Settlement Memorandum Sent

Re: Why is Vermont Service center slowest?

vsc is the fastest in terms of processing 485. Must put all 'manpower" on 485

Originally posted by hrithikroshan11
Why is Vermont Service center slowest in processing applications?

California and Nebraska are processing EADs for January and February 2004, while Vermont is still processing EAD for November 2003.

California and Nebraska are processing APs for January and February 2004, while Vermont is still processing APs for October 2003.

California and Nebraska are processing 140 for May 15 and June 15, 2003, while Vermont is still processing 140 for May 8, 2003.

Can we add it in the settlement memorandum that they should try to maintain similar response time for all service centers?
Click to expand...
 
We need to be a bit more organized

1. The questions should be drafted in a manner that permits exact response from CIS. For instance, there is no way to answer the question “What is going on?”

The question should be: “Please provide an explanation for the backlogs in the I-485 processing, listing specifically, the problems and the anticipated solutions. Also provide data on the backlogs in each Service Center and adjudicating suboffices”


2. Also, break down the questions by category:
For example:
General Processing Issues
EAD Issues
Advance Parole Issues
Fingerprinting Issues
AC21 Issues
Miscellaneous


Do the best you can. Once we have a preliminary draft, we can start circulating it around. That done, we can run it by the govt.
 
DOL

Follow DOL, why not?

DOL has reported that there are over 300,000 permanent labor certification applications pending at this time. The two Backlog Reduction Centers should help to reduce the backlog cases once the centers open. The Backlog Reduction Centers are expected to be manned by private contractors and according to the unconfirmed sources of formation, such contract may not be offered until May 2004. Our earlier report that some state offices started
transferring backlog cases to contractors turned out to be outsourcing of backlog cases to overseas contractors by the Texas state labor certification office. It is unclear how far the overseas outsourcing of permanent labor certification applications will go in terms of the involved large states. Please stay tuned.
 
Some Qs to USCIS

Do you acknowledge that there is a problem when considering massive backlog at each service center for such a long time?

What are basic causes to slow down processing?

Is it security check taking time?

Is it money to run the centers and process cases despite of reasonable application fees collected?

Is it manpower shortage and difficulty hiring new officers or
making current officers work overtime?

Is there any other specific reason not listed above?

Based on USCIS response, then it can be argued that what they say is not right or not helping the current situation.
 
My question

Category: I-140 petition

Why is the processing of I-140 petition under national interest waiver (NIW) so slow in VSC (the processing date for NIW is about 1 year behind EB3)?
 
Re: My question

Becuase it is of national interest not processing them...just joking.

Originally posted by zyu
Category: I-140 petition

Why is the processing of I-140 petition under national interest waiver (NIW) so slow in VSC (the processing date for NIW is about 1 year behind EB3)?
Click to expand...
 
For all those who think terrorists will not report themselves to FBI or apply for GC, realize that not all terrorists are here to spread terror. For any successful operation a lot of logistics needs to be provided. Many of the people who provide logistics come to the target country legally and maintain a legal lifestyle and blend into the society. This allows them to make contacts, procure materials and plan the attack, before the strike team comes in for the kill. So it is very essential to screen out any sleeper cells.

Having said that I dont think security checks should take as long as it is taking.

$0.02
001
 
Originally posted by lca_001
For all those who think terrorists will not report themselves to FBI or apply for GC, realize that not all terrorists are here to spread terror. For any successful operation a lot of logistics needs to be provided. Many of the people who provide logistics come to the target country legally and maintain a legal lifestyle and blend into the society. This allows them to make contacts, procure materials and plan the attack, before the strike team comes in for the kill. So it is very essential to screen out any sleeper cells.

Having said that I dont think security checks should take as long as it is taking.

$0.02
001
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree with you and on the higher perspective our safety lies in the overall safety and security of the nation. How would delaying cases is going to help ?

What about the people who have already received green cards when there were less strict security screenings? And what about citizens ? Is there absolute guarantee that they cannot be brainwashed for similar activities ? Why are we who are suffering the most ?
 
Diverting USCIS resources

I imagine this is another diversion of USCIS resources.

http://www.immigration.com/newsletter1/dallasdisti485launchprog.pdf

The adjudicators who were to work on all AOS cases would be pulled out for this pilot which EXCLUDES employment based category. I would have been happy if they had included EB category. But to me this pilot appears to be nothing but a means of demonstrating to the Congress on how seriously USCIS is taking the backlog issue. Also since this is election year, they have to please the voters while EB petitioner would not be a voter at least till next 5+ years.
 
Re: Re: Re: My question

Originally posted by cinta
No joke! Read the article: "Read my lips: No new NIW". Another disgrace from USCIS.

http://www.entertheusa.com/publications.htm
Click to expand...

Cinta,

I believe this is an old article, published in 1998. FYI I know quite a few people whose I-140 NIW petitions have been approved in reasonable time (6 mo - 1 yr) since then. These days, when you file an NIW petition, you actually cite the NYSDOT (New York State Dept of Transportation) case that is the basis of this article to argue that you meet the criteria. In other words, this case helps to define a NIW case better if you have a good one.

In general, most I-140 NIW cases take more time to be adjudicated compared to EB3 cases because of the scarcity of the number of officers qualified to review such a case.

sg_rg2
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: My question

Originally posted by sg_rg2
Cinta,

I believe this is an old article, published in 1998. FYI I know quite a few people whose I-140 NIW petitions have been approved in reasonable time (6 mo - 1 yr) since then. These days, when you file an NIW petition, you actually cite the NYSDOT (New York State Dept of Transportation) case that is the basis of this article to argue that you meet the criteria. In other words, this case helps to define a NIW case better if you have a good one.

In general, most I-140 NIW cases take more time to be adjudicated compared to EB3 cases because of the scarcity of the number of officers qualified to review such a case.

sg_rg2
Click to expand...

It does not matter whether is old. It is a classic explaining the NIW saga from the late 80s and early 90s. NYSDOT made it harder for NIW. I had the impression (maybe wrong?) that NIW receive more RFEs, Transfers, etc, i.e. Harassment.

Note: The Federal Administrative Procedure Act (APA) was enacted in 1946 and amended later on..
 
Re: Diverting USCIS resources

I don't see a date on this document. Is this current? Also is it just for TSC or all centers.

Originally posted by jat
I imagine this is another diversion of USCIS resources.

http://www.immigration.com/newsletter1/dallasdisti485launchprog.pdf

The adjudicators who were to work on all AOS cases would be pulled out for this pilot which EXCLUDES employment based category. I would have been happy if they had included EB category. But to me this pilot appears to be nothing but a means of demonstrating to the Congress on how seriously USCIS is taking the backlog issue. Also since this is election year, they have to please the voters while EB petitioner would not be a voter at least till next 5+ years.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Re: Diverting USCIS resources

Originally posted by hidden_dragon
I don't see a date on this document. Is this current? Also is it just for TSC or all centers.
Click to expand...
Date in PDF properties is 03/24/2004 1:49:54 PM
 
The govt said - no

Here is the email I have just received from the govt. counsel:

"The agency has reported back to me, and has informed me that it is unable to enter into a settlement agreement with the plaintiffs at this time. They believe that many of the requests set forth in your proposed settlement agreement and the Complaint are being addressed as a result of steps that were taken prior to this litigation (i.e. proposed EAD reg, and allocation of more agency funds to adjudicate applications in the future, and other initiatives). As to point 4 in plaintiffs' proposed settlement agreement, the agency is barred by statute and regulation from agreeing to that point."
 
Re: The govt said - no

Originally posted by operations
Here is the email I have just received from the govt. counsel:

"The agency has reported back to me, and has informed me that it is unable to enter into a settlement agreement with the plaintiffs at this time. They believe that many of the requests set forth in your proposed settlement agreement and the Complaint are being addressed as a result of steps that were taken prior to this litigation (i.e. proposed EAD reg, and allocation of more agency funds to adjudicate applications in the future, and other initiatives). As to point 4 in plaintiffs' proposed settlement agreement, the agency is barred by statute and regulation from agreeing to that point."
Click to expand...



My response:
"The govt. is wrong in that they are barred by statute. But that argument is really academic at this point. We shall see what the court says. Regards."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top