A Big Announcement Likely In Next 24 Hours That Will Resolve Issues
- Thread starter Vsach
- Start date
Looks like the PERMANENT SOLUTION was to allow all applicants to apply for AOS....but it's losing ground, it seems...
Looks like July 485 applications will be accepted soon....from the looks of it USCIS is admitting it's mistakes...and working towards remedy...I CAN'T THINK OF ANY OTHER REMEDY but them taking back their notice...of 485 rejections.. USCIS has really no authority but to follow the rules of INA act and the rules cannot be changed without Congress approval..
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
>>>>>>>>>>>>
BATTLE TAKING PLACE AT CIS OVER PRECISE REMEDY IN THE VISA BULLETIN MESS
I have been reporting on plans for USCIS to make a major announcement today or Monday regarding fixing the mess created by USCIS' not quite valid claim to have fully processed all remaining cases for the fiscal year.
Apparently, there are multiple camps arguing for different solutions, according to more than one of my sources with at least one side arguing for providing interim work and travel benefits without a visa number being available (the "permanent" solution), another arguing for only accepting adjustment applications for July and other possibilities as well. The "permanent" solution camp has apparently lost some ground since yesterday.
An announcement today is still possible which might make sense given the holding up of publishing of the Visa Bulletin and the deadline imposed by Congresswoman Lofgren. But obviously USCIS has to decide what it wants to do, check the legality, then draft and release a press statement.
I'll update you as I learn more.
Looks like July 485 applications will be accepted soon....from the looks of it USCIS is admitting it's mistakes...and working towards remedy...I CAN'T THINK OF ANY OTHER REMEDY but them taking back their notice...of 485 rejections.. USCIS has really no authority but to follow the rules of INA act and the rules cannot be changed without Congress approval..
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
>>>>>>>>>>>>
BATTLE TAKING PLACE AT CIS OVER PRECISE REMEDY IN THE VISA BULLETIN MESS
I have been reporting on plans for USCIS to make a major announcement today or Monday regarding fixing the mess created by USCIS' not quite valid claim to have fully processed all remaining cases for the fiscal year.
Apparently, there are multiple camps arguing for different solutions, according to more than one of my sources with at least one side arguing for providing interim work and travel benefits without a visa number being available (the "permanent" solution), another arguing for only accepting adjustment applications for July and other possibilities as well. The "permanent" solution camp has apparently lost some ground since yesterday.
An announcement today is still possible which might make sense given the holding up of publishing of the Visa Bulletin and the deadline imposed by Congresswoman Lofgren. But obviously USCIS has to decide what it wants to do, check the legality, then draft and release a press statement.
I'll update you as I learn more.
chatterjee1
Registered Users (C)
Why highlight and single out individual cases at such alarming regularity on a forum where people on all sides are on their edges. Naturally, no one likes being pointed to and Sachatur is probably trying to give a rational explanation for his as well as the other July approvals. If his was the only case, it would have been a fluke and really lucky. But we do see more cases like him so there must be a rationale for USCIS(however warped that may be!!!) to act like that. Besides, I remember reading a post by Sachatur openly acknowledging that he has been a beneficiary of USCIS' latest act. Its good to see so many people getting approved everyday, so many oldtimers. If a few new ones slip in, there is no reason to act nasty/churlish. Lets just hope the juggernaut rolls till all get approved and everyone is able to file for their AOS>
banta4gc
banta4gc
Courts DONT have the authority to give judgement contrary to the law itself.
First I dont understand who would AILF sue - State Department or USCIS ?
If its for VB fiasco then it should be directed to State Department, not USCIS as they dont have control over it. Even if its State Department, what is the standing? You are not their customers. This is similar to namecheck delay issues. Who would you sue - USCIS or FBI. If FBI then you are not their customers so they dont have to answer you. If USCIS they would claim its not their fault. This is again similar to why there were too many pending cases - I-485 category. what did the USCIS say recently. They just blamed that its beyond agency control due to visa unavailability.
Guys all these are set up wisely that you cannot point any body and file lawsuit and let the court force uscis to approve case soon. Kind of conspiracy theory. uhh!
If USCIS, what for ? AILF cannot ask USCIS to accept application when UPDATED-VB says unavailable which is illegal which the court will not authorize. The only issue for USCIS is for not accepting the application that did reached its office on July 2nd morning before the updated VB got released. This is the only INA violatin of USCIS. State-Department should update the VB again WITH time-stamp and accept application that reached its office before the updated-VB got released.
banta4gc
Courts DONT have the authority to give judgement contrary to the law itself.
First I dont understand who would AILF sue - State Department or USCIS ?
If its for VB fiasco then it should be directed to State Department, not USCIS as they dont have control over it. Even if its State Department, what is the standing? You are not their customers. This is similar to namecheck delay issues. Who would you sue - USCIS or FBI. If FBI then you are not their customers so they dont have to answer you. If USCIS they would claim its not their fault. This is again similar to why there were too many pending cases - I-485 category. what did the USCIS say recently. They just blamed that its beyond agency control due to visa unavailability.
Guys all these are set up wisely that you cannot point any body and file lawsuit and let the court force uscis to approve case soon. Kind of conspiracy theory. uhh!
If USCIS, what for ? AILF cannot ask USCIS to accept application when UPDATED-VB says unavailable which is illegal which the court will not authorize. The only issue for USCIS is for not accepting the application that did reached its office on July 2nd morning before the updated VB got released. This is the only INA violatin of USCIS. State-Department should update the VB again WITH time-stamp and accept application that reached its office before the updated-VB got released.
Thanks Chatterjee1!
Banta4gc: I don't take these things personally and I was hoping others wouldn't either.
I understand the frustration and helplessness people feel. I also 'get it' that these fora are their only outlets.
While that may be the case, what is not justified is their unwillingness to see and accept evidence that contradicts their pet theories.
I will not apologize for wanting to help people understand this mess and for calling things like I see them.
If your objection was that this thread has gone off track, I will readily agree and cease posting here.
Banta4gc: I don't take these things personally and I was hoping others wouldn't either.
I understand the frustration and helplessness people feel. I also 'get it' that these fora are their only outlets.
While that may be the case, what is not justified is their unwillingness to see and accept evidence that contradicts their pet theories.
I will not apologize for wanting to help people understand this mess and for calling things like I see them.
If your objection was that this thread has gone off track, I will readily agree and cease posting here.
Last edited by a moderator:
A faux pas...
If you read it once again, the permanent solution is providing EAD and AP only (no AOS and so no AC21). Obviously this measure would benefit no one but primarily the dependents (e.g. who cannot work). No wonder this solution lost ground because its not something that would save DOS/USCIS from existing and further inquiries and lawsuits.
If you read it once again, the permanent solution is providing EAD and AP only (no AOS and so no AC21). Obviously this measure would benefit no one but primarily the dependents (e.g. who cannot work). No wonder this solution lost ground because its not something that would save DOS/USCIS from existing and further inquiries and lawsuits.
Jackolantern
Registered Users (C)
When multiple parties are involved who each have a piece of the responsibility, you sue them all.
By law a visa number is not used until actual approval. If they for example still had 15000 visas left that were merely preallocated but not approved, and/or had returned unused visas to the pool, the VB should not have shown "all unavailable." Courts can't give a judgment that would make them violate the law, but they can force them to follow the law. Following the law could mean giving a revised July bulletin based on the number of unused visas at the start of July.
susan ward
Banned
Hi
I have made bold (as above) I am currently suing under cspa and sueing many, just do not understand why we have to sue them all, can you explain
Jackolantern
Registered Users (C)
By "all" I don't mean literally everybody. I mean you sue enough parties so it is hard for them use finger-pointing at each other to get out of it.
rambharose90
Registered Users (C)
according to Murthy, AILF is confident of winning the lawsuit. one good point about Murthy is that she doesnt publish anything on her website unless she is sure about it.
I dont know why Rajiv Khanna is not confident of the same.
I dont know why Rajiv Khanna is not confident of the same.
Hi:
Can someone explain to me what it means to be documentarily-qualified
My husband's PD (feb 04 rest of world) became current as of the June VB, but we could not file the 485 because of the mess on July 2. What are our options now???
Can someone explain to me what it means to be documentarily-qualified
My husband's PD (feb 04 rest of world) became current as of the June VB, but we could not file the 485 because of the mess on July 2. What are our options now???
Jackolantern
Registered Users (C)
All you can do is wait. Wait until October or the outcome of the AILF lawsuit, whichever comes first. Hopefully in October the cutoff dates for ROW will be similar to what they were in June.
I think "documentarily qualified" means the USCIS has thoroughly evaluated your case and decided that you should get a green card. However, if USCIS is lazy that means there can be a small number of documentarily qualified cases from a large pool of pending cases, simply because the USCIS didn't look at the other pending cases yet.
Last edited by a moderator:
BECsufferer
Registered Users (C)
Wolf Wolf Wolf !!!
13th came and went by and now it is Monday ... and nowhere do I see the BIG ANNOUNCEMENT!!!. What a "Beep"
13th came and went by and now it is Monday ... and nowhere do I see the BIG ANNOUNCEMENT!!!. What a "Beep"
varsityboys
Registered Users (C)
U.S. to Reverse Some Denials Of Work Visas-from wall stree journal
U.S. to Reverse
Some Denials
Of Work Visas
By MIRIAM JORDAN
July 16, 2007; Page A2
Looking to resolve a messy immigration tangle, the U.S. government is close to announcing that it will accept at least some applications for work-based green cards that were filed by thousands of skilled workers in early July at the government's invitation and then abruptly rejected.
Tens of thousands of skilled workers, many of them in the U.S. on temporary H1B visas, responded to an official invitation, in a June 12 "visa bulletin" issued by the State Department, to take the final step in July toward attaining U.S. permanent residency. That sent workers, their families and their employers scrambling to compile paperwork and meet other requirements such as medical exams. Normally, eligible employment-sponsored workers wait years for their numbers to be called.
Then, July 2, as applications poured into processing centers, the State Department announced in a bulletin "update" that no employment-based immigrant visas were left for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30 because of "sudden backlog reduction" by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. USCIS announced it would reject applications that it received.
People familiar with the situation say that officials are working out the final details of a plan that would at least partially rectify the problem.
It isn't clear, however, whether the immigration agency will now accept all applications and process them later, accept only those that have arrived, or come up with some other approach.
The July 2 decision provoked outrage among immigration lawyers, foreign workers and their employers. July 5, Microsoft Corp. announced that it plans soon to open a software-development center in Vancouver, Canada, with a view to "recruit and retain highly skilled people affected by immigration issues in the U.S." The announcement sent a clear signal to the government of the high-tech industry's dissatisfaction with the visa situation.
July 6, a large Chicago immigration law firm filed a lawsuit seeking class-action status against the government. Separately, the American Immigration Law Foundation, a nonprofit group, said it will file this week its own suit seeking class-action status.
Meanwhile, disgruntled green-card applicants cried foul, saying they had been unfairly treated by the government despite playing by the rules.
July 10, they registered their disappointment at the immigration system by dispatching hundreds of flower bouquets to the office of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services chief Emilio Gonzalez.
The next day, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), whose district includes Silicon Valley, sent a letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff requesting "all correspondence, emails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation" leading to the immigration system's about-face July 2.
The problem may have resulted from a communications breakdown between the State Department, which issues a monthly bulletin detailing who is eligible to file a green-card application, and USCIS, which processes the visa applications. The State Department has said that its role is to ensure that every visa slot available is used. In the past, however, the immigration agency has failed to use all of the slots.
Write to Miriam Jordan at miriam.jordan@wsj.com
U.S. to Reverse
Some Denials
Of Work Visas
By MIRIAM JORDAN
July 16, 2007; Page A2
Looking to resolve a messy immigration tangle, the U.S. government is close to announcing that it will accept at least some applications for work-based green cards that were filed by thousands of skilled workers in early July at the government's invitation and then abruptly rejected.
Tens of thousands of skilled workers, many of them in the U.S. on temporary H1B visas, responded to an official invitation, in a June 12 "visa bulletin" issued by the State Department, to take the final step in July toward attaining U.S. permanent residency. That sent workers, their families and their employers scrambling to compile paperwork and meet other requirements such as medical exams. Normally, eligible employment-sponsored workers wait years for their numbers to be called.
Then, July 2, as applications poured into processing centers, the State Department announced in a bulletin "update" that no employment-based immigrant visas were left for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30 because of "sudden backlog reduction" by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. USCIS announced it would reject applications that it received.
People familiar with the situation say that officials are working out the final details of a plan that would at least partially rectify the problem.
It isn't clear, however, whether the immigration agency will now accept all applications and process them later, accept only those that have arrived, or come up with some other approach.
The July 2 decision provoked outrage among immigration lawyers, foreign workers and their employers. July 5, Microsoft Corp. announced that it plans soon to open a software-development center in Vancouver, Canada, with a view to "recruit and retain highly skilled people affected by immigration issues in the U.S." The announcement sent a clear signal to the government of the high-tech industry's dissatisfaction with the visa situation.
July 6, a large Chicago immigration law firm filed a lawsuit seeking class-action status against the government. Separately, the American Immigration Law Foundation, a nonprofit group, said it will file this week its own suit seeking class-action status.
Meanwhile, disgruntled green-card applicants cried foul, saying they had been unfairly treated by the government despite playing by the rules.
July 10, they registered their disappointment at the immigration system by dispatching hundreds of flower bouquets to the office of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services chief Emilio Gonzalez.
The next day, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), whose district includes Silicon Valley, sent a letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff requesting "all correspondence, emails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation" leading to the immigration system's about-face July 2.
The problem may have resulted from a communications breakdown between the State Department, which issues a monthly bulletin detailing who is eligible to file a green-card application, and USCIS, which processes the visa applications. The State Department has said that its role is to ensure that every visa slot available is used. In the past, however, the immigration agency has failed to use all of the slots.
Write to Miriam Jordan at miriam.jordan@wsj.com