Is there any case like mine? Sept..2009 PD.. And only Dependant got rfe on 14th. Also strangely my wife EAD was renewed for only 1 year this time.. And mine was renewed for 2..we sent the renewal application together in one single mail. I can't think of any logical explanation than a glitch in the s system.. Let's see next week what do they want in RFE..Originally Posted by qesehmk
If in fact it turns out to be that everyone needs to give FP again it might lead to somewhat risky situation if especially the appointment cannot be obtained in time.
1 week for RFE to arrive then about 1 month to schedule for FP ( or much longer as thousands got RFE same time). NOt sure how long it will take to check background again of all the applicants .)
How can they issue GC to anyone in august if that is the case and moreover dont you think some might miss the boat again as the window of oppurtunity this time is much less than last time.
My hunch is still that this is a glitch but I know its wishful thinking and it just might turn out to be FP ( which i personally think is one of the most time consuming one ), I jsut hope its something like updated photo ( within 6 months ) or something much quicker and easier to reply.
addendum: just heard that someone got RFE in dallas already for updated EVL, EAD/797 etc., I hope by monday all the dust will settle and we will have clear view about whats going on.
Last edited by indiani; 06-15-2013 at 06:24 PM.
Another trackit user, gcvegas, has received the exact same RFE http://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussi...page/last_page
RFE Received States
- You are an Employment-Based Principal Applicant
First, please submit proof of your continuous employment authorization in US from the date you filed your form I-485 to the present.
- EAD(s)
- I 797 approval notices
- I 94
Secondly, you must submit a currently dated letter from your petitioning (Form I 140) employer, verifying that their job offer to you continues to exist.
Without an irritant, there can be no pearl.
Spec, I am thinking out loud here. PLease let me know what you think of it.
Last time, when dates moved a lot, USCIS simply sent out the green cards. Some went to the attorneys on file. These attorneys found out that the applicants were no longer even in the US. Some attorneys mailed GCs to them. Some folks had their friends collect it for them. This caused great anguish to folks that missed out on getting Gcs. It must have been brought to USCIS' attention that they are bunch of morons for simply sending out GCs like that without verifying. Now bitten once, they are making their darnest best to not repeat previous mistakes.
kd2008, good point!....if majority of these RFEs turn out to be EVL type along with a proof of legal stay from the date of I-485 application, it indicates that USCIS is just double checking if an approv-able case is still alive and legal before they put their formal stamp of approval on it.
What beats me is that its just TSC sending RFE. Not a single RFE for applicants whose service center is NSC.
kd,
Could be. It is possible. I want to see if the pattern continues. It certainly would weed those cases out.
Also thinking out loud, Indian EB jobs are concentrated in IT fields and within that concentrated in the consultancy model.
Lay offs and especially employer changes seem to be especially prevalent in that area (almost part of the job). USCIS must also be aware that large numbers of people are using the AC21 I-140 portability law to change employer.
Unapproved cases filed in October 2011 to April 2012 will be 15-20 months old when they become current again and a lot may have happened in that time span.
I realise that sounds very much like profiling and I am not sure whether that is something USCIS do. They have appeared to use certain indicators in the past on other areas to use resource "effectively".
Alternatively, it may be a policy change and we will see the same repeated in the future for EB3-ROW cases that do not get approved this FY. That is also a strong possibility and may be more likely. It may be relevant that it has happened immediately after the final RFE/NOID memo was published. It just happens that the pending EB2-I cases are the first to feel the effect. I did notice that some EB3-I cases that are about to become current have also received RFE.
I do wish USCIS or SCOPS would work in a consistent manner. It may change, but currently this appears to be a TSC only initiative.
If the RFE phenomenon is real and not simply a system glitch, then at least USCIS have approached it in a manner that allows 45 days before the dates become current again. Employment Authorization and EVL information is not particularly onerous to obtain and everybody has the chance to respond well before the dates become current again. It should not delay any approvals at all unless RFEs start to involve biometric appointments in large numbers.
What is a little strange at the moment is the number of Dependents receiving RFE requests, some of which already seem inappropriate.
As I said, I would prefer to see
a) That this is not a system glitch at TSC.
b) What the pattern of RFE requests is.
It is definitely an interesting development. It is perhaps too early to analyse it, but human nature does not allow that!So apologies for the rather rambling post. It's difficult to understand what USCIS do and why.
Last edited by Spectator; 06-17-2013 at 01:35 PM. Reason: Corrected the time to respond to the RFE
Without an irritant, there can be no pearl.
To me the question is if CO aware that these RFEs are being sent out ? Assuming it is not a glitch, there has to be some historic stats on response time, response accuracy %, etc. This will drive how far in the future the COD will move. If the response accuracy is 75%, for example, that will have a major implication than if it was 90%.
You are spot on spec, even though my intial inclination and hope was possible system glitch, now as we saw atleast 2 RFEs in mail already asking EAD/ EVL, it might be related to new guidelines to have everything uptodate.kd,
Could be. It is possible. I want to see if the pattern continues. It certainly would weed those cases out.
Also thinking out loud, Indian EB jobs are concentrated in IT fields and within that concentrated in the consultancy model.
Lay offs and especially employer changes seem to be especially prevalent in that area (almost part of the job). USCIS must also be aware that large numbers of people are using the AC21 I-140 portability law to change employer.
Unapproved cases filed in October 2011 to April 2012 will be 15-20 months old when they become current again and a lot may have happened in that time span.
I realise that sounds very much like profiling and I am not sure whether that is something USCIS do. They have appeared to use certain indicators in the past on other areas to use resource "effectively".
Alternatively, it may be a policy change and we will see the same repeated in the future for EB3-ROW cases that do not get approved this FY. That is also a strong possibility and may be more likely. It may be relevant that it has happened immediately after the final RFE/NOID memo was published. It just happens that the pending EB2-I cases are the first to feel the effect. I did notice that some EB3-I cases that are about to become current have also received RFE.
I do wish USCIS or SCOPS would work in a consistent manner. It may change, but currently this appears to be a TSC only initiative.
If the RFE phenomenon is real and not simply a system glitch, then at least USCIS have approached it in a manner that allows 45 days before the dates become current again. Employment Authorization and EVL information is not particularly onerous to obtain and everybody has the chance to respond before the dates become current again. It should not delay any approvals at all unless RFEs start to involve biometric appointments in large numbers.
What is a little strange at the moment is the number of Dependents receiving RFE requests, some of which already seem inappropriate.
As I said, I would prefer to see
a) That this is not a system glitch at TSC.
b) What the pattern of RFE requests is.
It is definitely an interesting development. It is perhaps too early to analyse it, but human nature does not allow that!
I think there is still plenty of time as most wouldn't need more than a week to respond.
all these applications are no longer "pre-adjudicated" and CO will not know the exact DD until the responses are received, so i am wondering how the COD for august bulletin will play out?
Last edited by Spectator; 06-17-2013 at 01:36 PM. Reason: Corrected quote to be consisnt with revised version
These applications are definitely in the demand data but theoretically they are getting pulled out of "demand" and back in to "pending inventory". If that's the case, then assignment of SOFAD will be tricky and the COD will move further ahead than if CO was doing a straight demand data-based movement. this can be a total cluster as FIFO might be lost in this scenario as people without RFEs will automatically jump ahead of those with RFEs when dates become current regardless of PD.
As several thousands of RFE responses needs to be looked at , there might be a chance that all these won't be processed in time and by sept bulletin CO might decide to move it way further into late 2008.
FIFO of course cannot be implemented in the current scenario.
I think CO might be thinking " I am giving X number to India" but not necessarily care whether a 2007 PD applicant gets GC before late 2008 applicant.
If we "2007 PD" folks miss again even if we do everything the right way, it will be another disaster for us.
Viz, these cases in the DD are already existing in the pending inventory as well. As you suggest the RFE response accuracy % would make an impact in the wastage .
Spec has the most reasonable point, shooting RFEs ahead would reduce the wastage % giving ample time to respond or else reallocate the visa to someone.
Sorry for the confusion - what i meant was that they are taken out of Demand i.e pre-adjudicated and back in "pending" i.e. not pre-adjudicated ... not specifically referring to the documents.
The response accuracy % (or some better term for it) won't affect consumption of visas ... it'll affect who consumes them though. For example,
Demand up to March 2008 - 10000 (made up numbers). If you go by straight demand, if you have 10000 spillover, people up to March 2008 will get visas.
Now assume 50% of the people get RFEs and 80% of those people will respond and their responses will get processed in time. True demand that'll consumer spillover reduces to 9000. that'll mean there will be 1000 visas for folks post March 2008.
That's why % of RFEs sent out and % processed are all both items (I've lumped them together as response accuracy %). This is not a new phenomenon but its especially relevant this year due to the wide range of spillover projections and the timing for releasing those.
Last edited by vizcard; 06-16-2013 at 01:45 PM.
I think you described the scenario well.
The following is not in response to your post but my unfortunate situation which i share with few thousands of late 2007 and early 2008 ( original EB2 applicants )
The RFE's gives a hope for people who have PD in mid to late 2008, at the same time some anxiety to folks in late 2007 ( including me ).
There is always some degree of anxiety whenever RFE is sent no matter how straight forward it is, as i don't know whether the IO will pick up my file "pre-adjudicate" and issue a GC or else perhaps issue to later PD and pick up the file after dates retrogressed.
This time around when the dates become current, i will certainly keep calling L2 and if needed local congressman/ senator's office as it has become almost decades long journey of uncertainity. ( BTW: I came to this country in 2001 as a physician and didn't have a clue what I was getting into )
My cousin who has B.com from india ( anyone form india understand how easy it is to finish one ) came 1 yr ago in 2012 on L1 ( hardly can speak english ) got GC in EB1C and I know someone who has EB2 2010 PD got GC last year.
Last edited by indiani; 06-16-2013 at 01:59 PM.
i am not if anyone posted about this memo...if someone has,, let me know ,,i will delete this post..ty
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memo...%20(Final).pdf
I think I saw this on trackitt/ this forum recently but no need to delete it as its useful info.
I think this memo in fact tilts the tendency towards issuance of RFE where "eligibility" is of concern. But it does not mandate RFE's
what bothers me is that it was done one on such a massive scale on the same day without merits of each individual case. let me give my example, anyone with any amount of general knowledge in this country knows that a doctor will have the oppurtunity to work in "same/similar" job, so sending RFE to me is just waste of time and money to Govt. and me ( as RFE's consume time for govt. without generating new revenue and by doing that they are not gaining any "useful additional information" )
The point I was trying to make is that even though my profession is perhaps not even as intellectual as other IT jobs etc., it is just a fact that the jobs for us are there everywhere in the country and i guess almost all IO officers will be aware of this ( i understand for the requirement of all basic documents but repeat EVL's is waste of time as I ahve sent one 6 months ago )
I think we just have to deal with this as it comes at us for the timebeing until CIR pased then the entire issue of COD might be an issue of the past (especially with recapture of visas ).
longwait,
I suppose in many ways it depends on what you mean by "move the dates aggressively". Personally, I think a move to the end of August 2008 would be very aggressive.
The difference in number for a date in February (CO's most favourable date) and the end of August is 8-9k.
8-9k would be a sizable % of the total number of visas available to EB2-I IMO (perhaps 50% or more).
If 50% more cases are "ready to go" and the dates move to the end of August, the chances of approval drop to 67%. A fair number of people with earlier PD would likely lose out again as later PD were approved and the visa numbers were exhausted.
But quite apart from that, I do not know where or how Oh Law Firm have reached the conclusion about August 2008.
I've integrated the data I had before from Trackitt with the googledocs document (before someone "helpfully" deleted the information in the sheet).
Attachment 444
That data still doesn't suggest that RFEs in any great quantity have been received beyond March 2008 as far I can interpret it.
Quite where Oh get an August 2008 date is quite beyond me. They do not say how they arrived at that conclusion.
Last edited by Spectator; 06-16-2013 at 08:16 PM. Reason: typo
Without an irritant, there can be no pearl.
Then there's a significant risk of wastage because Sept 10 would be the the OCt VB i.e. next fiscal year. So he would almost need to move it ahead another couple of months just in case.. no?
Last edited by vizcard; 06-16-2013 at 09:01 PM.
Trackitt update
Few EB3I also received RFE emails on June 14th. Recipients' PDs are in Feb 2003 while the cut off date as of July 1st is 22nd Jan 2003.
Looks like the RFEs are genuine! (?)
Based on early Trackitt responses, It seems the RFEs are not a system glitch. So far it's about EVL in all the 3 cases.
This is very informative, would like to see Q/Spec/Kanmani's analysis. This is turning out dramatic, if everbody is not going to get RFE and they are sent out while the dates are not current, then there won't be automatic assigning of visa number for these cases.
REQUEST FOR EVIDENCE
On January1 1,2011., USCIS issued a Policy Memorandum directing Service Centers processing certain
visa-retrogressed applications for adjustment of status to request additional information prior to a final
decision. This policy is reflected in Chapter 23.5(t)(4) of the Adjudicator's Field Manual (AFM).
Specifically, review of your application shows that:
- You are an Employment-Based Principal Applicant
- An immigrant visa is not immediately available, and
- A valid job offer may be required for your adjustment.
First, please submit proof of your continuous employment authorization in the U.S. from the date you
filed your Form I-485 to the present. Such evidence may include copies of:
- Employment Authorization Documents (EADs, Forms I-688 or I-766) granted to you by USCIS
- Form l-797 approval notices, showing you were granted status in an employment-authorized
nonimmigrant classification, or
- Copies of Form I-94 Arrival Departure Records showing you were admitted to the U.S. in an
employment-authorized nonimmigrant status.
Second, you must submit a currently dated letter from your petitioning (Form I-140) employer, verifying
that their job offer to you continues to exist. If their job offer no longer exists or you no longer intend to
work for the original I-140 employer, you may be eligible to adjust pursuant to visa portability under
section 204() of the Immigration and Nationality Act if:
- Your Form I-485 application has been pending for 180 days or more, AND
- Your new intended permanent employment is in the same or similar occupational classification
as the original Form I-140 job.
Note that the current job offer letter from your original or new employer must state the title an( duties
of the offered position, the minimum educational training requirement the-date you began ( or will
begin) employment and the offered salary or wage. This letter should be on company letterhead and
signed, in the original, by a person authorized by the organization to make or confirm an offer of
permanent employment.
Failure to submit a response is grounds for the denial of your application. A response is required
regardless of whether an immigrant visa is currently available to you. Your case must remain pending
until a visa becomes available to you as per the U.S. Department of State's monthly Visa Bulletin,
available online at www.travel.state.gov under 'Visas'.
tackle's attorney has received the RFE physical copy....http://www.qesehmk.org/forums/showth...6377#post36377
Bieber,
I don't see a (t) sub-division under chapter 23.5 of AFM , the chapter ends with a (p), but nowadays am misreading too. Without that I can't understand the circumstances/necessity of this RFE format being printed in the AFM itself.
Moreover I have not seen the substance of the RFEs that were issued during PDs 2006-2007 clearance. Q/Spec might have a informations of those RFEs.
beiber,
That's quite interesting. What was the source?
There is no 23.5(t) section in the publicly available AFM. The last section is (p).
A quick bit of research makes me think it is actually Chapter 23.5(f)(4) of the Adjudicator's Field Manual (AFM). http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/A.../0-0-0-31.html
Interestingly that is not in the publicly available version of the AFM either, nor can I find it by searching. It does not appear in the Policy and Procedural Memoranda section on the USCIS website.PM-602-0026 -- AD10-44 (1/11/2011) -- Chapter 23.5(f)(4) -- This memorandum revises the AFM by adding Chapter 23.5(f)(4) to clarify the Evidence of Compliance with Employment Requirement Prior to Final Adjudication of Employment-Based Adjustment of Status Application.
Perhaps someone else might have better luck, but I suspect it may be a redacted section. The AFM has been updated since the Memo above.
As far as the RFE content, my take is:
REQUEST FOR EVIDENCE
On January1 1,2011., USCIS issued a Policy Memorandum directing Service Centers processing certain
visa-retrogressed applications for adjustment of status to request additional information prior to a final
decision. This policy is reflected in Chapter 23.5(t)(4) of the Adjudicator's Field Manual (AFM).
Specifically, review of your application shows that:
- You are an Employment-Based Principal Applicant
- An immigrant visa is not immediately available, and
- A valid job offer may be required for your adjustment.
First, please submit proof of your continuous employment authorization in the U.S. from the date you
filed your Form I-485 to the present. Such evidence may include copies of:
- Employment Authorization Documents (EADs, Forms I-688 or I-766) granted to you by USCIS
- Form l-797 approval notices, showing you were granted status in an employment-authorized
nonimmigrant classification, or
- Copies of Form I-94 Arrival Departure Records showing you were admitted to the U.S. in an
employment-authorized nonimmigrant status.
They are checking that the applicant has not accumulated more Unauthorized Employment than 245(k) would allow for.
Second, you must submit a currently dated letter from your petitioning (Form I-140) employer, verifying
that their job offer to you continues to exist.
They are checking a valid job continues to exist.
If their job offer no longer exists or you no longer intend to
work for the original I-140 employer, you may be eligible to adjust pursuant to visa portability under
section 204() of the Immigration and Nationality Act if:
- Your Form I-485 application has been pending for 180 days or more, AND
- Your new intended permanent employment is in the same or similar occupational classification
as the original Form I-140 job.
A reminder of the AC21 I-140 portability rules.
Note that the current job offer letter from your original or new employer must state the title an( duties
of the offered position, the minimum educational training requirement the-date you began ( or will
begin) employment and the offered salary or wage. This letter should be on company letterhead and
signed, in the original, by a person authorized by the organization to make or confirm an offer of
permanent employment.
Failure to submit a response is grounds for the denial of your application. A response is required
regardless of whether an immigrant visa is currently available to you. Your case must remain pending
until a visa becomes available to you as per the U.S. Department of State's monthly Visa Bulletin,
available online at www.travel.state.gov under 'Visas'.
Some more detail on the information required in the EVL.
Since it may well be a different job to that in the approved I-140, they are also checking that it "same or similar" and fulfills the criteria for the Category the applicant is applying under. e.g. an applicant couldn't be approved under EB2, if the job that was going to be performed would only qualify under EB3.
Last edited by Spectator; 06-17-2013 at 01:24 PM.
Without an irritant, there can be no pearl.
Spec, Kanmani
I copied it from Trackitt, It looks like user just posted the content of RFE
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote