My conversation with USCIS Lawyer

Delay in I-485 approval

I would like to thank Mr. Rajiv Khanna for all his effort on this critical issue.

Any improvements in the area of Potability factor, AP, EAD is a definite plus. But, the main issue here is the delay in processing I-485 approval. We know INS has constraints (Lack of manpower)in quick adjudication of I-485 application. But, some cases get approved in 1 year and some cases don't in three years. Their answer to this is: each case is different, so is the difference in time. The I485 form is same, the procedure is same, everything is same except some critical info. like security clearance etc. That can make such a big difference ? If it is, then it is USCIS's working procedure, that is causing this delay. My point here is, USCIS should have a hard upper limit of 2 or 3 years at most. They should make a decision (approve or deny) before that time. Otherwise some cases will be hanging for ever. The service centers will always come up with some story all the time as they have been doing all through. This is our only chance to get something related to I-485 approval. When the system says I-485 should be approved in six months, don't you think 3 years is a lot of time to make a decision ?

I think, we should not settle for anything other than a reasonable upper hard limit. They should have some kind of pressure on them when it comes to deadline for a particular application is concerned.


Thanks
mandu
 
Rajiv, thanks for your hard work on this case. It means so much to all of us to have some hope.

My experience in court has shown me it is often better to settle than risk a trial. You never know what a judge is going to do, especially with a complex or new type of challenge, which this certainly represents.

To add my 2 cents:

- The DOJ can only go so far without direction from Congress (although one could argue that Congress has already said GC's should take six months in AC21)

- I would ask that you push for USCIS to finally implement guidelines based on the AC21 laws passed way back in 2000. Getting those clarified and published in the next 90 days would be a big help for all of us and is a no-brainer.

- GC premium processing also appears to be something USCIS can do without an act of Congress. I'd happily pay $2000 to get my GC in 90 days. This would also help those financially less fortunate because it means smaller backlogs and more revenue for USCIS.

Hopefully the lawsuit also gets the attention of those in Congress. I note that the proposed 'Immigration Reform Act of 2004 (S. 2010)' in it's current form has nothing I can see that will help legal immigrants in our situation, and will probably make the situation 10x worse due to increasing backlogs.

Keep up the good work!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
one more wish

Multiple I485 cases should be allowed to file on one alien's behalf. For example, one person may have multiple approved I-140s, or one's spouse is also qualified for Adjustment by his/her own skills, the entire family should be able to apply for AOS based on all qualifications. This is especially important at this time when AOS takes forever and the result becomes unknown.
 
Do it the CA-DMV style!

First of all, thanks Mr. Khanna for all your efforts. Here are some of my thoughts on what could have made my immigration process a pleasant experience:

When a non-resident alien applies for a driver's licence in California, the DMV doesn't give the licence right away, but a temporary licence is issued instead. Then the legal presence verification is done by a sub-unit of DMV. Once this check comes out fine, the DMV issues a "permanent" licence. Whether the person can drive is verified before the temporary licence is issued. The temporary licence gives the applicants the same driving rights as a permanent licence. The DMV doesn't come back and ask for more tests before the permanent licence is issued. The only reason for the denial of permanent licence is illegal presence. USCIS also could do something along this line.

Issue a "temporary" green-card within 180 days of application (valid for say 2 years) after an initial scrutiny (such as will the applicant be really employed at the salary quoted in the LC, are the dependents really the primary applicant's etc.) and then do all the security check (at their usual snail pace) and issue a "permanent" green-card before the temporary card expires. The temporary card should give the card holder same benefits as a permanent card. The only reasons for denying the permanent card should be perjury and security risk. The employment aspects should be verified before the temporary card is issued.

The above is more like a "permanent" plan. Now, for the people who have been affected by the current massive backlog: Within the next 3 months, issue a "temporary" green-card that is valid for 1 year after checking whether all the documents are in order. Do the other checks within 1 year and issue a permanent card.

I am not sure if this is asking too much...
 
Please read the original post by Rajiv.

I suggested that we meet with USCIS to discuss immediate remedial measures that would help ameliorate problems without massive overhaul in the statutory or regulatory framework.

Many of the ideas being suggested are massive changes to immigration law and would clearly require an act of Congress. There is no way DOJ/USCIS could do these by itself.

AC21 implementation and premium processing are already on the table, and probably don't need Congress to act. Any other idea like temporary green cards and other special statuses and exemptions require new laws, and it is futile to suggest them as part of a settlement to this suit.

All ideas are valuable. I suggest starting a new thread about items to include in upcoming immigration reform legislation. I haven't seen a single thread which analyzes the current crop of bills, and that is a much more likely area for these ideas to be implemented.
 
The Points mentioned by Rajiv and others make perfect sense. We are suffering because of delays in GC processing. If we get rid of the "sufferings" part, it does not matter that much if the process is still slow....And the suffering part includes:

Repeated renewals of EAD, AP, FP.
Inability to work on "dissimilar" jobs and change careers.
Inability to leave "Oppressing" employers.
 
One suggestion I would like to add here. I'm sure Rajiv might have thought over it already....

To make our voice heard more loudly, is it possible for us to make other prominent Immigration lawyers like Sheela Murhty etc.. join us in this effort???????
 
Overhaul-free Solution

I agree with morpheus: my previous solution (Do it the DMV-style!) needs a massive change. Here is a 3-point solution, I believe, that might be easy for USCIS to execute and also benefit us:

1. Process the AP and EAD applications within 3 months of receive date. If an RFE is issued, make a decision on the application within 15 days of receiving the response from the applicant. And most importantly, process the AP and EAD applications in the order in which the applications were received.

2. Make I-485 backlog clearance as the highest priority action item for USCIS. Come out with a firm plan (with reasonable time lines) to clear the I-485 backlog and guarantee us that they will stick to the plan. Again, process the I-485 applications in the order in which they were received and if an RFE is issued, make a decision on the application within 15 days of receiving the response from the applicant

3. Don't ask for a current employment verification letter from anybody whose application is pending for more than 6 months. USCIS, with AC-21 in mind, can ask the applicants to show that they were employed for the first 6 months since I-485 was filed (irreespective of whether it was filed after I-140 was approved or concurrently with an I-140).
 
Re: one more wish

Originally posted by greenpencil
Multiple I485 cases should be allowed to file on one alien's behalf. For example, one person may have multiple approved I-140s, or one's spouse is also qualified for Adjustment by his/her own skills, the entire family should be able to apply for AOS based on all qualifications. This is especially important at this time when AOS takes forever and the result becomes unknown.
Click to expand...

They are already allowed.
 
Originally posted by gogia
One suggestion I would like to add here. I'm sure Rajiv might have thought over it already....

To make our voice heard more loudly, is it possible for us to make other prominent Immigration lawyers like Sheela Murhty etc.. join us in this effort???????
Click to expand...

I am yet to meet a lawyer who did not have their own agenda. I hope I try to be agenda-free. Anyone is welcome to join as long as they do not put themselves before the community AND do not create obstructions in my way for what I perceive to be my job.
 
Originally posted by gogia
The Points mentioned by Rajiv and others make perfect sense. We are suffering because of delays in GC processing. If we get rid of the "sufferings" part, it does not matter that much if the process is still slow....And the suffering part includes:

Repeated renewals of EAD, AP, FP.
Inability to work on "dissimilar" jobs and change careers.
Inability to leave "Oppressing" employers.
Click to expand...


Well put! We need to get rid of the suffering.
 
Rajiv,

It is so kind of you to allow other lawyers to share the platform. But I am against it. See I want you to sound selfish on this point.

Gogia,

If those lawyers want to get a stage - they are no less qualified then Rajiv(no disgrace meant), but then they never took initiative. Rajiv needs to do it the way it deems suitable to him. It is pretty rotten idea to ask someone else to be given a share - just cause he/she is a lawyer. What did any other lawyer ever did for this cause? Excuse me gogia but this is asking too much. How could you possibly ask something like this? And most of all if any other lawyer feels so strongly - even now they can fight the cause - can't they? It will be better if 10-100 such lawsuit comes from different good lawyers. But see no one is coming to fight it - none as far as I know.
 
To Rajiv

To the list of sufferings mentioned by gogia, I would like to include the following:

First, bad experiences at other govt. agencies due to the lack of a definitive status of AOS folks. For instance, it was brought to your attention recently that another patron of this portal was given a rough treatment at the DMV in NJ (MVC).

Secondly, unlike greencard holders or US citizens who have their spouse and/or dependant children abroad, AOS candidates with families abroad are unable to enjoy the various tax benefits while they still undergo the same hardships to support a family.

Third, most European countries now require transit passengers bound to the US to obtain a transit visa which usually is priced at $40. This requirement is waived if the passengers are of US origin or a permanent resident of this country.

If you could highlight such issues to the defendants (and their defendants ;) ), I think we may get a sympathetic jury (or a judge)!
 
Originally posted by Jharkhandi
Rajiv,

It is so kind of you to allow other lawyers to share the platform. But I am against it. See I want you to sound selfish on this point.

Gogia,

If those lawyers want to get a stage - they are no less qualified then Rajiv(no disgrace meant), but then they never took initiative. Rajiv needs to do it the way it deems suitable to him. It is pretty rotten idea to ask someone else to be given a share - just cause he/she is a lawyer. What did any other lawyer ever did for this cause? Excuse me gogia but this is asking too much. How could you possibly ask something like this? And most of all if any other lawyer feels so strongly - even now they can fight the cause - can't they? It will be better if 10-100 such lawsuit comes from different good lawyers. But see no one is coming to fight it - none as far as I know.
Click to expand...

Oh no. I do not look at it that way at all. Let me explain. This lawsuit is not a banner for our advertisement. Most lawyers, who typically run their practice as a business, would look at it that way. I do not want pettiness. I do not wish to sound like I am down on lawyers. EVERYONE has an angle. As long as they do not mess with my conducting the community business, I have no problem. Who cares about the credit. I hope my sense of self worth is defined by something more than what people think about me.
 
Re: To Rajiv

Originally posted by WheresMahGreen
To the list of sufferings mentioned by gogia, I would like to include the following:

First, bad experiences at other govt. agencies due to the lack of a definitive status of AOS folks. For instance, it was brought to your attention recently that another patron of this portal was given a rough treatment at the DMV in NJ (MVC).

Secondly, unlike greencard holders or US citizens who have their spouse and/or dependant children abroad, AOS candidates with families abroad are unable to enjoy the various tax benefits while they still undergo the same hardships to support a family.

Third, most European countries now require transit passengers bound to the US to obtain a transit visa which usually is priced at $40. This requirement is waived if the passengers are of US origin or a permanent resident of this country.

If you could highlight such issues to the defendants (and their defendants ;) ), I think we may get a sympathetic jury (or a judge)!
Click to expand...


Noted. Thanks.
 
Originally posted by Jharkhandi
Rajiv,

It is so kind of you to allow other lawyers to share the platform. But I am against it. See I want you to sound selfish on this point.

Gogia,

If those lawyers want to get a stage - they are no less qualified then Rajiv(no disgrace meant), but then they never took initiative. Rajiv needs to do it the way it deems suitable to him. It is pretty rotten idea to ask someone else to be given a share - just cause he/she is a lawyer. What did any other lawyer ever did for this cause? Excuse me gogia but this is asking too much. How could you possibly ask something like this? And most of all if any other lawyer feels so strongly - even now they can fight the cause - can't they? It will be better if 10-100 such lawsuit comes from different good lawyers. But see no one is coming to fight it - none as far as I know.
Click to expand...


Jharkandi,
I totally agree with you. It's like too many cooks spoil the food.
Everyone has their own style of doing things and we have to go with somebody we trust.

-rajum
 
Hello,
Though I've been following this forum for a while, this is my first post.
I'm no lawyer, so correct me if I'm wrong.
I believe our primary focus should not be merely on the processing speed (which depends on several factors, not all in our or USCIS hands), but rather on the issue of transparency, or the lack of it in the existing procedures.
USCIS is a unique organization, which is not accountable to the vast majority of its 'customers'. In these circumstances, its devolution into a Kafkaesque bureaucracy is inevitable unless checked by efforts such as this lawsuit.
Moreover, I think, a right to transparency is more established within the legal framework than an assertion for 'better service'. Steps for improving tranparency are both with the bounds of USCIS and the law enforcement authorities, whithout depending on Congressional action, and also better serve the ultimate goal of faster processing. Some possibilities are:
1) Right to ask for an explanation in case of delayed cases.
2) Mandatory publishing of USCIS's case status' for different catagories.
3) Right to ask for explanation in case of differences in processing times for different catagories. etc.
 
Thanks Mr Khanna, you are great!

Since there is no harm in asking, here is my wish list

- Put all other cases in the back-burner till all EB/I-485 cases
pending for more than 12 / 15 / 20 months are processed.
If they could do that for religios workers and asylum
seekers, why not us?

- Like Mr Khanna suggested, let EAD/AP/FP be done only
once and left valid till I485 is adjudicated.

Thanks again!
S Vengat
 
All,

Based on my experience with other immigration firms and their websites, I personaly feel Rajiv is doing a great job in helping the immigration community than other firms.

In the midst of his regular schedules, I get a prompt reply from Rajiv for my views/questions.

http://www.immigration.com is one of the very few sites who has the updates immediately and correctly.

Everyone knows what happens when too many chefs are in the kitchen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top