looks like good news !!

[GC_ka_jhanjhat]

Long pending 2001 cases are being approved STRAIGHT
not waiting for 2FP/ RFEs etc....

 

[aamirus1]

Where did u get this new from

Sounds like a really good news. What is your source of information

RD: 12/14/2001
ND: 12/26/2001
FP1: May 2002
FP2: April 30 2004

 

[Mulan Liu]

where is the resource?

just wondering where did you hear that from?

rd 12/03/01
eac-02-053-*****

 

[mark rajiv]

hope you are right

my attorney mentioned it to me too, hope it's true

 

[Sanga]

You mean without even a FP2?

my attorney mentioned it to me too, hope it's true

 

[292641]

my attornery this week told me the opposite, stating it will now take 4 years to process I-485 due to check. And also state if you make any more enquiries they will not be pleased.

 

[GC_ka_jhanjhat]

my attornery this week told me the opposite, stating it will now take 4 years to process I-485 due to check. And also state if you make any more enquiries they will not be pleased.

My theory is based on trends out of very small samples.

NOTE :
If you order "causes of agony of 485" in decreasing intensity
Attorney/Law offices comes first. ( above USCIS).. in majority of cases

In addition to that "default quality", your attorney seems to be
- stupid
- and brainless

 

[bangloreboy]

my attornery this week told me the opposite, stating it will now take 4 years to process I-485 due to check. And also state if you make any more enquiries they will not be pleased.

looks like your attorney takes historic facts and corelate it to current trends..

 

[timaeuti]

my attornery this week told me the opposite, stating it will now take 4 years to process I-485 due to check. And also state if you make any more enquiries they will not be pleased.

In all likelyhood your purpose is to get your case moving, not to make them pleased.

 

[new1975]

GC_ka_jhanjhat,

Pls don't misguide surfers here with your theories on small sample. It confuses and makes people believe. Also, when you are posting, post with all details. GC is such a sensitive thing these days everyone is tempted to know whats going to happen for their cases and when such theories/rumours are floating in this useful forum, it only agonizes the hopeful applicants.

Thanks

 

[tufan]

Hope you have not forgotten my case!

 

[mark rajiv]

that's what he said

"may not need 2nd FP, may not RFE" but should be expected---he covered all the all the possibities=none

 

[cinta]

"may not need 2nd FP, may not RFE" but should be expected---he covered all the all the possibities=none

It may be related with tomorrow's testimony in The Congressional committee: See the link below (in DHS / Press thread collection, also) and " low risk applicants"...............

http://www.sltrib.com/2004/Jun/06172004/nation_w/176300.asp