USCIS Move to Reduce RFEs
- Thread starter staycool
- Start date
reach_honey
Registered Users (C)
This thing would sucks. If lawyer make mistake or forge anything we are done.
So these would give employer good chance to delay your filing as long as possible.
So these would give employer good chance to delay your filing as long as possible.
smart_guy007
Registered Users (C)
MOTR
one can always file motion to reopen the case and appeal against the decision, but i doubt that it will get high priority.
one can always file motion to reopen the case and appeal against the decision, but i doubt that it will get high priority.
140_takes_4ever
Registered Users (C)
Can you post the contents? Couldn't find it on the link posted.
smart_guy007
Registered Users (C)
here is the article
05/05/2004: USCIS Move to Reduce RFEs
The AILA has reported that yesterday the USCIS started its move to reduce issuance of RFEs which had burdened the agency with tons of workloads leading to the delays in adjudication and backlogs. This move cuts both ways for the customers. But before we get to this point, let's find out the skeleton of the agency's new guidelines.
Outright Denial for Failure to Meet Basic Statutory/Regulatory "Substantive" Qualification Requirements: From today, the agency will deny petitions or applications if the filing fails to meet the "threshold" eligibility requirements for the petitions or applications. This will help the agency to throw out either frivolous or totally ineligible cases without wasting any time and money.
Outright Denial for Failure to Submit "Sufficient" Evidence to Establish Eligibility: When the petitioners or applicants submit the required basic threshold supporting documentation which meet the "initial" evidence requirement under the statute and regulation, the agency will not give additional opportunity to supplement the evidence by issuing RFE. Accordingly, it will be critically important that the petitioners or applicants go an extra mile to document not just de minimus threshold evidence but sufficient evidence to prove the threshold requirements.
RFE is required When "Initial" Records Are Missing: The statutes and regulations list the record requirements for filing of petitions or applications. If such records or evidence are missing, the agency will continue to issue RFE.
The positive impact of this move is obviously reduction of backlog. This web site has been advocating such move all along.
However, one should not ignore the negative side of this decision. People will see increased number of denials in the mail without RFEs. A couple of things people should be conscious in presenting a case from here on:
Meticulous Documentation for Threshold: One cannot sit on a minimal documentation anymore. The agency cited as an illustration issue of "employer's financial ability to pay the proffered salary" to the alien employees. If the least amount of evidence is submitted to establish this requirement, which the agency believes failed to prove this requirement, the case will be denied outright. From here on, "extra" documentation may be a prudent thing to do.
EAD vs. H-1B Strategy for I-485 Filers: The risk of working on EAD rather than H-1B status will increase substantially under the new policy. Once I-485 is denied, the alien loses the legal status immediately if the alien worked on EAD rather than a nonimmigrant status. The agency will immediately revoke the EAD. The only recourses available will be either an appeal or a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Meanwhile, those who work on H-1B will not be affected by such denial when it comes to their H-1B employment and legal status. Besides, those who work on EAD rather than a nonimmigrant status are subject to removal proceedings as they do not have any specific nonimmigrant status when the I-485 application is denied. Another important point to remember for the 7th-year H-1B extension eligible professionals. Under the current court decision, the denial of agency does not deprive them of eligibility for the 7th-year extension "if" an appeal has been filed timely. The court determined that "final decision" under the AC 21 that stops the eligibility for the 7th extension eligibility would not arrive until a decision is made by an appeal unit. It is thus likely that people will witness an increased number of appeals to seek remedy for the legal issues and to preserve their right to the 7th-year H-1B extension pending appeal.
05/05/2004: USCIS Move to Reduce RFEs
The AILA has reported that yesterday the USCIS started its move to reduce issuance of RFEs which had burdened the agency with tons of workloads leading to the delays in adjudication and backlogs. This move cuts both ways for the customers. But before we get to this point, let's find out the skeleton of the agency's new guidelines.
Outright Denial for Failure to Meet Basic Statutory/Regulatory "Substantive" Qualification Requirements: From today, the agency will deny petitions or applications if the filing fails to meet the "threshold" eligibility requirements for the petitions or applications. This will help the agency to throw out either frivolous or totally ineligible cases without wasting any time and money.
Outright Denial for Failure to Submit "Sufficient" Evidence to Establish Eligibility: When the petitioners or applicants submit the required basic threshold supporting documentation which meet the "initial" evidence requirement under the statute and regulation, the agency will not give additional opportunity to supplement the evidence by issuing RFE. Accordingly, it will be critically important that the petitioners or applicants go an extra mile to document not just de minimus threshold evidence but sufficient evidence to prove the threshold requirements.
RFE is required When "Initial" Records Are Missing: The statutes and regulations list the record requirements for filing of petitions or applications. If such records or evidence are missing, the agency will continue to issue RFE.
The positive impact of this move is obviously reduction of backlog. This web site has been advocating such move all along.
However, one should not ignore the negative side of this decision. People will see increased number of denials in the mail without RFEs. A couple of things people should be conscious in presenting a case from here on:
Meticulous Documentation for Threshold: One cannot sit on a minimal documentation anymore. The agency cited as an illustration issue of "employer's financial ability to pay the proffered salary" to the alien employees. If the least amount of evidence is submitted to establish this requirement, which the agency believes failed to prove this requirement, the case will be denied outright. From here on, "extra" documentation may be a prudent thing to do.
EAD vs. H-1B Strategy for I-485 Filers: The risk of working on EAD rather than H-1B status will increase substantially under the new policy. Once I-485 is denied, the alien loses the legal status immediately if the alien worked on EAD rather than a nonimmigrant status. The agency will immediately revoke the EAD. The only recourses available will be either an appeal or a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Meanwhile, those who work on H-1B will not be affected by such denial when it comes to their H-1B employment and legal status. Besides, those who work on EAD rather than a nonimmigrant status are subject to removal proceedings as they do not have any specific nonimmigrant status when the I-485 application is denied. Another important point to remember for the 7th-year H-1B extension eligible professionals. Under the current court decision, the denial of agency does not deprive them of eligibility for the 7th-year extension "if" an appeal has been filed timely. The court determined that "final decision" under the AC 21 that stops the eligibility for the 7th extension eligibility would not arrive until a decision is made by an appeal unit. It is thus likely that people will witness an increased number of appeals to seek remedy for the legal issues and to preserve their right to the 7th-year H-1B extension pending appeal.
140_takes_4ever
Registered Users (C)
Thanks for the update.
This whole thing is a bloody farce. They say they are helping us but actually they are kicking us. How can a rule be effective retrospecitively? How can they suddenly decide that the threshold of eligibility needs to be well documented and that any deviation from it will result in a rejection?
This is like INS trying to make up for the years it has slept by being over zealous and pro-active. Bloody hell, a lot of rejections are going to pour in. I do hope everyone's lawyers have done a competitive job in filing the applications.
This whole thing is a bloody farce. They say they are helping us but actually they are kicking us. How can a rule be effective retrospecitively? How can they suddenly decide that the threshold of eligibility needs to be well documented and that any deviation from it will result in a rejection?
This is like INS trying to make up for the years it has slept by being over zealous and pro-active. Bloody hell, a lot of rejections are going to pour in. I do hope everyone's lawyers have done a competitive job in filing the applications.
The text does say..
"From today, the agency will deny petitions or applications if the filing fails to meet the "threshold" eligibility requirements for the petitions or applications."
I wonder if that means cases filed from today , or cases in the system?
We'll see - especially as the prevailing advice til now has been "give them what they ask for". Seems very unfair to me.
"From today, the agency will deny petitions or applications if the filing fails to meet the "threshold" eligibility requirements for the petitions or applications."
I wonder if that means cases filed from today , or cases in the system?
We'll see - especially as the prevailing advice til now has been "give them what they ask for". Seems very unfair to me.
ghost-rider
Registered Users (C)
Ok then get get ready for backlog of Motion to repon then. It does't make a difference they will get all the EVLS and big load of company paperworks supporting documents against there rejection. Its like dig another hole to comeout from another . and u know how long this motion to reopen will take another 2 yrs . Those assh.... just bought another 2 yrs of wait time from 40-50% of applications.
Meticulous Documentation for Threshold by the sponsaring company has to be done at I-140 stage. Does it effect a I-485 case with already I-140 approved?. Beacuse at I-485 filing it is the individuals information that needs to be sent to BCIS.
I think this rule will effect concurrent I-140 and I-485 cases. Correct me if I am wrong .
WAC 02103XXXXX
I think this rule will effect concurrent I-140 and I-485 cases. Correct me if I am wrong .
WAC 02103XXXXX
BTW what is threshold" eligibility requirements for the petitions or applications". Is it defined any where or it just means the ability to pay. What happens if a person switched the employment pursuant to AC21. ?.
If the USCIS is going to ask for financial statements, then it is going to be an RFE again.
If the USCIS is going to ask for financial statements, then it is going to be an RFE again.