ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: VBGate (Close, Open, Close, Open...)

  1. #1
    "The government will be announcing shortly that it has reversed its July 2 announcement that the fiscal year 2007 employment based visa numbers had been used up and that it was going to refuse to accept adjustment of status filings during July. Instead, Secretary Chertoff advises that USCIS will keep the applications filed and reopen filings for a 31-day period from July 18 through August 17, 2007, in order to provide the same filing window people would have had if the July 2 actions had not taken place. Filers will be able to pay the July filing fees during the entire window period.

    Unfortunately, it does not appear that today's announcement helps the EB-3 other workers whose applications were rejected in June."

    A Scoop from AILA National

  2. #2
    "The government will be announcing shortly that it has reversed its July 2 announcement that the fiscal year 2007 employment based visa numbers had been used up and that it was going to refuse to accept adjustment of status filings during July. Instead, Secretary Chertoff advises that USCIS will keep the applications filed and reopen filings for a 31-day period from July 18 through August 17, 2007, in order to provide the same filing window people would have had if the July 2 actions had not taken place. Filers will be able to pay the July filing fees during the entire window period.

    Unfortunately, it does not appear that today's announcement helps the EB-3 other workers whose applications were rejected in June."

    A Scoop from AILA National

  3. #3
    It's very difficult (almost next to impossible) to understand the logic behind what has actually taken place.

    In any case, those eligible to apply must now be feeling relieved.

  4. #4
    As what they say, "the USCIS isn't known for efficiency, but this issue is a new low."

  5. #5
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RationalE:
    It's very difficult (almost next to impossible) to understand the logic behind what has actually taken place.

    In any case, those eligible to apply must now be feeling relieved. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Logic? looks none. Aggrieved applicants should rightfully be indemnified, not just feel relieved. Wishful thinking, I know.

  6. #6
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As what they say, "the USCIS isn't known for efficiency, but this issue is a new low." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Who knows.

    Michael Chertoff is an extremenly intelligent man (he worked with Giulliani in New York, was one who brought down the Bonanno family, not an easy feat by all means), thus ,as long as he heads DHS (USCIS, by default), anyone who berates him (and those under him) as incompetent is doing so at the cost of overestimating his/her own intelligence.

    It could be either (Note: A and B are my humble guesses) :

    A) Unintentional miscommunication (or lack thereof) in certain level

    B) USCIS actually wants Congress to allocate MORE imm. visas for EB workers and thus brings this issue to National headlines

    C) Unknown

  7. #7
    ... and that's also an uncalled for rush to judgment to infer and deduce that I, who quoted the cited line, mean to belittle the distinguished career in the practice of law and in government service of the honorable DHS secretary and the agency he heads... and that I exercised extreme caution that such idea, though I agreed to when I read it, should in any way be attributed to myself.

    But the actual deal isn't that the people manning the Immigration Service and the blunders being attributed to it are of their own doing but are sorry offshoots of outdated laws and systems that need from top to bottom revamping.

    Even the Secretary himself was exasperated in the aftermath of Immigration Reform's demise late last month. This is an excerpt from a Washington Post story on July 1:


    "Chertoff Scolds Senate on Immigration

    The homeland security chief on Sunday scolded the Senate for failing to pass an immigration bill and said it will be difficult for the government to crack down on illegal workers. "We're going to continue to enforce the law. It's going to be tough," Michael Chertoff said. "We don't really have the ability to enforce the law with respect to illegal work in this country in a way that's truly effective."" AP, July 1, 2007."


    While the originally cited quotation above came from this other more recent Washington Post article that was also published on our host website the ILW.COM, entitled: A Gift from Gandhi.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...2007071002055_2.html

    "Crystal Williams, deputy director for programs at the American Immigration Lawyers Association, suspects that there may still be open slots in the annual green card quota.
    "They lied. That's the simple part of it. They lied to keep from having to take these applications," Williams said. The association's sister organization is filing a lawsuit to force the government to accept the filed applications.
    "The system is deeply broken," Williams said.
    Rep. Zoe Lofgren, (D-Calif.), the chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Citizenship, Refugees, Immigration, and Border Security, says she plans to hold a hearing on the issue and is pressing USCIS to accept the recently filed applications.
    "They have really messed this up," she said. "The Department of Homeland Security is not known for overarching efficiency, but this is a new low."
    " (emphasis mine).

  8. #8
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">... and that's also an uncalled for rush to judgment to infer and deduce that I, who quoted the cited line, mean to belittle the distinguished career in the practice of law and in government service of the honorable DHS secretary and the agency he heads... and that I exercised extreme caution that such idea, though I agreed to when I read it, should in any way be attributed to myself. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I agree, that's why didn't mention you personally (if you thought I did, then it indeed was "an uncalled for rush to judgment" on your behalf), but I referred - in general - to anyone who berates him as overestimating their own intelligence.

  9. #9
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RationalE:
    ... (if you thought I did, then it indeed was "an uncalled for rush to judgment" on your behalf)... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    That's what I meant, you did it ON MY BEHALF!

    Hahaha!

  10. #10
    What exactly did I do on your behalf?

    What is it that you meant?

    And what exactly do you mean now?

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">... and that's also an uncalled for rush to judgment to infer and deduce that I, who quoted the cited line, mean to belittle the distinguished career in the practice of law and in government service of the honorable DHS secretary and the agency he heads... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    From my responce to the above: "I agree, that's why didn't mention you personally (IF you thought I did, then it indeed was "an uncalled for rush to judgment" on your behalf), but I referred - in general - to anyone who berates him as overestimating their own intelligence".

    Definition of "IF" :

    Main Entry: if

    Pronunciation: 'if, &f

    Function: conjunction

    Etymology: Middle English, from Old English gif; akin to Old High German ibu if

    1 a : in the event that b : allowing that c : on the assumption that d : on condition that
    2 : WHETHER &lt;asked if the mail had come&gt; &lt;I doubt if I'll pass the course&gt;
    3 -- used as a function word to introduce an exclamation expressing a wish &lt;if it would only rain&gt;
    4 : even though : although perhaps &lt;an interesting if untenable argument&gt;
    5 : and perhaps not even &lt;few if any changes are expected&gt; -- often used with not &lt;difficult if not impossible&gt;
    - if anything : on the contrary even : perhaps even &lt;if anything, you ought to apologize&gt;

    Source


    P.S. I like having fun too.

Similar Threads

  1. H-1B close to the quota
    By U.S. Immigration Lawyer in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-13-2010, 12:21 PM
  2. i-130 its close to a year
    By zim in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-13-2007, 07:30 AM
  3. close a case
    By lalata in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-24-2006, 11:11 PM
  4. How to close I-140
    By Bare_Bones in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-04-2005, 06:01 PM
  5. Close Call for F1 Students
    By Mo in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-14-2004, 08:42 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: