ALL F4s

[Umairkhan 0]

.....

its not true not a single person in that range was issued a visa. my pd is 27 aug 2001 and didn't receive any interview even and u r talking about visa lol. All the people in that range of pd will be current again and will get interview and visa after .

[Waleed39 10]

what they do they check in medical checkup before interview

they basically want to make sure that you do not have any disease that could spread to others when you go to the US

[nrocky 3]

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/nri/visa-and-immigration/us-immigration-now-that-the-bill-is-dead-reforms-should-take-course/articleshow/21093668.cms

[AHMED042 1]

did the cases go in adminitrative processing for names

[jolly786 96]

did the cases go in adminitrative processing for names

YES..

[AHMED042 1]

YES..

is AHMED is in that list and what are those names

[Hiiiii1972 5]

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/nri/visa-and-immigration/us-immigration-now-that-the-bill-is-dead-reforms-should-take-course/articleshow/21093668.cms

Edited July 16, 2013 by Hiiiii1972

[Hiiiii1972 5]

It says it will be beneficial for EB category. Now if its dead what will be the future of F4

[AHMED042 1]

plz guide me i am at age of 27 (unmarried) my case pirority date is 06/07/2001 and case approval date is 25/08/2005 and i am also doing a job will the CSPA case is applicable on me i am bit worried coz i hope i will get the letter in the next bulletin what should i do

reply me as soon as possible

Edited July 16, 2013 by AHMED042

[bebin 4]

Actually i have one graph ..which shows the number of petitions filled from 1997 to 2002 for F4.....i am trying to upload it..but it shows error over here......

so let me explain you..In the graph the demand of visas of PD 2001 is very very high up to July 2001 or august 2001...after august 2001 PD the demand become very very very low ).....now when i compared the demand of visas from august 2001 to December 2002 with the demand of 1999 Pd's it is almost same....so guys now u can check that the Pd of 1999 will cover in only 6 months........

Could you kindly direct me as to where you got this graph? Would be happy to take a look at it because I've been trying to get it on NVC site but is unsuccessful.

[bebin 4]

Actually i have one graph ..which shows the number of petitions filled from 1997 to 2002 for F4.....i am trying to upload it..but it shows error over here......

so let me explain you..In the graph the demand of visas of PD 2001 is very very high up to July 2001 or august 2001...after august 2001 PD the demand become very very very low ).....now when i compared the demand of visas from august 2001 to December 2002 with the demand of 1999 Pd's it is almost same....so guys now u can check that the Pd of 1999 will cover in only 6 months........

Could you kindly direct me as to where you got this graph? Would be happy to take a look at it because I've been trying to get it on NVC site but is unsuccessful.

[jolly786 96]

plz guide me i am at age of 27 (unmarried) my case pirority date is 06/07/2001 and case approval date is 25/08/2005 and i am also doing a job will the CSPA case is applicable on me i am bit worried coz i hope i will get the letter in the next bulletin what should i do

reply me as soon as possible

sorry..so sad...you are not eligible under CSPA.....

[lengygf 25]

Guys, LIFE Act isn't causing the slow priority date movement this fiscal year. One of the things LIFE (Legal Immigration Family Equity) Act of 2000 did was granting adjustment of status (not I-130 filing) to those who were left out from 1986 amnesty, as well as some other unlawfully present aliens (who were petitioned for permanent residency through I-130) whose PD was already current (or have been waiting for 3 years) but otherwise unable to adjust their status due to illegal presence.

Therefore LIFE Act caused extraordinarily slow PD movement in FY2001 (movement of 4 months total) when these people were allowed to submit for AOS. As for why this FY is slow, I have no idea, but LIFE Act isn't the culprit.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

I looked at the explanations regarding LIFE Act. Basically, the idea is:

An applicant may qualify for adjustment of status to that of a LPR, if (s)he is the beneficiary of a non-frivolous immigrant visa petition (I-130, I-140, etc.), that was filed before April 30, 2001. The petition need not have been approved, but must have been eligible for approval at the time of filing.

So basically, when the act was announced at the end of 2000, immigrants still had plenty of time to file I-130 petitions for their undocumented relatives. I also read from another source that the USCIS received almost a million petitions before Apr 30th 2001, and some of them were "bare" petitions (came with no supporting documents, only I-130 form). Therefore, I believe there were quite a few Hispanic petitioner who took advantage of this act and filed petition for their undocumented siblings. Note this LIFE Act is still effective, meaning once those petitions with 2001-ish PD got current a few month ago, those undocumented people (if they are still residing in United States, and I believe most of them do) can file AOS with USCIS according to LIFE Act, regardless of their illegal immigration status.

Please also correct me if someone has better insights into this thing.

Edited July 17, 2013 by lengygf

[lengygf 25]

Guys, LIFE Act isn't causing the slow priority date movement this fiscal year. One of the things LIFE (Legal Immigration Family Equity) Act of 2000 did was granting adjustment of status (not I-130 filing) to those who were left out from 1986 amnesty, as well as some other unlawfully present aliens (who were petitioned for permanent residency through I-130) whose PD was already current (or have been waiting for 3 years) but otherwise unable to adjust their status due to illegal presence.

Therefore LIFE Act caused extraordinarily slow PD movement in FY2001 (movement of 4 months total) when these people were allowed to submit for AOS. As for why this FY is slow, I have no idea, but LIFE Act isn't the culprit.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

ok here we go. I found this old post from another member on this forum.

The Biggest Amnesty Yet

By 2000, high-immigration advocates again saw the need to shield this growing illegal population from the 3/10-year bar. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) introduced the LIFE Act, which was enacted on December 21, 2000, as part of an appropriations bill. It offered legalization to anyone present in the United States, legally or illegally, who had a petition submitted on their behalf by April 30, 2001. At the time the INS estimated that about 640,000 illegal aliens would benefit from this legislation.

Again, the INS went to great lengths to stretch the definition of what would be considered acceptable legalizing paperwork. In a January 2001 memorandum signed by Michael D. Cronin, Acting Executive Associate Commissioner, adjudicators were directed to accept even the most bare-bones petitions, without documentation of the claims made within: “Applications and petitions submitted under Section 245(i) of the Act may not be rejected prior to May 1, 2001, as long as they bear the required fee and the applicant’s signature.”

Of course, the applicant eventually does have to document his eligibility for a green card. But the processing backlogs caused by the LIFE Act guaranteed any applicant a years-long grace period of near immunity from removal before becoming subject to INS scrutiny.

The scale of the LIFE Act amnesty dwarfs all others since the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 (see Figure 1). From January 2001 until the end of August 2001, more than 1.8 million new non-refugee/asylee applications and petitions were received by the INS, compared with 725,000 over the same period in 2000. (The application deadline for the program was April 30, but the INS did not finish counting them until the end of August.)¹⁹ This avalanche of petitions caused the already too-large processing backlogs at INS to become completely unmanageable. The Department of Homeland Security has inherited this workload; in February 2003, it reported that it had a backlog of more than 2.8 million adjustment applications and petitions.

Soon after the LIFE Act deadline passed, advocates again began pressuring members of Congress to extend the deadline or make 245(i) permanent. Congress was on the verge of doing so on September 11, 2001, but dropped the idea, as members recognized the political risk involved in adopting any measures that would encourage more illegal immigration in this new era of attention to homeland security.

[prabh 0]

I looked at the explanations regarding LIFE Act. Basically, the idea is:

An applicant may qualify for adjustment of status to that of a LPR, if (s)he is the beneficiary of a non-frivolous immigrant visa petition (I-130, I-140, etc.), that was filed before April 30, 2001. The petition need not have been approved, but must have been eligible for approval at the time of filing.

So basically, when the act was announced at the end of 2000, immigrants still had plenty of time to file I-130 petitions for their undocumented relatives. I also read from another source that the USCIS received almost a million petitions before Apr 30th 2001, and some of them were "bare" petitions (came with no supporting documents, only I-130 form). Therefore, I believe there were quite a few Hispanic petitioner who took advantage of this act and filed petition for their undocumented siblings. Note this LIFE Act is still effective, meaning once those petitions with 2001-ish PD got current a few month ago, those undocumented people (if they are still residing in United States, and I believe most of them do) can file AOS with USCIS according to LIFE Act, regardless of their illegal immigration status.

Please also correct me if someone has better insights into this thing.

it means now it should move faster but it is just one month. hope it moves faster in future. PD nov 2003