Saralayar
03-10 05:55 PM
We could also do a signature/petition campaign that would focus on 'American Citizens' supporting our effort. We should aim at getting a lot of signatures. Afterall there have to be hundreds of thousands of formerly H1B holders who are citizens now; at least they would support our effort.
Excellent idea JBR. Why don't you create a letter template and put it in IV. If we have the facility to sign electronically, it will be nice. Later, it can be sent electronically to all Congress Members. Let us try to create a slogan for our campaign. Any IV member can shed their ideas on this.
Is PAPPU or any IV Core members following this thread?. PAPPU we need your involvement in this and make this as another IV campaign immediately...
Excellent idea JBR. Why don't you create a letter template and put it in IV. If we have the facility to sign electronically, it will be nice. Later, it can be sent electronically to all Congress Members. Let us try to create a slogan for our campaign. Any IV member can shed their ideas on this.
Is PAPPU or any IV Core members following this thread?. PAPPU we need your involvement in this and make this as another IV campaign immediately...
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
pmb76
07-14 07:34 PM
We should not let go of this.
Being a congressman he should not misuse his first amendment to utter false statements.
Dear congressman...i pity your lack of knowledge on H1B program and USCIS policies... We can help you understand better....Please do not make a fool out of your self.... I hope people do not look at you as a moron...and we wish you all the best in your political career.
Ha..Ha :D - That is funny. He indeed should be sent an e-mail saying just that.
Being a congressman he should not misuse his first amendment to utter false statements.
Dear congressman...i pity your lack of knowledge on H1B program and USCIS policies... We can help you understand better....Please do not make a fool out of your self.... I hope people do not look at you as a moron...and we wish you all the best in your political career.
Ha..Ha :D - That is funny. He indeed should be sent an e-mail saying just that.
amitjoey
07-09 06:34 PM
This is great news, it will definately make a good story.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
bestofall
09-30 05:52 PM
Guys
please report your Approvals in this thread . wish you luck for EB2 / EB3 guys whose PD s are current in October 2009
“If you think IV as an organization, IV’s leadership team and many members who donated their time and money were in anyways helpful in your GC journey, please consider making a “Thank You” donation to IV. Also, keep visiting IV and support your fellow immigrants stuck in this GC queue” __________________
please report your Approvals in this thread . wish you luck for EB2 / EB3 guys whose PD s are current in October 2009
“If you think IV as an organization, IV’s leadership team and many members who donated their time and money were in anyways helpful in your GC journey, please consider making a “Thank You” donation to IV. Also, keep visiting IV and support your fellow immigrants stuck in this GC queue” __________________
more...
sanju
05-15 10:24 AM
Guys:
Based on the June Bulletin, I will be filing my I485 in June.
Now, I have H1-B(with my current company till Feb'2010 that I just got approved a month back.(not stamped in passport yet)
-- Should I file EAD for myself ( I probably would want to change jobs after 180 days) ? Or is it better to be on H1-B.
-- Should I file AP for both myself and my wife(she is on H4) ?
Also, when I decide to change jobs using AC21 rule, is it better to tranfer
H1-B to a new company or if I have EAD, how does that work ?
Any inputs will be greatly appreciated..!!
Thanks
If I were you, I would apply for EAD and AP for spouse and self immediately. You never know when you may need it. Say, your company announces a merger and your entire department is wiped out and you have to leave before coming Friday. It would be almost impossible to find another employer who will send the new H-1B application before Friday. In such instances EAD will help to keep you in status. EAD card for spouse will allow her to apply for SSN and thus Drivers license. AP for wife will help to travel out of country after you have used EAD. So in short, I would apply for all the docs for all members of the family. This could result in spending couple of hundred dollars but will help secure peace of mind.
Based on the June Bulletin, I will be filing my I485 in June.
Now, I have H1-B(with my current company till Feb'2010 that I just got approved a month back.(not stamped in passport yet)
-- Should I file EAD for myself ( I probably would want to change jobs after 180 days) ? Or is it better to be on H1-B.
-- Should I file AP for both myself and my wife(she is on H4) ?
Also, when I decide to change jobs using AC21 rule, is it better to tranfer
H1-B to a new company or if I have EAD, how does that work ?
Any inputs will be greatly appreciated..!!
Thanks
If I were you, I would apply for EAD and AP for spouse and self immediately. You never know when you may need it. Say, your company announces a merger and your entire department is wiped out and you have to leave before coming Friday. It would be almost impossible to find another employer who will send the new H-1B application before Friday. In such instances EAD will help to keep you in status. EAD card for spouse will allow her to apply for SSN and thus Drivers license. AP for wife will help to travel out of country after you have used EAD. So in short, I would apply for all the docs for all members of the family. This could result in spending couple of hundred dollars but will help secure peace of mind.
royus77
06-29 05:12 PM
If rumors are true there is no point in sending I485 application if State dept announces that Visa is not available on July 2nd Morning. If confusion or rumor is cleared then Lawyers can send the application. That stand may be correct. But what if State Dept announces on Wednesday. Then those who are filed on Monday and Tuesday will get EAD and AP. I hope these rumors will not become true
If they have info about non-availbility they will announce now rather than waiting for monday morning . Also they will be in deep trouble by moving the dates without accepting single application . As AILA reported they will do it either on monday evening/tuesday quotaing the number of application received
If they have info about non-availbility they will announce now rather than waiting for monday morning . Also they will be in deep trouble by moving the dates without accepting single application . As AILA reported they will do it either on monday evening/tuesday quotaing the number of application received
more...
lazycis
10-16 08:55 PM
One idea is to give GC to AOS applicants regardless of namecheck result, if all
other security checks are OK and let the namecheck run in background . If the namecheck turns out critical , cancel the GC & deport the applicant.
But USCIS and lawyers will loose big time , because of reduced demand for APs,EADs etc.
This is exactly as Congress intended it to be. There is no mandatory requirement to complete NC before GC can be issued in the INA. There is a provision to cancel GC in the INA.
other security checks are OK and let the namecheck run in background . If the namecheck turns out critical , cancel the GC & deport the applicant.
But USCIS and lawyers will loose big time , because of reduced demand for APs,EADs etc.
This is exactly as Congress intended it to be. There is no mandatory requirement to complete NC before GC can be issued in the INA. There is a provision to cancel GC in the INA.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
andy garcia
04-18 11:11 AM
Thanks for the replies fellas, this isn't a renewal I am talking about. This is the first time I have applied for an EAD. BTW, does anyone know what's involved in converting from H4 to EAD status i.e.
1. Do you need to apply for SSN before you take a job offer?
A. Yes, you can not start working w/o a SSN
2. EAD by itself is enough to accept employment?
A. No, refer to 1
3. Can you take jobs/resign as and when you please or do you have to somehow get back to H4 status if you quit job on EAD?
A. You can work wherever you want to.
4. Does use of EAD by H4, change non-immigrant status of H1 worker?
A. No, it does not.
Thanks
andy
1. Do you need to apply for SSN before you take a job offer?
A. Yes, you can not start working w/o a SSN
2. EAD by itself is enough to accept employment?
A. No, refer to 1
3. Can you take jobs/resign as and when you please or do you have to somehow get back to H4 status if you quit job on EAD?
A. You can work wherever you want to.
4. Does use of EAD by H4, change non-immigrant status of H1 worker?
A. No, it does not.
Thanks
andy
more...
amsgc
06-17 01:08 AM
Hi
I have a question regarding g28 , did u file this form when you did it yourself ..
can an attorney file g28 later on if there is a RFE , who else can file g28
I don't think you need to fill it yourself. But, for the second question, someone with experience in dealing with RFEs should enlighten.
I have a question regarding g28 , did u file this form when you did it yourself ..
can an attorney file g28 later on if there is a RFE , who else can file g28
I don't think you need to fill it yourself. But, for the second question, someone with experience in dealing with RFEs should enlighten.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
WaldenPond
03-02 05:33 PM
Here is the news that is very important but often overlooked in the immigration spectrum:
"Senate OKs Patriot Act renewal sends to House"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11638713/
Why this is the news is good and relevant from the point of view EB provisions?
Because EB provisions (section 8001) were thrown out of S.1932 because of the differences between key players over the Patriot act. Now that this is out of the picture, at least there is one less thing to worry about.
"Senate OKs Patriot Act renewal sends to House"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11638713/
Why this is the news is good and relevant from the point of view EB provisions?
Because EB provisions (section 8001) were thrown out of S.1932 because of the differences between key players over the Patriot act. Now that this is out of the picture, at least there is one less thing to worry about.
more...
Hunter
05-09 01:57 PM
You guys are just too lazy to study new technologies that is ever changing. You are more interested in having beers and watching football
Let us talk about the "skills" introduced by H1/L1/offshore companies
a) One guy takes the phone interview for 15 other guys with "skills" they preted to have
b) Lying on the resume with "skills" that you don't have, so that you can learn the "skill" at the expense of the client
c) "Skill" in Violating B1 visa laws and sending people on B1 to do actual work to client
d) "Skill" in violating L1 law which is used to drive down the wages by 20-30%
e) "Skill" demonstrated by indian offshorers to enter into a contract with a large corporation where they will provide warm bodies in exchange for a very low billing rate. Client wouldn't have any ability to interview the incoming cosultant, which means the offshorer employee is learning at the expense of the foolish client. Then that will be touted as "savings".
f) "Skill" of fly-by-night operators to shave off 70% of the billing rate through a 6-level pyramid of contracting companies
Should I add to this list of "skills" further?
Let us talk about the "skills" introduced by H1/L1/offshore companies
a) One guy takes the phone interview for 15 other guys with "skills" they preted to have
b) Lying on the resume with "skills" that you don't have, so that you can learn the "skill" at the expense of the client
c) "Skill" in Violating B1 visa laws and sending people on B1 to do actual work to client
d) "Skill" in violating L1 law which is used to drive down the wages by 20-30%
e) "Skill" demonstrated by indian offshorers to enter into a contract with a large corporation where they will provide warm bodies in exchange for a very low billing rate. Client wouldn't have any ability to interview the incoming cosultant, which means the offshorer employee is learning at the expense of the foolish client. Then that will be touted as "savings".
f) "Skill" of fly-by-night operators to shave off 70% of the billing rate through a 6-level pyramid of contracting companies
Should I add to this list of "skills" further?
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
cnag
09-09 04:40 PM
I could not reach the following reps the first time in the morning. I called them again now:
Tammy Baldwin 202-225-2906 - Congresswoman will vote in favour of the bill
Rick Boucher 202-225-3861 - Will pass on the message
William Delahunt 202-225-3111 - Will pass on the message
Guys, Please keep calling. will take less than a minute per call
Tammy Baldwin 202-225-2906 - Congresswoman will vote in favour of the bill
Rick Boucher 202-225-3861 - Will pass on the message
William Delahunt 202-225-3111 - Will pass on the message
Guys, Please keep calling. will take less than a minute per call
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
Hunter
05-09 01:42 PM
American college kids spend most of their time partying and sex. They do not study. Only a very very few really study
As usual typical stereotyping devoid of any reality and isn't even worth a reply. It is clear that knowledge of the above poster about ameriacn teenager comes from watching MTV.
No wonder otherwise tolerant americans are saying "F*** You" to fraudulent indian companies trying to commit fraud under the guise of globalization.
As usual typical stereotyping devoid of any reality and isn't even worth a reply. It is clear that knowledge of the above poster about ameriacn teenager comes from watching MTV.
No wonder otherwise tolerant americans are saying "F*** You" to fraudulent indian companies trying to commit fraud under the guise of globalization.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
Libra
09-15 09:58 AM
Congrats Chandu!!!
Mine is somewhat similar
09/10/2010 - CPO emails for self and wife (Friday)
........
Mine is somewhat similar
09/10/2010 - CPO emails for self and wife (Friday)
........
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
puddonhead
10-09 05:15 PM
Your router may have the problem.
You need to buy a good router. Your phone is good with long range.
WiFi is 2.4 GHZ.
5.8 GHZ phone will have many disadvantages.
The BEST choice for cordless phone for range, and lack of interfearance is a DECT phone.. the 1.9Ghz range is a licenced radio frequency for the exclusive use of cordless phones, unlike any other cordless phone frequency (900Mhz, 2.4Ghz, 5.8Ghz.) and as it is lower in frequency (aside from 900 Mhz) it operates with the furthest distance than any cordless phone.
Aah - okay, I stand corrected. I did not know DECT phones run on 1.9 GHz.
Anyway - both the links I provided are DECT phones. So they should still be good if you are in the market for a phone :-)...
You need to buy a good router. Your phone is good with long range.
WiFi is 2.4 GHZ.
5.8 GHZ phone will have many disadvantages.
The BEST choice for cordless phone for range, and lack of interfearance is a DECT phone.. the 1.9Ghz range is a licenced radio frequency for the exclusive use of cordless phones, unlike any other cordless phone frequency (900Mhz, 2.4Ghz, 5.8Ghz.) and as it is lower in frequency (aside from 900 Mhz) it operates with the furthest distance than any cordless phone.
Aah - okay, I stand corrected. I did not know DECT phones run on 1.9 GHz.
Anyway - both the links I provided are DECT phones. So they should still be good if you are in the market for a phone :-)...
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
neelu
10-11 03:01 PM
Congratulations to all those who are finally getting their GCs after a month long wait (a much longer wait, I know). :)
I am beginning to find out that having your priority date current does not automatically mean GC. It is just another waiting area where it is another lottery game. When you are not current, you know there are a lot of people going thru the same thing, and you hope that one day dates would be current and that things would be fine. Unfortunately I dont feel that way now. And strangely, it feels kinda lonely here in CurrentLand!
Kewlchap, thank you for the detailed information. It is very useful.
My PD is 12Jan2005, EB2-I , NSC. I have already talked to two IOs using POJ method. The first one (was very nice) told me that my case was in transit to an IO officer (she said that it was an intra-office transit) and that I should give it 4 days. I called back one week later (on 10/8/2009) and this time did not get as nice a lady - she said that may case was waiting to be assigned to an officer and that I should wait 90 days. I dont know which one to believe or if I can believe both.:confused:
A few questions:
1) Should we contact senators or congressmen, or both? What is the recommended method to contact them - through phone or through snail mail?
2) I understand that there are still many people before my PD that are waiting for their GC and I wish them the best. Should I give myself more time (say till the last week of the month for others before me to get approved) before I try the various approaches that Kewlchap and others have suggested? Or do you recommend trying all the approaches one by one right away?
3) For form 7001, do you think it should be treated as the last resort, or will I be able to save some time by starting with this? Is there any advantage if the attorney submits this for me?
Thanks in advance and good luck to all.
Folks,
Got the email about being registered as a new permanent resident on Oct 8th. Thanks to SoP, caliguy, fatjoe and all others on the forum who helped / gave me support. I essentially learned that USCIS will not move quickly on their own, they need to be pursued just like any other govt. office in India. I give my time line below for an idea of what I did. If anyone is waiting still, I sincerely think that you should do all of POJ/SR/Infopass/Senator/Ombudsman.
Timeline:
Sept 1st - became current
Sept 5th - contacted NSC several times through POJ. Finally, a very nice lady told me that my case was not even assigned to an officer. Said that she will send in a request to the contractor to pull my case out and get it assigned to an officer.
Sept 11th - Case pulled out of storage area and moved to a smaller waiting room [got this info later, but this is what had happened]
Sept 13th: Opened SR.
Sept 18th - Infopass: Told me that my case was assigned to an officer on Sept 11th (which was wrong really) and that I should wait 30 days. Also told me that my FP were renewed on March 9th and all my checks were clear.
Sept 20th: Contacted Senator's office. Said they will send in inquiry.
Sept 25: Response to SR. Case under review. Wait 30 days.
Sept 27th: Letter from Senator saying my case was under review and I need to wait 30 days.
Oct 2nd: Contacted NSC again through POJ method. A nice lady, Terry, told me that my case was assigned to officer on Sept 30th. She said, "your case was pulled out of storage and put in a rather large holding area where it was till Sept 30th." Also confirmed that my FP was renewed and other checks were clear. Said, just wait, it will happen soon.
Oct 6th: Sent 7001 form to USCIS Ombudsman.
Oct 8th: Got decision email.
Learnings: Pursue your case as much as you can. Call NSC, but be polite. They are usually in good mood on Thu/Friday evenings and if you make some small talk, they will help you. I kept records of which NSC IO is rude and if they picked up the next time, I would just keep the phone down. In fact, the lady who helped me remembered me 'coz I managed to reach her 3 times. Dont just ask for status, say that you have called in the past and so far you know xxxx about your case. Some IOs are nice, some are rude. Nice ones actually tried to explain the entire storage area, holding area, supervisor supply chain to me. I think I kind of understand the process that happens at NSC just through these conversations now. Approach Ombudsman asap with form 7001. Call your Senator office and ask to speak to the immigration person. They are very understanding and will help you.
Long-ish email, but thought that I will put it out there, and it might help someone stuck in this morass. If you need more info, ask me / PM me. I will be around these forums for some more time.
I am beginning to find out that having your priority date current does not automatically mean GC. It is just another waiting area where it is another lottery game. When you are not current, you know there are a lot of people going thru the same thing, and you hope that one day dates would be current and that things would be fine. Unfortunately I dont feel that way now. And strangely, it feels kinda lonely here in CurrentLand!
Kewlchap, thank you for the detailed information. It is very useful.
My PD is 12Jan2005, EB2-I , NSC. I have already talked to two IOs using POJ method. The first one (was very nice) told me that my case was in transit to an IO officer (she said that it was an intra-office transit) and that I should give it 4 days. I called back one week later (on 10/8/2009) and this time did not get as nice a lady - she said that may case was waiting to be assigned to an officer and that I should wait 90 days. I dont know which one to believe or if I can believe both.:confused:
A few questions:
1) Should we contact senators or congressmen, or both? What is the recommended method to contact them - through phone or through snail mail?
2) I understand that there are still many people before my PD that are waiting for their GC and I wish them the best. Should I give myself more time (say till the last week of the month for others before me to get approved) before I try the various approaches that Kewlchap and others have suggested? Or do you recommend trying all the approaches one by one right away?
3) For form 7001, do you think it should be treated as the last resort, or will I be able to save some time by starting with this? Is there any advantage if the attorney submits this for me?
Thanks in advance and good luck to all.
Folks,
Got the email about being registered as a new permanent resident on Oct 8th. Thanks to SoP, caliguy, fatjoe and all others on the forum who helped / gave me support. I essentially learned that USCIS will not move quickly on their own, they need to be pursued just like any other govt. office in India. I give my time line below for an idea of what I did. If anyone is waiting still, I sincerely think that you should do all of POJ/SR/Infopass/Senator/Ombudsman.
Timeline:
Sept 1st - became current
Sept 5th - contacted NSC several times through POJ. Finally, a very nice lady told me that my case was not even assigned to an officer. Said that she will send in a request to the contractor to pull my case out and get it assigned to an officer.
Sept 11th - Case pulled out of storage area and moved to a smaller waiting room [got this info later, but this is what had happened]
Sept 13th: Opened SR.
Sept 18th - Infopass: Told me that my case was assigned to an officer on Sept 11th (which was wrong really) and that I should wait 30 days. Also told me that my FP were renewed on March 9th and all my checks were clear.
Sept 20th: Contacted Senator's office. Said they will send in inquiry.
Sept 25: Response to SR. Case under review. Wait 30 days.
Sept 27th: Letter from Senator saying my case was under review and I need to wait 30 days.
Oct 2nd: Contacted NSC again through POJ method. A nice lady, Terry, told me that my case was assigned to officer on Sept 30th. She said, "your case was pulled out of storage and put in a rather large holding area where it was till Sept 30th." Also confirmed that my FP was renewed and other checks were clear. Said, just wait, it will happen soon.
Oct 6th: Sent 7001 form to USCIS Ombudsman.
Oct 8th: Got decision email.
Learnings: Pursue your case as much as you can. Call NSC, but be polite. They are usually in good mood on Thu/Friday evenings and if you make some small talk, they will help you. I kept records of which NSC IO is rude and if they picked up the next time, I would just keep the phone down. In fact, the lady who helped me remembered me 'coz I managed to reach her 3 times. Dont just ask for status, say that you have called in the past and so far you know xxxx about your case. Some IOs are nice, some are rude. Nice ones actually tried to explain the entire storage area, holding area, supervisor supply chain to me. I think I kind of understand the process that happens at NSC just through these conversations now. Approach Ombudsman asap with form 7001. Call your Senator office and ask to speak to the immigration person. They are very understanding and will help you.
Long-ish email, but thought that I will put it out there, and it might help someone stuck in this morass. If you need more info, ask me / PM me. I will be around these forums for some more time.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
InTheMoment
08-04 09:21 PM
Very relevant info regarding FBI namecheck:
http://immigrationportal.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16343&d=1179435102
Relevant part below:
Testimony of Michael Cannon,
Section Chief
National Name Check Program Section
Records Management Division
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
Feb 9th, 2006, US District Court
Southern District of Florida
(1) 1 am currently the Section Chief of the National Name Check Program Section ("NNCPS"), formerly pa rt of the Record/Information Dissemination Section ("RIDS"), Records Management Division ("RMD"), at the Federal Bureau of Investigation Headqua rters ("FBIHQ")
in Washington , D.C. I have held this position since March 7, 2005 . This declaration supplements my January 30, 2006 declaration previously submitted in this ma tter and is intended to provide further information in accordance with the order issued in the above captioned case
on February 9, 2006 by the Honorable United States Dist rict Judge Ursula Ungaro-Henagcs .
(2) This Honorable Court is seeking additional information on the FBI' s name check process, including the amount of time, on average, required to complete a name check requiring a secondary manual search; the average time required to retrieve and review an FBI record for
possible derogatory information ; and why it took three years to complete the plaintiffs name check.
(3) The amount of time, on average , required to complete a name check requiring a secondary manual search varies from case to case. Because there is a backlog of cases currently pending, it is difficult to compute an overall average. As mentioned in my January 30, 2006
declaration, approximately 68% of the name checks submitted by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) are electronically returned to USCIS Headquarters as having "No Record" within 48 hours, with a secondary manual search usually identifying an additional 22% of the requests as having a "No Record," for an overall 90% "No Record " response rate . The additional 22% identified as having a "No Record" are returned to USCIS Headquarters within 30 - 60 days of the date of their original submission. As mentioned in my
January 30, 2006 declaration, the remaining 10% are identified as possibly being the subject of an FBI record, which requires the retrieval and review of the record .
(4) Many times, the delay associated with the processing of the remaining 10% is not so much the actual time it takes to process a name check, but the time it takes for an analyst to get to the name check request in order to process it. This is due to the constant volume of name
checks submitted by USCIS, in addition to the FBI's other customers, combined with the FBI's current work on processing the residual name checks from the 2 .7 million name check requests submitted by USCIS in November 2002, as compared to the National Name Check Program's
(NNCP's) limited resources. So far this fiscal year, the NNCP has received a total average of over 62,400 name checks per week, with over 27,700 coming from USCIS on a weekly basis .
(5) The average time required to retrieve and review an FBI record for possible derogatory information is case specific, it depends on the number of files an analyst must obtain (which is dictated by the number of "hits" on a name), the location and availability of those files, and the amount of information contained in a file . If a file is located at the Alexandria Records Center located in Alexandria, Virginia, an analyst will be able to obtain a file within a matter of days . If a file is located in a field office or other FBI location, the applicable information must be requested from that location. 'here are over 265 different FBI locations that could house information pertinent to a name check request, If a file is electronically available, an analyst will have immediate access to a file. Additionally, once an analyst receives the file, or the pertinent information contained in a file, the analyst must review it for possible derogatory information . The length of time this takes depends on the amount of information in a file and its complexity.
(6)The name check request for the plaintiff Maria Trujillos was submitted by USCIS 28 on March 25, 2003 . The timing was such that the submission of the plaintiffs name check request immediately followed the submission of the 2 .7 million names resubmitted by USCIS November 2002 , which unfortunately delayed NNCP' s ability to immediately address the plaintiffs name check request. Plaintiffs name check could not be immediately addressed because the submission of the 2.7 million name checks further depleted NNCP's ability to quickly address its current workload at that time , in addition to hindering NNCP's ability to address future submissions, which included the plaintiff s name check . This, combined with the factors outlined in paragraphs (3) - (5) above, contributed to the time it took to complete the plaintiffs name check .
http://immigrationportal.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16343&d=1179435102
Relevant part below:
Testimony of Michael Cannon,
Section Chief
National Name Check Program Section
Records Management Division
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
Feb 9th, 2006, US District Court
Southern District of Florida
(1) 1 am currently the Section Chief of the National Name Check Program Section ("NNCPS"), formerly pa rt of the Record/Information Dissemination Section ("RIDS"), Records Management Division ("RMD"), at the Federal Bureau of Investigation Headqua rters ("FBIHQ")
in Washington , D.C. I have held this position since March 7, 2005 . This declaration supplements my January 30, 2006 declaration previously submitted in this ma tter and is intended to provide further information in accordance with the order issued in the above captioned case
on February 9, 2006 by the Honorable United States Dist rict Judge Ursula Ungaro-Henagcs .
(2) This Honorable Court is seeking additional information on the FBI' s name check process, including the amount of time, on average, required to complete a name check requiring a secondary manual search; the average time required to retrieve and review an FBI record for
possible derogatory information ; and why it took three years to complete the plaintiffs name check.
(3) The amount of time, on average , required to complete a name check requiring a secondary manual search varies from case to case. Because there is a backlog of cases currently pending, it is difficult to compute an overall average. As mentioned in my January 30, 2006
declaration, approximately 68% of the name checks submitted by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) are electronically returned to USCIS Headquarters as having "No Record" within 48 hours, with a secondary manual search usually identifying an additional 22% of the requests as having a "No Record," for an overall 90% "No Record " response rate . The additional 22% identified as having a "No Record" are returned to USCIS Headquarters within 30 - 60 days of the date of their original submission. As mentioned in my
January 30, 2006 declaration, the remaining 10% are identified as possibly being the subject of an FBI record, which requires the retrieval and review of the record .
(4) Many times, the delay associated with the processing of the remaining 10% is not so much the actual time it takes to process a name check, but the time it takes for an analyst to get to the name check request in order to process it. This is due to the constant volume of name
checks submitted by USCIS, in addition to the FBI's other customers, combined with the FBI's current work on processing the residual name checks from the 2 .7 million name check requests submitted by USCIS in November 2002, as compared to the National Name Check Program's
(NNCP's) limited resources. So far this fiscal year, the NNCP has received a total average of over 62,400 name checks per week, with over 27,700 coming from USCIS on a weekly basis .
(5) The average time required to retrieve and review an FBI record for possible derogatory information is case specific, it depends on the number of files an analyst must obtain (which is dictated by the number of "hits" on a name), the location and availability of those files, and the amount of information contained in a file . If a file is located at the Alexandria Records Center located in Alexandria, Virginia, an analyst will be able to obtain a file within a matter of days . If a file is located in a field office or other FBI location, the applicable information must be requested from that location. 'here are over 265 different FBI locations that could house information pertinent to a name check request, If a file is electronically available, an analyst will have immediate access to a file. Additionally, once an analyst receives the file, or the pertinent information contained in a file, the analyst must review it for possible derogatory information . The length of time this takes depends on the amount of information in a file and its complexity.
(6)The name check request for the plaintiff Maria Trujillos was submitted by USCIS 28 on March 25, 2003 . The timing was such that the submission of the plaintiffs name check request immediately followed the submission of the 2 .7 million names resubmitted by USCIS November 2002 , which unfortunately delayed NNCP' s ability to immediately address the plaintiffs name check request. Plaintiffs name check could not be immediately addressed because the submission of the 2.7 million name checks further depleted NNCP's ability to quickly address its current workload at that time , in addition to hindering NNCP's ability to address future submissions, which included the plaintiff s name check . This, combined with the factors outlined in paragraphs (3) - (5) above, contributed to the time it took to complete the plaintiffs name check .
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
mamit
02-26 05:53 AM
Hi All
I received the passport from VFS (h1-B renewal - PIMS check delay) after a wait of 2 Months... All the best with your case !!
congrats man. I remember reading you angry emails about the delay. good luck.
I received the passport from VFS (h1-B renewal - PIMS check delay) after a wait of 2 Months... All the best with your case !!
congrats man. I remember reading you angry emails about the delay. good luck.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
leoindiano
10-14 09:02 PM
my case is assigned to IO on sept 17th. Still waiting.... EB2I - Nov 2004. TSC...
SunnySurya
08-07 04:09 PM
Thank you. I am not worried about the three companies I know of , I am worried about other 3000 companies that I don't know of.
I also beleive, it is not the companies that are evil. It is the system that provides the incentive. And I am trying to take away that incentive.
First: I appreciate that you have not lost your cool yet despite all the opposition and rude posts against you. We will not close the thread as long as the discussion remains civil.
While I personally do not support the lawsuit idea because it divides the community in two parts and there are better ways to help the community. You can try to help positively for the greater good for everyone or run a negative campaign that will help some but hurt others who are also like you and are genuinely following the law. I also think it will be expensive and may not have a lifeline. As IV members we need to all work together to fix the system. This was the basis of founding IV. The aim was never to look after our own selfish interests and hurt others who are like us. We never discriminated between different EB categories or country of changeability. The intent of our fight is not to deny others their greencards and get ours first, but to allow everyone get their greencards. The intent is to have the system be efficient and work the way it was intended. IV core team has never made action items or ask lists in campaigns to suit their own selfish needs.
Now in this post you have raised a serious issue. If a fraud is going on, do collect evidence and file a complaint against it. If consulting companies are making money by gaming the system, drag those companies in your complaint. Help punish such people who are gaming the system. IV community will appreciate that.
There is some wisdom needed here to draw a line between selfishness and working with honest intentions to clean up the system.
I also beleive, it is not the companies that are evil. It is the system that provides the incentive. And I am trying to take away that incentive.
First: I appreciate that you have not lost your cool yet despite all the opposition and rude posts against you. We will not close the thread as long as the discussion remains civil.
While I personally do not support the lawsuit idea because it divides the community in two parts and there are better ways to help the community. You can try to help positively for the greater good for everyone or run a negative campaign that will help some but hurt others who are also like you and are genuinely following the law. I also think it will be expensive and may not have a lifeline. As IV members we need to all work together to fix the system. This was the basis of founding IV. The aim was never to look after our own selfish interests and hurt others who are like us. We never discriminated between different EB categories or country of changeability. The intent of our fight is not to deny others their greencards and get ours first, but to allow everyone get their greencards. The intent is to have the system be efficient and work the way it was intended. IV core team has never made action items or ask lists in campaigns to suit their own selfish needs.
Now in this post you have raised a serious issue. If a fraud is going on, do collect evidence and file a complaint against it. If consulting companies are making money by gaming the system, drag those companies in your complaint. Help punish such people who are gaming the system. IV community will appreciate that.
There is some wisdom needed here to draw a line between selfishness and working with honest intentions to clean up the system.
pappu
06-24 05:48 PM
for all those whose lawyers allow multiple filings: what are you filling in for I-485 Part 3 section A "Have you ever before applied for permanent resident status in the U.S"?
In my case both applications are proceeding in parallel and I dont know which lawyer will end up filing first!
The one you apply next should should have the option checked.
Word of advice:
Understand the full implications if you want to file 2. I have gone into its details over the past week and this weekend, and would not advice someone to do it just for the heck of it. You should have VERY genuine reasons for it due to some risks involved. This is a grey area and there is no law for it or against it. There can be some risks and advantages.
In my case both applications are proceeding in parallel and I dont know which lawyer will end up filing first!
The one you apply next should should have the option checked.
Word of advice:
Understand the full implications if you want to file 2. I have gone into its details over the past week and this weekend, and would not advice someone to do it just for the heck of it. You should have VERY genuine reasons for it due to some risks involved. This is a grey area and there is no law for it or against it. There can be some risks and advantages.
