Jharkhandi
Registered Users (C)
sertra2002 said:
I am surprised what could possibly be holding NSC? They seemed more ready than any other center till 4 weeks back! It is indeed a mystery going by pre-memo performance of NSC!
I-140 approvals after ohata memo
- Thread starter bigbadwolf
- Start date
I am surprised what could possibly be holding NSC? They seemed more ready than any other center till 4 weeks back! It is indeed a mystery going by pre-memo performance of NSC!
sertra2002
Registered Users (C)
Jharkhandi said:
I totally agree with you. Infact NSC had specifically stated that they would be implementing the memo, unlike other centers. Looks like their words do not match their actions !!
sertra2002
Registered Users (C)
One Ohata memo beneficiary more from VSC !!
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=131458
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=131458
Jharkhandi
Registered Users (C)
I think they are coming up with 485 approvals and it may take a week or two more for NSC. Let use see if naanshi gets concurrent approval - all the best.sertra2002 said:
********************************************************
Till here for sertra2002.
********************************************************
By the way, feel free to join us in VSC 140 - we never oppose anyone posting there:
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=808618&postcount=51
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=809862&postcount=54
It is always good to see more and more people posting in VSC (we get a feel like center of Universe). You are always welcome to participate.
sertra2002
Registered Users (C)
Jharkandi,
Your point about inter forum postings is well taken. I am not trying to defend the two, but If I remeber correctly the replies were to a peroson who posted his ND/RD at and wanted to know how long it would take to process his case in VSC. As you know each center has its own processing times and I guess the guys were only trying to point him to the right forum. Ofcourse for any general questions, everyone is welcome to post on any forum.
Take care,
sertra2002
Your point about inter forum postings is well taken. I am not trying to defend the two, but If I remeber correctly the replies were to a peroson who posted his ND/RD at and wanted to know how long it would take to process his case in VSC. As you know each center has its own processing times and I guess the guys were only trying to point him to the right forum. Ofcourse for any general questions, everyone is welcome to post on any forum.
Take care,
sertra2002
Jharkhandi
Registered Users (C)
Agree about that intent sertra2002. It was about polity - people could have given hyperlink to VSC 140 rather easily and was there a need to second on opinions?sertra2002 said:
See when people are not familiar with structure - they post it where they think is right - guide them to right forum if you can. You could have been instead of that person - no?
Anyway enjoy new dates.
Ohata memo was implemented 4/30
shishe - you got your I 140 approval before 4/30. Ohata memo was not implemented until then. So far, it seems that you got lucky since others like me are left in limbo with I 140 pending. Whether this would mean faster 485 approval - time'll tell!
shishe - you got your I 140 approval before 4/30. Ohata memo was not implemented until then. So far, it seems that you got lucky since others like me are left in limbo with I 140 pending. Whether this would mean faster 485 approval - time'll tell!
amrcn_attd
Registered Users (C)
From my observation, after Ohata memo was put in force, it looks like those who received their FP notices before anything else(like EAD/AP)etc... stand the best chance of getting concurrent adjudication from NSC.
iknowitall
Registered Users (C)
ya that is if the "ohata memo" ever goes into action.amrcn_attd said:
amercn_attd
Could you please enlighten me as to why you would think so? It seems that everything here is random - concurrent filers were supposed to keep track of 140 dates rather than 485 dates. Now the processing dates have changed and no one has an approval, at least people in this and other forums. Some people have FPs, some have EADs, while some have nothing at all.
Could you please enlighten me as to why you would think so? It seems that everything here is random - concurrent filers were supposed to keep track of 140 dates rather than 485 dates. Now the processing dates have changed and no one has an approval, at least people in this and other forums. Some people have FPs, some have EADs, while some have nothing at all.
amrcn_attd
Registered Users (C)
akv01 said:
Hi akv,
I am thinking that DHS is giving more stress on FP. EAD and AP are secondary to them from the standpoint of security. With the existing manpower, If EAD/AP times(first duration, then processing are extended), then the I-485 times can be brought down considerably. I am thinking that
this years filers who have their FP done, should be getting approvals/denials in 9-12 months time.
The reasoning of some organisations and agencies is that those who have suffered have suffered anyway, why to make more people suffer(sic)
If it is speeding, it is good for all. Old timers should not envy the New filers, the same way people who applied for GCs in the 70s got them within a period of months. Trying to make logic of this is just like my paying for some other person's ancestor's slavery.
Did I enlighten you in any way - If not, sorry
.Singhflying
Registered Users (C)
Preference EAD.
Hi,
My EAD approval e-mail came today (for both of us, mywife and me). CIS has not sent any FP or 140 approval/notices etc till now.
I do not think that they are emphasising more on FP as a priority. I am concluding this based on my case and a few others that I have come across. My case is a pure post Ohata memo and was filed on May 06 2004 (as per the CIS receipt and website, though it was mailed on April 28th).
Hi,
My EAD approval e-mail came today (for both of us, mywife and me). CIS has not sent any FP or 140 approval/notices etc till now.
I do not think that they are emphasising more on FP as a priority. I am concluding this based on my case and a few others that I have come across. My case is a pure post Ohata memo and was filed on May 06 2004 (as per the CIS receipt and website, though it was mailed on April 28th).
Singhflying
Registered Users (C)
Ohata memo is dead. Burial notice attached.
To: REGIONAL DIRECTORS
SERVICE CENTER DIRECTORS
DISTRICT DIRECTORS
NATIONAL BENEFIT CENTER DIRECTOR
From: William R. Yates /S/
Associate Director of Operations
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Department of Homeland Security
Date: December 29, 2004
RE: Regression of E31 and E32 Visa Numbers for Applicants from Mainland China, India, and
the Philippines
Rescission of March 31, 2004 Policy Memo re: Concurrent Adjudication of Concurrently
Filed Form I-140s and Form I-485s
1. Purpose.
This memorandum provides guidance to the field on how to handle Form I-485 adjustment of
status applications and concurrently filed Form I-140 immigrant visa petitions/I-485 adjustment of
status applications that are affected by the visa number regression under the E31 skilled worker or
the E32 professional categories for applicants from mainland China, India, and the Philippines. This
memorandum also notifies the field that the March 31, 2004 policy memorandum issued by Fujie
Ohata, Director Service Center Operations and entitled Procedural Instructions for Concurrent
Adjudication of Concurrently Filed Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker and Form I-
485, Application for Adjustment of Status is hereby rescinded. This guidance is effective
immediately.
2. Background.
The January 2005 Visa Bulletin published by the Department of State (DOS) indicates that
visa availability under the E31 and E32 categories for applicants from mainland China, India, and
the Philippines has regressed to January 1, 2002. In recent years, all employment-based visa
Regression of E31 and E32 Visa Numbers for Applicants from Mainland China, India, and the
Philippines
HQOPRD 70/11.1
Page 2
categories have been “Current” for all countries, primarily as a result of The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC-21), Pub. L. 106-331, and changes in U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) processing procedures that created a significant
backlog of cases and a consequent reduction in demand for visa numbers.
In FY 2004, USCIS embarked on a major effort to reduce backlogs by the end of FY 2006.
As noted, this memorandum also rescinds the March 31, 2004, concurrent adjudication
memorandum. USCIS has determined that, from an operational standpoint, the concurrent
adjudication of the Form I-140 and Form I-485 has created administrative challenges and has not
resulted in enhancements to customer service. Accordingly, USCIS has decided to rescind the
March 31, 2004 memorandum. This decision will further USCIS’ goal of reducing backlogs in the
adjudication of these forms.
3. Concurrent Filing, Concurrent Adjudication, and Withdrawal of the Form I-485.
(a) Concurrent Filing. As a result of the visa regression, beginning on January 1, 2005, and
until further notice, affected applicants from mainland China, India, and the Philippines will not be
able to file Form I-485 or concurrently file Form I-140 and Form I-485 unless an immigrant visa
number is available, pursuant to the Visa Bulletin. Concurrent filings from applicants not affected
by the visa regression will continue in accordance with established policies and procedures.
(b) Concurrent Adjudication. Effective immediately, the memorandum issued by Fujie
Ohata, Director of Service Center Operations, dated March 31, 2004, entitled: Procedural
Instructions for Concurrent Adjudication of Concurrently Filed Form I-140 Immigrant Petition for
Alien Worker and Form I-485 Application for Adjustment of Status is rescinded. The Service
Centers shall continue accepting concurrently filed Form I-140s and Form I-485s and ancillary
applications (Form I-765 applications for employment authorization and Form I-131 applications for
advance parole/travel documents), if a visa number is available and the remaining eligibility criteria
have been met. Adjudication of the Form I-140, however, is no longer dependent on the
adjudicative readiness of the Form I-485.
(c) Withdrawal of the Form I-485 by Applicants Affected by the Visa Regression. When an
applicant withdraws the Form I-485 from a concurrent Form I-140/I-485 filing, the Service Centers
will view the withdrawal as an indication that the applicant intends to pursue immigrant visa
Regression of E31 and E32 Visa Numbers for Applicants from Mainland China, India, and the
Philippines
HQOPRD 70/11.1
Page 3
processing overseas and adjudicate the Form I-140 petition before forwarding it to the National Visa
Center.
4. Timely filed before the visa regression.
Applicants affected by the visa regression may continue to file the Form I-485 adjustment
application (with ancillary applications) or concurrently file a Form I-140 immigrant visa petition
and a Form I-485 adjustment application (with ancillary applications) until close of business on
December 30, 2004, provided that they have a current priority date and are otherwise eligible to file.
Applications filed under this provision must be properly filed on or before December 30,
2004. Under 8 CFR 103.2(a)(7), an application will be considered to have been properly filed when
it is physically received at a USCIS office and stamped with the time and date of actual receipt.
USCIS is closed on December 31, 2004, as it is a federal holiday.
5. Fees and Data Entry.
(a) Fee receipting and data entry functions. All fee receipting and data entry functions shall
be performed according to the standards applicable to the receiving location.
(b) Remittance of a Single Check for Multiple Filings. If a single check is remitted for
multiple filings and the fee is incorrect and/or the priority date is not current, all of the filings shall
be rejected. Filing receipts should not be issued for any of the filings.
(c) Remittance of Multiple Checks for Multiple Filings. If Form I-140 and Form I-485 are
filed together with separate fees and there is no visa currently available, the Form I-140 and fee shall
be accepted, but all relating Form I-485s and ancillary applications shall be rejected.
(d) Remittance of Multiple Checks for Principal Applicants and their Dependents. In the case
of multiple checks, when the acceptance of the dependents’ applications is contingent upon the
acceptance of the principal’s application, the principal’s application shall be fed in first, followed by
the dependents. If the principal’s application is rejected, the dependents’ applications must also be
rejected.
(e) Acceptance of cash. All offices should continue their normal practice regarding the
acceptance of cash.
6. Alternate Chargeability.
Applicants have been advised to flag a Form I-485 on the face of the application to identify it
as one that should be handled under the rules applicable to alternate chargeability. Contract staff
Regression of E31 and E32 Visa Numbers for Applicants from Mainland China, India, and the
Philippines
HQOPRD 70/11.1
Page 4
will forward all cases identified as “Alternate Chargeability” to mailroom review for further review
by USCIS staff.
Section 202(b) of the INA provides rules for determining whether an applicant may be
“charged” to a country other than the one where he/she was born. These alternate chargeability rules
are designed to ensure that children are not separated from their parents, that spouses are not
separated from each other, and that individuals born during the temporary visit of their parents to a
country where they have no residence are not adversely affected by “an accident of birth.” Note that
while a child may be charged to his or her parent’s country of birth, the reciprocal is not true. A
parent cannot be charged to the country where his/her child was born. For a complete discussion of
the alternate chargeability rules, see Adjudicator Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 20.1(d).
If upon review, it is determined that a case may be covered by the provisions of section
202(b) of the INA, the Form I-485, along with any ancillary applications and concurrently filed
petition will be accepted and handled under normal practice, provided that the beneficiary who is
accompanying or following to join is not affected by the visa regression and otherwise meets the
criteria set forth in section 202(b) of the INA.
7. Handling of Form I-140/I-485s Filed After Visa Numbers Have Regressed.
(a) Form I-485s filed separately. If there is no visa available when a Form I-485 is filed, the
I-485 and fee shall be rejected.
(b) Form I-140s and Form I-485s filed together with one fee. If the Form I-140 and the Form
I-485 are filed together with one fee and there is no visa currently available, the Form I-140, the
relating Form I-485 and ancillary applications, along with fees, all shall be rejected.
(c) Form I-140s and Form I-485s filed together with separate fees. If the Form I-140 and
Form I-485 are filed together with separate fees and there is no visa currently available, the relating
Form I-485 and ancillary applications shall be rejected. The Form I-140 shall be accepted, if the
correct fee has been remitted.
8. Pipeline Form I-485s.
“Pipeline” cases refer to those Form I-485s physically received on or before December 30,
2004, in the appropriate service office but subsequently affected by a regression.
Pipeline cases will be held in abeyance until such time as a visa number becomes available.
Pipeline cases will be considered to be pending during this period, and applicants will be eligible to
apply for interim benefits such as employment authorization and advance parole.
Regression of E31 and E32 Visa Numbers for Applicants from Mainland China, India, and the
Philippines
HQOPRD 70/11.1
Page 5
9. Contact Information.
Operational and policy questions regarding the guidance provided in this memorandum
should be directed to Robert Genesoni and Bunnie Bryce, respectively, via DHS e-mail, through
appropriate channels.
To: REGIONAL DIRECTORS
SERVICE CENTER DIRECTORS
DISTRICT DIRECTORS
NATIONAL BENEFIT CENTER DIRECTOR
From: William R. Yates /S/
Associate Director of Operations
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Department of Homeland Security
Date: December 29, 2004
RE: Regression of E31 and E32 Visa Numbers for Applicants from Mainland China, India, and
the Philippines
Rescission of March 31, 2004 Policy Memo re: Concurrent Adjudication of Concurrently
Filed Form I-140s and Form I-485s
1. Purpose.
This memorandum provides guidance to the field on how to handle Form I-485 adjustment of
status applications and concurrently filed Form I-140 immigrant visa petitions/I-485 adjustment of
status applications that are affected by the visa number regression under the E31 skilled worker or
the E32 professional categories for applicants from mainland China, India, and the Philippines. This
memorandum also notifies the field that the March 31, 2004 policy memorandum issued by Fujie
Ohata, Director Service Center Operations and entitled Procedural Instructions for Concurrent
Adjudication of Concurrently Filed Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker and Form I-
485, Application for Adjustment of Status is hereby rescinded. This guidance is effective
immediately.
2. Background.
The January 2005 Visa Bulletin published by the Department of State (DOS) indicates that
visa availability under the E31 and E32 categories for applicants from mainland China, India, and
the Philippines has regressed to January 1, 2002. In recent years, all employment-based visa
Regression of E31 and E32 Visa Numbers for Applicants from Mainland China, India, and the
Philippines
HQOPRD 70/11.1
Page 2
categories have been “Current” for all countries, primarily as a result of The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC-21), Pub. L. 106-331, and changes in U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) processing procedures that created a significant
backlog of cases and a consequent reduction in demand for visa numbers.
In FY 2004, USCIS embarked on a major effort to reduce backlogs by the end of FY 2006.
As noted, this memorandum also rescinds the March 31, 2004, concurrent adjudication
memorandum. USCIS has determined that, from an operational standpoint, the concurrent
adjudication of the Form I-140 and Form I-485 has created administrative challenges and has not
resulted in enhancements to customer service. Accordingly, USCIS has decided to rescind the
March 31, 2004 memorandum. This decision will further USCIS’ goal of reducing backlogs in the
adjudication of these forms.
3. Concurrent Filing, Concurrent Adjudication, and Withdrawal of the Form I-485.
(a) Concurrent Filing. As a result of the visa regression, beginning on January 1, 2005, and
until further notice, affected applicants from mainland China, India, and the Philippines will not be
able to file Form I-485 or concurrently file Form I-140 and Form I-485 unless an immigrant visa
number is available, pursuant to the Visa Bulletin. Concurrent filings from applicants not affected
by the visa regression will continue in accordance with established policies and procedures.
(b) Concurrent Adjudication. Effective immediately, the memorandum issued by Fujie
Ohata, Director of Service Center Operations, dated March 31, 2004, entitled: Procedural
Instructions for Concurrent Adjudication of Concurrently Filed Form I-140 Immigrant Petition for
Alien Worker and Form I-485 Application for Adjustment of Status is rescinded. The Service
Centers shall continue accepting concurrently filed Form I-140s and Form I-485s and ancillary
applications (Form I-765 applications for employment authorization and Form I-131 applications for
advance parole/travel documents), if a visa number is available and the remaining eligibility criteria
have been met. Adjudication of the Form I-140, however, is no longer dependent on the
adjudicative readiness of the Form I-485.
(c) Withdrawal of the Form I-485 by Applicants Affected by the Visa Regression. When an
applicant withdraws the Form I-485 from a concurrent Form I-140/I-485 filing, the Service Centers
will view the withdrawal as an indication that the applicant intends to pursue immigrant visa
Regression of E31 and E32 Visa Numbers for Applicants from Mainland China, India, and the
Philippines
HQOPRD 70/11.1
Page 3
processing overseas and adjudicate the Form I-140 petition before forwarding it to the National Visa
Center.
4. Timely filed before the visa regression.
Applicants affected by the visa regression may continue to file the Form I-485 adjustment
application (with ancillary applications) or concurrently file a Form I-140 immigrant visa petition
and a Form I-485 adjustment application (with ancillary applications) until close of business on
December 30, 2004, provided that they have a current priority date and are otherwise eligible to file.
Applications filed under this provision must be properly filed on or before December 30,
2004. Under 8 CFR 103.2(a)(7), an application will be considered to have been properly filed when
it is physically received at a USCIS office and stamped with the time and date of actual receipt.
USCIS is closed on December 31, 2004, as it is a federal holiday.
5. Fees and Data Entry.
(a) Fee receipting and data entry functions. All fee receipting and data entry functions shall
be performed according to the standards applicable to the receiving location.
(b) Remittance of a Single Check for Multiple Filings. If a single check is remitted for
multiple filings and the fee is incorrect and/or the priority date is not current, all of the filings shall
be rejected. Filing receipts should not be issued for any of the filings.
(c) Remittance of Multiple Checks for Multiple Filings. If Form I-140 and Form I-485 are
filed together with separate fees and there is no visa currently available, the Form I-140 and fee shall
be accepted, but all relating Form I-485s and ancillary applications shall be rejected.
(d) Remittance of Multiple Checks for Principal Applicants and their Dependents. In the case
of multiple checks, when the acceptance of the dependents’ applications is contingent upon the
acceptance of the principal’s application, the principal’s application shall be fed in first, followed by
the dependents. If the principal’s application is rejected, the dependents’ applications must also be
rejected.
(e) Acceptance of cash. All offices should continue their normal practice regarding the
acceptance of cash.
6. Alternate Chargeability.
Applicants have been advised to flag a Form I-485 on the face of the application to identify it
as one that should be handled under the rules applicable to alternate chargeability. Contract staff
Regression of E31 and E32 Visa Numbers for Applicants from Mainland China, India, and the
Philippines
HQOPRD 70/11.1
Page 4
will forward all cases identified as “Alternate Chargeability” to mailroom review for further review
by USCIS staff.
Section 202(b) of the INA provides rules for determining whether an applicant may be
“charged” to a country other than the one where he/she was born. These alternate chargeability rules
are designed to ensure that children are not separated from their parents, that spouses are not
separated from each other, and that individuals born during the temporary visit of their parents to a
country where they have no residence are not adversely affected by “an accident of birth.” Note that
while a child may be charged to his or her parent’s country of birth, the reciprocal is not true. A
parent cannot be charged to the country where his/her child was born. For a complete discussion of
the alternate chargeability rules, see Adjudicator Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 20.1(d).
If upon review, it is determined that a case may be covered by the provisions of section
202(b) of the INA, the Form I-485, along with any ancillary applications and concurrently filed
petition will be accepted and handled under normal practice, provided that the beneficiary who is
accompanying or following to join is not affected by the visa regression and otherwise meets the
criteria set forth in section 202(b) of the INA.
7. Handling of Form I-140/I-485s Filed After Visa Numbers Have Regressed.
(a) Form I-485s filed separately. If there is no visa available when a Form I-485 is filed, the
I-485 and fee shall be rejected.
(b) Form I-140s and Form I-485s filed together with one fee. If the Form I-140 and the Form
I-485 are filed together with one fee and there is no visa currently available, the Form I-140, the
relating Form I-485 and ancillary applications, along with fees, all shall be rejected.
(c) Form I-140s and Form I-485s filed together with separate fees. If the Form I-140 and
Form I-485 are filed together with separate fees and there is no visa currently available, the relating
Form I-485 and ancillary applications shall be rejected. The Form I-140 shall be accepted, if the
correct fee has been remitted.
8. Pipeline Form I-485s.
“Pipeline” cases refer to those Form I-485s physically received on or before December 30,
2004, in the appropriate service office but subsequently affected by a regression.
Pipeline cases will be held in abeyance until such time as a visa number becomes available.
Pipeline cases will be considered to be pending during this period, and applicants will be eligible to
apply for interim benefits such as employment authorization and advance parole.
Regression of E31 and E32 Visa Numbers for Applicants from Mainland China, India, and the
Philippines
HQOPRD 70/11.1
Page 5
9. Contact Information.
Operational and policy questions regarding the guidance provided in this memorandum
should be directed to Robert Genesoni and Bunnie Bryce, respectively, via DHS e-mail, through
appropriate channels.