retropain
09-01 11:08 AM
What's particularly interesting is the number of 'scare words' used in this selected testimony on aspects of the CIR bill. Its a lot like Loo Dobbs "War" on the middle class. Its clear CIS, Nusa, FAIR provide the script to him on immigration matters. I knew Loo wasn't that creative in the first place
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
apahilaj
07-19 07:11 AM
Hi Seahawks,
I had a question regarding your post - you mentioned that if you are filing with your spouse, there's another form you have to file. I filed along with my spouse and I did not have to fill out any special form; my attorney did not ask for any special form for my spouse and neither did he ask for my tax information.
Can you please provide details of this form you are talking about? My application has already reached USCIS in the begining of July.
Am I expecting an RFE on it? Thanks.
I had a question regarding your post - you mentioned that if you are filing with your spouse, there's another form you have to file. I filed along with my spouse and I did not have to fill out any special form; my attorney did not ask for any special form for my spouse and neither did he ask for my tax information.
Can you please provide details of this form you are talking about? My application has already reached USCIS in the begining of July.
Am I expecting an RFE on it? Thanks.
django.stone
02-01 03:22 PM
and congratulations!
vbkris77
12-27 02:29 PM
So many bills are introduced but most don't even see day of light.. I personally don't see this ever passing the congress.. For most treaty countries this feature is already available and its called E1/E2 visa.. There is no limit on number of people and number years for visa.
Hope some of you might have seen the Wall Street Journal story this weekend on visas/Green Cards for owners of start-up businesses. (Foreign Entrepreneurs Eye StartUp Visa Act - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052748704694004576020001550357580-lMyQjAxMTAwMDIwNTEyNDUyWj.html) )
According to the story there is broad consensus for a program to offer green card to foreign nationals who can bring in as low as $100,000 to start a new business in U.S. While this may not be an option for most of the folks in this forum, the premise of the proposed law has something in common with all of us.
The law is proposed by senators John Kerry (D) and Richard Lugar (R) on the principle that immigrants are more willing to be entrepreneurial and hence offering permanent residency to foreigners who will open a small business will increase the employment opportunities in U.S. Endorsing the entrepreneurial mind of new immigrants WSJ sights that; �Immigrants are nearly 30% more likely to start a business than non-immigrants � and �about a third of Silicon Valley technology firms were started by Indian or Chinese entrepreneurs� . If the proposed bill is attempting to attract skilled and entrepreneurial minded immigrants into U.S. as a means to increase employment why not U.S. look into the pool of highly skilled and eager folks waiting for a green card for many years? Wouldn�t these folks be highly likely to open a new small business than someone from outside of the U.S. with no U.S. business background? If we are to take cues from the one third of the Silicon Valley entrepreneurs wouldn�t a good number of these people waiting for green card open up the starts up businesses that senators Kerry and Lugar are hoping to .
Would it be worth writing on behalf of Immigration Voice to senators Kerry and Lugar to consider the pool of potential entrepreneurs minded people already in U.S. and have been waiting for an opportunity to realize their entrepreneurial dreams? I don�t have the actual numbers. Aren�t there about 30 or 40,000 people who have been in U.S. with an approved immigration petition but waiting for a green card for many years? Could IV put forward a win-win propositions for everyone?
Hope some of you might have seen the Wall Street Journal story this weekend on visas/Green Cards for owners of start-up businesses. (Foreign Entrepreneurs Eye StartUp Visa Act - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052748704694004576020001550357580-lMyQjAxMTAwMDIwNTEyNDUyWj.html) )
According to the story there is broad consensus for a program to offer green card to foreign nationals who can bring in as low as $100,000 to start a new business in U.S. While this may not be an option for most of the folks in this forum, the premise of the proposed law has something in common with all of us.
The law is proposed by senators John Kerry (D) and Richard Lugar (R) on the principle that immigrants are more willing to be entrepreneurial and hence offering permanent residency to foreigners who will open a small business will increase the employment opportunities in U.S. Endorsing the entrepreneurial mind of new immigrants WSJ sights that; �Immigrants are nearly 30% more likely to start a business than non-immigrants � and �about a third of Silicon Valley technology firms were started by Indian or Chinese entrepreneurs� . If the proposed bill is attempting to attract skilled and entrepreneurial minded immigrants into U.S. as a means to increase employment why not U.S. look into the pool of highly skilled and eager folks waiting for a green card for many years? Wouldn�t these folks be highly likely to open a new small business than someone from outside of the U.S. with no U.S. business background? If we are to take cues from the one third of the Silicon Valley entrepreneurs wouldn�t a good number of these people waiting for green card open up the starts up businesses that senators Kerry and Lugar are hoping to .
Would it be worth writing on behalf of Immigration Voice to senators Kerry and Lugar to consider the pool of potential entrepreneurs minded people already in U.S. and have been waiting for an opportunity to realize their entrepreneurial dreams? I don�t have the actual numbers. Aren�t there about 30 or 40,000 people who have been in U.S. with an approved immigration petition but waiting for a green card for many years? Could IV put forward a win-win propositions for everyone?
more...
ivy55
08-01 09:38 AM
Please note the reponse I got from service center to a query sent by the senators office
""
The scheduling of the biometrics is not based on the FBI fingerprints or name check being clearedfirst. ""
All waiting for FP leave no stone unturned, call, take infopass, etc
Thanks
""
The scheduling of the biometrics is not based on the FBI fingerprints or name check being clearedfirst. ""
All waiting for FP leave no stone unturned, call, take infopass, etc
Thanks
augustus
07-13 01:33 PM
You are right. Suits are the way to go. Let them know we are no scum bags!!!! GO PEOPLE! Dress up... Have your day!!
more...
gxr
10-15 10:41 AM
Folks - My (EB3) I140 got approved.
RD - Oct 7, 2006
Service Inquiry - Sept 18, 2007
Approval Date: Oct 15, 2007
RD - Oct 7, 2006
Service Inquiry - Sept 18, 2007
Approval Date: Oct 15, 2007
hazishak
07-31 11:25 PM
My wife is planning to go for H4 visa stamping in October. My question is can she go alone and what kind of documents she need. Our I-485 applications have reached USCIS on July 2nd. Any reply will be greatly appreciated.
more...
eastindia
04-08 08:39 AM
Looking at this issue, isnt' it USCIS who is at fault here ?
How can they allow the employer to "reuse" the original labor when employee1 has already used it for his I-140 approval ?
This is definitely a USCIS mess. Employees/beneficiaries shouldn't be paying the price for USCIS's fault.
This is really wonderful.
USCIS should be screwing people who used Substitute labor. They should even revoke or issue RFEs to all peoples who got Greencard using Substitute labor. I am sure the queue is get very very short if this happens. let us not allow these people who jumped in this queue.
I am writing to USCIS about this. Let us all write to USCIS, Ombudsman and also on USCIS blog about this.
How can they allow the employer to "reuse" the original labor when employee1 has already used it for his I-140 approval ?
This is definitely a USCIS mess. Employees/beneficiaries shouldn't be paying the price for USCIS's fault.
This is really wonderful.
USCIS should be screwing people who used Substitute labor. They should even revoke or issue RFEs to all peoples who got Greencard using Substitute labor. I am sure the queue is get very very short if this happens. let us not allow these people who jumped in this queue.
I am writing to USCIS about this. Let us all write to USCIS, Ombudsman and also on USCIS blog about this.
srkamath
07-16 10:47 PM
^^
immi_seeker, you applied for an EAD extension in a normal time frame, he/she didn't apply too early.
We know for a fact that they give 1 year EAD the first time round, we are not sure if they also give renewals i exactly one year increments.
Assuming that an adjudicating officer approved your EAD, I still believe that they did so because they expect to decide on your case by the end of this year, which is good news for all of us.
I'm not trying to falsely raise your hopes here, but i'm just drawing optimistic conclusions.
immi_seeker, you applied for an EAD extension in a normal time frame, he/she didn't apply too early.
We know for a fact that they give 1 year EAD the first time round, we are not sure if they also give renewals i exactly one year increments.
Assuming that an adjudicating officer approved your EAD, I still believe that they did so because they expect to decide on your case by the end of this year, which is good news for all of us.
I'm not trying to falsely raise your hopes here, but i'm just drawing optimistic conclusions.
more...
jayleno
12-15 03:44 PM
:D Nice find. Does it really say where he is from or where the wife has to go in case of the husband being laid off in 4 months time? It just says the person was born in India. I really dont want to extend this...please stop responding.
Read line 2 of this thread, OP says he is EB3-India , so why should he not send his wife to India ??
Read line 2 of this thread, OP says he is EB3-India , so why should he not send his wife to India ??
pappu
02-10 01:18 PM
Check the job requirement for your position. What is the qualification needed for your position?
That will answer you.
That will answer you.
more...
ujjwal_p
06-10 02:19 AM
Received RFE for primary applicant (myself) and spouse.
Please submit evidence of lawful presence from October 1998 until August 17, 2007.
The documents may include the following:
A) a photo copy of form I-797 for all extensions and change of status
B) photo copy of form I-20 or IAP66 school records (front and back) including all school annotations
c) Photocopy (front and back) of applicant's Form I-94 Arrival/Departure Record
Below is my immigration timeline
CLASS ------ VALID FROM ------ VALID TO ------ Comments
H1-B -------- 5/16/1995 -------- 5/17/1998
H1-B -------- 5/17/1998 -------- 5/17/2001
H1-B -------- 12/23/1999 ------- 6/30/2001
H1-B -------- 7/1/2001 --------- 9/30/2001
0-1 --------- 10/3/2001 ------ 10/1/2004 ------ Stamped in Chennai
EAD --------- 8/4/2004 -------- 8/3/2005 ------- EB1 denied 1/15/2005
0-1 --------- 5/13/2005 ------- 5/12/2008 ------ Stamped in Chennai
0-1 --------- 4/3/2007 --------- 3/13/2010
0-1 ---------- 5/2/2207 --------- 5/12/2009
After 1/15/05 (EB-1 denial)
- Left the country on 6/15/05 (less than 6 months)
- During this time, applied for O-1 visa and got approved
- Got visa stamping in Chennai with O-1 visa
Do you see any issues with my response ?
Pretty long timeline and multiple visa types. Not sure how O-1 works and whether it is a dual intent visa. In any case, looks like the RFE is pretty straight forward and they only need the historical documents, possibly because the record is pretty long.
**- This is not legal advise.
Please submit evidence of lawful presence from October 1998 until August 17, 2007.
The documents may include the following:
A) a photo copy of form I-797 for all extensions and change of status
B) photo copy of form I-20 or IAP66 school records (front and back) including all school annotations
c) Photocopy (front and back) of applicant's Form I-94 Arrival/Departure Record
Below is my immigration timeline
CLASS ------ VALID FROM ------ VALID TO ------ Comments
H1-B -------- 5/16/1995 -------- 5/17/1998
H1-B -------- 5/17/1998 -------- 5/17/2001
H1-B -------- 12/23/1999 ------- 6/30/2001
H1-B -------- 7/1/2001 --------- 9/30/2001
0-1 --------- 10/3/2001 ------ 10/1/2004 ------ Stamped in Chennai
EAD --------- 8/4/2004 -------- 8/3/2005 ------- EB1 denied 1/15/2005
0-1 --------- 5/13/2005 ------- 5/12/2008 ------ Stamped in Chennai
0-1 --------- 4/3/2007 --------- 3/13/2010
0-1 ---------- 5/2/2207 --------- 5/12/2009
After 1/15/05 (EB-1 denial)
- Left the country on 6/15/05 (less than 6 months)
- During this time, applied for O-1 visa and got approved
- Got visa stamping in Chennai with O-1 visa
Do you see any issues with my response ?
Pretty long timeline and multiple visa types. Not sure how O-1 works and whether it is a dual intent visa. In any case, looks like the RFE is pretty straight forward and they only need the historical documents, possibly because the record is pretty long.
**- This is not legal advise.
my2cents
08-04 03:53 PM
Not True
All dual intention like H1b/H4 are treated differently. For those AOS applicants where they also have H1b/H4 status ( Not necessarily VISA stamped) ..they need to be here when filed and if they leave after filing then neither I-485 or I-131 will get cancelled.
After approval, you can mail them.
I have known 2 person whose spouses came without problem.
Now , If you are F1 or B1 pure non immigrant VISA and you leave without it being approved then you are in problem.
All dual intention like H1b/H4 are treated differently. For those AOS applicants where they also have H1b/H4 status ( Not necessarily VISA stamped) ..they need to be here when filed and if they leave after filing then neither I-485 or I-131 will get cancelled.
After approval, you can mail them.
I have known 2 person whose spouses came without problem.
Now , If you are F1 or B1 pure non immigrant VISA and you leave without it being approved then you are in problem.
more...
wildcat1313
03-28 12:43 PM
Can anyone please respond? What should I do?
pappu
12-05 07:56 AM
At the time i was 2 semesters away from my Masters plus the mess my previous attorney had caused, my new attorney felt comfortable filing under EB3 because he felt i would have problems at the I-140 stage if i did not compete my Masters by that time.
In 2001 my attorney expected to have my GC by 2003 the latest and he was not counting on this mess with DBEC.
Hope all of us are through with this nightmare by end of 2007.http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2453
In 2001 my attorney expected to have my GC by 2003 the latest and he was not counting on this mess with DBEC.
Hope all of us are through with this nightmare by end of 2007.http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2453
more...
GCNirvana007
04-08 03:05 PM
Trying to reach you guys for a while now.
1. How many active users are there as of today.
2. What are the media we have connection with.
Thanks.
1. How many active users are there as of today.
2. What are the media we have connection with.
Thanks.
ambals03
01-11 11:24 AM
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr43ih/pdf/BILLS-112hr43ih.pdf
gc_chahiye
06-11 06:02 PM
You may port the PD as well as get 3 yrs extension based on previously approved I-140 regardless of employer as long as I-140 is not revoked.
what happens to the H1 extension if the I-140 is subsequently revoked?
what happens to the H1 extension if the I-140 is subsequently revoked?
hopefulgc
07-16 01:12 PM
this post is a great example of diplomatically writing a lot and actually saying nothing ... way to go!
Feed from my lawyer
Several sources have now reported that high-level agency discussions on solutions to the July 2007 Visa Bulletin crisis are underway and could result in a new opportunity for certain eligible foreign nationals to submit adjustment of status applications. Apparently, no final decision has been reached, and it is difficult to predict with absolute certainty what the final outcome will be or when an announcement might be made.
__________________________________________________ _______
Several sources have reported that high-level discussions are now taking place within the government concerning a possible solution to the July 2007 Visa Bulletin crisis. As a result of these discussions, there have been indications that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) could change course on its position regarding acceptance of applications for adjustment of status, in whole or in part, and create a new opportunity to submit adjustment cases. Some reports have indicated that cases submitted on July 2 will now be accepted for filing, while other reports have suggested that there will be a completely new window of opportunity to submit cases. Apparently, several options are being considered.
Sources caution that the government has not reached a final decision on this matter, and there are no concrete details concerning the mechanics of any future filing opportunity. It is important to note that in the current climate of swift policy reversals and rampant rumors, it is possible that any tentative agreement on reopening an adjustment submission period could falter
Feed from my lawyer
Several sources have now reported that high-level agency discussions on solutions to the July 2007 Visa Bulletin crisis are underway and could result in a new opportunity for certain eligible foreign nationals to submit adjustment of status applications. Apparently, no final decision has been reached, and it is difficult to predict with absolute certainty what the final outcome will be or when an announcement might be made.
__________________________________________________ _______
Several sources have reported that high-level discussions are now taking place within the government concerning a possible solution to the July 2007 Visa Bulletin crisis. As a result of these discussions, there have been indications that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) could change course on its position regarding acceptance of applications for adjustment of status, in whole or in part, and create a new opportunity to submit adjustment cases. Some reports have indicated that cases submitted on July 2 will now be accepted for filing, while other reports have suggested that there will be a completely new window of opportunity to submit cases. Apparently, several options are being considered.
Sources caution that the government has not reached a final decision on this matter, and there are no concrete details concerning the mechanics of any future filing opportunity. It is important to note that in the current climate of swift policy reversals and rampant rumors, it is possible that any tentative agreement on reopening an adjustment submission period could falter
cagedcactus
11-21 06:54 AM
Yes pappu, you are right.
I just sent the email explaining the proper differences between H-1B and Immigration catagories.
I just sent the email explaining the proper differences between H-1B and Immigration catagories.
