Premium Processing for I-485 : How much can you pay ?

How much can you pay for Premium Processing for I-485 ?

  • NEVER want to pay even if it would be introduced !!

    Votes: 12 8.5%

  • $1,000

    Votes: 32 22.5%

  • $2,500

    Votes: 35 24.6%

  • $5,000

    Votes: 48 33.8%

  • $10,000

    Votes: 12 8.5%

  • $25,000

    Votes: 1 0.7%

  • $50,000

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • $100,000

    Votes: 1 0.7%

  • $1,000,000

    Votes: 1 0.7%
  • Total voters
    142
Re: Re: Re: Re: Auction for I-485 Premium Processing

Originally posted by kashmir
I am really disappointed that Premium Processing has been repeatedly proposed by members of this community at Rajiv's I-485 Litigation thread.

Originally posted by rk4gc
Kashmir,
Its never going to happen. I think indefinitely valid temp GC is the way to go.
Click to expand...
Thanks, rk4gc.
I know that Premium Processing for I-485 will not happen in near future and of course that Rajiv will never propose such a shameless solution to the Defendants,
but it is just disappointing to see many community members proposing it in the context of our I-485 litigation while Rajiv and Plaintiffs are fighting for the whole community.
 
Kashmir, Rk4gc,

You are right premium processing is not the solution to reduce backlog. Even if introduced what is the guarantee that money will be used to reduce backlog.

Based on poll it is clear that most of the EB I-485 applicants are ready to spend between 1000 to 5000 dollars for speedy approval of GC.

I would like to remind everyone about the problems faced by GC labor applicants when RIR was introduced. When RIR was introduced the applicants who filed regular labor application faced lot of problem to convert to RIR process. We'll face such problems, if premium processing is introduced for I-485.
 
Those who really represents the whole community never propose Premium Processing for I-485.

Those who expects to expedite only one's own case are proposing Premium Processing.
They explain USCIS would allocate additional resource with these extra fees.
Shamefully, they want to believe even USCIS for one's own green card.
Stupidly, they believe that one's own case would be approved at the top priority in one or three months by paying only small amount of fee such as $1,000 or $5,000.
Of course, I believe there is no one such a shameless and stupid one in this forum
even though somebody might like Premium Processing at first.
 
Premium Processing for I-140

Originally posted by kashmir
02/12/2004: Thaw in I-140 Backlog on the Horizon
The I-140 processing has been experiencing a terrible delay for several months. There is a good news, though. Very soon, the H-1B annual cap is expected to reach and the USCIS is scheduled to move the adjudicating forces from the H-1B production line to the I-140 production line. ...


(my comment)
I think I-140 applicants are victims of Premium Processing (PP) for I-129.
Once INS tried to introduce PP for I-140.
Petitioner of both I-129 and I-140 is Employer unlike I-485.
I don't think USCIS introduce PP for I-485.

USCIS moved its resource from I-140 to I-129 and will just shift it from I-140 to I-129 soon.
Even with additional revenue of PP, USCIS never hires additional officers aggresively.
If USCIS would introduce PP for I-485, it would just create another victims like the current I-140 applicants.
We should not expect PP for I-485.
Click to expand...
Absolutely NO to PP for I-485.
How about PP for I-140 ?

Obviously, I-140 long-waiting applicants are victims of PP for I-129.
Before FY2005, starting PP for I-129 on 10/1/2004 again,
PP for I-140 may be required to be introduced.
As I-140 is similar to I-129, it should be $1,000 for PP within 15 days.
Also, the employer should pay $1,000 as petitioner, but I am not sure whether most of employers agree or not.

Recently, I learned that some employers didn't allow the concurrent filing of I-140 and I-485.
PP for I-140 should solve this problem, too.
 
Kashmir,

These are very strong words indeed. And though I see where you are coming from, I don't necessarily agree 100 % with what you are stating:

1. There is no way the INS can clear its backlog without an added influx of funds to hire new employees.

2. If PP is implemented in a very honest manner, by actually hiring new employees as compared to taking current resources and turning PP into another money making gimmick, it has high probability of reducing the backlog.

3. If 2. above is followed then assuming a number of current 485 applicants move over to PP, the people waiting adjudication in the normal queue will suddenly find their cases moving fast as well, thanks to the traffic moving to the other queue. Offcourse this is only if additional resources are hired by INS.

4. Waiting for 485 has become a serious burden, a lot of lives are on hold, and people do want to move on and get over it. If PP is the answer, then so be it. Offcourse this is state sponsored graft, but if it works then it works. In developing countries like India, etc. It is common enough to pay a little extra to get that telephone connection or get that gas line, it is under the table, but in this case it appears to be over the table, people have reached a stage where the line between state sponsored graft and illegal graft is a very thin red line and easily crossed over.

5. If it is possible for INS to raise funds but retro-actively increasing the fees even for people who applied for AOS a couple of years ago, I would even support that measure. Raise more money, hire more people. Pay them based upon results and keep the queue flowing in a FIFO manner. That will prevent pp as well as bring an influx of funds that the INS can use to reduce the backlog.


Originally posted by kashmir
Those who really represents the whole community never propose Premium Processing for I-485.
Click to expand...
 
Hi, 140_takes_4ever,
I almost agree with you.
I don't deny Premium Processing (PP) itself and a raise of fees though I don't like it.
But I just oppose that Plaintiffs propose I-485 PP for settlement of the litigation.

I agree on 1) and 5).
For 2) and 3), simply I can not trust USCIS to increase enough resource instead of just shifting its resource,
and no comment for 4).
Originally posted by 140_takes_4ever
Kashmir,

These are very strong words indeed. And though I see where you are coming from, I don't necessarily agree 100 % with what you are stating:

1. There is no way the INS can clear its backlog without an added influx of funds to hire new employees.

2. If PP is implemented in a very honest manner, by actually hiring new employees as compared to taking current resources and turning PP into another money making gimmick, it has high probability of reducing the backlog.

3. If 2. above is followed then assuming a number of current 485 applicants move over to PP, the people waiting adjudication in the normal queue will suddenly find their cases moving fast as well, thanks to the traffic moving to the other queue. Offcourse this is only if additional resources are hired by INS.

4. Waiting for 485 has become a serious burden, a lot of lives are on hold, and people do want to move on and get over it. If PP is the answer, then so be it. Offcourse this is state sponsored graft, but if it works then it works. In developing countries like India, etc. It is common enough to pay a little extra to get that telephone connection or get that gas line, it is under the table, but in this case it appears to be over the table, people have reached a stage where the line between state sponsored graft and illegal graft is a very thin red line and easily crossed over.

5. If it is possible for INS to raise funds but retro-actively increasing the fees even for people who applied for AOS a couple of years ago, I would even support that measure. Raise more money, hire more people. Pay them based upon results and keep the queue flowing in a FIFO manner. That will prevent pp as well as bring an influx of funds that the INS can use to reduce the backlog.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kashmir,

The problem is that INS does not work in an idealistic way. I agree, that retroactively increasing the fees is the best way to go, but is it legal? Can INS push it through all kinds of opposition? I don't trust the INS on PP myself. It is a fact that H1 processing times have regressed to 8-11 months from 2-4 months prior to introduction of PP. It was infact mentioned in an audit report and INS was criticised for the same, unfortunately nothing came of it.

Unfortunately at this time, we need solutions, any which way we can reduce the backlogs we must take it. I only hope that the ways are legal and above board, just because this is a great country and has a good record on rights of individuals.

It is only with great reluctance I support PP, and that to only because I see no hope of INS reducing the backlogs any other way. I see a few folks on this website getting very happy when INS releases a press statement that backlogs will be down within 6 months, or that their lawyers have told them something, unfortunately there is no proof on the ground. After waiting such a long time, I would like to close this chapter in my life and move on. And hence the acceptance for pp.

Originally posted by kashmir
But I just oppose that Plaintiffs propose I-485 PP for settlement of the litigation.

For 2) and 3), simply I can not trust USCIS to increase enough resource instead of just shifting its resource,
and no comment for 4).
Click to expand...
 
For every problem, we have to find the root cause and try to resolve the fundamental issues. Do you think funding is the fundamental issue? Obviously no, so premium processing will not solve the problem.

When labor approval for GC took very long time, RIR was introduced, nowadays even RIR takes years, so now DOL is planning to introduce PERM processing, so it continues........

If premium processing is introduced for I-485, then it will not resolve the backlogs issues, then what? Premium processing Plus for I-485, after few years CIS will realize that problem still persists so they will introduce Super Premium processing, then.........
 
Originally posted by Edison
For every problem, we have to find the root cause and try to resolve the fundamental issues. Do you think funding is the fundamental issue? Obviously no, so premium processing will not solve the problem.

When labor approval for GC took very long time, RIR was introduced, nowadays even RIR takes years, so now DOL is planning to introduce PERM processing, so it continues........

If premium processing is introduced for I-485, then it will not resolve the backlogs issues, then what? Premium processing Plus for I-485, after few years CIS will realize that problem still persists so they will introduce Super Premium processing, then.........
Click to expand...
I strongly agree with Edison.

On the other hand, I understand some (or many) people come to want PP for one's own speedy approval (and also backlog reduction ?) during a long wait in uncertain circumstances.
I don't mind such a person trying to let USCIS introduce PP outside of our I-485 Litigation.
It is one's own choice.
 
Edison,

You are obviously joking! You don't seriously believe that funding is NOT the root cause of the problem.

Offcourse funding is the root cause of EVERYTHING! With a paltry budget how can you hire more IIO's? Without money how can you pay for the best? Without money how can you throw more hands to make the work light?

Offcourse funding is the ISSUE! And INS recognizes it, hence the proposal to increase fee's!

Addressing the issue of PP versus PP plus, you are mistaken. PERM has definitely reduced the time of processing of people who applied under it. The fact that it has increased the backlog for H1 is a totally different matter and that is due to the fact that INS has not been honest about its own guidelines of not taking away current resources. And if you read my earlier post, it talks about this in more detail. So don't try to confuse the issue here.

Originally posted by Edison
For every problem, we have to find the root cause and try to resolve the fundamental issues. Do you think funding is the fundamental issue? Obviously no, so premium processing will not solve the problem.
Click to expand...
Kashmir,

I was under the impression that this discussion was solely to judge the merits and demerits of premium processing. and to gauge the opinion. The fact that it be included or not in the lawsuit is totally upto Rajiv. The litigation does not deal with providing answers, that part will be done only if the INS lawyers decide to settle and hold arbitration meetings that people can discuss these issues.

Take a look at the poll above, and you will see that close to 92% of the people are in favour of PERM. What does that tell you about the state of affairs? It is okay to be idealistic, but the bottom line is solutions! THAT is the key.

Personally, I am against PERM being introduced, I consider it graft! I would want to try eveything else to solve the issue, but after waiting for over 18 months, I am pretty darn tired of this wait, and would like to go ahead with my life.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Funding is one of the problems that INS is facing. And we should admit it. There is no doubt about it. So INS needs funds. But is the premium processing is the best way to get funds? Do we want to accept it as a solution to reduce backlogs ? The answer is a big NO.

History tells me, that any kind of premium procesisng is a failure and is not going to help us any way. Do I trust INS to use premium processing as a way to reduce backlogs? NO again.

Premium processing is going to fail. INS is not good at managing its resources, its a universal truth. In an ideal scenario Premium Processing works but not with INS. Thats one reason why I'm against Premium Processing. It may work for us, for a couple of years but after that there will be backlogs even in Premium Processing for sure :D.

By increasing fees it should increase resources and use them right. So, in case of a settlement we should ask for proper allocation of resources and reduction of backlogs. I dont mind if I've to pay higher fees to increase INS resources and reduce backlogs.
 
if I go for Consular Process, I only have to pay $3000 including lawyer & traveling to complete, and I may be able to obtain green card by the end of the year. 2 years of AOS waiting is acceptable for me so I didn't dare to choose CP and pay $3000.

So if I paied for premium processing, $1000 is only reasonable. $5000? kidding.
 
CIs faces funding problem but premium processing will not solve backlog issue because the application fees we paid was siphoned-off to some other department of DHS(namely border enforcement department) and it will continue.

rk4gc, the situation you explained clearly fits current DOL situation (regular labor, RIR, PERM,...)

BTW, PERM process is for GC labor and it is yet to be implemented.
 
if PP is not our choice, why in the 1st place Kashmir started this thread?

Premium Processing for I-485: How much can you pay ?
 
Originally posted by kenboo
if PP is not our choice, why in the 1st place Kashmir started this thread?
Premium Processing for I-485: How much can you pay ?
Click to expand...
I'd like everyone to understand why I-485 PP doesn't work.
Seeing the above result, do you still think PP contributes to speedy approval of your own I-485 case and I-485 backlog reduction ?
If so, how much should USCIS set PP fee ?
 
All,

Nothing offensive.

I don't understand why we guys are so against Premium Processing. If by giving out $2000 or so, I get away from INS wait for 3 years, I think it is a best way to do it. With EAD and AP Renewal fees increasing, I will end up paying more than this if I have to go for 2 more AP and EAD renewals.

Point to think !!!

-Honeybee
:)
 
Originally posted by honeybee
All,
Nothing offensive.
I don't understand why we guys are so against Premium Processing. If by giving out $2000 or so, I get away from INS wait for 3 years, I think it is a best way to do it. With EAD and AP Renewal fees increasing, I will end up paying more than this if I have to go for 2 more AP and EAD renewals.
Point to think !!!
-Honeybee
:)
Click to expand...
The CSC has already over 60,000 pending I-485 cases now.
According to the vote, if PP fee is $2,000, 70% of them choose PP.

How long do you expect for PP ?
If you expect 3-month processing, how can the CSC adjudicate over 42,000 cases within 3 months ?
or
Can you trust USCIS to hire enough officers immediately to adjudicate 42,000 cases within 3 months ?
 
Originally posted by honeybee
All,

Nothing offensive.

I don't understand why we guys are so against Premium Processing. If by giving out $2000 or so, I get away from INS wait for 3 years, I think it is a best way to do it. With EAD and AP Renewal fees increasing, I will end up paying more than this if I have to go for 2 more AP and EAD renewals.

Point to think !!!

-Honeybee
:)
Click to expand...

We can discuss premium processing if we are about to file I-485 and not at this stage.
Even Rajiv didn't suggest premium processing for I-485, for further details follow the below mentioned thread.

Can We settle on These Bases?

Also, Kashmir started this thread just to educate our forum members about the disadvantages of I-485 premium processing since most of our friends were suggesting premium processing as solution to reduce I-485 backlogs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top