Philadelphia Backlog Elimination Center Tracking
- Thread starter gp111
- Start date
neenasingh
Registered Users (C)
helpjune4 said:
Hello,
I definitely know that when you file your LC at State SWA sends a acknowledgement letter to the attorney and also assigns the case no [only specific to State]. My lawyer gave me a copy and my husband got his too. When your case moves to Regional level , some communication goes to attorney as the region level assign a new no to the case [not same as assigned by SWA]
Now the Backlog center is assigning another case no so finally i had 3 case no
1- SWA
2- When moved to Regional level
3- when 45 day letter is received.
I hope this helps
Thankyou
USCISisMockery
Registered Users (C)
Marithe said:
According to Just_watching analysis, best case scenerio is April 2006 and worst case scenerio is Dec 2006.
USCISisMockery
Registered Users (C)
FYI
Background of Emily DeRocco (ETA head) profile , it seems like she is true conservative.
Elaine L. Chao (Secretary of Labor) profile , she is immigrant .
One thing (among many others
)I don't get it is why ILW, AILA, Murthy, Cyrus... are so much interested in PERM and none of them is talking about backlog or BEC ?
I haven't seen a single lawyer (except Rajiv doing community service) publishing article on BEC or backlog.
ILW has tons of articles on PERM which is still not completely implemented.
Something is fishy here.
Background of Emily DeRocco (ETA head) profile , it seems like she is true conservative.
Elaine L. Chao (Secretary of Labor) profile , she is immigrant .
One thing (among many others
)I don't get it is why ILW, AILA, Murthy, Cyrus... are so much interested in PERM and none of them is talking about backlog or BEC ? I haven't seen a single lawyer (except Rajiv doing community service) publishing article on BEC or backlog.
ILW has tons of articles on PERM which is still not completely implemented.
Something is fishy here.
fastergcwanted
Registered Users (C)
sleepless_in_IN said:
Apart of all the speculations by members in these forums where has this been officially posted?...............i think NOWHERE.......Only official position DOL has maintained till now is that they will honor FIFO and agreed.. we haven't seen any indication of that yet..but it's coming big time..we will see older state cases getting 45 day letters soon...and then getting processed soon.
Let me know if I am missing something here...
fastergcwanted
Registered Users (C)
sleepless_in_IN said:
Regional cases reached BPC earlier than state cases, so obviously they are getting 45 days letters and few getting processed first. As state cases get entered, we should see action on them. And my friend, all of us here are in the same boat. And I am not trying to win the argument here ...we all want cases processed asap. I am just pointing to a realistic scenario (not speculation) which we may want to consider. Thanks.
USCISisMockery
Registered Users (C)
fastergcwanted said:
Can you please define "soon", I am sure SOON is something that is less than 4 years. DOL released many programs which were nothing but gimmicks and they will continue to do so till I take the matter in my hand. Actions from individual like you and me will revolutionalize the way BEC works.
Anand_Mishra
Registered Users (C)
No approval so no body talks. Philly is long behind Dallas.
sacbee said:
BPC cases entry was done according to Ms Murthy's office
BPCs Start to Process Cases The DOL reports that the BPCs have started processing those cases from the DOL Regional Offices where they have received responses to the 45-day letters and the data entry has been completed in the PBLS.
We at The Law Office of Sheela Murthy appreciate the helpful update from the DOL and look forward to the time when the BPCs routinely issue approvals or certifications on the backlogged labor certifications.
BPCs Start to Process Cases The DOL reports that the BPCs have started processing those cases from the DOL Regional Offices where they have received responses to the 45-day letters and the data entry has been completed in the PBLS.
We at The Law Office of Sheela Murthy appreciate the helpful update from the DOL and look forward to the time when the BPCs routinely issue approvals or certifications on the backlogged labor certifications.
aprlc2002 said:
From another site
http://www.lewslaw.com/index.htm
AILA-DOL Liaison Meeting of April 27,2005 (05-18-2005)[Top]
The DOL advised that some attorneys have not received 45-day letters due to several possible reasons:
Letter was issued but the delivery address was incomplete (BCR error);
Letter was issued to an old address (the documentation requesting the address change/change of attorney had not reached the file prior to issuing the 45-day letter);
Letter was not issued because the case had not yet been entered into the BRC system;
Letter was not issued/or response to the 45-day letter received because of file mismatch as a result of the transfer.
DOL is working on solving this issue. Any cases closed as a result of DOL error will be reinstated.
Days_go_by
Registered Users (C)
not sure
I think what it means is that BECs have started processing cases whose 45 days letter has been recevied and those letters have been updated in DB.
It does not say all data has been entered.
I think what it means is that BECs have started processing cases whose 45 days letter has been recevied and those letters have been updated in DB.
It does not say all data has been entered.
Need for Clarification of Labor Certification Backlog Adjudication Standards
Need for Clarification of Labor Certification Backlog Adjudication Standards
It appears that DFLC is slowly moving toward completion of data entry and soon moving into the phase of actual processing and adjudication of applications. There is however one concern as related to the standards for review and adjudication of applications. The DFLC changed on this issue. Initially, it stated that the analysts and certifying officers would use the local or regional standards as when it came to the specific requirements and evidence were concerned, each state and each Region differed and the variation was very steep in specific issues. This was particularly noticeable in the recruitment requirement in the RIR proceedings. Considering the fact that the backlog reduction program was intended to apply the same traditional regulation, rules, and standards, and not intended to develop and apply a new law or rules or standards, such policy may make more sense than developing and applying a new uniform standards. The adoption and application of a uniform standard system are acceptable in the case of the PERM labor certification as it applies to future cases only.
However, the recent conference record between the DFLC and the AILA reflects that DFLC was considering and developing a certain uniform national standards for the review and adjudication of backlog cases. Such policy change is manifestly wrong. In the RIR cases and some of the traditional cases which completed recruitment process under the supervision of SWA, the recruitment was already completed and cleared based on the different practice and standards adopted by each SWA and each Region, and DFLC should not revisit the completed proceedings based on any ex poste facto national standards, particularly in the issues relating to the appropriateness and sufficiency of the recruitment. We urge the DFLC not to change policy on this issue and complete the adjudication based on each state and Region's standards. As the DFLC is about to move from the clerical job of data entry and 45-day letters to actual processing and adjudication of applications, we find it important that the DFLC assures the backlog application employers and alien beneficiaries that the Processing Centers would follow each locality's standard to complete the adjudication process.
Source: Immigration-law
Need for Clarification of Labor Certification Backlog Adjudication Standards
It appears that DFLC is slowly moving toward completion of data entry and soon moving into the phase of actual processing and adjudication of applications. There is however one concern as related to the standards for review and adjudication of applications. The DFLC changed on this issue. Initially, it stated that the analysts and certifying officers would use the local or regional standards as when it came to the specific requirements and evidence were concerned, each state and each Region differed and the variation was very steep in specific issues. This was particularly noticeable in the recruitment requirement in the RIR proceedings. Considering the fact that the backlog reduction program was intended to apply the same traditional regulation, rules, and standards, and not intended to develop and apply a new law or rules or standards, such policy may make more sense than developing and applying a new uniform standards. The adoption and application of a uniform standard system are acceptable in the case of the PERM labor certification as it applies to future cases only.
However, the recent conference record between the DFLC and the AILA reflects that DFLC was considering and developing a certain uniform national standards for the review and adjudication of backlog cases. Such policy change is manifestly wrong. In the RIR cases and some of the traditional cases which completed recruitment process under the supervision of SWA, the recruitment was already completed and cleared based on the different practice and standards adopted by each SWA and each Region, and DFLC should not revisit the completed proceedings based on any ex poste facto national standards, particularly in the issues relating to the appropriateness and sufficiency of the recruitment. We urge the DFLC not to change policy on this issue and complete the adjudication based on each state and Region's standards. As the DFLC is about to move from the clerical job of data entry and 45-day letters to actual processing and adjudication of applications, we find it important that the DFLC assures the backlog application employers and alien beneficiaries that the Processing Centers would follow each locality's standard to complete the adjudication process.
Source: Immigration-law
You will be seeing that if you subscribe for New letter or Visit http://murthy.com
website tomorrow.
website tomorrow.
please read bullet 5 others edited due to upload constraints
VOL. XI, no. 20; May 2005, week 3
Posted : May 20, 2005
3. USCIS and DOL on H1Bs
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) each provided useful clarifications in mid-May 2005 that affect the H1B process.
USCIS on RFE Reponses for H1B Upgrade Cases
As reported in this week's MurthyBulletin (see article #2 entitled, USCIS Service Center Operations on H1Bs under FY2005 / 2006 Quotas), it is now possible to request an upgrade of an H1B case filed with a Fiscal Year (FY) 2006 start date (October 1, 2005 or after) to an H1B with an immediate, FY2005 start date if the beneficiary has a U.S. master's degree or higher. All of these upgrade requests must be filed with the Vermont Service Center (VSC) at an address explicitly for this purpose. This has prompted questions regarding where to send Request for Evidence (RFE) responses in these cases.
USCIS has indicated that an employer who filed an H1B petition with an FY2006 start date and received an RFE on the case must send the response to the Service Center that issued the RFE. This is true even if the employer is now requesting an upgrade to an FY2005 start date for that case through the Vermont Service Center (VSC). For example, if an H1B petition was filed at the Texas Service Center (TSC) for an October 1, 2005 start date, and the TSC issues an RFE, the employer must send the RFE response to the TSC. This procedure must be followed even if the employer also has made an upgrade request to the special VSC upgrade address. The notice did not specifically address which address to use if the case was filed at VSC originally. It would seem, however, that the safest approach would be to respond to the address on the bottom of the RFE, which will probably be the standard VSC address at 75 Lower Welden Street, not the special one for upgrades.
DOL on Proof of Labor Certification Filing for One-Year Incremental Extensions
The DOL has indicated that the Backlog Processing Centers (BPCs) are working to respond to requests for acknowledgement that a labor certification was filed for persons who need this document to file for H1B extensions beyond the six-year limit. The DOL has directed that requests be faxed or mailed to the appropriate BPC. They caution requestors not to both fax and mail the request, since this duplication creates backlogs in the request system and causes delays for all requestors. It is not clear whether faxing or mailing is faster at the Dallas, TX BPC, but immigration attorneys have reported that Philadelphia, PA generally processes mailed requests faster than faxed requests.
We at The Law Office of Sheela Murthy would like to thank the USCIS for these important procedural clarifications, as well as the DOL for providing the necessary acknowledgement for those who wish to extend their H1B status beyond the six-year limit and need documentary evidence to do so.
� 2005, The Law Office of Sheela Murthy, P.C. All Rights Reserved
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5. DOL Update on BPCs
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued answers to Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) in early May 2005 about processing at the Backlog Processing Centers (BPCs). These questions cover a wide range of issues pertaining to case processing and 45-day letters. MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers unfamiliar with BPCs and 45-day letters should review our March 18, 2005 article, DOL Watch : Update on BECs and BPCs, available on MurthyDotCom.
The DOL has used terms like Backlog Reduction Centers (BRCs) or Backlog Elimination Centers (BECs) for the BPCs. Whether the term BEC, BRC, or BPC is used, all refer to the two centers established at Philadelphia, PA and Dallas, TX to reduce the backlogs of the regular labor or RIR cases filed before March 28, 2005.
Special Handling The DOL indicated that there is not a separate track, per se, for special handling cases. Special handling cases involve special recruitment processes used only for college and university professors. The DOL is attempting to identify all such "special handling" cases and find ways to process them quickly.
New Case Numbers Assigned for All Cases in PBLS The DOL confirmed that all cases will receive new case numbers at the BPCs once each case is entered into the Permanent Backlog System (PBLS).
Age-Outs Expedites Not Available The DOL reiterated its policy not to expedite the processing of a labor certification solely because a beneficiary's child will "age out" by turning 21 years old and, potentially, lose derivative benefits under immigration law.
Timeline for Receiving 45-Day Letter The DOL is not able to predict when any particular case will receive the 45-day letter. We note that, at The Law Office of Sheela Murthy, we continue to receive these letters for our cases in a haphazard or random order since some cases filed later obtain them before those filed years earlier.
File New Information for Merger, Acquisition, or Name Change If the employer has merged, been purchased, or has undergone a name change, the new employer must submit copies of the new articles of incorporation, business license, state registration, or other official documents that prove that the employer is a legitimate entity, employing the foreign national or intending to do so, and has become the successor in interest to the original employer. The employer must also submit new ETA 750As and 750Bs. This information and documentation is submitted in connection with the response to the 45-day letter.
Employer Address Change Requires Revised Forms and Possibly New Recruitment If only the addresses has changed, the employer must send a written request to the proper BPC to obtain the original ETA 750A and 750B. The address changes must be made, initialed, and dated by the employer. The DOL indicates that, if the employer moves to a new labor market, new recruitment may be required even if the employer used reduction in recruitment. This will likely depend upon whether the location of the job offer has changed.
Employer Must Update its Information on Wage, Existence, Etc If the corrections list contained as part of the 45-day letter indicates that the employer's name or address does not match the ETA 750A and 750B, the employer must correct any differences, initialing and dating the changes.
If the corrections list indicates that more data is needed in the "basic rate per" fields, this means that, even if a wage is stated, the employer must indicate whether the wage is hourly, daily, weekly, bi-weekly, monthly, yearly, etc. As with all changes, these must be initialed and dated by the employer.
If the corrections list indicates that the employer has failed the existence check, the employer must provide proof of its existence by submitting items such as, but not limited to, articles of incorporation, business license, state registration, or other official documents showing that the employer is a legitimate business entity.
No Lost Cases According to DOL's Quality Check System The DOL reports that their quality check system for cases shipped from State Workforce Agencies (SWAs) and Regional DOL offices indicates that no cases have been lost during shipping. This, of course, has been a major concern for many who are wondering where their cases are and if they have safely reached one of the two BPCs.
BPCs Start to Process Cases The DOL reports that the BPCs have started processing those cases from the DOL Regional Offices where they have received responses to the 45-day letters and the data entry has been completed in the PBLS.
We at The Law Office of Sheela Murthy appreciate the helpful update from the DOL and look forward to the time when the BPCs routinely issue approvals or certifications on the backlogged labor certifications.
� 2005, The Law Office of Sheela Murthy, P.C. All Rights Reserved
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
VOL. XI, no. 20; May 2005, week 3
Posted : May 20, 2005
3. USCIS and DOL on H1Bs
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) each provided useful clarifications in mid-May 2005 that affect the H1B process.
USCIS on RFE Reponses for H1B Upgrade Cases
As reported in this week's MurthyBulletin (see article #2 entitled, USCIS Service Center Operations on H1Bs under FY2005 / 2006 Quotas), it is now possible to request an upgrade of an H1B case filed with a Fiscal Year (FY) 2006 start date (October 1, 2005 or after) to an H1B with an immediate, FY2005 start date if the beneficiary has a U.S. master's degree or higher. All of these upgrade requests must be filed with the Vermont Service Center (VSC) at an address explicitly for this purpose. This has prompted questions regarding where to send Request for Evidence (RFE) responses in these cases.
USCIS has indicated that an employer who filed an H1B petition with an FY2006 start date and received an RFE on the case must send the response to the Service Center that issued the RFE. This is true even if the employer is now requesting an upgrade to an FY2005 start date for that case through the Vermont Service Center (VSC). For example, if an H1B petition was filed at the Texas Service Center (TSC) for an October 1, 2005 start date, and the TSC issues an RFE, the employer must send the RFE response to the TSC. This procedure must be followed even if the employer also has made an upgrade request to the special VSC upgrade address. The notice did not specifically address which address to use if the case was filed at VSC originally. It would seem, however, that the safest approach would be to respond to the address on the bottom of the RFE, which will probably be the standard VSC address at 75 Lower Welden Street, not the special one for upgrades.
DOL on Proof of Labor Certification Filing for One-Year Incremental Extensions
The DOL has indicated that the Backlog Processing Centers (BPCs) are working to respond to requests for acknowledgement that a labor certification was filed for persons who need this document to file for H1B extensions beyond the six-year limit. The DOL has directed that requests be faxed or mailed to the appropriate BPC. They caution requestors not to both fax and mail the request, since this duplication creates backlogs in the request system and causes delays for all requestors. It is not clear whether faxing or mailing is faster at the Dallas, TX BPC, but immigration attorneys have reported that Philadelphia, PA generally processes mailed requests faster than faxed requests.
We at The Law Office of Sheela Murthy would like to thank the USCIS for these important procedural clarifications, as well as the DOL for providing the necessary acknowledgement for those who wish to extend their H1B status beyond the six-year limit and need documentary evidence to do so.
� 2005, The Law Office of Sheela Murthy, P.C. All Rights Reserved
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5. DOL Update on BPCs
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued answers to Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) in early May 2005 about processing at the Backlog Processing Centers (BPCs). These questions cover a wide range of issues pertaining to case processing and 45-day letters. MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers unfamiliar with BPCs and 45-day letters should review our March 18, 2005 article, DOL Watch : Update on BECs and BPCs, available on MurthyDotCom.
The DOL has used terms like Backlog Reduction Centers (BRCs) or Backlog Elimination Centers (BECs) for the BPCs. Whether the term BEC, BRC, or BPC is used, all refer to the two centers established at Philadelphia, PA and Dallas, TX to reduce the backlogs of the regular labor or RIR cases filed before March 28, 2005.
Special Handling The DOL indicated that there is not a separate track, per se, for special handling cases. Special handling cases involve special recruitment processes used only for college and university professors. The DOL is attempting to identify all such "special handling" cases and find ways to process them quickly.
New Case Numbers Assigned for All Cases in PBLS The DOL confirmed that all cases will receive new case numbers at the BPCs once each case is entered into the Permanent Backlog System (PBLS).
Age-Outs Expedites Not Available The DOL reiterated its policy not to expedite the processing of a labor certification solely because a beneficiary's child will "age out" by turning 21 years old and, potentially, lose derivative benefits under immigration law.
Timeline for Receiving 45-Day Letter The DOL is not able to predict when any particular case will receive the 45-day letter. We note that, at The Law Office of Sheela Murthy, we continue to receive these letters for our cases in a haphazard or random order since some cases filed later obtain them before those filed years earlier.
File New Information for Merger, Acquisition, or Name Change If the employer has merged, been purchased, or has undergone a name change, the new employer must submit copies of the new articles of incorporation, business license, state registration, or other official documents that prove that the employer is a legitimate entity, employing the foreign national or intending to do so, and has become the successor in interest to the original employer. The employer must also submit new ETA 750As and 750Bs. This information and documentation is submitted in connection with the response to the 45-day letter.
Employer Address Change Requires Revised Forms and Possibly New Recruitment If only the addresses has changed, the employer must send a written request to the proper BPC to obtain the original ETA 750A and 750B. The address changes must be made, initialed, and dated by the employer. The DOL indicates that, if the employer moves to a new labor market, new recruitment may be required even if the employer used reduction in recruitment. This will likely depend upon whether the location of the job offer has changed.
Employer Must Update its Information on Wage, Existence, Etc If the corrections list contained as part of the 45-day letter indicates that the employer's name or address does not match the ETA 750A and 750B, the employer must correct any differences, initialing and dating the changes.
If the corrections list indicates that more data is needed in the "basic rate per" fields, this means that, even if a wage is stated, the employer must indicate whether the wage is hourly, daily, weekly, bi-weekly, monthly, yearly, etc. As with all changes, these must be initialed and dated by the employer.
If the corrections list indicates that the employer has failed the existence check, the employer must provide proof of its existence by submitting items such as, but not limited to, articles of incorporation, business license, state registration, or other official documents showing that the employer is a legitimate business entity.
No Lost Cases According to DOL's Quality Check System The DOL reports that their quality check system for cases shipped from State Workforce Agencies (SWAs) and Regional DOL offices indicates that no cases have been lost during shipping. This, of course, has been a major concern for many who are wondering where their cases are and if they have safely reached one of the two BPCs.
BPCs Start to Process Cases The DOL reports that the BPCs have started processing those cases from the DOL Regional Offices where they have received responses to the 45-day letters and the data entry has been completed in the PBLS.
We at The Law Office of Sheela Murthy appreciate the helpful update from the DOL and look forward to the time when the BPCs routinely issue approvals or certifications on the backlogged labor certifications.
� 2005, The Law Office of Sheela Murthy, P.C. All Rights Reserved
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .