Philadelphia Backlog Elimination Center Tracking
- Thread starter gp111
- Start date
SlipperyGC
Registered Users (C)
What's this now?
someone posted in PBEC@yahoogroup approval of PD Sept 04....True?????
unbelievable!
someone posted in PBEC@yahoogroup approval of PD Sept 04....True?????
unbelievable!
lavendersummer
Registered Users (C)
what's the message number?
SlipperyGC said:
va_aug_2002
Registered Users (C)
Does this mean that the EB3 date for IN has changed by one year in last 2 months? from 01JAN98 to 01JAN99 ?MDwatch said:
SlipperyGC
Registered Users (C)
#169
RIR/CA/EB3
PD: 09/25/03
RD: 10/04/04
BEC#: P-04303-30451
RECD 45DL: 02/17/05
RPLD 45DL: 02/23/05
SNAPSHOT
CASE STATUS: RIR
Electronics Engineers, Except Computer - 17-2072.00lavendersummer said:
RIR/CA/EB3
PD: 09/25/03
RD: 10/04/04
BEC#: P-04303-30451
RECD 45DL: 02/17/05
RPLD 45DL: 02/23/05
SNAPSHOT
CASE STATUS: RIR
lavendersummer
Registered Users (C)
So the PD is 9/03 but is it possible that this guy's case went to Dallas even his case number has P? Otherwise it's still a great sign for PBEC
SlipperyGC said:
annonymoususa
Registered Users (C)
butthead said:I have an appointment with the Mumbai consulate on the 25th of July. I am concerned too, since my case is pending with PBEC and my family is in US. I had to wait for 45 days for the interview date. That is the most painful part as most employers don't want to wait that long for you to return from vacation. Hope you can find a way to get an interview date before leaving US.
Will let you know if there were any issues...Wish me well
hello Butthead,
Did you have any problems with your interview at the Mumbai Consulate regarding your 7th year H1B ext? I will be taking appointment at the Mumbai consulate soon. Please share your experience.
Also within how many days did your 7th year H1B get approved? I have applied on 9/22/05 at the Vermont Center. No approval yet.
lavendersummer
Registered Users (C)
Actually I'm sorry that I misled you in my last post. I just realized 09/03 was not PD in the original post, that was SlipperyGC's. This is the original post. I took the liberty to quote it here.
================================
Hi
I applied LC on September 10, 2004 from Atlanta. I
have received letter from PBEC that my LC was approved
on November 3, 2005. I know some of you try to track
dates. Good luck to you all...
JFF
=================================
================================
Hi
I applied LC on September 10, 2004 from Atlanta. I
have received letter from PBEC that my LC was approved
on November 3, 2005. I know some of you try to track
dates. Good luck to you all...
JFF
=================================
Guys,
Just finished the telecon with Rajiv Khanna's attorney and here is the outline:
1) They feel that Federal District court, DC has already voted in favor of DOL, which means District Courts would be even more averse to any litigation at this point. And even if we approach Federal Court, there answer would be to look at the recent decision they took.
2) The clause which was to be used in litigation-"Unreasonable delay" under section 28USC1361 has already been used in the recent judgement, which makes future litigation(atleast in nearby future) very difficult to win against DOL.
3) They feel lobbying can be of great help at this stage and if anyone can get hold of one good Senator/ Congressman, who can vouch for the case, it can make us heard in Congress.
4) Their office did send a petition to Stephen Stefanko and he replied stating that he has forwarded it to DOL office in DC.
Solutions suggested:
Rajiv Khanna's office can petition on behalf of all of us formally to PBEC. This will cost us some money and our names will appear individually on this Petition.They are going to email me the cost structure by Tue/Wed.Once I have the info, I shall pass it on.
Basically, this is what was discussed today. They persisted on meeting Senator/Congressmen personally (if feasible), than letters/faxes.
Thanks.
Just finished the telecon with Rajiv Khanna's attorney and here is the outline:
1) They feel that Federal District court, DC has already voted in favor of DOL, which means District Courts would be even more averse to any litigation at this point. And even if we approach Federal Court, there answer would be to look at the recent decision they took.
2) The clause which was to be used in litigation-"Unreasonable delay" under section 28USC1361 has already been used in the recent judgement, which makes future litigation(atleast in nearby future) very difficult to win against DOL.
3) They feel lobbying can be of great help at this stage and if anyone can get hold of one good Senator/ Congressman, who can vouch for the case, it can make us heard in Congress.
4) Their office did send a petition to Stephen Stefanko and he replied stating that he has forwarded it to DOL office in DC.
Solutions suggested:
Rajiv Khanna's office can petition on behalf of all of us formally to PBEC. This will cost us some money and our names will appear individually on this Petition.They are going to email me the cost structure by Tue/Wed.Once I have the info, I shall pass it on.
Basically, this is what was discussed today. They persisted on meeting Senator/Congressmen personally (if feasible), than letters/faxes.
Thanks.
The lawsuit against DOL
I studied the DEC lawsuit vs DOL carefully and here is my comment:
The court resorts to the leading precedence, TRAC and refuses actions
after consideration of TRAC principles. After careful review of the
court opinion, I believe the court's judgement is flawed and it is possible
to be reversed if we can strengthen our argument for BEC cases.
In the analysis section, refer to page 17, paragraph 1, the opinion says:
"Turning now to the other TRAC factors, the one that weights most heavily
under the circumstances of these cases is the fourth factor -- the effect
of granting relief on the agency's competing priorities"
In the following paragraphs, the judge wrote:
"Thus, any grant of relief to petitioners would
simple move petitioners to the front of the queue, at the expense of
other similarly situated applicants."
The court also cited a precedence stating "The court suggested that competing
priorities would be the most significant factor in any case where the agency
delay was due to lack of resources and the agency applied a first-come approach".
But the competing priorities the court studied were H1B, H2B and other
backlog center cases. The court DID NOT mention the PERM cases, which DOL
processes in 45-60 days.
If the court consider PERM cases as the backlog center cases' competing priority,
it can easily find out how unfair DOL is when it handles the cases
regulated by the same law, for the same purpose so differently.
If we can successfully argue that PERM case and backlog case have same
law standing but were subjectively separated by DOL, and thus ask DOL to
grant higher priority to backlog cases, based on the same principle the court
has adopted, it is very hopeful DOL has to allocate more resources to BECs
and administer backlog cases in the same pace as PERM.
I studied the DEC lawsuit vs DOL carefully and here is my comment:
The court resorts to the leading precedence, TRAC and refuses actions
after consideration of TRAC principles. After careful review of the
court opinion, I believe the court's judgement is flawed and it is possible
to be reversed if we can strengthen our argument for BEC cases.
In the analysis section, refer to page 17, paragraph 1, the opinion says:
"Turning now to the other TRAC factors, the one that weights most heavily
under the circumstances of these cases is the fourth factor -- the effect
of granting relief on the agency's competing priorities"
In the following paragraphs, the judge wrote:
"Thus, any grant of relief to petitioners would
simple move petitioners to the front of the queue, at the expense of
other similarly situated applicants."
The court also cited a precedence stating "The court suggested that competing
priorities would be the most significant factor in any case where the agency
delay was due to lack of resources and the agency applied a first-come approach".
But the competing priorities the court studied were H1B, H2B and other
backlog center cases. The court DID NOT mention the PERM cases, which DOL
processes in 45-60 days.
If the court consider PERM cases as the backlog center cases' competing priority,
it can easily find out how unfair DOL is when it handles the cases
regulated by the same law, for the same purpose so differently.
If we can successfully argue that PERM case and backlog case have same
law standing but were subjectively separated by DOL, and thus ask DOL to
grant higher priority to backlog cases, based on the same principle the court
has adopted, it is very hopeful DOL has to allocate more resources to BECs
and administer backlog cases in the same pace as PERM.
cantstandit
Registered Users (C)
a_to_z_gc said:
a_to_z: tks for your efforts ! we all appreciate it.
now, did u get to mention the other ideas floating around, meaning pushing the DOL to disclosure info on its website ? (the simplified case db, for example) ? no comments on that ?! I personally think that would be easier to achieve.
javaconsultant
Registered Users (C)
Thanks for your efforts..
I am ready to contribute....
Just a dumb question ....
What would be the purpose of the petition ?
Is it a request to PBEC to expedite our cases or a lawsuit against PBEC ?
I am ready to contribute....
Just a dumb question ....
What would be the purpose of the petition ?
Is it a request to PBEC to expedite our cases or a lawsuit against PBEC ?
a_to_z_gc said:
cantstandit
Registered Users (C)
kllrpssr said:
interesting analysis, kllrpssr. I like the idea of making the comparison between old LC and PERM, because it would be clear that they are treating essentially the same process (labor) in 2 totally different ways, maybe we have a strong point there.
the drawback would be that, suppose a court orders the DOL to apply PERM for everyone ... that would cause a HUGE delay, because they'd argue that they'd have to convert old cases to PERM, etc, etc ... I can already see the "we need 3 years to convert to PERM" bull argument.
can u look a little more into that idea ?
I'm gonna ask a friend of mine who is a lawyer, to see if we could possibly have grounds based on the comparison.
javaconsultant
Registered Users (C)
Meeting Senators- Any ideas ?????
Guys,
How shall we personally contact Senators ?
Any thoughts ......
Guys,
How shall we personally contact Senators ?
Any thoughts ......
a_to_z_gc said:
immidude74
Registered Users (C)
I agree 100% with kllrpssr!!
Hi all,
Here's my thoughts on going thru' that law suit.
The Federal court has compared Apples Vs Oranges and still DOL was lucky enough to get thru' bcos Apple was not represented fully (my own opinion though..) The DOL Attorneys were lucky enough bcos the Judge did not fully know the consequences behind that ( Frustrations leading to getting our GC - Physical / Mental problems - Submissive to the Employer ). The only thing the Judge knew was DOL was following their rules (but was not aware that it was at expense of all Law abiding / Tax paying legal aliens).
Again like I said earlier the DOL attorneys (from DOJ) were clever enough when they compared Apples (Old LC Process) to Oranges (PERM) with respect to processing times, to which the judge might have thought is right and again wat he might not be aware is the priority dates and it's effect at later stages.
Anyway, these are my opinion and I feel light when I shared with u all. Again Iam not saying iam right, might be others may differ (Just like that judge or fellow americans who can/could not differentiate us from Illegal Immigrants).
The irony here is --->
1."Illegal Immigrants seems to be enjoying and get more attention from this gov. and they have nothing to loose, but we give everything to this society and end up at the other side"
2. We r being treated on par with this "Illegal" ones..
3. See the Visa availability dates - Mexico is Current for EB1 & EB2 and India... no more comments.
Anyway Wish u all a Healthy & Tension free life.
Regards,
Immidude74
-----------
EB3 - RIR
Cleared State and Was @ Philly Regional
Case Number - Pxxxxx 00xxx
45 day letter Received - 12/20/2004
Replied - 12/21/2004 (yay yay - Iam gonna celebrate my 1st anniversary)
Hi all,
Here's my thoughts on going thru' that law suit.
The Federal court has compared Apples Vs Oranges and still DOL was lucky enough to get thru' bcos Apple was not represented fully (my own opinion though..) The DOL Attorneys were lucky enough bcos the Judge did not fully know the consequences behind that ( Frustrations leading to getting our GC - Physical / Mental problems - Submissive to the Employer ). The only thing the Judge knew was DOL was following their rules (but was not aware that it was at expense of all Law abiding / Tax paying legal aliens).
Again like I said earlier the DOL attorneys (from DOJ) were clever enough when they compared Apples (Old LC Process) to Oranges (PERM) with respect to processing times, to which the judge might have thought is right and again wat he might not be aware is the priority dates and it's effect at later stages.
Anyway, these are my opinion and I feel light when I shared with u all. Again Iam not saying iam right, might be others may differ (Just like that judge or fellow americans who can/could not differentiate us from Illegal Immigrants).
The irony here is --->
1."Illegal Immigrants seems to be enjoying and get more attention from this gov. and they have nothing to loose, but we give everything to this society and end up at the other side"
2. We r being treated on par with this "Illegal" ones..
3. See the Visa availability dates - Mexico is Current for EB1 & EB2 and India... no more comments.
Anyway Wish u all a Healthy & Tension free life.
Regards,
Immidude74
-----------
EB3 - RIR
Cleared State and Was @ Philly Regional
Case Number - Pxxxxx 00xxx
45 day letter Received - 12/20/2004
Replied - 12/21/2004 (yay yay - Iam gonna celebrate my 1st anniversary)
kllrpssr said:
Looks like Stephen Stefanko replied to Rajiv Khanna immediately after Rajiv's attorney sent a petition. Looks like DOL know Rajiv Khanna's immigration abilities and they respect him. They also withdrew their stance on multiple LC stance when they sent a notice to Elaine Chow.
So the purpose of this petition would be to send it through his office in a much formal way asking them to expedite the cases.
Shall keep the forum updated on what cost structure they want.
Thanks.
So the purpose of this petition would be to send it through his office in a much formal way asking them to expedite the cases.
Shall keep the forum updated on what cost structure they want.
Thanks.
javaconsultant said: