Can We settle on These Bases?

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

We want USCIS to:
1. Start premium processing of I-140’s;

2. All I-140’s pending over 180 days should be adjudicated immediately without premium processing fees;

3. Continue concurrent filing of I-140 and I-485;

4. Once the I-485 has been pending for 180 days, the applicants should receive a conditional approval of the green card evidenced by a stamp on the passport valid for 5 years, subject to revocation only on security grounds;

5. USCIS should provide public reports on agency workloads and priorities;

6. The phone system should be improved so meaningful information can be received;

7. We must be provided a method of getting binding, written opinions on AC21 and other regulatory issues on which no regulations are issued by USCIS within six months after enactment of a statute; and

8. We should be assured a community contact point for addressing recurring grievances.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Originally posted by frantic
Should we mention anything about obtaining citizenship - saying that USCIS should start counting the time from the date I485 is filed?

I would have to look at the statutes. CIS may not have the power to do this.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Re: Re: Can We settle on These Bases?

Originally posted by PhillyJulyLC
I don't know about others, but this is definetely much much more than I expected. If we could settle on these terms, I'd be thrilled! Point#4 is the interim GC concept - once that is granted, we'd viturally be worry-free, no EAD/AP/second time FP etc... And I guess point#1 premium processing of I-140 assumes it'd adjudicate I-140 within 180 days. Now the big question is - What are the chances of USCIS accepting this settlement?

Great job, Mr. Khanna. Thank you!

I have thought long and hard. So far, these points seem to take care of all our grievances with may be a little sacrifice of premium processing money.

I want to ask people. Nonmembers can email me directly.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Originally posted by Edison
Can We settle on These Bases?

>>>>> I-551 stamp is acceptable solution, if the case has been pending for more than 180 days. I-551 for 5 years is most welcome since currently CIS is stamping I-551 after approving I-485 for only 1 year.
But I-751 (Petition to remove the conditions on residence) has to be applied if GC is approved with condition(pending security check). So backlog queue will shift from I-485 to I-751.

Oh, no I-751. This is an unconditional approval execpt for sceurity grounds.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Re: All 8 options are really great

Originally posted by Satvika
Hello Mr.Rajiv,

Thanks alot for ur great efferts to finally end our endless misory.

I think all 8 options are really great but option 4

4. Once the I-485 has been pending for 180 days, the applicants should receive a conditional approval of the green card evidenced by a stamp on the passport valid for 5 years, subject to revocation only on security grounds;

Does this mean that after 180 days of filling I-485 can we enjoy all the benifts of greencard holders like choosing what ever job or carrier like that.

Once again THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

That is correct. see the language. the green card is conditional BUT "subject to revocation only on security grounds."

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Originally posted by jose loaiza
I think that this proposal takes care of our suffering.

About I485: If CIS approved stamp after I485 is pending for more than 180 days, would it mean that CIS wouldn't request employment letter at the time of stamping???

God bless you!! Dr. Rajiv

I did not understand this. Can you please explain? Thanks.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Originally posted by hmd
What types improvements are we asking USCIS to implement?/

should'nt we more specific on this one.

As per the rest i think they are fair and will help the community especially 1,2,3 and 4.

hmd

These are broad points. But give any suggestions you think would be helpful.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Re: Re: Can We settle on These Bases?

Originally posted by rk4gc
Rajiv great job. Thank you.

It is complete if we can get #4 with that date counted for Citizenship requirement. Thats possible, if we rephrase #4 as

"4. Once the I-485 has been pending for 180 days, the applicants should receive an approval of the green card evidenced by a stamp on the passport valid for 5 years and issuance of the plastic card, subject to revocation only on security grounds;"

The requests are complete, fair and do justice to all the concerned applicants.

Hmm. I will add something to cover the citizenship aspect, even though I think what would be covered. But we should make it explicit.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Originally posted by lz25888
This is a important point. however, i am just afraid CIS would not accept idea of 5 yrs stamp.

As far as it's renewable (automaticaly except security grounds) , I would be happy with 1-2 yrs stamp.

I am not sure they will accept ANY of these, but heck, we have to try. Othwise, there is always the Court. As I mentioned somewhere earlier, we are going on with the lawsuit full steam ahead. We are not stopping any efforts. If we can settle - great. If not, so what. we will fight on.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Originally posted by morpheus12
I think these are sensible settlement points.

A couple of thoughts:

- I doubt they would agree to use PP funds for any specific purposes. It makes the job of drawing up a budget too hard, and few government agencies like to accept cash if it comes with strings attached on how they can spend it.

- I think any requests re citizenship eligibility are a stretch.

The ruling in the asylum case issued last week might be a wakeup call for the USCIS. If you read the ruling, the judge clearly indicates the INS/USCIS has no basis for issuing EAD's with only a one year expiry date.

Hopefully that ruling will put them in the frame of mind to settle this case!

Good luck Rajiv!

Thanks for your input. I want them to tell me what they do not want to or cannot do. If they agree to meet, I will update you folks right away. I do not intend to make an offer for about a week. My be, wednesday, next week. I want us to think about this carefully.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Originally posted by peace_of_mind
Mr. Rajiv Khanna,

Original point
4. Once the I-485 has been pending for 180 days, the applicants should receive a conditional approval of the green card evidenced by a stamp on the passport valid for 5 years, subject to revocation only on security grounds;

We should add....
In case of any immigration verification, USCIS or any other organization should not find any difference between conditional approval and actual approval, if not new type of problems would be created for conditionally approved GC's.

I am adding this language:
"This “conditional” approval would carry with it all rights and privileges of LPR (green card), including commencement of the time required for naturalization"

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Re: one 'small' concern

Originally posted by John_cdn
These 8 items are great!

However, myself and a few others are in a unique situation that might complicate item 4:
Myself and others are employed by various defense contractors. Our conditions for employment include compliance with unbelievably restrictive export laws. (our employers can not let us see anything that could be deemed 'technical data' without approval by the state department - this makes things so difficult that termination of employment is a serious risk for us) Once we get a green card, then almost all these restrictions are removed.

My concern is that if the approval is conditional on security grounds, then the green card may no longer be enough to remove export restrictions, and rather than wait for citizenship, the employers might just decide to lay us off.

However, I wouldn't want this fairly unique situation to prevent others from getting thier green card sooner. So if we can't eliminate the security condition I'll just hope for the best.

EDIT: I wrote this before the change in wording to item 4. This may be enough, even for those of us trying to work in the defense industry.

Thanks!

Oh no. I would like us to accomodate everyone. But, there may be no way to hasten the security checks. But I will ask them. I will footnote this concern.

" Some provisions must be made for hastening the process of security checks for defense or export restrictions related jobs. These people not only need their LPR, they need it after completion of security checks."

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Re: thanks rajiv...

Originally posted by tmc
i have a second thought on this conditional approval. lets say uscis issued gc to somebody (regular gc & plastic card) and later find out some criminal connection then they will anyway revoke his gc, right? so there is no such thing as conditional gc pending security clearance. even if you cleared security today, later they discovered something, your gc is going to get revoked. i mean there is no way they will let you have gc after knowing u r criminal/terrorist.

so we can just call it unconditional. let them give "unconditional" stamping, (same way as they do all these days after 485 approval) after 180 days, so it is "LAWFUL PERMANENT RESIDENCY" (basically, absolutely no difference). they will give the plastic card after security verification.

May be. Let them tell us why they cannot do it. By the way, revoking a green card is a lot more difficult usually.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

I would like to add the following to your proposals:

1. Fix a process of premium processing for 485s.

++++++++++++That may be too much. Not enough resources. But if we get a green card even though 485 is pending, we are good.

2. Also for #4, clarify the rights of the person who has the proposed temporary green card on the passport -- is the person free to move about with respect to jobs, enrolling in a full-time degree program at a uiversity without getting a student visa, start a business, etc...

+++++++++++Already covered.
"This “conditional” approval would carry with it all rights and privileges of Lawful Permanent Residence (green card)"

3. Remove the need for constant renewals of EAD, FP and AP -- this is a viscious cycle that only creates dead work for the departments involved.
++++++++++++++You have a GC. Will not need AP or EAD.

4. Set up an action plan for 485 cases pending more than a 540 days (or any other length of time).

+++++++++++++++++++++You have GC. What do you care?

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Re: Item 7

Originally posted by lbonneau
Rajiv,
Thank you so much for spending so much time and resource in helping us out !
Like most of us, I would be totally thrilled and would feel free again if USCIS would accept item 4, with the citizenship clock start. No problem if USCIS needs money to get that part started, I would be ready to give up to $5,000 to help them.

I am wondering however why we are asking for item 7: if there is no condition on employment after 180 days as per item 4, why would we need AC21 for ? Sorry I probably missed something there.

Thanks again, and let us know how we can help.

We have all suffered from CIS' lack of regulations. Floundering with uncertain laws. I say, enough! Tell us what the law is, we will follow it.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Re: Looks Good

Originally posted by Dream On
Thanks for all the hard work. The points look good, especially # 4. Herewith a couple of questions :

1. Do we need to add anything that we are definitely willing to give up ie bargaining points. If they start to negotiate and we back down on one or two requests, would that help us from a perception point of view ie make it look like we are being reasonable in trying to come to a resolution.

2. As I have a primary interest in EB1 (ex-L1A) applicants, do we need to spell out that this covers ALL Employment Based cases – especially as there is this vagueness in the AC21 interpretation?

I would have no problem if asked to pay a Premium Fee to get things moving - say $1000 to guarantee the stamp in 60 days (or something like this)!!

I will add the L-1A clause. As to bargaining, these are bottomline demands. Below this, we are better off fighting. But I will not agree to anything without checking with all of you.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Can We settle on These Bases?

Originally posted by PhillyJulyLC
These terms are so very good. Instead of pondering on whether these terms are good enough for us, I believe most people here are crossing figures for whether CIS is willing to settle with us and how close is their expectation to ours. If you could make some initial analysis on this, that would be great. Otherwise please do indicate what we could do to help make good things happen. Thanks...

You can help by getting more people to be aware and involved in suggestions.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Re: Re: Looks Good

Originally posted by PhillyJulyLC
Or, another way is to not propose #5, 6 and 8, so they won't have a chance to show their giving in and comprise by taking care of these little things. Make all requests solid good ones so they must face the hardcore questions and solve them one way or the other.

I think all these are very important. Otherwise, we will back in court on one of these points.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Originally posted by bishma
Thanks Rajiv!!!.

As per the workload data published by USCIS (dec 2003), total number of I-485 application pending is 1,242,783.

Assuming that they agree on Apr 2004 (they have bought time till March 30) for conditional approval after 180 days. This means people whoever filed on or before Sep 2003 will qualify.

Total # of 485 pending as of dec 2003 - 1,242,783
Total 485 filed on Oct, Nov, Dec - 140,308

This leaves 1,102,475 people eligible. My question is how much time will it take to process / approve these applications.

Assuming 100 IIOs per center and each officer approves 20 cases per day and 22 days per month.

1,102,475 / 400 = 2756.1875 cases per IIO

2756.1875 / 20 = 137.809375 days (20 cases per day)

137.809375 / 22 = 6.26 months......


Hhmmmmmmm. I may be wrong about these numbers....

If they agree for these terms, we need to hear from them, how they plan to achieve these.

Once they agree, it is their problem how to meet the targets. Why should we worry.

 

[Rajiv S. Khanna]

Re: FPs...

Originally posted by tmc
we may also need to add that they should send out FPs in order (atleast for TSC). there is absolutely no order in this. i haven't gotten my FP after 15 months of filing whereas people for 2003 have got FP from TSC. it is really sick. i mean they can't even do some scheduling properly.

We will have the GC. Rest is their problem. No?