abc
12-13 03:36 PM
I am planning to forget GC and move on with new company.
For new company to file EB2 based on BS + 6 years experience. What kind of experience letter we will need from old company.
AS you know desi companies dont give experience letters, how do people manage to show old experiences and file for EB2 in new company ?
For new company to file EB2 based on BS + 6 years experience. What kind of experience letter we will need from old company.
AS you know desi companies dont give experience letters, how do people manage to show old experiences and file for EB2 in new company ?
wallpaper Iced Tea and Peppermint Yukon
Jaime
09-10 01:12 PM
You are constantly and unjustly attacked - You are attacked by anti-immigrants who not only spread outrageously false rumors such as "High-skilled immigrants don't pay taxes" or "High-skilled immigrants lower wages" but also dismiss your contributions to the U.S. economy like patents, opening world-leading companies, etc etc by not acknowledging them. Lou Dobbs is a good example in the media, but anti-immigrants (which are not that many in numbers) make their presence felt everywhere.
gene77
03-17 01:54 PM
Category: EB3 India
PD: Oct 2004
140 Approved
485 Applied July 07 and pending.
PD: Oct 2004
140 Approved
485 Applied July 07 and pending.
2011 Iced Tea and Peppermint Yukon
grinch
03-10 07:31 PM
... OMG...
I'm so pissed at myself. I didn't have time to add anything I wanted, and now my volley looks like crap. But eh, I'm a newb so oh well. I'm gonna keep working on it and posting it in D&D.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/grinchvader/final.jpg
I'm so pissed at myself. I didn't have time to add anything I wanted, and now my volley looks like crap. But eh, I'm a newb so oh well. I'm gonna keep working on it and posting it in D&D.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/grinchvader/final.jpg
more...
.jpg "Iced tea blends well with a")
StarSun
03-16 07:12 PM
VA/DC/MD members, please host members from out of states. Contact sukhwinderd (private message) or send him an email.......... 2011carpool@gmail.com Lots of members are asking for hosts......
VA and MD chapter leaders, please post this information in your state chapters, encourage people to open their homes to fellow members.
VA and MD chapter leaders, please post this information in your state chapters, encourage people to open their homes to fellow members.
kumarc123
04-09 03:37 PM
Visa Bulletin for May 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4805.html)
Hey Pappu,
What do you conclude of this? Their has to be some rational reason behind them not moving EB2I, it is hard to grasp that they are still working on 2004-2005 PD's. Is their something we can do bring them in more transparency.
I believe earlier they screwed up and now they are on apposite extreme end, scrutinizing every element.
Hey Pappu,
What do you conclude of this? Their has to be some rational reason behind them not moving EB2I, it is hard to grasp that they are still working on 2004-2005 PD's. Is their something we can do bring them in more transparency.
I believe earlier they screwed up and now they are on apposite extreme end, scrutinizing every element.
more...
nixstor
07-04 08:56 PM
Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
2010 Half Iced Tea Lemonade
dummgelauft
08-21 09:28 AM
You are an illegal. Go back to Canada, and try properly.
more...
amitjoey
07-05 02:00 PM
Thanks a lot.
Please ask this sincere question to yourself, Are you the one that takes and takes and dosent give in return?. (Hopefully not). Now, If you have benefitted any way because of this forum, getting answers, getting insights, then dont you think that it is your turn to give back a little, Please contribute.
Please ask this sincere question to yourself, Are you the one that takes and takes and dosent give in return?. (Hopefully not). Now, If you have benefitted any way because of this forum, getting answers, getting insights, then dont you think that it is your turn to give back a little, Please contribute.
hair Iced passion tea lemonade
jonty_11
12-13 10:13 AM
Count me and 2 more members with me....lets have a plan..and execute it.
more...
vine93
06-10 03:54 PM
sent
hot Iced tea blends well with a
Jaime
09-10 12:35 PM
You want to start your own company and give jobs to Americans, but can't- Because you are on an H1-B, and you are not allowed to work for your own company if you start one, so you cannot support yourself.
more...
house cold passion tea lemonade!
anurakt
01-16 09:13 PM
If you remember that I had pledged $1000 in last 20$ campaign and you guys could only shell out $500 out of me...which means that I still have a block of $500 which was not spent for IV in the past. Here is my next pledge :
" I will donate a lumpsum amount of $500 when we have the following level of monthly contribution and verified by IV core members :
200 members for 20$ and 100 members for $50 and 20 members for $100 , there is no date restriction attached this time , but I hope that it's done in this month, I call upon the members who can take this challenge and take that $500 from my pocket this time"
Note : Kvrr has signed for $100 and I will sign up for another $100 , which means we have only 18 members to go for $100 monthly to finish one piece of my pledge.
Can anyone tomm morning give me an update on where we are at from my pledge point of view !!
Come on guys make me poorer by another $500 if you have *****.
" I will donate a lumpsum amount of $500 when we have the following level of monthly contribution and verified by IV core members :
200 members for 20$ and 100 members for $50 and 20 members for $100 , there is no date restriction attached this time , but I hope that it's done in this month, I call upon the members who can take this challenge and take that $500 from my pocket this time"
Note : Kvrr has signed for $100 and I will sign up for another $100 , which means we have only 18 members to go for $100 monthly to finish one piece of my pledge.
Can anyone tomm morning give me an update on where we are at from my pledge point of view !!
Come on guys make me poorer by another $500 if you have *****.
tattoo Venti Passion Fruit Iced Tea
hpandey
04-10 11:17 AM
seem kind of depressing . It looks like there are a lot more people from mid 2004 and before than from 2005 onwards.
is the sample size too small ( 939 people only ) or does it really signify that even the end 2004 people are in for a long long wait !!:rolleyes:
is the sample size too small ( 939 people only ) or does it really signify that even the end 2004 people are in for a long long wait !!:rolleyes:
more...
pictures Arnold Palmer Lite Iced Tea
neelu
12-12 10:48 AM
We have asked an immigration lawyer this question. Someone even quoted all the sections of INA and CFR(code of federal regulations) to make the point -- that you can have regulation changed to file 485.
The lawyer was of the opinion that you need change in INA to be able to file 485 when dates are not current. It cannot be done with administrative changes.
Hi Logiclife,
If an attorney says that it cannot be done with administrative changes, then I guess, we dont have much to argue.
But I cannot understand the logic behind why it cant be done. I mean, disallowing concurrent processing is possible by an administrative change, why is the reverse (or something similar like allowing 485 filing without pd being current), not possible?
I am sorry for not being to let go of this, but I thought, logic-life can see some logic in this!!! :)
Thank you.
The lawyer was of the opinion that you need change in INA to be able to file 485 when dates are not current. It cannot be done with administrative changes.
Hi Logiclife,
If an attorney says that it cannot be done with administrative changes, then I guess, we dont have much to argue.
But I cannot understand the logic behind why it cant be done. I mean, disallowing concurrent processing is possible by an administrative change, why is the reverse (or something similar like allowing 485 filing without pd being current), not possible?
I am sorry for not being to let go of this, but I thought, logic-life can see some logic in this!!! :)
Thank you.
dresses regular iced tea, lemonade
Madhuri
10-12 02:41 PM
PD Mar 2006
485 pending
Recd EAD
485 pending
Recd EAD
more...
makeup but starting to buy them
nonimmi
02-21 01:52 PM
yes, you can unless your eb3 I140 has been revoked for fraud or misrepresentation of facts.
Good info.
My attorney said EB3->EB2 is not possible now. Can you please post some link for this and pm me some attorney you may know have done this before.
Good info.
My attorney said EB3->EB2 is not possible now. Can you please post some link for this and pm me some attorney you may know have done this before.
girlfriend some Passion Tea Lemonade
imneedy
05-06 04:57 PM
I dont think we should relay on their 15 months time line. Its too late. I am sure in coming 15 months whole immigration system will be changed. May be we will see point based system or something different. And at that time information will be no use. They are smart that is why they gave us 15 months. They will wait for 12 months to Congress to do something and then if nothing happen they will write SQL query in last 3 months.
gc_on_demand, did you or anyone else here got similar letter?
gc_on_demand, did you or anyone else here got similar letter?
hairstyles Arnold Palmer Lite Iced Tea Lemonade
svr_76
06-10 01:38 PM
@eastindia: I doubt if that 's required - "Basically a letter from employer". You definitely include your I-485 notice that shows that a AOS in pending.
eb3_nepa
07-05 01:37 PM
1) You can VIEW the forums ONLY if you are a REGISTERED member (that part is FREE).
2) You can POST replies to people's questions only if you are a REGISTERED member (again this part is FREE).
3) HOWEVER, you can start a NEW Thread ONLY IF you are a PAID member (the minimum fee should be $10 - $20)
2) You can POST replies to people's questions only if you are a REGISTERED member (again this part is FREE).
3) HOWEVER, you can start a NEW Thread ONLY IF you are a PAID member (the minimum fee should be $10 - $20)
luvschocolates
08-21 02:17 PM
If I was not required to fill out the form I-485, then why did USCIS send me a letter requesting me to do so? I'm sick of the smart a$$ remarks from some of you. This isn't funny and there are human beings involved. If you can't be helpful then please don't bother responding. Keep your remarks to yourself. I came here looking for some help, not a bunch of criticism and hurtful comments. It's not that simple just to go back to Canada like you think and I can't just leave the person I care for because you think I'm considered indispensible. Perhaps you'd like to talk to the people in this household and see just how willing they are to let me go. This is not just about packing up and leaving, I have roots here now and I cannot just abandon these folks. There is NO ONE to take care of them, not family, not friends and they do not want a stranger - period. We already tried that and it didn't work. How many people do you know that would willingly take care of a 500 lb. bedridden person, change catheters, bathe them and cook, clean and take care of other household chores simply for room and board? We offered the job to legal American citizens and when they heard the man was 500 lbs, they backed off before hearing the rest. I AM WILLING, he is used to me, I am used to him and there is no one else, including his own children, who will do what I do, so before you tell me I'm indispensible, try doing this job. We can't even get professional medical personnel in here to help, so exactly how am I indispensible under the circumstances? Should I just abandon him and let him rot and die in his own bed? Is that considered humane in your eyes? If he's obese does he not deserve the same quality of care as an ideal body weight person? Does his obesity make him undeserving of humane treatment? As I said, this is not just about legalities, this is about a human being needing someone to care for him and it's not that simple to get another person in here. I deal with him 24/7, I don't get a day off - would you do that? I doubt it!
If you had to go back to your country under similar circumstances I don't think you would be any more pleased than I am. USCIS has not asked me to leave, they are requesting more information. I have no problem with that part, just the time frame given and the money involved. I am more than willing to submit what they requested, but I need more time, especially for the medical exam after reading what is required.
As for the person that filed on my behalf, HE is the one who spoke to USCIS, so they didn't do their job if they did not tell him what was required. He wrote down every single thing they said we had to file and we did so. If they failed to mention what was needed, how would he find out? He's elderly, disabled and not computer literate so it's hard for him to look things up on his own. He simply did what they told him to do and if he screwed up, it's because he wasn't told what was needed. You can't expect everyone to be knowledgeable on stuff like this, it was all new to him and very unfamiliar.
If I had known more was required, I would have taken care of it myself, but since he was the person to file the application - which by the way was an employment based according to what we were told, then he did only what he was told and had no clue there was more beyond that.
I am trying to find an attorney and I will get this sorted out one way or the other, but leaving this household is not an option and if the American people care so much about each other, then I'd like to see one of them show up here and do what I do. I'm not naive enough to believe that will happen.
If you had to go back to your country under similar circumstances I don't think you would be any more pleased than I am. USCIS has not asked me to leave, they are requesting more information. I have no problem with that part, just the time frame given and the money involved. I am more than willing to submit what they requested, but I need more time, especially for the medical exam after reading what is required.
As for the person that filed on my behalf, HE is the one who spoke to USCIS, so they didn't do their job if they did not tell him what was required. He wrote down every single thing they said we had to file and we did so. If they failed to mention what was needed, how would he find out? He's elderly, disabled and not computer literate so it's hard for him to look things up on his own. He simply did what they told him to do and if he screwed up, it's because he wasn't told what was needed. You can't expect everyone to be knowledgeable on stuff like this, it was all new to him and very unfamiliar.
If I had known more was required, I would have taken care of it myself, but since he was the person to file the application - which by the way was an employment based according to what we were told, then he did only what he was told and had no clue there was more beyond that.
I am trying to find an attorney and I will get this sorted out one way or the other, but leaving this household is not an option and if the American people care so much about each other, then I'd like to see one of them show up here and do what I do. I'm not naive enough to believe that will happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment