CIS Ombudsman 2015 Annual Report to Congress

[Administrator2]

CIS Ombudsman 2015 Annual Report to Congress | Homeland Security

"Employment-Based Immigrant Petition
(Form I-140) Processing
Stakeholders continue to report concerns pertaining to
USCIS’ handling of employment-based immigrant petitions.
With extensive backlogs in certain employment-based
preference categories due to statutory visa caps and potential
changes to USCIS policies on petitioner-beneficiary rights,
it is imperative that USCIS maintain clear and consistent
communication with its stakeholders. In recent months,
USCIS has taken steps to review its longstanding policy
on who is an “affected party” when it comes to appealing
a decision of a Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien
Worker. The Ombudsman encourages USCIS to consider
the significant case law and recognize legal standing for
certain beneficiaries of a Form I-140 petition"

Read Page 66 to 69 of this Obmudsman's report.

It seems lawyer organizations are against making the beneficiary as the "affected party". Some time back IV had submitted response to Amicus Brief to AAO court asking to make beneficiary as affected party so our members know what is going on with the petition, have access to documents and RFE/decision notices etc.

This Ombudsman report has not adequately covered the issues of skilled immigrants and exploitation. We have noticed the trend in last 2-3 years that Ombudsman is mostly in the pocket of lawyers and employers, trying to obfuscate the green card backlog.

[abcdgc]

Originally Posted by administrator2

cis ombudsman 2015 annual report to congress | homeland security


this ombudsman report has not adequately covered the issues of skilled immigrants and exploitation. We have noticed the trend in last 2-3 years that ombudsman is mostly in the pocket of lawyers and employers, trying to obfuscate the green card backlog.

shame on uscis ombudsman

shame on uscis ombudsman

shame on uscis ombudsman

shame on uscis ombudsman

[sengs]

This makes it imperative that HR 213 must pass.

[DMX17]

So, is this the report we were expecting?

[Administrator2]

No, this is not the same report that you are referring. In this sphere, many things are referred too as "report". When that report will come out, we will let you know.

Originally Posted by DMX17

So, is this the report we were expecting?

[DMX17]

Thanks.

[sdeshpan]

Originally Posted by Administrator2

No, this is not the same report that you are referring. In this sphere, many things are referred too as "report". When that report will come out, we will let you know.

Ah, I didn't think "that" report was still in play. It's been so long that most people forgot about it, I guess. I remember it was supposed to be delayed by a few weeks and not months, but alas, time is going by. I understand stuff is being worked on in the background and IV has been as transparent and open as they can practically be, but boy would it feel reassuring when we hear it directly from the Administration!