somegchuh
01-03 04:11 PM
I think you bring up very valid points. For a lot of ppl who have stayed away from family/extended family for so long, they may not like the constant interference.
"I miss my parents" is not quantifiable but what about the paying back the debt by supporting your aging parents? Let me make the question a little broader, isn't every immigrant divided between doing what's best for the children and supporting the parents?
for some it is money, for others it is about taking care of parents etc.
for me it is all about where I would like to live, grow and bring up my child. to me the answer is very clear. while this country is not perfect, no country on this planet is. if a human makes an objective list based on quantifiable pros and cons, the decision is very easy to make.
as for stuff like "I miss my parents" that is not quantifiable and should never figure in the discussion. what is the guarantee that you can return to your home country and live in the same city as you parents do? what happens if your kids don't want the grandparents to interfere in their lives? what happens if you cannot take constant interference from friends and extended family?
my reasons may come across as cold and calculating. however, it is an inhospitable world we live in and it is up to us to provide the best possible cocoon for our immediate family and that is exactly what I intend to do.
"I miss my parents" is not quantifiable but what about the paying back the debt by supporting your aging parents? Let me make the question a little broader, isn't every immigrant divided between doing what's best for the children and supporting the parents?
for some it is money, for others it is about taking care of parents etc.
for me it is all about where I would like to live, grow and bring up my child. to me the answer is very clear. while this country is not perfect, no country on this planet is. if a human makes an objective list based on quantifiable pros and cons, the decision is very easy to make.
as for stuff like "I miss my parents" that is not quantifiable and should never figure in the discussion. what is the guarantee that you can return to your home country and live in the same city as you parents do? what happens if your kids don't want the grandparents to interfere in their lives? what happens if you cannot take constant interference from friends and extended family?
my reasons may come across as cold and calculating. however, it is an inhospitable world we live in and it is up to us to provide the best possible cocoon for our immediate family and that is exactly what I intend to do.
logiclife
04-26 04:48 PM
Actually, its called form I-907.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=79ef78264614d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
Read more on USCIS.gov about I-907.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=79ef78264614d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
Read more on USCIS.gov about I-907.
Ram_C
09-28 07:25 PM
They are working overtime for it, hopefully 24 hours as well. This is my fear even before this announcement that visa numbers be wasted again.
Maybe we can volunteer to adjudicate each of our own case...lol!
or may be recent EADs (ex H4 visa holders) will do a better job
Maybe we can volunteer to adjudicate each of our own case...lol!
or may be recent EADs (ex H4 visa holders) will do a better job
snathan
05-02 01:13 PM
Good job Admin2.
Folks with ITINs,
Please file for SSNs quoting this stimulus package and get the refund. If someone tries and SSA refuses, we can take it up with legislators or even pursue litigation.
I will try with SSA and update you...may be next month.
Folks with ITINs,
Please file for SSNs quoting this stimulus package and get the refund. If someone tries and SSA refuses, we can take it up with legislators or even pursue litigation.
I will try with SSA and update you...may be next month.
more...
willwin
09-12 10:49 AM
Let us continue a debate on
a) Pros of this idea
b) Cons of this idea
c) Alternative we might have.
Also, please do not get emotionally attach to an idea let democratically select that is best for the community.
Please limit to those ideas that are executable and within the bounds of law.
In my opinion, we should do this:
Just send two information to USCIS, DOS, President, VP, First Lady and all Congress person of the following:
1. 1st info should have a photocopy of our degree certificate(s). On the same page, print your expereince in years and total tax paid till date to the US government.
2. On a fresh page, type in all the H1B/L VISA approval information and type in bold, we were wanted/invited here legally (and admitted via H1/L).
And, mention that our I140 is approved which means the immigration department has validated our eligibility to become PR.
Ask a question (larger font) on the same page, why keep us on limbo?
This would keep the whole thing short and sweet. We are explicitly saying that we are legals. And we were invited here - legally. We are approved by immigration team to be a PR.
If we could send couple of thousands of letters, I am sure it would have impact as much as any other letter we have in mind.
We are not humiliating them, we are just expressing our frustrations but in mass. May be we can say something like, "Legal Techie slaves in the land of liberty" or "Immigration process that enslave Legal Techies". But, we should keep it short.
As always, ignore this idea if you guys dont like it.
a) Pros of this idea
b) Cons of this idea
c) Alternative we might have.
Also, please do not get emotionally attach to an idea let democratically select that is best for the community.
Please limit to those ideas that are executable and within the bounds of law.
In my opinion, we should do this:
Just send two information to USCIS, DOS, President, VP, First Lady and all Congress person of the following:
1. 1st info should have a photocopy of our degree certificate(s). On the same page, print your expereince in years and total tax paid till date to the US government.
2. On a fresh page, type in all the H1B/L VISA approval information and type in bold, we were wanted/invited here legally (and admitted via H1/L).
And, mention that our I140 is approved which means the immigration department has validated our eligibility to become PR.
Ask a question (larger font) on the same page, why keep us on limbo?
This would keep the whole thing short and sweet. We are explicitly saying that we are legals. And we were invited here - legally. We are approved by immigration team to be a PR.
If we could send couple of thousands of letters, I am sure it would have impact as much as any other letter we have in mind.
We are not humiliating them, we are just expressing our frustrations but in mass. May be we can say something like, "Legal Techie slaves in the land of liberty" or "Immigration process that enslave Legal Techies". But, we should keep it short.
As always, ignore this idea if you guys dont like it.
EternityInLimbo
05-02 10:43 PM
PD - Nov 2001, regular, EB2 - No 45 day letter yet - How about that ?
PD Sept 2001, RIR EB2 (completed MD SWA Nov 2003 before going BEC), response confirmation filed Jan 2005, no further word... Just got my 10th-year H-1B extension approved.
How's this for a sad, twisted case of one-upmanship!
Almost glad for the company, but at the same time really sorry for it.
I mentioned this in another thread, but I heard from my law firm that the Philly BEC was prioritizing resource allocation to entering cases into their system, rather than in reviewing (and approving) the cases...
PD Sept 2001, RIR EB2 (completed MD SWA Nov 2003 before going BEC), response confirmation filed Jan 2005, no further word... Just got my 10th-year H-1B extension approved.
How's this for a sad, twisted case of one-upmanship!
Almost glad for the company, but at the same time really sorry for it.
I mentioned this in another thread, but I heard from my law firm that the Philly BEC was prioritizing resource allocation to entering cases into their system, rather than in reviewing (and approving) the cases...
more...
kevinkris
05-23 03:07 PM
Toppp
Sachin_Stock
08-23 10:09 AM
Those who initiated the panic attack, I want them to explain what so frightening about this memo!? Please put forth your points.
more...
leo2606
07-14 08:17 PM
I guess we need to bump until the Admins make it sticky.
avis
01-05 11:46 AM
My PD is Dec 2002. Still waiting for the 45 day letter.
Dallas Backlog Center
Dallas Backlog Center
more...
Humhongekamyab
02-18 05:33 PM
i had run these numbers a while back. for sure EB2 will reach the end of 2005 this year. i just hope its done systematically so that they clear everybody with an EB2 2005 PD this year.
I have a different question. My PD is Dec 2005 but my 485 was filed in August 2005. Do you think they will approve (or work) on my 485 once my PD is current or will they wait for the US CIS processing time to move to August 2008 (which I don't think for India will happen anytime soon).
I have a different question. My PD is Dec 2005 but my 485 was filed in August 2005. Do you think they will approve (or work) on my 485 once my PD is current or will they wait for the US CIS processing time to move to August 2008 (which I don't think for India will happen anytime soon).
slammer
07-11 07:57 AM
wooohooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooo
I assume you like the new cutoff-dates ????
Rita ;)
I assume you like the new cutoff-dates ????
Rita ;)
more...
delhirocks
07-28 06:55 PM
Are you sure it was Atlanta and not Chicago?. Your timeline suggests it was applied in Chicago.
My company applied for PERM ALC EB-2 category at Atlanta on 18th June 2007, got it approved on 20th June. Received hard copy on 26th June.
My company applied for PERM ALC EB-2 category at Atlanta on 18th June 2007, got it approved on 20th June. Received hard copy on 26th June.
axp817
11-26 10:21 AM
Sharing what I read on IV - some members reported their 140 status reverted to 'pending' along with a recent LUD when their ex-employer revoked already approved 140. In your case, status is not changed. Keep an eye on status. Hopefully, CIS will not do another wrongful denial, crossing my fingers. Best Luck bro!
Thank you, I'll keep everyone posted if anything changes.
I called USCIS customer service to ask for the attorney name on file and they said that they didn't have access to that information and I would have to get an Infopass appointment for that. Given the crap that ChanduV had to deal with (for changing jobs on AC21) during his infopass appointment, it is probably best I just wait to ask that question until my second biometric appointment is due in a few months.
Thanks,
Thank you, I'll keep everyone posted if anything changes.
I called USCIS customer service to ask for the attorney name on file and they said that they didn't have access to that information and I would have to get an Infopass appointment for that. Given the crap that ChanduV had to deal with (for changing jobs on AC21) during his infopass appointment, it is probably best I just wait to ask that question until my second biometric appointment is due in a few months.
Thanks,
more...
Milind123
09-13 12:17 PM
mohitb272, wolfsappi, kanaihya and of course sam
Thank you for your contribution. kanaihya no contribution is small. I consider it a very big contribution because you made it in spite of having a big debt.
We need one more newbee to squeeze the trigger so I can have the pleasure of taking the last shot in this round. :cool:
Thank you for your contribution. kanaihya no contribution is small. I consider it a very big contribution because you made it in spite of having a big debt.
We need one more newbee to squeeze the trigger so I can have the pleasure of taking the last shot in this round. :cool:
GooblyWoobly
08-11 02:01 AM
I think the monday deadline makes sense. See, USCIS said they are going to issue the receipting update every week. Last week's update said, 7/1/2007 for EB cases at Nebraska. How would you think it would look if, after a whole week, USCIS issues another update, with the same date. Embarrassing, Eh?
So, since they have to issue the update on Friday, they put this deadline. However, they probably realize that it's not possible for them to issue receipts of all July 2nd filers by Friday, so, they move the internal deadline to Monday. That's probably the reason they did not issue a receipting update today.
Just putting two and two together.
So, since they have to issue the update on Friday, they put this deadline. However, they probably realize that it's not possible for them to issue receipts of all July 2nd filers by Friday, so, they move the internal deadline to Monday. That's probably the reason they did not issue a receipting update today.
Just putting two and two together.
more...
akhilmahajan
09-14 02:04 PM
Ppl dont deserve, its their right. If they understand the meaning of deserve, they would be in DC with families.
But we educated ppl still think we dont deserve.
I dont know when we will come out of our comfort zone.
Its very easy to find 1000 cowards but always hard to find 1 brave person.
I am sure all our educated brethern are BRAVE ppl, but i think hesitant to show it outside their comfort zone.
Go IV Go
It's on September 18th or Never.
But we educated ppl still think we dont deserve.
I dont know when we will come out of our comfort zone.
Its very easy to find 1000 cowards but always hard to find 1 brave person.
I am sure all our educated brethern are BRAVE ppl, but i think hesitant to show it outside their comfort zone.
Go IV Go
It's on September 18th or Never.
ItIsNotFunny
10-21 11:06 AM
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Guys,
This is one of the most serious issue we are facing in current time. Lay offs are happening left and right and on top of that employers learned that AC21 is giving troubles, they started squeezing more (I myself is partially victim of that).
We need sincere efforts sending emails to ombudsman. This will not take more than 5 minutes as NK2006 put efforts on even giving you the email template.
I sincerely urge everyone to send emails to addresses NK2006 mentioned above and even request your collegues, spouse to do so. We need volume to show our presence.
One more request, please take one more minute and make sure that you post here that you sent emails. This will give us real picture and give others motivation too!
I sent my emails (actually twice ;)).
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Guys,
This is one of the most serious issue we are facing in current time. Lay offs are happening left and right and on top of that employers learned that AC21 is giving troubles, they started squeezing more (I myself is partially victim of that).
We need sincere efforts sending emails to ombudsman. This will not take more than 5 minutes as NK2006 put efforts on even giving you the email template.
I sincerely urge everyone to send emails to addresses NK2006 mentioned above and even request your collegues, spouse to do so. We need volume to show our presence.
One more request, please take one more minute and make sure that you post here that you sent emails. This will give us real picture and give others motivation too!
I sent my emails (actually twice ;)).
learning01
04-25 05:39 PM
Go back and look at the forum postings. There are much more amenable and practical suggestions made. This PD thing doesn't pass the basic test: was there a precedence or prior history, can it be done and does it lessen the time for one to apply for I-485 and GC. Does it reduce backlog?
PD as the date of < insert whatever> doesn't pass this basic test.
I have to respectfully disagree with you on that...just because it was never brought up doesn't mean it should never be taken up. I think you core members know better...if this does not sound practial...End of discussion.
Thanks
PD as the date of < insert whatever> doesn't pass this basic test.
I have to respectfully disagree with you on that...just because it was never brought up doesn't mean it should never be taken up. I think you core members know better...if this does not sound practial...End of discussion.
Thanks
bsbawa10
09-10 04:03 PM
Completely Agree with you. Rather have some process than none.
I agree 100% too. Just feel so helpless.
I agree 100% too. Just feel so helpless.
GCwaitforever
04-30 02:11 PM
I believe the 140 backlog is artificial. They processed only 2k cases in one month. How come they finished all EADs in 3 months for all June/July filers? There is something more to all this than meets the eye.
Bootmline is they want to make it hard for us one way or the other. Btw, I had just come out of BEC and got stuck with 140 now.
When did your labor process from BEC? Do you know if there are any pending cases with National processing center, which is the successor of BECs?
Bootmline is they want to make it hard for us one way or the other. Btw, I had just come out of BEC and got stuck with 140 now.
When did your labor process from BEC? Do you know if there are any pending cases with National processing center, which is the successor of BECs?
No comments:
Post a Comment