- Home
- Forums
- Master Archive of Old and Closed Forums
- Older Forums - THESE HAVE BEEN ARCHIVED AS OF Sept
- Pending I-485 Litigation
- The Complaint
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
***********So, Is our I-485 Litigation Over?*************
- Thread starter Rajiv S. Khanna
- Start date
Originally posted by dsatish
Let us launch a campaign : "STOP Last In First Out Policies " . Let us collect signatures from people and fax it to VSC director, USCIS director etc. We can fax it on the letterhead of our new organization.
I will start that campaign at VSC forum on Monday. I would like to see what Rajiv says on Sunday.
we have to make it very clear that for whatever new procedures USCIS use in the future to process I-140/I-485 they have to
CLEAR THE CURRENT BACKLOG FIRST!!!!!!!!!!!!
The new procedures can only be implemented AFTER THE CURRENT MESS IS CLEANED!!!
mustbepatient
Registered Users (C)
Another Point of View
While I definitely agree that applications should be processed in the order they are received, for those people who think that this is only negative for old filers, I don't think that's true. Most of the old filers already have their I-140 approved, which means that they can take advantage of AC-21. However, under the new system, people who concurrently file from this point on will NEVER have their I-140 approved before the I-485 is approved, which means they will never be able to take advantage of AC21.
There seems to be an assumption that processing times will improve to less than 180 days, so AC21 wouldn't be necessary anyway, but I think that's completely unrealistic.
Under today's system, if someone's I-140 was approvable in 6 months (although even that's not happening often - mine has been pending for almost 13 months so far), they could take advantage of AC21 even if there was a huge delay due to name check. However, under the new system, their I-140 would be put on hold for as long as it takes to solve the problem, even if there are no problems with the petition itself.
On the positive side, I think the NSC should be commended for being the only service center that seems to be communicating their procedures and activities publicly (they're usually the first center to release the JIT report each month as well). I wish the CSC would give as clear updates as to their activities.
I think the strangest thing about all these changes is that they're not including people who already have I-140s approved, just because they weren't filed at the same time as the I-485 (and in a lot of cases, that option wasn't available back then). It seems to me that they should be the first people to have their I-485s approved. I don't understand the reasoning there at all.
While I definitely agree that applications should be processed in the order they are received, for those people who think that this is only negative for old filers, I don't think that's true. Most of the old filers already have their I-140 approved, which means that they can take advantage of AC-21. However, under the new system, people who concurrently file from this point on will NEVER have their I-140 approved before the I-485 is approved, which means they will never be able to take advantage of AC21.
There seems to be an assumption that processing times will improve to less than 180 days, so AC21 wouldn't be necessary anyway, but I think that's completely unrealistic.
Under today's system, if someone's I-140 was approvable in 6 months (although even that's not happening often - mine has been pending for almost 13 months so far), they could take advantage of AC21 even if there was a huge delay due to name check. However, under the new system, their I-140 would be put on hold for as long as it takes to solve the problem, even if there are no problems with the petition itself.
On the positive side, I think the NSC should be commended for being the only service center that seems to be communicating their procedures and activities publicly (they're usually the first center to release the JIT report each month as well). I wish the CSC would give as clear updates as to their activities.
I think the strangest thing about all these changes is that they're not including people who already have I-140s approved, just because they weren't filed at the same time as the I-485 (and in a lot of cases, that option wasn't available back then). It seems to me that they should be the first people to have their I-485s approved. I don't understand the reasoning there at all.
hidden_dragon
Registered Users (C)
After some reading, I believe the Ohaa/NSC new memo may a bad news for people with approved 140. Anyone with approved 140, thus most people here in the forum except those filed in last few months, is a non concurrent case. NSC memo clears the "new" concurrent filing will be treated on a separate track. The result is the nonconcurrent cases will SLOW down, and newly filed concurrent case will be approved at the same time!!!
In the recent MurthyBulletin:
"Given staffing shortages, whenever one type of case processing is given priority, another type suffers. This is what the NSC seems to be stating with their information about anticipated delays in those cases that are filed non-concurrently"
In the recent MurthyBulletin:
"Given staffing shortages, whenever one type of case processing is given priority, another type suffers. This is what the NSC seems to be stating with their information about anticipated delays in those cases that are filed non-concurrently"
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally posted by hidden_dragon
In the recent MurthyBulletin:
"Given staffing shortages, whenever one type of case processing is given priority, another type suffers. This is what the NSC seems to be stating with their information about anticipated delays in those cases that are filed non-concurrently"
I agree with hidden_dragon....I also 100% with Murthy's assertion that if one type of case processing is given priority, another type suffers...
I think this is crux of the discussion going on this thread for three days....the real and concrete solutions are:
i) Increase the staff either by handing some work to contractors ( as suggested by Cinta) or through extra staffing
ii) No multiple EAD's, AP's and FP so that staff will be working on real adjudication rather than working on these routing stuff.
iii) Interim GC so that remains our sufferings...Edison expressed that interim GC may not be in the hands of USCIS...and I believe that it is in the hands of USCIS...so lets ask Rajiv on Sunday call what is his view on this and how we included this in our settlement proposal...
I think the settlement proposal which we sent to USCIS is the best proposal one can think of. Here most people are feeling that USCIS does not have any malign intentions in introducing these new pilots and new procedures. I also don't think that they got malign intentions but I definitely think they don't have any sincere intentions as well...if they are sincere, they should have taken the opinion of the suffers and their representatives like immigration lawyers before promulgating any new procedures on reduction of backlog... The first thing any person with minimal common sense will do is to issue multiple year EAD and AP ....
-rajum
gc999999999
Registered Users (C)
FULL TEXT OF MURTHY INTERPRETATION
1. New Procedures for Concurrently Filed I-140/I-485 Cases
There has been a significant change in the way that the USCIS Service Centers will process concurrently filed I-140/I-485 cases. In a March 31, 2004 memorandum (Ohata Memo), Fujie Ohata, Director of Service Center Operations, issued instructions to the Service Center Directors regarding certain procedural changes. Under the new procedures, a concurrently filed I-140/I-485 should be adjudicated together. Previously, the I-140 was reviewed on an initial, cursory level simply to identify any clearly frivolous cases. The I-140 was then adjudicated independently, without regard for the processing of the I-485. The cursory, or prima facie, review was performed to avoid improper receipt of the benefits of the I-485 filing, including obtaining an Employment Authorization Document (EAD) or Advance Parole (AP). Under this Memo, concurrently filed I-140/I-485 cases will be processed and adjudicated simultaneously.
I-140 Will Not Be Processed until I-485 is Ready to Be Processed
The Ohata Memo states that, even when the I-140 is ready for processing and placed on the 'ready to adjudicate' shelf, it will not be processed unless the I-485 is also ready for adjudication. The I-485 is not ready until the fingerprints and name checks have cleared. Essentially, the I-140 will be held in abeyance until these procedures have been completed in connection with the I-485. This raises significant concerns for the application of AC21 portability. AC21 portability, as interpreted under current USCIS memoranda, requires an approved I-140 and an I-485 that has been pending for 180 days. Thus, delaying the I-140 adjudication until the I-485 can be approved inevitably will curtail the ability to use AC21 portability in most cases under these current USCIS interpretations. Of course, since AC21 is only available for long-delayed cases, if the new process speeds adjudications to within a six-month period, AC21 portability is not an available option. While we would certainly favor case adjudications within fewer than 180 days, current processing times are approximately two to five times this timeframe. Thus, this may not be a realistic goal, at least in the near future.
RFEs on I-140 and I-485 Should be Issued Separately
The Memo directs that Requests for Evidence (RFEs) be issued separately on I-140s and I-485s, for legal reasons. If both the I-140 and I-485 are issued RFEs, the entire case will await the responses. If there is a response to the I-140 but not the I-485, the I-140 will be adjudicated and the I-485 denied. If there is no response to the I-140, both cases will be denied, whether or not there is a response to the I-485.
Prima Facie Review of I-140 Not Required in Non-Concurrent Cases
The Ohata Memo states that with a non-concurrently filed I-140, I-485, I-765 (EAD), and I-131 (AP) filings will continue to be processed as before. However, the Service Center Directors have discretion to end the prima facie review or modify the scope of that review. It is not clear from this whether the prima facie review would be eliminated in order to allow for complete case adjudication at one time. It would seem difficult to accomplish this, in light of the need for fingerprinting and background checks for the I-485. However, it is doubtful that the AP or EAD would be issued without some review of the basic legal sufficiency of the I-140 petition.
NSC’s Implementation of the Ohata Memo
The Nebraska Service Center (NSC) issued information regarding its plan to implement the new concurrent filing procedures. It has taken various internal reorganization efforts to permit the concurrent processing of I-140s/I-485s effective from April 30, 2004. The NSC notes that this was not part of the pilot program to adjudicate the I-140s/I-485s within 75 days of filing. The NSC also emphasizes that it anticipates a slow-down in processing non-concurrent I-485s, as they will be processing the concurrent and non-concurrent on separate tracks, giving priority to concurrently filed I-140s and I-485s over those that are not filed concurrently.
What Will Happen to Your Case?
At this point, it is not entirely clear exactly what this will mean for one's case. The purpose of the new procedures appears to be to reduce processing times and increase efficiency. Holding the I-140 adjudication until the I-485 can be approved, however, may end up slowing the I-140 processing. If the I-140 is not approved, then AC21 is held not to apply under current interpretations of the interplay between AC21 law and concurrent filing. If processing is not completed in a reasonable time, and AC21 portability cannot be used, this may mean that more cases will be denied if there is a termination of the employer’s sponsorship of the I-485 applicant, for any reason.
Given staffing shortages, whenever one type of case processing is given priority, another type suffers. This is what the NSC seems to be stating with their information about anticipated delays in those cases that are filed non-concurrently. Of course, if the I-140s and I-485s could be processed more quickly, time could be saved, as there would be far fewer requests for EADs and APs. Faster processing would also eliminate the need for AC21 portability since it would not apply if the I-485 is adjudicated within 180 days of filing.
1. New Procedures for Concurrently Filed I-140/I-485 Cases
There has been a significant change in the way that the USCIS Service Centers will process concurrently filed I-140/I-485 cases. In a March 31, 2004 memorandum (Ohata Memo), Fujie Ohata, Director of Service Center Operations, issued instructions to the Service Center Directors regarding certain procedural changes. Under the new procedures, a concurrently filed I-140/I-485 should be adjudicated together. Previously, the I-140 was reviewed on an initial, cursory level simply to identify any clearly frivolous cases. The I-140 was then adjudicated independently, without regard for the processing of the I-485. The cursory, or prima facie, review was performed to avoid improper receipt of the benefits of the I-485 filing, including obtaining an Employment Authorization Document (EAD) or Advance Parole (AP). Under this Memo, concurrently filed I-140/I-485 cases will be processed and adjudicated simultaneously.
I-140 Will Not Be Processed until I-485 is Ready to Be Processed
The Ohata Memo states that, even when the I-140 is ready for processing and placed on the 'ready to adjudicate' shelf, it will not be processed unless the I-485 is also ready for adjudication. The I-485 is not ready until the fingerprints and name checks have cleared. Essentially, the I-140 will be held in abeyance until these procedures have been completed in connection with the I-485. This raises significant concerns for the application of AC21 portability. AC21 portability, as interpreted under current USCIS memoranda, requires an approved I-140 and an I-485 that has been pending for 180 days. Thus, delaying the I-140 adjudication until the I-485 can be approved inevitably will curtail the ability to use AC21 portability in most cases under these current USCIS interpretations. Of course, since AC21 is only available for long-delayed cases, if the new process speeds adjudications to within a six-month period, AC21 portability is not an available option. While we would certainly favor case adjudications within fewer than 180 days, current processing times are approximately two to five times this timeframe. Thus, this may not be a realistic goal, at least in the near future.
RFEs on I-140 and I-485 Should be Issued Separately
The Memo directs that Requests for Evidence (RFEs) be issued separately on I-140s and I-485s, for legal reasons. If both the I-140 and I-485 are issued RFEs, the entire case will await the responses. If there is a response to the I-140 but not the I-485, the I-140 will be adjudicated and the I-485 denied. If there is no response to the I-140, both cases will be denied, whether or not there is a response to the I-485.
Prima Facie Review of I-140 Not Required in Non-Concurrent Cases
The Ohata Memo states that with a non-concurrently filed I-140, I-485, I-765 (EAD), and I-131 (AP) filings will continue to be processed as before. However, the Service Center Directors have discretion to end the prima facie review or modify the scope of that review. It is not clear from this whether the prima facie review would be eliminated in order to allow for complete case adjudication at one time. It would seem difficult to accomplish this, in light of the need for fingerprinting and background checks for the I-485. However, it is doubtful that the AP or EAD would be issued without some review of the basic legal sufficiency of the I-140 petition.
NSC’s Implementation of the Ohata Memo
The Nebraska Service Center (NSC) issued information regarding its plan to implement the new concurrent filing procedures. It has taken various internal reorganization efforts to permit the concurrent processing of I-140s/I-485s effective from April 30, 2004. The NSC notes that this was not part of the pilot program to adjudicate the I-140s/I-485s within 75 days of filing. The NSC also emphasizes that it anticipates a slow-down in processing non-concurrent I-485s, as they will be processing the concurrent and non-concurrent on separate tracks, giving priority to concurrently filed I-140s and I-485s over those that are not filed concurrently.
What Will Happen to Your Case?
At this point, it is not entirely clear exactly what this will mean for one's case. The purpose of the new procedures appears to be to reduce processing times and increase efficiency. Holding the I-140 adjudication until the I-485 can be approved, however, may end up slowing the I-140 processing. If the I-140 is not approved, then AC21 is held not to apply under current interpretations of the interplay between AC21 law and concurrent filing. If processing is not completed in a reasonable time, and AC21 portability cannot be used, this may mean that more cases will be denied if there is a termination of the employer’s sponsorship of the I-485 applicant, for any reason.
Given staffing shortages, whenever one type of case processing is given priority, another type suffers. This is what the NSC seems to be stating with their information about anticipated delays in those cases that are filed non-concurrently. Of course, if the I-140s and I-485s could be processed more quickly, time could be saved, as there would be far fewer requests for EADs and APs. Faster processing would also eliminate the need for AC21 portability since it would not apply if the I-485 is adjudicated within 180 days of filing.
Originally posted by rajum
I agree with hidden_dragon....I also 100% with Murthy's assertion that if one type of case processing is given priority, another type suffers...
I think this is crux of the discussion going on this thread for three days....the real and concrete solutions are:
i) Increase the staff either by handing some work to contractors ( as suggested by Cinta) or through extra staffing
ii) No multiple EAD's, AP's and FP so that staff will be working on real adjudication rather than working on these routing stuff.
iii) Interim GC so that remains our sufferings...Edison expressed that interim GC may not be in the hands of USCIS...and I believe that it is in the hands of USCIS...so lets ask Rajiv on Sunday call what is his view on this and how we included this in our settlement proposal...
I disagree with the interim GC. it will certainly give CIS a excuse to further delay the formal GC.
remember interim GC is just a combination of AP, EAD and AC21. it does not provide other material benefit but does give CIS a damn excuse to further delay the processing of formal GC!!!
Originally posted by rajum
I agree with hidden_dragon....I also 100% with Murthy's assertion that if one type of case processing is given priority, another type suffers...
I think this is crux of the discussion going on this thread for three days....the real and concrete solutions are:
i) Increase the staff either by handing some work to contractors ( as suggested by Cinta) or through extra staffing
ii) No multiple EAD's, AP's and FP so that staff will be working on real adjudication rather than working on these routing stuff.
iii) Interim GC so that remains our sufferings...Edison expressed that interim GC may not be in the hands of USCIS...and I believe that it is in the hands of USCIS...so lets ask Rajiv on Sunday call what is his view on this and how we included this in our settlement proposal...
Another thing about interim GC is that a lot of employers can still discrimate you because you hold an interim GC rather than GC!!!
I don't think interim GC is a good idea.
Re: FULL TEXT OF MURTHY INTERPRETATION
I hope they anticipate delay for future cases which will be filed non cuncurrently after 04/30/2004.iT DOESNOT MAKE SENSE TO DELAY THE CASES WITH 1-140 APPROVED OR ABOUT TO BE APPROVED.They have not mentioned that old cases will be affected and it was general in observation.May be NSC should clarify it what will happen to the old cases
I hope they anticipate delay for future cases which will be filed non cuncurrently after 04/30/2004.iT DOESNOT MAKE SENSE TO DELAY THE CASES WITH 1-140 APPROVED OR ABOUT TO BE APPROVED.They have not mentioned that old cases will be affected and it was general in observation.May be NSC should clarify it what will happen to the old cases
NSC’s Implementation of the Ohata Memo
The Nebraska Service Center (NSC) issued information regarding its plan to implement the new concurrent filing procedures. It has taken various internal reorganization efforts to permit the concurrent processing of I-140s/I-485s effective from April 30, 2004. The NSC notes that this was not part of the pilot program to adjudicate the I-140s/I-485s within 75 days of filing. The NSC also emphasizes that it anticipates a slow-down in processing non-concurrent I-485s, as they will be processing the concurrent and non-concurrent on separate tracks, giving priority to concurrently filed I-140s and I-485s over those that are not filed concurrently.
What Will Happen to Your Case?
At this point, it is not entirely clear exactly what this will mean for one's case. The purpose of the new procedures appears to be to reduce processing times and increase efficiency. Holding the I-140 adjudication until the I-485 can be approved, however, may end up slowing the I-140 processing. If the I-140 is not approved, then AC21 is held not to apply under current interpretations of the interplay between AC21 law and concurrent filing. If processing is not completed in a reasonable time, and AC21 portability cannot be used, this may mean that more cases will be denied if there is a termination of the employer’s sponsorship of the I-485 applicant, for any reason.
Given staffing shortages, whenever one type of case processing is given priority, another type suffers. This is what the NSC seems to be stating with their information about anticipated delays in those cases that are filed non-concurrently. Of course, if the I-140s and I-485s could be processed more quickly, time could be saved, as there would be far fewer requests for EADs and APs. Faster processing would also eliminate the need for AC21 portability since it would not apply if the I-485 is adjudicated within 180 days of filing. [/B]
hidden_dragon
Registered Users (C)
I think this is crux of the discussion going on this thread for three days....the real and concrete solutions are:
i) Increase the staff either by handing some work to contractors ( as suggested by Cinta) or through extra staffing
This won't be a short term solution to backlog, but it definitely will help in the coming years
ii) No multiple EAD's, AP's and FP so that staff will be working on real adjudication rather than working on these routing stuff.
these make sense. But the "concurrent" filing strategy seems completely elimiates these.
iii) Interim GC so that remains our sufferings...Edison expressed that interim GC may not be in the hands of USCIS...and I believe that it is in the hands of USCIS...so lets ask Rajiv on Sunday call what is his view on this and how we included this in our settlement proposal...
why interim? I waited so long, I want the real thing. We should ask for resolution for older filers now. Finished them first or at least get priority straight!
Events
There are several events that are coming up. All of them will discuss these problems in some shape and form. This presents an opportunity to get our voice heard; through a representative, a lawyer, a firm, a congressman, a participant...............
Examples: ACIP, ABLI, Companies, Paparelli, AILA, Congressman Diaz-Balart (FL), USCIS officials, Fragomen law firm, etc..........................
Since we do not get the luxury of meeting these people directly, we can try to use representation.
1:ACIP conference:
http://www.acip.com/acipweb.nsf/Con...26?OpenDocument
2: Center for Migration Studies
NYC Conference:
http://www.cmsny.org/27th-annual.htm
3: AILA Conference
AILA Conference in Philly.
http://www.aila.org/contentViewer.a...4,172,1948,4497
4: AILA Event
Tuesday, May 4, 2004:
Strategies to Deal with
Severe Backlogs
There are several events that are coming up. All of them will discuss these problems in some shape and form. This presents an opportunity to get our voice heard; through a representative, a lawyer, a firm, a congressman, a participant...............
Examples: ACIP, ABLI, Companies, Paparelli, AILA, Congressman Diaz-Balart (FL), USCIS officials, Fragomen law firm, etc..........................
Since we do not get the luxury of meeting these people directly, we can try to use representation.
1:ACIP conference:
http://www.acip.com/acipweb.nsf/Con...26?OpenDocument
2: Center for Migration Studies
NYC Conference:
http://www.cmsny.org/27th-annual.htm
3: AILA Conference
AILA Conference in Philly.
http://www.aila.org/contentViewer.a...4,172,1948,4497
4: AILA Event
Tuesday, May 4, 2004:
Strategies to Deal with
Severe Backlogs
Last edited by a moderator:
hidden_dragon
Registered Users (C)
Re: Events
I think this is the time for immigrationportal.org to act. Send someone to join these meeting and make our voice heard.
I think this is the time for immigrationportal.org to act. Send someone to join these meeting and make our voice heard.
Originally posted by cinta
There are several events that are coming up. ....
Re: Re: Events
As you are suggesting, I totally agree that the time has come for immigrationportal.org to act. I think till now we are doing our efforts in our individual capacities...now we have to integrate all these efforts under the immigrationportal.org banner. Till now in the immigrationportal.org, we are concentrating on the organizational aspects....
California team has done a good job and we need to emulate that in the VSC areas and other areas... California team has met a congressional representative chief of staff and they got a very positive feedback...we need to do that in our respective areas....
Regarding sending our representatives to the various meets as proposed by Cinta, to me it is a great idea...definitely, one has to look into it...
we have to look from our resources point of view as these meets are during the working days. If this meets are during the weekends, then without hesitation, we can send some one...
Everyone of us are suppose to do a full time job somewhere else(otherwise we will not get our green cards)...we have not reach that kind of financial muscle that we can appoint a person full time to work for our organization....till today we collected around $8500..
So, I take this opportunity to appeal for donations...we have to reach around $50,000/- to do any thing meaningful....
Many people might have doubts about the usage of funds ..I take this opportunity to assure you that we will maintain transparency....we will spend each dime with utmost care....Some people might be thinking that how can we contribute without any specific action plan....the other side of this argument is how can we plan anything without any clue of how much we might gather as contributions...it is a question of Chicken and egg problem.....somewhere the trust levels has to be there...
One thing is sure....no one is going to pocket the money...in US we got sufficient laws to tackle this kind of situations....OK...
Now coming back to the point,
I think in VSC we need to start some kind of campaigns...
I appeal to all of you who want to volunteer to send their names to anyone of the executive team or directors. If you have any idea you are most welcome...
We will coordinate with all of you...
-rajum
I
hidden_dragon and Cinta,Originally posted by hidden_dragon
I think this is the time for immigrationportal.org to act. Send someone to join these meeting and make our voice heard.
As you are suggesting, I totally agree that the time has come for immigrationportal.org to act. I think till now we are doing our efforts in our individual capacities...now we have to integrate all these efforts under the immigrationportal.org banner. Till now in the immigrationportal.org, we are concentrating on the organizational aspects....
California team has done a good job and we need to emulate that in the VSC areas and other areas... California team has met a congressional representative chief of staff and they got a very positive feedback...we need to do that in our respective areas....
Regarding sending our representatives to the various meets as proposed by Cinta, to me it is a great idea...definitely, one has to look into it...
we have to look from our resources point of view as these meets are during the working days. If this meets are during the weekends, then without hesitation, we can send some one...
Everyone of us are suppose to do a full time job somewhere else(otherwise we will not get our green cards)...we have not reach that kind of financial muscle that we can appoint a person full time to work for our organization....till today we collected around $8500..
So, I take this opportunity to appeal for donations...we have to reach around $50,000/- to do any thing meaningful....
Many people might have doubts about the usage of funds ..I take this opportunity to assure you that we will maintain transparency....we will spend each dime with utmost care....Some people might be thinking that how can we contribute without any specific action plan....the other side of this argument is how can we plan anything without any clue of how much we might gather as contributions...it is a question of Chicken and egg problem.....somewhere the trust levels has to be there...
One thing is sure....no one is going to pocket the money...in US we got sufficient laws to tackle this kind of situations....OK...
Now coming back to the point,
I think in VSC we need to start some kind of campaigns...
I appeal to all of you who want to volunteer to send their names to anyone of the executive team or directors. If you have any idea you are most welcome...
We will coordinate with all of you...
-rajum
I
Last edited by a moderator:
gc999999999
Registered Users (C)
Re: Re: Re: Events
My Friend,RajuM
Your arguments are convincing...
I paid My donation., ok...
Originally posted by rajum
hidden_dragon and Cinta,
As you are suggesting, I totally agree that the time has come for immigrationportal.org to act. I think till now we are doing our efforts in our individual capacities...now we have to integrate all these efforts under the immigrationportal.org banner. Till now in the immigrationportal.org, we are concentrating on the organizational aspects....
California team has done a good job and we need to emulate that in the VSC areas and other areas... California team has met a congressional representative chief of staff and they got a very positive feedback...we need to do that in our respective areas....
Regarding sending our representatives to the various meets as proposed by Cinta, to me it is a great idea...definitely, one has to look into it...
we have to look from our resources point of view as these meets are during the working days. If this meets are during the weekends, then without hesitation, we can send some one...
Everyone of us are suppose to do a full time job somewhere else(otherwise we will not get our green cards)...we have not reach that kind of financial muscle that we can appoint a person full time to work for our organization....till today we collected around $8500..
So, I take this opportunity to appeal for donations...we have to reach around $50,000/- to do any thing meaningful....
Many people might have doubts about the usage of funds ..I take this opportunity to assure you that we will maintain transparency....we will spend each dime with utmost care....Some people might be thinking that how can we contribute without any specific action plan....the other side of this argument is how can we plan anything without any clue of how much we might gather as contributions...it is a question of Chicken and egg problem.....somewhere the trust levels has to be there...
One thing is sure....no one is going to pocket the money...in US we got sufficient laws to tackle this kind of situations....OK...
Now coming back to the point,
I think in VSC we need to start some kind of campaigns...
I appeal to all of you who want to volunteer to send their names to anyone of the executive team or directors. If you have any idea you are most welcome...
We will coordinate with all of you...
-rajum
I
My Friend,RajuM
Your arguments are convincing...
I paid My donation., ok...
rajum,
I think that we now have about $10,000, if we include the checks that you collected from your friends.
Break Up : $6500 online collection + $2200 core team checks + $800 checks collected by rajum from his friends + $500 from checks by portal members.
It's time for every one to contribute today at www.immigrationportal.org
I think that we now have about $10,000, if we include the checks that you collected from your friends.
Break Up : $6500 online collection + $2200 core team checks + $800 checks collected by rajum from his friends + $500 from checks by portal members.
It's time for every one to contribute today at www.immigrationportal.org
Most of the explanation about the objectives of fund collection and the latest news about the fund collection can be found in the following thread :
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=122531&perpage=15&pagenumber=1
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=122531&perpage=15&pagenumber=1
Chain mails are really effective. Please check the below mentioned link and gather support for all the activities of ImmigrationPortal.org
Support ImmigrationPortal.org Activities
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=123375
Support ImmigrationPortal.org Activities
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=123375
Re: Re: Re: Re: Events
Thanks gc99999999..
-rajum
Originally posted by gc999999999
My Friend,RajuM
Your arguments are convincing...
I paid My donation., ok...
Thanks gc99999999..
-rajum
Re: Re: Re: Re: Events
gc999999999,
I sent you a PM.
-rajum
Originally posted by gc999999999
My Friend,RajuM
Your arguments are convincing...
I paid My donation., ok...
gc999999999,
I sent you a PM.
-rajum
Originally posted by unitednations
you guys persevered with the donation requests.
I just donated. Keep up the good work.
Thanks. We will not stop till all the congress men bombard this insensitive organization for the backlog delays. We know who this USCIS cares for and we will reach them (congress men) through the immigrationportal.org .
I hope that more people will join us now.