Immigration Voice - Forums
Register Get Involved Contact Lawmakers Advocacy Discussion Image Image Image Image

Go Back   Immigration Voice > Immigration Voice Issues and Congressional updates > IV Agenda and Legislative Updates
Click to log in with Facebook
IV Agenda and Legislative Updates Immigration Voice's Agenda and Legislative Updates

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #376 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2016, 03:10 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Jan-11
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 628
DMX17 is just really nice DMX17 is just really nice DMX17 is just really nice DMX17 is just really nice DMX17 is just really nice
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramalingam View Post
Usually comment process is very simple but in this case it is tricky. If they consider your comments as opposing then if opposing comments are overwhelming then they could drop the regulation. If they consider your comments as enhancement and your suggestions for improvement are impractical by law then either they could reject your comments or they could drop the regulation. Another aspect is more the number of comments more delay. When they racing against court imposed deadline they asked 3 months delay for 50k comments in OPT extension this regulation could drag months if not years and that could easily pass Obama Admin. All the above issues need to be tackled
Thank you for your insights and contribution. Now, tell us what kind of technical comments we should make so that the underlying PERM and I-140 remain valid when I change job to a new employer without me having to re-do the GC process again. EAD part is easy, right?

Appreciate it!
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #377 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2016, 05:14 PM
Facebook User
Priority Date
:
Category
:
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 5
ravic1900 is on a distinguished road
Default http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=USCIS-2015-0008-2546

How one "Amanda" is praising the Chamber in this comment:
Regulations.gov

"
This Rule achieves all Intentions and objectives of Businesses to retain high skilled immigrants. Businesses should dictate what benefits their employees get and these benefits include immigration benefits and benefits that will allow them to live freely.

I greatly applaud the writers of this rule and their partners including US Chamber of Commerce.

Thank You
Amanda
"
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #378 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2016, 05:43 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 18
kaca is on a distinguished road
Default

So that Amanda wants the law to just retain India born people for decades while people from rest of the world get their greencards and citizenship.

We should ask her to request for implementing the retention law for everybody regardless of their nationality.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #379 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2016, 05:49 PM
Facebook User
Priority Date
:
Category
:
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 5
ravic1900 is on a distinguished road
Default http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=USCIS-2015-0008-7239

Please see this comment


Regulations.gov


Thanks,
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #380 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2016, 06:15 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 379
Flyingcrow has a reputation beyond repute Flyingcrow has a reputation beyond repute Flyingcrow has a reputation beyond repute Flyingcrow has a reputation beyond repute Flyingcrow has a reputation beyond repute Flyingcrow has a reputation beyond repute Flyingcrow has a reputation beyond repute Flyingcrow has a reputation beyond repute Flyingcrow has a reputation beyond repute Flyingcrow has a reputation beyond repute Flyingcrow has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaca View Post
So that Amanda wants the law to just retain India born people for decades while people from rest of the world get their greencards and citizenship.

We should ask her to request for implementing the retention law for everybody regardless of their nationality.
Somebody had made a sarcastic comment, look at the name at the top on that comment :Amy NotNice
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #381 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2016, 08:40 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Jun-11
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
11/05/2011
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 13
casinoking is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyingcrow View Post
Somebody had made a sarcastic comment, look at the name at the top on that comment :Amy NotNice
Finally my comment got posted. Good to know.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #382 (permalink)  
Old 01-27-2016, 09:39 AM
Member
Priority Date
:
Mar-14
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 51
thankstooptx is on a distinguished road
Default

Any update on the technical comments. I don't want to sound pushy but I think we need some time to spread the word once the technical comments are out. I took me almost 2 weeks to force my friends to post a comment... I can only imagine how long it would take to post them second time around
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #383 (permalink)  
Old 01-27-2016, 03:31 PM
shv shv is offline
Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 61
shv is on a distinguished road
Default the rulemaking process

https://www.federalregister.gov/uplo...ng_process.pdf
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #384 (permalink)  
Old 01-27-2016, 04:09 PM
shv shv is offline
Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 61
shv is on a distinguished road
Default My technical comment

I've just added my technical comment in the regulations.gov and may help others too, see below:-

Thanks for coming up with the rule, I oppose this rule in the current format and want uscis/dhs to provide EAD/AP benefit for people having approved I140 with current employer and completed 6 years on H1b visa and facing compelling situation of long wait times due to huge Visa backlogs.

i140(As per rule Employee owns I140 after 180 days as the employer cannot revoke I140 and Priority Date is retained).

After having eligible for EAD/AP benefit based on the above criteria, here are the technical details that the rule should implement:-

1) Provide an option to Employee's to make a decision whether to remain in nonimmigrant status or to be in EAD/AP status.
a) Employee can choose to be on EAD/AP (and avail benefits of EAD/AP)
b) Employee may choose to maintain H1b (Maintain H1b nonimmigrant status if he/she wishes to)

2)
a) Go for Consular processing(or if possible by law file AOS) when Priority date(PD) becomes current when using ead status(and not maintaining H1/nonimmigrant status)
b) File AOS when PD becomes current (for those who are in or maintaining H1/nonimmigrant status)

3) Spouse & dependents(over 18 years) gets Ead/AP benefits.

4) Getting an Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and using an EAD are two entirely different things. Using an EAD means working based on that EAD, and that means when employee join any company (as the employee owns I140 here after 180 days), Employee must sign an I-9 form in which employment eligibility is based on the EAD. The person can change from H1 status to EAD status by contacting their HR department and filling out I9 form again based on EAD.

5) Similarly, getting an Advance Parole (AP) and using an AP are two entirely different things. Using an AP means leaving the U.S. and then showing your AP to enter the U.S. as a parolee, instead of showing the visa to enter the U.S. as a nonimmigrant. As parolees can't work in the U.S., he/she should get an EAD before traveling on an AP. Receiving an AP is just an addition of one more document in your file.Just receiving an EAD/AP does not change the nonimmigrant status in any way, and he/she is still on H1b status; thus, the person is either in EAD/AP status or in H1b status.

As long as a person maintains an H1b status (H1b status not expired, H1b holders working for any employer), he/she can travel outside the U.S. and come back without the need for advanced parole even after having an AP option in hand. The person can enter using his/her non-expired H1b visa. For valid H1b visa holders, there is no need to apply for EAD to continue working after returning to the U.S.

6) Employee's are not allowed to work on an expired EAD while his renewal EAD application is pending. He/she have to apply for renewal of EAD every year or every 3 years (if possible).

7) In general, if the person is married, he/she may want to apply for an EAD/AP for both, so that their spouse can start working and he/she can also work for another employer if he/she wishes. If the person is single, he/she may want to maintain H1b status so that he/she can bring his/her spouse on H4 if he/she gets married and then apply for EAD/AP for both.

9) If I485 denied being on EAD/AP a person have to go back to own country - as the person has already finished over 6 years on H1b and not maintaining H1b status.

10) Apply for timely renewal of EAD and AP. Please allow a person who is unemployed(sudden job loss) being on H1b status or EAD status upto the grace period of at least 90 days to get a new job within 90 days of time or leave the country.

11) Change jobs anytime on ead/ap after i140-ead approval based on same/similar criteria.

12) After changing jobs based on EAD or by H1b transfer, New Employer should just update employee's original PERM/I140(based on AC21 same/similar occupation criteria) and NOT filing a new one. If employee wants H1b transfer and wants to maintain H1b status then new employer should file for H1b transfer.

Through this rule, I urge DHS to propose to allow certain approved Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Form I-140) beneficiaries(with approved I140 with current employer and completed 6 years on H1b visa and facing long wait times due to huge Visa backlogs) to obtain work authorization, portable work authorization, and remove unnecessary restrictions on the ability to change jobs or progress in careers, as well as providing relief to workers facing lengthy adjustment delays due to huge backlogs ranging from 10-20 years of wait time and this way new employer don't have to restart PERM/I140 process every time employee changes job.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #385 (permalink)  
Old 01-27-2016, 05:15 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Sep-05
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
06/05/2006
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/02/2007
Compare
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 139
Blog Entries: 1
abcdgc is a name known to all abcdgc is a name known to all abcdgc is a name known to all abcdgc is a name known to all abcdgc is a name known to all abcdgc is a name known to all
Default

Murthy says how good this regulation is:

In the meantime...Friends of Amy (Sheela Ki) have started selling her regulation - Priority Date Retention & I-140 Revocation Protections: Proposed Regulation Murthy Law Firm : U.S. Immigration Law
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #386 (permalink)  
Old 01-27-2016, 05:46 PM
Administrator
Priority Date
:
Jun-02
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
08/04/2003
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140+I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
10/06/2003
Compare
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 996
Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute Administrator2 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abcdgc View Post
Murthy says how good this regulation is:

In the meantime...Friends of Amy (Sheela Ki) have started selling her regulation - Priority Date Retention & I-140 Revocation Protections: Proposed Regulation Murthy Law Firm : U.S. Immigration Law

When retrogression started and backlog became a problem in 2005, Murthy also said that retrogression and backlog is good because now unmarried people can go to marry.

Its like saying, if someone looted you of a million dollars then it is good that now you will no longer have to maintain a bank account.

The test for this regulation is, whether or not this regulation provide "portable work authorization" and "Advance Parole" as mentioned in President's Executive Action on Immigration? If the answer is no, then the regulation is useless.

"Retention/recapture of priority date" is already allowed even prior to this regulation. This regulation is not about "retention of priority date". It is about "retention of employees by employers so you live like slaves like rest of your lives so immigration lawyers like Murthy can make more money off of you.

Here is another lie. Immigration Lawyers will make you believe that per this regulation Withdrawal of I-140 by Petitioner Would No Longer Lead to Revocation, meaning employer cannot withdraw your I-140. This is just not true. Immigration lawyers and this regulation is making a fool out of immigrants. Here is how-

Remember a few years back Congress passed the law prohibiting companies to recover H1B fee and Green card fee from immigrant employees? Well, guess what? The same industry lobbyist who fuck'ed up this regulation were behind putting in "liquidated damages" loophole allowing companies to collect "liquidated damages" in case you leave them, meaning, creating means for companies to recover H1B fee and green card fee (plus 20,000 or 30,000 fee) from you. We know all this all too well, how the real system works. Every immigration lawyers knows that employer must not collect H1B fee and Green card fee from employee. But everyone (including every immigration lawyer) knows that immigrant employee pays the entire H1B cost and green card cost. Why, because of "liquidated damages" loophole. Likewise, this "withdrawing I-140 by employer" is a bunch of hogwash. The same sleazy lawyers have screwed this regulation to put a loophole which says that employers can revoke I-140 if there is a fraud. Well, there are already enough laws on the books which says that immigrant will not get green card if you are involved in bank robbery, murder, drugs trade, any fraud etc etc etc. There is absolutely no need to put in power in the hands of employer to revoke your I-140 for fraud. USCIS will revoke I-140 if there is fraud. But this loophole is put in place so employer can use it against you to revoke your I-140 by making up some fake reason for "fraud" to get even with you if you decide to change employer. This may look innocent, but these loopholes are all over this regulation to screw you many times over without immigrants realizing it.

If there is no "continuous validity of I-140", here will be no EAD for H-4 either.

"Retention/recapture of priority date" is already allowed under the current system even without this regulation. Even today you can change employer and retain your priority date to start your new green card process. Then what is new in this fucking 183 page regulation?

So now go back and read Murthy's analysis and ask what did you get out of this regulation. Answer is - Nada, Zero, nothing and the system got more complicated for you to cough up more money for immigration lawyers. So be careful to drink Murthy's cool-aid for this regulation. If you put in comments which might even remote sound like "I support" or "I support but can you change...", if you do this, you are your own worst enemy.

One has to be honest with oneself with looking at facts. IV was working on this regulation for long time. But because it has not delivered what was promised, we are now against it. And we would rather see this regulation burn down to the ground than sleazy and slimy immigration lawyers tell us how great this is.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


3 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
  #387 (permalink)  
Old 01-27-2016, 09:08 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2
Bsingh-IV is on a distinguished road
Smile Let us send 100000 printed letter to DHS/USCIS.

Let us send 100000 printed letter to DHS/USCIS. (Preferably with a colorful flower petal or $1 in side). I think this will be a novel and effective way to make our message persuasive and memorable.

Reason: USCIS / DHS hardly has any time to read our electronic comments and blogs.


Print and mail hard copy may cost you max 1 or 2$. (Use your innovation and creativity here).

To: Laura Dawkins, (DHS Docket No. USCIS-2015-0008)
Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division,
Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services,
Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20529.

Please reference DHS Docket No. USCIS-2015-0008 on your correspondence.

Good Luck friends.
B Singh
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
  #388 (permalink)  
Old 01-27-2016, 09:26 PM
Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 59
RandomizedPrecision is a jewel in the rough RandomizedPrecision is a jewel in the rough RandomizedPrecision is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bsingh-IV View Post
Let us send 100000 printed letter to DHS/USCIS. (Preferably with a colorful flower petal or $1 in side). I think this will be a novel and effective way to make our message persuasive and memorable.

Reason: USCIS / DHS hardly has any time to read our electronic comments and blogs.


Print and mail hard copy may cost you max 1 or 2$. (Use your innovation and creativity here).

To: Laura Dawkins, (DHS Docket No. USCIS-2015-0008)
Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division,
Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services,
Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20529.

Please reference DHS Docket No. USCIS-2015-0008 on your correspondence.

Good Luck friends.
B Singh
Another brilliant idea - this is what we desis are good at: endless ideation.

USCIS and any govt. agency is required by law to read and respond to any legit comments irrespective of what form they came in. So, if they are not going to read electronic ones what makes you think they will bother reading physical ones? Electronic ones are hard to erase as they leave a digital trail - paper ones can just be trashed.

So, please, pretty please - with cherry on top. If you have any energy left, please spend it wisely by following IVs instructions. Post more comments, donate, encourage others to post and donate... lather, rinse and repeat.

But please spare everyone from more of this brilliance and not turn this forum into one big dumpyard where folks just come to post endless blather of "innovative and creative" ideas.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
  #389 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2016, 12:34 PM
Member
Priority Date
:
Jun-05
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
07/15/2005
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/17/2007
Compare
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 78
chakdepatte has a reputation beyond repute chakdepatte has a reputation beyond repute chakdepatte has a reputation beyond repute chakdepatte has a reputation beyond repute chakdepatte has a reputation beyond repute chakdepatte has a reputation beyond repute chakdepatte has a reputation beyond repute chakdepatte has a reputation beyond repute chakdepatte has a reputation beyond repute chakdepatte has a reputation beyond repute chakdepatte has a reputation beyond repute
Angry Can't we just file a class action lawsuit and challenge these regulations

if DAPA/DACA can be challenged to Supreme court, why not take that route for this regulation?
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
  #390 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2016, 01:04 PM
Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 59
RandomizedPrecision is a jewel in the rough RandomizedPrecision is a jewel in the rough RandomizedPrecision is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chakdepatte View Post
if DAPA/DACA can be challenged to Supreme court, why not take that route for this regulation?
Sure. Good idea. Do it.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


3 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Proposed modification to regulation for allowing EAD for certain H4s Administrator2 IV Agenda and Legislative Updates 64 08-12-2014 01:06 PM
New AC-21 regulation discussion bazuka6 AC21 Portability after 180 days of 485 filing 4 05-12-2008 01:15 PM
LC Substitution Regulation Lasantha Retrogression, priority dates and Visa bulletins 2 05-02-2007 02:12 PM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c)ImmigrationVoice.org