nk2006
10-16 04:29 PM
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: Ombudsman
======================
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
=======================
============================
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
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: Ombudsman
======================
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
=======================
============================
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
wallpaper Parole D#39;Amore, Frasi
Keeme
03-04 12:46 PM
Forgot to mention, my attorney did state that their office received an approval 2 weeks back whose priority date was not even close to current. She did not share the specifics.
I just checked my online status and it doesnt have any updates since 2007, states its received and pending... Not sure how current is the online info.
I also learned from my attorny office that a case with out having PD current was approved. Will get specifics today on that case.
I just checked my online status and it doesnt have any updates since 2007, states its received and pending... Not sure how current is the online info.
I also learned from my attorny office that a case with out having PD current was approved. Will get specifics today on that case.
kevinkris
06-02 07:19 PM
Goto TOP
2011 frasi d amore. arunmohan
cjain
08-11 10:35 AM
...the question is - where do you fall.
more...
amits
07-19 12:59 PM
Thanks, kvsagar123!!
We need more supporters and contributers like you!!
I am silent reader on this site from last one month. It is great to know lot of people are working hard behing the scenes and really appreciate what IV has done regarding bulletin fiasco.
I will make couple of friends to join IV and contribute.
July 19th : signed up for 50$ recurring contribution
We need more supporters and contributers like you!!
I am silent reader on this site from last one month. It is great to know lot of people are working hard behing the scenes and really appreciate what IV has done regarding bulletin fiasco.
I will make couple of friends to join IV and contribute.
July 19th : signed up for 50$ recurring contribution
vin13
03-12 04:11 PM
So you are looking for motivation? Your post do not indicate that you are looking for motivation. There are those who are undecided or who cannot find enough energy/motivation to do something, and those people need motivation. You don't fall in that category. You are pretty much convinced that you don't belong here. Now you are just spoiling the environment to make sure that others all leave looking at you and mad-dog bickering. And one need not be a rocket scientist to figure that out. Its obvious. There goes your flag for "award for motivation". What's next, you need a shoulder to cry?
.
If i did not care about it, i would not have replied so much in this post. Talking about spoiling the environment... read your own posts and you will know...
.
If i did not care about it, i would not have replied so much in this post. Talking about spoiling the environment... read your own posts and you will know...
more...
MahaBharatGC
08-08 02:42 PM
Pappu - it is good to know that we are using the current mass media in this techie country (actually world...should say). Anything "Open" would yield good results.
My suggestion is not only contribution but also careful screening of opinions would be needed.
I will definitely love to contribute.
My suggestion is not only contribution but also careful screening of opinions would be needed.
I will definitely love to contribute.
2010 Frasi per auguri di matrimonio
pappu
09-09 09:01 PM
Pappu,
I work at NPR and joined recently. I am going to work with my manager next week and convince them to get coverage for our rally.
That will be wonderful. Thanks
I work at NPR and joined recently. I am going to work with my manager next week and convince them to get coverage for our rally.
That will be wonderful. Thanks
more...
div_bell_2003
02-10 08:52 PM
OMG , what an utterly disgusting attitude !!! and on top of it, you are trying to "summarize" ???
I tried to stop myself from posting on this thread since it's based on one guy's circumstances and though I feel sorry for him ( the same way I feel sorry for all the wives and their families being extorted huge sum of money in the name of marriage ) , it's hard to judge these things knowing only one side of the story.
To each his own , but do you think your parents spent their whole lives bringing you up only to know that you think it's "legally" not right to help them monetarily ???? I guess, they should have not spent that extra money to send you to a good school/college or spend it on your tution classes and kicked you out of their house once you reach the age of 18 , like some parents do here ??? Man, it's hard for me to imagine how one can think like that about their parents.
When someone gets married they should be grown up enough to handle the money matters and put their foot down in case of any unreasonable demands, it applies to both husband and wife. The intricacies of the "Indian arranged marriage" are difficult to understand and the equations vary from case to case, so it's better not to come to a judgement and come out with something utterly nonsensical.
I'm sorry if my post is a bit rude , what rude comments beget rude reactions !
To summarize the root causes now that we discussed:
1. Parental interference to control their own child even after marriage. This is cause no 1 of this kind of tensions.
2. Immaturity on the part of children, to let their parents control their feelings. (This is partly due to in arranged marriages, children are closer to parents than the spouse in initial years). This is no 2 issue. Children simply fail to understand they are no more part of their parents family. I honestly feel these people are not really ready for marriage or understand what marriage is.
3. Money transactions. One side expecting money from other side which is not really acceptable. I will elaborate this point a bit more.
4. In cases of couples settled in US/UK, parents know that couples are making a LOT more than by Indian standards. Hence to secure their own old age comfort, everyone tries to exert influence.
On no 3, let us separate our "legal" obligations from "moral".
Morally it is right to send money to parents, but legally it is not. As you can strive but, you wont be fair to either set of parents. Hence I believe "money" should not be sent to parents. Your parents should have planned their own future, including humanitarian needs. Only if your other half agrees, then only you should send money. Otherwise, it is your and your spouse's money.
If your parents needed monetary support then that they should have made clear to other parents at the time of marriage. Not after marriage. If its a love marriage, then the boy/girl should have clearly told this requirement to the other half.
I tried to stop myself from posting on this thread since it's based on one guy's circumstances and though I feel sorry for him ( the same way I feel sorry for all the wives and their families being extorted huge sum of money in the name of marriage ) , it's hard to judge these things knowing only one side of the story.
To each his own , but do you think your parents spent their whole lives bringing you up only to know that you think it's "legally" not right to help them monetarily ???? I guess, they should have not spent that extra money to send you to a good school/college or spend it on your tution classes and kicked you out of their house once you reach the age of 18 , like some parents do here ??? Man, it's hard for me to imagine how one can think like that about their parents.
When someone gets married they should be grown up enough to handle the money matters and put their foot down in case of any unreasonable demands, it applies to both husband and wife. The intricacies of the "Indian arranged marriage" are difficult to understand and the equations vary from case to case, so it's better not to come to a judgement and come out with something utterly nonsensical.
I'm sorry if my post is a bit rude , what rude comments beget rude reactions !
To summarize the root causes now that we discussed:
1. Parental interference to control their own child even after marriage. This is cause no 1 of this kind of tensions.
2. Immaturity on the part of children, to let their parents control their feelings. (This is partly due to in arranged marriages, children are closer to parents than the spouse in initial years). This is no 2 issue. Children simply fail to understand they are no more part of their parents family. I honestly feel these people are not really ready for marriage or understand what marriage is.
3. Money transactions. One side expecting money from other side which is not really acceptable. I will elaborate this point a bit more.
4. In cases of couples settled in US/UK, parents know that couples are making a LOT more than by Indian standards. Hence to secure their own old age comfort, everyone tries to exert influence.
On no 3, let us separate our "legal" obligations from "moral".
Morally it is right to send money to parents, but legally it is not. As you can strive but, you wont be fair to either set of parents. Hence I believe "money" should not be sent to parents. Your parents should have planned their own future, including humanitarian needs. Only if your other half agrees, then only you should send money. Otherwise, it is your and your spouse's money.
If your parents needed monetary support then that they should have made clear to other parents at the time of marriage. Not after marriage. If its a love marriage, then the boy/girl should have clearly told this requirement to the other half.
hair Parole d#39;amore:
aj1234567
07-05 07:34 PM
Hi Folks-
We (5 People) work for IBM company, SFO, today we went personally to the congress men and we submit the letter which is provided in this forum and after that we called state senator office and we explained about our problem. We faxed and email the letter to the senator office, staff had taken my contact details and they told me that they will inform the solution in 2days.
Thx
Aj
We (5 People) work for IBM company, SFO, today we went personally to the congress men and we submit the letter which is provided in this forum and after that we called state senator office and we explained about our problem. We faxed and email the letter to the senator office, staff had taken my contact details and they told me that they will inform the solution in 2days.
Thx
Aj
more...
harsh
01-03 04:13 PM
Its very interesting reading everyone's stories. To me GC represents freedom. Freedom to work for whom you want to, in a field you want to, not to work for someone you don't want to. To start your own buisness, to do all those things which US is known for. This country encourages entrepreneurs and I would like to be one, one of these days :).
hot Aforismi frasi amore vero
chanduv23
02-25 07:33 AM
Yesterday, @seaworld, the oldest Shamu got frustrated and killed the trainer. Imagine the level of frustration that goes through her when she is doing the smae thing again and again for 20 years.
more...
house Poesie x tegioia mia!
julsun
01-03 12:01 PM
I checked with NSC today regarding our AP filed on Oct 8th, 2007. I was told that they are processing September 16th right now and it would be few weeks before they get to mine.
Thanks
Thanks
tattoo LA MIA MUSICA (Frasi d#39;amore 2
JunRN
08-11 01:09 PM
Visa Screen is needed to adjust your status. It is always better to have your visa screen ready. USCIS will send an RFE for that. However, while AOS is pending, EAD can be issued.
more...
pictures frasi d amore. Le Più Belle Frasi D#39;amore; Le Più Belle Frasi D#39;amore
alok_msh
07-14 02:39 PM
Sent 25$ Conf: 7YB5G-450FX
dresses messaggi, poesie d#39;amorelt;/
h1techSlave
07-06 10:53 AM
Do you have your 485 approved ? If not, you are not supposed to contribute to any political campaigns. You have to be a GC holder or citizen to contribute to political campaigns. Its illegal otherwise.
In 1040, we have a checkbox to contribute $3 towards presidential election contribution. If I check that box while in H1B, is that illegal?
Cheers,
h1techSlave
In 1040, we have a checkbox to contribute $3 towards presidential election contribution. If I check that box while in H1B, is that illegal?
Cheers,
h1techSlave
more...
makeup quot;Le più belle lettere d#39; AMORE
qplearn
11-20 09:58 PM
Work in progress; . Nice job; Sent you a PM.
girlfriend Uno di questi è Frasi
miththoo
03-04 01:08 PM
I too noticed soft LUD on 485s last week for me and my wife
hairstyles Frasi D Amore
indio0617
03-08 12:29 PM
Beppen, I joined the conference a little late and heard of Sen. Brownback's amendments for extension of J1 visa rule and no cap for nurses/physical therapists in H1. They will reconvene at 2.00 again and present more amendments if there are any
Hope this helps
Nothing happens when I click on the capital hearings link.... ? Is it on c-span too.?
Hope this helps
Nothing happens when I click on the capital hearings link.... ? Is it on c-span too.?
snathan
02-13 10:42 PM
Well. Your parents and in laws may not need your money. But defintely IV needs it. So contribute at
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23597&page=1000
I will. Thanks for rounding up.
Whats the meaning of this...
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23597&page=1000
I will. Thanks for rounding up.
Whats the meaning of this...
desi3933
08-04 04:07 PM
What is wrong with bonded to 1 job type ? You file AC21 but job type should be similar. You cannot become a company's Vice president if your labor was for Programmer, why are you picking on things ?
If one is lucky enough to get a job of company vice-president then I am sure, in that case, company can do another I-140 and get PD ported.
BTW, I am yet to see any such cases where someone is offered job offer for vice president whereas he/she is working as Programmer.
The guy sitting next to my cubicle is here more than 7 years, he's waiting for his 140, he's stuck with my employer while he wants to move since he has a 3 years degree than a masters, He was considered a EB-3 I. Don't you think he wants to know how many decades it will take for his dates to get current ?
If it doesn't apply on you doesn't mean these are not facts...
I wish that he (guy in next cubicle) gets I-140 approved soon.
>> He was considered a EB-3 I. Don't you think he wants to know how many decades it will take for his dates to get current?
If his qualifications does not match with EB-2 job qualification, there is nothing much can be done in that case.
I am sure that many people would like to know when their PD is going to be current, but this can not be answered by anyone. Visa Bulletin dates depends on various input factors and they keep changing every month.
The PD uncertainty is, obviously, a part of GC process and kinda unknown factor.
If one is lucky enough to get a job of company vice-president then I am sure, in that case, company can do another I-140 and get PD ported.
BTW, I am yet to see any such cases where someone is offered job offer for vice president whereas he/she is working as Programmer.
The guy sitting next to my cubicle is here more than 7 years, he's waiting for his 140, he's stuck with my employer while he wants to move since he has a 3 years degree than a masters, He was considered a EB-3 I. Don't you think he wants to know how many decades it will take for his dates to get current ?
If it doesn't apply on you doesn't mean these are not facts...
I wish that he (guy in next cubicle) gets I-140 approved soon.
>> He was considered a EB-3 I. Don't you think he wants to know how many decades it will take for his dates to get current?
If his qualifications does not match with EB-2 job qualification, there is nothing much can be done in that case.
I am sure that many people would like to know when their PD is going to be current, but this can not be answered by anyone. Visa Bulletin dates depends on various input factors and they keep changing every month.
The PD uncertainty is, obviously, a part of GC process and kinda unknown factor.
No comments:
Post a Comment