Has anyone filed an EAD to a local office with code (a)(6) short before K-1 expires

[rebeccajo 14]

Y,

Ah! Gotcha. I remember (per the instructions) submitting a copy of Wes' I797 receipt notice for the I485 when we renewed his EAD.

I mistakenly thought I was missing out on some wrinkle with filing EAD shortly after filing AOS. There should be no problem doing so if the receipt notice is included, correct? (And of course one mails it to the correct location.)

Becca

becca,

I-765 submitted on the basis of (c )(9) needs to include the Receipt Notice for the I-485 or other evidence that an I-485 has been submitted. Mr and Mrs Bird quote their attorney as saying that the two application were submitted on the same day but to two different CIS offices, so I'm hard pressed to think of what evidence of the I-485 filing might have been sent with the I-765.

Just the fact that the I-765 was sent to the wrong place for a (c )(9) submission might be enough to kill it.

Yodrak

"If the I-765 mailed on June 1 was on the basis of (c )(9) it may also have been a waste of time and money if it was not sent in the same package with the I-485 application to adjust status.

Yodrak"

OK, you've got me here.

Why do you say this? Must be another wrinkle you know that I don't (happens often).

*plus I messed up the quote function - meh!*

[Mr and Mrs Bird 0]

The EAD application was mailed same day and I was wondering if they have asked our attorney for more evidence since their recieve date online is 2 weeks later.

I noticed that our case was touched yesterday, so really hope everything is ok

[Mr and Mrs Bird 0]

OMG I can't believe this

Thank you all for helping me.

Her is my email from my lawyer for few min ago

Dear Anette,

I have reviewed the regulations and it appears that you are correct. I have contacted the CIS California Service Center by e-mail to ask that they switch the requested work authorization category from (a)(6) to ©(9) on the applications for you and Thomas. I will keep you posted on their response.

If we do not hear back from them before my return to the States, we will file new employment authorization applications in category ©(9) (at my expense, of course) to avoid any delay in issuance. Work permits would not have been issued to you in category ©(9) prior to your adjustment interview anyway because of the special pilot program in San Diego for 90-day adjustment adjudications. Filing in late July should not delay issuance of work permits in category ©(9) if your cases cannot be approved at the time of your first interview.

I apologize for my error, but will do everything possible to correct the mistake.

[LaL 418]

OMG I can't believe this

Thank you all for helping me.

Her is my email from my lawyer for few min ago

Dear Anette,

I have reviewed the regulations and it appears that you are correct. I have contacted the CIS California Service Center by e-mail to ask that they switch the requested work authorization category from (a)(6) to ©(9) on the applications for you and Thomas. I will keep you posted on their response.

If we do not hear back from them before my return to the States, we will file new employment authorization applications in category ©(9) (at my expense, of course) to avoid any delay in issuance. Work permits would not have been issued to you in category ©(9) prior to your adjustment interview anyway because of the special pilot program in San Diego for 90-day adjustment adjudications. Filing in late July should not delay issuance of work permits in category ©(9) if your cases cannot be approved at the time of your first interview.

I apologize for my error, but will do everything possible to correct the mistake.

1. I am glad to see your attorney rechecked themselves and fessed up to his mistake. Looks like you will be put straight even if you lose a few weeks processing time.

2. has anyone else heard of a San Diego pilot program?

[Mr and Mrs Bird 0]

OMG I can't believe this

Thank you all for helping me.

Her is my email from my lawyer for few min ago

Dear Anette,

I have reviewed the regulations and it appears that you are correct. I have contacted the CIS California Service Center by e-mail to ask that they switch the requested work authorization category from (a)(6) to ©(9) on the applications for you and Thomas. I will keep you posted on their response.

If we do not hear back from them before my return to the States, we will file new employment authorization applications in category ©(9) (at my expense, of course) to avoid any delay in issuance. Work permits would not have been issued to you in category ©(9) prior to your adjustment interview anyway because of the special pilot program in San Diego for 90-day adjustment adjudications. Filing in late July should not delay issuance of work permits in category ©(9) if your cases cannot be approved at the time of your first interview.

I apologize for my error, but will do everything possible to correct the mistake.

1. I am glad to see your attorney rechecked themselves and fessed up to his mistake. Looks like you will be put straight even if you lose a few weeks processing time.

2. has anyone else heard of a San Diego pilot program?

I don't know about this pilot hahaha.

I bombed him with emails the last 2 days of everything you guys have told me. And copy and paste for him several regulations and instructions

[Mr and Mrs Bird 0]

OMG I can't believe this

Thank you all for helping me.

Her is my email from my lawyer for few min ago

Dear Anette,

I have reviewed the regulations and it appears that you are correct. I have contacted the CIS California Service Center by e-mail to ask that they switch the requested work authorization category from (a)(6) to ©(9) on the applications for you and Thomas. I will keep you posted on their response.

If we do not hear back from them before my return to the States, we will file new employment authorization applications in category ©(9) (at my expense, of course) to avoid any delay in issuance. Work permits would not have been issued to you in category ©(9) prior to your adjustment interview anyway because of the special pilot program in San Diego for 90-day adjustment adjudications. Filing in late July should not delay issuance of work permits in category ©(9) if your cases cannot be approved at the time of your first interview.

I apologize for my error, but will do everything possible to correct the mistake.

1. I am glad to see your attorney rechecked themselves and fessed up to his mistake. Looks like you will be put straight even if you lose a few weeks processing time.

2. has anyone else heard of a San Diego pilot program?

Here is what my lawyer was talking about.

USCIS also described a second pilot program currently in place. I-485 applicants who reside in the San Diego USCIS District, and who file an I-485 with the NBC, undergo a slightly different I-485 adjudications process than customers residing in other geographic locations. Within 90 days of the I-485 filing, the San Diego based I-485s are pre-screened at the NBC, an ASC appointment is issued to the applicant, and an I-485 interview appointment is scheduled. USCIS stated that it intended to expand this pilot program to the Albany and San Antonio service areas as well.

[Mr and Mrs Bird 0]

Very interesting

USCIS explained that it was currently running two different pilot programs, the goal of which was to reduce I-485 processing time to under 90 days. This would eliminate the need for advance paroles, EADs, etc. to be issued while I-485s were pending. Under the DORA pilot, instead of mailing the I-485 to the NBC, certain I-485 applicants (including family-based I-485 applicants) residing within the jurisdiction of the Dallas USCIS Office make an InfoPass appointment and bring the completed I-485 application to the appointment. If the application is complete, the applicant is interviewed that day at USCIS. Applicants later attend a biometrics appointment. Once the biometrics are cleared, a green card is generated and mailed to the applicant. All of this takes place within 90 days of the date of the InfoPass appointment. On November 20, 2006, the DORA pilot program was expanded to two other locations, Oklahoma City and El Paso. When initially implemented, DORA was an optional pilot program in Dallas. Under the expansion, the program became mandatory in all three cites. Therefore, after November 20, 2006, customers residing within the jurisdictions of Dallas, Oklahoma City, and El Paso must file their applications via the pilot program procedures. For more information about this program

new info.