Folks - anybody got EAD/AP renewed recently? How long did it take? I am at day 67 and am wondering whether some kind of follow-up is needed.
Printable View
Folks - anybody got EAD/AP renewed recently? How long did it take? I am at day 67 and am wondering whether some kind of follow-up is needed.
Thank you very much. We have postponed my travel to March just to wait out this whole thing. I do understand a lot more questions. I saw on Trackitt as well people returning back from India visit talking about extra questions but no major issues as such.
Quote:
Originally Posted by almost
Hi imdeng
I have renewed it back in November and it took less than half of what it already took for you. But May be it was just timing with number of applications etc. Also I heard about the new rule where you can still work for another 180 days or something even if you are waiting for EAD approval (beyond the expiry of current EAD). Is that official already ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
I was referring to this :Quote:
Originally Posted by incredible
https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/...oExtendEAD.pdf
RD:Oct 11, 2016Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
EAD Approved: Jan 23, 2017
EAD Received: Jan 30, 2017
It cut very close to the EAD/AP (and DL) expiry date. Although the new rule allows for 180 day extension (even for applications filed before 01/17/2017), the I9 validation method is framed such that, for applications filed in 2016, it is not possible to use the new rule. This is because the validation requires that your receipt notice shows the category under which you applied for extensions is eligible for extension - typically C09. The same was confirmed by company attorneys as well as by the I9 Central team (via email).
New I-9 validation rules/factsheet with screenshots available here: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/...oExtendEAD.pdf
USICS is apparently refusing expedite requests based on the new rule which says that the 120-day approval requirement is no longer valid. That said, there were reports that USICS is trying to speed up and approve the applications filed before Jan 17 to mitigate the issue. I would suggest you to raise SR etc after 75 days irrespective, esp. if you are working on EAD.
Mine took almost 80 days and my wife's took close to 90. I was almost about to contact USCIS when the card was mailed.Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
Iatiam
Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
I had applied for my and spouse's EAD/AP in October, and it was expiring on Feb 2nd. A USCIS Fact Sheet on Jan 30 saved me - it said that all applicants who have applied on a timely manner will get 180 days automatic extension. My HR supported me and updated the i-9 and I continued work. I took the USCIS fact sheet to the local Drivers License office, explained them the automatic extension to get my Drivers License renewed for 180 days (till Aug 2017). Even though the end result looks effortless, there was a lot of hoopla that ensued during this time. Here's the timeline:Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
Oct 2017: Applied for EAD/AP Renewal (my expired on 2/2, my wife's expired on 1/23)
Jan 22 2017: Called up lawyer, submitted a couple of USCIS inquiries on what is going on
Jan 23 2017: Wife takes furlough from work, as her EAD is expired. Logistical nightmare for me - picking up kids etc. is now an issue. Also a financial impact.
Jan xx 2017: USCIS publishes that all new applicants of EAD renewal (C9 group) going forward will be eligible for extension automatically, for up to 180 days. Lawyer says this does not apply to me because my application was submitted in October.
Jan 30 2017: Lawyer suggests to submit new i765 so that this new application can now be eligible for extension. Company and HR agree and we submitted new i-765. We agreed to NOT withdraw the previous i-765.
Jan 30 2017: As luck would have it, USCIS publishes fact sheet about 180 days EAD extension applying to those who submitted EAD renewals on time. Too bad that we had already fedexed our new i-765 by the time we came to know about this.
Feb 2 2017: My EAD and Drivers License expired. I took the fact sheet and miraculously convinced the drivers license office to extend my license for 180 days. Remember my receipt from my first i-765 application did not contain verbiage about automatic extensions. License is renewed for 180 days for both myself and my wife.
Feb 13 2017: I get a notice indicating card is under production for my first i-765 application, and my wife's (only) i-765 applicatoin. No news about about my second i-765 application. Also, no news about AP renewals yet - so cannot travel out of the country.
Last year, if you check my posts, same thing had happened but since there was no USCIS fact sheet or notification about automatic extension, I had to take a furlough of about 6 weeks (unpaid) from work. Stayed home, played xbox and gained a few pounds. This year, there was same anxiety but work was not affected.
Thanks folks for all the replies. The EAD Auto-Extend was a nice parting gift from the Obama admin.
Hi Self.Coach, I am in the same boat. My DL expires in 2 weeks. In which state/City you renewed your DL on pending EAD? I want to give it a try in Frisco/TX. What documents we need to take along with us?Quote:
Originally Posted by self.coach
Iowa.Quote:
Originally Posted by gkjppp
I took the printout of USCIS factsheet that was published on Jan 30, my i797, a couple of proof of addresses (which they did not really look at), my I-485 application and expired EAD cards. The DL examiner was not prepared to take me in after looking at the docs and did not give me the waiting number because she said that my I-797 receipt (for my EAD renewal application) said all fees were $0.00 and that they should contain a dollar amount of $380 something. I immediately realized she was either confusing me with some other scenario like asylum or simply did not know the rules. So I gave her my I-485 receipt and told her that maybe this is what you are referring to. She got confused, so I got my lawyer on the phone and they exchanged a 30 second conversation (luckily).
She deferred the case to the DL supervisor, who straight away refused to talk to the lawyer first. But she did spend the time to look at all my documents, read the fact sheet, cross-check the fact sheet on the USCIS website. After that she gave us a number and allowed us to sit in the waiting line.
When our numbers were called, the DL examiner in the booth had to call the supervisor and ask what were the next steps, She said to renew DL for 180 days (after initial talks of renewing for 30 days). Finally, my wife and I got a paper license for 30 days and were told that the mailed in license would expire in 180 days.
After I completed the visit, I realized that my company's immigration lawyer had sent me an email asking if it is okay to discuss my case with the local immigration liaison with the Department of Transportation. Since my problem got resolved without that, I respectfully declined, but maybe something to consider in your case? I cannot guarantee the results though as I did not go through that.
I provided a complete snapshot here so you can see the possible options. I believe that in my case it was a bit difficult because I went of Feb 2nd, about 2 days after the USCIS factsheet was published, so mine was the first such case probably at the DL office (also considering the lesser number of Indians in that county).
I hope you don't face so much trouble. Make sure to remain patient, respectful, and assertive during the whole process and best luck!
All of this took a total of about 2.5 hours. My kids seemed a bit shocked going through this experience, as they saw us in that kind of pleading, helpless plight for the first time ever. My son even asked me "why was that lady not nice to us - did we do something wrong".
In all fairness, I believe the DL examiner and supervisor were just doing their jobs, and they made the right decision.
Looks like this thread is a discussion of everything else other than "EB2-3 predictions". It is becoming more like trackitt where people hop on the most active thread and post personal queries.
I responded in here because of what was posted. But I am sure that all these posts will be moved to the relevant section by the admin. This has happened before.Quote:
Originally Posted by EB3Iwaiting
October 2016 I-485 pending inventory for EB2-India shows pending numbers till June 2016,
I485 Pending inventory:
https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/...tober_2016.pdf
Question, visa bulletin priority dates for EB2-India never reached July 2016, how are applicants able to apply I-485 and how there are pending cases in the list up to July 2016?
Thanks in advance!
Dear All,
I have an EB2 PD of May 1 2009 and was today talking to a colleague with a PD of May 9 2009. Both of us applied for EAD renewal a month apart (him in nov and myself in Dec) and both of us got the confirmation emails roughly a month apart with mine coming in a few days ago. The peculiar thing in his case is that he also had a mention of his 485 being approved in either the same email or a separate email (I am not entirely sure). Apparently he spoke to his attorney and he was advised to make a call to the service center who said it might take upto 60 days and was given the usual blah blah about processing times. He also mentioned that there have been other cases like his. My question is has anyone heard anything like this? My first reaction was that probably was a bug or a glitch as the priority date is still June 1 08 per the latest bulletin. Any thoughts on this or has anyone else heard anything similar?
It's been a while the USCIS has been approving the cases but not adjudicating them unless a visa is available from DOS.
Perhaps that's what this is. In normal cases the visa is available within 60 days. Hence the standard response from the rep.
Quote:
Originally Posted by almost
I did. Iit took exactly 3 months.Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
According to Greg Siskind, travel on AP is going to get a lot tougher even for AoS folks - as per the new DHS Memo.
Here's the relevant snippet from his blog:Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
Source: http://blog.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2017...cutive-orders/
"K. Proper Use of Parole Authority Pursuant to Section 212(d)(5) of the INA USCIS, CBP and ICE shall ensure that “pending the issuance of final regulations clarifying the appropriate use of the parole power, appropriate written policy guidance and training is provided to employees within those agencies exercising parole authority, [including advance parole], so that such employees are familiar with the proper exercise of parole under Section 212(d)(5) of the INA and exercise parole under that provision and exercise such parole authority only on a case-by-case basis, consistent with written policy guidance.” This would seemingly jeopardize the entire advance parole process for green card applicants who only have to show travel is needed for business or personal reasons versus showing a humanitarian of public benefit reason for their travel. Parole-in-place and other parole programs are seemingly in jeopardy as well.
"
I think this will come down to how the USCIS/CBP enforce the rule. Just like how everyone thought the "dropbox" has been terminated, but it wasn't.
Can someone please confirm if 485 AP will be affected? My understanding is that 485 AP does not come under humanitarian clause. Why is Siskind railing against it? As an imm. attorney, he should know better. Or is he trying to generate some free publicity?Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
Iatiam
iatam,Quote:
Originally Posted by iatiam
No-one knows yet whether it will be affected, since the Memo hasn't been published and implemented. The latest version, which Greg refers to can be found here.
My best guess is that the "written policy guidance" mentioned in the Memo will allow AP for AOS cases to continue as at present, but nothing in the Memo actually exempts it and nobody knows what the "written policy guidance" will be at this time.
AP for AOS applicants is granted under INA Section 212(d)(5). It's a discretionary benefit granted by DHS (USCIS) and the policy has always been that a showing of Urgent Humanitarian Need or Significant Public Benefit has not been required for this type of Advance Parole. There's nothing in the INA guaranteeing the issue of AP to AOS applicants, or the reasons required for it to be granted.
I think Greg is correct to flag the potential issue (although I might have used different words to do so).
a) AP for AOS applicants is issued under the relevant INA statute affected by the EO/Memo.
b) The mention of Advance Parole (as opposed to merely Parole) is new in the latest version of this proposed Memo.
A previous EO on the White House site entitled "Executive Order: Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements" says this in relation to Parole:
That's quite a draconian statement. There's no "ifs and buts" in it (case-by-case and needing to show urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit).Quote:
(d) The Secretary shall take appropriate action to ensure that parole authority under section 212(d)(5) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5)) is exercised only on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the plain language of the statute, and in all circumstances only when an individual demonstrates urgent humanitarian reasons or a significant public benefit derived from such parole.
You see the problem. Ill thought out and poorly written documents potentially introduce unforeseen consequences.
Aside from this issue, I'm very worried about the erosion of protections for large classes of people who habitually reside in the USA. Until now, they have generally been afforded the same protections as anybody else, including citizens.
It seems some of these protections have already been lost (at least for DHS data) due to the EOs. For example, the EO (on the White House site) entitled "Executive Order: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States" contains this language.
This is a very slippery slope in my opinion. I just hope other non DHS privacy laws still afford some protections. It has distinct echoes of "First they came for the ......".Quote:
Sec. 14. Privacy Act.
Agencies shall, to the extent consistent with applicable law, ensure that their privacy policies exclude persons who are not United States citizens or lawful permanent residents from the protections of the Privacy Act regarding personally identifiable information.
Spec,
Thank you for such an excellent explanation. Hope Mr. President recruits you to his administration! On one side, I have been frustrated by the lack of movement for EB2/3 India and the EB4 visas going to juvenile immigrants. So on one hand I want some level of enforcement to be implemented. However, on the other hand this administration has taken the pendulum all the way to the other side.
Iatiam
Wow Spec! You don't mince words. It is very disheartening what is happening.
I read through the memo again - and it does feel like it is targeted towards AP granted to folks like DACA recipients. It does not seem to target AOS people - but AOS may get caught in the net here.
No clarity yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
https://www.murthy.com/2017/02/20/le...e-implemented/
Quick news for folks waiting for EAD approvals - the 180 day automatic extension works beautifully. Just gone mine done. If you applied for renewal before the rule got into effect then USCIS will send you another receipt notice that explicitly states the 180 day auto-extension. I would imagine that would be helpful for DL extensions - though I haven't tried that yet.
Good to know, Imdeng! Although I just got my EAD renewed and I am now set until 2019. EAD has become like a mini green card. No need to depend on the employer, no need of a lawyer. It's like renewing your driver's license!Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng