Lofgren Gives USCIS 3 Days To Answer Questions

E

EB32002Ind-CA

New Member
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/breaking-news-l.html#comments

Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), chair of the House Immigration Subcommittee, sent Secretary Chertoff a list of questions and a request for documents from USCIS to get to the bottom of the whole Visa Bulletin fiasco. The letter is very interesting not just because it puts a heck of a lot of pressure on DHS right now, but also because Lofgren's folks imply from the questions that USCIS was short circuiting established security clearance procedures to "pre-request" visa numbers from DOS. If it turns out full security clearances were not carried out, USCIS will either need to say that they had the legal justification (which would be a public relations disaster for the agency) or that they intended to complete the checks after the fact (which would be a direct violation of their own regulations). The only way to avoid answering the questions and to make this go away would be to eat crow and start working the case July cases.

letterlink:
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/files/letter_to_chertoff_re_visa_bulletin_issues_july_9_2007.pdf
 
This looks positive guys!

As much as I want to feel good about this letter, what are the chances that the congresswoman will get any response from Rice or Chertoff this time? Last time they just neglected her letter and issued a revised visa bulletin...
 
Good info. Can we all send a vote of thanks to this congress woman for bringing such real issues to the table for legal immigrants ?
 
maybe we should send Thanks to the senator to let her know that her effort is being appreciated. we should contact more Indian newspapers and sites to potray the problems in getting green cards in USA ..at the very least this will make clear the fact that USA is no longer a great place for immigrants and in fact legal immigrants are third class citizens who end up paying atleast 10K + mental tension + 10 years to get a simple green card
 
WOW, this is big! And it could change the course of events between now and October!

My prediction is that the following breaking and bending of the rules will be revealed:

1. USCIS didn't actually approve 60,000 in June+July 1st. They preallocated several thousand of those, which is probably not illegal in and of itself, since preallocation is what they used to do years ago and is currently what the consulates do. However, a visa number is not actually used until approval, and denial will return a preallocated visa number to the available pool. So the July bulletin should not have been changed to 'U'.

2. EB3 India got way more than their 7% share, and much of the excess over 7% was given out in June, even though spillover from EB2, EB1, and ROW is not supposed to happen until the last quarter of the fiscal year (July-Sept).

3. EB2 India and EB3 India got spillover visas from EB1 India and all of ROW, even though there are still many approvable cases in EB1 India and all ROW categories pending (like mine!).

4. They approved some cases before their name check was completed. It is possible that this is not against the rules per se, because they also do two other security checks (IBIS and ADENT) so the lack of an FBI name check does not necessarily mean they are giving out GCs without checking people's background. However, Congress or the courts could force them to be consistent with this going forward, instead of selectively ignoring the name check for some people, while using "name check is pending" as an excuse to let other cases sit on the shelf for years. In other words, if in June they were ignoring name checks that were pending for more than 180 days, provided that the applicant passed the other two security checks, they could be made to implement that policy for all applicants going forward.

5. The overtime they worked in June cost hundreds of thousands if not millions of extra dollars, and wanting to use up the quota before July is not an appropriate justification for such expenditure. Somebody will be suspended or hopefully fired for this decision.

I am confident that at least 3 of the above 5 points will be proven true. But I don't know if the facts will be revealed fast enough to make a difference before October and force them to put something other than 'U' for some countries and categories. They certainly won't provide the information requested by the Congresswoman in three days, and possibly not even three weeks.
 
Text of Crystal Williams, deputy director for programs at the American Immigration Lawyers Association (courtesy washingtonpost)

Crystal Williams, deputy director for programs at the American Immigration Lawyers Association, suspects that there may still be open slots in the annual green card quota.

"They lied. That's the simple part of it. They lied to keep from having to take these applications," Williams said. The association's sister organization is filing a lawsuit to force the government to accept the filed applications. "The system is deeply broken," Williams said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../10/AR2007071002055_2.html?hpid=moreheadlines
 
Agree with Jack. They definitely gave away EB1 India and EB2 Row numbers to EB3/EB2 India even when people in these categories are still waiting with their visas current. If proven so, they will have to do some sort of adjustment to make up for this injustice to EB1 and ROw categories so come October, we may not see that many approvals in EB3/2 India and a surge in EB1 and Row approvals.
 
Washington, D.C. – Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose) today sent a letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Chertoff requesting “all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance” of the “Update to July Visa Availability” on July 2, 2007. The letter contains thirteen separate questions and requests for information relevant to the issuance of the updated Visa Bulletin.

“The Department’s unprecedented decision to reject adjustment of status applications has caused needless hardship and disruption to countless immigrants,” noted Rep. Zoe Lofgren. “It has also come to my attention that USCIS began returning visa numbers to the State Department as early as Thursday, July 5, 2007, due to their inability to review applications effectively. The Department of Homeland Security has once again demonstrated its inability to complete even its core missions. This debacle demonstrates the need for more transparency and oversight of the department’s operations and procedures.”
 
Who cares what she wants and asked,

If USCIS and DOS starts to do exactly what each congressman wants them to do they would simply stop working taking care of their requests.
 
sfmars said:
Who cares what she wants and asked,

If USCIS and DOS starts to do exactly what each congressman wants them to do they would simply stop working taking care of their requests.
Click to expand...
True, but this is not any ordinary Congressperson; Lofgren is the chairwoman of the immigration subcommittee.

I don't think USCIS is going to halt operations to produce the information in three days, but they will have to respond with some kind of plan for when they will provide the information and reasons why they can't provide certain information.
 
Jackolantern:

Here's my commentary on your points:

1. I think a large majority of July approvals will be those who were reported as documentarily-qualified for the purposes of the July Bulletin. Only a very small minority of July approvals will be those whose dates were current in July, but were not reported as documentarily-qualified.
The approvals in June were probably a combination of those reported documentarily-qualified for the June bulletin (in early May), and those whose dates were current in June, but were not included in the list of documetarily-qualified applicants for the June bulletin. In addition, DOS apparently realized late July 1st/early July 2nd that all visas available have been allocated, so they had no alternative but to make numbers unavailable.
See my analysis here:
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1716172&postcount=3
Now, why they worked on Jun 30th and July 1st is still up for speculation.

2& 3 . Per country limits did not apply in July. I say that because of this:

(2) Per-Country Limits

In addition to the overall limits, the INA contains a per-country ceiling to preclude preemption of the annual numbers by one or more foreign states of heavy emigration. Under the formula in Sec. 202(a), the per-country limit is 7% of the combined visa total available to family-sponsored and employment-based preference immigrants, i.e., at least 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or a minimum of 7,320.

Sec. 202(a)(5)(A) (which was added by Sec. 104 of Pub. L. 106−313) provides that if the total of employment-based visa numbers available for a calendar quarter is greater than the number of qualified applicants who may otherwise be issued such visa numbers, the per-country limitation on employment-based visa numbers will be lifted for the remainder of that quarter.
Click to expand...
from http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2001 app A.pdf

Obviously, the number of qualified applicants (documentarily-qualified) reported by USCIS to DOS in early June for July allocations was lesser than the number of available visa numbers for 4th quarter 2007, that is why all categories were made current!
again, look at my analysis of the situation here:
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1716172&postcount=3

4. I have no reason to suspect that they assigned visa numbers to people still stuck in name-check. All I hear are rumors. But like you said, even if they did that, it is probably not illegal.

5. No comment.

sachatur

PS: This is a layman's analysis. I'm not an attorney.
 
sachatur said:
In addition, DOS apparently realized late July 1st/early July 2nd that all visas available have been allocated, so they had no alternative but to make numbers unavailable.
Click to expand...
Until actual approval takes place, there is the potential for a visa number to be returned to the available pool, and a visa number is not counted as "used" until approval. So it is not correct for them to say that they have actually used all the visas, unless they have applied all those numbers to actual approvals. They should have adjusted (perhaps retrogressed) the date based on the ages of the pending and preallocated cases, not set everything to 'U'.

sachatur said:
2& 3 . Per country limits did not apply in July.
Click to expand...
But the limits do apply in June. Most of the approvals or preallocations occurred in June, not July, and what they did in June likely exceeded the per-country limit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The question is why DOS made all categories C in the VB issued mid-June. If 60K visas are available & 3 months to go, they could have moved the dates in substantially big steps.
What is the purpose making all categories C and having everyone file I485 and keeping USCIS busy (just issuing EAD\AP in six months) thereby GC approvals taking forever? IF USCIS would not have had any time to approve GC, then the numbers would go waste anyways and VB would say all categories C for the foreseeable future. Hence, CIS staff worked overtime to utilize all 60K visas and hence DOS made all categories U. However, if, prior to publishing july VB, the number of remaining visas is significantly greater than the qualified applicants, how did the 60K get utilized in the last fortnight of June?
sachatur said:
Jackolantern:

Here's my commentary on your points:

1. I think a large majority of July approvals will be those who were reported as documentarily-qualified for the purposes of the July Bulletin. Only a very small minority of July approvals will be those whose dates were current in July, but were not reported as documentarily-qualified.
The approvals in June were probably a combination of those reported documentarily-qualified for the June bulletin (in early May), and those whose dates were current in June, but were not included in the list of documetarily-qualified applicants for the June bulletin. In addition, DOS apparently realized late July 1st/early July 2nd that all visas available have been allocated, so they had no alternative but to make numbers unavailable.
See my analysis here:
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1716172&postcount=3
Now, why they worked on Jun 30th and July 1st is still up for speculation.

2& 3 . Per country limits did not apply in July. I say that because of this:


from http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2001 app A.pdf

Obviously, the number of qualified applicants (documentarily-qualified) reported by USCIS to DOS in early June for July allocations was lesser than the number of available visa numbers for 4th quarter 2007, that is why all categories were made current!
again, look at my analysis of the situation here:
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1716172&postcount=3

4. I have no reason to suspect that they assigned visa numbers to people still stuck in name-check. All I hear are rumors. But like you said, even if they did that, it is probably not illegal.

5. No comment.

sachatur

PS: This is a layman's analysis. I'm not an attorney.
Click to expand...
 
DOS must have thought the USCIS didn't have many pending "documentarily qualified" applicants, because of the slow rate they had been requesting visa numbers. USCIS didn't want to tell them the reality, which is that they have more than enough qualified applicants, but have been reviewing and approving very few of them, due to the laziness of USCIS.
 
everything said.....there is no doubt that USCIS screwed things big time...

no matter what they say....this is no way to run things.

i would like to see an explanation about what happened to EB1 and EB2-row visas.....were there so many candidates waiting?? then how come these categories were current since eternity???
 
Jackolantern said:
But they do apply in June. Most of the approvals or preallocations occurred in June, not July, and what they did in June likely exceeded the per-country limit.
Click to expand...

You may be right, and there may be other huge holes in my layman's analysis, but it is too early to say that most approvals occured in June.
One point of information to support your speculation is that the Ombudsman said in an e-mail response to someone (posted in one of the threads here) that just one service center requested 18000 visas in the first two weeks of June.

On the other hand, if as the Ombudsman's report to congress for 2007 (page 14) says, there were 29303 "Processed applications for green cards that cannot be approved due to annual statutory limits" -presumably meaning the number of documentarily-qualified applicants - as of March 2007, it is reasonable to assume that the number reported in June for July allocations is near that.

Another reason for my interpretation is: Most people who called TSC and/or had an Infopass in July, and are now approved, were told that a July visa was allocated to them, whenever that allocation actually happened.

Bottom line: They may have flirted with, and even crossed, per-country limits in June, but it is impossible to conclude either way without more data.

Before anybody accuses me of it, I will freely admit that my analysis is biased because I'm a beneficiary of this highly irregular behavior of the USCIS.

Taking that a step farther, I think the gainers in this whole shebang are documentarily qualifed applicants from oversubscribed countries who would otherwise have hit per-country limits; and the losers are those from other countries who, for whatever reason, were not documentarily-qualified
as of the 1st week of June.

I know, put like that, it almost sounds like a conspiracy theory ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top