addresses, then place all the 100 letters inside the envelope , then place 100 stamps and seal the envelope...

I think the second strategy of the individual or first strategy of the allocation of work are better from processing stand point than the first strategy of the individual...

Think which is better...If I am wrong, please let me know....




Moral: Don't get fooled by USCIS...the new system will further delay the backlogs...it will definitely delay I-140 and definitely invalidates AC 21.... whether USCIS is playing dirty tricks or they are doing with genuine interests , does not matter.... What matters is taking some real steps towards this end...experimenting with the process without any substantial increase in the productivity or increase in manpower does not help... if they are really concerned about the sufferings...they would have accepted to our genuine settlement proposal where we have send some good proposals to reduce backlogs and made an alternative suggestions like interim GC...

 

[zyu]

Re: Re: ***********So, Is our I-485 Litigation Over?*************

Originally posted by jhonyrk
If i am not wrong in my interpretation and with all my due respect to Rajiv for his untiring effort to Bring USCIS on it Knees ,Actually we won it for Future Immigrants and not for the present Sufferers.This will not eliminate the sufferings of the existing lot.But i may be wrong in my observation since Rajiv has the right insights in the legal matters.

These new rules will just make the current damn situations more and more complicated. it will certainly create a huge mess. soon we will see the new filers get approvals in months while people in the lines for 5 years are still waiting.

 

[Edison]

Re: I have read all your comments

Originally posted by operations
I think ths is great for future filers. But CIS has not announced any plans yet for pending apps.

I am trying to arrange a face-to-face.


the litigation goes on. But I am hopeful that good things will come about. Finally this agency has moved off its duff.


Shall we do a conference call? someone take over and arrange it. I can speak with everyone. I can hang out with you folks for 1-2 hours. I think everyone should pay for their own long distance phone charges. Someone should volunteer to take notes while we talk, so everyone can get a sense of what we have talked about.

Who will take over?

Rajiv,
Please let me know your preference. I'll arrange the conference call accordingly and let everyone know the details.

 

[rajum]

Re: I have read all your comments

Originally posted by operations
I think ths is great for future filers. But CIS has not announced any plans yet for pending apps.

I am trying to arrange a face-to-face.


the litigation goes on. But I am hopeful that good things will come about. Finally this agency has moved off its duff.


Shall we do a conference call? someone take over and arrange it. I can speak with everyone. I can hang out with you folks for 1-2 hours. I think everyone should pay for their own long distance phone charges. Someone should volunteer to take notes while we talk, so everyone can get a sense of what we have talked about.

Who will take over?

Rajiv,

I can take the notes like I did last time.

-rajum

 

[CouldNotPost]

$$$$

call me naive, but i wouldn't attribute malice to this proposed step...

virtually every USCIS policy has been aimed at systematically funding immigration benefits and more - multiple EADs, APs, and FPs... i won't be shocked to learn in a bob woodward book many moons from now there were little to no funds appropriated as a policy...

i believe, this is an opportunistic measure woven with meeting strategic political aim and hoping to blunt the bombshell of our lawsuit - a step USCIS never anticipated! shortly, i would expect this program being extended to old filers (to those willing to pay more!)... applying this policy to new filers alone is just too obtuse even for USCIS...

 

[rajum]

Originally posted by dynobuoy

Solution:
Beg... Yes you read it right B E G!

We need to contact the senators in our area and may be ask AILA (Do these guys do anything else beyond selling stupid T-shirts?) to contact Fujie and get a face-to-face to reconsider the decision. Well one more thing it is going to benefit the lawyers because they get out of trouble sooner... meaning the new cases will get approved in a years time, so quick money and gets rid of the pestering client faster. So who will care about the 'old-filers'? Heaven only knows!

And since a body like AILA haven't done anything useful these years, our only option now is to ask like minded lawyers like Rajiv to be our ambassador and express our feelings to USCIS and Fujie!

I agree with you ...


-rajum

 

[cinta]

Originally posted by I140_2003
Thinking from the process point of view, the only way you can reduce backlog is by reducing the amount of time an officer spends on a case. So in a given time frame, say a month, an officer can work on more number of cases, resulting in more case processed, eventually reducing the backlog.

I would say, this is an excellent strategy CIS have taken, hope it works as planned. Sad it does not help people waiting for a long time.

I agree with RajuM it will probably increase the I140 processing time.

Cinta, I do not think this is a dirty trick. I also do not think they are doing this to help the applicants. They are doing this to reduce the backlog, period.

I have no doubt that this was indeed introduced to reduce the backlogs and it will, BY 2006. Add a couple of more years to be sure. However, there are hundreds of more respectful, result oriented methods to do it. The way they are trying to do it is very obvious. Reduce the incoming load somewhat on some applications and MAYBE IN PARALLEL work on the existing backlogged applications. So by the year they said they will do it, I am sure they will.
here is what they should have done instead:
1: Irrespective of pilots and memos, take care of old cases: First applications with approved I-140, then concurrent filed applications and so on. Use overtime, home work programs, or establish CONTRACTORS for clearing (asa DOL).
2: Hire more adjudicators and personnel for security checks, thus freeing about 25% of them.
3: Reduce RFEs, increase validity of all pending EADs and APs as well as FPs.
4: Use the phone and fax instead of RFEs.

When you see all of these, they are serious about backlogs, otherwise call it anything you want, it does not solve our problem.

 

[gc999999999]

Re: I have read all your comments

Originally posted by operations
<COLOR=RED>I think ths is great for future filers.</COLOR> But CIS has not announced any plans yet for pending apps.

I am trying to arrange a face-to-face.


the litigation goes on. But I am hopeful that good things will come about. Finally this agency has moved off its duff.


Shall we do a conference call? someone take over and arrange it. I can speak with everyone. I can hang out with you folks for 1-2 hours. I think everyone should pay for their own long distance phone charges. Someone should volunteer to take notes while we talk, so everyone can get a sense of what we have talked about.

Who will take over?

Could you PLEASE explain HOW IT IS GREAT TO FUTURE FILERS??
I AM CONFUSED.. MOST OF MESSAGES CONTRADICT THIS...
THANKS

 

[Edison]

Conference

Conference:

Scheduled the conference. I'll confirm the time and date once we hear from Rajiv.

If you are interested to join the conference please send e-mail to immigration_o2@yahoo.com with your immigrationportal id if you are member of this forum otherwise just mention 'N/A' for immigrationportal id, I'll forward the conference details.

 

[rajum]

Re: $$$$

Originally posted by CouldNotPost
call me naive, but i wouldn't attribute malice to this proposed step...

virtually every USCIS policy has been aimed at systematically funding immigration benefits and more - multiple EADs, APs, and FPs... i won't be shocked to learn in a bob woodward book many moons from now there were little to no funds appropriated as a policy...

i believe, this is an opportunistic measure woven with meeting strategic political aim and hoping to blunt the bombshell of our lawsuit - a step USCIS never anticipated! shortly, i would expect this program being extended to old filers (to those willing to pay more!)... applying this policy to new filers alone is just too obtuse even for USCIS...

I don't think any body is attributing malice to this...clearly I believe that USCIS never gave any serious thought on this either...to me this memo was devised to show to the court that they attempted to reduce the backlogs...this is not any serious effort...
However, I am suprised at your statement.. that you are hoping to extend this program to old filers at a premium...of course every body will pay for it...however, don't you think it is official way of bribing to get your case done...is it justified for different processing fees for old filers and new filers and new filers paying less....

-rajum

 

[Edison]

If CIS use our application money only to adjudicate our applications rather than spending that money for security check which is actually Immigration Control work then CIS can move ahead and reduce backlog, the whole issue is not about insufficient fund it's about inappropriate usage of fund.

 

[Edison]

Re: Re: $$$$

Originally posted by rajum
...to me this memo was devised to show to the court that they attempted to reduce the backlogs...this is not any serious effort...
-rajum

Read the memo carefully especially last few lines, based on the words they cannot use this in court if we cannot use this memo in court.

 

[I140_2003]

Originally posted by rajum

I may be overkilling in emphasising my point. I want to give two examples:

RajuM
The examples you gave are proper for their respective cases, but they do not apply here. The basic idea is that processing I140 and I485 are similar and need similar skill set. Once the security check is cleared, the job left for the officer is to review the case and probably click a button, which is same for I140 and I485 and hence the advantage. Processing I485 alone would also need that step to be performed, this method eliminates that extra step.

The rest of the job, printing the approval notice or manufacturing the card are done by other people, where your examples apply - to the whole system.

 

[I140_2003]

Originally posted by cinta

1: Irrespective of pilots and memos, take care of old cases: First applications with approved I-140, then concurrent filed applications and so on. Use overtime, home work programs, or establish CONTRACTORS for clearing (asa DOL).
2: Hire more adjudicators and personnel for security checks, thus freeing about 25% of them.
3: Reduce RFEs, increase validity of all pending EADs and APs as well as FPs.
4: Use the phone and fax instead of RFEs.

Cinta,
Most of your points are valid, here is why I think they did not adopt them

1. Will cost more - e.g. 20% overtime do not produce 20% more work because productivity falls.
2. Will cost more - Then they have to train them.
3. Good point. I thought they are already issueing EAD/AP with two years validity.
4. This will reduce the processing time for an applicant in reducing the time is correspondence. But it will increase the amount of work they have to do.

 

[rajum]

Originally posted by I140_2003
RajuM
The examples you gave are proper for their respective cases, but they do not apply here. The basic idea is that processing I140 and I485 are similar and need similar skill set. Once the security check is cleared, the job left for the officer is to review the case and probably click a button, which is same for I140 and I485 and hence the advantage. Processing I485 alone would also need that step to be performed, this method eliminates that extra step.

The rest of the job, printing the approval notice or manufacturing the card are done by other people, where your examples apply - to the whole system.

I140_2003,
I have given the examples to illustrate the point that it is scientifically proven that one person doing one stuff will be more effective rather than one person doing different aspects...

For I-140 there is no security check. For 485 there is a security check. That means that they are not repetiting the security check..
To me, there is no overhaul of the process... we are not saving on any steps...I don't see any steps repetitive in I-140 & 485. Even now they have to issue approval for I-140 and 485 separately as such.. Please let me know what steps they are saving...
If 485 process is that simple, they why we got so much backlogs.....why don't they clear the backlogs...
....In this memo, there is no mention about the dependent petitions...will they be part of the same queue...or will they be thrown in different queue...

With so many aspects unclear, I am arguing that this is not a serious attempt at reducing backlogs...just an eyewash to show that they are attempting to do some thing....they never gave any serious thought on how to reduce the backlogs...any person with minimal common sense will agree to the fact that with the cosmetic process changes one cannot achieve tremendous productivity ...




-rajum