From snow@lucerne.rice.edu  Thu Aug  5 23:25:37 1993
Received: from moe.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA12728); Thu, 5 Aug 93 23:25:37 CDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA29156); Thu, 5 Aug 93 23:24:17 CDT
Received: by lucerne.rice.edu (AA06668); Thu, 5 Aug 93 23:25:38 CDT
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <9308060425.AA06668@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: Misc,Personal:  package #1
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1993 23:25:37 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1349      
Status: RO


*************************************************

>From:   IN%"guo@bach.convex.com"  5-AUG-1993 13:07:46.21
To: IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
Subj:   fax signature will be changed

Hi, there,

    I have received hint from a netter, that my fax's (dated 8/3 to
INS HQ and CSSA) usage of 'LADS network' is inappropriate.  And I apologize
to every one of you who thought I used your participance in the group
inappropriate.

    For the rest of you who second my fax and appreciate my efforts,
I would ask that if you still want me to do this for you as a group, I
will either:
    use your email address in the signature,
     or:
    withheld your address upon request.

    I will use:
      A subgroup of concerned applicant @ lads@lucerne.rice.edu
        <signatures> ... <*** signatures>

    Hope this would put an end to this.  Thanks.
                        - Jimmy

--------------------------------------------------------

WE ARE BEHIND 100%.


******************************************************8

>From:	IN%"B0LIU001@ulkyvx.louisville.edu"  "BIN LIU"  5-AUG-1993 23:32:03.80
To:	IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
Subj:	Procedure for LAD in China

I would appreciate informatin regarding the application procedure for
late arrival (follow to join) in China.  

Is I-428 enough? Anything else to accompanying this form?  


Thanks for advice.  

From my@math.luc.edu  Thu Aug  5 23:50:04 1993
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA13125); Thu, 5 Aug 93 23:50:04 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA20818; Thu, 5 Aug 93 23:50:29 CDT
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 93 23:50:29 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308060450.AA20818@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
Subject: J-1,J-2,F-2,DED:    package #1
Status: RO

******************************************
>From: luo <U61985%UICVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      I-94
To: lads <lads@lucerne.rice.edu>
Content-Length: 1506

My I-94 is in INS center.  If I go to lOCAL INS, I can only give them a copy of
 it and a letter from foreign student office in my uinversity certified my I-94
 was mailed to INS center by the office.  Do you think I will have trouble when
 I send my application as LAD at LOCAL INS.
Any comments are welcome.
luo


**************************************

>From: anonymous <U42212%UICVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      rejection and acception
To: folks <lads@lucerne.rice.edu>

Folks:
I hope someone can summerize the information about INS offices where
the LAD application is rejected or  accepted. I try to give the list below.
Please add and correct it( update on 8/5).

Accepted: Los Angeles, Houston, San Francisco, Memphis, Detroit, Dallas,
Indianapolis, Hawaii, Boston, Miami, Portland....

Rejected: Chicago, New York,...

Accepted but troublesome: ...


*****************************************

>From: LX4497%ALBNYVMS.bitnet@uacsc2.albany.edu
Subject: LAD form filling
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu

I am a CSPA pricipal. My wife and son are LAD. In Form I-485 Part 3. section B,
   they need to fill item "Apply with you ?". How should my wife fill this item
   ?  Should she fill "yes" or "no" ?


*******************************************

>From: AGYIY@acvax.inre.asu.edu
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu

HELP!!!
HI,
I am a LAD. My visa is F2(passport). But the LA INS officer wrote F1 in my I-94
and I-20 when I entered US two years ago.
Is that a big problem? What should I do now?
Thank you!



----- End Included Message -----


From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Fri Aug  6 09:58:34 1993
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA11239); Fri, 6 Aug 93 09:58:34 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA04053; Fri, 6 Aug 93 10:57:10 EDT
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 93 10:48:35 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308061448.AA20981@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
Subject: package#1 about Forms and Certificate
Status: RO

Sorry for the delay of this packages:
================================================================
==  The following are packed information form LAD-network.    ==
==  Please address your correspondence to the sender.         ==
==  To sign on / off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"            ==
==  To contribute information mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
================================================================
                       begin  
==========
>From:   IN%"LX4497%ALBNYVMS.bitnet@uacsc2.albany.edu"  5-AUG-1993 21:43:08.89
To:     IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   LAD form filling

I am a CSPA pricipal. My wife and son are LAD. In Form I-485 Part 3. section B,
   they need to fill item "Apply with you ?". How should my wife fill this item
   ?  Should she fill "yes" or "no" ?

==========
>From: AGYIY@acvax.inre.asu.edu
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
cc:

HELP!!!
HI,
I am a LAD. My visa is F2(passport). But the LA INS officer wrote F1 in my I-94
and I-20 when I entered US two years ago.
Is that a big problem? What should I do now?
Thank you!

==========
>From:   IN%"xie@ds1.uwyo.edu"  5-AUG-1993 22:53:21.65
To:     IN%"CCNL@utarlvm1.uta.edu"  "Multiple recipients of list CCNL"
CC:     
Subj:   RE: Help needed: on filing form I-485 for LAD

>        (1) In Part 2. should a LAD choose (B) as an answer?
>            Is it necessary to put something like "Following to join a
>        CSPA Principal "?

Either checking (b) without any more note, or checking (h) with a note
"spouse of CSPA pincipal applicant" has been accepted by local INS
here.

>        (2) In Part 3. (B) List your present husband/wife Blanket
>            In the information about CSPA Principal, that is, Husband
>                or wife, what should I answer for "Applying with you"?

Answer "NO" to "applying with you".

===========
>From:   IN%"YU@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu"  5-AUG-1993 22:12:34.26
To:     IN%"SGU@draco.rutgers.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   RE: Package

Hello,

   I strongly agree with your post regarding birth certificate.  I do think
we need Dr. Zhao and IFCSS to lobby INS about this very important issue.
Lots of people are simply impossible to obtain anofficial b-certificate
 official b-certificate.
I further believe it can be accompplished through normal communication
with INS HQ.  I was very disappointed to see the cable released a few days
ago did not mention b-certificate at all.  We need to convince the INS that
China did not issue B-certificate at all before 1980 (?), and other secondary
evidence should be OK to substitute B-certificate.  I do not understand why
IFCSS did nothing about this important issue.  In fact, I do not think IFCSS
did enough about LADS.  Let's unite and try to figure out how to convince
INS that other evidence such as passport is good to substitue B-certificate.

Mulong Yu

============
>From:   IN%"YU@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu"  5-AUG-1993 22:22:30.06
To:     IN%"LADS@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   Birth Certificate???

Hello everybody,

    Do you think it is good idea to lobby Dr. Zhao and IFCSS, let them take
care of tremendous problem related to birth certificate?  I see enough
complains and uneasiness about this issue.  Even some poeple claimed lucky
because their dependents' application were accepted without official
birth certificate.  But, why known what is going to happy when local INS
birth certificate.  But, why known what is going to happy when local INS

===========
>From GW1BB@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU Thu Aug  5 06:04:42 1993
To: jiang@MATH.ORST.EDU

I read your mail from LADs net.  Your mentioned that Chinese citizenship
I.D. can be used as birth certificate.  I cheked my I.D.(Chinese
citizenship), it did not show the birth place.  Do you know if INS
officier ask him that this I.D. did give birth place?  Your answer
will be deeply appreciated.  I don't have birth certificate.
Thank you very much.

===========
>From jiang Thu Aug  5 17:06:56 1993
To: GW1BB@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
Cc: jiang


I just came back from Portland INS for my son to apply for PR. Three of us
went there today. Neither of us has birth certificate notirized directly in
China. Everything went fine.

One of us only showed a copy of her Chinese cityzenship ID. (Yes, there is no
birth place on it.) She was only asked to show her original Chinese citizenship
ID. That's it ! Her application was accepted. The INS officer didn't mention
anything about the birth place.

Three of us obtained working permits immediately.(My son is more than 14 years
old.) One more thing is that the I-94 Forms of all of us were taken by the INS.
The INS officer said "You don't need it any more. It goes to your file." Will
it bring any trouble later ? I don't know.

================
>From: luo <U61985%UICVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      I-94
To: lads <lads@lucerne.rice.edu>

My I-94 is in INS center.  If I go to lOCAL INS, I can only give them a copy of
 it and a letter from foreign student office in my uinversity certified my I-94
 was mailed to INS center by the office.  Do you think I will have trouble when
 I send my application as LAD at LOCAL INS.
Any comments are welcome.
luo

=================




From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Fri Aug  6 10:06:30 1993
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA11254); Fri, 6 Aug 93 10:06:30 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA04287; Fri, 6 Aug 93 11:05:05 EDT
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 93 10:56:29 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308061456.AA21050@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
Subject: Resend Package#1 about Forms and Certificate
Status: RO

Sorry! The previous package is not complete:
================================================================
==  The following are packed information form LAD-network.    ==
==  Please address your correspondence to the sender.         ==
==  To sign on / off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"            ==
==  To contribute information mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
================================================================
                       begin  
==========

>From:   IN%"LX4497%ALBNYVMS.bitnet@uacsc2.albany.edu"  5-AUG-1993 21:43:08.89
To:     IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   LAD form filling

I am a CSPA pricipal. My wife and son are LAD. In Form I-485 Part 3. section B,
   they need to fill item "Apply with you ?". How should my wife fill this item
   ?  Should she fill "yes" or "no" ?

============

>From @ricevm1.rice.edu:ZXD100@PSUVM.PSU.EDU  Thu Aug  5 23:17:39 1993
Date:    Thu, 5 Aug 93 23:06 EDT
>From: <ZXD100@psuvm.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: package
To: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
Cc: lads@spike.rice.edu
In-Reply-To:  SGU AT draco.rutgers.edu -- Thu, 05 Aug 1993 22:13:47 -0400 (EDT)

To fill the " apply with you", anwser "yes", but write "seperately" in the blan
k. good luck.


==========

>From: AGYIY@acvax.inre.asu.edu
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
cc:

HELP!!!
HI,
I am a LAD. My visa is F2(passport). But the LA INS officer wrote F1 in my I-94
and I-20 when I entered US two years ago.
Is that a big problem? What should I do now?
Thank you!

==========

>From:   IN%"xie@ds1.uwyo.edu"  5-AUG-1993 22:53:21.65
To:     IN%"CCNL@utarlvm1.uta.edu"  "Multiple recipients of list CCNL"
CC:     
Subj:   RE: Help needed: on filing form I-485 for LAD

>        (1) In Part 2. should a LAD choose (B) as an answer?
>            Is it necessary to put something like "Following to join a
>        CSPA Principal "?

Either checking (b) without any more note, or checking (h) with a note
"spouse of CSPA pincipal applicant" has been accepted by local INS
here.

>        (2) In Part 3. (B) List your present husband/wife Blanket
>            In the information about CSPA Principal, that is, Husband
>                or wife, what should I answer for "Applying with you"?

Answer "NO" to "applying with you".

===========

>From:   IN%"YU@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu"  5-AUG-1993 22:12:34.26
To:     IN%"SGU@draco.rutgers.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   RE: Package

Hello,

   I strongly agree with your post regarding birth certificate.  I do think
we need Dr. Zhao and IFCSS to lobby INS about this very important issue.
Lots of people are simply impossible to obtain anofficial b-certificate
 official b-certificate.
I further believe it can be accompplished through normal communication
with INS HQ.  I was very disappointed to see the cable released a few days
ago did not mention b-certificate at all.  We need to convince the INS that
China did not issue B-certificate at all before 1980 (?), and other secondary
evidence should be OK to substitute B-certificate.  I do not understand why
IFCSS did nothing about this important issue.  In fact, I do not think IFCSS
did enough about LADS.  Let's unite and try to figure out how to convince
INS that other evidence such as passport is good to substitue B-certificate.

Mulong Yu

============

>From:   IN%"YU@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu"  5-AUG-1993 22:22:30.06
To:     IN%"LADS@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   Birth Certificate???

Hello everybody,

    Do you think it is good idea to lobby Dr. Zhao and IFCSS, let them take
care of tremendous problem related to birth certificate?  I see enough
complains and uneasiness about this issue.  Even some poeple claimed lucky
because their dependents' application were accepted without official
birth certificate.  But, why known what is going to happy when local INS
birth certificate.  But, why known what is going to happy when local INS

===========

>From GW1BB@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU Thu Aug  5 06:04:42 1993
To: jiang@MATH.ORST.EDU

I read your mail from LADs net.  Your mentioned that Chinese citizenship
I.D. can be used as birth certificate.  I cheked my I.D.(Chinese
citizenship), it did not show the birth place.  Do you know if INS
officier ask him that this I.D. did give birth place?  Your answer
will be deeply appreciated.  I don't have birth certificate.
Thank you very much.

===========

>From jiang Thu Aug  5 17:06:56 1993
To: GW1BB@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
Cc: jiang


I just came back from Portland INS for my son to apply for PR. Three of us
went there today. Neither of us has birth certificate notirized directly in
China. Everything went fine.

One of us only showed a copy of her Chinese cityzenship ID. (Yes, there is no
birth place on it.) She was only asked to show her original Chinese citizenship
ID. That's it ! Her application was accepted. The INS officer didn't mention
anything about the birth place.

Three of us obtained working permits immediately.(My son is more than 14 years
old.) One more thing is that the I-94 Forms of all of us were taken by the INS.
The INS officer said "You don't need it any more. It goes to your file." Will
it bring any trouble later ? I don't know.

================

>From: luo <U61985%UICVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      I-94
To: lads <lads@lucerne.rice.edu>

My I-94 is in INS center.  If I go to lOCAL INS, I can only give them a copy of
 it and a letter from foreign student office in my uinversity certified my I-94
 was mailed to INS center by the office.  Do you think I will have trouble when
 I send my application as LAD at LOCAL INS.
Any comments are welcome.
luo

=================

>From:   IN%"nwang@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu"  "Ning Wang"  6-AUG-1993 02:37:58.63
To:     IN%"SGU@draco.rutgers.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   RE:  package
I have a friend with some case  with you, She went to INS at San Antonio Tx
yesterday, and gave copy of I-94 and letter from foreign student office.Her 
appication was accepted. 

Good Luck

NW

=================

>From:   IN%"gsbs1041@UTSPH.SPH.UTH.TMC.EDU"  5-AUG-1993 23:09:27.63
To:     IN%"SGU@draco.rutgers.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   RE: package

With the copy of your I-94, I think you can to to the INS without any
problem. I just come back from HOUSTON INS to apply for my wife, the even
don't want the original of the marrige licence and birth certificate.
The INS officer even asked me if I want the original back so that they
could just keep a copy of it. But be sure to have the copy of your
I-94 form's both sides.
Good luck!!!

=================

>From:   IN%"gliu@ucdavis.edu"  6-AUG-1993 00:28:46.40
To:     IN%"lads@spike.rice.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   Format of birth or marrige certificate

Hi, Dear netters; 
        I have asked my relatives who are in China to get birth and
marriage certificates for my wife and daughter. Because that is a small
town, I concern they may not rearly know the right formats of these two
kinds of certificates. 
        So, I would like to ask anyone to post the correct formats of the
birth and marriage which have already went through the INS office. A
simple example is good enough. (Maybe they know this, well, maybe I
concern too much, sorry).
        Thank you for your attention and time!

==================

>From:   IN%"B0LIU001@ulkyvx.louisville.edu"  "BIN LIU"  5-AUG-1993 23:32:03.80
To:     IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
Subj:   Procedure for LAD in China

I would appreciate informatin regarding the application procedure for
late arrival (follow to join) in China.  

Is I-428 enough? Anything else to accompanying this form?  

Thanks for advice.

=======================

>From:   IN%"IZZYOS4@mvs.oac.ucla.edu"  "Weizhong He"  6-AUG-1993 01:15:22.68
To:     IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   Dependent in China

Can anyone tell me how I can fill the I-824 form for my son who is in China now
 and if there are any other forms besides I-824 form?

=======================

>From GUO@mps.ohio-state.edu  Fri Aug  6 10:45:43 1993
To: lads@spike.rice.edu

I guess there are three points in a certificate: parents' name,
time when you were born, where you were born.  It doesn't matter
how you arrange them as long as you have them on your certificate.
Most Chinese birth certificate will not put parents names on it.
As to the marrige certificate, you should have your name and your
spouse's name and place and time the marrige happened.
This is only my personal guess for your reference only.

========================

>From JIA_Z@nuacc.acns.nwu.edu  Fri Aug  6 10:46:48 1993
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 08:47 CDT
Subject: LAD's I-485 filed to Northern Service Center
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu

LAD's I-485 filed to Northern Service Center
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
My wife and my son are LADs in F-2.  We prepared I-485 application packages two
weeks ago.  We put two sets of I-485 applications in one envelop and mailed to
INS Northern Service Center on 7/28/93.  My son received his receipt yesterday
and my wife received hers today.  The receipt dates are 7/30/93.  Two A-numbers
were given.  The receipt numbers are LIN-93-209-50XXX.  Three paragraphs in
their receipts are the same as in my receipt except one that informed me to do
fingerprinting.  Information about their applications has been available in the
phone (402) 437-5218.

I post our experience here just for your reference.  I don't have any further
information.  Make your own judgment and decision.
Good Luck !!!!!

James 8/5/93
________________________________________________________________________________

List of CSPA-Family-Member PR Application and Attachments:

   1. Form I-485 (Application to Adjust Status), completed
   2. Copy of receipt for filing I-485 for CSPA-principal
   3. Application fee (A check of $120 payable to US-INS)
   4. Two photographs of ADIT-style
   5. Translation of marriage certificate, certified
   6. Translation of birth certificate, certified
   7. Form FD-258 (fingerprint Card), completed at XXXXXXXX Police Department
   8. Form I-693 (Medical Examination Report), in a sealed envelop, completed
   9. Form G325A (Biographic Information), completed
  10. Copy of Form I-94 (Arrival/Departure Record)
  11. Form I-134 (Affidavit of Support), completed by XXXXXXXXX XXX
  12. Letter of XXXXXXXXX XXX's employment from XXXXXXXXXXXX University
  13. Bank statement of XXXXXXXXX XXX's account at XXX bank
  14. Form 9003 (Additional Questions from IRS), completed
  15. Copy of letter showing waiver of two-year foreign residency requirement
  16. Copy of I-20 (Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant Student Status)
  17. Copy of IAP-66 (Certificate of Eligibility for Exchange Visitor Status)
  18. Photocopy of all pages of passport, notarized
________________________________________________________________________________
List of CSPA-Family-Member PR Application and Attachments (applicant under 14):

   1. Form I-485 (Application to Adjust Status), completed
   2. Copy of receipt for filing I-485 for CSPA-principal
   3. Application fee (A check of $95 payable to US-INS)
   4. Two photographs of ADIT-style
   5. Translation of birth certificate, certified
   6. Translation of parents' marriage certificate, certified
   7. Form I-693 (Medical Examination Report), in a sealed envelop, completed
   8. Copy of Form I-94 (Arrival/Departure Record)
   9. Form I-134 (Affidavit of Support), completed by XXXXXXXXX XXX
  10. Letter of XXXXXXXXX XXX's employment from XXXXXXXXXXXX University
  11. Bank statement of XXXXXXXXX XXX's account at XXX bank
  12. Form 9003 (Additional Questions from IRS), completed
  13. Copy of letter showing waiver of two-year foreign residency requirement
  14. Copy of I-20 (Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant Student Status)
  15. Copy of IAP-66 (Certificate of Eligibility for Exchange Visitor Status)
  16. Photocopy of all pages of passport, notarized
________________________________________________________________________________
BIRTH CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that:

     XXXXXXXXX XXX, male, was born on XXX XX, 19XX in XXXXXX, XXXXXXX Province,
     People's Republic of China.

Issued by XXXXX, XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX Province, People's Republic of China (SEAL).
Date of issuance: XXX X, 19XX
________________________________________________________________________________
MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE  No. XXX

This is to certify that:

            XXXXXX XXXX, male,   age XX,  and
            XXXXXX XXXX, female, age XX

were united in matrimony on a voluntary basis, as per prescription of the
People's Republic of China Marriage Law.

Issued by the People's Government of XXXXXXX City, XXXXXX District, XXXXXXX,
XXXXXXX Province, People's Republic of China (SEAL).
Date of issuance: XXX XX, 19XX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

			End
 


From shengj@acf2.nyu.edu  Fri Aug  6 10:50:47 1993
Received: from acf2.NYU.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA11497); Fri, 6 Aug 93 10:50:47 CDT
Received: by acf2.NYU.EDU (5.61/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
	id AA02681; Fri, 6 Aug 93 11:49:18 -0400
From: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
Message-Id: <9308061549.AA02681@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Subject: Package1.1: Status of Local INS
To: lads@spike.rice.edu, comm@lucerne.rice.edu
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 11:49:18 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1224      
Status: RO

Hi, netters,
The following is a list of local INS offices' status on LAD issue. For
those wish withhold their addresses please tell me. The default
is posting the addresses for netters' reference.
This list is updated every day and posted every evening at 9pm. Netters
may still go their INS office even its status may be "reject" and tell me your
experience there so that this list can be mostly updated. For those offices
which are still rejecting LAD applications, we may organize ourselves and
lobby higher authorities through suitable channels and push them to accept
applications.

DATE: 08/06/1993

              	STATUS	SOURCE
Boston          accept  wl@cfaitamp.harvard.edu
                        notes: 2year waiver may not be needed from 08/09
Chicago       	reject

Dallas??      	reject	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

Detroit         accept

Hawaii          accept

Houston       	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

Indianapolis    accept

Los Angeles     accept

Memphis         accept

Miami           accept

Pittsburgh    	accept	Bin_Luo@ius4.ius.cs.cmu.edu
			notes: 2year waiver may be needed before applying PR

Portland        accept

San Antonio	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

San Francisco   accept

From my@math.luc.edu  Fri Aug  6 12:59:13 1993
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA12096); Fri, 6 Aug 93 12:59:13 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA21488; Fri, 6 Aug 93 12:59:35 CDT
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 93 12:59:35 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308061759.AA21488@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
Subject: J-1,J-2,F-2,DED:    package #1.1
Status: RO

*************************************************************************
>From:    <DXW115@PSUVM.PSU.EDU>
Subject: J-1 LADs
To:      c492347@mizzou1.missouri.edu
 
Hi, Netters. Thank you for your responds about my J-1 LADs problem. I have
contacted a lawyer in DC and a Chinese consul in NY. Her are some messages
I got. (1) J-1 LADs can apply PR only after obtaining a waiver letter from
USIA. Some local INS may accept the application, but it will probably be
rejected. The application of waiver can not be handed as the same time as
the application of PR. (2) To obtain the two years waiver, you can
a. obain a "No Objection letter" from Chinese Embassy. But the Chinese consul
said a person can apply a waiver only he/she wants to change from J-1 to F-1
or to H-1 or J-2, F-2 ect. My wife is going to gradurate soon. No these
categories is suitable for her, so that the consul refused to help her.
b. fill in a Form I-612. You can ensure a lawyer to do this or do it at
your local INS by yourself. I am contacting a lawyer in DC. I'll tell you
the news when I get it from the lawyer.

Enclosed are the messages I got from the others about J-1 LADs.
 
Message-ID: <3717.744471710@IUS4.IUS.CS.CMU.EDU>
>From: Bin LUO <Bin_Luo@IUS4.IUS.CS.CMU.EDU>

I am not sure if you can apply PR right now, but I think the first thing you
should begin to do is to get a waiver for your J-1. One way to get a waiver
is by chinese embassy, you can ask chinese consulate in your area how to do
it. They may need your application, the letter from your working place in
china, the copy of your IAP-66 form, your employment letter here, and $50
check, you also are required to fill a special form giving by chinese
consulate.

Please read the relulation how to waive 2-year forgien residence
requirement(I found it in some mail), and find a good way to solve this
problem first.

Bin
>From: leiwang@ee.umn.edu (Lei Wang)
Message-Id: <9308041535.AA08837@ee.umn.edu>
To: dxw115@psuvm.psu.edu
Subject: J-1 LAD

Hi, I concern the issue of J-1 LAD. The INS in Menneapolis accepts the
application of LAD. But nobody knows what the decision they make will be.
Please let me know the information about this issue.
Thanks!

Lei Wang.

>From: sgao@athena.ess.ucla.edu (S. Gao)
Message-Id: <9308042334.AA21005@athena.ess.ucla.edu>
To: DXW115@psuvm.psu.edu
Subject: Re:  How J-1 LADs can apply PR
Cc: sgao@athena.ess.ucla.edu

Hi there,
My wife came here as a J-1 visitor after the magic day. She is now a
J-1 graduate student at UCLA. A tricky thing is that we visited Moscow
last year and when we came back, she got a J-1 student visa without
the 2 year requirement at the U.S. embassy of Moscow. BUT we she
asked our OISS officers here she was told that she still had the
requirement. Now she is applying for the waiver from U.S information
Agency. God knows if it can be approved.
Under such situation she doesn't plan to apply PR this August, unless
the waiver can be approved.
What's your plan?
S. Gao at UCLA.
 
>From: "b" <C492347@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu>
To:   dxw115@psuvm.psu.edu
Subject: J-1 holder

Hi, I read your E-mail message: How J-1 LADs can apply PR. I have the same
  situation. I am an F-1 holder, but my husband and my daughter are J-1 and
  J-2 visa status. I have no idea when and how my LADs can apply. Should they
  first file I-612 (two year waiver) or at the same time? Will INS accept
  their application for PR before getting the two-year waiver? How to get the
  two-year waiver? What is the procedure for the two-year waiver? What's your
  idea and suggestion? I hope we contact each other to solve this problem.
      look forward to hearing from you!
 
>From: SHI BAI <SHIBAI@PHYSC1.BYU.EDU>
Subject: Re: How J-1 LADs can apply PR
To: DXW115@psuvm.psu.edu
 
Hi, I got the same problem as you do. I went to local INS Office at Salt
Lake City  yesterday with my wife and handed in the application. The lady
working there told me that they will accept any application no matter what
the LAD's current status is. Now, What is your information?
-Shi Bai
*************************************************************************
>From: lin bu <LBU%SUVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Message-id: <9308061618.AA07922@lucerne.rice.edu>
X-Envelope-to: sgu
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Hi:
could you tell me that the two-year waiver letter come from where? Is it
true that I could apply PR (for LAD) with a letter form our guvernment or I
need another letter from either US information agency or INS ?  Thank you.
*************************************************************************
>From: Rugang Qi <rqi@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Two year waiver for J-2 possible?
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
 
Hi, netters:

Is anyone have better information on the issue of "two year waiver" for J-2.  I
was a J-1 and Filed a CSPA PR adjustment.  How to deal with the J-2 two year
issue for now?
Thanks for your attention.
*************************************************************************
>From:    <DXW115@PSUVM.PSU.EDU>
Subject: How J-1 LADs can apply PR
To:      lads@lucerne.rice.edu

Hi, Netters. Do you have a J-1 LAD who wants to apply PR in the August?
My J-1 LAD meets the problem of two years waiver before filing the application.
How do you solve this problem? Any idea is appreciated. If you know
somebody else who is facing the same problem, please send me his or her
address or ask him or her to contact me on the e-mail. I also have some
information about this issue.
*************************************************************************


 

From shengj@acf2.nyu.edu  Fri Aug  6 14:39:39 1993
Received: from acf2.NYU.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA12387); Fri, 6 Aug 93 14:39:39 CDT
Received: by acf2.NYU.EDU (5.61/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
	id AA16191; Fri, 6 Aug 93 15:38:18 -0400
From: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
Message-Id: <9308061938.AA16191@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Subject: Working with IFCSS, NCCA
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 15:38:18 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 3997      
Status: RO

>yuang@CCVAX.CCS.CSUS.EDU  writes:
>
>
>Hi, Dear Friends:
>	To  organize our group more efficiently, I have following 
>	suggestion and opinion:
>
>The Current problems and our goal:
>	As some netter point out there are "too many questions , too 
>	few answers". I think this means our group lack of professional 
>	involving.  We need some help from outside of LAD.  How we get 
>	these help? How we can use all of the current resources effectively? 
>	How we can push NCCA,  IFCSS, INS help us and involve our problems, 
>	this probably is our present goal. Besides, we find ourselves lack 
>	of manpower, every person is busy and can not spend too much time 
>	consuming. 
>
>Some suggestions :
>
>1.      As some body point out, we probably need a committee. 
>	But I think a committee  should  consist of several coodinates.  
>	Every coordinate is only responsible for the relationship with 
>	a specific organization or specific  issue. The coordinate should 
>                                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>	establish some regular communication with a organization , 
>        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>	such as Ifcss, NCCA.  Every two or three days,  he  reports our 
>	group's growing news, concern, suggestion to the organization, or to 
>	draft the letter to express our opinions. If they(IFCSS or NCCA) 
>	don't respond, a coordinate should doing some research, to know 
>	about this organization and to find out how to make them respond. 
>	if they respond, a coordinate should transfer their message to LADs. 
>	Believe or not, maintain a regular communication with IFCSS or NCCA 
>	is important, if we don't push them, don't  inform them enough 
>	information, don't have some kind of relationship with them, how we 
>	can expect their  big help.
>
>2.      Also,  I think we should establish a good relationship with
>                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
>	CND-news editors. I remember last issue of CND-US had information 
>	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>        exchange package regarding LAD issue, if we can have CND publish 
>	this package regularly, or have them establish a LAD directory at 
>	CND.org ftp site, ( I think under this directory, should have 
>	several category similarly to currently our LAD editing category) 
>	we probably don't have to  maintain our own editing stuff and have 
>	these stuff members doing coordinate's job.
>	
>	The reason I want to suggest to make change is that I find  many 
>	questions in lad net are  so simple and repeatedly again and again, 
>	later maybe we just tell those person go cnd.org ftp site to find 
>	what he wants. For some very complicate individual case ( I assume 
>	there isn't many) , if  it posts  only at LAD net, I doubt whether 
>	they can get a satisfaction answer. But if it posts at CND news , 
>	their chance are more. I would suggest , If we have a organization  
>	of LAD, our goal is serve 95% of LAD, but not  100%. To reach the 
>	100%  of satisfaction always costs too much, some time even 
>	impossible.

    I agree with you totally.
    Right now LADnet is simply info-sharing links among CS who have LADs.
Unlike IFCSS, NCCA, it is not a organization. In the long run, we have to work
with existing CS organizations IFCSS, NCCA lobbying U.S. government on LAD
issue since it is very unlikely most LADs will get PR soon.
   
>
>	Finally I would say the rule here  should be " One  serves for 
>                                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>	every body, every body serve for one".
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     I remember I organized a donation within my department last year after
I saw Dr.Zhao's ads on World Journal. I got very positive response from 
fellow students. I strongly believe if we work as a group bonded by common
destination, we will succeed.

>					Yuan Gang


Jonathan J. Sheng
Theoretical Chemistry, NYU {\\{ (212)998-8439  shengj@acf2.nyu.edu }//}

From snow@lucerne.rice.edu  Fri Aug  6 15:26:15 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA12863); Fri, 6 Aug 93 15:26:19 CDT
Received: from moe.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA12853); Fri, 6 Aug 93 15:26:15 CDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA08886); Fri, 6 Aug 93 15:24:55 CDT
Received: by lucerne.rice.edu (AA09227); Fri, 6 Aug 93 15:26:16 CDT
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <9308062026.AA09227@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: posting restricted now
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 15:26:15 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 815       
Status: RO

Hi, netters,
	The posting is restricted now. Please post your contributions to
lads@lucerne.rice.edu, again, lads@lucerne.rice.edu.
	Postings to lads@spike.rice.edu is restricted, your posting to
that account will be bounced back from now on. So don't do it.


Jun
-- 
                                 ^-^    Owlnet
                                (O O)   School of Engineering Network
                                ( v )
       o o o o o o . . .    __=--m-m--=_T__ ____======_T__ ____========_T_____
     o      _____          ||             | |            | |               |
   .][__n_n_|DD[  ====____  |   Jun  Wu   | |  ECE Rice  | | Snow@Rice.EDU | |
  >(________|__|_[________]_|_____________|_|____________|_|_______________|_|
 __/oo OOOOO oo`  ooo  ooo  'o^o       o^o` 'o^o      o^o` 'o^o         o^o`

From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Fri Aug  6 17:39:48 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA13263); Fri, 6 Aug 93 17:39:53 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA13253); Fri, 6 Aug 93 17:39:48 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA12752; Fri, 6 Aug 93 18:38:25 EDT
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 93 18:29:50 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308062229.AA26373@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Package#2 on Forms and Certificate
Status: RO

=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Forms and Certificate from  LAD-network         ==                 
== ADDRESS your correspondence to the SENDER       ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==        
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==      
=====================================================
begin  
>From r2jy2@dax.cc.uakron.edu Fri Aug  6 16:57:46 1993
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 17:54:53 -0400
>From: r2jy2@dax.cc.uakron.edu (Jie Yang)
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Subject: Format
Content-Length: 959

For your reference, the following are the formats of birth certificate
and marriage certificate copied from notarial certificate notarized by
a provincial capital city in China.

(1) Birth certification

                        NOTARIAL CERTIFICATE
                         
                                     (92) xx yy  No. *****
This is to certify that XXX, mail, was born on xxxxx, 19**, at X city,
Y province. His father is xy and his mother is xx.
  
                                        Notary: xyz
                                        ** Notary Public Office
                                        ** Province
                                        The People's republic of China
                                        August 1, 1992

(2)Marriage certification
                        NOTARIAL CERTIFICATE
                         
                                     (92) xx yy  No. *****
This is to certify that xx (Female, born on ****, 19**), an yy (mail,  born 
on xxxxx, 19**) were married on ****, 19** at X city, Y province. 
  
                                        Notary: xyz
                                        ** Notary Public Office
                                        ** Province
                                        The People's republic of China
                                        August 1, 1992

===========================================================================

>From:    Weizhong He   <IZZYOS4@UCLAMVS.BITNET>
>Would you tell me whose name should be put in part 1 of form I-824, my name or
>my son's name, how to fill out in part 2 and 3?
>Thank you. Talk to you later.
*************************
>From:   IN%"LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu"  "Mi Mi"  6-AUG-1993 16:49:31.99
To:     IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   I-824 form

How to file out I-824 (Unauthorized Analysis)
Part 1. Your name (petitioner) and information,
Part 2. Application Type: (c): X-town, China, for follow to join immigration
visa for XXX
Part 3. Type of Petition: I-485;
        Filing Receipt #: (your I-797 for I-485,like EAC-93-216-XXXXX)
        Date of filing  : (Notice Date on your I-797)
        Date Approved   : None

        Name etc: Your family members name and information
Part 4: Your signature.

Checklist:
1) $30 application fee,
2) Copy of your I-797
3) Birth certificate,
4) Marriage Certificate,
5) I-824

You have to include a cover letter to let INS know what are you up to

Mi Mi

==========================================================================
End
 


From my@math.luc.edu  Fri Aug  6 17:42:51 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA13322); Fri, 6 Aug 93 17:42:57 CDT
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA13312); Fri, 6 Aug 93 17:42:51 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA21932; Fri, 6 Aug 93 17:43:17 CDT
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 93 17:43:17 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308062243.AA21932@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: J-1,J-2,F-2,DED:    package #1.2
Status: RO

************************************************************************
>From yxiao@crsa.bu.edu Fri Aug  6 14:49:57 1993
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 93 15:39:05 -0400
>From: yxiao@crsa.bu.edu (Yan Xiao)
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
 
Hi, Netters,

Can a B2 LAD file the application if he is out of status for a quit long 
period?
Any answer would be appreciated.

-Yan Xiao
yxiao@crsa.bu.edu
> 
> 
> Hi, Netters,
> 
> Can a B2 LAD file the application if he is out of status for a quit long 
> period?
> Any answer would be appreciated.
> 
> -Yan Xiao
> yxiao@crsa.bu.edu
> 

Very tough question.  Should hire a lawer.

netter
******************************************************************************
To: my@math.luc.edu
Subject: DED questions
 
My wife came on F-2.  I fell into DED in early 1993 (so she was in DED
accordingly).  After I filed CSPA application, she lost her status.
A few days after 7/1/93, she managed to get her own H-1.  So although
she currently is in lawful status, she didn't CONTINUOUSLY maintain her 
lawful status.  Is she still eligible to apply for PR based on her relationship 
with me?  If not, what's workaround for this?

Thank you very much.  I'd appreciate it.


J. Chen
******************************************************************************

To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Subject: help needed !
 
Hi, folks. I really need your help about LAD's application. My wife is a LAD.
We got married after April 1990 and she is not with me right now (but in U.S.).
I want to know if she can apply for adjustment or not and how. Thanks.

Min   Missouri
******************************************************************************
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 93 15:08:56 PDT
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Subject: Def. of LADs

Hi,

Couple of my friends, who do not have accesses to the e-mail, asked to post this question. They have different situations.

1.	They married before 4/11/90, but the spouse is still in China.
2.	They married after 4/11/90, but the spouse in China.
3.	They are planning to marry after my friend get GC under CSPA.

	3.1 If their another half in US.
	3.2 If their another half in China.

Do you know if they are counted as LADs? Thanks for the info.

John

******************************************************************************
Subject: Question!
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Content-Length: 3033

I got a question about the defination of the eligible dependents
of CSPA principal.  The floowing is a paragraphy related to the
depentents in the regulation isssued on July 1, 1993 delieved thru
e-mail, (Immigration and Naturalization  Service. FR Doc. 93-15782
Filed 6-30-93; 8:45 am, BILLING CODE 4410-10-M)

**************
   Family members unable to  qualify  for   CSPA   adjustment  of
status may be eligible for lawful permanent resident status under
other provisions of the Act.  Those family members whose  spousal
or  parental  relationship  was  established before the principal
CSPA  alien's application for adjustment of  status  is  approved
may  be  eligible  for derivative immigrant status as employment-
based preference immigrants accompanying or following to join the
CSPA   principal.  A  child  born  of a qualifying marriage which
existed at the time of the principal
 CSPA  applicant's adjustment of status  will  be  considered  to
have  been acquired prior to the principal applicant's adjustment
of status, and may also be eligible for accompanying or following
to  join derivative employment-based preference immigrant status.
A qualified spouse or unmarried child who is under  21  years  of
age  at the time he or she is issued an immigrant visa or granted
adjustment of status may be considered as following to  join  the
principal   CSPA alien regardless of the amount of time which has
elapsed since the  CSPA principal's  status  was  adjusted.  Such
family  members  who  are  accompanying  or  following  to join a
principal  CSPA  applicant may derive the  principal  applicant's
employment-based  third  preference  category and may be accorded
the principal's priority date. These family members must  satisfy
the usual requirements for adjustment of status or immigrant visa
issuance, including the requirement that an immigrant visa number
be immediately available when the immigrant visa is issued or the
application for adjustment of status is filed.  When  the  family
member's visa number becomes current, the family member may apply
for an  immigrant  visa  abroad  or,  if  he  or  she  meets  the
requirements  of section 245 of the Act, for adjustment of status
in the United States.

********************


Therefore, if you get married before you are approved to have perment
residence status (none of us is given the approval yet, by my understanding,
your spouse can go ahead to apply to adjust her/his status between Aug.1, 1993
and Aug. 31, 1993 according to the news forwarded thru e-mail (evne you
just get married in today, your spouse should be eligible by the above
defination).  But our
local INS said the defination of depentent (specific here for spouse) is
that you are getting marriend before The Admintritive Order issued by former
President Bush on April, 1990.  Therefore, according to her explantion,
married spouses after the date are not include.  As I know there are alot
of students are getting married later than that.

Best Wishes!

a student in Albany, NY

**********************************************************************
 

From shengj@acf2.nyu.edu  Fri Aug  6 18:44:42 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA13564); Fri, 6 Aug 93 18:44:47 CDT
Received: from acf2.NYU.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA13554); Fri, 6 Aug 93 18:44:42 CDT
Received: by acf2.NYU.EDU (5.61/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
	id AA01173; Fri, 6 Aug 93 19:43:21 -0400
From: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
Message-Id: <9308062343.AA01173@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Subject: Local INS status: Package#1.2
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 19:43:20 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1718      
Status: RO

Hi, netters,
The following is a list of local INS offices' status on LAD issue upto
7:30PM, 08/06. For those wish withhold their addresses please tell me. 
The default is posting the addresses for netters' reference.
This list is updated every day and posted every evening. Netters
may still go their INS office even status is rejected and tell me your
experience there so that this list can be most updated.

========================================================================
              	STATUS	SOURCE
Arlington	accept	SWANG@american.edu

Atlanta         accept	liang@athena.cs.uga.edu

Buffalo         accept  V592XM8P@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu

Boston          accept  wl@cfaitamp.harvard.edu
                        notes: 2year waiver may not be needed from 08/09

Chicago       	accept	shi6@oddjob.uchicago.edu

Dallas      	accept	guo@bach.convex.com
			notes:  an interview date was assigned in mid October
				for a F-1

Detroit         accept

Hawaii          accept

Houston       	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

Indianapolis    accept

Los Angeles     accept

Louisville      reject	D0JIAN01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
			notes:	Birth Certificate Need to be Certified by U.S.
				Embassy in China

Memphis         accept

Miami           accept

Pittsburgh    	accept	Bin_Luo@ius4.ius.cs.cmu.edu
			notes: 2year waiver may be needed before applying PR

Portland        accept

Salt Lake City  reject	SHIBAI@PHYSC1.BYU.EDU

San Antonio	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

San Francisco   accept

St. Albans      accept	SGU@draco.rutgers.edu

=======================================================================
Jonathan J. Sheng
Theoretical Chemistry, NYU {\\{ (212)998-8439  shengj@acf2.nyu.edu }//}

From snow@lucerne.rice.edu  Sat Aug  7 01:49:15 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA15930); Sat, 7 Aug 93 01:49:22 CDT
Received: from moe.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA15919); Sat, 7 Aug 93 01:49:15 CDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA13322); Sat, 7 Aug 93 01:47:54 CDT
Received: by lucerne.rice.edu (AA10707); Sat, 7 Aug 93 01:49:16 CDT
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <9308070649.AA10707@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: lobby suggestion from a netter
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1993 01:49:14 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 3617      
Status: RO


This is a lobby letter proposed by a netter. He will remain anonymous according
to his will. So please do not write to me or anyone for his email. Post your
thoughts to lads@lucerne.rice.edu. Thank you.



---Begin the included letter from the netter---



				************
				LOBBY INS HQ
				************


	As someone suggested earlier, it is much easier to lobby INS HQ than
getting "official' certificates from China through illegal channels. Here
is what you can do:

	1. save and print out this letter;
	2. sign it (modify as you like);
	3. mail it or fax it; and
	4. distribute as widely as you can.

	It will help you and your LADs! REMEMBER: applications accepted
don't mean anything until they are approved.

	
	A Netter
	

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
	(NOTE: 3 Copies are needed)


TO:	Director, The Records Systems Division
	Policy Directives and Instructions Branch
	Immigration and Naturalization Service
	425 I street NW., Room 5307
	Washington     DC 20536

	Rita A. Boie
	Senior Immigration Examiner
	Administrations Branch
	Immigration and Naturalization Service
	425 I Street NW., Room 7223
	Washington     DC 20536


FROM:	XXXXXX  XXXXX
	----------------------
	----------------------
	----------------------


RE:	CSPA Later-Arriving Dependents Permanent Residence Applications



Dear INS HQ,

	I am reporting a concern regarding the permanent residence applications
of CSPA later-arriving dependents (LADs).  The applications are handled by
local INS offices.  As a result, practices at various local INS offices vary
substantially.  Several offices require original/certified birth certificates
and marriage certificates or certain certificates certified by overseas U.S.
agencies in China.  This practice has caused a lot of confusion and anxiety
among Chinese students and their LADs.  Because no birth certificates were
issued at the time when we were born.  It is also very difficult for us,
overseas Chinese students, to obtain notarized certificates from China.  A
couple of years ago, the Chinese government issued a new policy.  The policy
made it clear that no notarized birth certificates should be issued to 
overseas Chinese students.  The reason is to prevent Chinese students from
obtaining permanent residencies outside China and force more students to
return home.

	If the local INS offices continue to require the original/notarized
birth certificates, it will force many many Chinese students and their LADs
to commit massive crimes.  Because they will have to get these unavailable
documents through illegal channels, that is, to bribe the Chinese government
officials by paying big bucks $$$$$$ or buying valuable "gifts."  As you may
realize, these documents by no means are "official and original."  These
"black market" documents do not make much sense.

	Furthermore, the instructions on Form I-485 state that "submit a
copy of your birth certificate OR OTHER RECORD OF YOUR BIRTH."  Clearly,
other secondary documents of birth evidence are acceptable.

	Considering the above mentioned reasons, we kindly request INS HQ
to waive the requirement of the original/notarized birth certifcates, and
to accept secondary evidences, such as passports, PRC Citizen ID cards 
issued by local Chinese public security bureaus, marriage certificates, 
and degree certificates.  These real official documents are much better 
than the "black market" "official" documents.

	We greatly appreciate your consideration of our request.



						Sincerely,


						(Signature)


						XXX YYY ZZZ



---End the letter from the netter

From snow@lucerne.rice.edu  Sat Aug  7 01:53:11 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA16034); Sat, 7 Aug 93 01:53:14 CDT
Received: from moe.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA16024); Sat, 7 Aug 93 01:53:11 CDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA13349); Sat, 7 Aug 93 01:51:51 CDT
Received: by lucerne.rice.edu (AA10730); Sat, 7 Aug 93 01:53:13 CDT
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <9308070653.AA10730@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: LA demonstration?
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1993 01:53:12 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 400       
Status: RO

To netters at LA,
        Is it possible for netter(s) at LA to remotely monitor (or watch)
the demonstration sponsored by this Mr.(or Ms.) Yeh, and write a report
to post to lads@lucerne.rice.edu? It'd be good also for LADs to know
what's going on and better analyze the situation.
        Thanks in advance to netters at LA.

FYI: This demonstration is supposed to be held this Saturday at LA INS.

From my@math.luc.edu  Sat Aug  7 02:04:53 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA16103); Sat, 7 Aug 93 02:04:59 CDT
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA16093); Sat, 7 Aug 93 02:04:53 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA23517; Sat, 7 Aug 93 02:05:19 CDT
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 93 02:05:19 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308070705.AA23517@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: COUNCIL RELEASE: MEETING WITH STATE DEPARTMENT ON CSPA
Status: RO


----- Begin Included Message -----

>From song@math.cornell.edu Sat Aug  7 01:43:33 1993
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1993 02:41:26 -0400
>From: song@math.cornell.edu (Li-Min Song - Math Grad)
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Subject: COUNCIL RELEASE: MEETING WITH STATE DEPARTMENT ON CSPA
Content-Length: 9834

*****************************************************************


              MEETING WITH STATE DEPARTMENT ON CSPA


*****************************************************************

          TO:       CHINESE NATIONALS NATIONWIDE

          DATE:     AUGUST 6, 1993

          FROM:     DR. HAICHING ZHAO


          Yesterday Laura Reiff, Elaine Budd, Eleanor Pelta and
myself met with State Department officials from the Visa Services
Section.  Present from the State Department were Michael Hancock,
Associate Director of Visa Services, Bureau of Consular Affairs;
Seaton Stapleton, Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting Division
Chief and Jim Hergen, Legal Counsel, East Asian and Pacific
Affairs.  
          
          After our meeting with the INS last week to solve some
problems regarding late arriving dependents in the U.S., this
meeting with the State Department primarily focus on issues
related to dependents who are still in China.  The officials
present at the meeting are in charge of the policy related to
consular processing in China and in third countries and thus have
an important part to play in implementing the CSPA.  They are
also responsible for maintaining immigrant visa preference number
availability.

          The topics of the meeting were primarily three folds:
1, Dependents in China; 2, Visa availability; 3, Mandatary
consular processing in third country for some dependents in the
U.S.  The following is a brief report:
 

1)        EMPLOYMENT BASED THIRD PREFERENCE FOR CHINA TO REMAIN
          CURRENT THROUGH THE END OF SEPTEMBER.

          First, we discussed the issue of late arriving
dependents filing their applications.  The most significant
development during the discussion was that we were informed that
visa number availability for employment based third preference
for China will remain current through the month of September. 
This means that late arriving dependents of CSPA principals will
be able to file their applications during the entire months of
August and September.  

          Next week the State Department will release visa number
availability for September and they indicated that given the data
they now have they are willing to leave visa number third
preference availability current for China for the month of
September.  As a result, late arriving dependents will have more
time to file their applications.  This is particularly good news
for those with dependents in China, because it may give more time
to prepare their applications. 

          We will continue to watch visa number availability and
keep you informed.  However, you should be prepared for the
window to close at the end of September. 

          We would once again like to point out that it will not
make any difference when you file because your application is
placed in the queue according to the priority date you get from
your principal NOT from the date you file.  There are also some
other factors which effect when you get a visa number.  The most
important thing is to file a complete application any time during
the months of August and September accurately according to the
rules.

2)        DISCUSSION ON INCLUDING DEPENDENTS UNDER THE WORLDWIDE
          QUOTA ("203(D) QUESTION").

          Although this issue will have to be resolved by INS,
the State Department is consulted by INS for their views.  In
fact, it was initially the State Department which made the
determination that dependents were subject to the China quota. 
As a result, we fully explained our position that late arriving
dependents should be under the worldwide quota and informed the
State Department of our discussions with INS on this issue.   The
State Department said that they would follow INS' final decision
on this issue. 

3)        MANDATORY CONSULAR PROCESSING IN CANADA AND MEXICO FOR
          DEPENDENTS.

          In conjunction with our discussion on including
dependents under the worldwide quota, we raised the issue of
consular processing for dependents that have fallen out of
status.  If dependents eventually can be covered under the
worldwide quota, there is still the possibility that some
dependents may not be deemed as have maintained legal status.  In
that case, it is important that the State Department be prepared
to issue the necessary directives which would mandate Canadian
and Mexican consulates to process immigrant visas for these
dependents. 

          The State Department said they would certainly look
into the issue.  In addition, they understand the special
problems of China consular processing for CSPA dependents.  They
indicated that if the situation comes to that point, they would
be cooperative in providing for consular processing in Canada and
Mexico. 

          However, we are continuing to press the INS to deem
CSPA dependents to have maintained lawful status.  We think it is
particularly unfair that those that entered the DED program
before should cause their dependents being now deemed not to have
maintained legal status. 

4)        NONIMMIGRANT VISAS FOR CSPA DEPENDENTS IN CHINA. 

          We told the State Department that given the current
interpretation of the CSPA, some Chinese families would continue
to face long separations because their dependents in China may
not be easily coming to the U.S. to visit.  We asked that CSPA
dependents in China that request nonimmigrant visas to visit
family in the U.S. be given favorable consideration and not be
flatly rejected due to the "immigrant intent".  We thanked them
for their directives of a similar nature when implementing the
Executive Order and asked that they consider doing this once
again. 

          They indicated that if we had problems in this regard
in the future, please let them know and they would be
cooperative. 

          If you are a CSPA principal and have any problems
securing nonimmigrant visas for dependents in China, please let
us know and we will pass this information on to the proper
individuals at the State Department. 

5)        CONSULAR ACCEPTANCE OF SECONDARY EVIDENCE OF BIRTH AND
          CHINESE POLICE CERTIFICATE WAIVER.

          In the CSPA regulations, INS allows for production of
secondary evidence of birth without proving that a birth
certificate is not available.  They recognized the difficulty of
getting primary documentation from Chinese authorities that
oppose the CSPA.

          We asked that dependents processed at consulates also
be allowed to use secondary evidence of birth for the same reason
as it was necessary for the principal.  The State Department said
they would consider this and let us know later. 

          In addition, when dependents process in China or in a
third country, they are required to provide a police certificate. 
Again, this may be difficult for the same reason it is difficult
to get birth evidence.  The State Department said they would
consider this point. 


          CRUCIAL INFORMATION NEEDED ON CSPA RELATED ISSUES
               
          In our effort to solve CSPA related problems, we have
pushed different government agencies to consent on a variety of
issues.  However, in our meetings with INS and the State
Department, many decisions would not be definitely made primarily
due to the fact that there is not enough reliable data.  

          When we push the 203(d) issue, namely to have all
dependents covered under the worldwide quota instead of having
them compete with later coming students under the China quota, we
need an accurate number; When we pushed on the issue of DED
dependents' legal status, we were also asked for an estimate of
how many people we were talking about; When we seek more benefits
for dependents who are still in China, we need information as
accurate as possible.  

          Recently we have learned of many problems regarding
dependent applications in different local INS offices.  Some of
the problems we were able to help and some we have to seek help
from the INS central office.  When we push INS to solve these
CSPA implementation related problems at the local level, we need
to know about the problems as thoroughly as possible.       

          Please complete the following information sheet and
return to us as soon as possible.

          CSPA IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEM SURVEY

Name      (Last)___________   (First)__________

Address   ________________________________

          ________________________________

          ________________________________


Telephone:________________________________(H)

          ________________________________(O)


E-Mail:   ________________________________


If there are dependents in your family, please fill in the
appropriate box.

I am a dependent ____;   I am a principal _____.  In my family,
there are (please indicate the number):

          _____  dependents who can file according to INS cable;

          _____  DED dependents (out of status before 7/1/93)
                    according to INS cable;

          _____  dependents as J-1 holder themselves;

          _____  dependents in China or other country (_____);

          _____  dependents in other situation, explain:

                 ___________________________________________;


          _____  dependents who are in China and may need         
                 nonimmigrant visa to come to U.S.;

          _____  principals subject to 90 day rule.


We have encountered the following problems related to CSPA
application (please use seperate sheet if needed):
















Please forward the above information sheet to E-mail address:

          SONG@MATH.CORNELL.EDU

or FAX it to:  (202) 835-1883

You can also send your letter to:

          National Council on Chinese Affairs
          P.O. Box 77418
          Washington, D.C. 20013-7418

Thank you for your cooperation.

/end






 


----- End Included Message -----


From my@math.luc.edu  Sat Aug  7 02:38:19 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA16224); Sat, 7 Aug 93 02:38:24 CDT
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA16214); Sat, 7 Aug 93 02:38:19 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA23782; Sat, 7 Aug 93 02:38:46 CDT
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 93 02:38:46 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308070738.AA23782@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: A comment on lobby letter from a netter
Status: RO



My comment on the lobby letter to INS HQ to try to ease Birth Certificate
Requirement:

I basically agree with the points in the letter. But the language used
seems to be too exaggerating. Since the majority of Chinese students here
(as far as I know) have Birth Certificate from China, it's hard to
convince INS that all those people are committing "massive crimes" (quote
from the letter), especially because Birth Certificate is the reqirement
in normal procedure which many Chinese have used in the past to get green
cards. It might be better to soften the tone. Besides, the actually more
irrational practice of some INS local offices: asking for documents 
certified by American consulates, is not addressed in the letter, although
it's briefly mentioned in the beginning.



From my@math.luc.edu  Sat Aug  7 12:03:33 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA07703); Sat, 7 Aug 93 12:03:38 CDT
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA07693); Sat, 7 Aug 93 12:03:33 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA24664; Sat, 7 Aug 93 12:03:59 CDT
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 93 12:03:59 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308071703.AA24664@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: J-1,J-2,F-2,DED:    package #1.3
Status: RO


----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Hi Netters,

The following e-mail is from a friend of mine. Any thoughts and ideas
would be appreciated.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: INS said DED not a lawful status


According to the local INS, DED is NOT a lawful status, and those
in DED now are considered to have failed to maintain lawful status.

My application for PR as spouse of a CSPA principal was returned
yesterday.  INS explained that my current status DED is not a
lawful status, though it is a legal status.

Before I graduated, I consulted a foreign student adviser in
the International Student Office of my university regarding
future status.  The options are: continuing school, practical
training and DED.  DED was highly recommended since one could
change from DED to F, J, H visa, or adjust status to permanent
resident.  In one word, DED was much better than practical training
and would not have any negative effect on one's future.

The local INS responded it is true that the DEDs can switch back to
F, J, H, which are lawful status. They will be considered in lawful
status after they switch.  However, there is no guarantee that they
will be considered to have continuously maintained lawful status.
Technically, DED is not a lawful status.

It seems that if DEDs are not able to adjust status under CSPA, then
many other channels of immigration will be closed to them, too.  For
example, they cannot follow to join their family.  Can they apply
for PR under employment category 3?

I came to the U.S. in 1989 as a student.  I would have been an
eligible CSPA principal if my cumulative stay in China had not
exceeded 90 days for family emergency.

Thank you.
****************************************************************************
Subject: What to do if an F-1 student's applic. is rejected
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
X-Vms-To: IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
 
Hi,
	I am a F-1 graduate student in my second year. I expect to get 
master degree next may. Also I am a LAD. I was wandering what should I
do if my application is rejected. Will I still be able to stay in the 
United States as an F-1 student? I will appreciate for any answers.
****************************************************************************	
Subj:	J-1 LADs should speak loudly

Hi, Did you read the COUNCIL RELEASE:MEETING WITH STATE DEPARTMENT ON CSPA
from Dr Zhao on Aug. 6? It seems to me the regulations on CSPA are very
flexible if we can give a strong push to the State Department from Dr.Zhao.
Now, almost everything has obtained a positive result, including out of
status issue, quota issue and so on. Even the issue of LADs in China is
being considered seriously. However, the problem of J-1 LADs has not been
arised and considered even though they are in normal status and in USA.
The only reason is our voice is not strong enough. Please send a letter
to Dr. Zhao. We still have some chance because the application date has been
extended to September. Come on J-1 LADs.
****************************************************************************	

> My wife came on F-2.  I fell into DED in early 1993 (so she was in DED
> accordingly).  After I filed CSPA application, she lost her status.
> A few days after 7/1/93, she managed to get her own H-1.  So although
> she currently is in lawful status, she didn't CONTINUOUSLY maintain her 
> lawful status.  Is she still eligible to apply for PR based on her relationship 
> with me?  If not, what's workaround for this?

> Thank you very much.  I'd appreciate it.

> J. Chen


Hi, J. Chen, surely, I think she is eligible for PR.  At the worest you can 
fill a I-824 for her, and then she will be interviewed outside U.S.  This 
can be slower than doing I-485 directly, but might still catch August+September
window.  

I have a similar situation.  I am a LAD. I got my work authorizatio and went 
into voluntary departure last year. Right now, I am about to get my H-1 
through my employer. This might be a chance to correct the situation of 
"not continuously maintain the legal status", if I reenter from a third 
country.  

Here I have a question.  Did your wife get her H-1 from a third country
or just inside U.S?  Your information will be appreciated.

--Y. Hu

****************************************************************************	

From shengj@acf2.nyu.edu  Sat Aug  7 15:31:33 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA08062); Sat, 7 Aug 93 15:31:37 CDT
Received: from acf2.NYU.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA08052); Sat, 7 Aug 93 15:31:33 CDT
Received: by acf2.NYU.EDU (5.61/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
	id AA16470; Sat, 7 Aug 93 16:30:13 -0400
From: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
Message-Id: <9308072030.AA16470@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Subject: Local INS Status, Package #1.3
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1993 16:30:12 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 4961      
Status: RO

Hi, netters,
The following is a list of local INS offices' status on LAD issue. For
those wish withhold their addresses please tell me. The default
is posting the addresses for netters' reference.  This list is updated every
day. Netters may still go their INS office even status is rejected and tell me
your experience there so that this list can be mostly updated. After the list,
there is a Q&A list regarding to local INS on LAD applications.

=======================================================================
Date 08/07, 4:30PM

              	STATUS	SOURCE
Arlington	accept	SWANG@american.edu

Atlanta         accept	liang@athena.cs.uga.edu

Buffalo         accept  V592XM8P@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu

Boston          accept  wl@cfaitamp.harvard.edu
note 1> 2year waiver may not be needed from 08/09

Chicago       	accept	shi6@oddjob.uchicago.edu
note 1> quotations from a anonymous posting as your reference:
------------------------START---------------------------
Chicago INS information:
  Chicago accepted the application today. They do not check the birth
 certificate and marrige license. You may need the form for your 2 year waive
 if you are J-?er. I happened to hear two officials discuss such matter.
     A: Hi, B. How to handle chinese J visa two year waive? Do they need file
        a form?
     B: No they do not need file the form. I think they automatically get the
        waive.
     A. Are you sure?
     B. No,I am not. You better ask C.
It was 3.00pm. It was going to close. No one chinese got trouble.
 Few things I want to mension are:
   1. They need your original I-94 form.
   2. Even you have the evidence to support your family, you still need file
  the Form I-134. The form I-134 is filed by YOU, not some esle. You can file
 there or take home and bring back when interview.
   3. You will get interview date which is exact two monthes later.
   4. They don not look whatever you file (b) of part 2 and  YES or Not of
   "apply with you" in the Form I-485.
------------------------ END ------------------------------



Dallas      	accept	guo@bach.convex.com
notes 1>  an interview date was assigned in mid October for a F-1

Detroit         accept

Hawaii          accept

Houston       	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

Indianapolis    accept	xiawang@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu
note 1> secondary evidence for BC(Birth Certificate) seems ok.

Jacksonvile     accept	ZHEN@pine.circa.ufl.edu
note 1> application can only be sent by mail.

Kansas City     accept	fengzou@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
note 1>  need official birth certificate from china(Public notary).

Los Angeles     accept

Louisville      reject	D0JIAN01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
note 1> Birth Certificate Need to be Certified by U.S. Embassy in China

Memphis         accept

Miami           accept	zhaoc@surf03.sci.fau.edu
note 1> INS reject applications of LAD married after 4/11/90

Missouri        accept	linhia@acc.wuacc.edu 
note 1> quote from linhia:
        Birth certificate need to be made and notrized in China.
        Marrige certificate notrized in U.S. is acceptable,
        but has to translated by other than that couples on the
        certificate.  The translater need sigh his name on there
        and with his address.


Pittsburgh    	accept	Bin_Luo@ius4.ius.cs.cmu.edu
note 1> 2year waiver may be needed before applying PR J visa holders

Philadelphia    accept	***@***.***.EDU

Portland        accept

Salt Lake City  reject	SHIBAI@PHYSC1.BYU.EDU

San Antonio	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

San Francisco   accept

St. Albans      accept	SGU@draco.rutgers.edu

================================================================

Q & A:
1.3-1
>zhaoc@surf03.sci.fau.edu  writes on Fri Aug  6 23:29:15 1993:
>I think the compiled list is somewhat misleading. When you put the
>"accept" there, you probably should also put the troubles people may have.
>Take the Miami office for example, there is only one post up to now (as
>far as I know) which only tells that the office refused to accept applications
>of LAD who got married after 4/11/90. Nobody has posted any news on the
>acceptance of other LADS' applications. It would be better, therefore, to
>put that in the list to let people know.
A: No notes following a local INS means there is no further information
   available about the INS, which includes special rules the local INS applies
   to implementation of LAD applications. Please provide us anything you knew
   about your INS which is not included in the list or is contradicting to
   existing notes. Therefore the infomation can be updated, added and corrected

1.3-2
>guohong@lamont.ldgo.columbia.edu  write on Fri Aug  6 21:45:16 1993:
>    I am glad to see your list about local INS status. Do you know any
>information about New York INS? Accept or reject? Any limitation for married 
>date (I am married in 1991)? I saw the last information about New York INS 
>is "08/04, reject". 
A: No news about New York so far.

From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Sat Aug  7 19:30:14 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA08436); Sat, 7 Aug 93 19:30:19 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA08426); Sat, 7 Aug 93 19:30:14 CDT
Message-Id: <9308080030.AA08426@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 7421; Sat, 07 Aug 93 19:30:43 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 9070; Sat, 7 Aug 1993 19:30:43 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 7836; Sat, 7 Aug 1993 20:28:22 -0400
Date:         Sat, 07 Aug 93 20:25:36 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      Personal & Misc
To: LADs netters <lads@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO

Please refer your answers to the author, not me.
If you have anything to post, send it to lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Thanx.
Mi Mi
lads-net committee member

===================================================================
>From: luo <U61985%UICVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      if you don't have original I-94

I don't have original I-94 form. Today I went to Chicago INS. The officer, a la
dy, refused to accept my application at the beginning, even I gave her the copy
 of I-94, a letter from international student office of our university, and a l
etter from a INS center. She said I must hand in my I-94.
After talked to another officer, she decided to accept my application. She said
 "today is a good day for you", with smiling face, finally.

===================================================================

>From: jli@mines.utah.edu (Jianliang Li)
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu


	I am trying to compile a Frequently-Asked Questions for LAD
	(LAD-FAQ).  If you have good answers to any of the following
	questions, please SUMMARIZE and mail to:

		JLI@MINES.UTAH.EDU

	Remember: Application accepted doesn't mean approved. We may
		  still need all the documents.

	I need help from all LADs and their CSPA principals to complete
	this project.  Please contribute your Q or A to me.

	Thanks!


	---------------------------------------------------------------

Q1: 	Form I-485:

		(b) or (h)?

		Applying with you?   Yes or no?


Q2: 	J-2 LAD:

		2-year waiver


Q3: 	J-1 LAD

		2-year waiver


Q4: 	DED Legal Status

		What to do?


Q5:	Birth Certificate

		What to do?


Q6:	Marriage Certificate:

		What to do?


Q7:	Marriage Date:

		4/11/91, Priority Date or before CSPA Approval?


	(to be continued ...... by you)


MI MI'S comment: Very good idea. Jianliang Li, why not join our
lads-net committee, and let's work it out together?

===================================================================
>From: Robert Xiao <xiao@chaph.usc.edu>

To whom will be concerned:
Before I sign off from this group, I'd like to share my experience with
everybody, if you have any further questions pls don't E-mail me but post here,
if it would not be me, hopefully someone else could do the follow up
answering.
LA is paradise in some way, believe it or not, around 150 LAD
applications have been accepted each day starting Monday, working
permits were also granted at the same time if people applied.
No real questioning, I-485;Form9003;I-468(processing
sheet);I-765;G-325A;finger print;photos;birth cert;I-797(CSPA);
passport copy;marriage lincense;I-20 copy;bank statement;employment
letter;I-94 copy; I-693(med exam) was optional at this monment, a copy
is need at time of interviewing.
My wife is Taiwan citicen, we got married last Aug., this may answer
one question I saw earlier on the LADnet; of course I can't be sure
she would get approved, but no questioning on this issue by the
officer; officers were quiet and fast, I paid at the cashier where one
of the bottle necks was, $180 total; I took the approved I-765 to the
photographing counter where the lady worked ten minutes per hour, my
wife took a picture, punched a finger print, signed a name, five
minutes later, she got her working permit; overall six and half hours
in LA INS's lobby this morning, we got what we want, we were issued a
appointment sheet assigned the interview time in Feb.'94, the earliest
time I heard was Feb.8, the time set today were all Feb.14. We stood
outside the INS building for a while, imagining where Shannon could
possibly stand tomrrow. Good luck to everyone including Shannon.

P.S. Hsin: in case you're on this net too, call me, take care.

Robert
at LA
===================================================================

>From: <DXW115@psuvm.psu.edu>
Subject: J-1 LADs should speak loudly
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu

Hi, Did you read the COUNCIL RELEASE:MEETING WITH STATE DEPARTMENT ON CSPA
from Dr Zhao on Aug. 6? It seems to me the regulations on CSPA are very
flexible if we can give a strong push to the State Department from Dr.Zhao.
Now, almost everything has obtained a positive result, including out of
status issue, quota issue and so on. Even the issue of LADs in China is
being considered seriously. However, the problem of J-1 LADs has not been
arised and considered even though they are in normal status and in USA.
The only reason is our voice is not strong enough. Please send a letter
to Dr. Zhao. We still have some chance because the application date has been
extended to September. Come on J-1 LADs.


Why not try to lobby? Mi MI

From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Sat Aug  7 20:34:35 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA08690); Sat, 7 Aug 93 20:34:39 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA08680); Sat, 7 Aug 93 20:34:35 CDT
Message-Id: <9308080134.AA08680@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 7480; Sat, 07 Aug 93 20:35:04 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 9698; Sat, 7 Aug 1993 20:35:04 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 8546; Sat, 7 Aug 1993 21:32:47 -0400
Date:         Sat, 07 Aug 93 21:32:18 EDT
From: Mi MI <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      Complains 1
To: LADs netters <lads@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO


>From: Liequn Qiu <QIU%SNYBKSAC.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>

Urgent! My wife went to New york city INS in the afternoon of Aug.4.A black
lady(supervisor) read the text of cable from INS central office in my wife's
statement,then just gave her an appointment sheet dated Oct.4 and refused to
accept the application. If so, we will miss Aug.,my wife tried to talk other
officer in other office, they reply they only do that now. Then my wife back to
information desk, another lady said" you are illegal to apply" with very bad
attitude.my wife argued with her and asked to talk to supervisor. Afterwards,
the first lady showed up again and said "she can apply now" but refuse to talk
further.Some Chinese said if person did not know the detail,they even could't
get apointment.Obviously, NYC INS knew everything, the INS or part officers are
obstructing LAD's application on purpose. What can we do now? Can IFCSS make
some legal action?

From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Sat Aug  7 22:37:15 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA09167); Sat, 7 Aug 93 22:37:19 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA09157); Sat, 7 Aug 93 22:37:15 CDT
Message-Id: <9308080337.AA09157@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 7598; Sat, 07 Aug 93 22:37:44 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 1101; Sat, 7 Aug 1993 22:37:44 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 9867; Sat, 7 Aug 1993 23:35:26 -0400
Date:         Sat, 07 Aug 93 23:31:19 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      Please send your CSPA IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEM SURVEY now!
To: LADs netters <lads@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO

Hi netters!  Please file out the following survey as requested by Dr. Zhao
and sen them out to him ASAP. He needs your situations and numbers.
Help Dr. Zhao and help ourselves.



Mi Mi

========================================================================
          CSPA IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEM SURVEY

Name      (Last)___________   (First)__________

Address   ________________________________

          ________________________________

          ________________________________


Telephone:________________________________(H)

          ________________________________(O)


E-Mail:   ________________________________


If there are dependents in your family, please fill in the
appropriate box.

I am a dependent ____;   I am a principal _____.  In my family,
there are (please indicate the number):

          _____  dependents who can file according to INS cable;

          _____  DED dependents (out of status before 7/1/93)
                    according to INS cable;

          _____  dependents as J-1 holder themselves;

          _____  dependents in China or other country (_____);

          _____  dependents in other situation, explain:

                 ___________________________________________;


          _____  dependents who are in China and may need
                 nonimmigrant visa to come to U.S.;

          _____  principals subject to 90 day rule.


We have encountered the following problems related to CSPA
application (please use seperate sheet if needed):








Please forward the above information sheet to E-mail address:

          SONG@MATH.CORNELL.EDU

or FAX it to:  (202) 835-1883

You can also send your letter to:

          National Council on Chinese Affairs
          P.O. Box 77418
          Washington, D.C. 20013-7418

Thank you for your cooperation.

From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Sun Aug  8 11:15:21 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA24018); Sun, 8 Aug 93 11:15:27 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA24008); Sun, 8 Aug 93 11:15:21 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA04707; Sun, 8 Aug 93 12:14:00 EDT
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 93 12:05:29 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308081605.AA07478@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Q & A on LAD
Status: RO

>From: jli@mines.utah.edu (Jianliang Li)
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu

        I am trying to compile a Frequently-Asked Questions for LAD
        (LAD-FAQ).  If you have good answers to any of the following
        questions, please SUMMARIZE and mail to:

                JLI@MINES.UTAH.EDU

        Remember: Application accepted doesn't mean approved. We may
                  still need all the documents.

        I need help from all LADs and their CSPA principals to complete
        this project.  Please contribute your Q or A to me.

        Thanks!

        ---------------------------------------------------------------

Q1:     Form I-485:

                (b) or (h)?

                Applying with you?   Yes or no?


Q2:     J-2 LAD:

                2-year waiver


Q3:     J-1 LAD

                2-year waiver


Q4:     DED Legal Status

                What to do?


Q5:     Birth Certificate

                What to do?


Q6:     Marriage Certificate:

                What to do?


Q7:     Marriage Date:

                4/11/91, Priority Date or before CSPA Approval?


        (to be continued ...... by you)


From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Sun Aug  8 11:14:54 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA24006); Sun, 8 Aug 93 11:14:59 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA23996); Sun, 8 Aug 93 11:14:54 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA04679; Sun, 8 Aug 93 12:13:27 EDT
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 93 12:04:51 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308081604.AA07475@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Package#3 on Forms
Status: RO

=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Forms and Certificate from  LAD-network         ==                 
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==        
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==      
=====================================================
begin  
===================================================================

>From fang@vlsia.uccs.edu Fri Aug  6 21:35:22 1993
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 93 20:33:49 MDT
>From: fang@vlsia.uccs.edu (Yi_Fang)
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Content-Length: 1466

Form I-824 is for normal cases in INA, it is very difficult to fill out
correctly. There are some quastions:

(1) Part 1 in Form: Information about the person that filed the original application or petition.

The person is the CSPA principal or LAD? B/c CSPA gives the principal a approvalof petition under 3nd employment category, the LAD should have no petition for
3nd employment category too. So the person could be LAD as well, is it right?

(2) Part 2 in Form: Application type (check one).

There are three: a I am applying for a duplicate approval notice. b. I am 
requesting that a new U.S. Consulate or Port of entry be notified of tprevious   
approval of a petition. Please notify the Consulate or Port at__________
c. I am requesting that a Consulate be notified that my status has been adjustedto PR, please notify the Consulate at:_________. Which one do we need to check?
a--seems obviously not. b---it seems very confused, what means a new Consulate?
c--it is confused too, unless LAD am applying for family-based category.

(3) Part 3 in Form: Processing information. Subsection: If petition is filed foranother person-give the following about the person you filed for:

Who is the anather person? the LAD or who?

Could somebody reply above quastions? many thanks in advance. The I-824 also
suggests that LAD application is not normal case and needs INS HQ's to give
out some directions. The LAD application can not be treated as normal case!

==============================================================================

>From:   IN%"HCYU@ucs.indiana.edu"  7-AUG-1993 13:42:54.45
To:     IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   should local INS require our passport ?

Hi, everyone, a LAD here went to the local INS office to file her application
this week and was asked to give her passport and I-94 (both original) which
she did. Although she was given a receipt by the INS officer, I am wondering 
if it is appropriate for INS to take our passport away. What happens if our
passport got lost. Since CSPA principals were reuired only to submit copy of 
their passport, why should their qualified dependants be asked to give the 
original ?  Does anyone have any idea ?  (Indianapolis area)


====================================================================

>From:   IN%"ling@ecn.purdue.edu"  7-AUG-1993 09:56:53.34
To:     IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:     
Subject: Marrige date has to be before 4/12/90 ??!!

I am a CSPA principal. My wife is a F-2 now, We got marry at 6/11/90. We went
to INS at INDIANOPOLIS this afternoon. The lady there said only if the marrige
date before 4/12/90 can apply "followed to join". She show me a doc. issued on
6/28/93 which wrote that the marrige has to be before 4/12/90. So, my wife can
NOT fill I-485. She give me the I-130 form and ask her to fill that form after
I get the CSPA approve letter.Then she has to wait two more year for for GC.

Since there is an example at Dallas INS that they accept application even the
marrige date is after 4/12/90, I wonder that is there has any words in cable 
wire #4 clearly define the marrige date limitation, or there are some other
INS documents which give the clear qualifications for the LADS application?

Any help is very much appreciated!

-ling
8/6/93

===================================================================================
End
 


From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Sun Aug  8 11:18:57 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA24034); Sun, 8 Aug 93 11:19:02 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA24024); Sun, 8 Aug 93 11:18:57 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA04735; Sun, 8 Aug 93 12:17:34 EDT
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 93 12:09:03 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308081609.AA07529@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Zhao Haiching's Letter
Status: RO


>From song@math.cornell.edu Sat Aug  7 01:43:33 1993
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1993 02:41:26 -0400
>From: song@math.cornell.edu (Li-Min Song - Math Grad)
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Subject: COUNCIL RELEASE: MEETING WITH STATE DEPARTMENT ON CSPA
Content-Length: 9834

*****************************************************************
              MEETING WITH STATE DEPARTMENT ON CSPA
*****************************************************************
          TO:       CHINESE NATIONALS NATIONWIDE

          DATE:     AUGUST 6, 1993

          FROM:     DR. HAICHING ZHAO

          Yesterday Laura Reiff, Elaine Budd, Eleanor Pelta and
myself met with State Department officials from the Visa Services
Section.  Present from the State Department were Michael Hancock,
Associate Director of Visa Services, Bureau of Consular Affairs;
Seaton Stapleton, Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting Division
Chief and Jim Hergen, Legal Counsel, East Asian and Pacific
Affairs.           
          After our meeting with the INS last week to solve some
problems regarding late arriving dependents in the U.S., this
meeting with the State Department primarily focus on issues
related to dependents who are still in China.  The officials
present at the meeting are in charge of the policy related to
consular processing in China and in third countries and thus have
an important part to play in implementing the CSPA.  They are
also responsible for maintaining immigrant visa preference number
availability.
          The topics of the meeting were primarily three folds:
1, Dependents in China; 2, Visa availability; 3, Mandatary
consular processing in third country for some dependents in the
U.S.  The following is a brief report:

1)        EMPLOYMENT BASED THIRD PREFERENCE FOR CHINA TO REMAIN
          CURRENT THROUGH THE END OF SEPTEMBER.


          First, we discussed the issue of late arriving
dependents filing their applications.  The most significant
development during the discussion was that we were informed that
visa number availability for employment based third preference
for China will remain current through the month of September. 
This means that late arriving dependents of CSPA principals will
be able to file their applications during the entire months of
August and September.  
          Next week the State Department will release visa number
availability for September and they indicated that given the data
they now have they are willing to leave visa number third
preference availability current for China for the month of
September.  As a result, late arriving dependents will have more
time to file their applications.  This is particularly good news
for those with dependents in China, because it may give more time
to prepare their applications. 
          We will continue to watch visa number availability and
keep you informed.  However, you should be prepared for the
window to close at the end of September. 
         We would once again like to point out that it will not
make any difference when you file because your application is
placed in the queue according to the priority date you get from
your principal NOT from the date you file.  There are also some
other factors which effect when you get a visa number.  The most
important thing is to file a complete application any time during
the months of August and September accurately according to the
rules.

2)        DISCUSSION ON INCLUDING DEPENDENTS UNDER THE WORLDWIDE
          QUOTA ("203(D) QUESTION").

          Although this issue will have to be resolved by INS,
the State Department is consulted by INS for their views.  In
fact, it was initially the State Department which made the
determination that dependents were subject to the China quota. 
As a result, we fully explained our position that late arriving
dependents should be under the worldwide quota and informed the
State Department of our discussions with INS on this issue.   The
State Department said that they would follow INS' final decision
on this issue. 


3)        MANDATORY CONSULAR PROCESSING IN CANADA AND MEXICO FOR
          DEPENDENTS.

          In conjunction with our discussion on including
dependents under the worldwide quota, we raised the issue of
consular processing for dependents that have fallen out of
status.  If dependents eventually can be covered under the
worldwide quota, there is still the possibility that some
dependents may not be deemed as have maintained legal status.  In
that case, it is important that the State Department be prepared
to issue the necessary directives which would mandate Canadian
and Mexican consulates to process immigrant visas for these
dependents. 

          The State Department said they would certainly look
into the issue.  In addition, they understand the special
problems of China consular processing for CSPA dependents.  They
indicated that if the situation comes to that point, they would
be cooperative in providing for consular processing in Canada and
Mexico. 

          However, we are continuing to press the INS to deem
CSPA dependents to have maintained lawful status.  We think it is
particularly unfair that those that entered the DED program
before should cause their dependents being now deemed not to have
maintained legal status. 
4)        NONIMMIGRANT VISAS FOR CSPA DEPENDENTS IN CHINA. 

          We told the State Department that given the current
interpretation of the CSPA, some Chinese families would continue
to face long separations because their dependents in China may
not be easily coming to the U.S. to visit.  We asked that CSPA
dependents in China that request nonimmigrant visas to visit
family in the U.S. be given favorable consideration and not be
flatly rejected due to the "immigrant intent".  We thanked them
for their directives of a similar nature when implementing the
Executive Order and asked that they consider doing this once
again. 

          They indicated that if we had problems in this regard
in the future, please let them know and they would be
cooperative. 

          If you are a CSPA principal and have any problems
securing nonimmigrant visas for dependents in China, please let
us know and we will pass this information on to the proper
individuals at the State Department. 

5)        CONSULAR ACCEPTANCE OF SECONDARY EVIDENCE OF BIRTH AND
          CHINESE POLICE CERTIFICATE WAIVER.

          In the CSPA regulations, INS allows for production of
secondary evidence of birth without proving that a birth
certificate is not available.  They recognized the difficulty of
getting primary documentation from Chinese authorities that
oppose the CSPA.

          We asked that dependents processed at consulates also
be allowed to use secondary evidence of birth for the same reason
as it was necessary for the principal.  The State Department said
they would consider this and let us know later. 

          In addition, when dependents process in China or in a
third country, they are required to provide a police certificate. 
Again, this may be difficult for the same reason it is difficult
to get birth evidence.  The State Department said they would
consider this point.

          CRUCIAL INFORMATION NEEDED ON CSPA RELATED ISSUES
               
          In our effort to solve CSPA related problems, we have
pushed different government agencies to consent on a variety of
issues.  However, in our meetings with INS and the State
Department, many decisions would not be definitely made primarily
due to the fact that there is not enough reliable data.  

          When we push the 203(d) issue, namely to have all
dependents covered under the worldwide quota instead of having
them compete with later coming students under the China quota, we
need an accurate number; When we pushed on the issue of DED
dependents' legal status, we were also asked for an estimate of
how many people we were talking about; When we seek more benefits
for dependents who are still in China, we need information as
accurate as possible.  

          Recently we have learned of many problems regarding
dependent applications in different local INS offices.  Some of
the problems we were able to help and some we have to seek help
from the INS central office.  When we push INS to solve these
CSPA implementation related problems at the local level, we need
to know about the problems as thoroughly as possible.       

          Please complete the following information sheet and
return to us as soon as possible.

          CSPA IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEM SURVEY

Name      (Last)___________   (First)__________

Address   ________________________________

          ________________________________

          ________________________________


Telephone:________________________________(H)

          ________________________________(O)


E-Mail:   ________________________________


If there are dependents in your family, please fill in the
appropriate box.

I am a dependent ____;   I am a principal _____.  In my family,
there are (please indicate the number):

          _____  dependents who can file according to INS cable;

          _____  DED dependents (out of status before 7/1/93)
                    according to INS cable;

          _____  dependents as J-1 holder themselves;

          _____  dependents in China or other country (_____);

          _____  dependents in other situation, explain:

                 ___________________________________________;


          _____  dependents who are in China and may need         
                 nonimmigrant visa to come to U.S.;

          _____  principals subject to 90 day rule.


We have encountered the following problems related to CSPA
application (please use seperate sheet if needed):
















Please forward the above information sheet to E-mail address:

          SONG@MATH.CORNELL.EDU

or FAX it to:  (202) 835-1883

You can also send your letter to:

          National Council on Chinese Affairs
          P.O. Box 77418
          Washington, D.C. 20013-7418

Thank you for your cooperation.

/end


From my@math.luc.edu  Sun Aug  8 13:56:03 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA24380); Sun, 8 Aug 93 13:56:11 CDT
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA24369); Sun, 8 Aug 93 13:56:03 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA25443; Sun, 8 Aug 93 13:56:30 CDT
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 93 13:56:30 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308081856.AA25443@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: J-1,J-2,F-2,DED:    package #1.4
Status: RO

*********************************************************************
Subject: J-1 LAD waiver
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Content-Length: 1617

I just sent a message to Dr. Zhao.  May be it is incorrect and
incompleted.  Any concerned netter please correct me and send
a message to whoever can help us.

----------------
Dear Dr. Zhao and Dr. Song,

I have a concern with the LADs who are J-1 holders.

(1) Both CSPA and its regulation do not mention this issue clearly.  At
    least, it has not been excluded to be waived, like the 90 days issue.
    Instead, it should belong to the catagory that the Attorney General
    could waive based on the family union consideration.

(2) J-1 holders maintain (continously) lawful status.  The INS said
    (according to your News Releases)
    the J-1 holders may apply for waiver.  One of the condition for
    waiver is that the applicant has a citizen or PR spouse or child
    (It is mentioned in the I-612 form instaruction).  In the CSPA case,
    all the CSPA LADs are eligible for this condition. Therefore, it is
    reasonable to ask for the blanket waiver for all J-1 LADs.
    (I assume the CSPA principal applicant will not be rejected).
    It also will reduced the workload of INS.

(3) You can easily imagine that most LADs with J-1 visa were forced
    to get the J-1 visa instead of J-2 or F-2.  I don't want to mention
    the detail here.  As all LAD could apply for J-2 or F-2, they were
    unable to.......

In one word,  if you are able to lobby and push the INS or dept. of
justice or State dept. in this issue, it is highly appreciated.  On the
other hand, we only ask for a favor implementation instead of asking for
modifying the Act. Hopefully it should be easier.

A Chinese Student
***********************************************************************************
Subject: RE: J-1,J-2,F-2,DED:    package #1.3
Content-Length: 1115

This is in reply to the question in your package #1.3 from someone who 
indicates that INS's position is that DEDs are not considered to have 
maintained lawful status although they are considered to have legal status.  
The person's application for PR as a derivative family member of CSPA has been
returned by the INS on the basis of the above interpretation of the DED 
status by the INS.  

This is quite a shock to us as we have submitted the same appication package as
a result of exceeding the 90 days for reasons beyond our control.  Since mine
is not returned yet by the INS, I can only ask the person who raised the
question to please give me her/his email address so that if mine is by any 
chance approved, I would get into touch with this individual so that the 
situation can be remedied.  If the same fate is awaiting us, we can then put
our heads together to work out a strategy in dealing with this very urgent 
situation.  It will be less than four months before DEDs lose their legal 
status, and no one seems to come to our rescue (or should we expect anyone?).
It is a scary situation indeed. 
***********************************
Dear fellow netter,
	I forwarded your mail to the person who raised the question. He/She may have
tried to reply you. I tried several time to reply you, but got error message: 
"Host unknown".                             --Miao YE
***********************************************************************************

From jli@mines.utah.edu  Sun Aug  8 17:25:14 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA02454); Sun, 8 Aug 93 17:25:21 CDT
Received: from cs.utah.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA02444); Sun, 8 Aug 93 17:25:14 CDT
Received: from mines.utah.edu by cs.utah.edu (5.65/utah-2.21-cs)
	id AA28162; Sun, 8 Aug 93 16:23:48 -0600
Received: by mines.utah.edu (5.57/Ultrix2.4-C)
	id AA10661; Sun, 8 Aug 93 16:24:02 MDT
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 93 16:24:02 MDT
From: jli@mines.utah.edu (Jianliang Li)
Message-Id: <9308082224.AA10661@mines.utah.edu>
To: LADS@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO



			-------------------------
			LAD-Q&A UPDATE (08-08-93)
			------------------------- 


	This is an updated LAD-Q&A.  No accuracy is guaranted.  It is
	provided for your reference ONLY.  If you have questions or 
	answers to the following questions, please send to:


	     YHL%CMLIRIS@HARVARD.HARVARD.EDU 	(LI, Yonghong)
				or
	     JLI@MINES.UTAH.EDU 		(LI, Jianliang)


	Thanks!

------------------------------------------------------------------------

		  	*****************	
			LIST OF QUESTIONS
		  	*****************


Q1.*	Form I-485: (b) or (h)? Applying with you? Yes or no?

Q2.*	J-2 LAD: 2-year Waiver?

Q3.* 	J-1 LAD: 2-year Waiver?

Q4.*	DED Legal Status?

Q5.	Birth Certificate

Q6.	Marriage Certificate

Q7.*	Marriage Date: 4/11/91, Priority Date or before CSPA Approval?

Q8.	Voluntary Departure Status

Q9.	If CSPA Principal or LAD's application rejected, what to do?

Q10. 	What is the sufficient financial support? 
                                                                            
Q11.*	90-day Limit and LAD Derivative Status


*  Unauthorative answers/discussions are provided below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------
Q1. 	Form I-485:
-------------------


	1. (b) or (h)?

	   Select both (b) and (h).  Add a note to (h): "CSPA Derivative.
	   My husband/wife filed on 7/1/93 (or your date) under CSPA."

	2. Applying with you?   Yes or no?

	   No.  But add: "He/She filed on 7/1/93 (or your date) under
	   CSPA."


-------------------------------
Q2. 	J-2 LAD: 2-year waiver?
------------------------------- 


	On Form I-485, Part III, Q12, answer "yes" but add "Once my husband/
	wife's permanent residence application as a CSPA Principal (J-1) is 
	approved, the 2-year foreign country residence requirement for me
	(J-2) will be waived simultaneously.

	After your LAD files her/his application, it is also recommended that
	you file Form I-612 for the 2-year waiver.  It will cost you additional
	$90.  It may worth it.  It is up to you.


-------------------------------
Q3. 	J-1 LAD: 2-year waiver?
-------------------------------


	I have contacted a lawyer in DC and a Chinese consul in NY. Here are
	are some messages I got. (1) J-1 LADs can apply PR only after obtaining 
	a waiver letter from USIA. Some local INS may accept the application, 
	but it will probably be rejected. The application of waiver can not be
	handed in at the same time as the application of PR. (2) To obtain the
	the 2-year waiver, you can (a). obtain a "No Objection letter" from 
	Chinese Embassy.  But the Chinese consul said a person can apply 
	a waiver only he/she wants to change from J-1 to F-1
	or to H-1 or J-2, F-2 ect. My wife is going to gradurate soon. No these
	categories is suitable for her, so that the consul refused to help her.
	(b). fill in a Form I-612. You can ensure a lawyer to do this or do it
	at your local INS by yourself. I am contacting a lawyer in DC. I'll tell
	you the news when I get it from the lawyer.
 
  	-----------------

   	I am not sure if you can apply PR right now, but I think the first
   	thing you should begin to do is to get a waiver for your J-1. One way
   	to get a waiver is by chinese embassy, you can ask chinese consulate
   	in your area on how to do it. They may need your application, the letter
   	from your working place in China, the copy of your IAP-66 form, your
   	employment letter here and $50 check, you also are required to fill a 
	special form giving by Chinese consulate.

	-------------------

      	I concern the issue of J-1 LAD. The INS in Menneapolis accepts the
      	application of LAD. But nobody knows what the decision they make will
     	be. Please let me know the information about this issue.

	-------------------

	I got the same problem as you do. I went to local INS Office at Salt
	Lake City  yesterday with my wife and handed in the application. The
	lady working there told me that they will accept any application no
	matter what the LAD's current status is. Now, What is your information?


-------------------------
Q4. 	DED Legal Status:
-------------------------


	According to the local INS, DED is NOT a lawful status, and those
	in DED now are considered to have failed to maintain lawful status.

	My application for PR as spouse of a CSPA principal was returned
	yesterday.  INS explained that my current status DED is not a
	lawful status, though it is a legal status.

	Before I graduated, I consulted a foreign student adviser in
	the International Student Office of my university regarding
	future status.  The options are: continuing school, practical
	training and DED.  DED was highly recommended since one could
	change from DED to F, J, H visa, or adjust status to permanent
	resident.  In one word, DED was much better than practical training
	and would not have any negative effect on one's future.

	The local INS responded it is true that the DEDs can switch back to
	F, J, H, which are lawful status. They will be considered in lawful
	status after they switch.  However, there is no guarantee that they
	will be considered to have continuously maintained lawful status.
	Technically, DED is not a lawful status.

	It seems that if DEDs are not able to adjust status under CSPA, then
	many other channels of immigration will be closed to them, too.  For
	example, they cannot follow to join their family.  Can they apply
	for PR under employment category 3?


--------------------------
Q5.	Birth Certificate:
--------------------------


	What to do?


-----------------------------
Q6.	Marriage Certificate:
-----------------------------


	What to do?


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Q7.	Marriage Date: 4/11/91, Priority Date or before CSPA Approval?
----------------------------------------------------------------------


	I think you can apply, as long as the marriage date is before the CSPA
	approval date. But you may have problems with the local INS, because
	they don't always understand the law the same way as the INS headquater.
	So my suggestion is to wait for one week before you file. If you are
	close to the local INS, go there in person. If they still reject the 
	application, hire a lawyer who knows the CSPA to talk with INS. 
	Remember one thing, all above have to be finished in Aug., so plan 
	ahead.
 

-----------------------------------
Q8.	Voluntary Departure Status:
-----------------------------------


	What to do?


--------------------------------------------------------------------
Q9.	If CSPA Principal or LAD's application rejected, what to do?
--------------------------------------------------------------------


	What to do to keep lawful/legal status?


-------------------------------------------------
Q10. 	What is the sufficient financial support?
-------------------------------------------------

                                                                            
	(1) whether both of employee letter showing annual salary and bank
	    statement are necessary? 
	
	(2) What is minimal amount of bank balance is necessary for a 3
	    member family?


----------------------------------------------
Q11.	90-day limit and LAD Derivative Status
----------------------------------------------


	Some CSPA principals who have exceeded 90-day limit are denied to
	opportunity to apply even as derivative family member of CSPA principal 
	on grounds that DED status (which is what these LADs status) is not
	considered be lawful although it is legal according to the INS standards
	and interpretation of the INS regulations.

	This is causing grief and big problems for many others and for me, too.
	Wonder if you can call this question "legal status of CSPA 
	principlas who fall out of status for exceeding the 90-day limit and
	their inability to apply as derivative family member?"



	(to be continued ...... by you)


From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Mon Aug  9 09:10:25 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA18054); Mon, 9 Aug 93 09:10:31 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA18042); Mon, 9 Aug 93 09:10:25 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA17619; Mon, 9 Aug 93 10:08:58 EDT
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 93 10:00:28 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308091400.AA13294@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Your help on LAD-Q&A
Cc: jli@mines.utah.edu
Status: RO

>From: 		LAD Network Committee
To:   		Network Members
Subject:	Frequent Asked Questions and Answers 
                on Late-Arriving Dependent (LAD-Q&A)

We are trying to compile a Frequently-Asked Questions and Answers 
for LADs, which is Called LAD-Q&A. Maybe we can upload to
CND.ORG. So everyone can FTP.
  
If your question is not here, or you has answers to any of the 
following questions, please SUMMARIZE and mail to:

                JLI@MINES.UTAH.EDU
		yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu

and after "Subject:",
write 		more Qs     if you add  questions

write		Ans to Q*   if you answer a question.

If you do not want your name shown in LAD-Q&A, please state so.

Thank you for co-operation!
------------------------------------------------------------------
LIST OF QUESTIONS

Q1.	Form I-485: (b) or (h)? Applying with you? Yes or no?

Q2.	J-2 LAD: 2-year Waiver?

Q3. 	J-1 LAD: 2-year Waiver?

Q4.	DED Legal Status?

Q5.	Birth Certificate

Q6.	Marriage Certificate

Q7.	Marriage Date: 4/11/91, Priority Date or before CSPA Approval?

Q8.	Voluntary Departure Status

Q9.	If CSPA Principal or LAD's application rejected, what to do?

Q10. 	What is the sufficient financial support? 
                                                                            
Q11.	90-day Limit and LAD Derivative Status

Q12.	How to file I-812?
---------------------------------------------------------------------


From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Mon Aug  9 11:16:12 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA18588); Mon, 9 Aug 93 11:16:18 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA18578); Mon, 9 Aug 93 11:16:12 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA19925; Mon, 9 Aug 93 12:14:40 EDT
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 93 12:06:09 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308091606.AA14264@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Packge#3 on Forms
Status: RO

=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Forms and Certificate from  LAD-network         ==                 
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==        
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==      
=====================================================
begin  
===================================================================
>From 72620.431@compuserve.com Sun Aug  8 22:45:59 1993
Date: 08 Aug 93 23:41:16 EDT
>From: Jeff Song <72620.431@compuserve.com>
To: <LADS@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: How to fill I-485
Content-Length: 260

    I have a question on the fields of CURRENT INS STATUS and EXPIRES 
ON in PART 1 of I-485. Since a F-2 or J-2 later-arriving dependent 
falled out of lawful status when his/her principal filling I-485, what
proper words should be put in the fields?

===================================================================================

>From:   IN%"CAI@neurophys.wisc.edu"  9-AUG-1993 11:02:03.95
To:     IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   Marriage Certificate, answer

Marriage Certificate etc.

1. Marriage Certificate

This is the format I used for my own application and was modified from a
posting of a netter in June.  For your reference only.
You must attach a copy of your original MC with this translation.

------
                       Marriage Certificate

                          (Translation)

Whereas the applicants XXXXX XXX (male), born on (Month) xx, 19xx, 
and XXXXX XXX (female), born on (Month) xx, 19xx, are found confirming 
to the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China, this marriage 
certificate is hereby issued to them.


                     (Photograph of the married)



              Issued by:

              The People's Government of XXXX District,
              XXXX City, XXXX (Province), P.R. China
              on (month) xx, 19xx
----------

2. Certificate of Translation

This certificated of translation must be attached to any translated document 
to certify that the translation is accurate.  Note you can not translate your
own documents by default, so ask a friend sign it, do NOT sign it yourself.

-------------
     I, XXXXX XXX, hereby certify that I am competent
     to translate from the Chinese language into
     English, and that the attached is an accurate 
     translation of the original document.


                (Signature & date)

               Name of translator:  XXXXX XXX

               Address: xxxx Who-Know's-What St, Apt xx
                        Whatever-Town, One-of-100-State xxxxx

               Telephone: 123-456-7890
----------

3.  This part MUST be attached to ANY application to INS in which you submitted
a photocopy of the original document.  It should be placed at the beginning
of your documents, right after the cover letter (if any).  This is scanned form
a letter sent by INS (so there should be NO typing error).  Don't try to modify
it.

----------
        I certify that copies of documents submitted are exact 
        photocopies of unaltered original documents, and I understand 
        that I may be required to submit original documents to an 
        immigration or consular official at a later date.



        Signed ___________________________   Date: June 30, 1993



        Printed name_______________________  A-file # _____________

----------

=======================================================================
End
 


From snow@lucerne.rice.edu  Mon Aug  9 17:01:17 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA19368); Mon, 9 Aug 93 17:01:25 CDT
Received: from moe.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA19358); Mon, 9 Aug 93 17:01:17 CDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA04563); Mon, 9 Aug 93 16:59:52 CDT
Received: by lucerne.rice.edu (AA16498); Mon, 9 Aug 93 17:01:17 CDT
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <9308092201.AA16498@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: # of netters
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1993 17:01:16 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 704       
Status: RO

We have an unbelievablely high number of netters now: 926.

This is about the same size as CCNL. :-)

This mail also serves as a bad address tester.

Jun
-- 
                                 ^-^    Owlnet
                                (O O)   School of Engineering Network
                                ( v )
       o o o o o o . . .    __=--m-m--=_T__ ____======_T__ ____========_T_____
     o      _____          ||             | |            | |               |
   .][__n_n_|DD[  ====____  |   Jun  Wu   | |  ECE Rice  | | Snow@Rice.EDU | |
  >(________|__|_[________]_|_____________|_|____________|_|_______________|_|
 __/oo OOOOO oo`  ooo  ooo  'o^o       o^o` 'o^o      o^o` 'o^o         o^o`

From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Mon Aug  9 18:11:58 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA19625); Mon, 9 Aug 93 18:12:03 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA19615); Mon, 9 Aug 93 18:11:58 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA27947; Mon, 9 Aug 93 19:10:32 EDT
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 93 19:02:03 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308092302.AA17537@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: pack#4 on forms
Status: RO

=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Forms and Certificate from  LAD-network         ==                 
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==        
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==      
=====================================================
begin  
===================================================================

>From DZENG@ucs.indiana.edu Mon Aug  9 11:25:08 1993
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 93 11:23:12 EST
>From: Daisy ZENG <DZENG@ucs.indiana.edu>
X-To: WINS%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu."
Subject: form I-130
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Content-Length: 78

Please
Would anyone please send a I-130 form filling example to ladnet?
        D.Z.

=======================================================================

>From ychen4@eos.ncsu.edu Mon Aug  9 13:27:03 1993
>From: ychen4@eos.ncsu.edu
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 93 14:24:41 EDT
Content-Length: 159

Ans to Q*: marriage certificate
   If you got married in the United States. You can get a certified copy of
your marriage license from your local courthouse.

===========================================================================

>From:   IN%"FY@ucsvax.ucs.umass.edu"  9-AUG-1993 14:36:23.35
To:     IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   LAD in China


Hi:

Can anybody tell me the procedures to apply for the adjustment of status

for CSPA's dependent who is now in China ?

Thanks

=====================================================================================

>From:   IN%"R2YS%AKRONVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu"  "Jim"  9-AUG-1993 18:08:13.00To:     IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   Question

Hello.  Can somebody give information as to the latest INS decision regarding
the birth certificate of lads?  I guess many lads have this problem.
Thanks a lot.

=========================================================================
End
 


From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Mon Aug  9 18:11:25 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA19613); Mon, 9 Aug 93 18:11:30 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA19603); Mon, 9 Aug 93 18:11:25 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA27936; Mon, 9 Aug 93 19:09:58 EDT
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 93 19:01:27 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308092301.AA17534@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: J-2 and Marriage date
Status: RO


		 Marriage date and J-2 waiver
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
	I called an Immigration Lawyer in Boston (Adam Green or Russel Swapp at 
617-338-2413) and found these two answers.

(1)	No restriction on the marriage date. That is, as long as you are married
before the principal's application is approved, the spouse is eligible to "follow
to join".

(2)	There is no need for J-2 to get a waiver since J-1 principal get
a waiver automatically and this waiver can be automatically extended to J-2.

	Before you go to INS, prepare the following staff:

(1)	Make a copy of the Interim Rule, which can be FTP on CND.ORG 
(pub/InfoBase/CSPA). Be ready to show the INS officer as follows:
  " Family members unable to  qualify  for   CSPA   adjustment  of
status may be eligible for lawful permanent resident status under
other provisions of the Act.  Those family members whose  spousal
or  parental  relationship  was  established before the principal
CSPA  alien's application for adjustment of  status  is  approved
may  be  eligible  for derivative immigrant status as employment-
based preference immigrants accompanying or following to join the
CSPA   principal."

(2)	Keep the number of the Immigration Lawyer. Ask the officer to call.

	Good luck!	 


From my@math.luc.edu  Mon Aug  9 18:34:03 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA19674); Mon, 9 Aug 93 18:34:08 CDT
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA19664); Mon, 9 Aug 93 18:34:03 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA26698; Mon, 9 Aug 93 18:34:27 CDT
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 93 18:34:27 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308092334.AA26698@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: J-1,J-2,F-2,DED:    package #1.5
Status: RO

*************************************************************************
Subj:	PR Pending Status
 
I filed I-485 under CSPA on June 30, 93 by mail.  Since that day, I have
been the PR Pending status instead of an F-1 status.  I continue to
study for my Ph.D. and receive assistantship.  My question is:
Can I legally get the assitantship in the period of PR pending?
Or, I must get the Work Permission first then get the paycheck?
Since the assistantship can be maintained until next June, I don't
want to work outside campus.  The Work Permission will cost me $60.
I think I don't need to apply the Work Permission Card during this
Pending period.  If I try to find a job outside the campus, I need
to apply the Work Permission Card.  Am I right?

*****************************************************************************
 
Hi;

I went to INS Houston office this morning to apply PR for
my wife and daughter. They are both LADs. Our application is
rejected because of the fact that I am no longer a FULL-TIME
student. I was a F-1, but I got a job after I graduated last 
year. I never applied DED. The officer said since I am out
of status, so my dependents are out of status and they can not
apply now.
I wonder am I on DED? I remember INS HQ cable said only DED's
dependents can not apply now. What can we do now? Any suggestion
will be fully appreciated.

Yunqiang

*****************************************************************************

>From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu Mon Aug  9 18:19:38 1993
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 93 19:01:27 -0400
>From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: J-2 and Marriage date
Content-Length: 1303


		 Marriage date and J-2 waiver
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
	I called an Immigration Lawyer in Boston (Adam Green or Russel Swapp at 
617-338-2413) and found these two answers.

(1)	No restriction on the marriage date. That is, as long as you are married
before the principal's application is approved, the spouse is eligible to "follow
to join".

(2)	There is no need for J-2 to get a waiver since J-1 principal get
a waiver automatically and this waiver can be automatically extended to J-2.

	Before you go to INS, prepare the following staff:

(1)	Make a copy of the Interim Rule, which can be FTP on CND.ORG 
(pub/InfoBase/CSPA). Be ready to show the INS officer as follows:
  " Family members unable to  qualify  for   CSPA   adjustment  of
status may be eligible for lawful permanent resident status under
other provisions of the Act.  Those family members whose  spousal
or  parental  relationship  was  established before the principal
CSPA  alien's application for adjustment of  status  is  approved
may  be  eligible  for derivative immigrant status as employment-
based preference immigrants accompanying or following to join the
CSPA   principal."

(2)	Keep the number of the Immigration Lawyer. Ask the officer to call.

	Good luck!	 

*******************************************************************************

From my@math.luc.edu  Mon Aug  9 21:29:46 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA20559); Mon, 9 Aug 93 21:29:51 CDT
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA20548); Mon, 9 Aug 93 21:29:46 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA28160; Mon, 9 Aug 93 21:30:10 CDT
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 93 21:30:10 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308100230.AA28160@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: J-1,J-2,F-2,DED:    package #1.6
Status: RO


>From caomath@matt.ksu.ksu.edu Mon Aug  9 20:53:25 1993
>From: caomath@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
Subject: Re: J-1,J-2,F-2,DED:    package #1.5
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1993 20:51:29 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL17]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 2129

> 
> *************************************************************************
> Subj:	PR Pending Status
>  
> I filed I-485 under CSPA on June 30, 93 by mail.  Since that day, I have
> been the PR Pending status instead of an F-1 status.  I continue to
> study for my Ph.D. and receive assistantship.  My question is:
> Can I legally get the assitantship in the period of PR pending?
> Or, I must get the Work Permission first then get the paycheck?
> Since the assistantship can be maintained until next June, I don't
> want to work outside campus.  The Work Permission will cost me $60.
> I think I don't need to apply the Work Permission Card during this
> Pending period.  If I try to find a job outside the campus, I need
> to apply the Work Permission Card.  Am I right?

You have to apply work permit! You are not F-1 student anymore and the 
on campus work permit issued by your international student office will
not be valid anymore. Assistantship is an offer, whether you maintain
eligible is another matter. Work without permit is illegal, even when
you are in PR pending.

> 
> *****************************************************************************
>  
> Hi;
> 
> I went to INS Houston office this morning to apply PR for
> my wife and daughter. They are both LADs. Our application is
> rejected because of the fact that I am no longer a FULL-TIME
> student. I was a F-1, but I got a job after I graduated last 
> year. I never applied DED. The officer said since I am out
> of status, so my dependents are out of status and they can not
> apply now.
> I wonder am I on DED? I remember INS HQ cable said only DED's
> dependents can not apply now. What can we do now? Any suggestion
> will be fully appreciated.
> 
> Yunqiang


Even though you did not apply DED, you were in DED automatically, 
because you failed to maintain your legal status ( out of status).
The officer was right, your wife has to be in VD and file I-824.
She lost her chance of applying I-485 because of your failure of
maintaining your status. 
> 
> 
> *******************************************************************************
> 
 

From snow@lucerne.rice.edu  Tue Aug 10 00:01:44 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA21890); Tue, 10 Aug 93 00:01:48 CDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA21880); Tue, 10 Aug 93 00:01:44 CDT
Received: by lucerne.rice.edu (AA18257); Tue, 10 Aug 93 00:01:46 CDT
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <9308100501.AA18257@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: LADnet packages available via anonymous ftp
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 00:01:45 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1125      
Status: RO

Netters,
	The packages posted to LADnet by committee members are now
avilable via anonymous ftp. The site is spike.rice.edu, file is
/lads/9308lads.log. This file contains all packages posted (excluding
my junk test mails :), and is auto-appened when new pacakges are posted.
The file is in normal UNIX mail box format. You can consider it as a
normal text file as well.
	Due to the capacity of the poor machine, there is currently
a limit of 5 users maximum at anytime. Later on, we may consider
mirroring it on ifcss.org or cnd.org if we get the permission.
	Enjoy!


Jun

-- 
                                 ^-^    Owlnet
                                (O O)   School of Engineering Network
                                ( v )
       o o o o o o . . .    __=--m-m--=_T__ ____======_T__ ____========_T_____
     o      _____          ||             | |            | |               |
   .][__n_n_|DD[  ====____  |   Jun  Wu   | |  ECE Rice  | | Snow@Rice.EDU | |
  >(________|__|_[________]_|_____________|_|____________|_|_______________|_|
 __/oo OOOOO oo`  ooo  ooo  'o^o       o^o` 'o^o      o^o` 'o^o         o^o`

From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Tue Aug 10 08:22:00 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA13206); Tue, 10 Aug 93 08:22:05 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA13196); Tue, 10 Aug 93 08:22:00 CDT
Message-Id: <9308101322.AA13196@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 1768; Tue, 10 Aug 93 08:22:24 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 6853; Tue, 10 Aug 1993 08:22:23 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 5564; Tue, 10 Aug 1993 09:20:00 -0400
Date:         Tue, 10 Aug 93 09:19:11 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      Resend of package
To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO


======================================================================== 132
Date:         Mon, 09 Aug 93 15:23:50 EDT
>From:         Mi Mi <LHGCC@CUNYVM>
Subject:      Special Report 2
To:           LADs netters <LADS@SPIKE.RIce.edu>


=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Misc & personal infor from  LAD-network         ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================
=== Summary of comments by netters on the lobby letter ================
1) The lobby letter implies that many Chinese will be forced to buy fake
   documents. Actually many have already had their documents from China
   and such claimes as they will conduct "massive crime" will probably
   result in law suit.
2) The wording "massive crime" is not appropriate and thus should be
   altered.

Editor's comment:The lobby letter only represents that particular
author's opinion and is protected by the First Amendament. When you
voice your concern to INS, please use your own judgment on the proper
wording. If the author has no objection, you may use, and modify the
sample letter and send out on your own. You do not have to get
consent of all the other netters. If we decide to send a collective
lobby letter to anyone, we should conduct collective consultation
among our netters. Again, if any one does not agree, he/she can simply
refuse to sign it. The commentator, Mi Mi, does not like the wording
in the lobby letter either. But again, Mi Mi respects the author's
judgement on representing him/herself.

Mi Mi

=== A message from a netter =======================================
Forwarded message:

I knew from news paper that there were only six people participated in the
"big demonstration". Among them, three can not speak Chinese. That mean only
three real Chinese students in there. It does not make any sense to me.
==== Special edition for LA demo ===================================
>From: yeh@netix.com (Mr Shannon Yeh)
Subject: Only 16 people participated our demonstration
Date: 7 Aug 93 23:14:21 GMT

Among these 16 people:

        Late comer: 1
        Americans: 8  (American Chinese 5)
        early comers: 7 (including me)

The number of spies were more than demonstrators.  Many Asian look people drove
thru but did not participate.  Some people complained they were not able to
find a place to park their cars, but the cross street security parking
only costs $3.30.  A former 9201 activist agreed to show up and agreed to
bring some people there but I did not see them on the demo site; a former
classmate of mine in Beijing agreed to bring her wife to the demo site but
                                             ^^^ ^^^^ a lesbian couple?
we did not see them at all...

Our slogans were:

        Shutdown Hanjian
        CSPA green cards are blood cards
        CSPA refugees lie
        ......


Since my goal is NOT to get a blood card for myself, instead, my goal is
to move those liars out of the Chinese politics picture, I think my goal
has been approached one step closer.  At least, before I started the
demonstration, Los Angeles Police and Irvine Police are aware of my concerns
and they orally supported me.

Yesterday, some Chinese students made threatening calls to my office.
The crime maker asked me to wait for him on 6:00pm, and I waited for him
until 6:30pm but he did not show up.  Since I received those harrasment
calls, our local police has been very careful with those Chinese students.
That's how the police understands my intention/concern and orally supported
me.

The reporter of World Journal is the only media man on the demo site.
What I told him is: in the CSS community, there are two voices, one
of them is "blood cards are totally wrong", the other is "why you can have
the blood cards while I cannot".  When he asked me if I have any specific
request to INS, I said "we leave this to specific interests group.  for
example, if late comers like to voice their "Equal Immigration" concept,
they are going to do it by themselves.  We are not going to voice for them."

I will continue to be active on the anti-blood-carding matter.  But since only
one late comer participated our demo, I am going to shutdown the late comers
network (lcn).  Since I strat to know how to bring people there, I will
                        ^^^^^ what does this mean?
organize another bigger demo when I have time.
                                    ^^^^ I hope so
I am pleased to realize that my 16 is greater than CCP's 12.  CCP only had 12
communists show up in their founding ceremony:-).

Best,

shannon
======================================================================

>From: Zhang.Hao@launchpad.unc.edu (zhang hao)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Only 16 people participated our demonstration
Date: 9 Aug 1993 04:01:46 GMT

It looks like you enjoyed a great saturday in LA. Actually, you could have
had 19 if you were able to give me three RT tickets from NC to CA, so my
son, my wife and I could pay a visit to your special occation.

Seriously though, how many of the demonstrators are your netix.com emproyees?
IS there anyone of 16 that you didn't know before, either in person or through
email? I asked the 1st question because you seems the owner (or co-owner) of
the company and I am kind of suspecting that you payed them for this great
event.

Also, you didn't make a complete report. What are the turn outs in other
places? I rembered you mentiones Chincago INS, right?

Hao
=========================================================='
ÚMi Mi               LADs netters         8/09/93 Special Report 2

From SGU@draco.rutgers.edu  Tue Aug 10 09:45:30 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA13759); Tue, 10 Aug 93 09:45:36 CDT
Received: from DRACO.RUTGERS.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA13749); Tue, 10 Aug 93 09:45:30 CDT
Received: from draco.rutgers.edu by draco.rutgers.edu (PMDF V4.2-11 #3283) id
 <01H1KSUQ24XQ96W50W@draco.rutgers.edu>; Tue, 10 Aug 1993 10:43:51 EDT
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 10:43:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
Subject: lobby letter from 1 netter --- repost
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Message-Id: <01H1KSUQ24XC96W50W@draco.rutgers.edu>
X-Envelope-To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Vms-To: LADS
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Status: RO

===============================================================================

>From:	IN%"snow@lucerne.rice.edu"  "Jun Wu"  7-AUG-1993 02:56:26.83
To:	IN%"lads@spike.rice.edu"
CC:	
Subj:	lobby suggestion from a netter


This is a lobby letter proposed by a netter. He will remain anonymous according
to his will. So please do not write to me or anyone for his email. Post your
thoughts to lads@lucerne.rice.edu. Thank you.



---Begin the included letter from the netter---



				************
				LOBBY INS HQ
				************


	As someone suggested earlier, it is much easier to lobby INS HQ than
getting "official' certificates from China through illegal channels. Here
is what you can do:

	1. save and print out this letter;
	2. sign it (modify as you like);
	3. mail it or fax it; and
	4. distribute as widely as you can.

	It will help you and your LADs! REMEMBER: applications accepted
don't mean anything until they are approved.

	
	A Netter
	

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
	(NOTE: 3 Copies are needed)


TO:	Director, The Records Systems Division
	Policy Directives and Instructions Branch
	Immigration and Naturalization Service
	425 I street NW., Room 5307
	Washington     DC 20536

	Rita A. Boie
	Senior Immigration Examiner
	Administrations Branch
	Immigration and Naturalization Service
	425 I Street NW., Room 7223
	Washington     DC 20536


FROM:	XXXXXX  XXXXX
	----------------------
	----------------------
	----------------------


RE:	CSPA Later-Arriving Dependents Permanent Residence Applications



Dear INS HQ,

	I am reporting a concern regarding the permanent residence applications
of CSPA later-arriving dependents (LADs).  The applications are handled by
local INS offices.  As a result, practices at various local INS offices vary
substantially.  Several offices require original/certified birth certificates
and marriage certificates or certain certificates certified by overseas U.S.
agencies in China.  This practice has caused a lot of confusion and anxiety
among Chinese students and their LADs.  Because no birth certificates were
issued at the time when we were born.  It is also very difficult for us,
overseas Chinese students, to obtain notarized certificates from China.  A
couple of years ago, the Chinese government issued a new policy.  The policy
made it clear that no notarized birth certificates should be issued to 
overseas Chinese students.  The reason is to prevent Chinese students from
obtaining permanent residencies outside China and force more students to
return home.

	If the local INS offices continue to require the original/notarized
birth certificates, it will force many many Chinese students and their LADs
to commit massive crimes.  Because they will have to get these unavailable
documents through illegal channels, that is, to bribe the Chinese government
officials by paying big bucks $$$$$$ or buying valuable "gifts."  As you may
realize, these documents by no means are "official and original."  These
"black market" documents do not make much sense.

	Furthermore, the instructions on Form I-485 state that "submit a
copy of your birth certificate OR OTHER RECORD OF YOUR BIRTH."  Clearly,
other secondary documents of birth evidence are acceptable.

	Considering the above mentioned reasons, we kindly request INS HQ
to waive the requirement of the original/notarized birth certifcates, and
to accept secondary evidences, such as passports, PRC Citizen ID cards 
issued by local Chinese public security bureaus, marriage certificates, 
and degree certificates.  These real official documents are much better 
than the "black market" "official" documents.

	We greatly appreciate your consideration of our request.



						Sincerely,


						(Signature)


						XXX YYY ZZZ



---End the letter from the netter

===============================================================================

From shengj@acf2.nyu.edu  Tue Aug 10 10:25:23 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA13972); Tue, 10 Aug 93 10:25:32 CDT
Received: from acf2.NYU.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA13962); Tue, 10 Aug 93 10:25:23 CDT
Received: by acf2.NYU.EDU (5.61/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
	id AA27785; Tue, 10 Aug 93 11:23:57 -0400
From: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
Message-Id: <9308101523.AA27785@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Subject: Local INS Status, Package #1.5
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 11:23:57 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 4749      
Status: RO

Hi, netters,
The following is a list of local INS offices' status on LAD issue. For
those wish withhold their addresses please tell me. The default
is posting the addresses for netters' reference.  This list is updated every
day. Netters may still go their INS office even status is rejected and tell me
your experience there so that this list can be mostly updated. After the list,
there is a Q&A or comments regarding to local INS on LAD applications.

=======================================================================
Date 08/10, 11PM

              	STATUS	SOURCE
Arlington	accept	SWANG@american.edu

Atlanta         accept	liang@athena.cs.uga.edu

Buffalo         accept  V592XM8P@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu
note 1> No interview was scheduled, and No medical examination was required.

Boston          accept  wl@cfaitamp.harvard.edu
note 1> 2year waiver may not be needed from 08/09

Chicago       	accept	shi6@oddjob.uchicago.edu
note 1> quotations from a anonymous posting as your reference:
------------------------START---------------------------
Chicago INS information:
  Chicago accepted the application today. They do not check the birth
 certificate and marrige license. You may need the form for your 2 year waive
 if you are J-?er. I happened to hear two officials discuss such matter.
     A: Hi, B. How to handle chinese J visa two year waive? Do they need file
        a form?
     B: No they do not need file the form. I think they automatically get the
        waive.
     A. Are you sure?
     B. No,I am not. You better ask C.
It was 3.00pm. It was going to close. No one chinese got trouble.
 Few things I want to mension are:
   1. They need your original I-94 form.
   2. Even you have the evidence to support your family, you still need file
  the Form I-134. The form I-134 is filed by YOU, not some esle. You can file
 there or take home and bring back when interview.
   3. You will get interview date which is exact two monthes later.
   4. They don not look whatever you file (b) of part 2 and  YES or Not of
   "apply with you" in the Form I-485.
------------------------ END ------------------------------



Dallas      	accept	guo@bach.convex.com
notes 1>  an interview date was assigned in mid October for a F-1

Detroit         accept

Hawaii          accept

Houston       	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

Indianapolis    accept	xiawang@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu
note 1> secondary evidence for BC(Birth Certificate) seems ok.

Jacksonvile     accept	ZHEN@pine.circa.ufl.edu
note 1> application can only be sent by mail.

Kansas City     accept	fengzou@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
note 1> need official birth certificate from china(Public notary).
note 2> quotations from linhia@acc.wuacc.edu: 
        "Birth certificate need to be made and notrized in China.
        Marrige certificate notrized in U.S. is acceptable,
        but has to translated by other than that couples on the
        certificate.  The translater need sigh his name on there
        and with his address."



Los Angeles     accept

Louisville      reject	D0JIAN01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
note 1> Birth Certificate Need to be Certified by U.S. Embassy in China

Memphis         accept

Miami           accept	zhaoc@surf03.sci.fau.edu
note 1> INS reject applications of LAD married after 4/11/90

New York        accept	bail@rockvax.rockefeller.edu
note 1> quotations from bail@rockvax.rockefeller.edu:
       "I went to INS at New York City today (8/9). They now accept LAD PR
	applications. The officer was initially hesitated when he knew that
	I got married after the stupid 4/11/90 date. Then he went to the
	supervisor, and came back saying it's fine. He didn't take any
	original document (actually didn't even ask to see). But to be safe,
	it's better to bring the originals.  BTW, no interview date was given.
	And he said it's likely I would be interviewed next year."


Omaha           accept	TBC05@ISUVAX.IASTATE.EDU

Pittsburgh    	accept	Bin_Luo@ius4.ius.cs.cmu.edu
note 1> 2year waiver may be needed before applying PR J visa holders

Philadelphia    accept	***@***.***.EDU
note 1> quotations from Xia@ee.udel.edu about filing I-485:
        "checking section (b) in part 2, and for question 12 of part 3,
         checking "NO""

Portland        accept

Salt Lake City  reject	SHIBAI@PHYSC1.BYU.EDU

San Antonio	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

San Francisco   accept

Spokane         accept

St. Albans      accept	SGU@draco.rutgers.edu

================================================================
COMMENTS:
Q&A
Q1.4-1  Charlotte INS
>From: ychen4@eos.ncsu.edu Sat, 07 Aug 93 17:38:14 EDT writes:
     Does anybody know whether the Charlotte INS in North Carolina has started
to accept the application of LADs ?

A: Anybody?

From shengj@acf2.nyu.edu  Tue Aug 10 10:51:58 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA14144); Tue, 10 Aug 93 10:52:02 CDT
Received: from acf2.NYU.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA14134); Tue, 10 Aug 93 10:51:58 CDT
Received: by acf2.NYU.EDU (5.61/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
	id AA29434; Tue, 10 Aug 93 11:49:52 -0400
From: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
Message-Id: <9308101549.AA29434@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Subject: Correction on Salt Lake City
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 11:49:52 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 46        
Status: RO

Salt Lake City   accept	SHIBAI@VANLAB.BYU.EDU

From my@math.luc.edu  Tue Aug 10 16:49:20 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA14947); Tue, 10 Aug 93 16:49:26 CDT
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA14937); Tue, 10 Aug 93 16:49:20 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA02846; Tue, 10 Aug 93 16:49:45 CDT
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 16:49:45 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308102149.AA02846@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: J-1,J-2,F-2,DED:    package #1.7
Status: RO


To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu, mail@helix.nih.gov
Subject: J-1 wavier
Content-Length: 322

I am LAD. Does anybody know how to fill Form 612 ? I called several laywers in Maryland. They told me it's very very difficult to get wavier from unacceptable  
hardship. INS and USIA would suggest your spouse who gets PR go to China with you. If somebody have any information about this. PLease help me. Thanks a lot.
..

To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Subject: Work-permit
 
A netter earlier pointed out that after submitting the I-485, we'll
lose the F-1 status and it's illegal to continue to receive 
assistantship because it's also considered a kind of work. Then my
question is: How about fellowship? Is it also considered a kind
of work? 
This thing is really scary if the answer is "yes" because all the
Chinese students here have fellowships, and none of us has applied
the work-permit.
*************************************************************************
 
>From yuang@ccvax.ccs.csus.edu Tue Aug 10 13:12:46 1993
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 11:08:25 PDT
>From: yuang@ccvax.ccs.csus.edu
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Subject: Good news for DED, and Finaceal ground
Content-Length: 995



Hi, Friends:

	I went to see the foreign student adviser in our school
for a letter that verify my F-1 status. He told me:

1	What he knows is that now Chinese student should not worry about 
	their status , no matter what are their statu, as long as they are 
	CSPA, their dependents' application will be processed. He said
	he get some news from INS hq. I asked whether  INS' atitude
	toward LAD will be easy from now on, He replyed "yes".
	That is good news, isn't it?

2.	When I ask how much would be a bottom line for finacial
	ground for a family of three. He said there is no clearly 
	cut-off line, but he would say about $15,000 yearly income
	should do it. If it is only $14,000 a year, INS will look 
	over at other aspect to make decision. He also knows poverty
	line for CSPA.

	I think if all our lad members go to see foreiagn adviser, and 
	later share all information what we  get , probably this is 
	another resource to get new information.

	Any comments?


					Yuan Gang
*******************************************************************************

>From ywang@ee.duke.edu Tue Aug 10 14:45:06 1993
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 15:43:10 -0400
>From: Yucheng Wang <ywang@ee.duke.edu>
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Subject: Re:  PR Pending Status
Content-Length: 1372

> I filed I-485 under CSPA on June 30, 93 by mail.  Since that day, I have
> been the PR Pending status instead of an F-1 status.  I continue to
> study for my Ph.D. and receive assistantship.  My question is:
> Can I legally get the assitantship in the period of PR pending?
> Or, I must get the Work Permission first then get the paycheck?
> Since the assistantship can be maintained until next June, I don't
> want to work outside campus.  The Work Permission will cost me $60.
> I think I don't need to apply the Work Permission Card during this
> Pending period.  If I try to find a job outside the campus, I need
> to apply the Work Permission Card.  Am I right?

*You have to apply work permit! You are not F-1 student anymore and the
*on campus work permit issued by your international student office will
*not be valid anymore. Assistantship is an offer, whether you maintain
*eligible is another matter. Work without permit is illegal, even when
*you are in PR pending.


This brings my question regurding my eligiblity of working as RA
during my PR pending. I applied work permission under Bush'a
Excutive Order which allows me to work 20 hrs per week during
school session. Is this permission still valid till Jan,1,1994?
Maybe I can find the answer in the CSPA regulation, so far I just
raise the question for some discussion.
Thanks for your time.
-Y. Xiao

************************************************************************* 
A netter earlier pointed out that after submitting the I-485, we'll
lose the F-1 status and it's illegal to continue to receive 
assistantship because it's also considered a kind of work. Then my
question is: How about fellowship? Is it also considered a kind
of work? 
This thing is really scary if the answer is "yes" because all the
Chinese students here have fellowships, and none of us has applied
the work-permit.
 

From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Tue Aug 10 17:24:05 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA15009); Tue, 10 Aug 93 17:24:11 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA14999); Tue, 10 Aug 93 17:24:05 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA11203; Tue, 10 Aug 93 18:22:36 EDT
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 18:14:09 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308102214.AA24234@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Pack#5 on Forms etc
Status: RO

=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Forms and Certificate from  LAD-network         ==                 
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==        
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==      
=====================================================
begin  
===================================================================

>From jyu@papaya.wustl.edu Mon Aug  9 21:05:37 1993
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 93 21:07:00 -0500
>From: jyu@papaya.wustl.edu (Jiye Yu )
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Subject: question
Content-Length: 224

I noticed that there are lads who have applied for PR and also got working permits, I'd like to know: is there an expiring date on the working permit? How long
can the permit usually be used?
Thanks for any possible anwser!

=======================================================================

>From:   IN%"54YANG@cua.edu"  "Feng Gang 301-441-8871 (home)" 10-AUG-1993 10:47:56.80
To:     IN%"LADS@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:     
Subj:   Birth Certificate

Hello,

Yesterday I filed the application for my wife in the Maryland (Baltimore)
INS office.  My wife does not have a notarized birth certificate from PRC.
She got "proofs" from her parents here in the US -- notarized statement
about her birth.  The application was accepted without a question.

Interestingly, she got a standard letter with written A#, name, and file
date, which says she does not need an interview (interview is waived),
and just go back and wait for 60-90 days for the process.  Before paid
the $120, she was asked to sign a card and print her fingerprints on it.

Another Chinese person got a similar letter.
However, when we first arrived, a Chinese couple came off the counter
without handing in the forms.  I asked them what's the matter, they said
the officer asked for birth certificate notarized in PRC.  They left
quickly so that I couldn't get more info from them about their case.

This is for your info.  Good luck every LAD and their family.
.........................................................
..  Fenggang Yang, The Catholic University of America  ..
..  Internet: 54yang@cua.edu       BITNET: 54YANG@CUA  ..
..  FAX: (U.S.) 202-319-6267                           ..
.........................................................
=========================================================================
End
 


From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Tue Aug 10 18:09:37 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA15104); Tue, 10 Aug 93 18:09:42 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA15094); Tue, 10 Aug 93 18:09:37 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA11844; Tue, 10 Aug 93 19:08:11 EDT
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 18:59:43 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308102259.AA24407@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: More help on LAD-Q&A
Status: RO

>From: 		LAD Network Committee
To:   		Network Members
Subject:	Continuing to collect Qs and As for LAD-Q&A
  
Thanks to the network members. We got a lot of answers up to now.
But we still need your contribution to this LAd-Q&A to finish it.
We hope it will come out soon.

If your question is not here, or you has answers to any of the 
following questions, please SUMMARIZE and mail to:

                JLI@MINES.UTAH.EDU
		yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu

and after "Subject:",
write 		more Qs     if you add  questions

write		Ans to Q*   if you answer a question.

If you do not want your name shown in LAD-Q&A, please state so.

Note: A "*" before the question means that we receive no answers
      to this question.
------------------------------------------------------------------
LIST OF QUESTIONS

Q1.	Form I-485: (b) or (h)? Applying with you? Yes or no?

Q2.	J-2 LAD: 2-year Waiver?

Q3. 	J-1 LAD: 2-year Waiver?

Q4.	DED Legal Status?

Q5.	Birth Certificate

Q6.	Marriage Certificate

Q7.	Marriage Date: 4/11/91, Priority Date or before CSPA Approval?

*Q8.	Voluntary Departure Status

Q9.	If CSPA Principal or LAD's application rejected, what to do?

Q10. 	What is the sufficient financial support? 
                                                                            
Q11.	90-day Limit and LAD Derivative Status

Q12.	How to file I-812?

Q13.	Will I be interviewed?

*Q14. 	How to file I-756 form line 16 ( Eligibility section ) for
     	LAD's applying for Employment Authorization.

*Q15. 	Spouse and Child can use one I-485 form together or not?

*Q16. 	Can one's parents be treated as the dependents of the CSPA pricipal?

*Q17. 	If a LAD can not apply for PR now (e.g. out of status), what to do?

---------------------------------------------------------------------


From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Wed Aug 11 09:54:13 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA26879); Wed, 11 Aug 93 09:54:18 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA26869); Wed, 11 Aug 93 09:54:13 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA23277; Wed, 11 Aug 93 10:52:47 EDT
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 93 10:44:20 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308111444.AA28255@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: For ans to Q9 and Q20
Status: RO

>From: 		LAD Network Committee
To:   		Network Members
Subject:	Continuing to collect Qs and As for LAD-Q&A
  
Thanks to the network members. The LAd-Q&A is ready to show up after
the committee review it.

We still accept new questions or your unofficial answers, 
especially the question with a "*". Please SUMMARIZE and mail to:

                JLI@MINES.UTAH.EDU
		yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu

and after "Subject:",
write 		more Qs     if you add  questions

write		Ans to Q*   if you answer a question.
		(e.g. Ans to Q7, Q12)

If you do not want your name shown in LAD-Q&A, please state so.

Note: A "*" before the question means that we received no answers
      to this question up to now.
------------------------------------------------------------------
LIST OF QUESTIONS

Q1.	Form I-485: (b) or (h)? Applying with you? Yes or no?

Q2.	J-2 LAD: 2-year Waiver?

Q3. 	J-1 LAD: 2-year Waiver?

Q4.	DED Legal Status?

Q5.	Birth Certificate

Q6.	Marriage Certificate

Q7.	Marriage Date: 4/11/91, Priority Date or before CSPA Approval?

Q8.	Voluntary Departure Status

*Q9.	If CSPA Principal or LAD's application rejected, what to do?

Q10. 	What is the sufficient financial support? 
                                                                            
Q11.	90-day Limit and LAD Derivative Status

Q12.	How to file I-812?

Q13.	Will I be interviewed?

Q14. 	How to file I-756 form line 16 ( Eligibility section ) for
     	LAD's applying for Employment Authorization.

Q15. 	Spouse and Child can use one I-485 form together or not?

Q16. 	Can one's parents be treated as the dependents of the CSPA pricipal?

Q17. 	If a LAD can not apply for PR now (e.g. out of status), what to do?

Q18. 	If LAD and principal live in seperate places, where to file?

Q19. 	When CSPA principal to file I-824 for LADS out of status?

*Q20. 	How to file I-612? How to write a statement about unacceptable hardship?
---------------------------------------------------------------------


From my@math.luc.edu  Wed Aug 11 10:17:18 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA27186); Wed, 11 Aug 93 10:17:23 CDT
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA27176); Wed, 11 Aug 93 10:17:18 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA03474; Wed, 11 Aug 93 10:17:41 CDT
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 93 10:17:41 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308111517.AA03474@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: J-1,J-2,F-2,DED:    package #1.8
Status: RO

 
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Subject: Question
 
Hi
I have a quuestion regarding out off status LADS.
When can CSPA principal file I-824 for their LADS who are
out of status? File I-824 now or after principal's PR is approved?

Thanks

Y.Z.
*****************************************************************************

 To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu

> I filed I-485 under CSPA on June 30, 93 by mail.  Since that day, I have
> been the PR Pending status instead of an F-1 status.  I continue to
> study for my Ph.D. and receive assistantship.  My question is:
> Can I legally get the assitantship in the period of PR pending?
> Or, I must get the Work Permission first then get the paycheck?
> Since the assistantship can be maintained until next June, I don't
> want to work outside campus.  The Work Permission will cost me $60.
> I think I don't need to apply the Work Permission Card during this
> Pending period.  If I try to find a job outside the campus, I need
> to apply the Work Permission Card.  Am I right?

*You have to apply work permit! You are not F-1 student anymore and the
*on campus work permit issued by your international student office will
*not be valid anymore. Assistantship is an offer, whether you maintain
*eligible is another matter. Work without permit is illegal, even when
*you are in PR pending.


>This brings my question regurding my eligiblity of working as RA
>during my PR pending. I applied work permission under Bush'a
>Excutive Order which allows me to work 20 hrs per week during
>school session. Is this permission still valid till Jan,1,1994?
>Maybe I can find the answer in the CSPA regulation, so far I just
>raise the question for some discussion.
>Thanks for your time.
>-Y. Xiao

************************************************************************* 
>A netter earlier pointed out that after submitting the I-485, we'll
>lose the F-1 status and it's illegal to continue to receive 
>assistantship because it's also considered a kind of work. Then my
>question is: How about fellowship? Is it also considered a kind
>of work? 
>This thing is really scary if the answer is "yes" because all the
                                                           ^^^  
>Chinese students here have fellowships, and none of us has applied
                            ^^^^^^^^^^^
>the work-permit.

You said that all the Chinese students here have Felloships.  This
is not true.  Only a few Chinese students receive Fellowship.
Students who receive Fellowship are not needed to work.  The money
seems to be awarded to them.  Most of the Chinese students obtain 
RA or TA, and they need to work on Research or Teaching for their 
assistantship.  The difference between RA or TA and Fellowship or
Scholorship is RA or TA get money by work, however, Fellowship
and Scholorship get money without working.  Some Chinese students
take RA or TA as Fellowship or Fellowship for tax purpose.  This
is another story.

The question originally put forward by me. When I got the negative
anwser, I was quite surprised. This morning I asked the immigration
specialist in the International Student Office in our School. The
anwser was confirmed: PR applicant who receives RA or TA with original
F-1 or J-1 HAS TO apply work permission.  Those who originally held
an H-1 might not be the same due to "dual intent".

It seems a little bit safe with Work Permission Card during the pending
period. It is up to you. Thoese receiving Fellowship or Scholorship
probabaly do not need the Work Permission Card because they don't work.
**************************************************************************
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Content-Length: 429

The messages in the net confused me.  Someone pointed out that we will
not allowed to work (receive assistantship) after we filed the I-485 if
we do not have the work permit. (we were F-1 LADs)

The problem is: we did apply for the work permit while we filed the I-485,
but we were told that we needed to wait 60 days to get approved. What should
we do? stop the RA/TA activities and stop receiving the money right away?

---ZYu
****************************************************************************

North Carolina Netters:

Charlotte INS refuses to accept the employment authorization document
(EAD card) application from CSPAs, delays the EAD process for LADs
for 90 days instead of approving it at the same day. This situation
hurts a lot of people who were eligible to accept jobs as F-1 ( such
as RA or TA), but lost the work authorization after applied the
PR adjustment. We need to do something about it now before it is too 
late to do anything. Working without authorization is a very serious
problem. I hope we are aware of this.

-Y. Xiao
****************************************************************************

> 
> I noticed that there are lads who have applied for PR and also got working 
> permits, I'd like to know: is there an expiring date on the working permit? 
> How long
> can the permit usually be used?
> Thanks for any possible anwser!
> 
   The working permition we got is valid for a year.

***************************************************************************

Can an F-1 LAD apply, (1) if he(she) came here under 21 yr. old; (2) if he
(she) came older than 21 yr. old?

*********************************************************************

Hi,

Can someone tell me when applying for work authorization, what kind of eligibility
do I have? I am referring to applying for LADS, form I765, line 16.

Should it be the same as in I-485:  other       FOLLOW TO JOIN UNDER CSPA.

thanks in advance.


xhw
******************************************************************************

From shengj@acf2.nyu.edu  Wed Aug 11 10:16:21 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA27037); Wed, 11 Aug 93 10:16:34 CDT
Received: from acf2.NYU.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA26968); Wed, 11 Aug 93 10:16:21 CDT
Received: by acf2.NYU.EDU (5.61/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
	id AA13944; Wed, 11 Aug 93 11:14:51 -0400
From: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
Message-Id: <9308111514.AA13944@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Subject: Local INS Status, Package #1.6
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 11:14:51 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 5109      
Status: RO

Hi, netters,
The following is a list of local INS offices' status on LAD issue. For
those wish withhold their addresses please tell me. The default
is posting the addresses for netters' reference.  This list is updated every
day. Netters may still go their INS office even status is rejected and tell me
your experience there so that this list can be mostly updated. After the list,
there is a Q&A or comments regarding to local INS on LAD applications.

=======================================================================
Date 08/11, 11:00AM

              	STATUS	SOURCE
Albuquerque     accept	ssong@beta.lanl.gov

Arlington	accept	SWANG@american.edu

Atlanta         accept	liang@athena.cs.uga.edu

Buffalo         accept  V592XM8P@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu
note 1> No interview was scheduled, and No medical examination was required.

Baltimore       accept	CHUANHE@enh.nist.gov
note 1> need BC or "a letter from China saying they refuse to issue the birth
        certificate to you" plus cerfication of your birth from someone other
	than your parents. Certified birth certificate from hospital is also
	acceptable substitution.
   
Boston          accept  wl@cfaitamp.harvard.edu
note 1> 2year waiver may not be needed from 08/09

Chicago       	accept	shi6@oddjob.uchicago.edu
note 1> quotations from a anonymous posting as your reference:
	"1. They need your original I-94 form.
	2. Even you have the evidence to support your family, you still need
	file the Form I-134. The form I-134 is filed by YOU, not some esle. 
	You can file there or take home and bring back when interview.
	3. You will get interview date which is exact two monthes later.
	4. They don not look whatever you file (b) of part 2 and  YES or Not of
	"apply with you" in the Form I-485."


Dallas      	accept	guo@bach.convex.com
notes 1>  an interview date was assigned in mid October for a F-1

Detroit         accept

El Paso         reject

Hawaii          accept

Houston       	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

Indianapolis    accept	xiawang@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu
note 1> secondary evidence for BC(Birth Certificate) seems ok.

Jacksonvile     accept	ZHEN@pine.circa.ufl.edu
note 1> application can only be sent by mail.

Kansas City     accept	fengzou@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
note 1> need official birth certificate from china(Public notary).
note 2> quotations from linhia@acc.wuacc.edu: 
        "Birth certificate need to be made and notrized in China.
        Marrige certificate notrized in U.S. is acceptable,
        but has to translated by other than that couples on the
        certificate.  The translater need sigh his name on there
        and with his address."


Los Angeles     accept

Louisville      reject	D0JIAN01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
note 1> Birth Certificate Need to be Certified by U.S. Embassy in China

Memphis         accept

Miami           accept	zhaoc@surf03.sci.fau.edu
note 1> INS reject applications of LAD married after 4/11/90

Newark          reject	yexiaoxu@phoenix.princeton.edu

New York        accept	bail@rockvax.rockefeller.edu
note 1> quotations from bail@rockvax.rockefeller.edu:
       "I went to INS at New York City today (8/9). They now accept LAD PR
	applications. The officer was initially hesitated when he knew that
	I got married after the stupid 4/11/90 date. Then he went to the
	supervisor, and came back saying it's fine. He didn't take any
	original document (actually didn't even ask to see). But to be safe,
	it's better to bring the originals.  BTW, no interview date was given.
	And he said it's likely I would be interviewed next year."


Omaha           accept	TBC05@ISUVAX.IASTATE.EDU

Pittsburgh    	accept	Bin_Luo@ius4.ius.cs.cmu.edu
note 1> 2year waiver may be needed before applying PR for J visa holders

Philadelphia    accept	***@***.***.EDU
note 1> quotations from Xia@ee.udel.edu about filing I-485:
        "checking section (b) in part 2, and for question 12 of part 3,
         checking "NO""

Portland        accept

Salt Lake City  accept	SHIBAI@PHYSC1.BYU.EDU

San Antonio	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

San Francisco   accept

Spokane         accept

St. Albans      accept	SGU@draco.rutgers.edu

================================================================
Q&A
Q1.6-1 If LAD and principal live in seperate places, say New York and Chicago,
       where should LAD send his(her) applications to?
    A: I called Donald Tela ESQ attorney at law in New York, the answer is
       sending applications to principal's INS. But answer from another
       attorney's office is applying in both INS offices is OK. I guess it is
       better to apply in principal's INS office, or call your local
       INS to find out.

COMMENTS:
C1.6-1  Newark INS office:
	yexiaoxu@phoenix.princeton.edu writes:
	"I and my wife went to Newark INS office yesterday.  And they still
	 reject application for LAD.  The reason was that I didn't have my
	 priority date and their understanding of priority date is the date of
	 my PR application being approved.  Is anyone has the similar
	 experience?  Could anyone give me some advice?  Thank you very much!"

From jli@mines.utah.edu  Wed Aug 11 12:32:48 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA27417); Wed, 11 Aug 93 12:32:54 CDT
Received: from cs.utah.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA27407); Wed, 11 Aug 93 12:32:48 CDT
Received: from mines.utah.edu by cs.utah.edu (5.65/utah-2.21-cs)
	id AA10518; Wed, 11 Aug 93 11:31:23 -0600
Received: by mines.utah.edu (5.57/Ultrix2.4-C)
	id AA22328; Wed, 11 Aug 93 11:31:34 MDT
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 93 11:31:34 MDT
From: jli@mines.utah.edu (Jianliang Li)
Message-Id: <9308111731.AA22328@mines.utah.edu>
To: LADS@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO


	The following message is forwarded from a netter:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>From ZHOU@marvin.yorkcol.edu Wed Aug 11 09:41:28 1993
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 11:41:00 -0400 (EDT)
>From: ZHOU@marvin.yorkcol.edu
To: jli@mines
Cc: ZHOU@marvin.yorkcol.edu
Message-Id: <930811114100.204020d2@marvin.yorkcol.edu>
Subject: For those who have exceeded the 90-day limit 
Status: R

Please post the following message.  Thanks. 

Some concerns have been heard on the issue of those who have exceeded the
90-day-limit and who have also been denied the opportunity  to apply for 
adjustment of status as a derivative family member of CSPA principal under 
ED-3rd Preference.  The reason for the INS to reject their applications is 
their assumption that Chinese  nationals who have this violation of 90-day 
limit are considered legal but not lawful.  To apply as a derivatiave family 
member, one needs to have maintained lawful status, hence they don't qualify.

Well, I have taken a look at the Bush Executiave Order 12711 of April 11,
1990( the full text of which can be found in Federal Register, April 13, 1990
which is available in any college library), it says in section 3 the following:

"The Secretary of State and the Attorney General are directed ato provide the
following protections:

(a)...

(b) maintenance of lawful status for purposes of adjustment of status or change
of nonimmigrant status for such PRC nationals who were in lawful status at any
time on or after June 5, 1989, up to and including the date of this order"

Since the above section of the Bush executive order assures the lawfulness of
DED and the executive order makes no mention of the possibility of that status
being suspended as a result of a trip or two to China between then and 1/1/94,
we can challenge the INS examiners claims that people who have exceeded 90-day
limit are no longer eligible for adjustment of status as a derivative family
member because they are not lawful.  Even CSPA itself does not say people 
excluded from CSPA because of the 90-day problem may not apply as derivative 
family member.  

The above is my personal analysis only, but I don't think it will hurt if one
brings this to the attention of the INS officials who deem us legal but not
lawful.  We do have a strong case here.  

I would appreciate any discussion on this.





From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Wed Aug 11 14:43:47 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA27581); Wed, 11 Aug 93 14:43:54 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA27571); Wed, 11 Aug 93 14:43:47 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA29713; Wed, 11 Aug 93 15:42:12 EDT
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 93 15:33:45 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308111933.AA00007@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Now the LAD-Q&A
Cc: jli@mines.utah.edu
Status: RO

Thanks to the network members. Here is the LAD-Q&A. This file can also be FTP
from spike.rice.edu.
Remember, handing in I-485 does not mean everything is over. We must be preparedfor future problems. So keep updating this LAD-Q&A.
Below is the full text of LAd-Q&As:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT NOTES FIRST:
====================================================================
This package is only for INFORMATION EXCHANGE. The answers have no
way to be official and your own judgement must be used.
We ( including the SENDERs ) hold no responsibility to any future 
legal problems resulting from this LAD-Q&As.

If you need more information or have doubt about any of the answers,
contact the SENDER who answered this question DIRECTLY.

If your questions are not covered in this LAD-Q&A, please mail them to us.
We will post your questions to the network for an answer.

We also welcome your unofficial answers to the questions,
which will be used to update the LAD-Q&A.(Please state in your mail
if you want to be anonymous).

Please SUMMARIZE and send to:

     YHL%CMLIRIS@HARVARD.HARVARD.EDU
or
     JLI@MINES.UTAH.EDU

Thank you for your co-operations!

Note: A"*" before a question means that we have not got any answer yet.
======================================================================

***************************
*** LAD-Q&A 		***
***(Updated on 08-11-93)***
***************************


LIST OF QUESTIONS

Q1.Form I-485: (b) or (h)? Applying with you? Yes or no?

Q2.J-2 LAD: 2-year Waiver?

Q3. J-1 LAD: 2-year Waiver?

Q4.DED Legal Status?

Q5.Birth Certificate

Q6.Marriage Certificate

Q7.Marriage Date: 4/11/91, Priority Date or before CSPA Approval?

Q8.Voluntary Departure Status

Q9.If CSPA Principal or LAD's application rejected, what to do?

Q10. What is the sufficient financial support? 
                                                                            
Q11.90-day Limit and LAD Derivative Status

Q12.How to file I-812?

Q13.Will I be interviewed?

Q14. How to file I-756 form line 16 ( Eligibility section ) for
     LAD's applying for Employment Authorization.

Q15. Spouse and Child can use one I-485 form together or not?

Q16. Can one's parents be treated as the dependents of the CSPA pricipal?

Q17. If a LAD can not apply for PR now (e.g. out of status), what to do?

Q18. If LAD and principal live in seperate places, where to file?

Q19. When CSPA principal to file I-824 for LADS out of status?

*Q20. How to file I-612? How to write a statement about unacceptable hardship?

Q21. If one is changing his/her status, e.g., from F-2 and F-1, what to do?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNOFFICIAL ANSWERS
-------------------
Q1. Form I-485:
-------------------


>From: JLI@MINES.UTAH.EDU (8/8/93)

1. (b) or (h)?

   Select both (b) and (h).  Add a note to (h): "CSPA Derivative.
   My husband/wife filed on 7/1/93 (or your date) under CSPA."

2. Applying with you?   Yes or no?

   No.  But add: "He/She filed on 7/1/93 (or your date) under
   CSPA."

>From U55363@UICVM.BITNET  (Wed Aug 11 15:18:06 1993)

   (b). I wrote "CSPA-dependent" after that.
   Not applying with you. (indicating that "s/he applied under CSPA".

-------------------------------
Q2. J-2 LAD: 2-year waiver?
------------------------------- 


>From: Xia@ee.udel.edu

	We went to INS office in Philadelphia this morning at 7:35Am. Every
	thing is ok so far. About filling I-485, a INS person told us that 
	checking section (b) in part 2, and for question 12 of part 3, 
	checking "NO".


>From:  JLI@MINES.UTAH.EDU (8/8/93)

On Form I-485, Part III, Q12, answer "yes" but add "Once my husband/
wife's permanent residence application as a CSPA Principal (J-1) is 
approved, the 2-year foreign country residence requirement for me
(J-2) will be waived simultaneously.

After your LAD files her/his application, it is also recommended that
you file Form I-612 for the 2-year waiver.  It will cost you additional
$90.  It may worth it.  It is up to you.

>yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (8/11/93)

   I called an Immigration Lawyer in Boston (Adam Green or Russel Swapp at 
617-338-2413) and found that there is no need for J-2 to get a waiver since J-1 principal get
a waiver automatically and this waiver can be automatically extended to J-2.
   Before you go, take the number. Ask the officer to call when questioned.

-------------------------------
Q3. J-1 LAD: 2-year waiver?
-------------------------------


>From: Anonymous (8/9/93)

I have contacted a lawyer in DC and a Chinese consul in NY. Here are
are some messages I got. (1) J-1 LADs can apply PR only after obtaining 
a waiver letter from USIA. Some local INS may accept the application, 
but it will probably be rejected. The application of waiver can not be
handed in at the same time as the application of PR. (2) To obtain the
the 2-year waiver, you can (a). obtain a "No Objection letter" from 
Chinese Embassy.  But the Chinese consul said a person can apply 
a waiver only he/she wants to change from J-1 to F-1
or to H-1 or J-2, F-2 ect. My wife is going to gradurate soon. No these
categories is suitable for her, so that the consul refused to help her.
(b). fill in a Form I-612. You can ensure a lawyer to do this or do it
at your local INS by yourself. I am contacting a lawyer in DC. I'll tell
you the news when I get it from the lawyer.
 
  -----------------

>From LHGCC@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU Mon Aug  9 06:20:32 1993
>From: Mi Mi <LHGCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>

Q: What should J-1 LAD do?
A: Unless there is a blanket waiver for J-1 LADs, J-1 LAD should be
   dealt case by case.
      J-1 visa holders are required mandately to comply the two-year
 home country residency before s/he can apply any nonimmigrate or
    immigrate visa. Even a J-1er had been stayed in US for only one day.
       To waive two-year home country residency, you can do either
  1) Ask a US government agency to help you. This is highly impossible
unless you were very important to them.
   2) Ask a no-objection letter from China government. This option is
 possible now but takes considerable time and energy.
       You should do: a) Ask your work unit to present a no-objection
       letter
    b) Get a no-objection letter from China Embassy,
 c) Ask Information Agency for approval,
      d) Ask INS for approval.
    You should contact the China Embassy and your foreign student
  advisor for details.
     There are other possible solutions based on family, political reasons
which you may not be interested in or may be difficult to process.


-------------------

   I am not sure if you can apply PR right now, but I think the first
   thing you should begin to do is to get a waiver for your J-1. One way
   to get a waiver is by Chinese Embassy, you can ask chinese consulate
   in your area on how to do it. They may need your application, the letter
   from your working place in China, the copy of your IAP-66 form, your
   employment letter here and $50 check, you also are required to fill a 
special form giving by Chinese consulate.

-------------------

      I concern the issue of J-1 LAD. The INS in Menneapolis accepts the
      application of LAD. But nobody knows what the decision they make will
     be. Please let me know the information about this issue.

-------------------

I got the same problem as you do. I went to local INS Office at Salt
Lake City  yesterday with my wife and handed in the application. The
lady working there told me that they will accept any application no
matter what the LAD's current status is. Now, What is your information?


-------------------------
Q4. DED Legal Status:
-------------------------


>From: Anonymous (8/9/93)

According to the local INS, DED is NOT a lawful status, and those
in DED now are considered to have failed to maintain lawful status.

My application for PR as spouse of a CSPA principal was returned
yesterday.  INS explained that my current status DED is not a
lawful status, though it is a legal status.

Before I graduated, I consulted a foreign student adviser in
the International Student Office of my university regarding
future status.  The options are: continuing school, practical
training and DED.  DED was highly recommended since one could
change from DED to F, J, H visa, or adjust status to permanent
resident.  In one word, DED was much better than practical training
and would not have any negative effect on one's future.

The local INS responded it is true that the DEDs can switch back to
F, J, H, which are lawful status. They will be considered in lawful
status after they switch.  However, there is no guarantee that they
will be considered to have continuously maintained lawful status.
Technically, DED is not a lawful status.

It seems that if DEDs are not able to adjust status under CSPA, then
many other channels of immigration will be closed to them, too.  For
example, they cannot follow to join their family.  Can they apply
for PR under employment category 3?


--------------------------
Q5.Birth Certificate:
--------------------------


>From bisong@utdallas.edu (Mon Aug  9 21:09:08 1993)
  You need to have the original or original of other notrarized evidence
submitted along with copies. There were about 15 LADs submitted there
application at Dallas INS this morning. All were asked for the original copy
as well as the photo copy on Birth Certificate.
  (Note: The original should be kept for interview.See I-485 instruction. --Editor)


>yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (8/11/93)

  At first, make a copy of the original document. Then ask a friend
to translate it into English (better word by word translation) and type
it up. Below the translation, write or type the following before you
go to a Notary Public:
"I,____________, hereby certify that I am competent to translate English
into Chinese, and that the above is an accurate translation from the Chinese
original".
"Signature of the translator___________________________
Address ________________________________________________

Submitted and stated under oath before me ____________________
on the date of _______________________________________________
My commission expires on _____________________________________
My signature ________________    Title:______________________"
   Now go to the public  with your friend. The notary public can
tell you what to do next.


-----------------------------
Q6.Marriage Certificate:
-----------------------------

>From bisong@utdallas.edu  (Mon Aug  9 21:09:08 1993)
  You need to submit the original marriage license along with its translated
photo copy. Information source is as above. I got my wife's translated by a
friend and notrarized by a notrary public.
  (Note: The original should be kept for interview. See I-485 instruction. --Editor)


>yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (8/11/93)

  At first, make a copy of the original document. Then ask a friend
to translate it into English (better word by word translation) and type
it up. Below the translation, write or type the following before you
go to a Notary Public:
"I,____________, hereby certify that I am competent to translate English
into Chinese, and that the above is an accurate translation from the Chinese
original".
"Signature of the translator___________________________
Address ________________________________________________

Submitted and stated under oath before me ____________________
on the date of _______________________________________________
My commission expires on _____________________________________
My signature ________________    Title:______________________"
   Now go to the public  with your friend. The notary public can
tell you what to do next.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Q7.Marriage Date: 4/11/91, Priority Date or before CSPA Approval?
----------------------------------------------------------------------


>From: Anonymous (8/9/93)
I think you can apply, as long as the marriage date is before the CSPA
approval date. But you may have problems with the local INS, because
they don't always understand the law the same way as the INS headquater.
So my suggestion is to wait for one week before you file. If you are
close to the local INS, go there in person. If they still reject the 
application, hire a lawyer who knows the CSPA to talk with INS. 
Remember one thing, all above have to be finished in Aug., so plan 
ahead.

>From bisong@utdallas.edu  (Mon Aug  9 21:09:08 1993)
  That date (4/11/91) is for non-PRC nationals to apply under CSPA. For LADs,
I can find only one sentence concerning this in the INS regulation. It says
something like: "Those dependents who got their relationship with CSPA
principal established before the approval date of the principal may apply for
adjustment of status as derived family members." 
  We married in Dec. 1991, and the application has been accepted. 

>yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (8/11/93)

  Those whose application was rejected due to marriage date may apply again
now. Nearly most of the local INS recognized their mistakes and start to accept
these applications. Before you go, make a copy of the Interim Rule 
which can be FTP in cnd.org (/pub/InfoBase/CSPA/????-regulation???).
Be ready to show them:
" Family members unable to  qualify  for   CSPA   adjustment  of
status may be eligible for lawful permanent resident status under
other provisions of the Act.  Those family members whose  spousal
or  parental  relationship  was  established before the principal
CSPA  alien's application for adjustment of  status  is  approved
may  be  eligible  for derivative immigrant status as employment-
based preference immigrants accompanying or following to join the
CSPA   principal."


-----------------------------------
Q8.Voluntary Departure Status:
-----------------------------------


>From IFCSS released news (7/15/93)

There is no application form or fee for an application for
Voluntary Departure. A request for voluntary departure may be made
in writing to the District Director having jurisdiction over the
person's place of residence. After Voluntary Departure  is granted, he
can apply for work permit.
(Note: FTP /pub/InfoBase/CSPA/ in cnd.org for more --editor)


--------------------------------------------------------------------
Q9.If CSPA Principal or LAD's application rejected, what to do?
--------------------------------------------------------------------

>From U55363@UICVM.BITNET  (Wed Aug 11 15:18:06 1993)
 
 Both of you will lose your status. You have to apply for a new
    non-immigration status.


-------------------------------------------------
Q10. What is the sufficient financial support?
-------------------------------------------------

                                                                            
>From: XiaoFei Wang <xiaofei@EINSTEIN.PHYSICS.BUFFALO.EDU>  (7/3/93)

Subject: Poverty Line Figures

Poverty Line:

Fimily Size              Income
1                        $  6809.99
2                        $  9189.99
3                        $ 11569.99
4                        $ 13929.99
5                        $ 16329.99
6                        $ 18709.99
7                        $ 21089.99
8                        $ 23469.99

Source: Federal Poverty Income Guideline


----------------------------------------------
Q11.90-day limit and LAD Derivative Status
----------------------------------------------


>From: Anonymous (8/9/93)

Some CSPA principals who have exceeded 90-day limit are denied to
opportunity to apply even as derivative family member of CSPA principal 
on grounds that DED status (which is what these LADs status) is not
considered be lawful although it is legal according to the INS standards
and interpretation of the INS regulations.

This is causing grief and big problems for many others and for me, too.
Wonder if you can call this question "legal status of CSPA 
principlas who fall out of status for exceeding the 90-day limit and
their inability to apply as derivative family member?"

----------------------------
Q12.How to file I-812?
----------------------------


>From lhgcc@cunyvm.bitnet (Mi Mi)  (8/6/93)

Part 1. Your name (petitioner) and information,
Part 2. Application Type: (c): X-town, China, for follow to join 
immigration
        visa for XXX
Part 3. Type of Petition: I-485;
           Filing Receipt #: (your I-797 for I-485,like EAC-93-216-XXXXX)
           Date of filing  : (Notice Date on your I-797)
           Date Approved   : None
           Name etc: Your family members name and information
Part 4: Your signature.

Checklist:

1) $30 application fee,
2) Copy of your I-797
3) Birth certificate,
4) Marriage Certificate,
5) I-824
You have to include a cover letter to let INS know what are you up to.


------------------------------
Q13. 	Will I be interviewed?
------------------------------


>From LHGCC@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU Mon Aug  9 06:20:32 1993
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 93 08:15:31 EDT
>From: Mi Mi <LHGCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>

Check the following questionaries
   1) My visa, whatever I had, expired prior to October 9, 1992 ____
   2) I did not apply any Executive Order 12711 benefit(s)      ____
If you checked 1) yes and 2): no, and you should expect an interview.
   Interviewing could significantely slow down your green card process.

>From U55363@UICVM.BITNET  (Wed Aug 11 15:18:06 1993)

  YES!

--------------------------------------------------------------
Q14. How to file I-756 form line 16 ( Eligibility section ) for
     LAD's applying for Employment Authorization.
--------------------------------------------------------------


>From caomath@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Tue Aug 10 20:11:15 1993)

Since a LAD has summited I-485, S/He can write c 9, the same
as CSPA pricipal. If one has problem to determine, local INS
officer can help when one summits his/her application.


--------------------------------------------------------------
Q15.  Spouse and Child can use one I-485 form together or not?
--------------------------------------------------------------


>From caomath@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Tue Aug 10 20:11:15 1993)

No. Each person is treated individually at INS office, and 
has his own file. You can choose Yes when answer "apply 
together with you?" question. But you have to summit each
person with an I-485.


>From xzwang@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Wed Aug 11 09:47:42 1993)

Why bother. The forms are free and you need to pay the $120 any way for each
applicant.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q16.  Can one's parents be treated as the dependents of the CSPA pricipal?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


>From caomath@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Tue Aug 10 20:11:15 1993)

No. For the immigration purpose, dependents are the spouse
and children. The common sense can tell you that. Look at
I-485 part 2 Application Type b, the derivative status are
for spouse and children, not for parents.

>From xzwang@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Wed Aug 11 09:47:42 1993)

No. Only spouse and children under 21 are able to derive the following to
join benifits. Even parents were dependent on you, they can not use E3.
Parents need to go through family based GC. You may want to file I130 for
your parents.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Q17. If a LAD can not apply for PR now (e.g. out of status), what to do?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


>From caomath@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Tue Aug 10 20:11:15 1993)

The CSPA pricipal files an I-824 to INS service center. Present
a letter to local INS office, requesting the approval of VD
status. After VD approval, apply for work permit and live in
US until your visa is availabel. Go to a third country like
Canada to process your application for PR and re-enter US
with an immigrant visa.

>From xzwang@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Wed Aug 11 09:47:42 1993)

The only way is to apply VD and for the principal to file I824. Once an
immigration Visa is available, he or she may be able to re-enter US with an
immigration Visa.

(Note: VD = Voluntary Departure --editor)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q18. If LAD and principal live in seperate places, where to file?
------------------------------------------------------------------------


>yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (8/11/93)

LAD should file at the local INS having jurisdiction over the
his place of residence. So the LAD should file in his/her place. He/she
need only the I-797 (receipt) from the principal.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Q19. When CSPA principal to file I-824 for LADS out of status?
----------------------------------------------------------------------


>yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (8/11/93)

After the principal's application is approved.


----------------------------------------------------
Q20. How to file I-612? and how to write a statement
     about unacceptable hardship?
----------------------------------------------------

Anyone can answer this question?

-----------------------------------------------------
Q21. If one is changing his/her status, e.g., from F-2 and F-1, what to do?
-----------------------------------------------------


>yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (8/11/93)
 
  The person does not need to withdraw his application for 
changing status before he file. He use the copy of I-94 for file 
application for PR. His new I-94 and F-1 (if it is) are useless 
after file I-485.
  What is his status if rejected? This is a open question! (see Q9)


------------------------------------------------------------------
(to be continued ...... by you)
end.



From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Wed Aug 11 15:49:15 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA27643); Wed, 11 Aug 93 15:49:19 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA27633); Wed, 11 Aug 93 15:49:15 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA00973; Wed, 11 Aug 93 16:47:50 EDT
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 93 16:39:22 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308112039.AA00442@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: confusion on work permit
Status: RO

Netter,
	There is a big confusion among the network about the CSPA
applicant's work permit, i.e. CSPA need to get a work permit now to
receive the RA or TA, otherwise, it is illegal to work after file I-485.
Here is the information I got.
	My friend visited the INS days ago. The officer told him that since
July 1st, 1993, anyone who filed I-485 on the employment base can work 
90 days without a wrok permit. In these 90 days, those who filed I-485 will
be their original status.But before 7/1/93, those who file I-485 should also file I-765 at the same time.
	I hope that readers can further confirm this.
	This also answer the Q9 in LAD-Q&A, that is
	If you are rejected in 90 days, you go back to your old status.
However, What is story if you pass "90 days"? The LADs are not likely to
get a GC in 90 days.
	Welcome anyone's new information.


From my@math.luc.edu  Wed Aug 11 17:32:02 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA27969); Wed, 11 Aug 93 17:32:08 CDT
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA27958); Wed, 11 Aug 93 17:32:02 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA03828; Wed, 11 Aug 93 17:32:28 CDT
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 93 17:32:28 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308112232.AA03828@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: WORK PERMIT (J-1,J-2,F-2,DED:    package #1.9)
Status: RO

>From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu Wed Aug 11 15:56:46 1993
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 93 16:39:22 -0400
>From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: confusion on work permit
Content-Length: 849

Netter,
	There is a big confusion among the network about the CSPA
applicant's work permit, i.e. CSPA need to get a work permit now to
receive the RA or TA, otherwise, it is illegal to work after file I-485.
Here is the information I got.
	My friend visited the INS days ago. The officer told him that since
July 1st, 1993, anyone who filed I-485 on the employment base can work 
90 days without a wrok permit. In these 90 days, those who filed I-485 will
be their original status.But before 7/1/93, those who file I-485 should also
file I-765 at the same time.
	I hope that readers can further confirm this.
	This also answer the Q9 in LAD-Q&A, that is
	If you are rejected in 90 days, you go back to your old status.
However, What is story if you pass "90 days"? The LADs are not likely to
get a GC in 90 days.
	Welcome anyone's new information.
 
***************************************************************************************
 
>From snow@lucerne.rice.edu Wed Aug 11 13:59:31 1993
>From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: again, work permit
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 13:59:01 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1034


It seems different INS offices have different explainations aobut work
permit to receive RA or TA, or should we say different Foreign Student 
Advisors (FSA) have different explainations.

The foreign student advisor here said,

	As long as you are a F-1 at the time of your application, and
your I-20 is not going to expire before you get you GC, it is fine for
you to continue receiving RA or TA from school without work permit.
And she sited a law for it. She also said they had a meeting with Houston
INS officials, and both agreed that it is legal to work IN-campus without
applying for work permit while your application is pending.  Also, 
the INS officals said that if you had a receipt, it entitled you to work
at least 90 days after you submit your application without work permit.

	The overall point is, you maintain whatever benefits you had before
your application until you receive your GC, unless:

	1. your I-20 will expire before you get your GC.
	2. You want new benefit. ie, you want to work off-campus now.

Jun
*********************************************************************************
>From: ZYHUANG@ducvax.auburn.edu
Subject: work permit
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
 

As someone pointed out that once we filed I485, we losed F-1 status. So we can't
 work anymore without a work permit.I asked a lawyer about this problem. What she
told me was that if you have W.P. under the Bush'exacutive order which is valid 
to 01-01-94, that is good enough. If you don't have it, you should apply a W.P.now. 
But you may not get it right now,it may take a month. during this time you
might get your GC, since it is mid-august.

***********************************************************************************
Do we need Work Permission Card?
This morning, I went Pittsburgh INS for applying Work Permission Card.
The receptionist said three points to me:
1) I must send my application, $60.00, singature,  and two photos to the 
East Center (Vermont) to get the Work Permission Card.  They only deal 
with LADs' applications not Principals'
2) If I work only inside campus, the original work permission (means I-20) 
signed by the Foreign Student Advisor in my school is still WORKING until 
I get final approved.  I don't need to apply the work permission card, 
if I only work inside the campus.  The purpose of applying the card is 
to work outside the campus.
3) The situation for Lads with F-1 are the same. If they work just inside 
the campus, they don't need to apply the work permission card.

I was really confused and I said that someone told me that once I filed 
the PR application, I lost my original F-1 status, and I had to get work 
permission from INS to get the RA.  She said "you are talking to me now!
I am working on this issue"

It seems every local INS has different explanation on this issue.
We have to ask the Centers to clarify the issue: legal or illeagal
to get RA or TA without the Work Permission from INS in the pending
period?

K. R. H.

************************************************************************************

  I wonder what is the status of LAD after they file the I-485

  If A LAD is F-1 now, can he(she) change the status now? e.g.


  From F-1 to H-4(F-2), etc?

  Thanks

  Feng
************************************************************************************
Hi,

I am a TA at university, dose any one know what an employment letter looks like?
Your help will be appreciated.

******************************************************************************
 
Hi, Fellow Students:

    I am concerned about the fact that I lost J-1 status
    after applying under CSPA and I still need employment
    authorization to continue my TA/RA to work legally.
    I may apply Employment Authorization Document at my
    local INS office with my CSPA receipt, yet I heard local
    INS in S. Carolyna refused to procees such EAD
    application.  What do you know about this situation?
    Usually how long doest it take to process EAD application?

***************************************************************************************


 
   

  


From shengj@acf2.nyu.edu  Wed Aug 11 18:06:40 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA28097); Wed, 11 Aug 93 18:06:46 CDT
Received: from acf2.NYU.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA28087); Wed, 11 Aug 93 18:06:40 CDT
Received: by acf2.NYU.EDU (5.61/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
	id AA09887; Wed, 11 Aug 93 19:05:16 -0400
From: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
Message-Id: <9308112305.AA09887@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Subject: Local INS Status, Package #2.1
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 19:05:16 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 5849      
Status: RO

Hi, netters,
The following is a list of local INS offices' status on LAD issue. For
those wish withhold their addresses please tell me. The default
is posting the addresses for netters' reference.  This list is updated every
day. Netters may still go their INS office even status is rejected and tell me
your experience there so that this list can be mostly updated.

Date 08/11, 7:00PM
SUMMARY:
=======================================================================
              	STATUS	SOURCE
Albuquerque     accept	ssong@beta.lanl.gov

Arlington	accept	SWANG@american.edu

Atlanta         accept	liang@athena.cs.uga.edu

Buffalo         accept  V592XM8P@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu

Baltimore       accept	CHUANHE@enh.nist.gov
   
Boston          accept  wl@cfaitamp.harvard.edu

Chicago       	accept	shi6@oddjob.uchicago.edu

Dallas      	accept	guo@bach.convex.com

Denver          accept	****@*****.****.**.***

Detroit         accept

El Paso         reject

Hawaii          accept

Houston       	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

Indianapolis    accept	xiawang@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu

Jacksonvile     accept	ZHEN@pine.circa.ufl.edu

Kansas City     accept	fengzou@matt.ksu.ksu.edu

Los Angeles     accept

Louisville      accept	D0JIAN01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu

Memphis         accept

Miami           accept	zhaoc@surf03.sci.fau.edu

Newark          reject	yexiaoxu@phoenix.princeton.edu

New York        accept	bail@rockvax.rockefeller.edu

Omaha           accept	TBC05@ISUVAX.IASTATE.EDU

Pittsburgh    	accept	Bin_Luo@ius4.ius.cs.cmu.edu

Philadelphia    accept	***@***.***.EDU

Portland        accept

Salt Lake City  accept	SHIBAI@PHYSC1.BYU.EDU

San Antonio	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

San Francisco   accept

Spokane         accept

St. Albans      accept	SGU@draco.rutgers.edu


NOTES, COMMENTS AND DETAILED REPORTS:
============================================================

Buffalo         V592XM8P@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu
note 1> No interview was scheduled, and No medical examination was required.

Baltimore       CHUANHE@enh.nist.gov
note 1> need BC or "a letter from China saying they refuse to issue the birth
        certificate to you" plus cerfication of your birth from someone other
	than your parents. Certified birth certificate from hospital is also
	acceptable substitution.

Boston          wl@cfaitamp.harvard.edu
note 1> 2year waiver may not be needed from 08/09

Chicago 
note 1> quotations from a anonymous posting as your reference:
	"1. They need your original I-94 form.
	2. Even you have the evidence to support your family, you still need
	file the Form I-134. The form I-134 is filed by YOU, not some esle. 
	You can file there or take home and bring back when interview.
	3. You will get interview date which is exact two monthes later.
	4. They don not look whatever you file (b) of part 2 and  YES or Not of
	"apply with you" in the Form I-485."

Dallas      		guo@bach.convex.com
notes 1>  an interview date was assigned in mid October for a F-1

Indianapolis    	xiawang@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu
note 1> secondary evidence for BC(Birth Certificate) seems ok.

Jacksonvile     	ZHEN@pine.circa.ufl.edu
note 1> application can only be sent by mail.

Kansas City     	fengzou@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
note 1> need official birth certificate from china(Public notary).
note 2> quotations from linhia@acc.wuacc.edu: 
        "Birth certificate need to be made and notrized in China.
        Marrige certificate notrized in U.S. is able,
        but has to translated by other than that couples on the
        certificate.  The translater need sigh his name on there
        and with his address."

Louisville      	D0JIAN01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
note 1> Birth Certificate Need to be Certified by U.S. Embassy in China

Miami           	zhaoc@surf03.sci.fau.edu
note 1> INS  applications of LAD married after 4/11/90

New York        	bail@rockvax.rockefeller.edu
note 1> quotations from bail@rockvax.rockefeller.edu:
       "I went to INS at New York City today (8/9). They now  LAD PR
	applications. The officer was initially hesitated when he knew that
	I got married after the stupid 4/11/90 date. Then he went to the
	supervisor, and came back saying it's fine. He didn't take any
	original document (actually didn't even ask to see). But to be safe,
	it's better to bring the originals.  BTW, no interview date was given.
	And he said it's likely I would be interviewed next year."

Ohama
>From: PATH018@unlvm.unl.edu
  "Present the I-797 copy that with your finger-print on it. OMAHA INS
did  not accept the I-797 copy that without principal's finger-print on.
Some body calls this I-89."
  "Child has to have the parent's Marrige Certificate too, in addition to his
Birth Certificate. The MC and BC notarized in China were required for both the
mother and child."
   NO "ON SPOT INTERVIEW or any interview schedule".

Pittsburgh    		Bin_Luo@ius4.ius.cs.cmu.edu
note 1> 2year waiver may be needed before applying PR for J visa holders

Philadelphia    	***@***.***.EDU
note 1> quotations from Xia@ee.udel.edu about filing I-485:
        "checking section (b) in part 2, and for question 12 of part 3,
         checking "NO""


========================================================================
Q&A
2.1-1 From: YILIU@jaguar.csc.wsu.edu writes:
The Spokane, WA INS office continues to  lads PR application married
after 4/11/90. They while ing otherwise, do not issue work permit
on site. I still do not know if it's essential to be married before 4/11/90.
Could someone give an answer?

A. This also happened in other INS offices. One suggestion is arguing with
   local INS people based on CSPA rules and INS HQ cable and make them change
   their mind. You can do it yourself or you may let your lawyer do it. Boston
   INS had this stupid restriction at beginning and they abondoned it later. 

From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Thu Aug 12 09:44:52 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA07640); Thu, 12 Aug 93 09:44:57 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA07630); Thu, 12 Aug 93 09:44:52 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA03916; Thu, 12 Aug 93 10:43:21 EDT
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 93 10:34:59 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308121434.AA04120@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: LAD-Q&A
Cc: jli@mines.utah.edu
Status: RO

The LAD-Q&A is kept updating. Since the file becomes bigger and bigger, it
will not be posted in the network ( some members have too small an account).
If anyone need it, FTP spike.rice.edu


From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Thu Aug 12 11:28:48 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA07913); Thu, 12 Aug 93 11:28:54 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA07903); Thu, 12 Aug 93 11:28:48 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA06003; Thu, 12 Aug 93 12:27:18 EDT
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 93 12:18:57 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308121618.AA05175@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: pack#8 on forms
Status: RO

=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Forms and Certificate from  LAD-network         ==                 
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==        
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==      
=====================================================
begin  
===================================================================

>From:   IN%"xiao@mbisgi.umd.edu"  "Jinsong Xiao" 12-AUG-1993 11:32:06.41
To:     IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"

Hi, netters:
I am a CSPA principal, and my wife is a F-2 lad.  She encountered several
questions when she filled forms in I-485 package.  I think our kind
netters might know the answers, so I post them here:
1. About I-485 form, Part I.  In blank : Current INS Status, what should
she put down? F-2 or NA? And What is the expire date of the status.

2. Form 9003, Q4: Did you file a united States Individual Income Tax
Return in any of the last three years?
 The fact is, my wife came to the U.S.A. in 1991, and I filed Federal Tax
Return jointly with my wife from 1991.  So,  in her case, should she say
yes or no?

3.  I-134 form.  I suppose I am eligible to file I-134 for my wife.  When
I fill the Q7 type of business, I should put down Research Assistant? In
the following blank ( name of concern), should I put down the university I
work in?


=======================================================================


>From zhang@utdallas.edu  Wed Aug 11 17:11:59 1993
>From: Jie Zhang <zhang@utdallas.edu>
To: yhl%cmliris@harvard
Subject: Re:  confusion on work permit
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 16:20:01 -0500

Thanks for info on work permit.  What is GC? (GC = Green Card,--editor) 

Q: my J-1 (IAP-66) expires in August 1993.  Before my CSPA application
is approved or rejected, or rather being rejected, I have no place to
fall into.  (Although it is comforting to think that my CSPA will be approved in October). 
I was trying to extend my IAP-66, but the local INS gave me a I-539 (applcation
for extension of stay/change of status) to fill.  I interviewed with my lawyer,
he saw no need to extend my J-1/IAP-66.

The situation demands a basic solution: what is the legal/lawful status of 
CSPA applicants on nonimmigrant visa during application.  I read somewhere
in CND that the State Department and INS is considering a solution to the
question of legal status of CSPA applicants and their dependents.  Any move
on this?

Thanks. -jz


=========================================================================
End
 


From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Thu Aug 12 12:12:45 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA08125); Thu, 12 Aug 93 12:12:49 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA08115); Thu, 12 Aug 93 12:12:45 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA06840; Thu, 12 Aug 93 13:11:14 EDT
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 93 13:02:53 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308121702.AA05358@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: About LAD-Q&A
Cc: jli@mines.utah.edu
Status: RO

Netters,

Upon requests of some readers, We make these changes:
The LAD-Q&A is posted to the network once a day (usually in the evening
to avoid the heavy traffic). If there is nothing new, we post the old version
LAD-Q&A. If you concern about only updated version or have a problem
with your account, be patient. Some new members are eager to know it 
and they have no access to internet.
Does anyone have nay new suggestion?

---Editors




From snow@lucerne.rice.edu  Thu Aug 12 16:23:39 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA08606); Thu, 12 Aug 93 16:23:47 CDT
Received: from moe.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA08596); Thu, 12 Aug 93 16:23:39 CDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA15986); Thu, 12 Aug 93 16:22:15 CDT
Received: by lucerne.rice.edu (AA00298); Thu, 12 Aug 93 16:23:41 CDT
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <9308122123.AA00298@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: important change, please read
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 16:23:40 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 949       
Status: RO

	Due to the name server problem at pactel.com, some readers
were unable to send mail to pei@nit.pactel.com for sub and signoff.
>From now on, please send your mail to the following addresses for
signoff and tell your friends to sign on at the same place:

pei%nit.pactel.com@zool.pactel.com


	Please use the exact address, don't change % sign of @ sign. Otherwise
you will get a bounced mail.


Jun
-- 
                                 ^-^    Owlnet
                                (O O)   School of Engineering Network
                                ( v )
       o o o o o o . . .    __=--m-m--=_T__ ____======_T__ ____========_T_____
     o      _____          ||             | |            | |               |
   .][__n_n_|DD[  ====____  |   Jun  Wu   | |  ECE Rice  | | Snow@Rice.EDU | |
  >(________|__|_[________]_|_____________|_|____________|_|_______________|_|
 __/oo OOOOO oo`  ooo  ooo  'o^o       o^o` 'o^o      o^o` 'o^o         o^o`

From snow@lucerne.rice.edu  Thu Aug 12 18:34:11 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA08815); Thu, 12 Aug 93 18:34:15 CDT
Received: from moe.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA08805); Thu, 12 Aug 93 18:34:11 CDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA17394); Thu, 12 Aug 93 18:32:48 CDT
Received: by lucerne.rice.edu (AA00682); Thu, 12 Aug 93 18:34:16 CDT
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <9308122334.AA00682@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: FAQ, important chagne, please read
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 18:34:15 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1966      
Status: RO

There are important changes about sign on and sign off address. Please
read.


Jun


----------------------

This is the a simple FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) about LADnet.
 
 
1. What is LADnet?
 
LADnet is a network dedicated to solve problems related to 
LADs of CSPA principals. It is an email network.


2. How can I join and quit LADnet?

Send your subscription and signoff messages to 
pei%nit.pactel.com@zool.pactel.com    or   lads-request@lucerne.rice.edu


3. How can I post to LADnet?

Send your post, questions, answers, opinions, to lads@lucerne.rice.edu.
Your message will be forwarded to one of the LADnet committee members.
Messages will be regrouped according to their topics and then repackaged.
Packages will be posted regularly to LADnet. Contributions sent during
the night may be posted in the next morning.


4.  How many kinds of packages do we have now?

Currently, we have 5 kinds of packages.
1. Reporting Acceptance/Rejection of application and related information.
2. Questions concerning status such as J-1, J-2, F-2, DED, ect.
3. Questions about filling out forms and about marriage/birth certificates.
4. Misc and personal questions.
5. Special report.


5. What is lads@spike.rice.edu? Why do I get strange errors by posting to
   that account?

This account is reserved for committee members to post packages. Posting
to this account is restricted to committee members only. A filter is
implemented. Non-committee member postings will be rejected and
cause delay to your problems. So please do not use this account for
posting. Use lads@lucerne.rice.edu instead.


6. Since we are all gurus on anonymous ftp now, is there a site for us?

Yes, we've got it now. You can use anonymous ftp to retrieve all the
packages posted to LADnet by committee members. The site is spike.rice.edu,
IP is 128.42.4.157, directory is /lads.


6. What if the network has a problem?

In case of an emergency, please contact snow@lucerne.rice.edu.

From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Thu Aug 12 21:09:47 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA09407); Thu, 12 Aug 93 21:09:53 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA09397); Thu, 12 Aug 93 21:09:47 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA15148; Thu, 12 Aug 93 22:08:14 EDT
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 93 21:59:52 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308130159.AA08505@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Dr. Zhao Haiching's letter
Status: RO

>From song@math.cornell.edu  Thu Aug 12 20:56:49 1993
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for yhl@cmliris) id AA14433; Thu, 12 Aug 93 21:05:00 EDT
Received: from poly.math.cornell.edu ([128.84.234.31]) by router.mail.cornell.edu with SMTP id <576722-2>; Thu, 12 Aug 1993 21:05:07 -0400
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 21:04:28 -0400
>From: song@math.cornell.edu (Li-Min Song - Math Grad)
Received: by poly.math.cornell.edu (4.1/1.5)
	id AA19437; Thu, 12 Aug 93 21:04:28 EDT
Message-Id: <9308130104.AA19437@poly.math.cornell.edu>
To: yhl%cmliris@harvard
Subject: COUNCIL RELEASE: MEETING WITH STATE DEPARTMENT ON CSPA
Status: R

*****************************************************************


              MEETING WITH STATE DEPARTMENT ON CSPA


*****************************************************************

          TO:       CHINESE NATIONALS NATIONWIDE

          DATE:     AUGUST 6, 1993

          FROM:     DR. HAICHING ZHAO


          Yesterday Laura Reiff, Elaine Budd, Eleanor Pelta and
myself met with State Department officials from the Visa Services
Section.  Present from the State Department were Michael Hancock,
Associate Director of Visa Services, Bureau of Consular Affairs;
Seaton Stapleton, Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting Division
Chief and Jim Hergen, Legal Counsel, East Asian and Pacific
Affairs.  
          
          After our meeting with the INS last week to solve some
problems regarding late arriving dependents in the U.S., this
meeting with the State Department primarily focus on issues
related to dependents who are still in China.  The officials
present at the meeting are in charge of the policy related to
consular processing in China and in third countries and thus have
an important part to play in implementing the CSPA.  They are
also responsible for maintaining immigrant visa preference number
availability.

          The topics of the meeting were primarily three folds:
1, Dependents in China; 2, Visa availability; 3, Mandatary
consular processing in third country for some dependents in the
U.S.  The following is a brief report:
 

1)        EMPLOYMENT BASED THIRD PREFERENCE FOR CHINA TO REMAIN
          CURRENT THROUGH THE END OF SEPTEMBER.

          First, we discussed the issue of late arriving
dependents filing their applications.  The most significant
development during the discussion was that we were informed that
visa number availability for employment based third preference
for China will remain current through the month of September. 
This means that late arriving dependents of CSPA principals will
be able to file their applications during the entire months of
August and September.  

          Next week the State Department will release visa number
availability for September and they indicated that given the data
they now have they are willing to leave visa number third
preference availability current for China for the month of
September.  As a result, late arriving dependents will have more
time to file their applications.  This is particularly good news
for those with dependents in China, because it may give more time
to prepare their applications. 

          We will continue to watch visa number availability and
keep you informed.  However, you should be prepared for the
window to close at the end of September. 

          We would once again like to point out that it will not
make any difference when you file because your application is
placed in the queue according to the priority date you get from
your principal NOT from the date you file.  There are also some
other factors which effect when you get a visa number.  The most
important thing is to file a complete application any time during
the months of August and September accurately according to the
rules.

2)        DISCUSSION ON INCLUDING DEPENDENTS UNDER THE WORLDWIDE
          QUOTA ("203(D) QUESTION").

          Although this issue will have to be resolved by INS,
the State Department is consulted by INS for their views.  In
fact, it was initially the State Department which made the
determination that dependents were subject to the China quota. 
As a result, we fully explained our position that late arriving
dependents should be under the worldwide quota and informed the
State Department of our discussions with INS on this issue.   The
State Department said that they would follow INS' final decision
on this issue. 

3)        MANDATORY CONSULAR PROCESSING IN CANADA AND MEXICO FOR
          DEPENDENTS.

          In conjunction with our discussion on including
dependents under the worldwide quota, we raised the issue of
consular processing for dependents that have fallen out of
status.  If dependents eventually can be covered under the
worldwide quota, there is still the possibility that some
dependents may not be deemed as have maintained legal status.  In
that case, it is important that the State Department be prepared
to issue the necessary directives which would mandate Canadian
and Mexican consulates to process immigrant visas for these
dependents. 

          The State Department said they would certainly look
into the issue.  In addition, they understand the special
problems of China consular processing for CSPA dependents.  They
indicated that if the situation comes to that point, they would
be cooperative in providing for consular processing in Canada and
Mexico. 

          However, we are continuing to press the INS to deem
CSPA dependents to have maintained lawful status.  We think it is
particularly unfair that those that entered the DED program
before should cause their dependents being now deemed not to have
maintained legal status. 

4)        NONIMMIGRANT VISAS FOR CSPA DEPENDENTS IN CHINA. 

          We told the State Department that given the current
interpretation of the CSPA, some Chinese families would continue
to face long separations because their dependents in China may
not be easily coming to the U.S. to visit.  We asked that CSPA
dependents in China that request nonimmigrant visas to visit
family in the U.S. be given favorable consideration and not be
flatly rejected due to the "immigrant intent".  We thanked them
for their directives of a similar nature when implementing the
Executive Order and asked that they consider doing this once
again. 

          They indicated that if we had problems in this regard
in the future, please let them know and they would be
cooperative. 

          If you are a CSPA principal and have any problems
securing nonimmigrant visas for dependents in China, please let
us know and we will pass this information on to the proper
individuals at the State Department. 

5)        CONSULAR ACCEPTANCE OF SECONDARY EVIDENCE OF BIRTH AND
          CHINESE POLICE CERTIFICATE WAIVER.

          In the CSPA regulations, INS allows for production of
secondary evidence of birth without proving that a birth
certificate is not available.  They recognized the difficulty of
getting primary documentation from Chinese authorities that
oppose the CSPA.

          We asked that dependents processed at consulates also
be allowed to use secondary evidence of birth for the same reason
as it was necessary for the principal.  The State Department said
they would consider this and let us know later. 

          In addition, when dependents process in China or in a
third country, they are required to provide a police certificate. 
Again, this may be difficult for the same reason it is difficult
to get birth evidence.  The State Department said they would
consider this point. 


          CRUCIAL INFORMATION NEEDED ON CSPA RELATED ISSUES
               
          In our effort to solve CSPA related problems, we have
pushed different government agencies to consent on a variety of
issues.  However, in our meetings with INS and the State
Department, many decisions would not be definitely made primarily
due to the fact that there is not enough reliable data.  

          When we push the 203(d) issue, namely to have all
dependents covered under the worldwide quota instead of having
them compete with later coming students under the China quota, we
need an accurate number; When we pushed on the issue of DED
dependents' legal status, we were also asked for an estimate of
how many people we were talking about; When we seek more benefits
for dependents who are still in China, we need information as
accurate as possible.  

          Recently we have learned of many problems regarding
dependent applications in different local INS offices.  Some of
the problems we were able to help and some we have to seek help
from the INS central office.  When we push INS to solve these
CSPA implementation related problems at the local level, we need
to know about the problems as thoroughly as possible.       

          Please complete the following information sheet and
return to us as soon as possible.

          CSPA IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEM SURVEY

Name      (Last)___________   (First)__________

Address   ________________________________

          ________________________________

          ________________________________


Telephone:________________________________(H)

          ________________________________(O)


E-Mail:   ________________________________


If there are dependents in your family, please fill in the
appropriate box.

I am a dependent ____;   I am a principal _____.  In my family,
there are (please indicate the number):

          _____  dependents who can file according to INS cable;

          _____  DED dependents (out of status before 7/1/93)
                    according to INS cable;

          _____  dependents as J-1 holder themselves;

          _____  dependents in China or other country (_____);

          _____  dependents in other situation, explain:

                 ___________________________________________;


          _____  dependents who are in China and may need         
                 nonimmigrant visa to come to U.S.;

          _____  principals subject to 90 day rule.


We have encountered the following problems related to CSPA
application (please use seperate sheet if needed):
















Please forward the above information sheet to E-mail address:

          SONG@MATH.CORNELL.EDU

or FAX it to:  (202) 835-1883

You can also send your letter to:

          National Council on Chinese Affairs
          P.O. Box 77418
          Washington, D.C. 20013-7418

Thank you for your cooperation.

/end






 



From my@math.luc.edu  Thu Aug 12 21:35:12 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA09866); Thu, 12 Aug 93 21:35:18 CDT
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA09856); Thu, 12 Aug 93 21:35:12 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA05076; Thu, 12 Aug 93 21:35:41 CDT
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 93 21:35:41 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308130235.AA05076@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: J-1,J-2,F-2,DED: package #1.10
Status: RO

*********************************************************************************	
Subj:	I-94 FORM

HI!  Folks:

I have a question about WORK-CARD AND I-94 FORM:

My wife as a LAD was accepted of her LAD application. She got her I-94 FORM tak
en off by the INS officer when being issued the WORK-CARD.

Is there any LAD having the same situation ? Or some one else can help me
to figure this out if this is a routine INS practice. I am a little
apprehensive at this, 'cause I-94 form is very important.

D.Sui

*********************************************************************************	
        My wife who is a F-2 lad got her application for PR accepted
        with an interview set for December 1, 1993, as well as her work
        authorization card at the spot. It was a 40 minute process,
        not counting the 3 hours' waiting for her number to be called.
        A statement from my school stating that I was in F-1 status up
        until my filing my CSPA applicaiton is needed, but could be
        supplied at the interview, as told by the nice young lady
        officer there. Bank statements showing the past year deposite
        activity was not requested over the regular bank acount
        statement we presented to her, which however is not saying
        that it is not needed at interview time when the PR application
        will be thoroughly reviewed. Other application materials were
        prepared and presented according to a check list posted in the
        net not so long ago (Exact date and source no by hand).

        One of our friends told us that the Detroit INS also accepted
        their DED lad application, but stated very clearly that the
        policy on the DED lad is still pending, and they will not do
        anything on it until recieving further clarification on the
        matter.

        Regarding the work permit (WP) for CSPA principles, my under-
        standing without consulting any specialists yet is that the WP
        applied under the former President Bush's executive order (a
        stamp on the back of your I-94 stating "Employment Authorized
        to Jan. 1, 1994") should be sufficient. I may be wrong, but I
        don't see why it would be invalidated by you filing CSPA PR,
        nor have I seen or heard that it has been. From postings
        in the net, it is obvious that interpretations differ on this
        issue depending on the source, local INSs, lawyers, or
        school international centers.  Under such confused circumstance,
        we may not need to worry over this until further news from the
        INS HQ which may come well after you have gotten your PR or may
        not come at all.

        This is only my thinking and understanding, therefore for
        reference ONLY.

        Wish everybody good luck!

        HX at Michigan State University.

*************************************************************************************
Dear LADs
 I went to local INS yesterday try to file I-485 for my wife(she is a LAD & out
of status because I am in DED status). The local INS officer told me that I
should file I-824 for my wife after Iam been approved. The local INS officer
also told methat because I am out of status, my wife can not apply. Our
International Student advicer said that anyone applied work authorolization
means he automaticlly give up his status and get into DED. 
My questions are :
1. Is anyone knews how to file I-824? Can I file it now? What kinds of shall I
file with?
2. Shall we write to IFCSS ask for help?(I faxed to them before for help but no
responses)
3. If IFCSS do not want to help these LADs, shall we write to the INS
Headquarter?
4. Any better suggestions.
*************************************************************************************
Yesterday I went to the international office in my school. According to
the international studendt advisor, I have to go to local INS(Pittsburgh)
to get work permit before I can receive TA/RA since my filing of I-485
means I am out of student status. But one netter says that Pittsburgh
INS allows us to work on-campus without work permit. It is confusing.

I have a question for netters:
   Do we need to pay tax (federal, state,..) while our applications are
   pending? After our applications are approved?

Y. Ge
*************************************************************************************
 
> 
> Hi, Mr. Cao:
> 
>     On the network, you mentioned the work permit for people
> under the protection of CSPA. You said they could get work
> permit immediately. Have you undergone this process or you heard
> of someone else.  I went to Dallas INS at Irving to apply for
> a work permit. They could not issue it to me immediately, instead
> of in 60-90 days. I felt very frustrated. In the next 60-90 days,
> I will already get the green card, why need the work permit then.
> I don't know if there is regulation or something that the local 
> immigation officer got to abide by to issue a work permit immediately
> for CSPA people. Any advice or suggestion is welcome.
> 
>     Thank you in advance.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Jianming Xu
> 
I don't know what the situation is in other places. Both my wife (LAD) and
I went to Kansas City INS office and got work permit immediately. That's 
what I know.
******************************************************************************
 
In my opinion, any CSPA principle can still apply work permit
under Bush's Excutive Order 12711, which is no fee.  But the
INS seems forget about it.  Maybe we need to talk to IFCSS or
Dr. Zhao Haiqing about it.
******************************************************************************

From shengj@acf2.nyu.edu  Fri Aug 13 10:28:26 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA18023); Fri, 13 Aug 93 10:28:31 CDT
Received: from acf2.NYU.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA18013); Fri, 13 Aug 93 10:28:26 CDT
Received: by acf2.NYU.EDU (5.61/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
	id AA10131; Fri, 13 Aug 93 11:27:02 -0400
From: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
Message-Id: <9308131527.AA10131@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Subject: A Important Message
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1993 11:27:01 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 700       
Status: RO

>Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 23:12 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Weizhong He <IZZYOS4@mvs.oac.ucla.edu> writes:
>The petition form I-824 sent last week was returned by INS. INS says that
>THE I-824 MAY BE FILED ONLY AFTER THE APPROVAL OF YOUR I-485 APPLICATION
>(UNDER CSPA). Can anyone tell me if this is the case and we have to get an
>approval before the family member file the form I-824. Any help is appreciated.

Those who have to file I-824 for family members in China please pay attention to
above message. I hope people from NCCA may clarify the situation from INS HQ. 

Once again accepting doesn't mean approved.


Jonathan J. Sheng
Theoretical Chemistry, NYU {\\{ (212)998-8439  shengj@acf2.nyu.edu }//}

From shengj@acf2.nyu.edu  Fri Aug 13 12:21:31 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA18203); Fri, 13 Aug 93 12:21:38 CDT
Received: from acf2.NYU.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA18193); Fri, 13 Aug 93 12:21:31 CDT
Received: by acf2.NYU.EDU (5.61/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
	id AA19551; Fri, 13 Aug 93 13:20:07 -0400
From: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
Message-Id: <9308131720.AA19551@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Subject: Local INS Status, Package#2.2
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1993 13:20:07 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 5345      
Status: RO

Hi, netters,
The following is a list of local INS offices' status on LAD issue. For
those wish withhold their addresses please tell me. The default
is posting the addresses for netters' reference.  This list is updated every
day. Netters may still go their INS office even status is rejected and tell me
your experience there so that this list can be mostly updated.

Date 08/13, 1:00PM
SUMMARY:
=======================================================================
              	STATUS	SOURCE
Albuquerque     accept	ssong@beta.lanl.gov

Arlington	accept	SWANG@american.edu

Atlanta         accept	liang@athena.cs.uga.edu

Buffalo         accept  V592XM8P@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu

Baltimore       accept	CHUANHE@enh.nist.gov
   
Boston          accept  wl@cfaitamp.harvard.edu

Chicago       	accept	shi6@oddjob.uchicago.edu

Dallas      	accept	guo@bach.convex.com

Denver          accept	****@*****.****.**.***

Detroit         accept

El Paso         reject

Hawaii          accept

Houston       	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

Indianapolis    accept	xiawang@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu

Jacksonvile     accept	ZHEN@pine.circa.ufl.edu

Kansas City     accept	fengzou@matt.ksu.ksu.edu

Los Angeles     accept

Louisville      reject	D0JIAN01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu

Memphis         accept

Miami           accept	zhaoc@surf03.sci.fau.edu

Newark          reject	yexiaoxu@phoenix.princeton.edu

New York        accept	bail@rockvax.rockefeller.edu

Omaha           accept	TBC05@ISUVAX.IASTATE.EDU

Oklahoma City   accept	jchang@chemdept.chem.uoknor.edu

Pittsburgh    	accept	Bin_Luo@ius4.ius.cs.cmu.edu

Philadelphia    accept	***@***.***.EDU

Phoenix:	accept	ASSES@ACVAX.INRE.ASU.EDU

Portland        accept

Salt Lake City  accept	SHIBAI@PHYSC1.BYU.EDU

San Antonio	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

San Francisco   accept

Spokane         accept

St. Albans      accept	SGU@draco.rutgers.edu


NOTES, COMMENTS AND DETAILED REPORTS:
============================================================

Buffalo         V592XM8P@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu
note 1> No interview was scheduled, and No medical examination was required.

Baltimore       CHUANHE@enh.nist.gov
note 1> need BC or "a letter from China saying they refuse to issue the birth
        certificate to you" plus cerfication of your birth from someone other
	than your parents. Certified birth certificate from hospital is also
	acceptable substitution.

Boston          wl@cfaitamp.harvard.edu
note 1> 2year waiver may not be needed from 08/09

Chicago 
note 1> quotations from a anonymous posting as your reference:
	"1. They need your original I-94 form.
	2. Even you have the evidence to support your family, you still need
	file the Form I-134. The form I-134 is filed by YOU, not some esle. 
	You can file there or take home and bring back when interview.
	3. You will get interview date which is exact two monthes later.
	4. They don not look whatever you file (b) of part 2 and  YES or Not of
	"apply with you" in the Form I-485."

Dallas      		guo@bach.convex.com
notes 1>  an interview date was assigned in mid October for a F-1

Indianapolis    	xiawang@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu
note 1> secondary evidence for BC(Birth Certificate) seems ok.

Jacksonvile     	ZHEN@pine.circa.ufl.edu
note 1> application can only be sent by mail.

Kansas City     	fengzou@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
note 1> need official birth certificate from china(Public notary).
note 2> quotations from linhia@acc.wuacc.edu: 
        "Birth certificate need to be made and notrized in China.
        Marrige certificate notrized in U.S. is able,
        but has to translated by other than that couples on the
        certificate.  The translater need sigh his name on there
        and with his address."

Louisville      	D0JIAN01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
note 1> Birth Certificate Need to be Certified by U.S. Embassy in China

Miami           	zhaoc@surf03.sci.fau.edu
note 1> INS  applications of LAD married after 4/11/90

New York        	bail@rockvax.rockefeller.edu
note 1> quotations from bail@rockvax.rockefeller.edu:
       "I went to INS at New York City today (8/9). They now  LAD PR
	applications. The officer was initially hesitated when he knew that
	I got married after the stupid 4/11/90 date. Then he went to the
	supervisor, and came back saying it's fine. He didn't take any
	original document (actually didn't even ask to see). But to be safe,
	it's better to bring the originals.  BTW, no interview date was given.
	And he said it's likely I would be interviewed next year."

Ohama
>From: PATH018@unlvm.unl.edu
  "Present the I-797 copy that with your finger-print on it. OMAHA INS
did  not accept the I-797 copy that without principal's finger-print on.
Some body calls this I-89."
  "Child has to have the parent's Marrige Certificate too, in addition to his
Birth Certificate. The MC and BC notarized in China were required for both the
mother and child."
   NO "ON SPOT INTERVIEW or any interview schedule".

Pittsburgh    		Bin_Luo@ius4.ius.cs.cmu.edu
note 1> 2year waiver may be needed before applying PR for J visa holders

Philadelphia    	***@***.***.EDU
note 1> quotations from Xia@ee.udel.edu about filing I-485:
        "checking section (b) in part 2, and for question 12 of part 3,
         checking "NO""


========================================================================

From my@math.luc.edu  Fri Aug 13 12:27:31 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA18222); Fri, 13 Aug 93 12:27:38 CDT
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA18212); Fri, 13 Aug 93 12:27:31 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA05674; Fri, 13 Aug 93 12:27:57 CDT
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 93 12:27:57 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308131727.AA05674@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: J-1,J-2,F-2,DED: package #1.11
Status: RO

******************************************************************************
I called the INS at Irving and get two pieces of information:

1.  It will take 60-90 days to get work permit, so the officer said that
    to apply a work permit is "almost redundant" since one will get his
    I-485 approved by then which grant work permission automatically.

2.  If a LAD applies PR, he/she will maintain his/her F-1 status.

I live in Tennessee, but the local INS has no person available to anwser 
questions.  I hope the anwser I got also represent the local INS interpretation.
If any one has contact with INS at Memphis, I'd like to know their opinion.

XWU

******************************************************************************
 
Hi editor,
Having read "Dr. Haiching Zhao's meeting", I raised such a question:
What kind nonimmigration visa is eligible for my daughter to visit
me? she had been rejected for F-2 visa for twice. I also lost F-1
status since I apllied for PR June 30th. I wish some friends could
offer explanation.

******************************************************************************
Hi,

I went to local INS office today. I asked the officer about file
the I-824 for my daughter in China. He told me that I have to wait
for my application approved.

My questions are Can I file I-824 without approved date(in I-824 form)?
How the INS will know that my daughter is in employment-based third preference
or family-base second preeerence from I-824? Is that mean if I only file the
I-824 that means she will in the employment-based third preference? In I-824
form there isn't any information about what kind of preference you can apply.

What kind of documents I need prepare? What kind of documents my daughter
has to prepare in China?

Thank you for answering the questions.
******************************************************************************
 
    I am a dependent of an CSPA principal. I have a problem with my PR
application. 
    I came to the US in Jul.1990 and married to my husband who is an CSPA
principal in Dec.1991.
    I went to the local INS office at Indianapolis to turn in my PR application
as an LAD. However my application was rejected for the reason that my 
marriage to an CSPA principal was after Apr.11.1990 and therefore I am not
considered as an LAD of CSPA principal. I was also told that I can only file
the Second category family based application after my husband has got his
approval notice. 
    The cable distributed by INS HQ didn't state this problem. I think 
there are many people who will have the same problem. So I wish that someone
could clear this up.
******************************************************************************
 
The petition form I-824 sent last week was returned by INS. INS says that THE I
-824 MAY BE FILED ONLY AFTER THE APPROVAL OF YOUR I-485 APPLICATION (UNDER CSPA
).  Can anyone tell me if this is the case and we have to get an approval befor
e the family member file the form I-824. Any help is appreciated.
*************************************************************************************
 
    Yesterday, one of my friend, who is a F1 student and filed I-485 under CSPA,
went to Detroit INS office to ask about whether he needs work permission to
receive RA during the PR pending period.  The answer is "yes".  So he tried
to apply a work permission card there. But the Detroit INS officer refused to
issue the card to him and asked him to send the application (I-765) to INS
northern service center where he filed his I-485.

**************************************************************************************
My university's ISO said anyone applied work authorization (I-899B)
under EO 12711 meant he/she automatically gave up his/her status and
therefore did not need to "keep status" anymore by extending IAP-66 or 
I-20 when it expired.

* I think we should ask IFCSS for help. DED should not constitute a
serious problem since even people entered U.S illegally before 04/11/90
have found their way to apply PR now. DED has been, at least, legal, if
not lawful.
Unfortunately, it seems that IFCSS does not want to help anymore. I
really don't understand. Probably, they have their own headaches.
Anyway, I think we should ask IFCSS for help at first.

* I think we should ask Dr. Zhao Haichin for help. I have written a
letter to him about DED. I believe he will try his best to help us. Dr.
Zhao is considerate and very capable in dealing with these problems. Let
us keep our fingers crossed.

* Should we write to INS HQ? Why not? There is no harm.

**************************************************************************************
 
Subj: I-94 Form

Yes, this is a routine INS practice.

***********************************************************************************
Those who have to file I-824 for family members in China please pay attention to
above message. I hope people from NCCA may clarify the situation from INS HQ. 

Once again accepting doesn't mean approved.


Jonathan J. Sheng
Theoretical Chemistry, NYU {\\{ (212)998-8439  shengj@acf2.nyu.edu }//}

***********************************************************************************

Hi, 

I read the ladnet package 1.10 and was confused by the saying "anyone applied work authorolization
means he automaticlly give up his status and get into DED. Is that correct? Who can clerify it?

Thanks in advance.
*********************************************************************************** 

From SGU@draco.rutgers.edu  Fri Aug 13 16:17:03 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA18591); Fri, 13 Aug 93 16:17:12 CDT
Received: from DRACO.RUTGERS.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA18581); Fri, 13 Aug 93 16:17:03 CDT
Received: from draco.rutgers.edu by draco.rutgers.edu (PMDF V4.2-11 #3283) id
 <01H1PDD73QHC96WARG@draco.rutgers.edu>; Fri, 13 Aug 1993 17:15:35 EDT
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1993 17:15:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
Subject: COUNCIL RELEASE: CSPA Q & A
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Message-Id: <01H1PDD752PE96WARG@draco.rutgers.edu>
X-Envelope-To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Vms-To: LADS
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Status: RO


==================================================================
>From:	IN%"song@math.cornell.edu" 13-AUG-1993 17:10:40.13
To:	IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:	
Subj:	COUNCIL RELEASE: CSPA Q & A


*****************************************************************


                      Q & A REGARDING CSPA DEPENDENTS


*****************************************************************
         

              TO:       CHINESE NATIONALS NATIONWIDE

              FROM:     DR. HAICHING ZHAO

              DATE:     AUGUST 13, 1993


         We have received hundreds of responses to our e-mail
regarding problems of late arriving dependents in filing their
adjustment applications.  Due to the massive response, we cannot
individually answer each and every question.  However, many of
the problems are of a similar nature.  As a result, we are
developing a series of Q&As which will answer many of your
questions.  In addition, we are currently working with INS
headquarters on resolving a number of problems dependents are
having when they try to file their applications.  In some
instances, rejections are caused by a lack of knowledge of the
CSPA.  We believe these problems can be easily solved.  However,
the DED late arriving dependent issue, the 90 day rule and the
203(d) issues are more difficult and will require more time to
resolve.  

         Please continue to let us know your problems and we will
make every effort to respond to your needs. 

 
Q:       I have not filed my application yet but I have read that
         enough CSPA applications have been filed to take up the visa
         numbers available for 1993.  If I file now, when can I
         expect to get my green card?

A:       For fiscal year 1993 there are approximately 46,000 visas
         available for CSPA principals.  If you filed in July and
         made the cutoff, you will probably get an approval notice
         before September 30, 1993.  However, after October 1, 1993,
         there is a new fiscal year.  As a result, new visa numbers
         will be available so even if you will not get one of the
         1993 visas, you may get a 1994 visa before the end of the
         year. 


Q:       What exactly is a "priority date?"

A:       Priority dates establish where you are in the queue while
         you wait for a visa number to become available so you can
         get your green card.  For principals, priority dates are 
         the date INS receives your application for filing, provided
         you have filed a complete and accurate application.  For
         CSPA dependents, priority dates are the same as the CSPA
         principal.


Q:       Why can late arriving dependents now file?

A:       The State Department is in charge of determining if visa
         numbers are available for the different preference
         categories and countries.  This is based on annual
         projections which are adjusted monthly.

         In July 1993, the State Department issued a bulletin which
         stated that as of August l, 1993, the China quota for
         employment based third preference was current.   The State
         Department has also issued a new visa bulletin which states
         that this category will remain current throughout the month
         of September.

         Normally, adjustment applications cannot be filed until a
         visa is available.  Saying that the employment category for
         China is current during August and September means that a
         window has opened up for late arriving dependents to file
         their adjustment applications. 


Q:       I am a CSPA principal with a July l, 1993 priority date. 
         Since the China employment based third preference category
         is current, my late arriving dependents can now file their
         adjustment applications.  I think it is important that they
         file immediately so they will be first in line, after all,
         there are a lot of people with priority dates of July l. 
         What do you think?

A:       The situation regarding the queue is different for
         dependents than it was for principals.  For principals it
         was important that you file as soon as possible in order to
         get an early priority date.  You were placed in the queue as
         soon as your application was received.  However, since
         dependents derive their priority date from their principal
         you do not gain any advantage from filing early.  

         CSPA dependents will probably not receive visa numbers right
         away no matter when you file.  First of all, there are a lot
         of people in the queue ahead of CSPA beneficiaries.  The
         queue went from October 1, 1991 to current.  As a result,
         there are many people with dates prior to July 1 that will
         receive their visas first.  Second, there is a complex
         system as to how local INS offices are allocated visas.  For
         example, it is possible that you may file early but your
         local INS office does not have any visas available.  Yet,
         someone that files later at an office that has some visas
         left may get one.  Thus, the date dependents file has little
         relevance to when they can receive a visa.  Late arriving
         dependents should expect to wait a few years for a visa. 

         The most important thing to remembers is that late arriving
         dependents have a window of August and September in which to
         file.  After that, it is expected that priority dates will
         no longer remain current but will retrogress to an earlier
         date because of high demand for visas.  You gain no
         advantage from filing early as you already have a priority
         date.  It is more important to make sure that your
         application is done correctly and that there are no grounds
         for rejection.  If our application is rejected, you may not
         have enough time to get it straighten out and refiled before
         the window closes. 


Q:       If I cannot get my green card right away, why should I file
         now?

A:       The main reason you want to file now is that you will
         receive the benefits of having a pending adjustment
         application.  These benefits include maintenance of your
         status, work authorization, and advance parole.  While we
         are working on getting a CSPA family unity program, this may
         not happen any time soon so it is best for you to apply for
         adjustment now if you are eligible. 


Q:       I am a CSPA late arriving dependent.  My application for
         adjustment was rejected even though I clearly qualify.  It
         seems to me that local INS offices are not familiar with
         CSPA late arriving dependent issues.  What can we do about
         these misinformed INS employees?

A:       The first thing to do is remain calm and reasonable.  Do not
         get into arguments with the local INS employees.  We have
         complaints that some Chinese nationals have been very rude
         and this does not reflect well on the Chinese community as a
         whole.  Remember, the INS has done a lot to help us in the
         past.  

         If you run across a problem with local INS employees that
         prevents you from filing your application even though you
         qualify as a late arriving CSPA dependent, please let the
         National Council on Chinese Affairs know as soon as
         possible.  Clearly state your problem, the local office you
         went to and what you were told by INS at that office and
         send it to us at P.O. Box 77418, Washington, D.C.  20013-
         7418.  We are now compiling a list of problems and will work
         with INS Headquarters to minimize difficulties and delays.

         Remember the CSPA is a unique program and many INS employees
         are not familiar with it.  This is why we argued for
         regional processing.  However, we will work to resolve these
         problems so that all eligible late arriving dependents can
         file their applications before the window closes at the end
         of September. 


Q:       I am a J-1 late arriving dependent of a CSPA principal.  Do
         I need a waiver of the two-year foreign residency
         requirement in order to file for adjustment as a CSPA
         dependent?

A:       Yes, you need to obtain a waiver before you can adjust. 
         There are a number of ways under current immigration law to
         apply for a waiver, however, it is not easy and takes some
         time.  You may want to contact an immigration professional
         to assist you.


Q:       I am a J-2 late arriving dependent of a CSPA J-1 principal
         who took advantage of the one-time irrevocable waiver
         provided under President Bush's Executive Order.  Am I still
         subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement?

A:       No, but you should provide proof with your adjustment
         application that your CSPA principal took advantage of the
         waiver provided under the Executive Order.  You can do this
         by including a copy of your CSPA principal's waiver letter
         or, if there is no waiver letter because of the blanket
         waiver provided CSPA principals, include the entire
         adjustment application of the CSPA principal.

         The factual background is as follows:
         In a September 27, 1989 letter from Lawrence J. Weinig, then
         INS Deputy Assistant Commissioner for Adjudications, Mr.
         Weinig stated that a J-1 principal who fulfills the two-year
         foreign residency requirement confers the same status on his
         or her J-2 spouse or children.  He noted that an alien
         granted J-2 status is not in an independent nonimmigrant
         status and can therefore only derive immigration status and
         benefits through the principal J-1.  They are subject to the
         requirement because of the J-1 principal's participation in
         an exchange program.  As a result, if the J-1 gets a waiver,
         so do the dependents.

         A further clarification regarding the applications of late
         arriving dependents was provided in a November 27, 1989
         letter from R. Michael Miller, then INS Deputy Assistant
         Commissioner for Adjudications.  Once again, it was noted
         that a J-2 dependent was only subject to the two-year home
         residence requirement because of the J-1 principal.  Once
         the J-1 receives a waiver, there is no longer a home
         residence requirement for any dependent of the J-1.  

         We know there has been confusion on this issue at local INS
         offices.  We will raise this with INS Headquarters and ask
         them to issue a cable to the field saying that J-2
         dependents have fulfilled the two-year foreign residence
         requirement if their CSPA J-1 principal received a waiver
         pursuant to the Executive Order.


Q:       I am a J-2 dependent whose application was rejected by the
         local INS office because they said I did not have a waiver
         of the two-year foreign residency requirement.  Should I
         enter voluntary departure?

A:       Do not enter voluntary departure unless absolutely
         necessary.  You CANNOT maintain lawful status if you are in
         voluntary departure.  We have learned from the DED program
         that there are serious drawbacks to taking advantage of
         these protection programs.  As you lose lawful status when
         you enter them, you should not do so unless absolutely
         necessary.  

         The local INS offices are not clear about the derivative
         waiver of the foreign residency requirement which you are
         entitled to.  We are requesting that INS headquarters send a
         cable to local offices to clarify this. 

 
Q:       Is the date on my fee receipt also my priority date?  

A:       Generally no.  The date on the fee receipt is usually the
         day your application was logged into the INS computer.  It
         is not the priority date.  However, some service centers
         have put July 1 on the fee receipt even though the
         application may have been logged in at a later date.  

         When you receive your approval notice, it will tell you what
         your priority date is.  Approval notices for those that
         qualify for the first 46,000 visas should be received by
         September 30.



From snow@lucerne.rice.edu  Fri Aug 13 22:41:56 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA19475); Fri, 13 Aug 93 22:42:01 CDT
Received: from moe.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA19465); Fri, 13 Aug 93 22:41:56 CDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA01782); Fri, 13 Aug 93 22:40:33 CDT
Received: by lucerne.rice.edu (AA03176); Fri, 13 Aug 93 22:42:03 CDT
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <9308140342.AA03176@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: pay attention
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1993 22:42:02 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 262       
Status: RO

Please pay particular attention to posts to LADnet during the coming
weekend.

Also, it is your interest to stay on the net for further developement in
LAD issue.


Jun

PS: # of netters is 982 now, despite many dropoffs after they filed their
    applications.

From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Fri Aug 13 23:21:58 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA19626); Fri, 13 Aug 93 23:22:03 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA19616); Fri, 13 Aug 93 23:21:58 CDT
Message-Id: <9308140421.AA19616@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 2321; Fri, 13 Aug 93 23:22:24 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 9176; Fri, 13 Aug 1993 23:22:24 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 6073; Sat, 14 Aug 1993 00:20:05 -0400
Date:         Sat, 14 Aug 93 00:13:32 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      Special Report
To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO

Following is a collection of e-mails among lads-net committee members.
Chengyan Liu  <cliu@wuecon.wustl.edu> is the chairman of LC's working committee

Mi Mi
=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Special Report  infor from  LAD-network         ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================
======================================================================== 73
Date:         Fri, 13 Aug 93 22:08:20 EDT
>From:         Mi Mi <LHGCC@CUNYVM>
Subject:      A letter from lads-committee member
To:           Chengyan Liu <cliu@wuecon.wustl.edu>,
              Committee <COMM@LUCERNE.rice.edu>


Hi, I just saw your mail about 8/14 teleconference. As an EC myself with
lad, I am very concerned with this issue. Frankly speaking, we are in the
same position and our interestes are not contradictory to each other. You
know why? CSPA gives ECers a green card. That is the law. Although that
magic date is arbitrary, but no one can change it now. The only thing we
can change, is how to implementate CSPA. If we can work together to achieve
this, that will be the best result for all of us.

I sincerely hope you will read further into the following message I included
in this mail. We have 1000 netters in our lads-net, and 10 members in our
working committee. The following message is the memo with our committee
members.

Best Regards

Mi Mi

------------------------------included message--------------------------






======================================================================== 41
Date:         Fri, 13 Aug 93 21:10:18 EDT
>From:         Mi Mi <LHGCC@CUNYVM>
Subject:      IFCSS Council' Teleconference
To:           Committee <comm@lucerne.rice.edu>

I think we should try to attend IFCSS Council' Teleconference. I am afraid
I may not be the right person. But I suggest that everyone of us call
IFCSS HQ to try out if there is any possibility that one of us could
attend. I think ANY ONE of us could make our voice heard. The number is
Tel. (202) 347-0017. If we make ten calls, and all of us mention our
lads-net and its 1000 strong netters, we can at least get one ticket
to attend that meeting. We shall make it clear that we ARE NOT individuals.
We are a committee of volunteers who have 1000 concerned netters. Again,
I suggest the following.
1) We need cooperation, not confrontation. Trust IFCSS Council and LC
   Committee. Respect their needs and concerns. Our Green Cards are secured,
   now matter what happens. Their's are still in the air. We shall understand
   them. They are seeking their opportunity while we have ours already.
   No matter what their arguments are, listen to them and explain
   to them.
2) Lads and LC' interests are not contradicting to each other. The best
   solution is to locate lads into world-wide EB3. Tell them most lads
   have to go through China's EB3. That is the law. Although FB2 is the
   possible solution, but none can expect that many lads will go through
   FB2 instead of EB3. At least most qualified lads will apply in both
   categories. If lads can not be relocated into world-wide EB3 and FB2,
   that will be a great loss for the whole CSS community. And we are lossing
   time.
3) There are not only EC and LC CSSers. In New York City, There are many
   firms selling fake documents, helping other China, Hong Kong nationals
   to jump into CSPA. And many have gotten 6.4 Work Permit, Advance Parole
   long ago. These people might take the advantage of China's EB3 as well.
   We do not know how strict the INS will be on those guys. If we do not
   make rooms for both LC and Lads, all of us might be in trouble someday.

   If any one of us are lucky enough to be able to attend the meeting,
   please voice the above.


Mi Mi
ÚMi Mi               Chengyan Liu         8/13/93 ssss
======================================================================== 28
Date:         Fri, 13 Aug 93 23:46:01 EDT
>From:         Mi Mi <LHGCC@CUNYVM>
Subject:      INS allows illegals to apply under CSPA!
To:           Chengyan Liu <cliu@wuecon.wustl.edu>,
              Committee <COMM@LUCERNE.rice.edu>

Hi, every body. Just got a phone call from my friend. He said on Fridays
newspaper World Journal (8/12), INS adopted a new policy which allows those
entered US illegaly, but managed to get Advance Parole under E.O.12711
to re-enter US to apply under CSPA. The paper was for New York area, a
whole page was on this.

As to the best of my knowledge, many illegals I know had already gotten
their A.P. And worst of all, most of them have family members, ussually
not only one child. Many have more than one. That will make the lads issue
far more complicated.

There are lots of law firms and companies in New York City's Chinatown
are doing bussiness for those illegals. We CSSer ussually do everything
by ourselves, so they have no interest in us.

The new explanation of INS, according to the World Journal, was achieved
by US Immigration Lawyers Association's lobby efforts. We shall do
on our own behave.

Best Wishes
Mi Mi
ÚMi Mi               Chengyan Liu         8/14/93 INS allows illegals to apply u

From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Fri Aug 13 23:23:46 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA19640); Fri, 13 Aug 93 23:23:50 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA19630); Fri, 13 Aug 93 23:23:46 CDT
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 93 23:23:46 CDT
Resent-Message-Id: <9308140423.AA19630@spike.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <9308140423.AA19630@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 2322; Fri, 13 Aug 93 23:24:12 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 9184; Fri, 13 Aug 1993 23:24:12 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 6122; Sat, 14 Aug 1993 00:21:49 -0400
Resent-Date:  Sat, 14 Aug 93 00:20:35 EDT
Resent-From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Resent-To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@rice.edu>
Subject:      INS allows illegals to apply under CSPA!
To: Chengyan Liu <cliu@wuecon.wustl.edu>, Committee <COMM@lucerne.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO

Hi, every body. Just got a phone call from my friend. He said on Fridays
newspaper World Journal (8/12), INS adopted a new policy which allows those
entered US illegaly, but managed to get Advance Parole under E.O.12711
to re-enter US to apply under CSPA. The paper was for New York area, a
whole page was on this.

As to the best of my knowledge, many illegals I know had already gotten
their A.P. And worst of all, most of them have family members, ussually
not only one child. Many have more than one. That will make the lads issue
far more complicated.

There are lots of law firms and companies in New York City's Chinatown
are doing bussiness for those illegals. We CSSer ussually do everything
by ourselves, so they have no interest in us.

The new explanation of INS, according to the World Journal, was achieved
by US Immigration Lawyers Association's lobby efforts. We shall do
on our own behave.

Best Wishes
Mi Mi

From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Sat Aug 14 08:49:06 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA29736); Sat, 14 Aug 93 08:49:14 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA29726); Sat, 14 Aug 93 08:49:06 CDT
Message-Id: <9308141349.AA29726@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 2727; Sat, 14 Aug 93 08:49:32 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 2399; Sat, 14 Aug 1993 08:49:32 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 0782; Sat, 14 Aug 1993 09:47:11 -0400
Date:         Sat, 14 Aug 93 09:44:47 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      New development on INS's allowing illegals to file under CSPA
To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO

Hi, everbody. Please pay attention to last Thursday's (8/12) and today's
(8/14) World Journal's reports on these important issues. Good Luck.

Mi MI

From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Sat Aug 14 09:53:04 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA29830); Sat, 14 Aug 93 09:53:10 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA29820); Sat, 14 Aug 93 09:53:04 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA12188; Sat, 14 Aug 93 10:51:36 EDT
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 93 10:43:13 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308141443.AA17159@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Q&A from Zhao Haiching
Status: RO

>From song@math.cornell.edu  Fri Aug 13 17:32:45 1993
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for yhl@cmliris) id AA01803; Fri, 13 Aug 93 17:40:59 EDT
Received: from poly.math.cornell.edu ([128.84.234.31]) by router.mail.cornell.edu with SMTP id <576706-1>; Fri, 13 Aug 1993 17:41:08 -0400
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1993 17:40:27 -0400
>From: song@math.cornell.edu (Li-Min Song - Math Grad)
Received: by poly.math.cornell.edu (4.1/1.5)
	id AA08911; Fri, 13 Aug 93 17:40:27 EDT
Message-Id: <9308132140.AA08911@poly.math.cornell.edu>
To: yhl%cmliris@harvard
Subject: COUNCIL RELEASE: CSPA Q & A
Status: RO

*****************************************************************


                      Q & A REGARDING CSPA DEPENDENTS


*****************************************************************
         

              TO:       CHINESE NATIONALS NATIONWIDE

              FROM:     DR. HAICHING ZHAO

              DATE:     AUGUST 13, 1993


         We have received hundreds of responses to our e-mail
regarding problems of late arriving dependents in filing their
adjustment applications.  Due to the massive response, we cannot
individually answer each and every question.  However, many of
the problems are of a similar nature.  As a result, we are
developing a series of Q&As which will answer many of your
questions.  In addition, we are currently working with INS
headquarters on resolving a number of problems dependents are
having when they try to file their applications.  In some
instances, rejections are caused by a lack of knowledge of the
CSPA.  We believe these problems can be easily solved.  However,
the DED late arriving dependent issue, the 90 day rule and the
203(d) issues are more difficult and will require more time to
resolve.  

         Please continue to let us know your problems and we will
make every effort to respond to your needs. 

 
Q:       I have not filed my application yet but I have read that
         enough CSPA applications have been filed to take up the visa
         numbers available for 1993.  If I file now, when can I
         expect to get my green card?

A:       For fiscal year 1993 there are approximately 46,000 visas
         available for CSPA principals.  If you filed in July and
         made the cutoff, you will probably get an approval notice
         before September 30, 1993.  However, after October 1, 1993,
         there is a new fiscal year.  As a result, new visa numbers
         will be available so even if you will not get one of the
         1993 visas, you may get a 1994 visa before the end of the
         year. 


Q:       What exactly is a "priority date?"

A:       Priority dates establish where you are in the queue while
         you wait for a visa number to become available so you can
         get your green card.  For principals, priority dates are 
         the date INS receives your application for filing, provided
         you have filed a complete and accurate application.  For
         CSPA dependents, priority dates are the same as the CSPA
         principal.


Q:       Why can late arriving dependents now file?

A:       The State Department is in charge of determining if visa
         numbers are available for the different preference
         categories and countries.  This is based on annual
         projections which are adjusted monthly.

         In July 1993, the State Department issued a bulletin which
         stated that as of August l, 1993, the China quota for
         employment based third preference was current.   The State
         Department has also issued a new visa bulletin which states
         that this category will remain current throughout the month
         of September.

         Normally, adjustment applications cannot be filed until a
         visa is available.  Saying that the employment category for
         China is current during August and September means that a
         window has opened up for late arriving dependents to file
         their adjustment applications. 


Q:       I am a CSPA principal with a July l, 1993 priority date. 
         Since the China employment based third preference category
         is current, my late arriving dependents can now file their
         adjustment applications.  I think it is important that they
         file immediately so they will be first in line, after all,
         there are a lot of people with priority dates of July l. 
         What do you think?

A:       The situation regarding the queue is different for
         dependents than it was for principals.  For principals it
         was important that you file as soon as possible in order to
         get an early priority date.  You were placed in the queue as
         soon as your application was received.  However, since
         dependents derive their priority date from their principal
         you do not gain any advantage from filing early.  

         CSPA dependents will probably not receive visa numbers right
         away no matter when you file.  First of all, there are a lot
         of people in the queue ahead of CSPA beneficiaries.  The
         queue went from October 1, 1991 to current.  As a result,
         there are many people with dates prior to July 1 that will
         receive their visas first.  Second, there is a complex
         system as to how local INS offices are allocated visas.  For
         example, it is possible that you may file early but your
         local INS office does not have any visas available.  Yet,
         someone that files later at an office that has some visas
         left may get one.  Thus, the date dependents file has little
         relevance to when they can receive a visa.  Late arriving
         dependents should expect to wait a few years for a visa. 

         The most important thing to remembers is that late arriving
         dependents have a window of August and September in which to
         file.  After that, it is expected that priority dates will
         no longer remain current but will retrogress to an earlier
         date because of high demand for visas.  You gain no
         advantage from filing early as you already have a priority
         date.  It is more important to make sure that your
         application is done correctly and that there are no grounds
         for rejection.  If our application is rejected, you may not
         have enough time to get it straighten out and refiled before
         the window closes. 


Q:       If I cannot get my green card right away, why should I file
         now?

A:       The main reason you want to file now is that you will
         receive the benefits of having a pending adjustment
         application.  These benefits include maintenance of your
         status, work authorization, and advance parole.  While we
         are working on getting a CSPA family unity program, this may
         not happen any time soon so it is best for you to apply for
         adjustment now if you are eligible. 


Q:       I am a CSPA late arriving dependent.  My application for
         adjustment was rejected even though I clearly qualify.  It
         seems to me that local INS offices are not familiar with
         CSPA late arriving dependent issues.  What can we do about
         these misinformed INS employees?

A:       The first thing to do is remain calm and reasonable.  Do not
         get into arguments with the local INS employees.  We have
         complaints that some Chinese nationals have been very rude
         and this does not reflect well on the Chinese community as a
         whole.  Remember, the INS has done a lot to help us in the
         past.  

         If you run across a problem with local INS employees that
         prevents you from filing your application even though you
         qualify as a late arriving CSPA dependent, please let the
         National Council on Chinese Affairs know as soon as
         possible.  Clearly state your problem, the local office you
         went to and what you were told by INS at that office and
         send it to us at P.O. Box 77418, Washington, D.C.  20013-
         7418.  We are now compiling a list of problems and will work
         with INS Headquarters to minimize difficulties and delays.

         Remember the CSPA is a unique program and many INS employees
         are not familiar with it.  This is why we argued for
         regional processing.  However, we will work to resolve these
         problems so that all eligible late arriving dependents can
         file their applications before the window closes at the end
         of September. 


Q:       I am a J-1 late arriving dependent of a CSPA principal.  Do
         I need a waiver of the two-year foreign residency
         requirement in order to file for adjustment as a CSPA
         dependent?

A:       Yes, you need to obtain a waiver before you can adjust. 
         There are a number of ways under current immigration law to
         apply for a waiver, however, it is not easy and takes some
         time.  You may want to contact an immigration professional
         to assist you.


Q:       I am a J-2 late arriving dependent of a CSPA J-1 principal
         who took advantage of the one-time irrevocable waiver
         provided under President Bush's Executive Order.  Am I still
         subject to the two-year foreign residency requirement?

A:       No, but you should provide proof with your adjustment
         application that your CSPA principal took advantage of the
         waiver provided under the Executive Order.  You can do this
         by including a copy of your CSPA principal's waiver letter
         or, if there is no waiver letter because of the blanket
         waiver provided CSPA principals, include the entire
         adjustment application of the CSPA principal.

         The factual background is as follows:
         In a September 27, 1989 letter from Lawrence J. Weinig, then
         INS Deputy Assistant Commissioner for Adjudications, Mr.
         Weinig stated that a J-1 principal who fulfills the two-year
         foreign residency requirement confers the same status on his
         or her J-2 spouse or children.  He noted that an alien
         granted J-2 status is not in an independent nonimmigrant
         status and can therefore only derive immigration status and
         benefits through the principal J-1.  They are subject to the
         requirement because of the J-1 principal's participation in
         an exchange program.  As a result, if the J-1 gets a waiver,
         so do the dependents.

         A further clarification regarding the applications of late
         arriving dependents was provided in a November 27, 1989
         letter from R. Michael Miller, then INS Deputy Assistant
         Commissioner for Adjudications.  Once again, it was noted
         that a J-2 dependent was only subject to the two-year home
         residence requirement because of the J-1 principal.  Once
         the J-1 receives a waiver, there is no longer a home
         residence requirement for any dependent of the J-1.  

         We know there has been confusion on this issue at local INS
         offices.  We will raise this with INS Headquarters and ask
         them to issue a cable to the field saying that J-2
         dependents have fulfilled the two-year foreign residence
         requirement if their CSPA J-1 principal received a waiver
         pursuant to the Executive Order.


Q:       I am a J-2 dependent whose application was rejected by the
         local INS office because they said I did not have a waiver
         of the two-year foreign residency requirement.  Should I
         enter voluntary departure?

A:       Do not enter voluntary departure unless absolutely
         necessary.  You CANNOT maintain lawful status if you are in
         voluntary departure.  We have learned from the DED program
         that there are serious drawbacks to taking advantage of
         these protection programs.  As you lose lawful status when
         you enter them, you should not do so unless absolutely
         necessary.  

         The local INS offices are not clear about the derivative
         waiver of the foreign residency requirement which you are
         entitled to.  We are requesting that INS headquarters send a
         cable to local offices to clarify this. 

 
Q:       Is the date on my fee receipt also my priority date?  

A:       Generally no.  The date on the fee receipt is usually the
         day your application was logged into the INS computer.  It
         is not the priority date.  However, some service centers
         have put July 1 on the fee receipt even though the
         application may have been logged in at a later date.  

         When you receive your approval notice, it will tell you what
         your priority date is.  Approval notices for those that
         qualify for the first 46,000 visas should be received by
         September 30.




From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Sat Aug 14 17:08:01 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA00646); Sat, 14 Aug 93 17:08:05 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA00636); Sat, 14 Aug 93 17:08:01 CDT
Message-Id: <9308142208.AA00636@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 3097; Sat, 14 Aug 93 17:08:28 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 6791; Sat, 14 Aug 1993 17:08:28 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 6942; Sat, 14 Aug 1993 18:06:06 -0400
Date:         Sat, 14 Aug 93 17:46:20 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      Special Report Urgent!!!!!!!!!!!!
To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO

Hi, netters. I had made several telephone calls yesterday and today. The
message I have got are not so good for us.

1) IFCSS HQ replied that NR 5033 was wrong on world-quota issue. It is
   still to be solved. I also called some Council members. They had
   also wrong impression on this, i.e., believed that the quota had
   been solved. After July 1, there was no voice from lads side in the
   public domain. We need our voice be heard.
2) I called Chairman of LC committee(I would say he called me). His position
   is reasonable - do not hurt LC's interest. He did not want to change CSPA
   nor lads issue, but just want us to save some chances for LC. I told him
   we can cooperate. Putting lads into world-quota will benefit both LC and
   lads. We need communication, not confrontation. He agreed, and eager to
   work with us.
3) Recent development are not to our advantage. INS's recent rule allowing
   illagels to apply under CSPA will not only creats a lot of principals
   (I am against this) but also creates a lot of lads. The outcome is profound
   because it will creat serious backlog in China's EB-3 and FB-2 which hurts
   LC and lads alike.
4) We are trying to work on pushing relevant agencies to work on our advantage.
   We need your help, Keep alert!

   Mi Mi

From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Sat Aug 14 19:55:20 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA00982); Sat, 14 Aug 93 19:55:24 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA00972); Sat, 14 Aug 93 19:55:20 CDT
Message-Id: <9308150055.AA00972@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 3238; Sat, 14 Aug 93 19:55:47 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 8427; Sat, 14 Aug 1993 19:55:47 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 8659; Sat, 14 Aug 1993 20:53:25 -0400
Date:         Sat, 14 Aug 93 20:40:38 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      Re: Special Report Urgent!!!!!!!!!!!!
To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO

On the previous message, I made a mistake. No matter if you like it or
not, I AM NOT against illegals who entered U.S. before 4/11/90 to apply
under CSPA, repeat again, I AM NOT against it. They are covered by E.O.12711
and are our countrymen, after all.

We need a strong voice. We should help our lads, LC brothers and sisters
alike.

We must understand while many ECer understand the CSPA related issues,
many LCers do not. That is not their fault. We must understand we need
communicate with them. We must understand there is always a limit beyond
which no one could go. IFCSS HQ has done tremendous work on CSPA. The HQ
has its limits too.

We lads-net committee needs your help, suggestions and criticisms.

Lads issue is far away from solved.

Best Wishes

Mi Mi

From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Sat Aug 14 22:48:05 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA01609); Sat, 14 Aug 93 22:48:09 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA01599); Sat, 14 Aug 93 22:48:05 CDT
Message-Id: <9308150348.AA01599@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 3395; Sat, 14 Aug 93 22:48:32 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 0295; Sat, 14 Aug 1993 22:48:32 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 0802; Sat, 14 Aug 1993 23:46:10 -0400
Date:         Sat, 14 Aug 93 23:43:58 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      A suggestion from a netter
To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO


=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Special Report  infor from  LAD-network         ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================
Return-Path: <@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU:owner-ccnl@UTARLVM1.UTA.EDU>
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
          (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 0410; Sat, 14 Aug 1993 23:13:38 -0400
Date:         Sat, 14 Aug 1993 22:13:13 CDT
Reply-To:     U42212@UICVM.BITNET
Sender:       Newsletter on Chinese Community <CCNL@UTARLVM1.BITNET>
>From:         U42212@UICVM.BITNET
Subject:      Forwarded note below
To:           Multiple recipients of list CCNL <CCNL@UTARLVM1.BITNET>

=======================================================================
======================================================================== 29
Date:         Sat, 14 Aug 93 21:18:53 CDT
>From:         U42212@UICVM
Subject:      Suggestion
To:           lads@spide.rice.edu

I would like to put in my 2 cents:
As I understand, American Lawyer Association ( maybe other name ) objected
CSPA at that time  we were labbing. But later on, ALA does not object it
strongly. May ALA realized they do not lose many chances of business since
we just use 300 from china quota.( They do not get other 700 if we do not
use it). That a lot of chinese turn to CSPA does not   mean there is a
 lack of chinces using china quato. The business from china quota still
  is there for them. But there is a lack of people using world quota.
   If we had not used world quato left this year, they still could not
    make money from this leftover quato.

ALA never help us in pushing CSPA. Right now ALA jumped in pushing INS to
let illigal-entering chinese qualified for CSPA. ( I do not object it at
 all). These chinese have to turn to their help. This is a motivation of
  ALA, I guess.


I got a suggestion here. We may turn to ALA for help. If Later-Arriving
-Dependents have to use china quato, most of us do not need any help from
lawyers. We use china quato. It definitely means they lose business.
 But if we can use world quato which can not be used up each year, it
  will befenit both us ( LADs & LCs ) and lawyers. So, ALA may be glad
   to help us, not just us.

We need  a stratagy to push ALA and let ALA push INS. We also need to
let ALA know this fact that they lose money if LADs use china quato.

From my@math.luc.edu  Sun Aug 15 02:24:21 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA02466); Sun, 15 Aug 93 02:24:30 CDT
Received: from dedekind.math.luc.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA02456); Sun, 15 Aug 93 02:24:21 CDT
Received: from euler.math.luc.edu by dedekind.math.luc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA07067; Sun, 15 Aug 93 02:24:49 CDT
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 93 02:24:49 CDT
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
Message-Id: <9308150724.AA07067@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: package #1.12
Status: RO

***********************************************************************************
  I have some thoughts regarding application for working permit.

  Different INS offices has different backlog on working permit. Last year when
we apply for working permit under Bush's order, we went to San antonio since 
there is no backlog there on application for working permit. Bush's order didn't
say whwere you could apply so the folks here living in Dallas (whose INS has a
three month backlog) could take advantage of it by going to San Antonio.

  But bnow, since the cable did say that LAD applications will be handles by
local INS office and didn'y say that working permits will be a issued 
immediately upon request, you have to follow the ordinary rules of your local
INS office.

  Wge When I accompany my wife to Dallas INS to hand in the applicaytion,
The lady there told me it would take 90 days to get WP and the interview for
PR is scheduled 60 days later. She nicely suggested that since WP will be
granted after the successful interview upon reqest immediately, why bothger
apply for WP now and waste $60?  I think she's got a good point. So we 
withdrawed her I-765.

  I think for those of you who really need WP , you still have to wait until
the time of interview if your local INS has a backlog on E WP which is longer 
than time till the interview.

  Good luck,

*****************************************************************************
I called the foreign student affair before I went to INS.
They clearly indicated that we need work permission to gain
assistantship. In Chicago INS, the work permission was granted
the same day as you applied.

ST
*******************************************************************************
Hi, Netters; 
	Please any knowledgeable friend give my a suggestion about: 
	
	What kind visa should CSPA principal's family member who is in
outsite of U.S. get to enter U.S. now? 

	We, as the CSPA principals, have F-1 or J-1, so family member can
not get F-2 or J-2 because we are out of status. So, I think our family
can only get visiting visa. Last year my wife visited me with B-2 visa for
a month. If I am right, the B-2 must be visiting visa? I am not sure,
would someone can confirm this for me? If it is, do you know whether B-2
can be extend before it is expired?                                       
	Dr. Zhao's meeting with the State Department mentioned that if
there is difficult on the visa application of the family members who are
in China or third countries, they can give help. So, where we should
contact if we rearly have trouble with the visa application? 
	I read lads net package 1.11 which forwarded the same question as
I raised above. I do not know the sender's address, if you (the sender)
got a personal answer to this question, could you forward the message to
me? Otherwise, we can contact each other, and may help each other. my
e-mail address is szliu@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu. 
	Any suggestion is welcome. Thank you for your attention and time!
 
**********************************************************************************
	I am CSPA principal, my wife came to US in July of 1991 with J-1 visa,
three months later, she changed to J-2 visa, another three months later, she went  
to China in Feb. of 1992.  She came to US again with private passport and B-2
visa in March of 1993.  She stayed in China about one year and two months.
	My question is if she is eligible to file as a LAD, I asked several 
immigrantion lawyer and could not get clear answer.  If she is not eligible to
file I-485, how to keep her legal status and if she can file how to answer the
question 12 in I-485?  Anyone can help me, please send me email.
	Thanks.
***********************************************************************************

From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Sun Aug 15 11:50:20 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA10681); Sun, 15 Aug 93 11:50:25 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA10671); Sun, 15 Aug 93 11:50:20 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA25763; Sun, 15 Aug 93 12:48:56 EDT
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 93 12:40:35 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308151640.AA20771@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Reader's Letter
Status: RO

>From SGU@draco.rutgers.edu  Sun Aug 15 12:31:21 1993
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for yhl@cmliris) id AA25725; Sun, 15 Aug 93 12:39:33 EDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA11081); Sun, 15 Aug 93 11:35:19 CDT
Received: from DRACO.RUTGERS.EDU by lucerne.rice.edu (AA00956); Sun, 15 Aug 93 11:36:45 CDT
Received: from draco.rutgers.edu by draco.rutgers.edu (PMDF V4.2-11 #3283) id
 <01H1RW99NJZ496WBT2@draco.rutgers.edu>; Sun, 15 Aug 1993 12:35:07 EDT
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 1993 12:35:06 -0400 (EDT)
>From: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
Subject: Local INS
To: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu
Cc: comm@lucerne.rice.edu
Message-Id: <01H1RW99PFHU96WBT2@draco.rutgers.edu>
X-Envelope-To: comm@lucerne.rice.edu
X-Vms-To: JONATHAN
X-Vms-Cc: COMM
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Status: R

>From:	IN%"EGM137@ukcc.uky.edu" 15-AUG-1993 11:08:37.76
To:	IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:	
Subj:	LAD application in Kentucky

Return-path: <@ukcc.uky.edu:EGM137@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Received: from moe.rice.edu by draco.rutgers.edu (PMDF V4.2-11 #3283) id
 <01H1RT83DK4G96WAYY@draco.rutgers.edu>; Sun, 15 Aug 1993 11:08:29 EDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA10783); Sun,
 15 Aug 93 10:08:15 CDT
Received: from UKCC.uky.edu by lucerne.rice.edu (AA00939); Sun,
 15 Aug 93 10:09:45 CDT
Received: from UKCC.UKY.EDU by UKCC.uky.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id
 2151; Sun, 15 Aug 93 11:07:34 EDT
Received: from ukcc.uky.edu (NJE origin EGM137@UKCC) by UKCC.UKY.EDU (LMail
 V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 7709; Sun, 15 Aug 1993 11:07:34 -0400
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 1993 11:02:06 -0400 (EDT)
>From: EGM137@ukcc.uky.edu
Subject: LAD application in Kentucky
To: lads@lucerne.rice.edu
Message-id: <9308151509.AA00939@lucerne.rice.edu>
X-Envelope-to: sgu
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT


***************************************************************************
Dear editor:
   Please post the following message to the lads netters regarding
LAD situation in Kentucky.
    Thank you for your assistance.
****************************************************************

Hi LAD netters

  As we know, so far (on August 14) the local INS office in Louisville,
Kentucky has not accepted any application from LADs because nobody
seemingly has made his/her Birth and Marriage Certificates verified
by American Embassy or Consulates in P. R. China. As a matter of fact,
the USA Embassy in Beijing has refused, in an official note with seal, to
provide such a service.   Besides, in past a few days individuals
frequently visited the local INS at Louisville so that it seemed to
lead to a harassing environment there.   Continuation of this kind of
situation will not be helpful on this matter or even put our LADs
in Kentucky in a worse status.

     To push this matter towards a better situation, we, a group of
students in  the University of Kentucky, would like to suggest that
all the LADs in the Kentucky area share the information.    More
importantly, we think that an organized group appears to be
necessary for further efforts on this matter.

     The following is our opinions and suggestions.

1.   The situation occurring in the other states of the U.S.A. could
not be used to argue with the officials in the local INS at least since
the CSPA claims that the local INS is fully in charge of the execution
for the business of LADs.

2.   A unified voice might be better and more effective than any
disordered individual action.  Therefore, we would like to suggest that
let our potential representatives negotiate with the local INS in
Louisville and try to reach a reasonable deal.

3.   In a few days, the representatives will issue the information
about the development of this affair to us through either LADnet or
potential  coordinators of each department or college.

     If you agree with our opinions and suggestions, please send your name,
address, and phone numbers to egm137@ukcc.uky.edu. We will try to
contact with you.


                              Several Chinese students
                              Department of Engineering Mechanics
                              University of Kentucky, Lexington



From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Sun Aug 15 15:45:23 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA10918); Sun, 15 Aug 93 15:45:29 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA10908); Sun, 15 Aug 93 15:45:23 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA27740; Sun, 15 Aug 93 16:43:58 EDT
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 93 16:35:37 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308152035.AA21738@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Reader's Letter2
Status: RO

>From GUOP2@baylor.ccis.baylor.edu  Sun Aug 15 12:57:40 1993
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for yhl@cmliris) id AA26012; Sun, 15 Aug 93 13:05:54 EDT
Received: from baylor.edu by baylor.edu (PMDF V4.2-11 #3376) id
 <01H1RV75QS7K8WW6DL@baylor.edu>; Sun, 15 Aug 1993 12:05:36 CDT
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 1993 12:05:36 -0500 (CDT)
>From: "Michael P. Guo" <GUOP2@baylor.ccis.baylor.edu>
Subject: Experiences in INS(San Antonio)--You may forward to LADnet.
To: egm137@ukcc.uky.edu, yhl%cmliris@harvard
Message-Id: <01H1RV75RUSI8WW6DL@baylor.edu>
X-Vms-To: IN%"egm137@ukcc.uky.edu",IN%"yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu",
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Status: R

			

              A pleasant experience in INS(San Antonio)

My 7 years old daughter(LAD) and I(pricipal) went to INS office 
in San Antonio on Aug. 12. 15 minutes after we entered the building,
it was our turn to talk to the immigation officer. The officer was a
very kind and friendly lady. It seemed she knew CSPA and LAD issue very 
well. 

The documents I turned in and the events were:  

1. My CSPA receipt(xerox copy)
2. My daughter's birth certificate(natorized in China)(xerox copy)
3. My TA salary letter(xerox copy)
4. Notarized I-134(I filed)
5. My bank statement with amount of ~ $10000.00
6. My wife's employment letter(when the officer saw this, she asked for
   my marriage license)
7. Marriage license(Notarized in China, xerox copy)
8. 9003(IRS)
9. I-693(medical form, no TB test, no blood test, cost me $25 in Temple, TX)
10.pictures(She said the pictures I took were not good, then my daughter was 
   led to a photographer a few yards away to get 4 copy of pictures($9))
   The officer was so nice telling that after I got the pictures I did not 
   need to stand in line again, just come to her window directly.  
11. My sworn letter, saying all xerox copies were true.
12. 2 years waiver letter which I got on Spe. 18, 1989, when I changed my 
    status from J-1 to F-1. But she did not want to keep neither original 
    nor xerox of my IAp-66,I-20 forms.
13. She asked for my daughter's original I-94.
14. She stamp something on my daughter's passport, and told me that my daughter
    can not leave this country for 60 days. She said my daughter and I can get
    GC in 60 days, or 30 days or even 15 days(I am now in doubt about my recall)
15. She stabled all documents mentioned above and passed to me, asking me
    to give it to cashier. The cashier kept all my daughter's document after
    I paid $95.(No credit cards are accepted)
16. When I was ready to leave, I heard a conversation between a Chinese guy
    and that friendly lady. He asked her whether he needed to apply for 
    employment authorization. She said "You don't have to, you may get your
    GC in 30 days or even 15 days"(I may hear wrong). He said"I have to 
    start a job on Aug 16", then she said"Let me write 'RUSH' on your 
    application" --How nice this lady was!
17. A Chinese person on E32 class(3rd employment base immigaration) with 
    priority date in Sept. 1992 has to wait for another year for visa availble. 
17. It took us less than an hour in INS building to finish evevrthing. 


Good luck to every one. 

Michael Guo



From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Sun Aug 15 15:54:54 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA10932); Sun, 15 Aug 93 15:54:59 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA10922); Sun, 15 Aug 93 15:54:54 CDT
Message-Id: <9308152054.AA10922@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 4000; Sun, 15 Aug 93 15:55:21 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 6738; Sun, 15 Aug 1993 15:55:20 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 9164; Sun, 15 Aug 1993 16:52:58 -0400
Date:         Sun, 15 Aug 93 16:50:33 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      Response From Netters
To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO

== The following are packed information on         ==
== Special Report  infor from  LAD-network         ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================
>From:         IQM166@URIACC.URI.EDU
Hi! My friend:
I am CSPA-p and have Lads in my family. I undersdtand what the LCers think abou
t toward CSPA.

I have tow suggestions. 1. Stop using "illegels" and call them APers(Advance Pa
rroler) at least in public communication. 2. Try to push the "Family Unity Plan
", first start to determine its real contents and make strong voice to Administ
ration.

We do not have enough information which is detailed; This is the most important
before making any action.

Chinese reputation is number one and try to establish a mechanistic system to s
olve our internal problems. After all of them, we are able to work hard to find
 our best benifits.

Best luck for all of us.

Min.
====================================================================
>From: lix@crsa.bu.edu (Xiaowen Li)

>3) INS's recent rule regarding IIers complicates the current quota crisis.

   Recent development are not to our advantage. INS's recent rule allowing
   illegals (I would use IIers, meanning Illegal Immigrants)
   to apply under CSPA will not only creat a lot of principals (I am not
   against this) but also create a lot of lads. The outcome is profound...

On today's World Journal, INS denied that. But some laywers claim they
will sue INS.

Xiaowen
=========================================================================
>From: Donglin.Mi@Dartmouth.EDU (Donglin Mi)
Subject: Re: Special Report Urgent!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hi, Mi Mi:

Thank you for your message. I basically agree with your suggestion and the
one forwarded by you. It seems that IFCSS HQ will not work on the LADs. We
need some "professional" people to help us to lobby INS. Dr Zhou and NCCA may
be right persons.

I just came from an int'l conference. I might miss a lot of info. Does Dr
Zhou want to cooperate on the LADs?

BTW, I can ask my local Chinese folks to push the issue of LADs.

Good luck.

Donglin Mi
=========================================================================
>From: Huaxin Li <hli@beta.tricity.wsu.edu>
Subject: Re: Special Report Urgent!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Sat, 14 Aug 1993, Mi Mi wrote:

> Hi, netters. I had made several telephone calls yesterday and today. The
> message I have got are not so good for us.
>
> 1) IFCSS HQ replied that NR 5033 was wrong on world-quota issue. It is
>    still to be solved. I also called some Council members. They had
>    also wrong impression on this, i.e., believed that the quota had
>    been solved. After July 1, there was no voice from lads side in the
>    public domain. We need our voice be heard.
> 2) I called Chairman of LC committee(I would say he called me). His position
>    is reasonable - do not hurt LC's interest. He did not want to change CSPA
>    nor lads issue, but just want us to save some chances for LC. I told him
>    we can cooperate. Putting lads into world-quota will benefit both LC and
>    lads. We need communication, not confrontation. He agreed, and eager to
>    work with us.
> 3) Recent development are not to our advantage. INS's recent rule allowing
>    illagels to apply under CSPA will not only creats a lot of principals
>    (I am against this) but also creates a lot of lads. The outcome is profound
>    because it will creat serious backlog in China's EB-3 and FB-2 which hurts
>    LC and lads alike.
> 4) We are trying to work on pushing relevant agencies to work on our advantage
.  
>    We need your help, Keep alert!
>
>    Mi Mi

Hi, I believe IFCSS HQ has the responsibility to orgnise all chinese
students and scholars to solve the LAD problem.  I am a EC and now
understand the anger expressed by LCs because the current solution on LADs
(my son is a LAD) does hurt LCs badly.  We ECs should do our best to help
our LC brothers and sisters.  I wonder if we could put LADs into would
quota by a legal means and may hire a strong lawer to help us.  We can
call for donation to cover the expenses for hiring a lawer.  I feel that
we ECs, wether we have LADs or not, have moral obligation to support this
issue financially.  I also feel that LAD problem stemmed from unproper
proach by IFCSS HQ on the CSPA.


Huaxin
=========================================================================

From shengj@acf2.nyu.edu  Sun Aug 15 23:33:38 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA11789); Sun, 15 Aug 93 23:33:44 CDT
Received: from acf2.NYU.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA11779); Sun, 15 Aug 93 23:33:38 CDT
Received: by acf2.NYU.EDU (5.61/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
	id AA25882; Mon, 16 Aug 93 00:32:15 -0400
From: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
Message-Id: <9308160432.AA25882@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Subject: Local INS Status, Package#3.1
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1993 00:32:14 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 4947      
Status: RO

Hi, netters,
The following is a list of local INS offices' status on LAD issues. 
The most recent reports, comments from LADnetters regarding to local INS 
offices are attached at the end of the list.  For those wish withhold their 
addresses please tell me. The default is posting the addresses for netters' 
reference. 

Date 08/16, 0:30AM
SUMMARY:
=======================================================================
              	STATUS	SOURCE
Albuquerque     accept	ssong@beta.lanl.gov

Arlington	accept	SWANG@american.edu

Atlanta         accept	liang@athena.cs.uga.edu

Buffalo         accept  V592XM8P@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu

Baltimore       accept	CHUANHE@enh.nist.gov
   
Boston          accept  wl@cfaitamp.harvard.edu

Chicago       	accept	shi6@oddjob.uchicago.edu

Charllote       accept	pguo@eos.ncsu.edu

Dallas      	accept	guo@bach.convex.com

Denver          accept	****@*****.****.**.***

Detroit         accept

El Paso         reject

Hawaii          accept

Houston       	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

Indianapolis    accept	xiawang@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu

Jacksonvile     accept	ZHEN@pine.circa.ufl.edu

Kansas City     accept	fengzou@matt.ksu.ksu.edu

Los Angeles     accept

Louisville      reject	D0JIAN01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu

Memphis         accept

Miami           accept	zhaoc@surf03.sci.fau.edu

Newark          reject	yexiaoxu@phoenix.princeton.edu

New York        accept	bail@rockvax.rockefeller.edu

Omaha           accept	TBC05@ISUVAX.IASTATE.EDU

Oklahoma City   accept	jchang@chemdept.chem.uoknor.edu

Pittsburgh    	accept	Bin_Luo@ius4.ius.cs.cmu.edu

Philadelphia    accept	***@***.***.EDU

Phoenix:	accept	ASSES@ACVAX.INRE.ASU.EDU

Portland        accept

Salt Lake City  accept	SHIBAI@PHYSC1.BYU.EDU

San Antonio	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

San Francisco   accept

Spokane         accept

St. Albans      accept	SGU@draco.rutgers.edu


NEWLY DETAILED REPORTS, COMMENTS:
============================================================
CONTENTS:
1. A suggestion from some LADnetters in Louisville, Kentucky.
2. Report about Arlington, Virgina.

1. Lousiville:
--------------
>From: EGM137@ukcc.uky.edu

Hi LAD netters

  As we know, so far (on August 14) the local INS office in Louisville,
Kentucky has not accepted any application from LADs because nobody
seemingly has made his/her Birth and Marriage Certificates verified
by American Embassy or Consulates in P. R. China. As a matter of fact,
the USA Embassy in Beijing has refused, in an official note with seal, to
provide such a service.   Besides, in past a few days individuals
frequently visited the local INS at Louisville so that it seemed to
lead to a harassing environment there.   Continuation of this kind of
situation will not be helpful on this matter or even put our LADs
in Kentucky in a worse status.

     To push this matter towards a better situation, we, a group of
students in  the University of Kentucky, would like to suggest that
all the LADs in the Kentucky area share the information.    More
importantly, we think that an organized group appears to be
necessary for further efforts on this matter.

     The following is our opinions and suggestions.

1.   The situation occurring in the other states of the U.S.A. could
not be used to argue with the officials in the local INS at least since
the CSPA claims that the local INS is fully in charge of the execution
for the business of LADs.

2.   A unified voice might be better and more effective than any
disordered individual action.  Therefore, we would like to suggest that
let our potential representatives negotiate with the local INS in
Louisville and try to reach a reasonable deal.

3.   In a few days, the representatives will issue the information
about the development of this affair to us through either LADnet or
potential  coordinators of each department or college.

     If you agree with our opinions and suggestions, please send your name,
address, and phone numbers to egm137@ukcc.uky.edu. We will try to
contact with you.


                              Several Chinese students
                              Department of Engineering Mechanics
                              University of Kentucky, Lexington

2. Arlington:
-------------
>From:	IN%"qy2m@galen.med.virginia.edu"  "Qing Ye" 15-AUG-1993 15:33:20.89

Hi, netter:

My wife is a LAD and F-1 student with assistantship.  She went to
Arlington Virginia INS on Friday 13, August.  There was no problem
excepted that:

          (1) INS needs your originial I-94.
          (3) They don't need I-134 and Bank statement.
          (2) They ask you to apply Employment Autorization. When
              my wife asked INS wether this was necessary.  INS
              officer answered, "I don't know, please check your
              school". Anyway, my wife obtained the EA, valid only
              for next six monthes, after paying $60 that day.

Any comments are welcome.    Qing Ye


From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Mon Aug 16 10:54:34 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA19567); Mon, 16 Aug 93 10:54:42 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA19557); Mon, 16 Aug 93 10:54:34 CDT
Message-Id: <9308161554.AA19557@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 5306; Mon, 16 Aug 93 10:55:02 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 3130; Mon, 16 Aug 1993 10:55:02 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 9913; Mon, 16 Aug 1993 11:52:43 -0400
Date:         Mon, 16 Aug 93 11:52:21 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      Illegal Immigrants and CSPA
To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO



Q: Why should we push lads in to world quota?
A: To speed up lads application for PR;
   To save China quota for LC.
Q: How about to restrict lads in certain China's categories so that LC will
   not be hurt?
A: You never know which categories LC will use;
   You can not regulate which categories Lads should apply.
Q: By using EB3 only, LC will not be hurt, it that true?
A: No.
   To qualify for a PR under Employement Based Categories, you must have a Job.
   The job has to meet certain requiremnts:
   1) Salary; 2);Qualification of the applicant for that job;
   3) no USC or PR with that qualification can be found;
   4) the boss is willing to sponsor you.
   Say, you see a Ad. in a paper. It requires M.S., offers 3k. After fierce
   competition, you get the job, and you boss is willing to sponsor you.
   You think you meet all the above, and file for PR under EB2. You are sure
   that your American dream comes true.
   Well. INS finds out, with 2), the guideline of INS says the minimum salary
   acceptable for USC and PR is 4k, that is why you get the offer
   (unfortunately, that is ussualy true). So your PR application is rejected.
   Then you are left with two choices (a) increase 1) to 4k, (b) lower 2) to
   B.S. By doing 1), the new ad. attractes 400 USC and PR applicants, so you
   are out of the game; or, you pay tax for 4k income while your salary is
   still 3k. (you have to do so until you get your PR). Then doing 2) is the
   best choice. At this time, you find EB3 is full of lads. You must wait 4
   years for your turn under EB3, but your H-1 expires in 3 years and you
   can not extend it any more. So both EB2 and EB3 are no good for you and
   you are lossing time. Then you find a girl/boy who agrees to marry you
   and help you out. At this point, you suddenly find out, the family based
   category are full of lads too. You are queued for 4 years. And
   unfortunately, your marriage does not last that long. Is that too late
   for you to find out the truth and real impact of lads problem?
If you have read through World Journal's Immigration Section for years and
have friends who went through PR process, you will know it is not so simple
and you might think twice now.

Some major developments will screw you up even worse.

1) Illegal immigrants under CSPA may be able to apply PR.
   (see recent reports on World Journal)
2) Illegal immigrants came after 4/11/90 may convince INS they came before
   that date and INS is hopelessly incapable of screening them out.
3) People from other countries can claim they are PRC nationals under CSPA.
4) Sluggish economy prevents you from finding a decent job.
5) There are many other interest groups who want to utilize CSPA to make big
   bucks. American Immigration Lawyers Association is eager to help illegal
   immigrants to apply under CSPA. Estimated tens of thousands illegal
   immigrants means billions of dollars, and that is good for them.
6) There are many other interest groups who want to keep lads out of
   world-quota to save for their own ethnic groups.
7) etc. etc...

With lads jammed in China's quota, you will have to  ....  Scared?

A checklist of what you can do

1) Kill CSPA -----------------------------> Too late. It is the law.          No
2) Kick lads out of the game -------------> Impossible. It is against the law.No
3) Jump into the race now ----------------> Impossible if you are in school.  No
4) Wait until you graduate ---------------> Too late to do anything.          No
5) Support IFCSS to lobby for world-quota-> It is up to you                  Yes
6) Persuade American Immigration Lawyers Association to lobby for world-quota.
   That means billions of dollars for them.---> It is up to you              Yes

Wake up, my LC brothers and sisters! Support IFCSS and lads network to push
for world quota!

The above is for your information only.
The author assumes no legal responsiblilities about the accuracy and the
reliability of any kind for the information provided. Please consult your
lawyer and use your own discretion before you use the information printed
in this package to make decision(s) on related matter.


Mi Mi

From snow@lucerne.rice.edu  Mon Aug 16 12:28:42 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA19873); Mon, 16 Aug 93 12:28:47 CDT
Received: from moe.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA19863); Mon, 16 Aug 93 12:28:42 CDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA19622); Mon, 16 Aug 93 12:27:21 CDT
Received: by lucerne.rice.edu (AA04143); Mon, 16 Aug 93 12:28:53 CDT
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <9308161728.AA04143@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: FAQ
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1993 12:28:51 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1886      
Status: RO

We have 1010 netters now!



This is the a simple FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) about LADnet.
 
 
1. What is LADnet?
 
LADnet is a network dedicated to solve problems related to 
LADs of CSPA principals. It is an email network.


2. How can I join and quit LADnet?

Send your subscription and signoff messages to 
pei%nit.pactel.com@zool.pactel.com    or   lads-request@lucerne.rice.edu


3. How can I post to LADnet?

Send your post, questions, answers, opinions, to lads@lucerne.rice.edu.
Your message will be forwarded to one of the LADnet committee members.
Messages will be regrouped according to their topics and then repackaged.
Packages will be posted regularly to LADnet. Contributions sent during
the night may be posted in the next morning.


4.  How many kinds of packages do we have now?

Currently, we have 5 kinds of packages.
1. Reporting Acceptance/Rejection of application and related information.
2. Questions concerning status such as J-1, J-2, F-2, DED, ect.
3. Questions about filling out forms and about marriage/birth certificates.
4. Misc and personal questions.
5. Special report.


5. What is lads@spike.rice.edu? Why do I get strange errors by posting to
   that account?

This account is reserved for committee members to post packages. Posting
to this account is restricted to committee members only. A filter is
implemented. Non-committee member postings will be rejected and
cause delay to your problems. So please do not use this account for
posting. Use lads@lucerne.rice.edu instead.


6. Since we are all gurus on anonymous ftp now, is there a site for us?

Yes, we've got it now. You can use anonymous ftp to retrieve all the
packages posted to LADnet by committee members. The site is spike.rice.edu,
IP is 128.42.4.157, directory is /lads.


6. What if the network has a problem?

In case of an emergency, please contact snow@lucerne.rice.edu.

From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Mon Aug 16 13:04:25 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA20167); Mon, 16 Aug 93 13:04:32 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA20157); Mon, 16 Aug 93 13:04:25 CDT
Message-Id: <9308161804.AA20157@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 5741; Mon, 16 Aug 93 13:04:52 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 7853; Mon, 16 Aug 1993 13:04:52 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 7065; Mon, 16 Aug 1993 14:02:30 -0400
Date:         Mon, 16 Aug 93 14:02:11 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO


Return-Path: <@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU:song@MATH.CORNELL.EDU>
Received: from CUNYVM (NJE origin SMTP@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (LMail
          V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 6353; Mon, 16 Aug 1993 13:47:15 -0400
Received: from router.mail.cornell.edu by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with TCP; Mon, 16 Aug 93 13:47:12 EDT
Received: from poly.math.cornell.edu ([128.84.234.31]) by
 router.mail.cornell.edu with SMTP id <576775-3>; Mon, 16 Aug 1993 13:47:50
 -0400
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1993 13:47:07 -0400
>From: song@math.cornell.edu (Li-Min Song - Math Grad)
Received: by poly.math.cornell.edu (4.1/1.5)
        id AA18248; Mon, 16 Aug 93 13:47:07 EDT
Message-Id: <9308161747.AA18248@poly.math.cornell.edu>
To: LHGCC@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
Subject: COUNCIL RELEASE: OFFICIAL COMMENTS ON CSPA INTERIM RULE




*****************************************************************


          OFFICIAL COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON CHINESE
         AFFAIRS REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS OF CSPA


*****************************************************************


     TO:       Chinese Nationals Nationwide

     FROM:     Dr. Haiching Zhao

     DATE:     August 16, 1993


     The following is the official comments letter we filed at the
INS regarding the CSPA interim regulations.  The comments were
filed on August 2, 1993, before the deadline of the 30 day comment
period for the interim rule.

     In the comments, we specifically addressed the following
issues:

     (1) Visa quota allocation.

     (2) Dependents should be covered by CSPA under the worldwide
          quota instead of subjecting them to China quota.

     (3) DED dependents should be deemed as have maintained their
          legal status.

     (4) A family unity program be established to correct the
          problems associated with the voluntary departure program.

     (5) 90 days rule.

     (6) People who entered without inspection.

     We enclose our official comments here for your reference.

________________________________________________________________



                         August 2, 1993





VIA HAND DELIVERY

Immigration and Naturalization Service
Records Systems Division
Director, Policy Directives and Instructions Branch
Washington, D.C.  20536

     Re:  Reference No: 1607-93
          Implementing Regulations - Chinese Student Protection Act
          P.L. 102-404

Dear Sir/Madame:

     This letter is filed in response to the interim final
regulations published by the Immigration and Naturalization Service
("INS") on July 1, 1993 to implement the Chinese Student Protection
Act ("CSPA").  58 Fed. Reg. 35832-39.  On October 9, 1992 the
President signed into law, S.1216, the CSPA.  The CSPA represents
the culmination of efforts by pro-democracy Chinese students and
scholars to protect themselves from return to China after the June
1989 massacre at Tiananmen Square in Beijing.  Following the
massacre, President Bush vetoed similar legislation and issued an
Executive Order (No. 12711, April 11, 1990) that provides temporary
work authorization and protection from forced return to China
through January 1, 1994 for certain Chinese nationals.

     The National Council on Chinese Affairs is a non-profit
organization whose goals are to promote human rights improvements
and political reform in China; to encourage and facilitate the
development of a market economy in China; and to protect the rights
of and promote opportunities for Chinese nationals living in the
U.S.

     The National Council on Chinese Affairs is committed to
building coalitions among Chinese nationals, U.S. policy-makers and
organizations to pursue programs and activities in support of our
goals.  It also serves as a source of information and develops
educational materials.

     We believe that there are several imperfections in the
regulations - particularly with regard to the visa number
allocation, the treatment of non-qualifying dependents both in the
U.S. and in China and the 90 day restriction on return to China.

VISA NUMBER ALLOCATION - GENERAL

     The interim regulations conclude that the immigrant visa
numbers allotted to the CSPA should be limited to those available
under the employment-based third preference category.   This
interpretation is derived from the CSPA at section 2(a)(1) which
designates the employment-based third preference category as the
appropriate "classification" for covered PRC nationals.

     As a result of an oversupply of employment based visas
following the implementation of the Immigration Act of 1990, a
surplus of approximately 45,000 visas is available for fiscal year
1993.  Once these visas have been exhausted the remainder of the
principals will use the employment based third preference visa
numbers following fiscal year 1993 until everyone is adjusted.

     It has always been estimated by INS and the Department of
State that 80,000 students may be eligible.  Should the principal
applications exceed the 46,000 then the standard third preference
category is likely to become oversubscribed.  A potential serious
consequence of the visa number interpretation is that all other
individuals who file their immigrant visa applications after the
PRC nationals will be unable to obtain any visas until all the PRC
nationals have obtained their visas.  Moreover, the 46,000 visas
that will potentially be used for CSPA applicants would have
spilled across to the backlogged family based second preference
category, under the provisions of the Immigration Act of 1990.
Therefore, the potential beneficiaries of the spill-over are also
affected by this State Department's interpretation of the CSPA.

     CSPA applicants should not be required to wait for a visa
number under the worldwide employment-based third preference
category under the worldwide quota.  The CSPA in Section 2(a)(1)
classifies covered PRC nationals within the employment-based third
preference category reserved for skilled workers.  Immigration and
Nationality Act ("INA") Section 203(b)(3)(A)(i).  Covered PRC
nationals are therefore deemed to have an immigrant visa petition
approved in this category without meeting the normal petitioning
and labor certification requirements.

     Congress presumably chose this employment-based category
because it is reserved for professionals and skilled workers. Under
normal immigrant visa circumstances, this category would be likely
to cover all the PRC nationals covered under the CSPA.

     The CSPA at Section 2(a)(4) waives the per country numerical
restrictions of INA Section 202(a)(2) applicable to China.  Without
this waiver, PRC nationals applying for adjustment of status would
be placed within the current backlog of the PRC employment based
categories.  Congress intended that PRC nationals filing under the
CSPA not be held up by an existing quota.

     Section 2(a)(2) of the CSPA specifically provides that an
application shall be considered without regard to whether immigrant
visa numbers are immediately available.  Under standard immigration
procedures, an immigrant visa applicant may not apply for
adjustment of status unless an immigrant visa is "immediately
available" at the time the application is filed.  INA Section
245(a)(3).  The fact that immediate visa number availability is not
an issue implies that visa numbers will be taken from some other
visa source.

     Arguably that source could be future China quotas.  The CSPA
at Section d provides for a detailed mechanism to repay all of the
visas used by PRC nationals under the CSPA over the next several
years.  Each fiscal year, beginning in fiscal year 1993, 1000 visas
will be subtracted from the overall China quota.  Three hundred
(300) of those visas will come from the employment-based third
preference quota and 700 will come from the employment-based fifth
preference quota.  The repayment of the visas is amortized over
many years so as not to dramatically affect the normal China
immigration quota.  Visas that are borrowed from future China
quotas for the initial issuance of immigrant visas could be repaid
through this mechanism.

     The written legislative history of the CSPA is ambiguous in
some spots, but taken in its totality supports the statutory
interpretation given above.  There are actually very few written
sources to draw upon -- the House Report, and the floor statements
in both chambers.  The House Report (H. Rep. No. 826, 102d Cong.,
2d Sess. (1992)) contains some ambiguous language concerning the
interpretation of the CSPA.  The report says that PRC nationals'
status should be regularized so that they do not have to live in
the same "limbo status" that they are currently experiencing where
they are unable to make long-term plans. p. 4.  The report also
says the number of adjustments will be placed "within the worldwide
annual quota of section 201 of the INA", and that deductions will
be made from the China country quota each year to offset against
those who adjust.  p. 5.  The ambiguity arises with the sentence,
"because the worldwide quota is not waived, applicants will be
required to await the availability of a visa number."  p.5.

     The statement in the report about awaiting visa availability
is not only ambiguous, but it is also inconsistent with Section
2(a) of the CSPA which provides that the application shall be
considered without regard to whether an immigrant visa number is
immediately available at the time the application is filed.  The
CSPA should be interpreted to provide for immediate visa issuance
to all PRC nationals and their dependents without having an adverse
impact on other employment or family based applicants.  A fair and
equitable reading of the CSPA would allow PRC nationals and their
dependents to borrow visas from future quotas and use the
offset/payback mechanism in the statue to repay the visa numbers
used.


VISA NUMBER ALLOCATION - DEPENDENTS


     Dependents are Covered by CSPA

     A further problem relates to visa issuance to late-arriving
dependents and dependents of the CSPA principals still in China, as
these individuals did not qualify directly under the Executive
Order.  The interim regulations subject dependents both in the U.S.
and in China to the employment based third preference China quota.
The principal applicants are not subject to the China quota because
of the waiver in the per country level found in Section 2(a)(4) of
the CSPA.  According to the July Visa Bulletin, cases are being
processed under the third preference China quota that were filed
prior to October 1, 1991.  Visa Bulletin, Vol VII, No. 25.
Dependents filing under the CSPA could potentially be subject to a
wait of many years before being eligible to file for and obtain an
immigrant visa.

     There are many derivative problems involved in subjecting
dependents to the China quota.  Dependents in the U.S. would be
required to maintain independently their current non-immigrant
status or face deportation.  Many dependents rely entirely on their
spouses or parents for their immigration status (e.g. F-2 or J-2)
and will not be able to maintain their non-immigrant status
independently.  The INS has proposed a case-by-case voluntary
departure program, but even if voluntary departure is granted, the
individual will not be able to adjust status in the U.S. when the
visa number is current because, arguably, they have failed to
maintain their status as required by INA section 245.  This is
clearly contrary to the underlying rationale of the CSPA, which
seeks to avoid sending Chinese nationals in the U.S. back to China.


     For dependents remaining in China, the situation is even more
bleak.  These individuals would be required to wait in China until
visa numbers are available which could potentially separate
families for inordinate periods of time.  The chances of obtaining
a nonimmigrant visa to enter the U.S. are severely hampered for the
dependents of a spouse or parent in the U.S.  In addition, many of
the dependents, both in the U.S. and in China, who are now
considered children, will reach the age of 21 prior to visa
availability.  This would disqualify them for visa issuance.

     There is authority in the statute and legislative history to
include the spouses and minor children as direct beneficiaries
under the CSPA.  The CSPA defines covered aliens at section 2(b)(1)
as nationals of the PRC described in section 1 of the Executive
Order (E.O. 12711, April 11, 1990).  The Executive Order, at
Section 1, describes covered aliens as PRC nationals and their
dependents who were in the U.S. on or after June 5, 1989, up to and
including April 11, 1990.  In the House Report under the heading
"Summary of Bill" it states that:

     S.1216 authorizes the Attorney General to grant lawful
     permanent residency to any national of the People's
     Republic of China (and the dependents of any such
     national) who (1) was in the United States after June 4,
     1989 and before April 11, 1990; (2) has resided
     continuously in the United States since April 11, 1990
     (other than for brief, casual and innocent absences); and
     (3) was not physically present in the PRC for longer than
     90 days after April 11, 1990.

p. 5 (emphasis added).  This language and the use of parentheses
seem to directly exempt family members from the three stated
requirements, but yet include them for purposes of adjustment.  In
addition, the Presidential signing statement describes the bill as
including dependents.

     Legally, Dependents must be Allowed to Accompany or Follow-To
     Join

     In the alternative, because the principal beneficiaries are
classified in the employment-based third preference category, under
normal immigration circumstances, spouses and minor children of
such dependents would also be immediately eligible for immigrant
visas, at the same time the principal applicant receives his/her
visa.  This is mandated by statute.  The INA at Section 203(d)
provides authority for spouses and minor children both in the U.S.
and outside of the U.S. to obtain permanent residence at the same
time as the principal applicant, and the final regulations should
reflect this.

EMPLOYMENT BASED THIRD PREFERENCE - CHINA QUOTA

     On July 9, 1993 the State Department released its Visa Number
availability for August.  Visa Bulletin, Vol VII, No. 26.  The visa
number projections for August listed ALL employment based visa
numbers as current, with the exception of unskilled workers and
skilled workers coming from the Philippines.  This includes the
employment based third preference category for China, where CSPA
dependents are expected to be classified.

     During the month of August 1993, many applications from late
arriving dependents here in the U.S will be filed with the INS.
The "current" status of this category will be short-lived.  By
September 1993, the backlog could well be five to seven years
depending upon the demand.  Those dependents whose applications for
adjustment are accepted for processing could potentially be
relieved from seeking any other temporary benefit, e.g., voluntary
departure or family unity (discussed below).  While these
dependents are pending adjustment of status (regardless of the
retrogression of the visa numbers), they should be (1) deemed to
have maintained their nonimmigrant status; (2) granted employment
authorization; and (3) granted liberal advance parole for travel
purposes.

     INA Section 245(c) clearly states that the maintenance of
status requirement is not applicable to those individuals who
"through no fault of his own or for technical reasons" failed to
maintain his status.  Both of these exceptions apply to individuals
who are derivative beneficiaries of CSPA principal applicants who
filed their applications in July 1993.  The Executive Order
provided for maintenance of status for its beneficiaries who
obtained Deferred Enforced Departure.  Many dependents technically
lost their status when the principal entered the DED program.  The
CSPA interim regulations necessitated separate adjustment
applications of CSPA principals and dependents.  A blanket waiver
of these potential technical violations of status should be given.

ADDITIONAL ISSUES FOR DEPENDENTS

     Aside from the potential visa issuance problems, dependents
will face additional problems.  If they are in the U.S. they must
remain in status in order to avoid the possibility of deportation
and eventually to adjust their status.  The INS' proposed voluntary
departure mechanism does not provide for maintenance of status.  In
fact voluntary departure is granted only on an individual, case-by-
case basis.  An individual would be required to subject himself to
possible deportation prior to obtaining voluntary departure.

     A blanket family unity program should be established to
protect all late-arriving dependents.  This program should mirror
the benefits of E.O. 12711 to (1) provide employment authorization
for the duration of the dependents' wait; (2) provide liberal
advance parole; (3) deem the individual to maintain his/her
nonimmigrant status for adjustment purposes; and (4) allow children
under twenty-one on the date of the CSPA principal's approval to be
eligible for adjustment even if they are over twenty-one at the
date of adjustment.  This family unity program would resolve the
problems involved with the case by case voluntary departure
program.


90 DAYS IN CHINA

     The implementing regulations provide that applicants who were
physically present in the PRC for a period exceeding 90 days
between April 11, 1990 and October 9, 1992 will not be eligible to
adjust status under the provisions of the law.  The regulations
express the view that because the restriction is statutorily
imposed, the INS has no authority to waive this restriction for any
reason.

     Although the legislative history of CSPA is silent with
respect to the rationale for the 90 day rule, Congress presumably
wished to withhold the benefits of the Act from individuals who
could, easily, frequently or on a long-term basis re-establish ties
with the same government responsible for the Tiananmen Square
massacre.  It is possible that the 90 day rule was meant as a
"bright line test", to ensure that those who truly feared a return
to the PRC -- as evidenced by minimal or no return trips -- would
be protected by CSPA.

     Viewed in this light, failure to provide an administrative
waiver to those unfortunate individuals who were detained in China
for periods totaling over 90 days, in circumstances beyond their
control, would certainly run counter to the motivation behind the
rule, and indeed, behind the statute as a whole.  In particular, it
is directly contrary to the legislative intent behind CSPA to deny
the benefits of the law to individuals who were detained through
actions of the PRC government.  It is undeniable that the law was
meant to protect Chinese nationals from such irrational and
retaliatory government actions.

     While there is no explicit statutory waiver for the 90 day
rule, neither is there a statutory bar on an administrative waiver.

Certainly the law, taken as a whole, encourages the agency to
exercise its discretion on humanitarian grounds.  Clearly,
administrative waivers of the 90 day rule in cases in which
returning PRC nationals were detained by government actions such as
imprisonment, withholding of a passport, or the denial of an exit
visa would be justified on humanitarian grounds.  Similarly waivers
for individuals whose departures were delayed by family or medical
emergencies would be within the spirit of the CSPA.

     The INS has, on at least one previous occasion, created an
administrative waiver without explicit statutory authority.  Under
the amnesty program created by the Immigration Reform and Control
Act of 1986 ("IRCA"), aliens who departed the U.S. during the
period of continuous unlawful residence, and reentered the U.S. to
resume their unlawful residence by use of a facially valid visa,
were required to obtain a waiver of the misrepresentation exclusion
ground.  This waiver -- not authorized by IRCA or in the specific
exclusionary waivers that existed in the INA at the time -- was
codified by the INS at 8 C.F.R. 245a.2(b)(10).  The administrative
waiver also seems to have survived judicial scrutiny.  See LULAC v.
INS, No. 87-4757-WDK (C.D. Cal. July 15, 1988).

     Where the statute is silent, then, it would appear that the
INS does have the authority to create a waiver if consistent with
the general aims of the statute.  We therefore, believe the 90 day
restriction should be waived for those individuals (1) who were
precluded from leaving the PRC by the PRC government; (2) who had
family medical emergencies; and (3) who had personal medical
emergencies.  If the INS is concerned about possible document fraud
in obtaining such a waiver, it can certainly require as much
corroborating evidence, in any form it deems appropriate, in order
to satisfy itself on this point. It would, however, be both tragic
and unjust to allow a general presumption of fraud with respect to
the entire community preclude from CSPA benefits those individuals
with legitimate grounds for a waiver.

CHINESE NATIONALS WHO ENTERED WITHOUT INSPECTION

     Although the Executive Order protected Chinese Nationals who
entered the U.S. without inspection, as well as those who were
inspected upon entry, the implementing regulations preclude
adjustment by Chinese Nationals who entered without inspection. The
INS bases its interpretation of the CSPA upon the lack of an
explicit statutory waiver of INA Section 245(a), which states that
inspection upon entry or parole is a pre-requisite to eligibility
for adjustment.

     The statute's extension of the CSPA benefits to all Chinese
nationals who were covered by the Executive Order is an implicit
waiver of the inspection/parole requirement of Section 245(a).
Moreover, the statute contains no explicit bar with respect to this
group, and there is no evidence of Congressional intent to carve
out a class of Executive Order Chinese nationals and preclude them
from permanent protection.

CONCLUSION

     On behalf of The National Council on Chinese Affairs we
respectfully request that INS and others at the Department of
Justice carefully consider and evaluate the issues raised above.
Should you have any questions or need additional information,
please contact the undersigned.


                         Sincerely,



                         Haiching Zhao, Ph.D.
                         President


_________________________________________________________________



     Please note that these comments are filed at the INS.  There
are other issues of our concern that we have also raised with other
government agencies of the appropriate jurisdiction.

     There are many people who have expressed their concerns and
suggestions and contributed to our official comments.  We sincerely
thank you for your efforts.  We will continue to hear your
concerns.  There are also many people who have asked how they can
contribute financially to our lobbying effort on CSPA related
issues.  For suggestions, concerns, or contributions, please send
to:

     National Council on Chinese Affairs
     P.O. Box 77418
     Washington, D.C. 20013-7418

     For further information concerning late-arriving dependents,
you may call (202) 835-1880

/end




From SGU@draco.rutgers.edu  Mon Aug 16 14:03:35 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA20319); Mon, 16 Aug 93 14:03:41 CDT
Received: from DRACO.RUTGERS.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA20309); Mon, 16 Aug 93 14:03:35 CDT
Received: from draco.rutgers.edu by draco.rutgers.edu (PMDF V4.2-11 #3283) id
 <01H1TFLR6AM896WCKM@draco.rutgers.edu>; Mon, 16 Aug 1993 15:02:07 EDT
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1993 15:02:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
Subject: COUNCIL RELEASE: OFFICIAL COMMENTS ON CSPA INTERIM RULE
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Message-Id: <01H1TFLR7D7696WCKM@draco.rutgers.edu>
X-Envelope-To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Vms-To: LADS
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Status: RO

======================== ORIGINAL MESSAGE ============================

>From:	IN%"song@math.cornell.edu" 16-AUG-1993 14:50:34.35
To:	IN%"lads@lucerne.rice.edu"
CC:	
Subj:	COUNCIL RELEASE: OFFICIAL COMMENTS ON CSPA INTERIM RULE


*****************************************************************


          OFFICIAL COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON CHINESE 
         AFFAIRS REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS OF CSPA


*****************************************************************


     TO:       Chinese Nationals Nationwide

     FROM:     Dr. Haiching Zhao

     DATE:     August 16, 1993


     The following is the official comments letter we filed at the
INS regarding the CSPA interim regulations.  The comments were
filed on August 2, 1993, before the deadline of the 30 day comment
period for the interim rule.

     In the comments, we specifically addressed the following
issues:
     
     (1) Visa quota allocation.

     (2) Dependents should be covered by CSPA under the worldwide
          quota instead of subjecting them to China quota.

     (3) DED dependents should be deemed as have maintained their
          legal status.

     (4) A family unity program be established to correct the
          problems associated with the voluntary departure program.

     (5) 90 days rule.

     (6) People who entered without inspection.

     We enclose our official comments here for your reference.

________________________________________________________________



                         August 2, 1993





VIA HAND DELIVERY

Immigration and Naturalization Service
Records Systems Division
Director, Policy Directives and Instructions Branch
Washington, D.C.  20536

     Re:  Reference No: 1607-93
          Implementing Regulations - Chinese Student Protection Act
          P.L. 102-404

Dear Sir/Madame:

     This letter is filed in response to the interim final
regulations published by the Immigration and Naturalization Service
("INS") on July 1, 1993 to implement the Chinese Student Protection
Act ("CSPA").  58 Fed. Reg. 35832-39.  On October 9, 1992 the
President signed into law, S.1216, the CSPA.  The CSPA represents
the culmination of efforts by pro-democracy Chinese students and
scholars to protect themselves from return to China after the June
1989 massacre at Tiananmen Square in Beijing.  Following the
massacre, President Bush vetoed similar legislation and issued an
Executive Order (No. 12711, April 11, 1990) that provides temporary
work authorization and protection from forced return to China
through January 1, 1994 for certain Chinese nationals.  

     The National Council on Chinese Affairs is a non-profit
organization whose goals are to promote human rights improvements
and political reform in China; to encourage and facilitate the
development of a market economy in China; and to protect the rights
of and promote opportunities for Chinese nationals living in the
U.S. 

     The National Council on Chinese Affairs is committed to
building coalitions among Chinese nationals, U.S. policy-makers and
organizations to pursue programs and activities in support of our
goals.  It also serves as a source of information and develops
educational materials. 

     We believe that there are several imperfections in the
regulations - particularly with regard to the visa number
allocation, the treatment of non-qualifying dependents both in the
U.S. and in China and the 90 day restriction on return to China.  

VISA NUMBER ALLOCATION - GENERAL 

     The interim regulations conclude that the immigrant visa
numbers allotted to the CSPA should be limited to those available
under the employment-based third preference category.   This
interpretation is derived from the CSPA at section 2(a)(1) which
designates the employment-based third preference category as the
appropriate "classification" for covered PRC nationals.   

     As a result of an oversupply of employment based visas
following the implementation of the Immigration Act of 1990, a
surplus of approximately 45,000 visas is available for fiscal year
1993.  Once these visas have been exhausted the remainder of the
principals will use the employment based third preference visa
numbers following fiscal year 1993 until everyone is adjusted.   

     It has always been estimated by INS and the Department of
State that 80,000 students may be eligible.  Should the principal
applications exceed the 46,000 then the standard third preference
category is likely to become oversubscribed.  A potential serious
consequence of the visa number interpretation is that all other
individuals who file their immigrant visa applications after the
PRC nationals will be unable to obtain any visas until all the PRC
nationals have obtained their visas.  Moreover, the 46,000 visas
that will potentially be used for CSPA applicants would have
spilled across to the backlogged family based second preference
category, under the provisions of the Immigration Act of 1990. 
Therefore, the potential beneficiaries of the spill-over are also
affected by this State Department's interpretation of the CSPA.   

     CSPA applicants should not be required to wait for a visa
number under the worldwide employment-based third preference
category under the worldwide quota.  The CSPA in Section 2(a)(1)
classifies covered PRC nationals within the employment-based third
preference category reserved for skilled workers.  Immigration and
Nationality Act ("INA") Section 203(b)(3)(A)(i).  Covered PRC
nationals are therefore deemed to have an immigrant visa petition
approved in this category without meeting the normal petitioning
and labor certification requirements.
  
     Congress presumably chose this employment-based category
because it is reserved for professionals and skilled workers. Under
normal immigrant visa circumstances, this category would be likely
to cover all the PRC nationals covered under the CSPA.  

     The CSPA at Section 2(a)(4) waives the per country numerical
restrictions of INA Section 202(a)(2) applicable to China.  Without
this waiver, PRC nationals applying for adjustment of status would
be placed within the current backlog of the PRC employment based
categories.  Congress intended that PRC nationals filing under the
CSPA not be held up by an existing quota.   

     Section 2(a)(2) of the CSPA specifically provides that an
application shall be considered without regard to whether immigrant
visa numbers are immediately available.  Under standard immigration
procedures, an immigrant visa applicant may not apply for
adjustment of status unless an immigrant visa is "immediately
available" at the time the application is filed.  INA Section
245(a)(3).  The fact that immediate visa number availability is not
an issue implies that visa numbers will be taken from some other
visa source.  
   
     Arguably that source could be future China quotas.  The CSPA
at Section d provides for a detailed mechanism to repay all of the
visas used by PRC nationals under the CSPA over the next several
years.  Each fiscal year, beginning in fiscal year 1993, 1000 visas
will be subtracted from the overall China quota.  Three hundred
(300) of those visas will come from the employment-based third
preference quota and 700 will come from the employment-based fifth
preference quota.  The repayment of the visas is amortized over
many years so as not to dramatically affect the normal China
immigration quota.  Visas that are borrowed from future China
quotas for the initial issuance of immigrant visas could be repaid
through this mechanism.     

     The written legislative history of the CSPA is ambiguous in
some spots, but taken in its totality supports the statutory
interpretation given above.  There are actually very few written
sources to draw upon -- the House Report, and the floor statements
in both chambers.  The House Report (H. Rep. No. 826, 102d Cong.,
2d Sess. (1992)) contains some ambiguous language concerning the
interpretation of the CSPA.  The report says that PRC nationals'
status should be regularized so that they do not have to live in
the same "limbo status" that they are currently experiencing where
they are unable to make long-term plans. p. 4.  The report also
says the number of adjustments will be placed "within the worldwide
annual quota of section 201 of the INA", and that deductions will
be made from the China country quota each year to offset against
those who adjust.  p. 5.  The ambiguity arises with the sentence,
"because the worldwide quota is not waived, applicants will be
required to await the availability of a visa number."  p.5. 

     The statement in the report about awaiting visa availability
is not only ambiguous, but it is also inconsistent with Section
2(a) of the CSPA which provides that the application shall be
considered without regard to whether an immigrant visa number is
immediately available at the time the application is filed.  The
CSPA should be interpreted to provide for immediate visa issuance
to all PRC nationals and their dependents without having an adverse
impact on other employment or family based applicants.  A fair and
equitable reading of the CSPA would allow PRC nationals and their
dependents to borrow visas from future quotas and use the
offset/payback mechanism in the statue to repay the visa numbers
used.


VISA NUMBER ALLOCATION - DEPENDENTS


     Dependents are Covered by CSPA
     
     A further problem relates to visa issuance to late-arriving
dependents and dependents of the CSPA principals still in China, as
these individuals did not qualify directly under the Executive
Order.  The interim regulations subject dependents both in the U.S.
and in China to the employment based third preference China quota. 
The principal applicants are not subject to the China quota because
of the waiver in the per country level found in Section 2(a)(4) of
the CSPA.  According to the July Visa Bulletin, cases are being
processed under the third preference China quota that were filed
prior to October 1, 1991.  Visa Bulletin, Vol VII, No. 25. 
Dependents filing under the CSPA could potentially be subject to a
wait of many years before being eligible to file for and obtain an
immigrant visa.  

     There are many derivative problems involved in subjecting
dependents to the China quota.  Dependents in the U.S. would be
required to maintain independently their current non-immigrant
status or face deportation.  Many dependents rely entirely on their
spouses or parents for their immigration status (e.g. F-2 or J-2)
and will not be able to maintain their non-immigrant status
independently.  The INS has proposed a case-by-case voluntary
departure program, but even if voluntary departure is granted, the
individual will not be able to adjust status in the U.S. when the
visa number is current because, arguably, they have failed to
maintain their status as required by INA section 245.  This is
clearly contrary to the underlying rationale of the CSPA, which
seeks to avoid sending Chinese nationals in the U.S. back to China.


     For dependents remaining in China, the situation is even more
bleak.  These individuals would be required to wait in China until
visa numbers are available which could potentially separate
families for inordinate periods of time.  The chances of obtaining
a nonimmigrant visa to enter the U.S. are severely hampered for the
dependents of a spouse or parent in the U.S.  In addition, many of
the dependents, both in the U.S. and in China, who are now
considered children, will reach the age of 21 prior to visa
availability.  This would disqualify them for visa issuance.  

     There is authority in the statute and legislative history to
include the spouses and minor children as direct beneficiaries
under the CSPA.  The CSPA defines covered aliens at section 2(b)(1)
as nationals of the PRC described in section 1 of the Executive
Order (E.O. 12711, April 11, 1990).  The Executive Order, at
Section 1, describes covered aliens as PRC nationals and their
dependents who were in the U.S. on or after June 5, 1989, up to and
including April 11, 1990.  In the House Report under the heading
"Summary of Bill" it states that:

     S.1216 authorizes the Attorney General to grant lawful
     permanent residency to any national of the People's
     Republic of China (and the dependents of any such
     national) who (1) was in the United States after June 4,
     1989 and before April 11, 1990; (2) has resided
     continuously in the United States since April 11, 1990
     (other than for brief, casual and innocent absences); and
     (3) was not physically present in the PRC for longer than
     90 days after April 11, 1990.  

p. 5 (emphasis added).  This language and the use of parentheses
seem to directly exempt family members from the three stated
requirements, but yet include them for purposes of adjustment.  In
addition, the Presidential signing statement describes the bill as
including dependents.
     
     Legally, Dependents must be Allowed to Accompany or Follow-To
     Join  

     In the alternative, because the principal beneficiaries are
classified in the employment-based third preference category, under
normal immigration circumstances, spouses and minor children of
such dependents would also be immediately eligible for immigrant
visas, at the same time the principal applicant receives his/her
visa.  This is mandated by statute.  The INA at Section 203(d)
provides authority for spouses and minor children both in the U.S.
and outside of the U.S. to obtain permanent residence at the same
time as the principal applicant, and the final regulations should
reflect this.      

EMPLOYMENT BASED THIRD PREFERENCE - CHINA QUOTA

     On July 9, 1993 the State Department released its Visa Number
availability for August.  Visa Bulletin, Vol VII, No. 26.  The visa
number projections for August listed ALL employment based visa
numbers as current, with the exception of unskilled workers and
skilled workers coming from the Philippines.  This includes the
employment based third preference category for China, where CSPA
dependents are expected to be classified.  

     During the month of August 1993, many applications from late
arriving dependents here in the U.S will be filed with the INS. 
The "current" status of this category will be short-lived.  By
September 1993, the backlog could well be five to seven years
depending upon the demand.  Those dependents whose applications for
adjustment are accepted for processing could potentially be
relieved from seeking any other temporary benefit, e.g., voluntary
departure or family unity (discussed below).  While these
dependents are pending adjustment of status (regardless of the
retrogression of the visa numbers), they should be (1) deemed to
have maintained their nonimmigrant status; (2) granted employment
authorization; and (3) granted liberal advance parole for travel
purposes.  

     INA Section 245(c) clearly states that the maintenance of
status requirement is not applicable to those individuals who
"through no fault of his own or for technical reasons" failed to
maintain his status.  Both of these exceptions apply to individuals
who are derivative beneficiaries of CSPA principal applicants who
filed their applications in July 1993.  The Executive Order
provided for maintenance of status for its beneficiaries who
obtained Deferred Enforced Departure.  Many dependents technically
lost their status when the principal entered the DED program.  The
CSPA interim regulations necessitated separate adjustment
applications of CSPA principals and dependents.  A blanket waiver
of these potential technical violations of status should be given.

ADDITIONAL ISSUES FOR DEPENDENTS

     Aside from the potential visa issuance problems, dependents
will face additional problems.  If they are in the U.S. they must
remain in status in order to avoid the possibility of deportation
and eventually to adjust their status.  The INS' proposed voluntary
departure mechanism does not provide for maintenance of status.  In
fact voluntary departure is granted only on an individual, case-by-
case basis.  An individual would be required to subject himself to
possible deportation prior to obtaining voluntary departure.   

     A blanket family unity program should be established to
protect all late-arriving dependents.  This program should mirror
the benefits of E.O. 12711 to (1) provide employment authorization
for the duration of the dependents' wait; (2) provide liberal
advance parole; (3) deem the individual to maintain his/her
nonimmigrant status for adjustment purposes; and (4) allow children
under twenty-one on the date of the CSPA principal's approval to be
eligible for adjustment even if they are over twenty-one at the
date of adjustment.  This family unity program would resolve the
problems involved with the case by case voluntary departure
program.
 

90 DAYS IN CHINA

     The implementing regulations provide that applicants who were
physically present in the PRC for a period exceeding 90 days
between April 11, 1990 and October 9, 1992 will not be eligible to
adjust status under the provisions of the law.  The regulations
express the view that because the restriction is statutorily
imposed, the INS has no authority to waive this restriction for any
reason.  
     
     Although the legislative history of CSPA is silent with
respect to the rationale for the 90 day rule, Congress presumably
wished to withhold the benefits of the Act from individuals who
could, easily, frequently or on a long-term basis re-establish ties
with the same government responsible for the Tiananmen Square
massacre.  It is possible that the 90 day rule was meant as a
"bright line test", to ensure that those who truly feared a return
to the PRC -- as evidenced by minimal or no return trips -- would
be protected by CSPA.  

     Viewed in this light, failure to provide an administrative
waiver to those unfortunate individuals who were detained in China
for periods totaling over 90 days, in circumstances beyond their
control, would certainly run counter to the motivation behind the
rule, and indeed, behind the statute as a whole.  In particular, it
is directly contrary to the legislative intent behind CSPA to deny
the benefits of the law to individuals who were detained through
actions of the PRC government.  It is undeniable that the law was
meant to protect Chinese nationals from such irrational and
retaliatory government actions.  

     While there is no explicit statutory waiver for the 90 day
rule, neither is there a statutory bar on an administrative waiver.

Certainly the law, taken as a whole, encourages the agency to
exercise its discretion on humanitarian grounds.  Clearly,
administrative waivers of the 90 day rule in cases in which
returning PRC nationals were detained by government actions such as
imprisonment, withholding of a passport, or the denial of an exit
visa would be justified on humanitarian grounds.  Similarly waivers
for individuals whose departures were delayed by family or medical
emergencies would be within the spirit of the CSPA.  

     The INS has, on at least one previous occasion, created an
administrative waiver without explicit statutory authority.  Under
the amnesty program created by the Immigration Reform and Control
Act of 1986 ("IRCA"), aliens who departed the U.S. during the
period of continuous unlawful residence, and reentered the U.S. to
resume their unlawful residence by use of a facially valid visa,
were required to obtain a waiver of the misrepresentation exclusion
ground.  This waiver -- not authorized by IRCA or in the specific
exclusionary waivers that existed in the INA at the time -- was
codified by the INS at 8 C.F.R. 245a.2(b)(10).  The administrative
waiver also seems to have survived judicial scrutiny.  See LULAC v.
INS, No. 87-4757-WDK (C.D. Cal. July 15, 1988).  

     Where the statute is silent, then, it would appear that the
INS does have the authority to create a waiver if consistent with
the general aims of the statute.  We therefore, believe the 90 day
restriction should be waived for those individuals (1) who were
precluded from leaving the PRC by the PRC government; (2) who had
family medical emergencies; and (3) who had personal medical
emergencies.  If the INS is concerned about possible document fraud
in obtaining such a waiver, it can certainly require as much
corroborating evidence, in any form it deems appropriate, in order
to satisfy itself on this point. It would, however, be both tragic
and unjust to allow a general presumption of fraud with respect to
the entire community preclude from CSPA benefits those individuals
with legitimate grounds for a waiver.

CHINESE NATIONALS WHO ENTERED WITHOUT INSPECTION

     Although the Executive Order protected Chinese Nationals who
entered the U.S. without inspection, as well as those who were
inspected upon entry, the implementing regulations preclude
adjustment by Chinese Nationals who entered without inspection. The
INS bases its interpretation of the CSPA upon the lack of an
explicit statutory waiver of INA Section 245(a), which states that
inspection upon entry or parole is a pre-requisite to eligibility
for adjustment.

     The statute's extension of the CSPA benefits to all Chinese
nationals who were covered by the Executive Order is an implicit
waiver of the inspection/parole requirement of Section 245(a).
Moreover, the statute contains no explicit bar with respect to this
group, and there is no evidence of Congressional intent to carve
out a class of Executive Order Chinese nationals and preclude them
from permanent protection.  

CONCLUSION

     On behalf of The National Council on Chinese Affairs we
respectfully request that INS and others at the Department of
Justice carefully consider and evaluate the issues raised above. 
Should you have any questions or need additional information,
please contact the undersigned.


                         Sincerely,

               

                         Haiching Zhao, Ph.D.
                         President


_________________________________________________________________



     Please note that these comments are filed at the INS.  There
are other issues of our concern that we have also raised with other
government agencies of the appropriate jurisdiction.

     There are many people who have expressed their concerns and
suggestions and contributed to our official comments.  We sincerely
thank you for your efforts.  We will continue to hear your
concerns.  There are also many people who have asked how they can
contribute financially to our lobbying effort on CSPA related
issues.  For suggestions, concerns, or contributions, please send
to:

     National Council on Chinese Affairs
     P.O. Box 77418
     Washington, D.C. 20013-7418

     For further information concerning late-arriving dependents,
you may call (202) 835-1880

/end 




From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Mon Aug 16 16:03:31 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA20414); Mon, 16 Aug 93 16:03:38 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA20404); Mon, 16 Aug 93 16:03:31 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA14918; Mon, 16 Aug 93 17:01:59 EDT
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 93 16:53:38 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308162053.AA27514@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Letter from Dr. Zhao Haiching
Status: RO

>From song@math.cornell.edu  Mon Aug 16 14:05:14 1993
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for yhl@cmliris) id AA12181; Mon, 16 Aug 93 14:13:20 EDT
Received: from poly.math.cornell.edu ([128.84.234.31]) by router.mail.cornell.edu with SMTP id <576780-2>; Mon, 16 Aug 1993 14:13:23 -0400
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1993 14:12:43 -0400
>From: song@math.cornell.edu (Li-Min Song - Math Grad)
Received: by poly.math.cornell.edu (4.1/1.5)
	id AA21630; Mon, 16 Aug 93 14:12:43 EDT
Message-Id: <9308161812.AA21630@poly.math.cornell.edu>
To: yhl%cmliris@harvard
Subject: COUNCIL RELEASE: OFFICIAL COMMENTS ON CSPA INTERIM RULE
Status: R




*****************************************************************


          OFFICIAL COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON CHINESE 
         AFFAIRS REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS OF CSPA


*****************************************************************


     TO:       Chinese Nationals Nationwide

     FROM:     Dr. Haiching Zhao

     DATE:     August 16, 1993


     The following is the official comments letter we filed at the
INS regarding the CSPA interim regulations.  The comments were
filed on August 2, 1993, before the deadline of the 30 day comment
period for the interim rule.

     In the comments, we specifically addressed the following
issues:
     
     (1) Visa quota allocation.

     (2) Dependents should be covered by CSPA under the worldwide
          quota instead of subjecting them to China quota.

     (3) DED dependents should be deemed as have maintained their
          legal status.

     (4) A family unity program be established to correct the
          problems associated with the voluntary departure program.

     (5) 90 days rule.

     (6) People who entered without inspection.

     We enclose our official comments here for your reference.

________________________________________________________________



                         August 2, 1993





VIA HAND DELIVERY

Immigration and Naturalization Service
Records Systems Division
Director, Policy Directives and Instructions Branch
Washington, D.C.  20536

     Re:  Reference No: 1607-93
          Implementing Regulations - Chinese Student Protection Act
          P.L. 102-404

Dear Sir/Madame:

     This letter is filed in response to the interim final
regulations published by the Immigration and Naturalization Service
("INS") on July 1, 1993 to implement the Chinese Student Protection
Act ("CSPA").  58 Fed. Reg. 35832-39.  On October 9, 1992 the
President signed into law, S.1216, the CSPA.  The CSPA represents
the culmination of efforts by pro-democracy Chinese students and
scholars to protect themselves from return to China after the June
1989 massacre at Tiananmen Square in Beijing.  Following the
massacre, President Bush vetoed similar legislation and issued an
Executive Order (No. 12711, April 11, 1990) that provides temporary
work authorization and protection from forced return to China
through January 1, 1994 for certain Chinese nationals.  

     The National Council on Chinese Affairs is a non-profit
organization whose goals are to promote human rights improvements
and political reform in China; to encourage and facilitate the
development of a market economy in China; and to protect the rights
of and promote opportunities for Chinese nationals living in the
U.S. 

     The National Council on Chinese Affairs is committed to
building coalitions among Chinese nationals, U.S. policy-makers and
organizations to pursue programs and activities in support of our
goals.  It also serves as a source of information and develops
educational materials. 

     We believe that there are several imperfections in the
regulations - particularly with regard to the visa number
allocation, the treatment of non-qualifying dependents both in the
U.S. and in China and the 90 day restriction on return to China.  

VISA NUMBER ALLOCATION - GENERAL 

     The interim regulations conclude that the immigrant visa
numbers allotted to the CSPA should be limited to those available
under the employment-based third preference category.   This
interpretation is derived from the CSPA at section 2(a)(1) which
designates the employment-based third preference category as the
appropriate "classification" for covered PRC nationals.   

     As a result of an oversupply of employment based visas
following the implementation of the Immigration Act of 1990, a
surplus of approximately 45,000 visas is available for fiscal year
1993.  Once these visas have been exhausted the remainder of the
principals will use the employment based third preference visa
numbers following fiscal year 1993 until everyone is adjusted.   

     It has always been estimated by INS and the Department of
State that 80,000 students may be eligible.  Should the principal
applications exceed the 46,000 then the standard third preference
category is likely to become oversubscribed.  A potential serious
consequence of the visa number interpretation is that all other
individuals who file their immigrant visa applications after the
PRC nationals will be unable to obtain any visas until all the PRC
nationals have obtained their visas.  Moreover, the 46,000 visas
that will potentially be used for CSPA applicants would have
spilled across to the backlogged family based second preference
category, under the provisions of the Immigration Act of 1990. 
Therefore, the potential beneficiaries of the spill-over are also
affected by this State Department's interpretation of the CSPA.   

     CSPA applicants should not be required to wait for a visa
number under the worldwide employment-based third preference
category under the worldwide quota.  The CSPA in Section 2(a)(1)
classifies covered PRC nationals within the employment-based third
preference category reserved for skilled workers.  Immigration and
Nationality Act ("INA") Section 203(b)(3)(A)(i).  Covered PRC
nationals are therefore deemed to have an immigrant visa petition
approved in this category without meeting the normal petitioning
and labor certification requirements.
  
     Congress presumably chose this employment-based category
because it is reserved for professionals and skilled workers. Under
normal immigrant visa circumstances, this category would be likely
to cover all the PRC nationals covered under the CSPA.  

     The CSPA at Section 2(a)(4) waives the per country numerical
restrictions of INA Section 202(a)(2) applicable to China.  Without
this waiver, PRC nationals applying for adjustment of status would
be placed within the current backlog of the PRC employment based
categories.  Congress intended that PRC nationals filing under the
CSPA not be held up by an existing quota.   

     Section 2(a)(2) of the CSPA specifically provides that an
application shall be considered without regard to whether immigrant
visa numbers are immediately available.  Under standard immigration
procedures, an immigrant visa applicant may not apply for
adjustment of status unless an immigrant visa is "immediately
available" at the time the application is filed.  INA Section
245(a)(3).  The fact that immediate visa number availability is not
an issue implies that visa numbers will be taken from some other
visa source.  
   
     Arguably that source could be future China quotas.  The CSPA
at Section d provides for a detailed mechanism to repay all of the
visas used by PRC nationals under the CSPA over the next several
years.  Each fiscal year, beginning in fiscal year 1993, 1000 visas
will be subtracted from the overall China quota.  Three hundred
(300) of those visas will come from the employment-based third
preference quota and 700 will come from the employment-based fifth
preference quota.  The repayment of the visas is amortized over
many years so as not to dramatically affect the normal China
immigration quota.  Visas that are borrowed from future China
quotas for the initial issuance of immigrant visas could be repaid
through this mechanism.     

     The written legislative history of the CSPA is ambiguous in
some spots, but taken in its totality supports the statutory
interpretation given above.  There are actually very few written
sources to draw upon -- the House Report, and the floor statements
in both chambers.  The House Report (H. Rep. No. 826, 102d Cong.,
2d Sess. (1992)) contains some ambiguous language concerning the
interpretation of the CSPA.  The report says that PRC nationals'
status should be regularized so that they do not have to live in
the same "limbo status" that they are currently experiencing where
they are unable to make long-term plans. p. 4.  The report also
says the number of adjustments will be placed "within the worldwide
annual quota of section 201 of the INA", and that deductions will
be made from the China country quota each year to offset against
those who adjust.  p. 5.  The ambiguity arises with the sentence,
"because the worldwide quota is not waived, applicants will be
required to await the availability of a visa number."  p.5. 

     The statement in the report about awaiting visa availability
is not only ambiguous, but it is also inconsistent with Section
2(a) of the CSPA which provides that the application shall be
considered without regard to whether an immigrant visa number is
immediately available at the time the application is filed.  The
CSPA should be interpreted to provide for immediate visa issuance
to all PRC nationals and their dependents without having an adverse
impact on other employment or family based applicants.  A fair and
equitable reading of the CSPA would allow PRC nationals and their
dependents to borrow visas from future quotas and use the
offset/payback mechanism in the statue to repay the visa numbers
used.


VISA NUMBER ALLOCATION - DEPENDENTS


     Dependents are Covered by CSPA
     
     A further problem relates to visa issuance to late-arriving
dependents and dependents of the CSPA principals still in China, as
these individuals did not qualify directly under the Executive
Order.  The interim regulations subject dependents both in the U.S.
and in China to the employment based third preference China quota. 
The principal applicants are not subject to the China quota because
of the waiver in the per country level found in Section 2(a)(4) of
the CSPA.  According to the July Visa Bulletin, cases are being
processed under the third preference China quota that were filed
prior to October 1, 1991.  Visa Bulletin, Vol VII, No. 25. 
Dependents filing under the CSPA could potentially be subject to a
wait of many years before being eligible to file for and obtain an
immigrant visa.  

     There are many derivative problems involved in subjecting
dependents to the China quota.  Dependents in the U.S. would be
required to maintain independently their current non-immigrant
status or face deportation.  Many dependents rely entirely on their
spouses or parents for their immigration status (e.g. F-2 or J-2)
and will not be able to maintain their non-immigrant status
independently.  The INS has proposed a case-by-case voluntary
departure program, but even if voluntary departure is granted, the
individual will not be able to adjust status in the U.S. when the
visa number is current because, arguably, they have failed to
maintain their status as required by INA section 245.  This is
clearly contrary to the underlying rationale of the CSPA, which
seeks to avoid sending Chinese nationals in the U.S. back to China.


     For dependents remaining in China, the situation is even more
bleak.  These individuals would be required to wait in China until
visa numbers are available which could potentially separate
families for inordinate periods of time.  The chances of obtaining
a nonimmigrant visa to enter the U.S. are severely hampered for the
dependents of a spouse or parent in the U.S.  In addition, many of
the dependents, both in the U.S. and in China, who are now
considered children, will reach the age of 21 prior to visa
availability.  This would disqualify them for visa issuance.  

     There is authority in the statute and legislative history to
include the spouses and minor children as direct beneficiaries
under the CSPA.  The CSPA defines covered aliens at section 2(b)(1)
as nationals of the PRC described in section 1 of the Executive
Order (E.O. 12711, April 11, 1990).  The Executive Order, at
Section 1, describes covered aliens as PRC nationals and their
dependents who were in the U.S. on or after June 5, 1989, up to and
including April 11, 1990.  In the House Report under the heading
"Summary of Bill" it states that:

     S.1216 authorizes the Attorney General to grant lawful
     permanent residency to any national of the People's
     Republic of China (and the dependents of any such
     national) who (1) was in the United States after June 4,
     1989 and before April 11, 1990; (2) has resided
     continuously in the United States since April 11, 1990
     (other than for brief, casual and innocent absences); and
     (3) was not physically present in the PRC for longer than
     90 days after April 11, 1990.  

p. 5 (emphasis added).  This language and the use of parentheses
seem to directly exempt family members from the three stated
requirements, but yet include them for purposes of adjustment.  In
addition, the Presidential signing statement describes the bill as
including dependents.
     
     Legally, Dependents must be Allowed to Accompany or Follow-To
     Join  

     In the alternative, because the principal beneficiaries are
classified in the employment-based third preference category, under
normal immigration circumstances, spouses and minor children of
such dependents would also be immediately eligible for immigrant
visas, at the same time the principal applicant receives his/her
visa.  This is mandated by statute.  The INA at Section 203(d)
provides authority for spouses and minor children both in the U.S.
and outside of the U.S. to obtain permanent residence at the same
time as the principal applicant, and the final regulations should
reflect this.      

EMPLOYMENT BASED THIRD PREFERENCE - CHINA QUOTA

     On July 9, 1993 the State Department released its Visa Number
availability for August.  Visa Bulletin, Vol VII, No. 26.  The visa
number projections for August listed ALL employment based visa
numbers as current, with the exception of unskilled workers and
skilled workers coming from the Philippines.  This includes the
employment based third preference category for China, where CSPA
dependents are expected to be classified.  

     During the month of August 1993, many applications from late
arriving dependents here in the U.S will be filed with the INS. 
The "current" status of this category will be short-lived.  By
September 1993, the backlog could well be five to seven years
depending upon the demand.  Those dependents whose applications for
adjustment are accepted for processing could potentially be
relieved from seeking any other temporary benefit, e.g., voluntary
departure or family unity (discussed below).  While these
dependents are pending adjustment of status (regardless of the
retrogression of the visa numbers), they should be (1) deemed to
have maintained their nonimmigrant status; (2) granted employment
authorization; and (3) granted liberal advance parole for travel
purposes.  

     INA Section 245(c) clearly states that the maintenance of
status requirement is not applicable to those individuals who
"through no fault of his own or for technical reasons" failed to
maintain his status.  Both of these exceptions apply to individuals
who are derivative beneficiaries of CSPA principal applicants who
filed their applications in July 1993.  The Executive Order
provided for maintenance of status for its beneficiaries who
obtained Deferred Enforced Departure.  Many dependents technically
lost their status when the principal entered the DED program.  The
CSPA interim regulations necessitated separate adjustment
applications of CSPA principals and dependents.  A blanket waiver
of these potential technical violations of status should be given.

ADDITIONAL ISSUES FOR DEPENDENTS

     Aside from the potential visa issuance problems, dependents
will face additional problems.  If they are in the U.S. they must
remain in status in order to avoid the possibility of deportation
and eventually to adjust their status.  The INS' proposed voluntary
departure mechanism does not provide for maintenance of status.  In
fact voluntary departure is granted only on an individual, case-by-
case basis.  An individual would be required to subject himself to
possible deportation prior to obtaining voluntary departure.   

     A blanket family unity program should be established to
protect all late-arriving dependents.  This program should mirror
the benefits of E.O. 12711 to (1) provide employment authorization
for the duration of the dependents' wait; (2) provide liberal
advance parole; (3) deem the individual to maintain his/her
nonimmigrant status for adjustment purposes; and (4) allow children
under twenty-one on the date of the CSPA principal's approval to be
eligible for adjustment even if they are over twenty-one at the
date of adjustment.  This family unity program would resolve the
problems involved with the case by case voluntary departure
program.
 

90 DAYS IN CHINA

     The implementing regulations provide that applicants who were
physically present in the PRC for a period exceeding 90 days
between April 11, 1990 and October 9, 1992 will not be eligible to
adjust status under the provisions of the law.  The regulations
express the view that because the restriction is statutorily
imposed, the INS has no authority to waive this restriction for any
reason.  
     
     Although the legislative history of CSPA is silent with
respect to the rationale for the 90 day rule, Congress presumably
wished to withhold the benefits of the Act from individuals who
could, easily, frequently or on a long-term basis re-establish ties
with the same government responsible for the Tiananmen Square
massacre.  It is possible that the 90 day rule was meant as a
"bright line test", to ensure that those who truly feared a return
to the PRC -- as evidenced by minimal or no return trips -- would
be protected by CSPA.  

     Viewed in this light, failure to provide an administrative
waiver to those unfortunate individuals who were detained in China
for periods totaling over 90 days, in circumstances beyond their
control, would certainly run counter to the motivation behind the
rule, and indeed, behind the statute as a whole.  In particular, it
is directly contrary to the legislative intent behind CSPA to deny
the benefits of the law to individuals who were detained through
actions of the PRC government.  It is undeniable that the law was
meant to protect Chinese nationals from such irrational and
retaliatory government actions.  

     While there is no explicit statutory waiver for the 90 day
rule, neither is there a statutory bar on an administrative waiver.

Certainly the law, taken as a whole, encourages the agency to
exercise its discretion on humanitarian grounds.  Clearly,
administrative waivers of the 90 day rule in cases in which
returning PRC nationals were detained by government actions such as
imprisonment, withholding of a passport, or the denial of an exit
visa would be justified on humanitarian grounds.  Similarly waivers
for individuals whose departures were delayed by family or medical
emergencies would be within the spirit of the CSPA.  

     The INS has, on at least one previous occasion, created an
administrative waiver without explicit statutory authority.  Under
the amnesty program created by the Immigration Reform and Control
Act of 1986 ("IRCA"), aliens who departed the U.S. during the
period of continuous unlawful residence, and reentered the U.S. to
resume their unlawful residence by use of a facially valid visa,
were required to obtain a waiver of the misrepresentation exclusion
ground.  This waiver -- not authorized by IRCA or in the specific
exclusionary waivers that existed in the INA at the time -- was
codified by the INS at 8 C.F.R. 245a.2(b)(10).  The administrative
waiver also seems to have survived judicial scrutiny.  See LULAC v.
INS, No. 87-4757-WDK (C.D. Cal. July 15, 1988).  

     Where the statute is silent, then, it would appear that the
INS does have the authority to create a waiver if consistent with
the general aims of the statute.  We therefore, believe the 90 day
restriction should be waived for those individuals (1) who were
precluded from leaving the PRC by the PRC government; (2) who had
family medical emergencies; and (3) who had personal medical
emergencies.  If the INS is concerned about possible document fraud
in obtaining such a waiver, it can certainly require as much
corroborating evidence, in any form it deems appropriate, in order
to satisfy itself on this point. It would, however, be both tragic
and unjust to allow a general presumption of fraud with respect to
the entire community preclude from CSPA benefits those individuals
with legitimate grounds for a waiver.

CHINESE NATIONALS WHO ENTERED WITHOUT INSPECTION

     Although the Executive Order protected Chinese Nationals who
entered the U.S. without inspection, as well as those who were
inspected upon entry, the implementing regulations preclude
adjustment by Chinese Nationals who entered without inspection. The
INS bases its interpretation of the CSPA upon the lack of an
explicit statutory waiver of INA Section 245(a), which states that
inspection upon entry or parole is a pre-requisite to eligibility
for adjustment.

     The statute's extension of the CSPA benefits to all Chinese
nationals who were covered by the Executive Order is an implicit
waiver of the inspection/parole requirement of Section 245(a).
Moreover, the statute contains no explicit bar with respect to this
group, and there is no evidence of Congressional intent to carve
out a class of Executive Order Chinese nationals and preclude them
from permanent protection.  

CONCLUSION

     On behalf of The National Council on Chinese Affairs we
respectfully request that INS and others at the Department of
Justice carefully consider and evaluate the issues raised above. 
Should you have any questions or need additional information,
please contact the undersigned.


                         Sincerely,

               

                         Haiching Zhao, Ph.D.
                         President


_________________________________________________________________



     Please note that these comments are filed at the INS.  There
are other issues of our concern that we have also raised with other
government agencies of the appropriate jurisdiction.

     There are many people who have expressed their concerns and
suggestions and contributed to our official comments.  We sincerely
thank you for your efforts.  We will continue to hear your
concerns.  There are also many people who have asked how they can
contribute financially to our lobbying effort on CSPA related
issues.  For suggestions, concerns, or contributions, please send
to:

     National Council on Chinese Affairs
     P.O. Box 77418
     Washington, D.C. 20013-7418

     For further information concerning late-arriving dependents,
you may call (202) 835-1880

/end 






From shengj@acf2.nyu.edu  Mon Aug 16 17:12:55 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA00188); Mon, 16 Aug 93 17:13:00 CDT
Received: from moe.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA00178); Mon, 16 Aug 93 17:12:55 CDT
Received: from acf2.NYU.EDU by moe.rice.edu (AA23995); Mon, 16 Aug 93 16:50:37 CDT
Received: by acf2.NYU.EDU (5.61/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
	id AA18850; Mon, 16 Aug 93 17:49:21 -0400
From: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
Message-Id: <9308162149.AA18850@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Subject: Local INS Status, Package#3.2
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1993 17:49:21 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 4182      
Status: RO

Hi, netters,
The following is a list of local INS offices' status on LAD issues. 
The most recent reports, comments from LADnetters regarding to local INS 
offices are attached at the end of the list.  For those wish withhold their 
addresses please tell me. The default is posting the addresses for netters' 
reference. 

Date 08/16, 6:00PM
SUMMARY:
=======================================================================
              	STATUS	SOURCE
Albuquerque     accept	ssong@beta.lanl.gov

Arlington	accept	SWANG@american.edu

Atlanta         accept	liang@athena.cs.uga.edu

Buffalo         accept  V592XM8P@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu

Baltimore       accept	CHUANHE@enh.nist.gov
   
Boston          accept  wl@cfaitamp.harvard.edu

Chicago       	accept	shi6@oddjob.uchicago.edu

Charllote       accept	pguo@eos.ncsu.edu

Dallas      	accept	guo@bach.convex.com

Denver          accept	****@*****.****.**.***

Detroit         accept

El Paso         reject

Hawaii          accept

Houston       	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

Indianapolis    accept	xiawang@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu

Jacksonvile     accept	ZHEN@pine.circa.ufl.edu

Kansas City     accept	fengzou@matt.ksu.ksu.edu

Los Angeles     accept

Louisville      reject	D0JIAN01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu

Memphis         accept

Miami           accept	zhaoc@surf03.sci.fau.edu

Newark          accept	**@***.***.edu

New York        accept	bail@rockvax.rockefeller.edu

Omaha           accept	TBC05@ISUVAX.IASTATE.EDU

Oklahoma City   accept	jchang@chemdept.chem.uoknor.edu

Pittsburgh    	accept	Bin_Luo@ius4.ius.cs.cmu.edu

Philadelphia    accept	***@***.***.EDU

Phoenix:	accept	ASSES@ACVAX.INRE.ASU.EDU

Portland        accept

Salt Lake City  accept	SHIBAI@PHYSC1.BYU.EDU

San Antonio	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

San Francisco   accept

Spokane         accept

St. Albans      accept	SGU@draco.rutgers.edu


NEWLY DETAILED REPORTS, COMMENTS:
============================================================
CONTENTS:
1. A letter from a group of students in University of Louisville.
2. A report about New York INS.

1.Louisville:
-------------
>From:	IN%"Y0MENG01@ulkyvm.louisville.edu"  "YUN MENG" 16-AUG-1993 13:29:22.69

GRADUATE STUDENT IN PHARMACOLOGY
Phone: 588-7952
We are at the University of Louisville Louisville, KY. In the state of KY, so
far, there hasn't been any LAD files accepted. We were rejected because non of
us were able to provide acceptable birth and marriage certificates which,
asrequested by the immigration office of KY ( not in any other state to my
knowledge), has to be notarized by the American embassy in Beijing. This
request makes us very concerned. Not only would most of us be unable to get
such documents from Beijing, also, as somebody did try, the American embassy
in Beijing had refused to do it saying that they don't have such authority and
responsibility. The officer in KY INS said that he had known that the other
states had been accepting LAD applications without such requests, but what he
was doing was according to the policy from INS in Washington D.C. and it was
not negotiable. It is mid August now, and we don't see any hope of changing
attitude of thelocal INS officer. It seems very likely that all LADs in KY
willlose this chance and be facing serious problem of losing status soon. By
posting in this network we are hoping to get the attention and help from any
possible ways. We are also hoping to have the INS headquarter noticed through
you and,if it is possible,it would be the best to have someone in the INSheadq
uarter in Washington D.C. to inform the local INS office in Louisville, KY.

Thank you very much for your attention and help.

Zhenmin Lei, Xian Li, Dalei Liang, and Yun Meng

University of Louisville, Louisville, KY

2.New York:
----------
>From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      New York INS accepts lads application
To: Committee <COMM@lucerne.rice.edu>
Status: OR

Starting on August 9, New York INS accepts lads application.
My application I-824 for my daughter she is in China was accepted by
regional center on August 9. The receipt (I-797) was received by me this
morning.

Good luck, every body.

Mi Mi


From snow@lucerne.rice.edu  Mon Aug 16 20:24:12 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA00708); Mon, 16 Aug 93 20:24:18 CDT
Received: from moe.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA00698); Mon, 16 Aug 93 20:24:12 CDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA25725); Mon, 16 Aug 93 20:22:38 CDT
Received: by lucerne.rice.edu (AA07644); Mon, 16 Aug 93 20:24:11 CDT
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <9308170124.AA07644@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: Number of Netters
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1993 20:24:10 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 58        
Status: RO

1012 netters now.

This mail also servers as a test.

Jun

From hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu  Tue Aug 17 09:08:54 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA08846); Tue, 17 Aug 93 09:09:01 CDT
Received: from med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA08836); Tue, 17 Aug 93 09:08:54 CDT
Received: by med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C)
	id AA21197; Tue, 17 Aug 93 10:07:14 -0400
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 93 10:07:14 -0400
From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
Message-Id: <9308171407.AA21197@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu, shengj@acf2.nyu.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Re:  A Important Message
Cc: .@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Status: RO





From shengj@acf2.nyu.edu  Tue Aug 17 11:25:50 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA08998); Tue, 17 Aug 93 11:05:17 CDT
Received: from acf2.NYU.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA08988); Tue, 17 Aug 93 11:05:12 CDT
Received: by acf2.NYU.EDU (5.61/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
	id AA14074; Tue, 17 Aug 93 12:03:38 -0400
From: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
Message-Id: <9308171603.AA14074@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Subject: Local INS Status, Package#3.3
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1993 12:03:38 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23beta]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 3021      
Status: RO

Hi, netters,
The following is a list of local INS offices' status on LAD issues. 
The most recent reports, comments from LADnetters regarding to local INS 
offices are attached at the end of the list.  For those wish withhold their 
addresses please tell me. The default is posting the addresses for netters' 
reference. 

Date 08/17, 12:00PM
SUMMARY:
=======================================================================
              	STATUS	SOURCE
Albuquerque     accept	ssong@beta.lanl.gov

Arlington	accept	SWANG@american.edu

Atlanta         accept	liang@athena.cs.uga.edu

Buffalo         accept  V592XM8P@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu

Baltimore       accept	CHUANHE@enh.nist.gov
   
Boston          accept  wl@cfaitamp.harvard.edu

Chicago       	accept	shi6@oddjob.uchicago.edu

Charllote       accept	pguo@eos.ncsu.edu

Dallas      	accept	guo@bach.convex.com

Denver          accept	****@*****.****.**.***

Detroit         accept

El Paso         reject

Hawaii          accept

Houston       	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

Indianapolis    accept	xiawang@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu

Jacksonvile     accept	ZHEN@pine.circa.ufl.edu

Kansas City     accept	fengzou@matt.ksu.ksu.edu

Los Angeles     accept

Louisville      reject	D0JIAN01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu

Memphis         accept

Miami           accept	zhaoc@surf03.sci.fau.edu

Newark          reject	gu@UMDNJ.EDU

New York        accept	bail@rockvax.rockefeller.edu

Omaha           accept	TBC05@ISUVAX.IASTATE.EDU

Oklahoma City   accept	jchang@chemdept.chem.uoknor.edu

Pittsburgh    	accept	Bin_Luo@ius4.ius.cs.cmu.edu

Philadelphia    accept	***@***.***.EDU

Phoenix:	accept	ASSES@ACVAX.INRE.ASU.EDU

Portland        accept

Salt Lake City  accept	SHIBAI@PHYSC1.BYU.EDU

San Antonio	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

San Francisco   accept

Spokane         accept

St. Albans      accept	SGU@draco.rutgers.edu


NEWLY DETAILED REPORTS, COMMENTS:
============================================================
CONTENTS:
1. A letter about Newark INS and response from editor.

1.Newark:
---------
>From gu@UMDNJ.EDU  Tue Aug 17 07:35:09 1993

Hi Jonathan Shen: (shengj@acf2.nyu.edu)
   In your today's local INS office report, someone reported that the local
Newark office accepted lad's applications.
   I went to the Newark office this morning, the lady told me to mail the
application to eastern service center, they don't accept application in person.
I might go to the wrong place. Please could you clarify this matter?
Please provide more info on Newark INS.
Thank you very much.
Keep up the good work.


J. Gu
-------

Hi, Gu,
The person who provided the info didn't tell me more details and he wanted to
be anonymous so I can not give out his address. I guess you have to mail the
applications if the lady clerk told you to do so. A friend of mine in Rugters
mailed applications for his wife on Aug.2.

If anyone who has questions or suggestions about this package, or any new 
infomation,  he(she) is very welcome to mail me directly. Thank you all.

From shengj@acf2.nyu.edu  Tue Aug 17 17:00:02 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA00585); Tue, 17 Aug 93 17:00:07 CDT
Received: from acf2.NYU.EDU by spike.rice.edu (AA00575); Tue, 17 Aug 93 17:00:02 CDT
Received: by acf2.NYU.EDU (5.61/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
	id AA03814; Tue, 17 Aug 93 17:58:27 -0400
From: shengj@acf2.nyu.edu (shengj)
Message-Id: <9308172158.AA03814@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Subject: Local INS Status, Package#3.4
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1993 17:58:27 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23beta]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 3686      
Status: RO

Hi, netters,
The following is a list of local INS offices' status on LAD issues. 
The most recent reports, comments from LADnetters regarding to local INS 
offices are attached at the end of the list.  Readers are referred to 
previous posted packages for old detailed information. For those wish withhold 
their addresses please tell me. The default is posting the addresses for 
netters' reference. 

Date 08/17, 6:00PM
SUMMARY:
=======================================================================
              	STATUS	SOURCE
Albuquerque     accept	ssong@beta.lanl.gov

Arlington	accept	SWANG@american.edu

Atlanta         accept	liang@athena.cs.uga.edu

Buffalo         accept  V592XM8P@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu

Baltimore       accept	CHUANHE@enh.nist.gov
   
Boston          accept  wl@cfaitamp.harvard.edu

Chicago       	accept	shi6@oddjob.uchicago.edu

Charllote       accept	pguo@eos.ncsu.edu

Dallas      	accept	guo@bach.convex.com

Denver          accept	****@*****.****.**.***

Detroit         accept

El Paso         reject

Hawaii          accept

Houston       	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

Indianapolis    accept	xiawang@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu

Jacksonvile     accept	ZHEN@pine.circa.ufl.edu

Kansas City     accept	fengzou@matt.ksu.ksu.edu

Los Angeles     accept

Louisville      reject	D0JIAN01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu

Memphis         accept

Miami           accept	zhaoc@surf03.sci.fau.edu

Newark          reject	gu@UMDNJ.EDU

New York        accept	bail@rockvax.rockefeller.edu

Omaha           accept	TBC05@ISUVAX.IASTATE.EDU

Oklahoma City   accept	jchang@chemdept.chem.uoknor.edu

Pittsburgh    	accept	Bin_Luo@ius4.ius.cs.cmu.edu

Philadelphia    accept	***@***.***.EDU

Phoenix:	accept	ASSES@ACVAX.INRE.ASU.EDU

Portland        accept

Salt Lake City  accept	SHIBAI@PHYSC1.BYU.EDU

San Antonio	accept	liu@maestro.geo.utexas.edu

San Francisco   accept

Spokane         accept

St. Albans      accept	SGU@draco.rutgers.edu


NEWLY DETAILED REPORTS, COMMENTS:
============================================================
CONTENTS:
1. Louisville has abondoned its ridiculous policy on cerficates.
2. Newark INS started to accept LAD applications in person.
3. Some words from the editor of this package.

1. Louisville:
-------------
>From: EGM137@ukcc.uky.edu, Tue, 17 Aug 1993

Dear netters:
     The local INS in Louisville, Kentucky has lifted the requirement
of the certification by USA consulate and started to accept the LAD
application.
      Good luck everyone!

2. Newark:
---------
>From zwei@remus.rutgers.edu  Tue Aug 17 15:06:49 1993

I went to Newark INS this morning to submit my application. The lady
took the receipt of CSPA-principle for a while then came back. She
accepted all the materials without read, and put a stamp on the blue
I-737 showing that the spouse of the CSPA-principle has applied to
adjust PR on Aug 17, 9:47am. It took about 5 minutes to do that.
Hopefully, this information (not very good) is useful for somebody.

3. Words:
-------- 
>From zhul@gauss.casr.fau.edu  Tue Aug 17 13:33:08 1993

Dear netter:

I see the news report of LAD today. It said that Miami INS accepted the LAD
application. But the fact is that my friend (CSPA Princial) and his wife
(LAD) second time went to Miami INS last Thursday (Aug. 12) with the copy
of Regulation from Federal Register and his wife's application still was
rejected due to the marrige date (after 4/11/90). Please make correction.
Can anyone give some advises how to deal with this matter.

Thanks in advance.

Liping
--------
Hi, there,
In Local INS Status, Package3.*, only newly arrived infomation is posted.
Readers are referred to Package2.* for old detailed reports.

From snow@lucerne.rice.edu  Tue Aug 17 17:57:00 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA00713); Tue, 17 Aug 93 17:57:05 CDT
Received: from moe.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA00702); Tue, 17 Aug 93 17:57:00 CDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA07602); Tue, 17 Aug 93 17:55:25 CDT
Received: by lucerne.rice.edu (AA12004); Tue, 17 Aug 93 17:56:58 CDT
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <9308172256.AA12004@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: FAQ
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1993 17:56:57 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1945      
Status: RO

You can ignore this if you have read the previous FAQ.

Jun

-------------------------

This is the a simple FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) about LADnet.
 
 
1. What is LADnet?
 
LADnet is a network dedicated to solve problems related to 
LADs of CSPA principals. It is an email network.


2. How can I join and quit LADnet?

Send your subscription and signoff messages to 
pei%nit.pactel.com@zool.pactel.com    or   lads-request@lucerne.rice.edu


3. How can I post to LADnet?

Send your post, questions, answers, opinions, to lads@lucerne.rice.edu.
Your message will be forwarded to one of the LADnet committee members.
Messages will be regrouped according to their topics and then repackaged.
Packages will be posted regularly to LADnet. Contributions sent during
the night may be posted in the next morning.


4.  How many kinds of packages do we have now?

Currently, we have 5 kinds of packages.
1. Reporting Acceptance/Rejection of application and related information.
2. Questions concerning status such as J-1, J-2, F-2, DED, ect.
3. Questions about filling out forms and about marriage/birth certificates.
4. Misc and personal questions.
5. Special report.


5. What is lads@spike.rice.edu? Why do I get strange errors by posting to
   that account?

This account is reserved for committee members to post packages. Posting
to this account is restricted to committee members only. A filter is
implemented. Non-committee member postings will be rejected and
cause delay to your problems. So please do not use this account for
posting. Use lads@lucerne.rice.edu instead.


6. Since we are all gurus on anonymous ftp now, is there a site for us?

Yes, we've got it now. You can use anonymous ftp to retrieve all the
packages posted to LADnet by committee members. The site is spike.rice.edu,
IP is 128.42.4.157, directory is /lads.


6. What if the network has a problem?

In case of an emergency, please contact snow@lucerne.rice.edu.

From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Tue Aug 17 20:56:54 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA01542); Tue, 17 Aug 93 20:57:01 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA01532); Tue, 17 Aug 93 20:56:54 CDT
Message-Id: <9308180156.AA01532@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 9412; Tue, 17 Aug 93 20:57:09 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 3867; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 20:57:09 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 4985; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 21:54:45 -0400
Date:         Tue, 17 Aug 93 21:53:52 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      Forwarded Message from LCnet
To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO


=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Forwarded Message from LCnet                    ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================
Return-Path: <@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU:owner-ccnl@UTARLVM1.UTA.EDU>
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
          (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 0372; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 15:07:46 -0400
Date:         Tue, 17 Aug 1993 14:07:33 CDT
Reply-To:     Chengyang Liu <cliu@WUECON.WUSTL.EDU>
Sender:       Newsletter on Chinese Community <CCNL@UTARLVM1.BITNET>
>From:         Chengyang Liu <cliu@WUECON.WUSTL.EDU>
Subject:      The_Truth
Comments: To: ccnl@utarlvm1.uta.edu
To:           Multiple recipients of list CCNL <CCNL@UTARLVM1.BITNET>

Dear Chinese Students and Scholars:

We called Ms Rita Boie, of INS, this morning. Here is what we got from her.

  (1) A LAD will not be allowed to use EP2 unless the principal has
      filed under EP2.   All other LAds will file appliaction under EP3,
      soly from China's quota, not from quota allocated worldwide.
      EP3 has become current this month. If EP3 quota are not enough
      this year, some LADs will wait to use EP3 quota next year,
      and on and on.

  (2) An illegally-entered Chinese national can file under CSPA IF
      he came before 4/11/90 and has granted an advance parole and came
      back to US with the advance parole.



                                                 LC Working Committee
                                                 August 17, 1993

From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Wed Aug 18 10:31:48 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA09780); Wed, 18 Aug 93 10:31:55 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA09770); Wed, 18 Aug 93 10:31:48 CDT
Message-Id: <9308181531.AA09770@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 0347; Wed, 18 Aug 93 10:32:03 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 6376; Wed, 18 Aug 1993 10:32:03 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 3850; Wed, 18 Aug 1993 11:26:22 -0400
Date:         Wed, 18 Aug 93 11:07:11 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      Special report: LCnet newsrelease081793
To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO


=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Special report: LCnet newsrelease081793         ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 93 23:55:38 CDT
>From: cliu@wuecon.wustl.edu (Chengyang Liu)
Message-Id: <9308180455.AA25204@wuecon.wustl.edu>
To: DONG%RADPH6.DECNET@relay.the.net, JCHENG@uoft02.utoledo.edu,
        LAHAMER@vunuc1.phy.Vanderbilt.Edu, LHGCC@CUNYVM.bitnet,
        YWU%OPUS@cutter.mco.edu, chu@earth.uwu.edu, deng@pangea.Stanford.EDU,
        h6wl@psuorvm.cc.pdx.edu, juhao@mosaic.uncc.edu, li@safety.srl.ford.com,
        xu@polecat.Uwyo.EDU, zeitler@stealth.poly.edu
Subject: LCN_News_release081793


+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                                                                           |
|                           WE CAME AFTER 04/11/90                          |
|                                  NETWORK                                  |
|                                                                           |
|                              August 17th, 1993                            |
|                                                                           |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+



			TABLE OF CONTENTS
	================================================
	1. News from INS
	2. Information on EP2, EP3 and CSPA's Effects
        3. Part of CND's News on LAD Issue
	================================================


============================================================================
1. News from INS
============================================================================

  Mr Shuren Zhang called Ms Rita Boie, of INS, this morning. Here is what he
got from her.

  (1) A LAD will not be allowed to use EP2 unless the principal has
      filed under EP2.   All other LAds will file appliaction under EP3,
      soly from China's quota, not from quota allocated worldwide.
      EP3 has become current this month. If EP3 quota are not enough
      this year, some LADs will wait to use EP3 quota next year,
      and on and on.

  (2) An illegally-entered Chinese national  can file under CSPA IF
      he came before 4/11/90 and has granted an advance parole and came
      back to US with the advance parole.

                                                      LC Working Committee


===========================================================================
2. Information on EP2, EP3 and CSPA's Effects on LCs
===========================================================================

(1) Message from a LCnet Reader

Editors:

I got some important facts about EP2 and EP3 and the negtive effects of
CSPA on us LCs:

An outstanding applicant applied for a job in a big company in USA.
He was refused because the company thought it's really hard to apply for GC
for him now. The job was an assistant research staff.
So his GC would  be from EP3. Therefore the company felt it's almost impossible
to apply GC for Chinese employees. The company has refused all applicants
from PRC without GC.

I was told that job offers from small companies often involve EP3, not EP2.

Application for CSPA is available till 7/1/1994. So a lot of people with their
EP immigration application in progress generally stay and wait until next year
to apply for CSPA. An immigration attorney said that EP2 will not be current
in 18 months. People who have applied EP GC will wait until next year to apply
for CSPA. They do not withdaw the EP GC application. Some one told me that they
can save tax-paying this year in this way.

Conclusion: CSPA and implementation of LAD issue makes LC feel the defect
already and MORE Serious than we expected.

Another non-refugee Chinese Student
...................................................

(2) A Post from soc.culture.china

Editors' note: This article was written by an activist working for LATE-
ARRIVING-DEPENDENTs. The opinions expressed here have nothing to do with
the LC Working Committee.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Illegal Immigrants and CSPA

Q: Why should we push lads in to world quota?
A: To speed up lads application for PR;
   To save China quota for LC.
Q: How about to restrict lads in certain China's categories so that LC will
   not be hurt?
A: You never know which categories LC will use;
   You can not regulate which categories Lads should apply.
Q: By using EB3 only, LC will not be hurt, it that true?
A: No.
   To qualify for a PR under Employement Based Categories, you must have a Job.
   The job has to meet certain requiremnts:
   1) Salary; 2);Qualification of the applicant for that job;
   3) no USC or PR with that qualification can be found;
   4) the boss is willing to sponsor you.
   Say, you see a Ad. in a paper. It requires M.S., offers 3k. After fierce
   competition, you get the job, and you boss is willing to sponsor you.
   You think you meet all the above, and file for PR under EB2. You are sure
   that your American dream comes true.
   Well. INS finds out, with 2), the guideline of INS says the minimum salary
   acceptable for USC and PR is 4k, that is why you get the offer
   (unfortunately, that is ussualy true). So your PR application is rejected.
   Then you are left with two choices (a) increase 1) to 4k, (b) lower 2) to
   B.S. By doing 1), the new ad. attractes 400 USC and PR applicants, so you
   are out of the game; or, you pay tax for 4k income while your salary is
   still 3k. (you have to do so until you get your PR). Then doing 2) is the
   best choice. At this time, you find EB3 is full of lads. You must wait 4
   years for your turn under EB3, but your H-1 expires in 3 years and you
   can not extend it any more. So both EB2 and EB3 are no good for you and
   you are lossing time. Then you find a girl/boy who agrees to marry you
   and help you out. At this point, you suddenly find out, the family based
   category are full of lads too. You are queued for 4 years. And
   unfortunately, your marriage does not last that long. Is that too late
   for you to find out the truth and real impact of lads problem?
If you have read through World Journal's Immigration Section for years and
have friends who went through PR process, you will know it is not so simple
and you might think twice now.

Some major developments will screw you up even worse.

1) Illegal immigrants under CSPA may be able to apply PR.
   (see recent reports on World Journal)
2) Illegal immigrants came after 4/11/90 may convince INS they came before
   that date and INS is hopelessly incapable of screening them out.
3) People from other countries can claim they are PRC nationals under CSPA.
4) Sluggish economy prevents you from finding a decent job.
5) There are many other interest groups who want to utilize CSPA to make big
   bucks. American Immigration Lawyers Association is eager to help illegal
   immigrants to apply under CSPA. Estimated tens of thousands illegal
   immigrants means billions of dollars, and that is good for them.
6) There are many other interest groups who want to keep lads out of
   world-quota to save for their own ethnic groups.
7) etc. etc...

With lads jammed in China's quota, you will have to  ....  Scared?

A checklist of what you can do

1) Kill CSPA -----------------------------> Too late. It is the law.          No
2) Kick lads out of the game -------------> Impossible. It is against the law.No
3) Jump into the race now ----------------> Impossible if you are in school.  No
4) Wait until you graduate ---------------> Too late to do anything.          No
5) Support IFCSS to lobby for world-quota-> It is up to you                  Yes
6) Persuade American Immigration Lawyers Association to lobby for world-quota.
   That means billions of dollars for them.---> It is up to you              Yes

Wake up, my LC brothers and sisters! Support IFCSS and lads network to push
for world quota!

The above is for your information only.
The author assumes no legal responsiblilities about the accuracy and the
reliability of any kind for the information provided. Please consult your
lawyer and use your own discretion before you use the information printed
in this package to make decision(s) on related matter.

Mi Mi



===========================================================================
3. Part of CND's News on LAD Issue
===========================================================================

Editors' note:
We are enclosing a part of CND's news on LAD issue. As the editors of
LCnet and members of LC Working Committee, we appeal for the attention
of IFCSS and some ECs: Don't go too far!!!!


                           CND (US Regional)
Information Exchange (XIV): About Preparing to Apply for U.S. PR Under CSPA
                         Saturday, June 26, 1993

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Zhao Haiching Meets White House Officials on CSPA Regulations;
   Background Information on Ineligible Dependents and Quota Issues .... 125
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From: "Ying Q. Ji" <MFACSS@VX.CIS.UMN.EDU> Fri, 25 Jun 1993 19:18:37
Abridged by CND-US

           Dr. Zhao Meeting in White House on INS Regulations

[..... much deleted]
IMMIGRATION BACKLASH

We are not the only group upset with the implement. The American Immigration
Lawyers Association has indicated they may sue the Justice Department. They
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
are upset that visa numbers that would otherwise go to the dependents of
other immigrant groups will now go to Chinese nationals.  During the debate
on the legislation, they were assured this would not happen.

In addition, there are reports that other organizations that represent other
nationalities may seek go back to the Congress and ask for legislative
amendments to reverse the implementing regulations.  This could adversely
impact upon the gains we have received under the Protection Act.

In addition, the political climate in the U.S. right now towards immigration
is bad.  The situation for Chinese nationals is particularly worse because
of widespread recent publicity on Chinese illegal boat people. The press
has focused on this illegal immigrant group.  Some people in the U.S.
political circle even purposely link the boat people with our Act.  For
example, there are TV commentators who publicly accuse Nancy Pelosi to pass
legislation to grant 80,000 illegal Chinese people permanent residence.  This
situation certainly hindered our ability to push for better regulations and
it will also negatively impact on many eligible Chinese nationals in their
applications.

As a result, we feel it is very important to get everyone in the U.S. covered
as soon as possible.  Events beyond our control could cause unforeseen
consequences in the future.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Editors' note:
Please distribute this news-release to your LC friends, or tell them the
sign on address (inside the box below). Thank you.

      +=========================================================+
      |     Editor-in-Chief: Enhua He, New York University      |
      |     Executive Editors: Min Gao, Syracuse University     |
      |                        Shuren Zhang, U of Pennsylvania  |
      |     Comments and Posts: cliu@wuecon.wustl.edu           |
      |     Sign on/off: mgao@suvm.syr.edu                      |
      +=========================================================+

From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Wed Aug 18 11:50:24 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA09898); Wed, 18 Aug 93 11:50:30 CDT
Received: from moe.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA09888); Wed, 18 Aug 93 11:50:24 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA14901); Wed, 18 Aug 93 11:47:58 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA18709; Wed, 18 Aug 93 12:46:04 EDT
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 93 12:37:42 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308181637.AA07049@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: Reader's letter
Status: RO

>From jzhao@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu  Wed Aug 18 03:00:00 1993
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for yhl@cmliris) id AA11502; Wed, 18 Aug 93 03:08:11 EDT
Received: by uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (4.1/Sun690)
	id AA02037; Tue, 17 Aug 93 21:08:07 HST
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 93 21:08:06 HST
>From: Jianhua Zhao <jzhao@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu>
To: yhl%cmliris@harvard (Yonghong Li)
Subject: Re: Reader's Letter
In-Reply-To: Your message of Sun, 15 Aug 93 12:40:35 -0400
Message-Id: <CMM.0.90.2.745657686.jzhao@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu>
Status: R

Hi, Friedn:
	Saw your message about birth cirtificate. Trying to use the copy of
Chinese "Hu (4) Kou (3) Bu (4)" as evidence and notary it here. By this way
in Hawaii, here, it worked.
good luck.



From snow@lucerne.rice.edu  Wed Aug 18 14:31:57 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA10080); Wed, 18 Aug 93 14:32:02 CDT
Received: from moe.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA10070); Wed, 18 Aug 93 14:31:57 CDT
Received: from lucerne.rice.edu by moe.rice.edu (AA17461); Wed, 18 Aug 93 14:30:23 CDT
Received: by lucerne.rice.edu (AA15560); Wed, 18 Aug 93 14:31:58 CDT
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <9308181931.AA15560@lucerne.rice.edu>
Subject: FAQ
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1993 14:31:57 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1898      
Status: RO

We have 1018 netters now.

Jun

------


This is the a simple FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) about LADnet.
 
 
1. What is LADnet?
 
LADnet is a network dedicated to solve problems related to 
LADs of CSPA principals. It is an email network.


2. How can I join and quit LADnet?

Send your subscription and signoff messages to 
pei%nit.pactel.com@zool.pactel.com    or   lads-request@lucerne.rice.edu


3. How can I post to LADnet?

Send your post, questions, answers, opinions, to lads@lucerne.rice.edu.
Your message will be forwarded to one of the LADnet committee members.
Messages will be regrouped according to their topics and then repackaged.
Packages will be posted regularly to LADnet. Contributions sent during
the night may be posted in the next morning.


4.  How many kinds of packages do we have now?

Currently, we have 5 kinds of packages.
1. Reporting Acceptance/Rejection of application and related information.
2. Questions concerning status such as J-1, J-2, F-2, DED, ect.
3. Questions about filling out forms and about marriage/birth certificates.
4. Misc and personal questions.
5. Special report.


5. What is lads@spike.rice.edu? Why do I get strange errors by posting to
   that account?

This account is reserved for committee members to post packages. Posting
to this account is restricted to committee members only. A filter is
implemented. Non-committee member postings will be rejected and
cause delay to your problems. So please do not use this account for
posting. Use lads@lucerne.rice.edu instead.


6. Since we are all gurus on anonymous ftp now, is there a site for us?

Yes, we've got it now. You can use anonymous ftp to retrieve all the
packages posted to LADnet by committee members. The site is spike.rice.edu,
IP is 128.42.4.157, directory is /lads.


6. What if the network has a problem?

In case of an emergency, please contact snow@lucerne.rice.edu.

From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu  Thu Aug 19 09:21:13 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA17454); Thu, 19 Aug 93 09:21:22 CDT
Received: from harvard.harvard.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA17444); Thu, 19 Aug 93 09:21:13 CDT
Received: by harvard.harvard.edu (5.54/a0.25)
	(for lads@spike.rice.edu) id AA06232; Thu, 19 Aug 93 10:19:28 EDT
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 93 10:11:11 -0400
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
Message-Id: <9308191411.AA12102@cmliris>
To: lads@spike.rice.edu
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Subject: How to ftp LAD-Q&A
Cc: sguo@draco.rutgers.edu, my@math.luc.edu
Status: RO

Hi, netters,
	I received many letters about using ftp. Here is a help file from CND.
You can go to the end of the file and read "Question (6)", which is a step-by-setp help on "ftp LAD-Q&A". 
	To use ftp, you need to have an access to internet.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              CND-CM Help File
			     How to FTP a File

Table of Contents: 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. What is anonymous FTP ............................................  08
2. How to get files from anonymous FTP ..............................  60
3. Some common formats in anonymous FTP .............................  51
4. Some frequently asked questions ..................................  54
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. What is anonymous FTP? 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

FTP stands for File Transfer Protocol.  It  is a subsystem to allow user to
transfer file between two  remote  systems.    On  internet, there are many
public file servers that archive  data  files and free/shareware of various
kinds. People can login these accounts as 'anonymous' (anonymous must be in
lower case for those servers on  unix system) and retrieve files from these
'anonymous' accounts. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. How to use anonymous FTP
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Users on internet systems (such  as  .edu,  .ca, gov, .se ,.ch,.fi etc) can
access anonymous  file  server  via  FTP.  Many  bitnet  nodes  are also on
internet at the same time. To  see  if you have internet access, type 'ftp'
or 'telnet' at system prompt, if you get a system message stating that your
command is wrong, then you  probably  don't  have ftp access, otherwise you
will be in ftp subsystem.

To login anonymous server on a  remote  machine, type in the following line
at your system prompt: 
ftp Host name
Example: To connect to anonymous ftp at ahkcus.org, type
ftp ahkcus.org  (or ftp 192.55.187.25)
After connecting to remote system, enter 
user anonymous 
On some systems, user are automatically prompted. In that case, just type 
anonymous
Then you will be prompted for  password.  You can enter your e-mail address
as password. 

A typical ftp session looks like this:

ftp ahkcus.org        (this command connect you to ahkcus.org)
user anonymous        (login anonymous account )
anything              (enter something as pw, your user id is preferred)
dir                   (list available directories and files)
cd gb/cnd-cm          (change directory to gb/cnd-cm subdir)
binary                (specify binary mode)
get cm9201a.gb        (retrieve file cm9201a.gb in binary mode)
quit                  (quit ftp session, return to your local system)

The first command  you  use  after  login  is  usually  'dir'. You use this
command to list available directories and files. Files in anonymous ftp are
organized in different directories. For example, all GB files in ahkcus.org
are  in  gb/  directory.   Under   gb/   directory,  there  are  some  more
subdirctories, one is gb/cnd-cm/ where  cnd-cm  past  issues in GB code are
archived. another is gb/poem/ where Chinese  poems  in GB are stored. cd ..
is the command that get you  up  one  level in the directory structure. For
example, if you are currently in  src/pc/  dirctory,  cd .. will let you go
back to src/. 

The command to retrieve files is 'get'  or 'mget'. For example, if you want
to get CMindx91.gb of cnd-cm. type the following in gb/cnd-cm directory:
bin
get CMindx91.gb
Note that file name should be typed in exactly the same way as it is listed
in the directory. Unix system is CASE SENSITIVE.

If the file is text(ASCII) file, you don't need to specify the transmission
mode(the default is ascii). But if the  files you are going to retrieve are
binary ones such as  .exe,  .gb,  .zip,  .tar.Z,  .gif,  you should issue a
command 'binary' before getting the file.  If  you  want to get a number of
files, you may use mget. Example:
mget byx*.exe  
This command will get  you  all  byx  files  in src/pc/BYX/ subdirectory at
ahkcus.org.

The last command in a ftp  session  is  'quit'. It will disconnect you from
remote machine.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Some common formats in public domain
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

To save diskspace and transfer  time,    most files in anonymous ftp server
are compressed in certain way. Here are some common compression format:

(1)ZIP format

This is the most common one for  PC.    You need  unzip utility to retrieve
files. The one we provided in  ahkcus.org is pkunzip.exe. pkunzip.exe is in
the self-extracting package pk110eu.exe.  For self-extracting packages, you
don't need any utilities to unarchive them.  Just type the file name at the
DOS prompt, files in  the  package  will be extracted automatically. BYX1.1
packages in ahkcus.org are self-extracting ones.

There are also  zip/unzip  utilities  for  unix  and  vms systems. They are
available in src/unix/ and  src/vms/  at  ahkcus.org.  You  can use them to
unzip files on your mainframe machines.

(2)Unix Compressed files:

Unix compressed file has an  extension  '.Z'. For example, cnd-g archive in
ahkcus.org  is  .Z  compressed.  Those   files    can  be  uncompressed  by
'uncompress' command on Unix. '.tar.Z'  is compressed unix tape archive. To
extract files from such an  archive  file, uncompress first, then untar the
'.tar' file. Example:
uncompress gb2ps.tar.Z
tar -xf gb2ps.tar

There are also unix compression  utilities  for vms system. compress.exe in
src/vms directory is one of them.  So you can uncompress  a unix .Z file on
a VMS system too. 

(3)Compression on Mac:

Mac files in  anonymous  ftp  often  have  .sit  or  sit.hqx extensions. To
uncompress/unarchive these files, use StuffIt and Binhex. Details are given
in MacHelp in src/Mac directory at ahkcus.org.

(4)Other formats:

The other compression formats  often  seen  in  anonymous servers are .lzh,
.arc, .zoo. 

HXWZ uses extension .gb to  indicate  GB  coded  Chinese.  If a file has an
extension BIG or BIG5, it is BIG5 coded Chinese. 

GIF stands for Graphic Interchange Format. xxxx.gif's are pictures.  

All these compressed files such  as  .zip,  .Z, .lzh, .sit are binary ones.
They should be transferred in  binary  mode.  .gif and .exe are also binary
files. .hqx, uue, and .txt are  text  files.  They  should be transfered in 
ascii mode. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Frequently asked questions:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1)I got a message 'xxx host unknown', what should I do?

A: A: Try IP(Internet Protocal) numbers. eg,
ftp 192.55.187.25

(2)I got a message 'network unreachable', what should I do?

A: Wait until  the  network  is  backup,  or  try  other anonymous ftp that
archive the same files you wanted.

(3)My system does not allow the  file  name  such as gb2ps.tar.Z. How can I
get files with this kind of names to my system?

On some system(eg, VMS), xxx.tar.Z  is  not a valid filename. When fetching
these .tar.Z file, change .tar.Z to .tar_z. For example:
get HXWZ45_1.tar.Z HXWZ45_1.tar_z
The remote file  HXWZ41_1.tar.Z  will  be  saved  as HXWZ45_1.tar_z on your
local disk.

(4)I just downloaded program xxx, but when  I run it, it simply hang my PC.
What's the problem? 

Most probably you forgot to use binary mode during either ftp or mainframe
to pc downloading. The file is corrupted.

(5)I got a message saying  "program  too large  for the memmory" When I run
program xxx on my PC?

Perhaps it's the same problem as in (4).

(4)Are there any other ftp servers that archive Chinese software?

Yes. There are quite a few. For example:
   blackbox.hacc.washington.edu [128.95.200.1]
   crl.nmsu.edu [128.123.1.1.4]
   cs.purdue.edu [128.10.2.1]
   ftphost.cac.washington.edu [128.95.112.1]
   hanauma.stanford.edu [36.51.0.16]

(5)Where can I get a list of  anonymous ftp sites? How can I search certain
program available on internet?

You can use Internet anonymous FTP database to get various useful info. To
access those "Archie" servers, login as archive  (by telnet or rlogin)

telnet archie.mcgill.ca or 132.206.2.3 (Can./USA)
telnet archie.funet.fi or 128.214.6.100 (Finland)
telnet archie.au or 128.184.1.4 (Aussie/NZ)
telnet archie.sura.net or 128.167.254.179

You can get help on how to use archive after login. If you know a program's
name, but don't know where it is available, archive can help you to locate
it on interenet.

(6)Where can I get the information packages on LAD network?

This is a step-by-step help. Anything in "   " is typed by yourself and the others
are response from the computer. Different computer may give you a different response.

%"ftp spike.rice.edu <return>"

Connected to spike.rice.edu.
220 spike FTP server (Version 6.25 Mon Aug 9 21:46:38 CDT 1993) ready. 
Name (spike.rice.edu:yhl): "anonymous <return>"

Password:"<return>"

230-Next time please use your e-mail address as your password
230-        for example: joe@cmliris.harvard.edu
230-Welcome! Network is fantastic, isn't it?
230-     For Univ. of Sci. & Tech. alumni address   ---> 852
230-     For Chinese novels and articles in GB      ---> Chinese
230-     For Late-Arrival-Dependent issues          ---> lads
230-This site may be shutdown without notice. Get what you want and keep them.
230-
230 Guest login ok, access restrictions apply.
Remote system type is UNIX.
Using binary mode to transfer files.

ftp>"ls -l"
200 PORT command successful.
150 Opening ASCII mode data connection for /bin/ls.
total 8
drwxr-xr-x  2 snow     misc          512 Aug 11 18:15 852
drwxr-xr-x  6 snow     misc          512 Aug 10 10:32 Chinese
drwxr-xr-x  2 root     wheel         512 Apr 21 10:42 bin
dr-xr-xr-x  2 root     wheel         512 Apr 21 10:40 dev
drwxr-xr-x  2 root     wheel         512 Aug  9 23:00 etc
drwxr-xr-x  2 root     wheel         512 Aug  9 23:12 incoming
drwxr-xr-x  2 snow     misc          512 Aug 13 23:56 lads
drwxr-xr-x  4 root     wheel         512 Nov 18  1992 usr
226 Transfer complete.

ftp>"cd lads"
250-This is an archive for packages posted to LADnet by LADnet committee.
250-
250- 9308lads.log    =>  auto-appended when a committee member posts a package.
250- Question.Answer =>  updated daily by committee members.
250- Special.*       =>  contains important special report.
250- faq             =>  updated whenever there is a change.
250-
250 CWD command successful.

ftp>"ls -l"
200 PORT command successful.
150 Opening ASCII mode data connection for /bin/ls.
total 485
-rw-r--r--  1 snow     misc          317 Aug 14 00:05 .message
-rw-rw-r--  1 snow     wheel      448765 Aug 18 14:43 9308lads.log
-rw-r--r--  1 snow     misc        26832 Aug 12 21:27 Question.Answer
-rw-r--r--  1 snow     misc         6652 Aug 13 23:55 Special.1
-rw-r--r--  1 snow     misc         1858 Aug 12 21:34 faq
226 Transfer complete.

ftp>"get Question.Answer"
local: Question.Answer remote: Question.Answer
200 PORT command successful.
150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for Question.Answer (26832 bytes).
226 Transfer complete.
26832 bytes received in 0.64 seconds (40.94 Kbytes/s)

ftp>"bye"
221 Goodbye.
%

------ now your are all done, use "more Question.Answer" to read the file -------------

---------------------<< End of Help File >>-------------------------------



From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Thu Aug 19 10:18:20 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA17545); Thu, 19 Aug 93 10:18:25 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA17535); Thu, 19 Aug 93 10:18:20 CDT
Message-Id: <9308191518.AA17535@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 3148; Thu, 19 Aug 93 10:18:35 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 0244; Thu, 19 Aug 1993 10:18:34 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 9266; Thu, 19 Aug 1993 11:16:12 -0400
Date:         Thu, 19 Aug 93 11:15:22 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      IFCSS NR5038
To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.
Status: RO


=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== IFCSS NR5038                                    ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================
Return-Path: <@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU:pbs-l@IFCSS.ORG>
Received: from CUNYVM (NJE origin SMTP@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (LMail
          V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 8139; Thu, 19 Aug 1993 10:56:29 -0400
Received: from ifcss.org by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP;
   Thu, 19 Aug 93 10:56:26 EDT
Received: from  ([127.0.0.1]) by ifcss.org (4.1/IFCSS-Mailer)
        id AA18035; Thu, 19 Aug 93 09:56:16 CDT
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 93 09:56:15 CDT
Errors-To: hq@ifcss.org
Message-Id: <199308191451.AA08898@rac1.wam.umd.edu>
Comment:  IFCSS Personal Broadcasting System
Originator: pbs-l@ifcss.org
Errors-To: hq@ifcss.org
Reply-To: <pbs-l@ifcss.org>
Sender: pbs-l@ifcss.org
Version: 5.5 -- Copyright (c) 1991/92, Anastasios Kotsikonas
>From: IFCSS HQ <ifcss@wam.umd.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <pbs-l@ifcss.org>
Subject: Current Status of CSPA and Visa Numbers for China (IFCSS HQ NR 5038)

**************************************************************
IFCSS Headquater News Release No. 5038            Aug 18, 1993
**************************************************************
Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars (IFCSS)
   733 15th Street, N.W., Suite 440, Washington, D.C.20005
         Tel. (202)347-0017  Fax: (202)347-0018
                Email: ifcss@wam.umd.edu



       Current Status of CSPA and Visa Numbers for China
       =================================================



     The past weeks have witnessed some confusion over CSPA, which
was due in part to inadequate communication. While some
beneficiaries complained about IFCSS' lack of enthusiasm in further
pursuing the issue, some new-comers (arriving after April 11, 1990)
accused IFCSS of promoting the interests of the early-arriving
students at their expenses. After contacting some representatives
on both sides, IFCSS HQ is convinced that there is no inherent
conflict of interests between the two groups. We reaffirms our
commitment to serving the whole CSS community and we hope that you
will help achieve this end by letting us know exactly what you want
to know and what your concerns are.

     The following information is provided as part of the effort to
dispel confusion and misunderstanding.

     The focus of contention seems to be late-arriving dependents
(LADs). We want to clarify that IFCSS has NEVER lobbied to include
LADs in the employment-based 3rd preference; the U.S. Immigration
Law provides that if the principal files under the 3rd preference,
his/her dependents are eligible to adjust their status using visa
numbers in the same category. In fact, we have recommended that
LADs be allowed to use worldwide quota. Having failed to achieve
that, we asked that they be allowed to adjust their status without
going to a third country. And we partly succeeded in this attempt.

     As for the overall impact of the CSPA on future China quotas,
the current information is not enough to make a precise assessment,
but we can safely predict that after CSPA, the waiting period for
applicants under China's employment-based 3rd preference should be
shorter rather than longer. Back in July, the cutoff date for the
3rd preference was October, 1993; by August, the backlog has
disappeared, which means that visa numbers have become available
for everyone who has applied for 3rd preference through normal
channels.

          We have no way to find out how many late-arriving
dependents have applied, since their applications are filed with
local offices and got mixed up with other applications. However,
according to our survey, the ratio between late-arriving dependents
and principals plus early-arriving dependents are 1:5. Therefore,
the total number of late-arriving dependents should be around
8,000. About half of these dependents are not eligible to file
under the employment-based 3rd preference, because the current
regulations provide that only those who have continuously
maintained lawful status are eligible to apply. So the actual
number of late-arriving dependents who apply should be around
4,000. It is true that applications are still coming in under CSPA,
and yet we should be aware that not all those who have filed will
be approved.

     There was an error in IFCSS News Release No.5033. Late-
arriving dependents are using China's quota, not the worldwide
quota. The wrong information was obtained from an INS officer. At
the time, it happened that both Heping Shi, IFCSS officer in charge
of the CSPA, and Ms. Rita Boie, who is in charge of drafting the
regulations, were out of town. We do apologize for the error.

     To help assess the impact of CSPA on China's employment-based
visa numbers, we contacted Immigrant Visa Control division at
Department of State. We were told that for both August and
September, 1,500 visa numbers would be allocated. A cut-off date
will be set in October or late September, depending on how many
applications INS will process in August and early September. The
next fiscal year starts on Oct. 1, 1993 and ends on September 30,
1994. It is impossible to predict how many visa numbers will be
made available to China's employment-based 3rd preference, for visa
numbers in different categories can roll over to one another. The
total number for China (all categories) for the current fiscal year
is 27,552, but the number for next fiscal year has not been
determined.

     We understand that some new-comers are concerned with the
reports that some LADs are applying under employment-based 2nd
preference and illegal immigrants are also eligible to apply under
the CSPA if they reenter on advanced parole. We wish to point out
that since all the CSPA principals are using the 3rd, it is
impossible for their dependents to have derivative benefits using
the 2nd. Some students must have confused family-based 2nd, for
which LADs are eligible, with employment-based 2nd. As for the
illegal immigrants, INS CSPA Wire #5, which was released on August
13, contained the following instruction:

     "It is clear from the language of the Executive Order that it
     was intended to protect Chinese students and scholars. The
     mandate to facilitate travel was out of concern for the
     necessity of certain of these students and scholars to travel
     abroad in connection with their academic pursuits. It is
     equally clear that the Executive Order's reference to travel
     facilitation was not intended to provide legitimate
     immigration status to those who did not already have such
     status."

     IFCSS is prepared to set up a work committee to address the
concerns of those who are not covered under the CSPA. It is also
willing to provide financial as well as human resource support for
any project that advances the interests of the new-comers. We also
encourage local Chinese student organizations help channel the
opinions of new-comers. Only by maintaining solidarity can we
protect and promote our interests.


*********************************************************************
*                 IFCSS Headquarters Office                         *
*-------------------------------------------------------------------*
* President:      Lin Changsheng        Vice President:  Shi Heping *
*-------------------------------------------------------------------*
* PBS-L is IFCSS's news distribution list for individuals. To sign  *
* on or off from the list, please send email to listserv@ifcss.org  *
* leave the subject line open and put in the mail body:             *
*    (For signing on)      sub PBS-L last name first name           *
*    (For signing off)     unsub PBS-L last name first name         *
* For more information about IFCSS, write to ifcss-info@ifcss.org   *
*********************************************************************

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Sat Aug 21 00:08:19 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA14226); Sat, 21 Aug 93 00:08:19 CDT
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 93 00:08:19 CDT
Message-Id: <9308210507.AA23307@lucerne.rice.edu>
Errors-To: listm@lucerne.rice.edu
Reply-To: snow@lucerne.rice.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
To: lads-log
Subject: Please pay attention
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Status: RO

	As more and more people have already filed their applications,
the network is not as active as before. The committee is now working on
pushing better solution for quota allocation, etc. Some comitttee members
are keeping close contact with IFCSS and Dr. Zhao, Haiqing. Please
pay attention to the posts in the next several days.


Jun

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Sat Aug 21 12:34:29 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA19946); Sat, 21 Aug 93 12:34:29 CDT
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 93 12:34:28 CDT
Message-Id: <9308211733.AA23952@lucerne.rice.edu>
Errors-To: listm@lucerne.rice.edu
Reply-To: LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject:      Special Report
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Special Reportl infor from  LAD-network         ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================
Dear Lads-netters:

Since most of lads have filed their application forms, fewer and fewer postings
are seen on this net. While most lads are resuming their normal routine lives,
the lads problem is still far from being solved. We still have the following:

	(1) Visa quota allocation.
	(2) DED dependents
	(3) Voluntary departure program.
	(4) People who entered without inspection.

Although aforementioned problems are far more complicated than the information
sharing problems, and the lads-net Committee is a volunteer group which has
limited resources and manpower, the lads-net Committee, however, is resolved to
serve the whole lads community on this matter.

The 5th IFCSS is mainly composed of new comer students. Inevitably, this
landslide change brings policy changes. As post-CSPA era begins, IFCSS strives
to serve the new comers community, which had been paid little attention by
previous IFCSS terms. By no way, we are assured, the early comers will be
forgotten. Instead, the 5th IFCSS vows to serve the CSS community as a whole.
Since new comers are not protected by CSPA, certainly they need more attention
and help from IFCSS.

We have noticed that a newly founded new comers group, Late Comer Working
Committee, or New Comer's Organization (NCO), has actively participated in
the current CSPA and IFCSS affair. By contacting the Chairman of NCO, and
friendly communication with his staff, we have established a very friendly
relationship with them, and possible collaboration in the future.

The main conflict, however, do exist. As lads are still subject to
China quota, the estimated 8000 lads of CSS community will jam China's
EB3 and FB2 categories for years. While most new comer students are going
to use these two categories, the serious backlog does hinder their efforts
to obtain the permanent residency. As for most lads, the prospective
long waiting period is not so happy to accept. Besides, there are still
other problems left unsolved which further complicate the plight of both
new comer students an lads.

New development to implement CSPA:

Illegally entered Chinese may be able to apply under CSPA:
==================begin=====================================
We called Ms Rita Boie, of INS, this morning. Here is what we got from her.

  (1) A LAD will not be allowed to use EP2 unless the principal has
      filed under EP2.   All other Lads will file application under EP3,
      solely from China's quota, not from quota allocated worldwide.
      EP3 has become current this month. If EP3 quota are not enough
      this year, some Lads will wait to use EP3 quota next year,
      and on and on.

  (2) An illegally-entered Chinese national can file under CSPA IF
      he came before 4/11/90 and has granted an advance parole and came
      back to US with the advance parole.

                                                 LC Working Committee
                                                 August 17, 1993
=================end====================================================

The impact of this policy change, will add substantially to the pool
of existing CSS-lads with unspecified number of IIer-lads. This group
of lads will be queued ahead of most new comer students.

As Mi Mi, a member of lads-net Committee, wrote to Ms. Wang Jing, Chair
of Infor & Survey Committee of IFCSS Council:
================= begin====================================================
Ms. Wang Jing

Hi. I, Mi Mi, from lads-net fully support your proposal on NCO.
As matter of fact, I had seen a lot of confusion and fighting on the net
when LCnet was connected with Yeh Shannon. As we lads-net saw the IFCSS
lost its steam to push CSPA implementation further, all of us lads were
somewhat disappointed. When we learnt that Liu Chengyan was invited to
attend IFCSS Teleconference last week, we decided to take a step forward.
Needless to say, all of us lads-netters and committee members appreciate
the tremendous efforts to achieve CSPA and its implementation. Whatever
decided by IFCSS for post-CSPA policy change is understandable. We as
beneficiaries of past IFCSS efforts can not ask more, otherwise we are
too greedy and selfish. To our LC brothers and sisters, we the lads
committee firmly believe, that communication and cooperation, mutual
understanding and solidarity are what we want. After one week
communication, we get very positive response from our LCnet committee.

As matter of fact, many ECers are paying their attention to somewhere
else. While lads are located in China's quota, and will be possibly
jamming  China's quota for many years to come, their principals are
not so much concerned about the waiting period. As one of my friends
pointed out, his wife can wait 6 year until her H-1 visa expires. During
that time, he probably gets citizenship, and in no way he should panic.
Some minor children can wait even longer. My daughter is 9. My only
concern is she gets her GC when she is ready for college. That is
almost ten years later. Of course some elder children are closer to
college and they are worried. But the population is quite small. So the
most urgent problem is for LCs, not for lads.

As matter of fact, passing another CSPA is almost impossible. What we
can do is to make room for LC by removing lads from China quota.
As the new interpretation made clear by Madam Rita Boie, IIers with
Advanced Parole can apply under CSPA. Further, the possibility of
allowing IIers with only Work Permits, even without any thing may be
allowed to apply also, still exists. With most CSS lads have filed already,
their lads inevitably have gotten more favorable priority dates
then anyone else, i.e., they are queued much ahead of the others.
So the policy change does not effect CSS lads too much, unless for
someone who is still in China. But the impact on the LC is imminent.
Those IIer lads will compete with LC, worse, be queued ahead of them.
When the spirit of CSPA is humanitarian and protection, it will be
ridiculous and self-destructive for IFCSS to oppose the inclusion
of these IIers. The best and only strategy for IFCSS, is to work
toward world quota.

I think, this point, as a major task aimed at helping our LC
brothers and sisters, should be included in your resolution.

Sincerely yours,

Mi Mi

Member of
Lads-net Committee
======================= end ========================

As an active entity which is still working on CSPA,
we have tried to communicate with Dr. Zhao and his NCCA.

As Li Y-H, member of lads-net Committee wrote:

======================= begin =====================================
To:		Dr. Haiching Zhao and National Council on Chinese Affair

>From:		Lads Network Committee

Date:		August 18, 1993

Subject:	Information Exchange And Collaboration

Dear Dr. Zhao Haiching and National Council on Chinese Affair:

	First, we would like to thank you for your tireless efforts
in achieving the CSPA and various issue concerning CSS community,
and providing valuable information to our late-arriving-
dependents (LAD) network members.

	Our network, which was established on July 26, is expanding
very fast. Now, we have over 1000 members and 10 volunteer
committee members nation wide.

	In the past days, we did a great job in providing
information exchange through the network and help late-arriving-
dependents file application for PR. Up to now, most of the late-
arriving-dependents have successfully filed their application and
we received fewer and fewer questions about filing I-485 or I-824
forms from our netters.

	The current agenda of our network is to push late-arriving-
dependents into the world quota. In order to achieve our goals,
in addition to talking to IFCSS, early-comers and late-comers, we
want to have best collaboration with you and your council
members.

	In our estimation, there are about 6000 late-arriving-
dependents. If we let them stay in China quota, only these late-
arriving-dependents will make the backlog of China EB-3 at least
two years longer.

	From World Daily reports and confirmed by Ms Rita Boie
herself, "An illegally-entered Chinese national can file under
CSPA if he came before  April 11, 1990 and has granted an advance
parole back to US". If it is true, more and more late-arriving-
dependents will be created.

	Based on the humanitarian reasons implanted in the E.O.12711
and CSPA, there is still possibility that some illegally-entered
Chinese nationals with Work Permit, or even without any benefits
they have claimed from E.O. 12711 will be allowed to apply under
CSPA. And there might be fraud claims made by those who came
after April 11, 1990. While we can not prevent those added CSPA
applications, their newly created late-arriving-dependents surely
are causing panic among our late-comers community, and bitter
confrontation between late-arriving-dependents and late-comers.
If that should happen, that will be a great tragedy to CSS
community. As up to now, after sincerely consultations and
discussions, we have established regular and friendly
relationship with the late-comers network committee. We believe
confrontation only make enemies but friends. We need friends but
enemies. Based on this mutual believe, we are well received by
the late-comers network committee.

	In order to benefit our whole Chinese community, especially
the late-comers, we believe that it is extremely urgent for us to
work together and solve this late-arriving-dependents problem.
The best solution is to push the late-arriving-dependents into
world quota.

	We need to communicate to each other and seek different
strategies to lobby this issue. We need leadership and
coordination to conduct the concert.

	We believe that you, Dr. Zhao,  as a tireless democratic
fighter and reputed leader of IFCSS and NCCA, have the
credibility and reputation to take the lead. If you need any help
from this network or you want to post any information to this
network, please mail to:

 	yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu

Sincerely Yours,

Lads-net Committee
================= end ============================================

Dear netters, as to strive our goals, mainly to push lads into the
world-quota, we need your support. As number does matter, we also need
help from our new comer students community. As the new move will benefit
both groups, we shall work together. Hope you will bring more new comer
students to this common goal.

United, we can make a differnce!

Mi Mi
Member
Lads-net Committee


From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Sat Aug 21 12:19:20 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA19890); Sat, 21 Aug 93 12:19:25 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA19880); Sat, 21 Aug 93 12:19:20 CDT
Message-Id: <9308211719.AA19880@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 0231; Sat, 21 Aug 93 12:22:41 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 2489; Sat, 21 Aug 1993 12:22:41 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 1017; Sat, 21 Aug 1993 11:28:43 -0400
Date:         Sat, 21 Aug 93 11:22:30 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      Special Report
To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.


=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Special Reportl infor from  LAD-network         ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================
Dear Lads-netters:

Since most of lads have filed their application forms, fewer and fewer postings
are seen on this net. While most lads are resuming their normal routine lives,
the lads problem is still far from being solved. We still have the following:

	(1) Visa quota allocation.
	(2) DED dependents
	(3) Voluntary departure program.
	(4) People who entered without inspection.

Although aforementioned problems are far more complicated than the information
sharing problems, and the lads-net Committee is a volunteer group which has
limited resources and manpower, the lads-net Committee, however, is resolved to
serve the whole lads community on this matter.

The 5th IFCSS is mainly composed of new comer students. Inevitably, this
landslide change brings policy changes. As post-CSPA era begins, IFCSS strives
to serve the new comers community, which had been paid little attention by
previous IFCSS terms. By no way, we are assured, the early comers will be
forgotten. Instead, the 5th IFCSS vows to serve the CSS community as a whole.
Since new comers are not protected by CSPA, certainly they need more attention
and help from IFCSS.

We have noticed that a newly founded new comers group, Late Comer Working
Committee, or New Comer's Organization (NCO), has actively participated in
the current CSPA and IFCSS affair. By contacting the Chairman of NCO, and
friendly communication with his staff, we have established a very friendly
relationship with them, and possible collaboration in the future.

The main conflict, however, do exist. As lads are still subject to
China quota, the estimated 8000 lads of CSS community will jam China's
EB3 and FB2 categories for years. While most new comer students are going
to use these two categories, the serious backlog does hinder their efforts
to obtain the permanent residency. As for most lads, the prospective
long waiting period is not so happy to accept. Besides, there are still
other problems left unsolved which further complicate the plight of both
new comer students an lads.

New development to implement CSPA:

Illegally entered Chinese may be able to apply under CSPA:
==================begin=====================================
We called Ms Rita Boie, of INS, this morning. Here is what we got from her.

  (1) A LAD will not be allowed to use EP2 unless the principal has
      filed under EP2.   All other Lads will file application under EP3,
      solely from China's quota, not from quota allocated worldwide.
      EP3 has become current this month. If EP3 quota are not enough
      this year, some Lads will wait to use EP3 quota next year,
      and on and on.

  (2) An illegally-entered Chinese national can file under CSPA IF
      he came before 4/11/90 and has granted an advance parole and came
      back to US with the advance parole.

                                                 LC Working Committee
                                                 August 17, 1993
=================end====================================================

The impact of this policy change, will add substantially to the pool
of existing CSS-lads with unspecified number of IIer-lads. This group
of lads will be queued ahead of most new comer students.

As Mi Mi, a member of lads-net Committee, wrote to Ms. Wang Jing, Chair
of Infor & Survey Committee of IFCSS Council:
================= begin====================================================
Ms. Wang Jing

Hi. I, Mi Mi, from lads-net fully support your proposal on NCO.
As matter of fact, I had seen a lot of confusion and fighting on the net
when LCnet was connected with Yeh Shannon. As we lads-net saw the IFCSS
lost its steam to push CSPA implementation further, all of us lads were
somewhat disappointed. When we learnt that Liu Chengyan was invited to
attend IFCSS Teleconference last week, we decided to take a step forward.
Needless to say, all of us lads-netters and committee members appreciate
the tremendous efforts to achieve CSPA and its implementation. Whatever
decided by IFCSS for post-CSPA policy change is understandable. We as
beneficiaries of past IFCSS efforts can not ask more, otherwise we are
too greedy and selfish. To our LC brothers and sisters, we the lads
committee firmly believe, that communication and cooperation, mutual
understanding and solidarity are what we want. After one week
communication, we get very positive response from our LCnet committee.

As matter of fact, many ECers are paying their attention to somewhere
else. While lads are located in China's quota, and will be possibly
jamming  China's quota for many years to come, their principals are
not so much concerned about the waiting period. As one of my friends
pointed out, his wife can wait 6 year until her H-1 visa expires. During
that time, he probably gets citizenship, and in no way he should panic.
Some minor children can wait even longer. My daughter is 9. My only
concern is she gets her GC when she is ready for college. That is
almost ten years later. Of course some elder children are closer to
college and they are worried. But the population is quite small. So the
most urgent problem is for LCs, not for lads.

As matter of fact, passing another CSPA is almost impossible. What we
can do is to make room for LC by removing lads from China quota.
As the new interpretation made clear by Madam Rita Boie, IIers with
Advanced Parole can apply under CSPA. Further, the possibility of
allowing IIers with only Work Permits, even without any thing may be
allowed to apply also, still exists. With most CSS lads have filed already,
their lads inevitably have gotten more favorable priority dates
then anyone else, i.e., they are queued much ahead of the others.
So the policy change does not effect CSS lads too much, unless for
someone who is still in China. But the impact on the LC is imminent.
Those IIer lads will compete with LC, worse, be queued ahead of them.
When the spirit of CSPA is humanitarian and protection, it will be
ridiculous and self-destructive for IFCSS to oppose the inclusion
of these IIers. The best and only strategy for IFCSS, is to work
toward world quota.

I think, this point, as a major task aimed at helping our LC
brothers and sisters, should be included in your resolution.

Sincerely yours,

Mi Mi

Member of
Lads-net Committee
======================= end ========================

As an active entity which is still working on CSPA,
we have tried to communicate with Dr. Zhao and his NCCA.

As Li Y-H, member of lads-net Committee wrote:

======================= begin =====================================
To:		Dr. Haiching Zhao and National Council on Chinese Affair

>From:		Lads Network Committee

Date:		August 18, 1993

Subject:	Information Exchange And Collaboration

Dear Dr. Zhao Haiching and National Council on Chinese Affair:

	First, we would like to thank you for your tireless efforts
in achieving the CSPA and various issue concerning CSS community,
and providing valuable information to our late-arriving-
dependents (LAD) network members.

	Our network, which was established on July 26, is expanding
very fast. Now, we have over 1000 members and 10 volunteer
committee members nation wide.

	In the past days, we did a great job in providing
information exchange through the network and help late-arriving-
dependents file application for PR. Up to now, most of the late-
arriving-dependents have successfully filed their application and
we received fewer and fewer questions about filing I-485 or I-824
forms from our netters.

	The current agenda of our network is to push late-arriving-
dependents into the world quota. In order to achieve our goals,
in addition to talking to IFCSS, early-comers and late-comers, we
want to have best collaboration with you and your council
members.

	In our estimation, there are about 6000 late-arriving-
dependents. If we let them stay in China quota, only these late-
arriving-dependents will make the backlog of China EB-3 at least
two years longer.

	From World Daily reports and confirmed by Ms Rita Boie
herself, "An illegally-entered Chinese national can file under
CSPA if he came before  April 11, 1990 and has granted an advance
parole back to US". If it is true, more and more late-arriving-
dependents will be created.

	Based on the humanitarian reasons implanted in the E.O.12711
and CSPA, there is still possibility that some illegally-entered
Chinese nationals with Work Permit, or even without any benefits
they have claimed from E.O. 12711 will be allowed to apply under
CSPA. And there might be fraud claims made by those who came
after April 11, 1990. While we can not prevent those added CSPA
applications, their newly created late-arriving-dependents surely
are causing panic among our late-comers community, and bitter
confrontation between late-arriving-dependents and late-comers.
If that should happen, that will be a great tragedy to CSS
community. As up to now, after sincerely consultations and
discussions, we have established regular and friendly
relationship with the late-comers network committee. We believe
confrontation only make enemies but friends. We need friends but
enemies. Based on this mutual believe, we are well received by
the late-comers network committee.

	In order to benefit our whole Chinese community, especially
the late-comers, we believe that it is extremely urgent for us to
work together and solve this late-arriving-dependents problem.
The best solution is to push the late-arriving-dependents into
world quota.

	We need to communicate to each other and seek different
strategies to lobby this issue. We need leadership and
coordination to conduct the concert.

	We believe that you, Dr. Zhao,  as a tireless democratic
fighter and reputed leader of IFCSS and NCCA, have the
credibility and reputation to take the lead. If you need any help
from this network or you want to post any information to this
network, please mail to:

 	yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu

Sincerely Yours,

Lads-net Committee
================= end ============================================

Dear netters, as to strive our goals, mainly to push lads into the
world-quota, we need your support. As number does matter, we also need
help from our new comer students community. As the new move will benefit
both groups, we shall work together. Hope you will bring more new comer
students to this common goal.

United, we can make a differnce!

Mi Mi
Member
Lads-net Committee

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Sat Aug 21 13:26:24 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA20802); Sat, 21 Aug 93 13:26:24 CDT
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 93 13:26:24 CDT
Message-Id: <01H20DRO8HJQ984O7H@draco.rutgers.edu>
Errors-To: listm@lucerne.rice.edu
Reply-To: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: LAD-Q&A.08-21-93
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas


PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT NOTES FIRST:
====================================================================
This package is only for INFORMATION EXCHANGE. The answers have no
way to be official and your own judgement must be used.
We ( including the SENDERs ) hold no responsibility to any future 
legal problems resulting from this LAD-Q&As.

If you need more information or have doubt about any of the answers,
contact the SENDER who answered this question DIRECTLY.

If your questions are not covered in this LAD-Q&A, please mail them to us.
We will post your questions to the network for an answer.

We also welcome your unofficial answers to the questions,
which will be used to update the LAD-Q&A.(Please state in your mail
if you want to be anonymous).

Please SUMMARIZE and send to:

     lads@lucerne.rice.edu

Thank you for your co-operations!

Note: A"*" before a question means that we have not got any answer yet.
======================================================================

***************************
*** LAD-Q&A 		***
***(Updated on 08-21-93)***
***************************


LIST OF QUESTIONS

Q1.Form I-485: (b) or (h)? Applying with you? Yes or no?

Q2.J-2 LAD: 2-year Waiver?

Q3. J-1 LAD: 2-year Waiver?

Q4.DED Legal Status?

Q5.Birth Certificate

Q6.Marriage Certificate

Q7.Marriage Date: 4/11/91, Priority Date or before CSPA Approval?

Q8.Voluntary Departure Status

Q9.If CSPA Principal or LAD's application rejected, what to do?

Q10. What is the sufficient financial support? 
                                                                            
Q11.90-day Limit and LAD Derivative Status

Q12.How to file I-824?

Q13.Will I be interviewed?

Q14. How to file I-756 form line 16 ( Eligibility section ) for
     LAD's applying for Employment Authorization.

Q15. Spouse and Child can use one I-485 form together or not?

Q16. Can one's parents be treated as the dependents of the CSPA pricipal?

Q17. If a LAD can not apply for PR now (e.g. out of status), what to do?

Q18. If LAD and principal live in seperate places, where to file?

Q19. When CSPA principal to file I-824 for LADS out of status?

*Q20.How to file I-612? How to write a statement about unacceptable hardship?

Q21. If one is changing his/her status, e.g., from F-2 and F-1, what to do?

Q22. After one files I-485, does he need a work permit to keep his current job?

Q23: Do you know what is the deadline for LAD application? Someone said it was
     the end of this month, is it correct?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNOFFICIAL ANSWERS
-------------------
Q1. Form I-485:
-------------------


>From: JLI@MINES.UTAH.EDU (8/8/93)

1. (b) or (h)?

   Select both (b) and (h).  Add a note to (h): "CSPA Derivative.
   My husband/wife filed on 7/1/93 (or your date) under CSPA."

2. Applying with you?   Yes or no?

   No.  But add: "He/She filed on 7/1/93 (or your date) under
   CSPA."

>From U55363@UICVM.BITNET  (Wed Aug 11 15:18:06 1993)

   (b). I wrote "CSPA-dependent" after that.
   Not applying with you. (indicating that "s/he applied under CSPA".

-------------------------------
Q2. J-2 LAD: 2-year waiver?
------------------------------- 


>From: Xia@ee.udel.edu

	We went to INS office in Philadelphia this morning at 7:35Am. Every
	thing is ok so far. About filling I-485, a INS person told us that 
	checking section (b) in part 2, and for question 12 of part 3, 
	checking "NO".


>From:  JLI@MINES.UTAH.EDU (8/8/93)

On Form I-485, Part III, Q12, answer "yes" but add "Once my husband/
wife's permanent residence application as a CSPA Principal (J-1) is 
approved, the 2-year foreign country residence requirement for me
(J-2) will be waived simultaneously.

After your LAD files her/his application, it is also recommended that
you file Form I-612 for the 2-year waiver.  It will cost you additional
$90.  It may worth it.  It is up to you.

>yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (8/11/93)

   I called an Immigration Lawyer in Boston (Adam Green or Russel Swapp at 
617-338-2413) and found that there is no need for J-2 to get a waiver since J-1 principal get
a waiver automatically and this waiver can be automatically extended to J-2.
   Before you go, take the number. Ask the officer to call when questioned.

-------------------------------
Q3. J-1 LAD: 2-year waiver?
-------------------------------


>From: Anonymous (8/9/93)

I have contacted a lawyer in DC and a Chinese consul in NY. Here are
are some messages I got. (1) J-1 LADs can apply PR only after obtaining 
a waiver letter from USIA. Some local INS may accept the application, 
but it will probably be rejected. The application of waiver can not be
handed in at the same time as the application of PR. (2) To obtain the
the 2-year waiver, you can (a). obtain a "No Objection letter" from 
Chinese Embassy.  But the Chinese consul said a person can apply 
a waiver only he/she wants to change from J-1 to F-1
or to H-1 or J-2, F-2 ect. My wife is going to gradurate soon. No these
categories is suitable for her, so that the consul refused to help her.
(b). fill in a Form I-612. You can ensure a lawyer to do this or do it
at your local INS by yourself. I am contacting a lawyer in DC. I'll tell
you the news when I get it from the lawyer.
 
  -----------------

>From LHGCC@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU Mon Aug  9 06:20:32 1993
>From: Mi Mi <LHGCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>

Q: What should J-1 LAD do?
A: Unless there is a blanket waiver for J-1 LADs, J-1 LAD should be
   dealt case by case.
      J-1 visa holders are required mandately to comply the two-year
 home country residency before s/he can apply any nonimmigrate or
    immigrate visa. Even a J-1er had been stayed in US for only one day.
       To waive two-year home country residency, you can do either
  1) Ask a US government agency to help you. This is highly impossible
unless you were very important to them.
   2) Ask a no-objection letter from China government. This option is
 possible now but takes considerable time and energy.
       You should do: a) Ask your work unit to present a no-objection
       letter
    b) Get a no-objection letter from China Embassy,
 c) Ask Information Agency for approval,
      d) Ask INS for approval.
    You should contact the China Embassy and your foreign student
  advisor for details.
     There are other possible solutions based on family, political reasons
which you may not be interested in or may be difficult to process.


-------------------

   I am not sure if you can apply PR right now, but I think the first
   thing you should begin to do is to get a waiver for your J-1. One way
   to get a waiver is by Chinese Embassy, you can ask chinese consulate
   in your area on how to do it. They may need your application, the letter
   from your working place in China, the copy of your IAP-66 form, your
   employment letter here and $50 check, you also are required to fill a 
special form giving by Chinese consulate.

-------------------

      I concern the issue of J-1 LAD. The INS in Menneapolis accepts the
      application of LAD. But nobody knows what the decision they make will
     be. Please let me know the information about this issue.

-------------------

I got the same problem as you do. I went to local INS Office at Salt
Lake City  yesterday with my wife and handed in the application. The
lady working there told me that they will accept any application no
matter what the LAD's current status is. Now, What is your information?


-------------------------
Q4. DED Legal Status:
-------------------------


>From: Anonymous (8/9/93)

According to the local INS, DED is NOT a lawful status, and those
in DED now are considered to have failed to maintain lawful status.

My application for PR as spouse of a CSPA principal was returned
yesterday.  INS explained that my current status DED is not a
lawful status, though it is a legal status.

Before I graduated, I consulted a foreign student adviser in
the International Student Office of my university regarding
future status.  The options are: continuing school, practical
training and DED.  DED was highly recommended since one could
change from DED to F, J, H visa, or adjust status to permanent
resident.  In one word, DED was much better than practical training
and would not have any negative effect on one's future.

The local INS responded it is true that the DEDs can switch back to
F, J, H, which are lawful status. They will be considered in lawful
status after they switch.  However, there is no guarantee that they
will be considered to have continuously maintained lawful status.
Technically, DED is not a lawful status.

It seems that if DEDs are not able to adjust status under CSPA, then
many other channels of immigration will be closed to them, too.  For
example, they cannot follow to join their family.  Can they apply
for PR under employment category 3?


--------------------------
Q5.Birth Certificate:
--------------------------


>From bisong@utdallas.edu (Mon Aug  9 21:09:08 1993)
  You need to have the original or original of other notrarized evidence
submitted along with copies. There were about 15 LADs submitted there
application at Dallas INS this morning. All were asked for the original copy
as well as the photo copy on Birth Certificate.
  (Note: The original should be kept for interview.See I-485 instruction. --Editor)


>yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (8/11/93)

  At first, make a copy of the original document. Then ask a friend
to translate it into English (better word by word translation) and type
it up. Below the translation, write or type the following before you
go to a Notary Public:
"I,____________, hereby certify that I am competent to translate English
into Chinese, and that the above is an accurate translation from the Chinese
original".
"Signature of the translator___________________________
Address ________________________________________________

Submitted and stated under oath before me ____________________
on the date of _______________________________________________
My commission expires on _____________________________________
My signature ________________    Title:______________________"
   Now go to the public  with your friend. The notary public can
tell you what to do next.


-----------------------------
Q6.Marriage Certificate:
-----------------------------

>From bisong@utdallas.edu  (Mon Aug  9 21:09:08 1993)
  You need to submit the original marriage license along with its translated
photo copy. Information source is as above. I got my wife's translated by a
friend and notrarized by a notrary public.
  (Note: The original should be kept for interview. See I-485 instruction. --Editor)


>yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (8/11/93)

  At first, make a copy of the original document. Then ask a friend
to translate it into English (better word by word translation) and type
it up. Below the translation, write or type the following before you
go to a Notary Public:
"I,____________, hereby certify that I am competent to translate English
into Chinese, and that the above is an accurate translation from the Chinese
original".
"Signature of the translator___________________________
Address ________________________________________________

Submitted and stated under oath before me ____________________
on the date of _______________________________________________
My commission expires on _____________________________________
My signature ________________    Title:______________________"
   Now go to the public  with your friend. The notary public can
tell you what to do next.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Q7.Marriage Date: 4/11/91, Priority Date or before CSPA Approval?
----------------------------------------------------------------------


>From: Anonymous (8/9/93)
I think you can apply, as long as the marriage date is before the CSPA
approval date. But you may have problems with the local INS, because
they don't always understand the law the same way as the INS headquater.
So my suggestion is to wait for one week before you file. If you are
close to the local INS, go there in person. If they still reject the 
application, hire a lawyer who knows the CSPA to talk with INS. 
Remember one thing, all above have to be finished in Aug., so plan 
ahead.

>From bisong@utdallas.edu  (Mon Aug  9 21:09:08 1993)
  That date (4/11/91) is for non-PRC nationals to apply under CSPA. For LADs,
I can find only one sentence concerning this in the INS regulation. It says
something like: "Those dependents who got their relationship with CSPA
principal established before the approval date of the principal may apply for
adjustment of status as derived family members." 
  We married in Dec. 1991, and the application has been accepted. 

>yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (8/11/93)

  Those whose application was rejected due to marriage date may apply again
now. Nearly most of the local INS recognized their mistakes and start to accept
these applications. Before you go, make a copy of the Interim Rule 
which can be FTP in cnd.org (/pub/InfoBase/CSPA/????-regulation???).
Be ready to show them:
" Family members unable to  qualify  for   CSPA   adjustment  of
status may be eligible for lawful permanent resident status under
other provisions of the Act.  Those family members whose  spousal
or  parental  relationship  was  established before the principal
CSPA  alien's application for adjustment of  status  is  approved
may  be  eligible  for derivative immigrant status as employment-
based preference immigrants accompanying or following to join the
CSPA   principal."


-----------------------------------
Q8.Voluntary Departure Status:
-----------------------------------


>From IFCSS released news (7/15/93)

There is no application form or fee for an application for
Voluntary Departure. A request for voluntary departure may be made
in writing to the District Director having jurisdiction over the
person's place of residence. After Voluntary Departure  is granted, he
can apply for work permit.
(Note: FTP /pub/InfoBase/CSPA/ in cnd.org for more --editor)


--------------------------------------------------------------------
Q9.If CSPA Principal or LAD's application rejected, what to do?
--------------------------------------------------------------------

>From U55363@UICVM.BITNET  (Wed Aug 11 15:18:06 1993)
 
 Both of you will lose your status. You have to apply for a new
    non-immigration status.


-------------------------------------------------
Q10. What is the sufficient financial support?
-------------------------------------------------

                                                                            
>From: XiaoFei Wang <xiaofei@EINSTEIN.PHYSICS.BUFFALO.EDU>  (7/3/93)

Subject: Poverty Line Figures

Poverty Line:

Fimily Size              Income
1                        $  6809.99
2                        $  9189.99
3                        $ 11569.99
4                        $ 13929.99
5                        $ 16329.99
6                        $ 18709.99
7                        $ 21089.99
8                        $ 23469.99

Source: Federal Poverty Income Guideline


----------------------------------------------
Q11.90-day limit and LAD Derivative Status
----------------------------------------------


>From: Anonymous (8/9/93)

Some CSPA principals who have exceeded 90-day limit are denied to
opportunity to apply even as derivative family member of CSPA principal 
on grounds that DED status (which is what these LADs status) is not
considered be lawful although it is legal according to the INS standards
and interpretation of the INS regulations.

This is causing grief and big problems for many others and for me, too.
Wonder if you can call this question "legal status of CSPA 
principlas who fall out of status for exceeding the 90-day limit and
their inability to apply as derivative family member?"

----------------------------
Q12.How to file I-824?
----------------------------


>From lhgcc@cunyvm.bitnet (Mi Mi)  (8/6/93)

Part 1. Your name (petitioner) and information,
Part 2. Application Type: (c): X-town, China, for follow to join 
immigration
        visa for XXX
Part 3. Type of Petition: I-485;
           Filing Receipt #: (your I-797 for I-485,like EAC-93-216-XXXXX)
           Date of filing  : (Notice Date on your I-797)
           Date Approved   : None
           Name etc: Your family members name and information
Part 4: Your signature.

Checklist:

1) $30 application fee,
2) Copy of your I-797
3) Birth certificate,
4) Marriage Certificate,
5) I-824
You have to include a cover letter to let INS know what are you up to.


------------------------------
Q13. 	Will I be interviewed?
------------------------------


>From LHGCC@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU Mon Aug  9 06:20:32 1993
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 93 08:15:31 EDT
>From: Mi Mi <LHGCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>

Check the following questionaries
   1) My visa, whatever I had, expired prior to October 9, 1992 ____
   2) I did not apply any Executive Order 12711 benefit(s)      ____
If you checked 1) yes and 2): no, and you should expect an interview.
   Interviewing could significantely slow down your green card process.

>From U55363@UICVM.BITNET  (Wed Aug 11 15:18:06 1993)

  YES!

--------------------------------------------------------------
Q14. How to file I-756 form line 16 ( Eligibility section ) for
     LAD's applying for Employment Authorization.
--------------------------------------------------------------


>From caomath@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Tue Aug 10 20:11:15 1993)

Since a LAD has summited I-485, S/He can write c 9, the same
as CSPA pricipal. If one has problem to determine, local INS
officer can help when one summits his/her application.


--------------------------------------------------------------
Q15.  Spouse and Child can use one I-485 form together or not?
--------------------------------------------------------------


>From caomath@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Tue Aug 10 20:11:15 1993)

No. Each person is treated individually at INS office, and 
has his own file. You can choose Yes when answer "apply 
together with you?" question. But you have to summit each
person with an I-485.


>From xzwang@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Wed Aug 11 09:47:42 1993)

Why bother. The forms are free and you need to pay the $120 any way for each
applicant.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q16.  Can one's parents be treated as the dependents of the CSPA pricipal?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


>From caomath@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Tue Aug 10 20:11:15 1993)

No. For the immigration purpose, dependents are the spouse
and children. The common sense can tell you that. Look at
I-485 part 2 Application Type b, the derivative status are
for spouse and children, not for parents.

>From xzwang@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Wed Aug 11 09:47:42 1993)

No. Only spouse and children under 21 are able to derive the following to
join benifits. Even parents were dependent on you, they can not use E3.
Parents need to go through family based GC. You may want to file I130 for
your parents.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Q17. If a LAD can not apply for PR now (e.g. out of status), what to do?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


>From caomath@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Tue Aug 10 20:11:15 1993)

The CSPA pricipal files an I-824 to INS service center. Present
a letter to local INS office, requesting the approval of VD
status. After VD approval, apply for work permit and live in
US until your visa is availabel. Go to a third country like
Canada to process your application for PR and re-enter US
with an immigrant visa.

>From xzwang@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Wed Aug 11 09:47:42 1993)

The only way is to apply VD and for the principal to file I824. Once an
immigration Visa is available, he or she may be able to re-enter US with an
immigration Visa.

(Note: VD = Voluntary Departure --editor)

>From: <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>

   INA requires that in order to file PR application, you must be in and have
   been continuously maintaining lawful status at least up to the point you
   file PR. (after you file, you have to maintain lawful status to keep your
   second chance if your first application is rejected in which you lost you
   pending status and lawful ststus as well). So if lad has a lawful status
   by him/herself, e.g. F-1, H-1 etc., the best choice is to keep it at the
   time being. If not, one way is go to another country or China and get
   a new independent visa, but it is as if one practices VD. So the best way
   is stay cool and do nothing(for those derivative who entered DED and can
   not apply PR now).


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q18. If LAD and principal live in seperate places, where to file?
------------------------------------------------------------------------


>yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (8/11/93)

LAD should file at the local INS having jurisdiction over the
his place of residence. So the LAD should file in his/her place. He/she
need only the I-797 (receipt) from the principal.

>From:IN%"yxu@igpp.ucla.edu" (11-AUG-1993 15:14:04.60)

My experience showed that LAD should apply in LAD's local INS.
My situation is my husband (principal) is living in Illinois and filed
in Northern Service center and  I (LAD) am living in Los Angeles. 
The Los Angeles INS official accepted my application without hesitation
after I pointed out this problem.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Q19. When CSPA principal to file I-824 for LADS out of status?
----------------------------------------------------------------------


>yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (8/11/93)

After the principal's application is approved.

>From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>

After their application have been approved.


----------------------------------------------------
Q20. How to file I-612? and how to write a statement
     about unacceptable hardship?
----------------------------------------------------

Anyone can answer this question?

-----------------------------------------------------
Q21. If one is changing his/her status, e.g., from F-2 and F-1, what to do?
-----------------------------------------------------


>yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (8/11/93)
 
  The person does not need to withdraw his application for 
changing status before he files. He uses the copy of I-94 for file 
application for PR. His new I-94 and F-1 (if it is) are useless 
after filing I-485.
  What is his status if rejected? This is an open question! (see Q9)


----------------------------------------------------------------
Q22. After one files I-485, does he need a work permit to keep his current job?
-------------------------------------------------------------------


>From yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Wed Aug 11 15:56:46 1993)

Netter,
        There is a big confusion among the network about the CSPA
applicant's work permit, i.e. CSPA need to get a work permit now to
receive the RA or TA, otherwise, it is illegal to work after file I-485.
Here is the information I got.
        My friend visited the INS days ago. The officer told him that since
July 1st, 1993, anyone who filed I-485 on the employment base can work 
90 days without a wrok permit. In these 90 days, those who filed I-485 will
be their original status.But before 7/1/93, those who file I-485 should also
file I-765 at the same time.
        I hope that readers can further confirm this.
        This also answer the Q9 in LAD-Q&A, that is
        If you are rejected in 90 days, you go back to your old status.
However, What is story if you pass "90 days"? The LADs are not likely to
get a GC in 90 days.
        Welcome anyone's new information.

>From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>

It seems different INS offices have different explainations aobut work
permit to receive RA or TA, or should we say different Foreign Student 
Advisors (FSA) have different explainations.

The foreign student advisor here said,

        As long as you are a F-1 at the time of your application, and
your I-20 is not going to expire before you get you GC, it is fine for
you to continue receiving RA or TA from school without work permit.
And she sited a law for it. She also said they had a meeting with Houston
INS officials, and both agreed that it is legal to work IN-campus without
applying for work permit while your application is pending.  Also, 
the INS officals said that if you had a receipt, it entitled you to work
at least 90 days after you submit your application without work permit.

        The overall point is, you maintain whatever benefits you had before
your application until you receive your GC, unless:

        1. your I-20 will expire before you get your GC.
        2. You want new benefit. ie, you want to work off-campus now.



>From: ZYHUANG@ducvax.auburn.edu

As someone pointed out that once we filed I485, we losed F-1 status. So we can't work anymore without a work permit.I asked a lawyer about this problem. What she
told me was that if you have W.P. under the Bush'exacutive order which is valid to 01-01-94, that is good enough. If you don't have it, you should apply a W.P.now. 
But you may not get it right now,it may take a month. during this time you
might get your GC, since it is mid-august.

***********************************************************************************
Do we need Work Permission Card?
This morning, I went Pittsburgh INS for applying Work Permission Card.
The receptionist said three points to me:
1) I must send my application, $60.00, singature,  and two photos to the 
East Center (Vermont) to get the Work Permission Card.  They only deal 
with LADs' applications not Principals'
2) If I work only inside campus, the original work permission (means I-20) 
signed by the Foreign Student Advisor in my school is still WORKING until 
I get final approved.  I don't need to apply the work permission card, 
if I only work inside the campus.  The purpose of applying the card is 
to work outside the campus.
3) The situation for Lads with F-1 are the same. If they work just inside 
the campus, they don't need to apply the work permission card.

I was really confused and I said that someone told me that once I filed 
the PR application, I lost my original F-1 status, and I had to get work 
permission from INS to get the RA.  She said "you are talking to me now!
I am working on this issue"

It seems every local INS has different explanation on this issue.
We have to ask the Centers to clarify the issue: legal or illeagal
to get RA or TA without the Work Permission from INS in the pending
period?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q23: Do you know what is the deadline for LAD application? Someone said it was
     the end of this month, is it correct?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From: LHGCC@CUNYVM.BITNET

	No deadline AT ALL, as long as the visa number is current, you can file.
That means, August and September (probably October as well, wait for
new information). For FB2, you can file when you are approved of PR.

------------------------------------------------------------------
(to be continued ...... by you)
end.


From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Sat Aug 21 21:20:47 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA21533); Sat, 21 Aug 93 21:20:47 CDT
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 93 21:20:47 CDT
Message-Id: <01H20UC8KPVM984OKX@draco.rutgers.edu>
Errors-To: listm@lucerne.rice.edu
Reply-To: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: LAD.08-21-93
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas


 # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
 #   The following are packed messages sent by LAD-netters in the past few     #
 #   days.  Please address your correspondence to the sender.                  #
 #   To sign on/off, please mail to                                            #
 #		lads-request@lucerne.rice.edu .                                #
 #   Please send your post, questions, answers, opinions, to                   #
 #		lads@lucerne.rice.edu .                                        #
 #   You can use anonymous ftp to retrieve all the packages posted to LADnet.  #
 #   The site is spike.rice.edu and the directory is /lads.                    #
 # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"leanne@skinner.cs.uoregon.edu"   21-AUG-1993 18:50:59.55

	I am a CSPA, my husband is a lad, and my daughter(She's 7 now) is 
	still in China. I have some problems need to be helped.

	1. When I filed I-485, I didn't file I-134, and I don't have any
	   job. I just presented a certificate from my bank with about
	   $10,000 savings. Am I going to have any trouble with this
	   kind of financial situation ?
	2. I'm going to graduate at the end of this year. I'd planned to
	   bring my daughter here by then. If I file I-824 for her, I'm
	   afraid she cannot come very soon. Can I get her a visiting
	   visa when I'm still a student now? Or is there any suggestion
	   which can make her come soon ?
	3. My husband doesn't have Birth Certificate. We got his approval
	   from Chinese consulate at San Francisco on Aug. 17 and mailed
	   back to the relatives in Beijing to do the certificate for him.
	   How long it'll take? Is it going to be late?

	Sorry for this long list of problems. I do appreciate for any kind of
	responses. Thanks.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"wum@craft.camp.clarkson.edu" 19-AUG-1993 12:30:52.68

	Hi, I would like to post/share the following with the netter.
	Thank you for your assistance.

	Does any LAD who filed I-485 to local INS get a official
	receipt or letter? I have a friend (he is a LAD) just got a
	short letter from Buffalo INS. The letter came with a questionnaire
	and asked him to provide additional information before the INS 
	initiates to process his application. The questionnaire contains
	3 parts: 1) educational and training background; 2) work experiences;
	3) organizations. The questions is very detailed. For example, it asks
	"Who is your supervisor when your worked in a university or research
	institute," "Did you work in a US joint venture?", "What was the Chinese
	partner and belongs to which Chinese department, etc" "What kind of 
	projects did you participated?" "Have you ever participated in  
	meetings of CPC, CYL, or housing committees, workplace committees, etc?"

	Has anybody receive similar letters?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"N332AP%TAMVM1.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu"  19-AUG-1993 12:21:57.18

	Hi, can anyone give some information about San Antonio INS, i.e., 
	do they accept application for LAD in person? Do they grant work permit 
	right away? Or do they give a specific date for interview? Thank you.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"deng@sal.cs.uiuc.edu"  "Zhong Deng" 19-AUG-1993 01:21:00.16

	I am covered by CSPA, but my girlfriend is not. If we get married these
 	days, can she apply for PR under CSPA as LAD?  BTW, I already filed my 
	application, if this makes any difference.

	Your information is highly appreciated.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"cheng@lamont.ldgo.columbia.edu" 20-AUG-1993 11:24:44.63

	How to get the past packages from LADnets? Can anybody kindly send me
	the checklist of the LAD application package? Thanks in advance.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"***@syr.edu"   20-AUG-1993 11:16:44.92

	Hi, I just received a notice called M-180 from INS. Attached are two 
	sheets of detailed questions regarding to education, working experience
 	and political affiliations(including communist youth league meetings 
	and activities, etc.). Does anyone has experience in handling such kind
	of things?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"yiying@dri.cornell.edu"  "Yiying Shao" 20-AUG-1993 11:16:34.02

	Has anybody received a question from INS after applying  the PR as a 
	LAD?  Could anybody give me some information about how to fill the 
	form? 

	Any information will be appreciated.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"tian@cs.uri.edu" 19-AUG-1993 22:06:11.13

	I have a questions about filling form I-485 part 3 C about membership. 
	I was Chinese Youth League. I am 26 years old. Should I fill waiver form
 	like communist member or Just fill I am a Chinese Youth League member, 
	and from 16 to 26. 
	Nature of it: Communist satellite? Thank you advance.

---=----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"QIAN.admin@admin.creol.ucf.edu" 19-AUG-1993 11:37:26.95

	This morning I and my wife went to the local INS in Orlando, Florida 
	to file the PR application for my wife. The application was rejected 
	just because we got married in January this year. The official said we 
	had to be married before October, 1992 in order to be eligible for the
     	application. If anyone else met this problem before, please give a guide
 	of how to handle it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Sun Aug 22 11:34:58 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA02136); Sun, 22 Aug 93 11:34:58 CDT
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 93 11:34:58 CDT
Message-Id: <9308221634.AA01199@lucerne.rice.edu>
Errors-To: listm@lucerne.rice.edu
Reply-To: snow@lucerne.rice.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: FAQ
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas



This is the a simple FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) about LADnet.
 
 
1. What is LADnet?
 
LADnet is a network dedicated to solve problems related to 
LADs of CSPA principals. It is an email network.


2. How can I join and quit LADnet?

Send your subscription and signoff messages to 
pei%nit.pactel.com@zool.pactel.com    or   lads-request@lucerne.rice.edu


3. How can I post to LADnet?

Send your post, questions, answers, opinions, to lads@lucerne.rice.edu.
Your message will be forwarded to one of the LADnet committee members.
Messages will be regrouped according to their topics and then repackaged.
Packages will be posted regularly to LADnet. Contributions sent during
the night may be posted in the next morning.


4.  How many kinds of packages do we have now?

Currently, we have 5 kinds of packages.
1. Reporting Acceptance/Rejection of application and related information.
2. Questions concerning status such as J-1, J-2, F-2, DED, ect.
3. Questions about filling out forms and about marriage/birth certificates.
4. Misc and personal questions.
5. Special report.


5. What is lads@spike.rice.edu? Why do I get strange errors by posting to
   that account?

This account is reserved for committee members to post packages. Posting
to this account is restricted to committee members only. A filter is
implemented. Non-committee member postings will be rejected and
cause delay to your problems. So please do not use this account for
posting. Use lads@lucerne.rice.edu instead.


6. Since we are all gurus on anonymous ftp now, is there a site for us?

Yes, we've got it now. You can use anonymous ftp to retrieve all the
packages posted to LADnet by committee members. The site is spike.rice.edu,
IP is 128.42.4.157, directory is /lads.


6. What if the network has a problem?

In case of an emergency, please contact snow@lucerne.rice.edu.

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Sun Aug 22 16:07:34 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA02992); Sun, 22 Aug 93 16:07:34 CDT
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 93 16:07:33 CDT
Message-Id: <9308222057.AA26748@cmliris>
Errors-To: listm@lucerne.rice.edu
Reply-To: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Letter to Dr. Zhao
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

Dear netters,
	You have not heard anything from me several days. Now I am working on
collaboration with Dr. Zhao to push LADs into World Quota. This is also the mainissue in our network.
	Please stay with this network and help us to finish this goal. Remember
that in current situation, you have to wait at least two years to get your GreenCard. If you have family member in China, you must wait more than two years to 
see him.
	If you have not filed your I-485, keep working on it while watching
our progress on the world quota. If you have successfully filed your application, put your effort into this world quota issue as hard as you did for your
application. If you can wait two years for your Green Card, think of others who
have family members in China and do them a favor.
	What you can do now is (1) stay in the network  (2) Be ready when we
need your help (e.g. signature). (3) Give us suggestions and strategies on how
to lobby.
	Here is the letter we send to Dr. Zhao Haiching and NCCS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

To:	Dr. Haiching Zhao and National Council on Chinese Affair

>From:	Lads Network Committee

Date:	August 18, 1993

Subject:Information Exchange And Collaboration


Dear Dr. Zhao Haiching and National Council on Chinese Affair:

	First, we would like to thank you for your tireless efforts
in achieving the CSPA and various issue concerning CSS community,
and providing valuable information to our late-arriving-
dependents (LAD) network members.

	Our network, which was established on July 26, is expanding
very fast. Now, we have over 1000 members and 10 volunteer
committee members nation wide.

	In the past days, we did a great job in providing
information exchange through the network and help late-arriving-
dependents file application for PR. Up to now, most of the late-
arriving-dependents have successfully filed their application and
we received fewer and fewer questions about filing I-485 or I-824
forms from our netters.

	The current agenda of our network is to push late-arriving-
dependents into the world quota. In order to achieve our goals,
in addition to talking to IFCSS, early-comers and late-comers, we
want to have best collaboration with you and your council
members.

	In our estimation, there are about 8000 late-arriving-
dependents. If we let them stay in China quota, only these late-
arriving-dependents will make the backlog of China EB-3 at least
two years longer.

	From World Daily reports and confirmed by Ms Rita Boie
herself, "An illegally-entered Chinese national can file under
CSPA if he came before  April 11, 1990 and has granted an advance
parole back to US". If it is true, more and more late-arriving-
dependents will be created.

	Based on the humanitarian reasons implanted in the E.O.12711
and CSPA, there is still possibility that some illegally-entered
Chinese nationals with Work Permit, or even without any benefits
they have claimed from E.O. 12711 will be allowed to apply under
CSPA. And there might be fraud claims made by those who came
after April 11, 1990. While we can not prevent those added CSPA
applications, their newly created late-arriving-dependents surely
are causing panic among our late-comers community, and bitter
confrontation between late-arriving-dependents and late-comers.
If that should happen, that will be a great tragedy to CSS
community. As up to now, after sincerely consultations and
discussions, we have established regular and friendly
relationship with the late-comers network committee. We believe
confrontation only make enemies but friends. We need friends but
enemies. Based on this mutual believe, we are well received by
the late-comers network committee.

	In order to benefit our whole Chinese community, especially
the late-comers, we believe that it is extremely urgent for us to
work together and solve this late-arriving-dependents problem.
The best solution is to push the late-arriving-dependents into
world quota.

	We need to communicate to each other and seek different
strategies to lobby this issue. We need leadership and
coordination to conduct the concert.

	We believe that you, Dr. Zhao,  as a tireless democratic
fighter and reputed leader of IFCSS and NCCA, have the
credibility and reputation to take the lead. If you need any help
from this network or you want to post any information to this
network, please mail to:

 	yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu

Sincerely Yours,

Lads-net Committee



From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Sun Aug 22 17:10:47 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA03206); Sun, 22 Aug 93 17:10:47 CDT
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 93 17:10:47 CDT
Message-Id: <9308222208.AA07575@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Errors-To: listm@lucerne.rice.edu
Reply-To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Phone talk with Liu Cheng
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

Cheng Liu, IFCSS Council member of New York State, called me today. The 
teleconference had passed two bills. The first is to establish an new comer 
committee, either to budget Liu Chengyan's, or through other means. 
The second is to rescue the lads/LC visa number crisis.

One thing he asked us to do, is to write down the experience we had during
July and August, when we tried to communicate with IFCSS HQ. The 5th HQ,
not only made mistake in reporting the quota issue, but other issues as
well. I said this is the most difficult thing to do, since we all benefit
from IFCSS HQ's efforts. He assured me, this is the new HQ, which has little
to do with the previous ones. He said HQ believed the CSPA was over, and 
just stopped there. I told him, I would ask the whole committee on this 
regard. So please discuss this, and, if we all agree to report our 
disappointment, try to recollect all the difficulties we had in communicating
with HQ. We shall compile the complain in written form, and send to him.

While IFCSS Council is resolved to push HQ to pick up CSPA again, we all 
realized the golden opportunity had passed. Hope this incident will unite
new comers with IFCSS, and bring a new solution to the lads/LC problem

Mi Mi

I also called Liu Chengyan and He Enhua. We discussed the current 
situations and possible strageties. Hope this HQ's mistake "stopped 
prematurely to push CSPA implementation to the very end" will unite
EC and LC together.

Yongho
YonghongYoYongyong, nice job! We will try to talk Zhao until he anwsers.
IIOII
I sent him two copies of fax, no response.

Mi MI

From LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu  Sun Aug 22 23:12:28 1993
Received: by spike.rice.edu (AA00794); Sun, 22 Aug 93 23:12:32 CDT
Received: from ricevm1.rice.edu by spike.rice.edu (AA00784); Sun, 22 Aug 93 23:12:28 CDT
Message-Id: <9308230412.AA00784@spike.rice.edu>
Received: from RICEVM1.RICE.EDU by ricevm1.rice.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 1423; Sun, 22 Aug 93 23:15:47 CDT
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@CUNYVMV2) by RICEVM1.RICE.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 6107; Sun, 22 Aug 1993 23:15:47 -0500
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (NJE origin LHGCC@CUNYVM) by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
 (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 2709; Mon, 23 Aug 1993 00:10:13 -0400
Date:         Sun, 22 Aug 93 23:47:02 EDT
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject:      Special Report
To: LADs netters <LADS@spike.rice.edu>
X-Delivery-Note: This mail was relayed by LADnet. Authorized posting ONLY.


=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Special Report  infor from  LAD-network         ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================

As we are informed by reliable sourse, IFCSS Council had just passed
two important resolutions. One is to establish a new committee to
address new comer students issue, which will either to be converted
from Mr. Liu Chengyan's New Comer's Organization (NCO) or to be
founded completely. Another is to assign a full time staff to take care
the lads and LC quota issue, and to correct the mistakes made before.
We are all human beings. Human being are always making mistakes from
time to time. While IFCSS did make some mistakes, and she will in the
future, let's count her successes, and praise her for her tireless endeavor
to serve us the CSS community.

IFCSS is resolved to solve the current quota crisis. Let's cross our
fingers and, more importantly, to support them with all we can!

Hope this crisis will bring all EC and LC CSS together!

Mi Mi

Member of
Lads-net Committee

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Mon Aug 23 01:05:25 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA01055); Mon, 23 Aug 93 01:05:25 CDT
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 93 01:05:25 CDT
Message-Id: <9308230605.AA21176@dedekind.math.luc.edu>
Errors-To: listm@lucerne.rice.edu
Reply-To: my@math.luc.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: my@math.luc.edu (Miao Ye)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: LAD.08-22-93
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas


 # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
 #   The following are packed messages sent by LAD-netters in the past few     #
 #   days.  Please address your correspondence to the sender.                  #
 #   To sign on/off, please mail to                                            #
 #		lads-request@lucerne.rice.edu .                                #
 #   Please send your post, questions, answers, opinions, to                   #
 #		lads@lucerne.rice.edu .                                        #
 #   You can use anonymous ftp to retrieve all the packages posted to LADnet.  #
 #   The site is spike.rice.edu and the directory is /lads.                    #
 # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

>From ***@***.edu Sun Aug 22 14:32:44 1993
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 93 14:26:26 CDT
>From: ***@***.edu
Subject: a few questions
To: <lads@lucerne.rice.edu>
Content-Length: 1077

I have a few questions and will appreciate any
answers or suggestions. Thanks in advance.

1. 	Although I had 90-day problem, I still filed my PR 
   	application as CSPA principal. And so far so good.
   	i.e. I have already received the receipt.
   	Now if I present this receipt to local INS office and 
	apply for work authorization, will the receipt guarantee
	my success in obtaining the work authorization?
	(I applied for work authorization under the Executive Order
	in June, 1993 and was denied.) 
	There are two kinds of work authorization. One is related to the 
	Executive Order and hence will expire on 1/1/94. Another is 
	simply a general work authorization which 
	lasts until the decision about my PR application is made.
        Which one should I apply for?


2. 	My wife is a LAD and a J-2 holder. And her J-2 status 
	(together with my J-1)
	expired on 6/26/93, just a few days before I was able to 
	file as CSPA principal. So we did not apply for DED.
	I wonder whether she can file her application now as 
	CSPA derivative with the local INS office.

****************************************************************************
Hi netters:
We got trouble because our principals entered the DED prior to July 1.
I read the letter that you sent to Dr. Zhao,  I'd like to remain you 
don't forget we still have problems in DED legal status.  Ask Dr. Zhao
to help us, please.

**********************************************************************************
Hi, I want to report a rejection I got from the Miami INS office.  I got married 
this year and would like to apply GC for my husband as a  CSPA dependent. The 
local INS office refuse to accept his application.  They said in order for his
to apply as CSPA dependent, our marrige has to exsit prior to April 11,90.  I 
know that is not true since I have read the regulation agian.  But How can  I 
convince those people?  It seems to me that the Miami office is the one giving
people a lot of trouble.

***********************************************************************************
The second I-824 I filed last week was returned again by INS Western Service Ce
nter. Does any one know the reasons?Do we have to wait until our PR application
s approve?

***********************************************************************************
The Ins accepted my friend's wife application. And his wife is going to have
a interview  in Nov. But they asked her to bring "spouse and prove of residing   
together". But now they are not living the same state and just get married.
Could anybody give any suggestion about this. Thanks.


From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Mon Aug 23 11:46:41 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA02364); Mon, 23 Aug 93 11:46:41 CDT
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 93 11:46:41 CDT
Message-Id: <9308231644.AA09491@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Errors-To: listm@lucerne.rice.edu
Reply-To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Special Report
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

/Hi netters:
/We got trouble because our principals entered the DED prior to July 1.
/I read the letter that you sent to Dr. Zhao,  I'd like to remain you
/don't forget we still have problems in DED legal status.  Ask Dr. Zhao
/to help us, please.

/Hi, Mi Mi
/Please don't forget DED lads. They have more difficulties.
/It was not their fault, was it.
/Even if the world quota issue is solved, they still cannot apply.
/Please don't forget them.
/a netter.

Hi, everyone. We lads-net committee will do our best to serve every lads.
We will not forget our problems. As matter of fact, while IFCSS HQ has shifted
her attention to somewhere else, lads-net committee tried her best to serve you
with the information all the lads are concerned. In the past ten days, lads-net 
committee has been reaching out to all the agencies to play a more active role
than merely sharing information with you. We have established friendly connection
with Mr. Liu Chengyan' New Comer's Organization, which could become one 
of the IFCSS subcommittee in charge of solving lads-visa-crisis, we have channeled 
our concerns to the IFCSS Council, which has passed two bills addressing the
current visa-crisis. We are also trying to establish close contact with Dr. Zhao's
NCCA, to voice our concerns and offer our support. We are now drafting a 
non-political petition letters to urge all the concerned agencies to help us 
to solve the lads visa-quota problems. We need your help, we need all the 
parties to participate, including new comer students. Please pass the draft
petition letters around and collect as many signatures as you can.

Our goal is very simple. 
1) Push lads into the world-wide-quota: cut the waiting period for lads,
	save the China quota for new comer students;
2) Solve the other lads problem such as DED, 90-day, etc.

With limited resources and manpower, we are trying our best to help the
whole community. Please help us to collect signatures, and help yourselves!

Mi Mi

Lads-net Committee


Mr/Ms/Miss:Name,Address,City,State,ZipCode,Tel#
	Co-signed Spouse, Mr/Ms:Name
	Co-signed Child, Mr/Miss:Name



     
					LADs Network Members
					c/o  ********
					*******************

Madam Rita A. Boie
Senior Immigration Examiner
Adjudication Branch
Immigration & Naturalization Services
425 I Street NW, room 5307
Washington, DC 20536

Dear Madam Rita A. Boie,

	We, Late-Arriving Dependents (LADs) and CSPA principals with LADs, 
who signed their names and addresses here, would like to call your attention to 
the following two big problems involved in subjecting LADs to the China quota.

(1) According to the survey made by IFCSS HQ, there are approximately 10000 
eligible LADs in the US who may file their applications under EB-3 and FB-2 
during this August and September. Since the annual China quota in EB-3 or 
FB-2 is about 2000, only these LADs will make the backlog of China's at least 
five years longer. This means that no China nationals can file application for 
adjustment of status in the next five years. So those who  are eligible to adjust
 their status under EB-3 or FB-2 in the normal situation will have to wait four 
more years to file their applications. To further complicate this situation is
 the reported INS decision to include all the illegally entered China nationals 
who came before April 11, 1990, and have obtained an advance parole to 
re-enter US to apply under CSPA. While this new decision reflects the spirit 
of humanitarian and protection that are implanted in the then President's 
Executive Order 12711, those added applicants with their LADs are facing 
more difficulties than anyone  else. Not only those LADs whose principals 
entered illegally will be queued after those whose principals entered 
legally, that means even  longer waiting period, but also the unspecified 
number of LADs will jam the normal China EB-3 and FB-2 categories for 
even more years. As Americans cherish their traditional family values
 and humanity, those traditional values are also deeply rooted in the Chinese 
culture and every Chinese family. The anticipated long separation of those 
families resulted from visa quota allocation problem will surely bring 
sadness and suffering to those families, and thus contradict the humanitarian 
spirit written both in the E.O.12711 and CSPA.

(2) For dependents remaining in China, the situation is even more bleak.  
These individuals would be required to wait in China until visa numbers 
are available that could potentially separate families for over five years. 
The chances of obtaining a non immigrant visa to enter the US. are 
severely hampered for the dependents of a spouse or parent in the US.  
In addition, many of the dependents, both in the US. and in China, 
who are now considered children, will reach the age of 21 prior to visa 
availability.  This would disqualify them for visa issuance.

Before more efficient solutions are found, we believe that two solutions are practical now.

(1)Re-allocate the LADs into world quota. The CSPA principals can be allocated into the 
world-wide 46,000 quota leftovers for fiscal year 1993 and it is reasonable to estimate 
that there are still world-wide quota leftover next years. Instead of let the LADs blocking 
the doors to China regular EB-3 or EP-2 visas, we free these people into the world quota.

(2)  A blanket family unity program should be established to protect all late-arriving 
dependents.  This program should mirror the benefits of E.O. 12711 to (1) provide
 employment authorization for the duration of the dependents' wait; (2) provide 
liberal advance parole; (3) deem the individual to maintain his/her non immigrant 
status for adjustment purposes; and (4) allow children under twenty-one on the date
 of the CSPA principal's approval to be eligible for adjustment even if they are over
 twenty-one at the date of adjustment.  This family unity program would resolve
 the problems involved with the case by case voluntary departure program.

    Thank you for your attention.  We are waiting for your kind consideration.

Signed by LADs Network members, and co-signed by all the concerned and 
sympathetic China nationals

Their names and address are in the following attached pages.


From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Mon Aug 23 12:01:03 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA02620); Mon, 23 Aug 93 12:01:03 CDT
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 93 12:01:02 CDT
Message-Id: <9308231658.AA09544@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Errors-To: listm@lucerne.rice.edu
Reply-To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Sorroy for the empty "Important Message"
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

>Subject: Re: A Important Message
>Hi,
>You forward this email to us but there is nothing in this email.
>Is there any news you try to send to us?
>Thank you.
>Qing Zhang

Sorry everyone. Because I am only a ordinary user, my VM account was
almost crashed by my endless e-mail activities concerning lads-net
committee. I just shifted to this DEC account which has a far more
bigger disc space to hold all the messages. But again, I am a green
hand on this UNIX system. In the process to learn how to use the 
new system and edit the mails, I have accidentally sent out some
junk testing mails, either with nothing in the content nor just
some meanlingless stuff. Please forgive for my mistake.
I very appreciate your attention.

Mi Mi


From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Mon Aug 23 16:51:09 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA03196); Mon, 23 Aug 93 16:51:09 CDT
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 93 16:51:09 CDT
Message-Id: <9308232148.AA10284@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Call for signatures!
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas


Hi, everyone. We lads-net committee will do our best to serve 
every lads. We will not forget our problems. As matter of fact, 
while IFCSS HQ has shifted her attention to somewhere else, lads-
net committee tried her best to serve you with the information 
all the lads are concerned. In the past ten days, lads-net 
committee has been reaching out to all the agencies to play a 
more active role than merely sharing information with you. We 
have established friendly connection with Mr. Liu Chengyan' New 
Comer's Organization, which could become one of the IFCSS 
subcommittee in charge of solving lads-visa-crisis. We have 
channeled our concerns to the IFCSS Council, which has passed two 
bills addressing the current visa-crisis. We are also trying to 
establish close contact with Dr. Zhao 's NCCA, to voice our 
concerns and offer our support. We are now drafting a non-
political petition letters to urge all the concerned agencies to 
help us to solve the lads visa-quota problems. We need your help, 
we need all the parties to participate, including new comer 
students. Actually, a copy of this petition letter is been 
forwarded to Mr. Liu's NCO for circulation and revision. 
Hopefully, NCO will help us collect many new comer students' 
signatures as well. From the past experience, we all know the 
number is very important in this land. Particularly, we need YOUR 
SIGNATURES, and your support. Please pass the draft petition 
letters around and collect as many signatures as you can.

Our goal is very simple.
1) Push lads into the world-wide-quota: 
	cut the waiting period or lads,
	save the China quota for new comer students;
2) Solve the other lads problem such as DED, 90-day, etc.

With limited resources and manpower, we are trying our best to 
help the whole community. Please help us to collect signatures, 
and help yourselves!

Mi Mi

Lads-net Committee

Please try to find as many people as you can, early comers, late 
comers, other China nationals, your American friends, to sign the 
letter. We only need you to give us the following information in 
electronically form, via e-mail, to 
lads-sig@spike.rice.edu
The desired format is:
Mr./Ms/Miss:Name,Address,City,State,ZipCode,Tel#
        Co-signed Spouse, Mr/Ms:Name(situation, e.g. DED, 90-day, 
etc.)
        Co-signed Child, Mr/Miss:Name(situation, e.g. DED, 90-
day, etc.)

Thank you very much!
					LADs Network Members
					c/o  ********
					*******************

Madam Rita A. Boie
Senior Immigration Examiner
Adjudication Branch
Immigration & Naturalization Services
425 I Street NW, room 5307
Washington, DC 20536

Dear Madam Rita A. Boie,

	We, Late-Arriving Dependents (LADs) and CSPA principals with 
LADs, who signed their names and addresses here, would like to 
call your attention to the following two big problems involved in 
subjecting LADs to the China quota.

(1) According to the survey made by IFCSS HQ, there are 
approximately 10000 eligible LADs in the US who may file their 
applications under EB-3 and FB-2 during this August and 
September. Since the annual China quota in EB-3 or FB-2 is about 
2000, only these LADs will make the backlog of China's at least 
five years longer. This means that no China nationals can file 
application for adjustment of status in the next five years. So 
those who  are eligible to adjust their status under EB-3 or FB-2 
in the normal situation will have to wait four more years to file 
their applications. To further complicate this situation is the 
reported INS decision to include all the illegally entered China 
nationals who came before April 11, 1990, and have obtained an 
advance parole to re-enter US to apply under CSPA. While this new 
decision reflects the spirit of humanitarian and protection that 
are implanted in the then President's Executive Order 12711, 
those added applicants with their LADs are facing more 
difficulties than anyone  else. Not only those LADs whose 
principals entered illegally will be queued after those whose 
principals entered legally, that means even  longer waiting 
period, but also the unspecified number of LADs will jam the 
normal China EB-3 and FB-2 categories for even more years. As 
Americans cherish their traditional family values and humanity, 
those traditional values are deeply rooted in the Chinese culture 
and every Chinese family. The anticipated long separation of 
those families resulted from visa quota allocation problem will 
surely bring sadness and suffering to those families, and thus 
contradict the humanitarian spirit written both in the E.O.12711 
and CSPA.

(2) For dependents remaining in China, the situation is even more 
bleak.  These individuals would be required to wait in China 
until visa numbers are available that could potentially separate 
families for over five years. The chances of obtaining a non 
immigrant visa to enter the US. are severely hampered for the 
dependents of a spouse or parent in the US.  In addition, many of 
the dependents, both in the US. and in China, who are now 
considered children, will reach the age of 21 prior to visa 
availability.  This would disqualify them for visa issuance.

Before more efficient solutions are found, we believe that two 
solutions are practical now.

(1) A blanket family unity program should be established to 
protect all late-arriving dependents.  This program should mirror 
the benefits of E.O. 12711 to (1) provide employment 
authorization for the duration of the dependents' wait; (2) 
provide liberal advance parole; (3) deem the individual to 
maintain his/her non immigrant status for adjustment purposes; 
and (4) allow children under twenty-one on the date of the CSPA 
principal's approval to be eligible for adjustment even if they 
are over twenty-one at the date of adjustment.  This family unity 
program would resolve the problems involved with the case by case 
voluntary departure program.

(2) Re-allocate the LADs into world quota. The CSPA principals 
can be allocated into the world-wide 46,000 quota leftovers for 
fiscal year 1993 and it is reasonable to estimate that there are 
still world-wide quota leftover next years. Instead of let the 
LADs blocking the doors to China regular EB-3 or EP-2 visas, we 
free these people into the world quota.

    Thank you for your attention.  We are waiting for your kind 
consideration.

Signed by LADs Network members, and co-signed by all the 
concerned and sympathetic China nationals

Their names and address are in the following attached pages.






From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Mon Aug 23 18:26:57 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA03448); Mon, 23 Aug 93 18:26:57 CDT
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 93 18:26:57 CDT
Message-Id: <9308232326.AA04293@lucerne.rice.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: snow@lucerne.rice.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Call for signatures!
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

This is an excerpt from Mi Mi's previous petition letter message, just to
highlight to you where to send the signagure. :-)

For the content of the letter, please refer to Mi Mi's last posting. 

==================================================================

Please try to find as many people as you can, early comers, late 
comers, other China nationals, your American friends, to sign the 
letter. We only need you to give us the following information in 
electronically form, via e-mail, to 


lads-sig@spike.rice.edu
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The desired format is:
Mr./Ms/Miss:Name,Address,City,State,ZipCode,Tel#
        Co-signed Spouse, Mr/Ms:Name(situation, e.g. DED, 90-day, 
etc.)
        Co-signed Child, Mr/Miss:Name(situation, e.g. DED, 90-
day, etc.)

Thank you very much!

===================================================================


Jun

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Tue Aug 24 10:45:23 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA06736); Tue, 24 Aug 93 10:45:23 CDT
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 93 10:45:23 CDT
Message-Id: <9308241542.AA12440@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Second Call for signature and Update Information
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Special Report  infor from  LAD-network         ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to "pei@nit.pactel.com"    ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================

We have received 110 e-mail signatures at 10:00am, CDT. Many 
of them contains more than one signature. It is estimated at 
least 160 signatures are receive in our day one. We will 
post our revisions late this week. Please send in your 
signatures and comments. Thank you.

Hi, everyone. We need your help, we need all the parties to 
participate, including new comer students. From the past 
experience, we all know the number is very important in this 
land. Particularly, we need YOUR SIGNATURES, and your 
support. Please pass the draft petition letters around and 
collect as many signatures as you can.

Our goal is very simple.
1) Push lads into the world-wide-quota: 
	cut the waiting period or lads,
	save the China quota for new comer students;
2) Solve the other lads problem such as DED, 90-day, etc.

With limited resources and manpower, we are trying our best 
to help the whole community. Please help us to collect 
signatures, and help yourselves!

Mi Mi

Only a Member of

Lads-net Committee

Please try to find as many people as you can, early comers, 
late comers, other China nationals, your American friends, 
to sign the letter. We only need you to give us the 
following information in electronical form, via e-mail, to 

lads-sig@spike.rice.edu
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The desired format is:
Mr./Ms/Miss:Name,Address,City,State,ZipCode,Tel#
        Co-signed Spouse, Mr/Ms:Name(situation, e.g. DED, 
90-day, etc., if applicable)
        Co-signed Child, Mr/Miss:Name(situation, e.g. DED, 
90-day, etc.,if applicable)

Thank you very much!

					LADs Network Members
					c/o  ********
					*******************

Madam Rita A. Boie
Senior Immigration Examiner
Adjudication Branch
Immigration & Naturalization Services
425 I Street NW, room 5307
Washington, DC 20536

Dear Madam Rita A. Boie,

	We, Late-Arriving Dependents (LADs) and CSPA principals 
with LADs, who signed their names and addresses here, would 
like to call your attention to the following two big 
problems involved in subjecting LADs to the China quota.

(1) According to the survey made by IFCSS HQ, there are 
approximately 10000 eligible LADs in the US who may file 
their applications under EB-3 and FB-2 during this August 
and September. Since the annual China quota in EB-3 or FB-2 
is about 2000, only these LADs will make the backlog of 
China's at least five years longer. This means that no China 
nationals can file application for adjustment of status in 
the next five years. So those who  are eligible to adjust 
their status under EB-3 or FB-2 in the normal situation will 
have to wait four more years to file their applications. To 
further complicate this situation is the reported INS 
decision to include all the illegally entered China 
nationals who came before April 11, 1990, and have obtained 
an advance parole to re-enter US to apply under CSPA. While 
this new decision reflects the spirit of humanitarian and 
protection that are implanted in the then President's 
Executive Order 12711, those added applicants with their 
LADs are facing more difficulties than anyone  else. Not 
only those LADs whose principals entered illegally will be 
queued after those whose principals entered legally, that 
means even  longer waiting period, but also the unspecified 
number of LADs will jam the normal China EB-3 and FB-2 
categories for even more years. As Americans cherish their 
traditional family values and humanity, those traditional 
values are deeply rooted in the Chinese culture and every 
Chinese family. The anticipated long separation of those 
families resulted from visa quota allocation problem will 
surely bring sadness and suffering to those families, and 
thus contradict the humanitarian spirit written both in the 
E.O.12711 and CSPA.

(2) For dependents remaining in China, the situation is even 
more bleak.  These individuals would be required to wait in 
China until visa numbers are available that could 
potentially separate families for over five years. The 
chances of obtaining a non immigrant visa to enter the US. 
are severely hampered for the dependents of a spouse or 
parent in the US.  In addition, many of the dependents, both 
in the US. and in China, who are now considered children, 
will reach the age of 21 prior to visa availability.  This 
would disqualify them for visa issuance.

Before more efficient solutions are found, we believe that 
two solutions are practical now.

(1) A blanket family unity program should be established to 
protect all late-arriving dependents.  This program should 
mirror the benefits of E.O. 12711 to (1) provide employment 
authorization for the duration of the dependents' wait; (2) 
provide liberal advance parole; (3) deem the individual to 
maintain his/her non immigrant status for adjustment 
purposes; and (4) allow children under twenty-one on the 
date of the CSPA principal's approval to be eligible for 
adjustment even if they are over twenty-one at the date of 
adjustment.  This family unity program would resolve the 
problems involved with the case by case voluntary departure 
program.

(2) Re-allocate the LADs into world quota. The CSPA 
principals can be allocated into the world-wide 46,000 quota 
leftovers for fiscal year 1993 and it is reasonable to 
estimate that there are still world-wide quota leftover next 
years. Instead of let the LADs blocking the doors to China 
regular EB-3 or EP-2 visas, we free these people into the 
world quota.

    Thank you for your attention.  We are waiting for your 
kind consideration.

Signed by LADs Network members, and co-signed by all the 
concerned and sympathetic China nationals

Their names and address are in the following attached pages.




From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Tue Aug 24 11:20:00 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA06939); Tue, 24 Aug 93 11:20:00 CDT
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 93 11:20:00 CDT
Message-Id: <9308241617.AA12531@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Clarify Some Facts
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas


On August 18, after reading LCN_News_release081793, I sent my comments to the sender of 
LCN_News_release081793, 
cliu@wuecon.wustl.edu (Chengyang Liu).

My motivation was to clarifying some facts, regarding to the "saving tax this way" claim. 
I have included the original wording from the Sino-US Tax Treaty concerning this subject.

Please correct me if I am mistaken.

Mi Mi, speaks for himself, in New York City


/From: cliu@wuecon.wustl.edu (Chengyang Liu)
/Subject: LCN_News_release081793
/2. Information on EP2, EP3 and CSPA's Effects on LCs

Message deleted =============

/================================================================
/(1) Message from a LCnet Reader
/
/Editors:
/
/I got some important facts about EP2 and EP3 and the negtive effects of
/CSPA on us LCs:
/
/An outstanding applicant applied for a job in a big company in USA.
/He was refused because the company thought it's really hard to apply for GC
/for him now. The job was an assistant research staff.
/So his GC would  be from EP3. Therefore the company felt it's almost impossible
/to apply GC for Chinese employees. The company has refused all applicants
/from PRC without GC.
/
/I was told that job offers from small companies often involve EP3, not EP2.
/
/Application for CSPA is available till 7/1/1994. So a lot of people with their
/EP immigration application in progress generally stay and wait until next year
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  Some people who already filed EB3 and paid the lawyers fee did not
  withdraw. On or after July 1, many of them filed under CSPA as well.
  They cannot be blamed for doing that. Without CSPA, they went through
  EB3 was quite legitimate. Because they can only be approved once, when
  they are granted PR this year, their application in normal EB3 will be
  freed. That should be part of the reason why the backlog for EB3
  disappeared in August and September.

/to apply for CSPA. An immigration attorney said that EP2 will not be current
                                                      ^^^ typo. EB2 is
  current up to now. EB3 is also current. All of the other EB have been always
  current, to the best of my knowledge.

/in 18 months. People who have applied EP GC will wait until next year to apply
/forCSPA. They do not withdaw the EP GC application. Some one told me that they
/can save tax-paying this year in this way.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

  Using training of F-1 or J-1 can enjoy $5,000 tax deduction per Sino-US
  tax treaty. THAT'S ONLY FOR NON-IMMIGRANT VISA HOLDERS. If some one wants
  to save that way, s/he can not apply PR nor H-1. So those of my friends who
  want to save one more year in tax did not file any PR nor H-1 application,
  neither regular EB nor CSPA. SO THEY ARE NOT QUEUED IN CHINA's EB3
  anyway. Please read the corresponding Sino-US treaty for details. Every
  CSS receiving assistantship in US can get a copy of it. (Pub. 901, Rev. Nov.
  1992, Cat. No.46849F, U.S. Tax Treaties).It is in page 13.
  Please check the background information for accuracy.

Following is the wording from the Publication 901(Rev. Nov. 1992), page 13:

A student, business apprentice or trainee who is a resident of the People's 
Republic of China on the date of arrival in the United States and who is 
present in the United States solely for the purpose of his education, training 
or obtaining special technical experience is exempt U.S. income tax on the 
following amounts:
	(a) Payments received from abroad for the purpose of his maintenance, 
education, study, research or training; 
	(b) grants or rewards from a government, scientific, educational or 
other tax exempt organization; and
	(c) Income from personal services performed in that Contracting State in 
an amount not excess of 5,000 United States dollars or its equivalent in 
Chinese Yuan for each taxable year. 
	The benefits under this Article shall extend only for such period of 
time as is reasonably necessary to complete the education or training. 

  Thank you for your attention.

  Mi Mi

/onclusion: CSPA and implementation of LAD issue makes LC feel the defect
/already and MORE Serious than we expected.

/Another non-refugee Chinese Student
..................................................

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Tue Aug 24 14:46:14 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA07621); Tue, 24 Aug 93 14:46:14 CDT
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 93 14:46:14 CDT
Message-Id: <9308241947.AA07245@cmliris>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Report on progress
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

Dear netters,

	We called NCCA. Although I could not talk to Dr. Zhao Haiching face-
by-face. I already passed the following messages to him and NCCA:

	(1) About our letter. They have read our letters.

	(2) Their leadership and advice on lobbying world quota.

	(3) Immidiate help on DED, IIers problems.

	Please be patient. They need time to digest our messages.

	We keep you informed if any progress.

	Now please work on "call for signature". What IFCSS did to CSPA 
should happend in our network since this is a capitalist country.

LAD network committee
 


From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Tue Aug 24 20:18:14 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA08478); Tue, 24 Aug 93 20:18:14 CDT
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 93 20:18:14 CDT
Message-Id: <9308250117.AA07227@lucerne.rice.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: snow@lucerne.rice.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Important Changes, Please read
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

Netters,

	Now we have a listserv to better serve our list. You may have
already noticed the change from the posting address, and you may have
already received a signon notice during the course when I moved all
LADnet netters to listserv.

	From now on, please send your signon and signoff to listserv.

	To signon, send email to listserv@spike.rice.edu, with mailbody as:

	sub lads-l Firstname Lastname

	To signoff, sendm email to listserv@spike.rice.edu, with mailbody as:

	signoff lads-l

	Netters who received this email please DO NOT send signon request
to listserv, you are already on the list.      ^^^^^^

	REPEAT, please DO NOT send signon request to listserv if you
receive this message, you are already on the list.

	From now on, please DO NOT send signon and signoff to Mr. Peiyuan Zhou.
pei@nit.pactel.com. He is relieved duty by listserv.


Jun

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Tue Aug 24 20:27:31 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA08549); Tue, 24 Aug 93 20:27:31 CDT
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 93 20:27:30 CDT
Message-Id: <9308250126.AA07253@lucerne.rice.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: snow@lucerne.rice.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: New version of FAQ
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas


Update on signature collection. 

We have over 200 emails rush in in two days.
Please show your support by sending your signature to lads-sig@spike.rice.edu.
For details of petition letter and signature format, please refer to
Mi Mi's last posting. You can retrieve it via anonymous ftp at
spike.rice.edu (128.42.4.157), directory /lads.

Now enjoy our new version FAQ.

=====================================

This is the a simple FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) about LADnet.
 
 
1. What is LADnet?
 
LADnet is a network dedicated to solve problems related to 
LADs of CSPA principals. It is an email network.


2. How can I join and quit LADnet?

Send your subscription request to listserv@spike.rice.edu, with mailbody as:
	sub lads-l Firstname Lastname

To signoff, send your request to listserv@spike.rice.edu, with mailbody as:
	signoff lads-l


3. How can I post to LADnet?

Send your post, questions, answers, opinions, to lads@lucerne.rice.edu.
Your message will be forwarded to one of the LADnet committee members.
Messages will be regrouped according to their topics and then repackaged.
Packages will be posted regularly to LADnet. Contributions sent during
the night may be posted in the next morning.


4.  How many kinds of packages do we have now?

Currently, we have 5 kinds of packages.
1. Reporting Acceptance/Rejection of application and related information.
2. Questions concerning status such as J-1, J-2, F-2, DED, ect.
3. Questions about filling out forms and about marriage/birth certificates.
4. Misc and personal questions.
5. Special report.

5. Why can't I post to lads-l@spike.rice.edu?

Right now, posting privilege is limited to LADnet committee members.
Please do not post to lads-l@spike.rice.edu, or your posting will be
ignored. Use lads@lucerne.rice.edu instead.


6. Since we are all gurus on anonymous ftp now, is there a site for us?

Yes, we've got it now. You can use anonymous ftp to retrieve all the
packages posted to LADnet by committee members. The site is spike.rice.edu,
IP is 128.42.4.157, directory is /lads.


6. What if the network has a problem?

In case of an emergency, please contact snow@lucerne.rice.edu.

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Tue Aug 24 23:03:17 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA09252); Tue, 24 Aug 93 23:03:17 CDT
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 93 23:03:17 CDT
Message-Id: <01H254SHFOTE984SJ8@draco.rutgers.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: LAD.08-24-93
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas


 # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
 #                                                                           #
 #   The following are packed messages sent by LAD-netters in the past two   #
 #   days.  Please address your correspondence to the sender.                #
 #   To sign on, send email to listserv@spike.rice.edu, with mailbody as:    #
 #	sub lads-l firstname lastname                                        #
 #   To sign off, send email to listserv@spike.rice.edu, with mailbody as:   #
 #	signoff lads-l                                                       #
 #   Please send your post, questions, answers, opinions, to                 #
 #		lads@lucerne.rice.edu .                                      #
 #   You can use anonymous ftp to retrieve the packages posted to LADnet.    #
 #   The site is spike.rice.edu and the directory is /lads.                  #
 #                                                                           #
 # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

===============================================================================

>From:	IN%"Bin_Luo@ius4.ius.cs.cmu.edu"  23-AUG-1993 09:21:15.58
Subj:	Questions about LAD with J-1

	When most of LAD filed I-485 successfully, we still have problems for 
	LAD with J-1 visa who suffered 2 years foreign residence requirement.

	My considerations are:
	1. They may not qualify to file follow joint during this window 
	   (Aug. and Sept.) as other later arrival dependents !? 
	2. Can they file follow joint when their waiver is proved
	   (like half of a year later)?
	3. Can they file family based application (I-130) by then? 
	4. If 3 is OK, what will be the status after they file I-130? 
	   Can they have a working permit as other PR pending cases or they 
	   will still in J-1 status?

	Thank you for the considerations.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>From:	IN%"ZXY2@psuvm.psu.edu" 23-AUG-1993 12:39:30.84
Subj:	J-1 and DED LAD issues

	Dear LAD netters and committee members,

	While the quota issue is very important, the status of some LADs still
	remains unsolved.  The recent letter to Dr. Zhao and other parties from
	LAD committee does not mention about them, however.

	As some netters pointed out some days ago, it has been very difficult to
	apply the 2-years waiver for J-1 holders. The INS even suggested that 
	the spouses of the J-1 holders, even they have GC, should go back China 
	as well as the J-1 holders.  It really does not make sense because it 
	is inconsistent with the spirit of the CSPA.  And once the I-612 form 
	is rejected, the J-1 LADs will face troubles. Therefore I think it is 
	urgent to ask the Attorney General to give a blanket waiver to J-1 LADs
 	based on the humanism and family union.  Both the EO and CSPA give the 
	right to Attorney General to do so. She could easily do that without 
	any modification of the law or CSPA.

	On the other hand, even the INS approved the waiver, it will take many
 	months. Since the illegals can apply under CSPA now, the LADs group 
	will become bigger and bigger.  The J-1 holders will not be able to 
	apply for a long long time since the visa number will not be available
	for a long time.  Needless to say, the J-1 holders are adults and need 
	to work immediately, in contrast to those kids who hold F-2 or J-2 visas
	.  That means that J-1 holders will be on the tail of the queue even 
	they can get the 2-years waiver a few months later.

	This is similar to the DED lads.  Before their principals get the 
	approved, they have to wait a while and then go to a third country, 
	in where a visa is not guaranteed.  They may have to wait a long time 
	with a VD status. This also makes a uncertain future for them.

	Any comment? or any action the LAD net should have?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"zhu@spec.mda.uth.tmc.edu" 23-AUG-1993 13:09:09.18

	In the petition letter to Madam Rita A. Boie, I do not see any out of
 	status LAD's are explicitly mentioned. According to IFCSS, there are 
	almost 50% of LAD's are out of status. Should you guys more explicitly
	mention on this matter also? Well, maybe you guys do not care about 
	this.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>From:	IN%"mluo@ozone.ps.uci.edu" 23-AUG-1993 13:57:17.45

   Three questions:

   (1) If Illegalers who came before 4/11/90 and were granted advance 
       paroles (anytime even if now?) can file GC under CSPA, how about 
       those CSPA principles disqualified due to the 90 day limit?  
       I assume most of them used advance paroles to reenter US.
 
   (2) Many LADs were assigned an interview day (this Oct., Nov., Feb. and
       June next year etc.) at their local INS offices.  Does this means 
       that they will get their GC or to be guaranteed a GC on that day if 
       they pass the interviews?

   (3) Assume a CSPAer obtains his GC in October this year.  What will be
       the status of his LAD before she get her GC (she is F-2, J-2 or H-4 
       now)?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>From:	IN%"GEOS3K@jetson.uh.edu" 24-AUG-1993 03:41:08.09
Subj:	dependents in china

	I am a principal, entered the United States in 1989 and have been 
	keeping legal status on F-1 till now. For some reason, my wife and 
	child did not come to America to visit me. Right now, they can not 
	apply for F-2 for coming here since I applied for permanent resident 
	last July.

	I was looking around all information about dependents of CSPA principal 
	remaining in China. Disappointedly, I understood that my dependents 
	have to apply for EB-3 or FB-2 to obtain visa, that means that my 
	dependents have to still wait for a few years due to limited quota for
	China. I believe that this regulation really disrupts family reunion 
	and violates the spirit of humanitarian and protection that are 
	implanted in the President's Executive Order.

	I need any suggestions and comments for my case. Thanks!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"RJIN@vms.cis.pitt.edu" 24-AUG-1993 19:59:34.14

	A child was beyond 21 years old on April 11, 90 and came to U.S. in 
	1991. The child is in U.S. now and doesn't get married. 

	Can he or she file the application for PR because his or her parent 
	is CSPA principal?

  	Is there any people who have same situation as mine? Could you tell 
	me what you are doing now?

  	What kind of form the child should fill in?

==================================THE END=====================================

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Wed Aug 25 07:28:00 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA10744); Wed, 25 Aug 93 07:28:00 CDT
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 93 07:28:00 CDT
Message-Id: <9308251225.AA15427@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Third Call for Signatures And Update
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas


=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Special Report  infor from  LADs-network        ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to listserv@spike.rice.edu ==
== In mailbody, write: sub lads-l Firstname Lastname=
== In mailbody, write: signoff lads-l              ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================

We have received 210 e-mail signatures at 23:00am, CDT. Many of 
them contains more than one signature. It is estimated at least 
500 signatures are receive in two days. We will post our 
revisions late this week. Please send in your signatures and 
comments. Thank you.

Note:
1) Please do not send your signature file to ME. If you do, 
please do not forward the whole package back to me. I have it 
myself.

2) Please forward your comments and suggestions to me. If there 
is someone of English major, please help me to do it better.

3) Please collect as many signatures as you can. We need all the 
parties to participate, including new comer students. From the 
past experience, we all know the number is very important in this 
land. Particularly, we need YOUR SIGNATURES, and your support. 
Please pass the draft petition letters around 

Our goal is very simple.
1) Push lads into the world-wide-quota: 
	cut the waiting period or lads,
	save the China quota for new comer students;
2) Solve the other lads problems such as DED, 90-day, etc.

With limited resources and manpower, we are trying our best to 
help the whole community.

Mi Mi

Only a Member of

Lads-net Committee

We only need you to give us the following information in 
electronical form, via e-mail, to 

lads-sig@spike.rice.edu
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The desired format is:
Mr./Ms/Miss:Name,Address,City,State,ZipCode,Tel#
        Co-signed Spouse, Mr/Ms:Name(situation, e.g. DED, 90-day, 
etc., if applicable)
        Co-signed Child, Mr/Miss:Name(situation, e.g. DED, 90-
day, etc.,if applicable)

Thank you very much!

Second draft follows:==========================================

					LADs Network Members
					c/o  ********
					*******************

Madam Rita A. Boie
Senior Immigration Examiner
Adjudication Branch
Immigration & Naturalization Services
425 I Street NW, room 5307
Washington, DC 20536

Dear Madam Rita A. Boie,

	We, Late-Arriving Dependents (LADs) and CSPA principals with 
LADs, who signed their names and addresses here, would like to 
call your kindly attention to the following plight involved in 
subjecting LADs to the China quota.

(1) According to the survey made by IFCSS HQ, there are 
approximately 10000 eligible LADs in the US who may file their 
applications under EB-3 and FB-2 during this August and 
September. Since the annual China quota in EB-3 or FB-2 is about 
2500, only these LADs will make the backlog of China's at least 
four years longer. This means that no China nationals can file 
applications for adjustment of status in the next four years. So 
those who are eligible to adjust their status under EB-3 or FB-2 
in the normal situation will have to wait four more years to file 
their applications. The recently reported decision of INS is to 
allow those illegally entered China nationals who came before 
April 11, 1990, and have obtained an advance parole to re-enter 
US to apply under CSPA. While this new decision reflects the 
spirit of humanitarian and protection that are implanted in the 
then President's Executive Order 12711, those added applicants 
with their LADs are facing more difficulties than anyone else. 
Not only those LADs whose principals entered illegally will be 
queued after those whose principals entered legally, that means 
even  longer waiting period, but also the unpredictable number of 
LADs will jam the normal China EB-3 and FB-2 categories for even 
more years. As Americans cherish their traditional family values 
and humanity, those traditional values are also deeply rooted in 
the Chinese culture and every Chinese family. The anticipated 
long separation of those families resulted from visa quota 
allocation problem will surely bring sadness and suffering to 
those families, and thus contradict the humanitarian spirit 
written in the INA, E.O.12711 and CSPA.

(2) For dependents remaining in China, the situation is even more 
bleak. These individuals would be required to wait in China until 
visa numbers are available that could potentially separate 
families for over five years. The chances of obtaining a non 
immigrant visa to enter the US. are severely hampered for the 
dependents of a spouse or parent in the US. In addition, many of 
the dependents, both in the US. and in China, who are now 
considered children, will reach the age of 21 prior to visa 
availability. This would disqualify them for visa issuance.

Before more efficient solutions are found, we believe that two 
solutions are practical now.

(1) Re-allocate the LADs into world quota. The CSPA principals 
can be allocated into the world-wide 46,000 quota leftovers for 
fiscal year 1993 and it is reasonable to estimate that there are 
still world-wide quota leftover next years. Instead of let the 
LADs blocking the doors to China regular EB-3 or EP-2 visas, we 
free these people into the world quota.

(2) A blanket family unity program, we believe, should be 
established to protect all late-arriving dependents. This program 
should mirror the benefits of E.O. 12711 to (1) provide 
employment authorization for the duration of the dependents' 
wait; (2) provide liberal advance parole; (3) deem the individual 
to maintain his/her non immigrant status for adjustment purposes, 
thus to eliminate the DED problem faced by the estimated 50% for 
LADS population, and (4) allow children under twenty-one on the 
date of the CSPA principal's approval to be eligible for 
adjustment even if they are over twenty-one at the date of 
adjustment. This family unity program would resolve the problems 
involved with the case by case voluntary departure program.

Thank you for your attention. We are waiting for your kind 
consideration.

Signed by LADs Network members, and co-signed by all the 
concerned and sympathetic China nationals

Their names and address are in the following attached pages.


From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Wed Aug 25 13:01:25 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA11814); Wed, 25 Aug 93 13:01:25 CDT
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 93 13:01:25 CDT
Message-Id: <9308251800.AA08748@lucerne.rice.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: snow@lucerne.rice.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: signon and signoff
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

Please pay attention, the listname is 

LADS-L

Many people used LADS-1. It is 'l', not '1'. :-)

Jun

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Thu Aug 26 12:20:37 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA15542); Thu, 26 Aug 93 12:20:37 CDT
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 12:20:37 CDT
Message-Id: <9308261718.AA19182@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Letters to the editor
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Letters to the editor from  LADs-network        ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to listserv@spike.rice.edu ==
== In mailbody, write: sub lads-l Firstname Lastname=
== In mailbody, write: signoff lads-l              ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================
=========================================1======================
>From: yl08@Lehigh.EDU (XXXXXX)
Subject: Re: Second Call for signature and Update Information
To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Status: R

Hi, Mi Mi:
As a principal with a lad, I appreciate very much your continuous effort on
the lad issue.  I was on F-1 status, so my wife had no problem to file her
application.  However, there are so many people in DED status, and china quota
problems, I will continue to support any effort on pushing this issue.  I
believe only united, can we stand.

Based upon the success of your earlier effort to unite the LCs and IFCSS, I
would like to point out my strong belief about our strategy.  We, the
principals with lads, should unite the LCs, and especially the IFCSS, and
Dr Zhao Haiqing if possible, and ACT AS A WHOLE GROUP and with a unified lobby
strategy BECAUSE OUR INTERESTS ARE THE SAME NOT OPPOSITE. If the above groups
act independently, no voice would be strong enough and it may counteract each
other's effort.  Yes, our voices could be heard by the INS.  But, it may also
send a wrong signal to the INS that the Chinese students are quite divided and
their interests conflict one another and they are demanding contradictory
Policies from INS.  Which one should INS listen to?  They may just stay where
their policies are.

As I can recall, in early July, there was one CBS news analysis about the
immigration problem.  They discussed about the successful implementation of
CSPA and bad lucks of people from other countries.  They emphasized that the
success of CSPA is due to the very strong UNITED EFFORTS of the Chinese
students, which surely impressed a lot of people, the media and the
congressmen.  The "6.4" type of thing happened in many other states, too. But,
students from those countries were not successful on pushing protection
policy because of their internal fights and weak lobby effort.

Let's not rush to send letters to INS or any other offices.  Let's first focus
on uniting the LCs and IFCSS.  We should exhaust all our efforts before we
give up and act on our own.  Action on the name of IFCSS, I believe, is much
stronger.  Also, by so doing, we can avoid any further counteraction from the
LCs.

I am sorry if I bored you.  It is only my own belief.  If you don't agree,
just forget it.

Y. Li
8/25/93
===========222222222222========================================
>From: zlin%decserv1@dns1.eecs.wsu.edu
Message-Id: <9308251309.AA28785@decserv1>
Subject: The letter to INS
To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 93 6:09:40 PDT
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Status: RO

Hi,

I am currently in Europe and got a chance to look at the letter.
I appreciate your efforts. I have found some minor errors in the letter
and have made an effort to provide possible corrections in (....).
Please try to have a native speaker look at the letter before it is sent.

Zongli Lin 
==============================3333=========================

>From: "Ray Everett (AILA)" <nnnnn.3454@CompuServe.COM>
To: Mi Mi <hua7291@MED2S0.ENGR.CCNY.CUNY.EDU>
Subject: Re: +Postage Due+Third Call for Signatures And Update

I still don't know what you're trying to achieve by this letter.... Taking
the numbers from the EB-3 category is in the law and would take
legislation through Congress to change. Rita Boie couldn't do anything
anyway, she just writes what she's told to write...she doesn't make
policy. You should be writing to members of Congress...

>From: "Ray Everett (AILA)" <nnnnn.3454@CompuServe.COM>
To: "INTERNET:hua7291@med2c8.engr.ccny.cuny.edu" <hua7291@med2c8.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Subject: Re: +Postage Due+Re: +Postage Due+Third Call for Signatures And Update

xxx xx, who follows CSPA issues for AILA is at 415-xxx-xxxx.
The AILA headquarters is 202-xxx-xxxx.

These numbers are not for distribution to the CCNL netters, but your
committee may use them. 

>From: "Ray Everett (AILA)" <nnnnn.3454@CompuServe.COM>
To: "INTERNET:hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu" <hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Subject: Re: +Postage Due+Re: +Postage Due+Re: +Postage Due+Third Call for Signatures And Update


You may share the numbers with the working committee. I will suggest that
it will be easiest for Mr. xx and Mr. xxxxxx to address your suggestions
if they are written rather than verbally transmitted, simply because of
the sheer volume of calls they receive in a day. 

Good luck.
======================== end ==================================

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Thu Aug 26 13:09:03 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA15740); Thu, 26 Aug 93 13:09:03 CDT
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 13:09:03 CDT
Message-Id: <9308261806.AA19364@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Fourth Call For Signature
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Special Report  infor from  LADs-network        ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to listserv@spike.rice.edu ==
== In mailbody, write: sub lads-l Firstname Lastname=
== In mailbody, write: signoff lads-l              ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================

We have received 290 e-mail signatures up to 8:00am, EDT. Many of 
them contains more than one signature. It is estimated at least 
600 signatures are receive in three days. During the mean time, 
we received many valuable suggestions on grammatical errors, 
detailed corrections, and situation analysis. We sincerely thank 
you all our lads-net supporters. Without your support, we can not 
make this petition signature drive possible. Based on many 
netters suggestion, we have many corrections and revisions in 
this new version. Please continue to send in your signatures and 
comments. Thank you.

As we have expressed all the times, our lads-net has been, and 
will always be a non-political and non-profit organization. We 
are not affiliated with any other political and nonpolitical 
organizations. Our goal is to help our netters, our CSS community 
in general. No matter when you came to this land, we are all 
brothers and sisters. We do not believe a divided CSS community 
is STRONGER. In the past days, Mi Mi, caused some confusion about 
some other organization's name. He sincerely apologizes for that 
inconvenience. 

Some netters have offered strategy suggestions. As we all know, 
the lads issue, might need some legislature change. To lobby the 
Congress means to hire some professional firms to do it. While 
the option is still open, Mi Mi, doubts the feasibility of such 
an option for our lads-net committee alone, based on our 
committee's capabilities. Even as we have reached out to all the 
concerned parties, and for some reasons, some obstacles of fully 
cooperation still exist. With a divided CSS community, nothing, 
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, can be achieved. Please think about this.

Note:
1) Please do not send your signature file to ME. If you do, 
please do not forward the whole package back to me. I have it 
myself.

2) Please forward your comments and suggestions to me. If there 
is someone of English major, please help me to do it better.

3) Please collect as many signatures as you can. We need all the 
parties to participate, including new comer students. From the 
past experience, we all know the number is very important in this 
land. Particularly, we need YOUR SIGNATURES, and your support. 
Please pass the draft petition letters around 
	
Our goal is very simple.
	
1) Push lads into the world-wide-quota: 
	cut the waiting period for lads,
	save the China quota for new comer students;
2) Solve the other lads problems such as DED, 90-day, etc.

With limited resources and manpower, we are trying our best to 
help the whole community.

Mi Mi

Only a Member of

Lads-net Committee

We only need you to give us the following information in 
electronically form, via e-mail, to 

lads-sig@spike.rice.edu
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The desired format is:
Mr./Ms/Miss:Name,Address,City,State,ZipCode,Tel#
        Co-signed Spouse, Mr/Ms:Name(situation, e.g. DED, 90-day, 
etc., if applicable)
        Co-signed Child, Mr/Miss:Name(situation, e.g. DED, 90-
day, etc.,if applicable)

Thank you very much!

Third draft follows:==========================================

					LADs Network Members
					c/o  ********
					*******************

Madam Rita A. Boie
Senior Immigration Examiner
Adjudication Branch
Immigration & Naturalization Services
425 I Street NW, room 5307
Washington, DC 20536

Dear Madam Rita A. Boie,

	We, CSPA principals with Late-Arriving Dependents, and  all 
the sympathetic individuals, who signed their names and addresses 
here, would like to call your kindly attention to the following 
plight involved in subjecting LADs to the China quota.

(1) According to the survey made by IFCSS HQ, there are 
approximately 10000 eligible LADs in the US who may file their 
applications under EB-3 and FB-2 during this August and 
September. Since the annual China quota in EB-3 or FB-2 is about 
2500, only these LADs will make the backlog of China's at least 
four years longer. This means that no other PRC nationals can 
file applications for adjustment of status under EB-3 or FB-2 
categories in the next four years. So those who are eligible to 
adjust their status  in the normal situation will have to wait 
for four more years to file their applications. The recently 
reported decision of INS is to allow those illegally entered PRC 
nationals who came before April 11, 1990, and have obtained an 
advance parole to re-enter US to apply under CSPA. While this new 
decision reflects the spirit of humanitarian and protection which 
are implanted in the  President's Executive Order 12711, those 
added applicants with their LADs are facing more difficulties 
than anyone else. Not only those LADs whose principals entered 
illegally will be queued after those whose principals entered 
legally, which means even  longer waiting period, but also the 
unpredictable number of LADs of illegally entered PRC nationals 
will jam the normal China EB-3 and FB-2 categories for even more 
years. As Americans cherish their traditional family values, 
family unity and humanity, those traditional values are also 
deeply rooted in the Chinese culture and every Chinese family. 
The anticipated long separation of those families resulted from 
visa quota allocation problem will surely bring sadness and 
suffering to those families, and thus contradict the humanitarian 
spirit imbedded in the INA, E.O.12711 and CSPA.

(2) For dependents remaining in China, the situation is even more 
bleak. These individuals, most of them are minor children, as we 
have surveyed among our LADS community; would be required to wait 
in China until visa numbers are available and thus could 
potentially be separated from their parents for many years. The 
separation will not only deprive those minor children of the much 
needed parental care, but also damage the precious family ties.  
In addition, many of the dependents, both in the US. and in 
China, who are now considered children, will reach the age of 21 
prior to visa availability. This would disqualify them for visa 
issuance.

Before more efficient solutions are found, we believe that two 
solutions are practical now.

(1) Re-allocate the LADs into world quota. The CSPA principals 
can be allocated into the world-wide 46,000 quota leftovers for 
fiscal year 1993 and it is reasonable to estimate that there are 
still world-wide quota leftover next years. Instead of letting 
the LADs blocking the doors to China regular EB-3 or EP-2 visas, 
we free these people into the world quota.

(2) A blanket family unity program, we believe, should be 
established to include all late-arriving dependents. This program 
should mirror the benefits of E.O. 12711 to (1) give dependents 
in China that request non immigrant visas to visit family in the 
U.S. favorable consideration and not to be flatly rejected due to 
the "immigrant intent", (2) deem the individual to maintain 
his/her non immigrant status for adjustment purposes, thus to 
eliminate the DED problem faced by the estimated 50% for LADS 
population,(3) provide liberal advance parole; (4) provide 
employment authorization for the dependents while they wait for 
their PR being granted; and (5)allow children under twenty-one on 
the date of the CSPA principal's approval to be eligible for 
adjustment even if they are over twenty-one at the date of 
adjustment. This family unity program would resolve the problems 
involved with the case by case voluntary departure program and 
family separation resulted from non immigrant visa denial.

Thank you for your attention. We are waiting for your kind 
consideration.

Signed by LADs Network members, and co-signed by all the 
concerned and sympathetic PRC nationals

Their names and address are in the following attached pages.


From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Thu Aug 26 20:29:26 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA00230); Thu, 26 Aug 93 20:29:26 CDT
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 20:29:26 CDT
Message-Id: <9308270128.AA12287@lucerne.rice.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: snow@lucerne.rice.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: Jun Wu <snow@lucerne.rice.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: FAQ
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas


This is the a simple FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) about LADnet.
=================================================================== 
 
1. What is LADnet?
 
LADnet is a network dedicated to solve problems related to 
LADs of CSPA principals. It is an email network.


2. How can I join and quit LADnet?

Send your subscription request to listserv@spike.rice.edu, with mailbody as:
	sub LADS-L Firstname Lastname

To signoff, send your request to listserv@spike.rice.edu, with mailbody as:
	signoff LADS-L 


3. How can I post to LADnet?

Send your post, questions, answers, opinions, to lads@lucerne.rice.edu.
Your message will be forwarded to one of the LADnet committee members.
Messages will be regrouped according to their topics and then repackaged.
Packages will be posted regularly to LADnet. Contributions sent during
the night may be posted in the next morning.


4.  How many kinds of packages do we have now?

Currently, we have 5 kinds of packages.
1. Reporting Acceptance/Rejection of application and related information.
2. Questions concerning status such as J-1, J-2, F-2, DED, ect.
3. Questions about filling out forms and about marriage/birth certificates.
4. Misc and personal questions.
5. Special report.

5. Why can't I post to lads-l@spike.rice.edu?

Right now, posting privilege is limited to LADnet committee members.
Please do not post to lads-l@spike.rice.edu, or your posting will be
ignored. Use lads@lucerne.rice.edu instead.


6. Since we are all gurus on anonymous ftp now, is there a site for us?

Yes, we've got it now. You can use anonymous ftp to retrieve all the
packages posted to LADnet by committee members. The site is spike.rice.edu,
IP is 128.42.4.157, directory is /lads.


6. What if the network has a problem?

In case of an emergency, please contact snow@lucerne.rice.edu.

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Thu Aug 26 22:10:50 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA00655); Thu, 26 Aug 93 22:10:50 CDT
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 22:10:50 CDT
Message-Id: <01H27VIM8KC2984VR0@draco.rutgers.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: LAD.08-26-93
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

 # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
 #   The following are packed messages sent by LAD-netters in the past few   #
 #   days.  Please address your correspondence to the sender.                #
 #   To sign on, send email to listserv@spike.rice.edu, with mail body as:   #
 #		sub lads-l firstname lastname                                #
 #   To sign off, sendm email to listserv@spike.rice.edu, with mail body as: #
 #		signoff lads-l                                               #
 #   Please send your post, questions, answers, opinions, to                 #
 #		lads@lucerne.rice.edu .                                      #
 #   You can use anonymous ftp to retrieve the packages posted to LADnet.    #
 #   The site is spike.rice.edu and the directory is /lads.                  #
 # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #



================================================================================
>From:	IN%"zhang@utdallas.edu"  "Jie Zhang" 25-AUG-1993 09:44:10.25

	Questions on J-1/J-2 issues: 

	1.  Should I (CSPA principal) and my spouse(LAD) extend
	    our J-1/J-2 (expired in August) with local INS through
 	    my university's international office, so that my spouse
	    and I maintain lawful status even if our separate 
	    PR applications get rejected ?  

	    The local INS cared about "out-of-status" on spouse
	    very much.  Nowhere in the regulation says what will
	    be the LAD's lawful status if s/he gets rejected by
 	    local INS for various reasons.

   	    I appreciate comments from you who share similar circumstances.

	2.  If I do NOT receive my CSPA principal PR approval 
	    before my spouse's scheduled interview at local INS, will
	    my spouse's application get rejected?  Will my spouse be
	    considered out-of-status during interview with local INS
	    because our J visa expired in August?

	3.  Will the local INS still insist on the 2 yr. home country
	    residence requirement for J-2 spouse on their PR
	    application?  I do NOT have a 2 yr. waiver.  Do I need to
	    file a I-612 for waiver ?  If so, where, local INS ?
    
	    Interim rule seems to say that if CSPA principal gets 
	    approval, then 2-yr waiver results automatically.  Please 
	    confirm this view.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"yudezhao@math.princeton.edu"  "Yude Zhao" 25-AUG-1993 11:06:28.73

	I have a few questions and will appreciate anyanswers or suggestions. 
	I would like to remain anonymous if you post  my questions on the net.
 	Thanks in advance.

    1. 	Although I had 90-day problem, I still filed my PR 
   	application as CSPA principal. And so far so good.
   	i.e. I have already received the receipt.
   	Now if I present this receipt to local INS office and 
	apply for work authorization, will the receipt guarantee
	my success in obtaining the work authorization?
	(I applied for work authorization under the Executive Order
	in June, 1993 and was denied.) 
	There are two kinds of work authorization. One is related to the 
	Executive Order and hence will expire on 1/1/94. Another is 
	simply a general work authorization which 
	lasts until the decision about my PR application is made.
        Which one should I apply for?

    2. 	My wife is a LAD and a J-2 holder. And her J-2 status 
	(together with my J-1)
	expired on 6/26/93, just a few days before I was able to 
	file as CSPA principal. So we did not apply for DED.
	I wonder whether she can file her application now as 
	CSPA derivative with the local INS office.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"xwu@wusun10.utsi.edu" 25-AUG-1993 15:05:12.68

	Is there anyone know whether the passport can be a valid substitution
	of birth certificate for LAD's application?  I remember this issue was 
	post to the INS and they said they will consider it. Is there any 
     	results?

	Can anyone tell me what kind of birth certificate the INS at Baltimore
	accepts?

	Your help is sincerely appreciated!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"DEFANG.PATHLOGY@mhs1.sth.ufl.edu" 25-AUG-1993 18:32:35.03

	I would like to ask a few questions about LAD on J-1:
	1. I understand that LAD on J-1 must get waiver in order to file
	for GC. However, if after getting the waiver, the visa number is
	not current and my J-1 is about to expire, what should I do about
	it? Should I file for GC anyway or should I wait?
	2. Can I file for GC before the waiver is grnated? I heard that
	if I do so, my J-1 visa would be automatically invalid. Is that
	true or not?

	Any information regarding the above two questions will be highly
	appreciated.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From: 	liny@cpu1.omrf.uokhsc.edu
Subject: working permission

	My friend and his wife went THe local INS office today to have an 
	interview for his wife's working permission. The officer told her 
	that she can't get a permission until my friend get GC. This seems 
	not the rule the INS head-office has. Since I was told that the LADS 
	can get working permission ease and now, not later-on. My friend told 
	the officer that in other states, LADS can get WP, why not here? The 
	anwser he got is that the office hasn't get any order like this from 
	head-office.

	Can you give me any useful material to show to the office, so that his 
	wife can get WP soon.

	Thank you!!!!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"cheng@lamont.ldgo.columbia.edu" 26-AUG-1993 13:51:31.14
Subj:	Questions about application of spouses of DED's

	Dear LAD netters,

	I have a few questions regarding to the situations the spouses of 
	people in DED status are facing. Can anyone out there kindly answer 
	the following questions?

	1) Is the spouse of a principal in DED status now eligible for PR 
	   application?
	2) If the answer is yes, is the spouse eligible for working permit 
	   during the waiting period?
	3) If the answer is no, what is she/he supposed to do?

	I didn't follow the situation closely. Hope someone can answer these 
	questions. Thanks in advance.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"rxchen@cbis.ece.drexel.edu" 26-AUG-1993 14:50:24.19

	Hello, I am a LAD. I submitted my application under CSPA derivative 
	to PHILA. INS today. My application was accepted. The problem is that 
	I was told to get Employment Authorization Card in 90 days instead of 
	today. My questions are:
 
 	(1) Did someone else have similar experience as mine? As I remember, 
	    some LAD's do get EAD right after they submit the application.
 	(2) Can I work before I get EAD? Someone told me that I can work with 
	    the process number on the receipt even I haven't got EAD. Is it 
	    true? 

  	I appreciate your time and effort. 

========================== THE END ===========================================

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Fri Aug 27 01:53:41 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA01462); Fri, 27 Aug 93 01:53:41 CDT
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 93 01:53:40 CDT
Message-Id: <9308270650.AA05099@mines.utah.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: jli@mines.utah.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: jli@mines.utah.edu (Jianliang Li)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: 
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas


		============================
		BEIJING 2000 OLYMPICS UPDATE
			 08/26/93      
		============================


	Our Day 2 has been very successful.  For results, see the signature
list attached below.  I just barely finish compiling and haven't got a
chance to check.   If there are any mistakes or changes, please let me know
(attach the NAME NO. please!).  I'm sorry for any mistyping.

	One guy was trying to crash CHINA2000 by sending a huge 410 KByte
email to CHINA2000 account. He covered his track pretty nicely. However,
the account has been taken care very well by my friend.  No damage at all.
We have reported the problem through the proper channels.  It also 
reminds me to backup all the files on my floppy disks!

	For those who would  like to add your signatures to the list,  please
send:	

		YOUR NAME	SCHOOL OR CITY      COUNTRY
		-------------------------------------------
TO:

		************************	
		CHINA2000@SPIKE.RICE.EDU
		************************


	Thanks for your support!


Jianliang Li (JLi)
University of Utah
JLI@MINES.UTAH.EDU
8/26/93




-------------------------------------------------------------------------

	We firmly support Beijing's bid for the 2000 Olympics!

Signed by:
----------

1.  	Jianliang Li	University of Utah 		USA
2.   	Wumin Dong	Michigan State University	USA
3.	Yisheng Zheng	Ohio State University 		USA 
4.	Jie Guan	Rutgers University 		USA
5.	Jun Wu		Rice University			USA
6.	Yi Li		Salt Lake City			USA
7.	Wei Wu		Kent State University		USA
8.	Fang Wang	University of Texas at Austin	USA
9	Shuning Tian	Texas Tech. University		USA
10.	Jean Kong	Texas Tech. University		USA
11.	Peihong Ding	University of Utah		USA
12.	Liangqui Chen	UCSD				USA
13.	Gong, Jason 	jgong@uu2.psi.com		USA
14.	Trinh, Jack 	from jgong@uu2.psi.com		USA
15.	Men, Michelle 	from jgong@uu2.psi.com		USA
16.	Sa, Jeff 	from jgong@uu2.psi.com		USA
17.	Zhang, LI	from jgong@uu2.psi.com		USA
18.    	Gong, Brian M. 	from jgong@uu2.psi.com		USA
19.	Jingchun Yu	University of Pennsylvania	USA
20.	Gabriel Chang	changgd@mail.beckman.com	USA
21.	Hong Chen	Michigan State University	USA
22.	Jinlong Xu	University of Utah		USA
23.	Hong-Bing Su	UC Davis			USA
24.	Jun Gu		Boston University		USA
25.	Dapeng Xiong	University of Texas at Austin	USA
26.	Banghe Xing	Techenische Uni. Braunscheig	Germany
27.	Li Yang		USC				USA
28.	Zhang Dehong	***************************** 	Holland
29.	Yi-Xiang Zhang	Univ. of Tennessee		USA
30.	Li Liu		Auburn University		USA
31.	Yu Liu		Auburn University		USA
32.	Xia Liu		Auburn University		USA
33.	Yanhong	Zhang	Harvard University		USA
34.	Janhua Ren	Harvard University		USA
35.	Li Wang		Citicorp			USA
36.	Tang, Huang	University of Houston		USA
37.	Li, Hua		University of Houston		USA
38.	Tan		tan@eng.auburn.edu		USA
39.	Eric W. Lee	NYU				USA
40.	Yi Ning		Rutgers University		USA
41.	Rongxin Chen	UT Dallas			USA
42.	Meishan Zhao	University of Chicago		USA
43.	Wei Rong	Wisconsin   			USA
44.	He Ping		Wisconsin			USA
45.	Xiaoli Zhu	xiaoli@koko.gso.uri.edu		USA
46.	Wei Wang	U. Conn.			USA
47.	Liu, Jie	University of Utah		USA
48.	Shiping Zhang	U. Conn.			USA
49.	Jianping Chen	U. Conn.			USA
50.	Sean H. Sun	U. Conn.			USA
51.	Xun Yu		U. Conn.			USA
52.	Chihua Chang	U. Conn.			USA
53.	Decai Zhu	University of Columbia		USA
54.	Jiafu Luo	CalTech				USA
55.	Zheng, Wei	SUNY @ Stony Brook		USA
56.	Zhiyun Xie	Florida State University	USA
57.	Chen, Dong	Columbia University		USA
58.	Rui Liu		Seattle				USA
59.	Haicheng Ni	ni@adra.com			USA
60.	Kwan, Vito	ACCVTK@VAXC.HOFSTRA.EDU		USA
61.	Yuelin Zou	Cornell University		USA
62.	Qin, Ziwei	University of Hawaii		USA
63.	Ji, Shaoquan	Rice University			USA
64.	Shenglin Ben	Purdue University		USA
65.	Jian Shi	Michigan State University	USA
66.	Jing Jiao	Michigan State University	USA
67.	Di Shi		Michigan State University	USA
68.	Detang Shi	Texas Tech. University		USA
69.	Jin-shan Hu	Brandeis University		USA
70.	Wilson Yan	University of Auckland		?
71.	Song Liang	University of Arizona		USA
72.	Wei-Min Lu	California Institute of Tech.	USA
73.	Jianwei Wang	Paris				France
74.	Zhou, Liping	University of Adelaide		Australia	
75.	Kuang, Zhanling	kuang@kjemi.unit.no		Norway
76.	Zhang, Wenxin	University of Oslo		Norway
76.	Wu, Bin		University of Oslo		Norway
77.	Zhao, Yuexing	UC Berkeley			USA
78.	Ma, Bo-qiang	Frankfurt University		Germany
79.	Yu, Zhi-wu	King's College, London		UK
80.	Miao, Shihua	University of Southampton	UK
81.	Wang Yanyu      Darmstadt			Germany
82.	Yang cheng     	Darmstadt			Germany	
83.	He   haiyan     Darmstadt			Germany
84.	yan  sha        Darmstadt			Germany
85.	Jian Wu		Jian.wu@histocel.umu.se		?
86.	Cheng Che	University Of Michigan		USA
87.	Qin Zen		Ohio State University		USA
88.	Xue-Feng Yuan	University of Cambridge		UK
89.	Duan Qiang Wang	The Open University		UK
90.	Han, Xiaoyan	University of Jyvaskla		Finland
91.	Ye He		yhe1@cc.swarthmore.edu		?
92.	Cao De Bi	cdb@me.titech.ac.jp		Japan
93.	Yu, Xiaohan	Tech. Res. Cnetre of Finland	Finland
94.	Ling Shi 	Sheffield 			UK
95.	Li Shencai	University of Warwick		UK
96.	Wang Zhiyan	-------(same)--------		UK
97.	Min Lequan	-------(same)--------		UK
98.	James Ji	-------(same)--------		UK
99.	Chu DaPing	-------(same)--------		UK
100.	Yu Yue		-------(same)--------		UK


101.	Hong Feng	University of Warwick		UK
102.	Li Yanming	-------(same)--------		UK
103.	Xu Li		-------(same)--------		UK
104.	Quan Chengen	-------(same)--------		UK
105.	Li Ying		-------(same)--------		UK
106.	Liu Zhiming	-------(same)--------		UK
107.	Xu Ying		-------(same)--------		UK
108.	Zhang Zhige	-------(same)--------		UK
109.	Ni Jian		-------(same)--------		UK
110.	Huang Dongjie	-------(same)--------		UK
111.	Huan Yousen 	-------(same)--------		UK
112.	Wang Weili	-------(same)--------		UK
113.	Zheng Youxin	-------(same)--------		UK
114.	Liu Xiaoyang	-------(same)--------		UK
115.	Liu Jiaweing	-------(same)--------		UK
116.	Pu Mengyi	-------(same)--------		UK
117.	Wang, Huisheng	ng@klizix.mpi-stuttgart.mpg.de	?
118.	Liu Chun	University of Birmingham	UK
119.	S. Li		Osaka University		Japan
120.	Song Y. Yan	Brunell University		England
121.	Gao, Donglie	D.L.Gao@bradford.ac.uk		UK
122.	Peng, Puping	University of Manchester	UK
123.	X. Huang	University of London		UK
124.	Y. Shan		-------(same)--------		UK
125.	Z. Luo		-------(same)--------		UK
126.	D. Hua 		-------(same)--------		UK
127.	S. Wu		-------(same)--------		UK
128.	Tao, Xiaoyong	msaxyt@cent1.lancs.ac.uk	UK
129.	Ren, Yonghong	ren@casc.com			USA
130.	Lin, Fengqi	Univ. of Missouri		USA
131.	Yin, Zhangshi	U of OK				USA
132.	Chen, Weiran	Datmouth Medical School		USA
133.	Guo, Qinghui	Northwestern University		USA
134.	Jiang, Tiebing	Arizona State University	USA
135.	Wei, Yiping	---------(same)---------	USA
136.	LI, Feng	University of Rochester		USA
137.	Bin Zhou	Kansas State University		USA
138.	Qin, Caigong	Oxford University		UK
139.	Qingping L	Wisconsin			USA
140.	You, Xuejuan	Indana State University		USA
141.	Lin, Fengchun	---------(same)---------	USA
142.	Chuang Peng	UGA				USA
143.	Yuan, Jie	University of Cincinnati	USA
144.	Zhang, Jian	jzhang@hibbs.vcu.edu		USA
145.	Ling Z Zhao	San Diego State Univ.		USA
146.	Jason Tian	Rockefeller University		USA
147.	Zhao, W.	McGill University		Canada
148.	Lu, Shenglin	Univ. of Michigan		USA
149.	Liu, Hanxing 	University of Pennsylvania	USA
150.	Li, Dewei	University of Waterloo		Canada
151.	Yan Ma		----------(same)----------	Canada
152.	Huang, Zhenjia	Tech. Univ. of Nova Scotia	Canada
153.	Yan, Yifeng	Princeton University		USA
154.	Qiu, Rongying	----------(same)----------	USA
155.	Wang, Zhaoxi	USUHS				USA
156.	Qin Kai		Brussels Free Univ. 		Belgium
157.	Shiqui Ruan	Waterloo			Canada
158.	Song Yu		Princeton University		USA
159.	Zhang, Jian	jzhang@hibbs.vcu.edu		USA
160.	Qian, Yifei	GA Tech				USA
161.	Wu, Laosheng	U. of MN			USA
162.	Zhang, Xiaoming	MIT				USA
163.	Ruisheng Peng	UIUC				USA
164.	Xu Kuan		Concordia University		Canada
165.	Huang, J.	jhuangp@andy.bgsu.edu		USA
166.	Xin, Jiannong	U. of FL.			USA
167.	Xu, Guoliang	Purdue University		USA
168.	Yang Wang	wangy@gmsds.ms.ornl.gov		USA
169.	Tang Qi		University of Sussex		UK
170.	Bo Wang		Clemson University		USA
171.	Lin		lin@ccmailpc.ctron.com		USA
172.	Xie, Xuezheng	University of Kentucky		USA
173.	Kai Tang	tang%aa1@aaaca1.SINet.SLB.COM	USA
174.	Zhong Ding	Univ. of Rochester		USA
175.	Qiu, Haiming	Univ. of Alberta		Canada
176.	Cao, Zhenlei	Univ. of Saskatchewan		Canada
177.	Zhang, Yushen	UC Santa Cruz			USA
178.	Feng Gao	gf@scs.leeds.ac.uk		UK
179.	Yuan, Huxin	Univ. of Southampton		UK
180.	Cheng, Xiaoming	---------(same)--------		UK
181.	Sun, Chengyong	Trieste				Italy
182.	Fu Ping		---------(same)--------		Italy
183.	Huo, Tongru	Osaka Univ.			Japan
184.	Chen, Xiaohong	U. of Texas at Austin		USA
185.	Bai Ming	Univ. of Melbourne & RMIT	Australia
186.	Tong, Yuejon	yuejon@nagus.bms.com		USA
187.	Yu, Xiaoming	Univ. of Iowa			USA
188.	Wu, Yegang	Florida				USA
189.	Mo, Le-wei	Standford			USA
190.	Zheng, Youlu	Univ. of Montana		USA
191.	Zhang, Bo	Purdue				USA
192.	Peter Qian	pqian@MSI.COM			USA
193.	Yiming Zhu	----------(same)----------	USA
194.	Shi, Jianming	University of Tsukuba		Japan
195.	Shen, Xiqiang	Strasbourg			France
196.	Li, Jianping	jianping@sirius.UVic.CA		Canada
197.	Hu, Hongxing	GMC				USA
198.	Wang, Lifeng	wang@cs.ubc.ca			Canada
199.	Zhao, Tiemin 	Stanford			USA
200.	Huan, Shuye	-----------(same)----------	USA


201.	Ning, Shoucheng	Stanford			USA
201.	Liu, Ying	liuy@mayo.edu			USA
202.	Jie Zhang	MIT				USA
203.	Wang, Huangxin	Univ. of Penn			USA
204.	Jian Jun Duan	U. Mass.			USA
205.	Feng Chen	fchen@taec.com			USA
206.	Zhu, Shihe	Zhu.hiHe@esat.kuleuven.ac.be	Belgium
207.	Zhang, Junqing	Univ. of FL			USA
208.	Zhang, Linglan	Univ. of Maryland		USA
209.	Yuan Pen	Univ. of Alberta		Canada
210.	Ning Jiang	UCLA				USA
211.	Jie Xu		Helsinki			Finland
212.	Song, Yulin	Sam Houston University		USA
213.	Liu, Dan	Sam Houston University		USA
214.	Xie Jiang	Sam Houston University		USA
215.	Tang, Xiqi	Sam Houston University		USA
216.	Sun, Huiqin	Sam Houston University		USA
217.	Chen, Hansheng	Sam Houston University		USA
218.	Du, Xiangyang	Sam Houston University		USA
219.	Xu, Jun		Sam Houston University		USA
220.	Xu, G.		Sam Houston University		USA
221.	Fan Jiang	Sam Houston University		USA
222.	Li, Min		Sam Houston University		USA
223.	Xu, Yang	Sam Houston University		USA
224.	Xu, Wenjun	Sam Houston University		USA
225.	Chen, Jiang	Sam Houston University		USA
226.	Zhu, Yingchun	Sam Houston University		USA
227.	Lou, Rongqing	Sam Houston University		USA
228.	Wang, Fuhua	Sam Houston University		USA
229.	Song, Yuanyuan	Sam Houston University		USA
230.	Wu, Jun		Sam Houston University		USA
231.	Huang Qun	Sam Houston University		USA
232.	Jiang, Yuli	Sam Houston University		USA
233.	Qian, Huzhuang	Sam Houston University		USA
234.	Luo, Guoqing	Sam Houston University		USA
235.	Li, Peishu	Sam Houston University		USA
236.	Dong, Shuyan	Sam Houston University		USA
237.	Wang, O.	Sam Houston University		USA
238.	Liu, Jianhui	University of Utah		USA
239.	Zhang, Zhen	Rutgers Univ.			USA
240.	Zhang, Zhihua	Rutgers Univ.			USA
241.	Liang Feng	Univ. of Calgary		Canada
242.	Lin Dong	Univ. of Toronto		Canada
243.	Zhang, Wandong	UGG00505@vm.uoguelph.ca		Canada
244.	Li, Xin		UCLA				USA
245.	Chen, Pengyuan	chen@nic.gac.edu		USA
246.	Kang Zhao	University of Utah		USA
247.	Lu, Ming	mlu@caliban.bme-mri.jhu.edu	USA
248.	Li, Yi		Univ. of Washington		USA
249.	Jiang, Z.	Univ. of New England		Australia
250.	Peng Tu		ptu@cs.ubc.ca			Canada
251.	Chen Song Xi	Hobart, Tasmania		Australia
252.	Dong, Zunqi	Griffith Univ. 			Australia
253.	Li, Hui		Univ. of Mass.			USA
254.	Li, Shuqin	910575A@DARWIN.NTU.EDU.AU	Australia
255.	Zhao, Yuejen	910575A@DARWIN.NTU.EDU.AU	Australia
256.	Xie, Zhiyun	FSU				USA
257.	Yu, Yongqing	GA Tech.			USA
258.	Zeng, Xiayun	Univ. of Penn.			USA
259.	Wang, Huangxin	Univ. of Penn.			USA
260.	Li, Weidong	weidong@cs.umb.edu		USA
261.	Guo, Fengmao	Univ. of Hawaii			USA
262.	Chen, Fan	Griffith Univ.			Australia
263.	Li, Qing	Tokyo				Japan
264.	Zhen Ding	Univ. of Maryland		USA
265.	Chen, Pu	N. Arizona Univ.		USA
266.	Chen, Xiaohong	Austin, Texas			USA
267.	Alice H. Su	Maryland			USA
268.	Lan Wang	Maryland			USA
269.	Lin, Pengxin	Maryland			USA
270.	Taiping Ye	Univ. of Conn.			USA
271.	Li Li          	Auburn, AL             		USA
272.	Claire Tan     	Auburn, AL             		USA
273.	Yan Wan       	Uconn, Storrs       		USA 
274.	Gao, youhe	gao@mbcg.uchc.edu		USA
275.	Ye Ding		yxd01@wadsworth.ph.albany.edu	USA
276.	Yanhui Yu	College Station, Texas		USA
277.	Jiasong Fang 	---------(same)-----------	USA
278.	Yang Fang	---------(same)-----------	USA 
279.	Yan Fang	---------(same)-----------	USA 
280.	Quoqiang He	---------(same)-----------	USA
281.	Minwei Li	---------(same)-----------	USA
282.	Jian He		---------(same)-----------	USA
283.	Bin Lin   	Case Western Reserve Univ.      USA
284.	Jianmei Yu  	Case Western Reserve Univ.    	USA
285.	Zhaosong Lin    Cleveland, Ohio             	USA
286.	Zhang, Zhidong 	Brandeis University   		USA
287.	He Liang  	Johnson & Wales Univ., RI	USA
288.	Xu, Dianxun    	Marquette Univ., Milwaukee	USA
289.	Xiaojun Wang   	UC Davis                        USA
290.	YueKuan Li  	Northwestern University     	USA
291.	YUAN, Fang      Northwestern University         USA
292.	Jeanne Yin      Loyola University of Chicago    USA
293.	SUN, JINMING	GR8629@siucvmb.siu.edu		USA
294.	SHUZHENG LIU	GR9123@siucvmb.siu.edu		USA
295.	Gao, Y.		Birmingham			UK
296.	Jason J. Huang	Ohio State Univ.		USA
297.	XUE-DONG ZHAN 	Northwestern University		USA
298.	Chen, Zheng     University of Connecticut	USA
299.	Huang, Yibo	UNIV. OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO 	USA
300.	Lianggui chen 	UCSD				USA


301.	shunping Zhuang	UCSD				USA
302.	Li wu		UCSD				USA
303.	shurong zhuang	UCSD				USA
304.	Yahong Jiang	Maryland			USA
305.	Xiaoyi Wu	UC Berkeley			USA
306.	Dongfen Gao    	University of Connecticut    	USA
307.	ZHANG,Xiaolong  Northwestern University         USA
308.	Jing Gui	SeaMagII@mhs.attmail.com	USA
309.	Timothy K. Xia  Atlanta Georgia			USA
310.	Helen   F. Xia  Atlanta Georgia			USA
311.	Mona  Xia       Atlanta Georgia			USA
312.	Lisa  Xia       Atlanta Georgia			USA
313.	Jun Wang	Stanford University		USA
314.	Baiping Xie   	Lawton, Oklahoma		USA
315.	Tianwen Ling  	Cameron University, Oklahoma	USA
316.	Yixiu Huang     Univ. of Illinios, Chicago	USA
317.	Daisy L. Huang  Harold Washington College	USA
318.	Yong Ren     	Boston     			USA
319.	Hong Xing Hu	Rochester Hills, MI		USA
320.	Shan Li		Rochester Hills, MI		USA
321.	Peng Hu		Rochester Hills, MI		USA
322.	Tom Chen Hu	Rochester Hills, MI		USA
323.	Kaien Li	Wayne State University		USA
324.	Zeyuan Wu	U. of Notre Dame		USA
325.	Dongzi Liu	University of Maryland 		USA
326.	Jianian shen	Ohio State Univ.		USA
327.	Xiaohong Liu	Ohio State Univ.		USA
328.	YAN MING WANG	Ohio State Univ.		USA
329.	Yihua Xiong	Florida Int'l Univ.		USA
330.	Lihua Chen	Florida Int'l Univ.		USA
326.	Jieyu Zhang	Ohio State Univ.		USA
327.	Hu, Ty		Rutgers Univ.			USA
328.	Yuan-Hua Ding   Pittsburgh			USA
328.	Mei Liu   	Pittsburgh			USA
329.	Xiongwen Rui	Columbus, OHIO			USA
330.	Jianhua Zhou	University of Pittsburgh	USA
331.	Rong Xue	Ohio State Univ.		USA
332.	Yuan Hu		Ohio State Univ.		USA
333.	Jianxiong Song, Michigan State University	USA
334.	Guangxi Wu      Univ. of B. C., Vancouver	Canada
335.	Linan Yu        Vancouver,  B. C.  		Canada
336.	Xiaoming Zhang  MIT             		USA
337.	Peiying Gong    Cambridge, MA   		USA
338.	Lingbo Zhang    Cambridge, MA   		USA
339.	Yinghui Jiang   Cambridge, MA   		USA
340.	Gao youhe 	Uconn Health Center 		USA
341.	Zhan-Gong Zhao  University of Arizona		USA
342.	Pipei GUO       University of Arizona		USA
343.	Ming XUE      	MIT 				USA
344.	Zheng Wang	Princeton Univ.			USA
345.	Bai, Lin	Rockefeller University		USA
346.	Hu, Yun		Rockefeller University		USA
347.	Liming Cai      Texas A&M University		USA
348.	Weiping Xie     Texas A&M University		USA
349.	Jianzheng Zhao  Columbia University		USA
350.	Ming Z. Liu     New York City			USA
351.	Weiming Liu     New York City			USA
352.	Hua, Chongyu    Peoria, Illinois  		USA
353.	Wu, Beifang     Bradley University, Illinois  	USA
354.	Yongmin Guan	Brookhaven National Lab		USA
355.	Li, Xiao-wei	Columbia University		USA
356.	Nanfei Xu	Univ. of Guelph, Ontario	Canada
357.	Gemao Huang   	Northeastern U, Boston		USA
358.	Shi   Huang   	B.H. college, Boston		USA
359.	Ruo   Huang   	Northeastern U,Boston		USA
360.	Lu Situ       	Northeastern U, Malden		USA
361.	HoiBen Ng     	Northeastern U, Boston		USA
362.	Jong Liu      	Boston U, Boston		USA
363.	Wubin Situ    	Medford H.S. Medford		USA
364.	Yizhang Mo	OHIO-STATE			USA
365.	Zhiwen Zheng	Stanford University		USA
366.	Hongyu Wu	Stanford University		USA
367.	Fang-ming Wu    Vanderbilt University		USA
368.	Hong Liu        Vanderbilt University		USA
369.	Chaoming Zhang 	Uinv. of Washington, Seattle	USA
370.	ZHU WEIYUAN     UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH, ONTARIO	CANADA
371.	CHEN YINGYING   UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH, ONTARIO	CANADA
372.	Xiangyang Pan	Minnesota			USA	
373.	Qianhua Zhao	Minnesota			USA
374.	Hairu Pan	Minnesota			USA
375.	Heying Ying	Minnesota			USA
376.	Weixiong Liang  University of Wyoming		USA
377.	Weining Lu      University of Wyoming		USA
378.	Jiayi Liang     University of Wyoming		USA
379.	Tingxian Xu     University of Wyoming		USA
380.	Chonghua Gu    	University of Washington	USA
381.	Zheng Yin       Seattle, WA			USA
382.	Elizabeth Y. Gu	Seattle, WA			USA
383.	Ai-Ping Wei	University of Utah		USA
384.	Wenqi Zhu       Northeastern                	USA
385.	Jian Lou    	Denver, colorado		USA
386.	Liaosheng Wang	Westminster Co 80020		USA
387.	Min Zhu		Colorado			USA
388.	Lei Yu		Kingston, Ontario		Canada
389.	Shenshi Wang	Kingston, Ontario		Canada
390.	Tom Yu		Kingston, Ontario		Canada
391.	Shaoping Xie	Rutgers University		USA
392.	Xiao, Ning	UT Austin			USA
393.	Zonghou Xiong	University of Utah		USA
394.	Mengjie Wang	ohio-state			USA
395.	XU, Huifang     Johns Hopkins University	USA
396.	SHAN, Zufang    Johns Hopkins University	USA
397.	Wang Zengxiang 	Queen's University Kingston 	Canada
398.	Kenong Wu	McGill University		Canada
399.	Lin Lin		McGill University		Canada


400.	Yanjun Wei	McGill University		Canada
401.	Chi Zhang	McGill University		Canada
402.	Jing Zhang	McGill University		Canada
403.	Xianze Chen	McGill University		Canada
404.	Fanbing Yuen	McGill University		Canada
405.	Changsheng Xi	Iowa State University		USA
406.	Jianlin Chang	Queen's University		Canada
407.	Liu, Xin   	SFSU    			USA
408.	Tainrui Zhou    University of Kansas		USA
409.	Gui, Jing   	UC Berkeley   			USA
410.	Tainrui Zhou    University of Kansas   		USA 
411.	Qing Cheng      University of Kansas   		USA
412.	Ma, Shaolong    Johns Hopkins U. 		USA
413.	Gao, Tieyong    El Paso				USA
414.	Gao, Daquan     El Paso				USA
415.	Lingbo Cao	Queen's Univ. at Kingston     	Canada
415.	Pan Ling	Queen's Univ. at Kingston     	Canada
416.	Jianfang Peng	Ohio State University		USA
417.	Wu Wen   	NTT Comm. Sci. Lab.  Kyoto	Japan
418.	Jun Zhao	Ohio State University		USA
419.	Jianfeng Su	James Cook University		Australia
420.	Shao, Ning 	College Park, MD 		USA
420.	Wang, Tianmei 	College Park, MD 		USA
421.	Yan, Yun 	College Park, MD 		USA
422.	REN-JIE ZHANG 	JOHNS HOPKINS U, BALTIMORE, MD	USA
423.	Liming Zhang,  	North Carolina State University	USA.
424.	Xiaojing Fan	Ohio State University           USA		
425.	Wei Qiu		Queen's University              Canada
426.	Huifang Wu	Queen's University              Canada
427.	Qinglai Sheng  	U of G Guelph. Ont. 		Canada
428.	XiuZhen Li     	U of G Guelph. Ont. 		Canada
429.	Chuanguo Zhang	Univ. of Maryland		USA
430.	He, Ming	University of Utah		USA
431.	David G. Dai	Medical College of Wisconsin	USA
432.	Jiang, Jiandong	University of Guelp		CANADA
433.	Fang Lin	George Mason University		USA
434.	Sufei Li  	University Of Maryland		USA
435.	Geeng-Tyng Shaw	gtshaw@kvsun11.ccl.itri.org.tw	Taiwan, China
436.	Hua Lin		Texas A&M University		USA
437.	Xiaohua Jiang	Texas A&M University		USA
438.	Ge Zhang	ZHANGG@FNALV.FNAL.GOV		?




From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Fri Aug 27 08:05:31 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA03198); Fri, 27 Aug 93 08:05:31 CDT
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 93 08:05:31 CDT
Message-Id: <9308271303.AA21568@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Fifth Call for Signature and Update
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Special Report  infor from  LADs-network        ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to listserv@spike.rice.edu ==
== In mailbody, write: sub lads-l Firstname Lastname=
== In mailbody, write: signoff lads-l              ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================

We have received 336 e-mail signatures up to 8:00am, EDT. Many of 
them contains more than one signature. It is estimated at least 
700 signatures are receive in four days. Compared with our list's 
population, over 1000 subscribers alone, this signature drive 
only gets 1/3 of our dear netter's responses. While lads-net 
committee has helped many netters problems with PR applications, 
this signature drive is another initiative of lads-net committee 
aimed to serve you better. Please show us your support and send 
in your signatures and support. Without your support, we can not 
make this petition signature drive possible. For those who gave 
us suggestions, corrections and revisions, here is our new 
version. We sincerely thank you all our lads-net supporters.

Yesterday, a CSPA mother called me on the phone. She expressed so 
vividly her desperation, frustration, and sadness resulted from 
her separation from her only child for over six years. Although 
Mi Mi never meets her in person, he was really moved by her 
story. She could be your sister. She could be your wife. She 
could be yourself. Think about this.

We are going to send this letter to various government officials, 
especially White House, Justice Department, and Congress. Please 
supply us with these agencies addresses, fax numbers, etc. While 
we lads-net is going to send them collectively, you are also 
encouraged to send in your own message. 

As we have expressed all the times, our lads-net has been, and 
will always be a non-political and non-profit organization. We 
are not affiliated with any other political and nonpolitical 
organizations. Our goal is to help our netters, our CSS community 
in general. No matter when you came to this land, we are all 
brothers and sisters. 

Some netters have offered strategy suggestions. As we all know, 
the lads issue, might need some legislature change. To lobby the 
Congress means to hire some professional firms to do it. While 
the option is still open, Mi Mi, doubts the feasibility of such 
an option for our lads-net committee alone, based on our 
committee's capabilities. Even as we have reached out to all the 
concerned parties, and for some reasons, some obstacles of fully 
cooperation still exist. With a divided CSS community, nothing, 
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, can be achieved. Please think about this.

Note:
1) Please do not send your signature file to ME. If you do, 
please do not forward the whole package back to me. I have it 
myself.

2) Please forward your comments and suggestions to me. If there 
is someone of English major, please help me to do it better.

3) Please collect as many signatures as you can. We need all the 
parties to participate, including new comer students. From the 
past experience, we all know the number is very important in this 
land. Particularly, we need YOUR SIGNATURES, and your support. 
Please pass the draft petition letters around.
	
Our goal is very simple.
	
1) Push lads into the world-wide-quota: 
	cut the waiting period for lads,
	save the China quota for new comer students;
2) Solve the other lads problems such as lads in China, DED, 
90 day-rule, etc.

With limited resources and manpower, we are trying our best to 
help the whole community.

Mi Mi

Member of

Lads-net Committee

We need you to give us the following information in 
electronically form, via e-mail, to 

lads-sig@spike.rice.edu
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The desired format is:
Mr./Ms/Miss:Name,Address,City,State,ZipCode,Tel#
        Co-signed Spouse, Mr/Ms:Name(situation, e.g. 
lad in China, DED, 90-day, etc., if applicable)
        Co-signed Child, Mr/Miss:Name(situation, e.g. 
lad in China, DED, 90-day, etc.,if applicable)

Thank you very much!

Fifth draft follows:==========================================

					LADs Network Members
					c/o  ********
					*******************

Madam Rita A. Boie
Senior Immigration Examiner
Adjudication Branch
Immigration & Naturalization Services
425 I Street NW, room 5307
Washington, DC 20536

Dear Madam Rita A. Boie,

	We, CSPA principals with Late-Arriving Dependents, and  all 
the sympathetic individuals, who signed their names and addresses 
here, would like to call your kindly attention to the following 
plight involved in subjecting LADs to the China quota.

(1) According to the survey made by IFCSS HQ, there are 
approximately 10000 eligible LADs in the US who may file their 
applications under EB-3 and FB-2 during this August and 
September. Since the annual China quota in EB-3 or FB-2 is about 
2500, only these LADs will make the backlog of China's at least 
four years longer. This means that no other PRC nationals can 
file applications for adjustment of status under EB-3 or FB-2 
categories in the next four years. So those who are eligible to 
adjust their status in the normal situation will have to wait for 
four more years to file their applications. The recently reported 
decision of INS is to allow those illegally entered PRC nationals 
who came before April 11, 1990, and have obtained an advance 
parole to re-enter US to apply under CSPA. While this new 
decision reflects the humanitarian and protection spirit which 
are implanted in the  President's Executive Order 12711, those 
added applicants with their LADs are facing more difficulties 
than anyone else. Not only those LADs whose principals entered 
illegally will be queued after those whose principals entered 
legally, which means even longer waiting period, but also the 
unpredictable number of LADs of illegally entered PRC nationals 
will jam the normal China EB-3 and FB-2 categories for even more 
years. As Americans cherish their traditional family unity, 
family values and humanity, those traditional values are also 
deeply rooted in the Chinese culture and every Chinese family. 
The anticipated long separation of those families resulted from 
visa quota allocation problem will surely bring sadness and 
suffering to those families, and thus contradict the humanitarian 
spirit imbedded in the INA, E.O.12711 and CSPA.

(2) For dependents remaining in China, the situation is even more 
bleak. These individuals, most of them are minor children, as we 
have surveyed among our LADS community; would be required to wait 
in China until visa numbers are available and thus could 
potentially be separated from their parents for many years. The 
separation will not only deprive those minor children of the much 
needed parental care, but also damage the precious family ties of 
those families. In addition, many of the dependents, both in the 
US. and in China, who are now considered children, will reach the 
age of 21 prior to visa availability. This would disqualify them 
for visa issuance.

Before more efficient solutions are found, we believe that two 
solutions are practical now.

(1) Re-allocate the LADs into world quota. The CSPA principals 
can be allocated into the world-wide 46,000 quota leftovers for 
fiscal year 1993 and it is reasonable to estimate that there are 
still world-wide quota leftover next years. Instead of letting 
the LADs blocking the doors to China regular EB-3 or EP-2 visas, 
we free these people into the world quota.

(2) A blanket family unity program, we believe, should be 
established to include all late-arriving dependents. This program 
should mirror the benefits of E.O. 12711 to (1) give dependents 
in China who request non immigrant visas to visit family in the 
U.S. favorable consideration and not to be flatly rejected due to 
the "immigrant intent", (2) deem the individual to maintain 
his/her non immigrant status for adjustment purposes, thus to 
eliminate the DED problem faced by the estimated 50% for LADS 
population,(3) provide liberal advance parole, (4) provide 
employment authorization for the dependents while they wait for 
their PR being granted; and (5)allow children under twenty-one on 
the date of the CSPA principal's approval to be eligible for 
adjustment even if they are over twenty-one at the date of 
adjustment. This family unity program would resolve the problems 
involved with the case by case voluntary departure program and 
family separation resulted from non immigrant visa denial.

Thank you for your attention. We are waiting for your kind 
consideration.

Signed by LADs Network members, and co-signed by all the 
concerned and sympathetic PRC nationals

Their names and address are in the following attached pages.


From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Fri Aug 27 15:50:21 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA00591); Fri, 27 Aug 93 15:50:21 CDT
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 93 15:50:21 CDT
Message-Id: <9308272047.AA22447@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Confidential 
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas


Hi, netters! Since there are still 2/3 netters who did not responde to 
the signature calls, we hereby announce that, all of your signatures ARE,
and will always be, CONFIDENTIAL, only for the purpose of petition.
Your signatures WILL NOT BE USED OR RELEASED for ANY OTHER PURPOSES.
When we finalize our petition letter, we will send them to appropriate
US agencies. We will also publish a copy and all the addresses of the US
agencies so you can send your own copies to these agencies. Please remember,
there is no free lunch at all. CSPA is very special. When it comes to your 
lads, you have to take care for yourselves. To the best of my knowledge,
you should, our dear lads-net netters, make some noise, at least. Otherwise
ONBODY, ABSOLUTELT NOBODY hears you.

Mi Mi


From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Sat Aug 28 09:42:38 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA04030); Sat, 28 Aug 93 09:42:38 CDT
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 93 09:42:38 CDT
Message-Id: <9308281440.AA24647@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Letters to the Editor
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Special Report  infor from  LADs-network        ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to listserv@spike.rice.edu ==
== In mailbody, write: sub lads-l Firstname Lastname=
== In mailbody, write: signoff lads-l              ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================
======================================
>From: Jie Zhang <zhang@utdallas.edu>
Hi, Signature drive organizer:

    I read a letter to the eidtor from Y. Li (8/26/93) on the
    issue of lobby strategy and signature drive.  I have to
    agree with his view that coordination with IFCCS and NCCA
    and Dr. Zhao is ESSENTIAL.  Otherwise, INS HQ would NOT
    listen to the opinions of LAD community alone; simply too
    many conflicting petitions from various Chinese groups.

    Without the endorsement of IFCCS and NCCA and Dr. Zhao, any
    petition effort by LAD community alone will be NOT productive
    at best, if not counter productive.  If signature from LC
    is needed, CND general will be more effetive.  It is very
    advisable to consult with NCCA and Dr. Zhao on this
    matter; it seems that HE is credible in the circle of
    Washington, and has access to legal resources.

    Minimum the LAD committee can do is to send the signature
    and letter to NCCA and IFCCS, and ask their advice and
    leadership in this matter.

    Your effort in organizing action within LAD community is
   appreciated sincerely.
================================================
>From: CAI@neurophys.wisc.edu
Subject: Re: Fifth Call for Signature and Update

Hi,
        Thank you for your work.  I just want to point out a general format
of an English text.  According to my collegues, there should be TWO spaces
after a period ".".  You can check with others and make sure.

If I re-type the above again, using the format you used:

        Thank you for your work. I just want to point out a general format
of an English text. According to my collegues, there should be TWO spaces
after a period ".". You can check with others and make sure.

I think you can see the difference of the visual effects.  I think the
content of the letter is not bad, but the wording and the English is NOT
good enough.  You don't want to give INS the impression that we LADs could
not find one who is able to write good English, right?  I would NOT send
the letter as it is, nor sign it.  Sorry I am just picky but not suggestive.

Yidao Cai
=====================


From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Sat Aug 28 09:49:40 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA04071); Sat, 28 Aug 93 09:49:40 CDT
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 93 09:49:40 CDT
Message-Id: <9308281444.AA24656@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Sixth Call for signature
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

=====================================================
== The following are packed information on         ==
== Special Report  infor from  LADs-network        ==
== ADDRESS correspondences to the ORIGINAL SENDER  ==
== To sign on/off, mail to listserv@spike.rice.edu ==
== In mailbody, write: sub lads-l Firstname Lastname=
== In mailbody, write: signoff lads-l              ==
== To post,        mail to "lads@lucerne.rice.edu" ==
=====================================================
== lads-net committee is a group of volunteers     ==
== who have lads just like you. If you have any    ==
== suggestions, criticisms, comments and concerns, ==
== please let us know. If you want to join us to   ==
== serve the lads-community, you are highly        ==
== encouraged to do so. Mi Mi.                     ==
=====================================================
Hi, netters! Since there are still 2/3 netters who did not 
respond to the signature calls, we hereby announce that, all 
of your signatures ARE, and will always be, CONFIDENTIAL, 
only for the purpose of petition. Your signatures WILL NOT 
BE USED OR RELEASED for ANY OTHER PURPOSES. When we finalize 
our petition letter, we will send them to appropriate U.S. 
agencies. We will also publish a copy of the petition letter 
and all the addresses of the U.S. agencies so you can send 
your own copies to these agencies. Please remember, there is 
no free lunch at all. CSPA is very special. When it comes to 
your lads, you have to take care of yourselves. To the best 
of my knowledge, you should, our dear lads-net netters, make 
some noise, at least. Otherwise NOBODY, ABSOLUTELY NOBODY 
hears you.
Note:
1) Please do not send your signature file to ME. If you do, 
please do not forward the whole package back to me. I have 
it myself.

2) Please forward your comments and suggestions to me. If 
there is someone of English major, please help me to do it 
better.

3) Please collect as many signatures as you can. We need all 
the parties to participate, including new comer students. 
>From the past experience, we all know the number is very 
important in this land. Particularly, we need YOUR 
SIGNATURES, and your support. Please pass the draft petition 
letters around.
	
Our goal is very simple.
	
1) Push lads into the world-wide-quota: 
	cut the waiting period for lads,
	save the China quota for new comer students;
2) Solve the other lads problems such as lads in China, DED, 
90 day-rule, etc.

With limited resources and manpower, we are trying our best 
to help the whole community.

Mi Mi

Member of

Lads-net Committee

We need you to give us the following information in 
electronically form, via e-mail, to 

lads-sig@spike.rice.edu
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The desired format is:
Mr./Ms/Miss:Name,Address,City,State,ZipCode,Tel#
        Co-signed Spouse, Mr/Ms:Name(situation, e.g. 
lad in China, DED, 90-day, etc., if applicable)
        Co-signed Child, Mr/Miss:Name(situation, e.g. 
lad in China, DED, 90-day, etc.,if applicable)

Thank you very much!


Sixth draft follows:==========================================

					LADs Network Members
					c/o  ********
					*******************

Madam Rita A. Boie
Senior Immigration Examiner
Adjudication Branch
Immigration & Naturalization Services
425 I Street NW, Room 5307
Washington, DC 20536

Dear Madam Boie,

	We, CSPA principals with Late-Arriving Dependents, and  all 
the sympathetic individuals, who signed their names and addresses 
here, would like to call your kindly attention to the following 
plight involved in subjecting LADs to the China quota.

(1) According to the survey made by IFCSS HQ, there are 
approximately 10000 eligible LADs in the U.S. who may file their 
applications under EB-3 and FB-2 during this August and 
September. Since the annual China quota in EB-3 or FB-2 is about 
2500, only these LADs will make the backlog of China's at least 
four years longer. This means that no other PRC nationals can 
file applications for adjustment of status under EB-3 or FB-2 
categories in the next four years. So those who are eligible to 
adjust their status in the normal situation will have to wait for 
four more years to file their applications. The recently reported 
decision of INS is to allow those undocumented PRC nationals who 
came before April 11, 1990, and have obtained an advance parole 
to re-enter U.S. to apply under CSPA. While this new decision 
reflects the humanitarian and protection spirit which are 
implanted in the Executive Order 12711, those added applicants 
with their LADs are facing even more difficulties than anyone 
else because their LADs are mostly queued after the existing pool 
of LADs and thus are facing even longer family separation. Not 
only will those LADs whose undocumented principals be queued 
after those whose principals entered legally, which means even 
longer waiting period, but also the unpredictable number of LADs 
of undocumented PRC nationals will jam the normal China EB-3 and 
FB-2 categories for even more years. As Americans cherish their 
traditional family unity, family values and humanity, those 
traditional values are also deeply rooted in the Chinese culture 
and every Chinese family. The anticipated long separation of 
those families resulted from visa quota allocation problem will 
surely bring sadness and suffering to those families, and thus 
contradict the humanitarian spirit imbedded in the INA, E.O.12711 
and CSPA.

(2) For dependents remaining in China, the situation is even more 
bleak. These individuals, most of them are minor children, as we 
have surveyed among our LADS community, would be required to wait 
in China until visa numbers are available and thus could 
potentially be separated from their parents for many years. The 
separation will not only deprive those minor children of the much 
needed parental care, but also damage the precious family ties of 
those families. In addition, many of the dependents, both in the 
U.S. and in China, who are now considered children, will reach 
the age of 21 prior to visa availability. This would disqualify 
them for visa issuance.

Before more efficient solutions are found, we believe that two 
solutions are practical now.

(1) Re-allocate the LADs into the world quota. Since the CSPA 
principals have been allocated into the world-wide 46,000 quota 
leftovers for fiscal year 1993, and it is reasonable to estimate 
that there are still world-wide quota leftover for the following 
years. Instead of wasting those leftover world-wide quota and 
letting the LADs block the doors to China regular EB-3 or EB-2 
visas, it would free these people into the world quota and 
benefit their families.

(2) A blanket family unity program, we believe, should be 
established to include all late-arriving dependents. This program 
should mirror the benefits of E.O. 12711 to (1) give dependents 
in China who request non immigrant visas to visit family in the 
U.S. favorable consideration and not to be flatly rejected due to 
the "immigrant intent", (2) deem the individual to maintain 
his/her non immigrant status for adjustment purposes, thus to 
eliminate the DED problem faced by the estimated 50% for LADS 
population,(3) provide liberal advance parole, (4) provide 
employment authorization for the dependents while their 
applications are being processed, and (5)allow children under 
twenty-one on the date of the CSPA principal's approval to be 
eligible for adjustment even if they are over twenty-one at the 
date of adjustment. This family unity program would resolve the 
problems involved with the case by case voluntary departure 
program and family separation resulted from non immigrant visa 
denial.

Thank you for your attention. We are looking forward to hearing 
from you soon.

Signed by LADs Network members, and co-signed by all the 
concerned and sympathetic PRC nationals

Their names and address are in the following attached pages.



From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Sat Aug 28 20:19:09 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA00670); Sat, 28 Aug 93 20:19:09 CDT
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 93 20:19:09 CDT
Message-Id: <01H2AK88KHIA984XVR@draco.rutgers.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: SGU@draco.rutgers.edu
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: LAD.08-28-93
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

 % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
 %   The following are packed messages sent by LAD-netters in the past two   %
 %   days.  Please address your correspondence to the sender.                %
 %   To sign on, send email to listserv@spike.rice.edu, with mail body as:   %
 %	sub lads-l firstname lastname                                        %
 %   To sign off, sendm email to listserv@spike.rice.edu,with mail body as:  %
 %	signoff lads-l                                                       %
 %   Please send your post, questions, answers, opinions, to                 %
 %		lads@lucerne.rice.edu .                                      %
 %   The packages posted to LADnet are available via anonymous ftp from the  %
 %   site spike.rice.edu under the directory  /lads.                         %
 % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %


==============================================================================
>From:	IN%"quan@mace.cc.purdue.edu" 27-AUG-1993 13:34:22.64
Subj:	question on filing I-824

	I have a question about fillig I-824 under CSPA for my daughter in 
	China.  If any one knows, please let me know.  Thank you.

   	I filed the I-485 last July. My daugter will turn 21 this Oct.

   	My Question is that the age requirment is based on which data: 
	(1) when I file the I-824, 
	(2) when INS approves the I-824, 
	(3) when INS approve the I-485, or 
	(4) when her immigration visa number is available. 

	I called the local INS office.  They told me that the data should be 
	based on (4).  Is that correct?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:  D259ZL@utarlg.uta.edu
Subj: prove for marriage

	My friend's wife got a receipt from INS's office after they accepted 
	her application. It says that she needs to bring her spouse and prove 
	of reside together on NOV. 5 for her interview. It is because now my 
	friend and her wife are studying  in the different place and not 
	living together right now. Dose anybody know what kind of documents 
	should she need as a proof?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"60753903@wsuvm1.csc.wsu.edu"  "xin" 27-AUG-1993 18:57:59.85
Subj:	F-1 extension

	Hi, I have a question and will appreciate any answers or advices.
	I am a cspa principal and have already applied for PR under cspa.
	My wife is a LAD and is preparing for the application of PR. Her 
	status is F-1 right now and will be expired next year. 

	My question is:

	If she applies for PR now and in case that she could not graduate 
	before the indicated date on I-20, can she apply for a extension 
	at that time since she might not be granted PR at that time?  We 
	asked the international students adviser on this issue, the adviser 
	said my wife can not apply for an extension on I-20 form if her 
	application for PR is on pending, since she is not a cspa principal. 
	The adviser said this is a special issuse she has to ask local INS 
	about it. Any one knows how to deal with this problem?

	Thank you in advance!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>From ***@***.dac.neu.edu Sat Aug 28 11:08:21 1993

	Some confusion about what DED lads should do according to NAFSA report
	on meeting at Boston INS office regarding ... lad's and CSPA dependents
	in China.

	Should they apply PR when their principals' application approved? Or
	should they apply before that? Or they cannot apply anyway? You know DED
	lads were not mentioned at all, but according to IFCSS, about half of
	the lads are DED lads (probably there are not so many DED lads).

	Thank you very much for your work.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From yuang@CCVAX.CCS.CSUS.EDU Sat Aug 28 11:14:00 1993
Subject: RE: Sixth Call for signature

	My son is a nine-year-old Lad. I submitted his I-485 to INS without 
	his I-693 ( medical examination report), because I was told that it 
	is not necessary to submit I-693 for a child who is under age of 14. 
	Now I am not sure whether it is right  since I can't find the sourece 
	to verify this point.

	Is any source there to verify this? 

	Thanks a lot!

						Yuan Gang

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From:	IN%"shu@pollux.geog.ucsb.edu" 28-AUG-1993 14:50:01.66
Subj:	Need help

	I have questions as shown below. Any answers, suggestions would be 
	greatly appreciated.

	I have filed I-485 as a CSPA principal. I have  a son aged 19 who is 
	now in Chian. I filed a I-824 on 8/21/93 for my son to apply for PR 
	under E-3 (following to join). I also enclosed a cover letter to tell 
	them my son's address in China. On 8/27, one week later, the I-824 was 
	returned to me from INS Western Service Center where I filed my I-485.

	The following is the letter attached with the returned I-824:

	*********************
	Dear Applicant:

	You are applying for adjustment to PR status under CSPA. You have 
	submitted I-485. You have also submitted I-824, application for action
	on a approved application or petition.

	Your I-824 and supporting document(s) is/are returned to you for the 
	following reason:

	THE CONSULATE HAS BEEN NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE APPLIED FOR ADJUSTMENT OF
 	STATUS TO PERMANENT RESIDENCY. HOWEVER, YOUR I-485 APPLICATION HAS NOT 
	YET BEEN ADJUDICATED.

	THE I-824 MAY BE FILED ONLY AFTER THE APPROVAL OF YOUR I-485. IF IT IS 
	NECESSARY, TO REFILE THE I-824, PLEASE ATTACH A COPY OF THE I-797 
	APPROVAL NOTICE YOU RECEIVED ON THE I-485.

	Date: 8/24/93
	File NO: Axxxx xxxx (my A #)
	CH #: 114-30
	****************************

	My questions are as follows:

	(1) What should I do next if the 'WINDOW' will be closed at the end of
 	    Sept.
	(2) I filed my I-485 on 7/1/93 and the filing date shown on my I-485 
	    receipt is 7/14/93. How much is the chance I can get the approval 
	    notice on my I-485 by the middle or end of Sept/93?
	(3) A U.S. Consulate in China will be notified only after the approval 
	    of a applicant's I-485. My I-485 has not yet been approved that is 
	    the major reason the INS returned my I-824, but they mentioned in 
	    their letter that "THE CONSULATE HAS BEEN NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE 
	    APPLIED FOR ADJUSTMEN OF STATUS TO PERMANENT RESIDENCY, HOWEVER  
	    ........". What does that mean? I am confused, because that does 
	    not make any sense even "the consulate has been notified that.....".
	(4) To take a second chance, can I resubmit the I-824 again. Maybe 
    	    different INS officers will handle the I-824 for LADs differently?
	(5) As shown in the letter from INS, there is a "CH # 114-30". Is there
    	    anyone know what is CH #?
	(6) Is there anyone who has the similar situation, but their I-824 for 
	    LADs in China have been accepted by INS. If any, I would like to 
	    contact them by Email.

	By the way, I did not submit any supporting documents, such as LAD's 
	birth certificate, marrige certificate, etc. as suggested by some LAD 
	netters. The only document I submitted was the receipt of my I-485 
	form. In INS's letter, they did not mention they need any additional 
	supporting document(s). My understanding is that all those documents 
	areneeded only after the LADs in China are notified by a U.S. consulate
	to file their application for immigration visa.

	Sorry for a long list of questions.

=========================== THE END =======================================

From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Sun Aug 29 13:24:08 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA03309); Sun, 29 Aug 93 13:24:08 CDT
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 93 13:24:08 CDT
Message-Id: <9308291826.AA03052@cmliris>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: Our Talk with Dr. Zhao Haiching
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas


	To:		LAD network members

	From:		LAD network committee

	Subject:	Our talk with Dr. Zhao Haiching

	Date:		August 28, 1993
	

Dear netters,

	Dr. Zhao Haiching called me today and we spent ~25 
minutes on the phone. This is a summary of our talk.

	First I addressed our problems:(1) DED (2) undocument 
alien. (3) World Quota. (4) His leadership on these campaign.

	Next, Dr. Zhao told me the current situation: 

(1) We have passed the golden time to push LADs into 
world quota. Before the Interim Rule, we even had a 
chance to push LADs into CSPA. But due to different 
reasons (you can find them from CND-US news in the June 
and July, but one main reason is that there was a 
fighting among the CSS community), we could not achieve 
this although Dr. Zhao and NCCA worked hard on this. 

(2) Now, we still have a chance to push the world quota 
issue, although the current situation is not good to us. For 
example, alien smuggling and objection to the 
immigration among American people.

(3) Compared to the situation before CSPA, it is more 
difficult to put the CSS community into the same boat. 
For example, ECers, LADs and LCers are conflicting to 
each other. Even IFCSS is not willing to fight for LADs 
since they thought CSPA was over. 

(4) Summer is the laziest time in white house. We can 
not expect that everything goes very fast.

Finally, we asked him for his comments on our current 
work and his suggestion:

(1) We should keep our close collaboration with new comer 
fellow students and IFCSS. This is very important.

(2) We should put DED issue before the World Quota 
issue or do both at the same time. The China EB-3 
window is open until Sept. 30, we should get all the 
DEDs filed. Otherwise, these people will have a hard 
time. We can work on the world quota issue any time. 
But DED must be done before Sept. 30. 

(3) Undocument alien issue is beyond our manpower.The INS 
has to include the IIers otherwise these people can 
accuse the INS since it is against the main point of 
CSPA (humanitarian reasons). The INS has started to 
control the advance parole. It is too late to exclude old 
undocument alien from the CSPA. Another reason is that our 
community will fight against each other and we can not get 
more support. We hope that new comer fellow students will 
be calm on this issue.

(4) It is good to write the petition letter. If we have a
big number of signatures on it, it will make a difference. 

(5) He did not have other comments on what we should do 
now or next. 

Before hanging up, we talked about future 
collaborations. We exchanged our phone numbers and we 
will keep close touch with each other.

Yonghong





From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Mon Aug 30 10:35:07 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA07476); Mon, 30 Aug 93 10:35:07 CDT
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 93 10:35:07 CDT
Message-Id: <9308301531.AA18816@mines.utah.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: jli@mines.utah.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: jli@mines.utah.edu (Jianliang Li)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: 
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas


J-2 2-year waiver:


	It is very simple and pretty much automatic approval (International
Student Advisor's language).  All you have to do is to file Form I-612 and
pay $90.  In Lincoln, Nebraska:

	You will receive a receipt notice (I-797) in about 12 days.

	After another 12 days, you will get the approval notice (I-797).  It
says: you and your immediate family members are granted the 2-year waiver.
The immediate family members must be J-2 derived from your J-1.

	The whole process takes less than 25 days.  It may be not necessary
and it costs $90.  The decision is yours to invest or not to invest the $90.


JLi


From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Mon Aug 30 16:22:57 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA08898); Mon, 30 Aug 93 16:22:57 CDT
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 93 16:22:57 CDT
Message-Id: <9308302124.AA07980@cmliris>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: EMERGENCY ON DEDs
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas


To:	LAD Network Members

>From:	Lads Network Committee

Subject:DED situations.

Date:	August 30, 1993

        Our committee are working on DED issue. For technical 
reason, we need to know what is the real situation of DEDs.
As I know, some DEDs filed, some were rejected and the other are
watching. If you are a DED or have a DED, please answer the 
questions below and send it back to me as soon as possible 
(I need this information by this Friday i.e.9/3). READ the notes
carefully.
 

---------------- Questions ---------------------
(1). Where is your Local INS?
(2). Are you a DED?
(3). How many DEDs do you have?
(4). Did/were you File/Rejected?  

----------------------- end -----------------------------------

Notes: DED = Delayed Enforced Deportion status.
  
1. The "DED" is defined here as the person who is a DED as well as 
a LAD. The DED who is also a CSPA principal are not counted here.

2. Every person among our network who is a DED defined in Notes#1 
or has DEDs defined in Notes#1 must do so.
(we can estimate the ratio of DEDs to LADs). 	

3. If you are not DED defined in Notes#1 or do not have DEDs defined
in Notes#1, DO NOT send the answers to me.

4. You need send me the answer ONLY ONCE. Resend it only if you
find your e-mail is bounced back.

5. If you are a DED and also a CSPA principal, answer "No" to (2).

6. Question (4) is for DED defined in Notes#1,
   put "Rejected" if you never tried to file I-485 for such a DED.

7. This is an example of your answers:

(1) Boston, MA.
(2) No.
(3) One.
(4) Filed.

8. Mail to "yhl@cmliris.harvard.edu".
   Under "subject:", write "DED".
   Then mail your answers, Do not send other "junks".   






From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Mon Aug 30 16:57:25 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA09027); Mon, 30 Aug 93 16:57:25 CDT
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 93 16:57:24 CDT
Message-Id: <9308302159.AA08249@cmliris>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: yhl%cmliris@harvard.harvard.edu (Yonghong Li)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject: DED Survey Changes
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

HI,
	I made a little change compared to the first "Question Survey".
Just make it more clear (some one do not read the notes).
Please do not send me your answers again if you have already done so.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

To:	LAD Network Members

>From:	Lads Network Committee

Subject:DED situations.

Date:	August 30, 1993

        Our committee are working on DED issue. For technical 
reason, we need to know what is the real situation of DEDs.
As I know, some DEDs filed, some were rejected and the other are
watching. If you are a DED or have a DED, please answer the 
questions below and send it back to me as soon as possible 
(I need this information by this Friday i.e.9/3). READ the notes
carefully.
 

---------------- Questions ---------------------
(1). Where is your Local INS?
(2). Answer "yes" if you are a DED and LAD but not CSPA principal.
(3). How many DEDs (must also be LADs) do you have 
     excluding yourself?
(4). Did/were you File/Rejected?  

----------------------- end -----------------------------------

Notes: DED = Delayed Enforced Deportion status.
  
1. The "DED" is defined here as the person who is a DED as well as 
a LAD. The DED who is also a CSPA principal are not counted here.

2. Every person among our network who is a DED defined in Notes#1 
or has DEDs defined in Notes#1 must do so.
(we can estimate the ratio of DEDs to LADs). 	

3. If you are not DED defined in Notes#1 or do not have DEDs defined
in Notes#1, DO NOT send the answers to me.

4. You need send me the answer ONLY ONCE. Resend it only if you
find your e-mail is bounced back.

5. If you are a DED and also a CSPA principal, answer "No" to (2).
   In (3), do not count yourself.

6. Question (4) is for DED defined in Notes#1,
   put "Rejected" if you never tried to file I-485 for such a DED.

7. This is an example of your answers:

(1) Boston, MA.
(2) No.
(3) One.
(4) Filed.

8. Mail to "yhl@cmliris.harvard.edu".
   Under "subject:", write "DED".
   Then mail your answers, Do not send other "junks".   






From lads-l@spike.rice.edu  Tue Aug 31 21:51:12 1993
Received: from  (localhost.rice.edu) by spike.rice.edu (AA13911); Tue, 31 Aug 93 21:51:12 CDT
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 93 21:51:12 CDT
Message-Id: <9309010250.AA02130@lucerne.rice.edu>
Errors-To: lads-request@spike.rice.edu
Reply-To: LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu
Originator: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Sender: lads-l@spike.rice.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: Mi Mi <LHGCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <lads-l@spike.rice.edu>
Subject:      Call for Signatures
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0a -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

Dear CND-US Editor:

The following is our the letter calling for signatures and our
petition letter to US government agencies, including White House
and Justis Department, and/or Congress. Since this petition drive
concerns most of LADs and new-comer-fellow-students, we believe it
is important to send it to a larger audience, and call more signatures.
Since number does not in U.S., please help our LADs and NCFS!

Lads-net Committee

|===============================================================|
|       Call for Signatures to Support Our Petition Drive       |
|                      Lads-net Committee                       |
|                       September 1, 1993                       |
|===============================================================|


We, the lads-net committee, are volunteers who dedicated to serve
CSPA late-arriving-dependents (LADs). As we are closely
monitoring the current development of implementation of CSPA, we
believe it is the time to call your attention to the imminent
visa crisis faced by CSS and Chinese American in general and our
petition to the appropriate U.S. agencies.

As stated in INS wire #5, carried by CD-US on August 28, those
undocumented Chinese nationals who previously were not eligible
to apply for permanent residency per CSPA, are allowed to apply.
The criterion of the eligibility is, those undocumented Chinese
nationals must come before April 11, 1990,  obtain Advance Parole
and reenter the U.S. While this new decision reflects the
humanitarian spirit of CSPA and Executive Order 12711,  this new
policy change, however, will cause serious backlog in China's
normal immigration channels if there is no appropriate follow up
changes in the implementation of CSPA.

As we all know now, while CSPA principals are subject to
worldwide quota, their LADs, are subject to the China's quotas.
As surveyed by IFCSS HQ, there are approximately 10,000 LADs
whose principals are documented. All of these LADs, will have to
use China's EB-3 and FB-2 quotas per INA, and will probably cause
four years backlog in these two categories.

The new policy change of INS, will push the backlogs even
further. While the undocumented Chinese Nationals are also
subject to worldwide quota, their LADs, will be added to the
existing pool of those whose principals are documented. While the
number of this group of LADs is unpredictable, it is plausible
that the number is at least comparable to those estimated by
IFCSS HQ, e.g., around 10,000. The anticipated long waiting
period for all of those Chinese nationals who will use China's
normal immigration channels is almost unbearable. The immediately
impact on the CSS community is, most new comer fellow students
will be excluded from EB-3, and those who have or will have
dependents in China will have to wait for more years to do so.

Based on the above assessment, we, the lads-net committee, are
calling signatures to support our petition campaign to push those
LADs in to the world-wide quota. Our goals are very simple:

1) Speed up CSPA LADs processing.
2) Save China's quota for general CSS and Chinese Community
public.
3) Solve the other lads problems such as lads in China, DED,
90 day-rule, etc.

Please show your support to our petition drive. Please send your
signature in the folllowing form

Mr./Ms/Miss:Name,Address,City,State,ZipCode,Tel#
        Co-signed Spouse,
        Co-signed Child,

electronically, via e-mail, to
lads-sig@spike.rice.edu
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Thank you very much!

Lads-net Committee


					c/o  ********
					*******************

Madam Rita A. Boie
Senior Immigration Examiner
Adjudication Branch
Immigration & Naturalization Services
425 I Street NW, Room 5307
Washington, DC 20536

RE: Chinese Student Protection Act (CSPA)

Dear Madam Boie,

	We, a group of concerned and sympathetic individuals who
signed their names and addresses here, would like to call your
kindly attention to the following problems involved in subjecting
Late-Arriving Dependents (LAD) of CSPA principals to the China
quota.

(1) According to the survey made by the Headquarters of
Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars (IFCSS
HQ), there are approximately 10000 eligible LADs in the U.S. who
may file their applications under EB-3 and FB-2 during this
August and September. Since the annual China quota in EB-3 or FB-
2 is about 2500, only these LADs will make the backlog of China's
at least four years longer. This means that no other Chinese
nationals can file applications for adjustment of status under
EB-3 or FB-2 categories in the next four years. According to the
recent INS Cable on August 13, those undocumented Chinese
nationals, who came before April 11, 1990, and have obtained an
advance parole to re-enter U.S., are allowed to apply under CSPA.
While this new decision reflects the humanitarian and protection
spirit which are implanted in the Executive Order 12711, those
added applicants with their LADs are facing even more
difficulties than anyone else because their LADs are mostly
queued after the existing pool of LADs whose principals entered
legally, and thus are facing even longer family separation. Not
only will those LADs whose principals are undocumented be queued
after those whose principals entered legally, which means even
longer waiting period, but also the unpredictable number of LADs
of undocumented Chinese nationals will jam the normal China EB-3
and FB-2 categories for even more years. As Americans cherish
their traditional family unity, family values and humanity, those
traditional values are also deeply rooted in the Chinese culture
and every Chinese family. The anticipated long separation of
those families resulted from visa quota allocation problem will
surely bring sadness and suffering to those families, and thus
contradict the humanitarian spirit imbedded in the INA, Executive
Order 12711 and CSPA.

(2) For dependents remaining in China, the situation is even more
bleak. These individuals, most of them are minor children, as we
have surveyed among our LADs community, would be required to wait
in China until visa numbers are available and thus could
potentially be separated from their parents for many years. The
separation will not only deprive those minor children of the much
needed parental care, but also damage the precious family ties of
those families. In addition, many of the dependents, both in the
U.S. and in China, who are now considered children, will reach
the age of 21 prior to visa availability. This would disqualify
them for visa issuance.

Before more efficient solutions are found, we believe that two
solutions are practical now.

(1) Re-allocate the LADs into the world quota. Since the CSPA
principals have been allocated into the world-wide 46,000 quota
leftovers for fiscal year 1993, it is reasonable to estimate that
there are still world-wide quota leftover for the following
years. Instead of wasting those leftover world-wide quotas and
letting the LADs block the doors to China's regular EB-3 and EB-2
channels, re-allocating LAD in to the world quota would solve
backlog problems and benefit many Chinese families in general.

(2) A blanket family unity program, we believe, should be
established to include all late-arriving dependents. This program
should mirror the benefits of Executive Order 12711 to (1) give
dependents in China who request non-immigrant visas to visit
family in the U.S. favorable consideration and not to be flatly
rejected due to the "immigrant intent", (2) deem the individual
to maintain his/her non-immigrant status for adjustment purposes,
thus to eliminate the DED problem faced by the estimated 50% for
LADS population,(3) provide liberal advance parole, (4) provide
employment authorization for the dependents while their
applications are being processed, and (5)allow children under
twenty-one on the date of the CSPA principal's approval to be
eligible for adjustment even if they are over twenty-one at the
date of adjustment. This family unity program would resolve the
problems involved with the case by case voluntary departure
program and family separation resulted from non-immigrant visa
denial.

Thank you for your attention. We are looking forward to hearing
from you soon.

Signed by initiating LADs Network members, and co-signed by all
the concerned and sympathetic Chinese nationals

Their names and address are in the following attached pages.


