Can We settle on These Bases?

[CloseToGod]

Originally posted by cinta
Edison and all other fellows,

I think there is no need to introduce "conditional" GC even with security checks pending. We give US CIS too much playing ground.
Also there is no need to suggest validity for the stamp to five years. Instead we should ask for a six month validity and the card should be furnished within this time frame. We should also demand the adjudication of I-485 in a maximum of six months as suggested by the Congress in the DHS Act and earlier AC-21. If we give them five years, believe me people will be receiving their cards after five years and six months pending security checks (see Angello Paparelli letter in my reference). We have to understand that we are dealing with a new culture of "NO" and no sincere acknowlegement of the problem so far. The director of US CIS (as noted earlier)in his latest comments in the Senate (usis web page)merely repeated the song "every applicant will receive the right benefit in the right amount of time" and in the area of Backlog reduction he mentioned the Adopted Children backlog elimination (for Citizens). This is a department that spent huge amounts of money in conferences about the Citizenship Oath...that tells us their priorities...
If they have doubts about one's GC let them make notes and follow up later with the appropriate DOJ personnel, not the adjudicators. Fraud has been around for a long time, but that does not mean immigration should stop.. (GAO fraud analysis GAO-02-972). In the same Senate commentary the Director pointed out a sex criminal arrest and a murderer as a success for the Front-back security checks..We all should be fools or so somebody thought..

Cinta is absolutely right. And I don't understand why some folks are suggesting that I-485 should be processed in one year, instead of 6-months. As Cinta has pointed out, 6-months has some sort of history and tradition attached to it; also, 6-months is also the period suggested by Congress so why not stick to it and demand it.

 

[dsatish]

CA folks

Hi California folks (rk4gc, 140_4ever etc),
please let me know if you can make it at 4.30am tomorrow. I definitely want both of you in the meeting.

 

[rk4gc]

Re: CA folks

Originally posted by dsatish
Hi California folks (rk4gc, 140_4ever etc),
please let me know if you can make it at 4.30am tomorrow. I definitely want both of you in the meeting.

I'm in for 4:30am.

 

[dsatish]

Originally posted by CloseToGod
Cinta is absolutely right. And I don't understand why some folks are suggesting that I-485 should be processed in one year, instead of 6-months. As Cinta has pointed out, 6-months has some sort of history and tradition attached to it; also, 6-months is also the period suggested by Congress so why not stick to it and demand it.

Let's discuss about this in the brainstorm session. I will also post my explanation in the evening. I am not using internet much from office at my new client.

 

[dsatish]

Conference call : 7.30am EST / 4.30am PST tomorrow

Originally posted by rk4gc
I'm in for 4:30am.

Thanks a lot RK. You have helped the East Coast guys. It's final now (Rajiv gave me full freedom to decide the timing).
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THE CONFERENCE CALL ON WEDNESDAY(tomorrow) AT 7.30am est / 6.30am CST /4.30am PST.
Today evening, I will send phone number by private message to the active members.

 

[ar888]

Re: Conference call

Originally posted by dsatish

PS: I just have 3 pricate messgaes (with short texts), still my PM box is getting clogged. Rajiv or "ar888" should help me in increasing the PM box size.

Try deleting messages from your 'Sent Items' folder.

 

[dsatish]

Re: Re: Conference call

Originally posted by ar888
Try deleting messages from your 'Sent Items' folder.

Thanks ar888. There were about 50 sent items and i have deleted them all now. So any one can send me PM now.

 

[feb6361]

Re: Conference call : 7.30am EST / 4.30am PST tomorrow

Dsatish,

I will dial in at 7:30 EST!

Thank you so much!

Originally posted by dsatish
Thanks a lot RK. You have helped the East Coast guys. It's final now (Rajiv gave me full freedom to decide the timing).
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THE CONFERENCE CALL ON WEDNESDAY(tomorrow) AT 7.30am est / 6.30am CST /4.30am PST.
Today evening, I will send phone number by private message to the active members.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

OK.

Tell me where to dial in. also, one of you folks should take notes so we can post our discussion summary for all.

 

[140_takes_4ever]

Re: CA folks

Originally posted by dsatish
Hi California folks (rk4gc, 140_4ever etc),
please let me know if you can make it at 4.30am tomorrow. I definitely want both of you in the meeting.

I will be there, sleepy, but there. I don't think I can volunteer to keep the minutes, it is going to be difficult enough to stay awake being totally alert is akin to cruelty!

dsatish, can you send out the conference number via email/pm/yahoo groups?

Thanks for taking the initiative to organize this event.

 

[Kanadian]

Re: OK.

Originally posted by operations
Tell me where to dial in. also, one of you folks should take notes so we can post our discussion summary for all.

Idea of notes is great. Thanks Rajiv for your time.

Rajiv why BCIS issues an RFE for W2 and Pay stub when this green card is for future employment and if they want they should ask for six months or so not from the time we came to US.... this sounds harassing...just wondering if we can add something to the wish list that they should not ask for pay stubs if a person is providing W2 or they should not ask for W2 & Pay stub more than six months old...I like the idea of six months as it seems an standard word around here. Well if that sounds confusing or not appropriate in your opinion than just change the wording but if BCIS is delaying the case then why should we suffer and provide all the history of pay stubs?

Thanks

 

[bumblebee]

If USCIS is reading this thread, does it hurt our case?

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Originally posted by bumblebee
If USCIS is reading this thread, does it hurt our case?

Nothing to hide.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Re: Re: OK.

Originally posted by Kanadian
Idea of notes is great. Thanks Rajiv for your time.

Rajiv why BCIS issues an RFE for W2 and Pay stub when this green card is for future employment and if they want they should ask for six months or so not from the time we came to US.... this sounds harassing...just wondering if we can add something to the wish list that they should not ask for pay stubs if a person is providing W2 or they should not ask for W2 & Pay stub more than six months old...I like the idea of six months as it seems an standard word around here. Well if that sounds confusing or not appropriate in your opinion than just change the wording but if BCIS is delaying the case then why should we suffer and provide all the history of pay stubs?

Thanks

I doubt if I can. CIS has the right to make certain of your status.

 

[prabca]

I fully agree with you Rajiv, i think BCIS has the right to verify the status of the person from day one, if we include any thing about paystubb and W2 in the settlement approach, it gives wrong signal to the BCIS about the lawsuit it self.
and all the best for your endeavor, though i am not into Labor certification or i 140, or I 485 situation, i admire what you are doing to the community keep it up, atlast there is some one who can stand for legal rights of legal immigrants

 

[functionalalert]

regarding the call

This is in reply to message below:

Dsatish,

Thanks for the invitation,I am unable to join the call due to the time of the call. But my support is there for this noble and just cause.

once the call discussion summary has been posted, i will also provide some feedback if necessary. I am confident that the core group you have formed will take action and I will join in.

if anyone knows any press reporters who are likely to be sympathetic,lets make a list and write to them.


in fact we should also begin collecting each members notarized affidavit documenting the pain and suffering and torture uscis have caused while turning a blind eye to our pleas for justice and fairness and mail a big box to the judge.

however,i feel that even if the uscis agrees to end the torture, we must not agree to anything that does not allow immiadete and instant relief that we can feel right away with concrete dates for implementation SET IN STONE

As a last point to you and core team,let us not forget THE LAW WAS BROKEN BY USCIS we just have to prove it.

i hope no one in future has to suffer again like us




tell the user-name also. I hope that cinta, edison,jharkhandi,functionalert,ramss,140_4ever,fe
b6361,lca_001,shsa etc will join the meeting.

 

[cinta]

Originally posted by prabca
I fully agree with you Rajiv, i think BCIS has the right to verify the status of the person from day one, if we include any thing about paystubb and W2 in the settlement approach, it gives wrong signal to the BCIS about the lawsuit it self.
and all the best for your endeavor, though i am not into Labor certification or i 140, or I 485 situation, i admire what you are doing to the community keep it up, atlast there is some one who can stand for legal rights of legal immigrants

USCIS has the right to know/check one's status through requests for continuous employment. This may be true but it is also true that the culture of "Adjudication" changed and this is reflected in the increased number of RFEs and Transfers (earlier reference posted by Paparelli, sending the memo of 1980 to the Ombudsman). The status could be checked otherwise also not by employment verification and they could also phone the employer, instead of issuing RFEs. Due to the chronic backlog problem also, the original submitted documents from employer, banks, statements all change as they become old/obsolete! So pending their right to know/have updated information they issue RFEs and the backlog increases! After the employment RFE they may issue another one on updated financial status of oneself or the company's. The fundamental problem gets worse and as always, YES they do have the right and the upperhand.

 

[hidden_dragon]

Cinta, I agree with you on this. I may have said this too many times on this tread. We should ask for a stamp and then permanent GC in a give time frame. (6 months for stamp, 1 yr for GC seems reasonable). USCIS are welcome to go on with security check with those got permanet GC if you can't do it in a year. Anything temporary will cause trouble later.
If possible, cinta, please join the meeting tomorrow to voice your opinion.

Originally posted by cinta
Edison and all other fellows,

I think there is no need to introduce "conditional" GC even with security checks pending. We give US CIS too much playing ground.
Also there is no need to suggest validity for the stamp to five years. Instead we should ask for a six month validity and the card should be furnished within this time frame. We should also demand the adjudication of I-485 in a maximum of six months as suggested by the Congress in the DHS Act and earlier AC-21. If we give them five years, believe me people will be receiving their cards after five years and six months pending security checks (see Angello Paparelli letter in my reference). We have to understand that we are dealing with a new culture of "NO" and no sincere acknowlegement of the problem so far. The director of US CIS (as noted earlier)in his latest comments in the Senate (usis web page)merely repeated the song "every applicant will receive the right benefit in the right amount of time" and in the area of Backlog reduction he mentioned the Adopted Children backlog elimination (for Citizens). This is a department that spent huge amounts of money in conferences about the Citizenship Oath...that tells us their priorities...
If they have doubts about one's GC let them make notes and follow up later with the appropriate DOJ personnel, not the adjudicators. Fraud has been around for a long time, but that does not mean immigration should stop.. (GAO fraud analysis GAO-02-972). In the same Senate commentary the Director pointed out a sex criminal arrest and a murderer as a success for the Front-back security checks..We all should be fools or so somebody thought..

 

[getit]

Rajiv,

No matter how many requests, we have to ask CIS to focus on out POINT. E.g. if CIS accepts item #3 "coutinue concurrent filing of I140 and I485", maybe they would say "we have accepted some of your requests". However it doesn't have any solution on our 485 backlog problem.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks,

 

[dsatish]

Re: OK.

Originally posted by operations
Tell me where to dial in. also, one of you folks should take notes so we can post our discussion summary for all.

The dial-in number is same as the one we are using for the coe team meetings for the past 2 months.