karanp25
07-14 06:34 PM
That's possible too. Please share when you received this RFE?
Is it possible they are trying to adjudicate my 485. I am EB2 India PD: JAN 2006.
Is it possible they are trying to adjudicate my 485. I am EB2 India PD: JAN 2006.
wallpaper i love you poems and quotes
actaccord
03-15 07:04 PM
/\/\/\/\
cps060
03-19 06:13 PM
Thanks for the information.
Does this mean that if my spouse wants to start school in Sept 2007, it is fine to keep working till August 2007, file I539 change of status to H4 then and then resign from the company once one gets that receipt notice. With the receipt notice itself its good to be in status and can go to school then. The actual approval may come in 3-4 months and that should not be a consideration for the school.
Please tell me your views/experiences.
H1 is a non immigrant but dual intent visa.. It is assumed that you might try to immigrate...When your spouse filed I-140 , the immigration intent came forth.. Now USCIS already knows that your spouse wnts to immigrate...
F1 is a strictly non-immigrant visa. You have to prove your intention of not immigrating to USCIS....
So your position for asking a H1 to F1 transfer is inherently weak....Again a good attorney can spin it....You need a an extremely good attorney....
If you are paying out of your pocket, you can go to college on H4..
Student loans are not available on H4...No financial aid of any kind would be available on H4...
Transferring from H1 to H4 should be quick....I would not bother to file in premium...You are to stop working anyway....Just getting an application receipt should be good enough to start college....If the college allows, you can start college immediately....USCIS never objects to you going to college
as long as you can pay....
I know all this because I did the research when my wife started her college..Should finish this may..
Does this mean that if my spouse wants to start school in Sept 2007, it is fine to keep working till August 2007, file I539 change of status to H4 then and then resign from the company once one gets that receipt notice. With the receipt notice itself its good to be in status and can go to school then. The actual approval may come in 3-4 months and that should not be a consideration for the school.
Please tell me your views/experiences.
H1 is a non immigrant but dual intent visa.. It is assumed that you might try to immigrate...When your spouse filed I-140 , the immigration intent came forth.. Now USCIS already knows that your spouse wnts to immigrate...
F1 is a strictly non-immigrant visa. You have to prove your intention of not immigrating to USCIS....
So your position for asking a H1 to F1 transfer is inherently weak....Again a good attorney can spin it....You need a an extremely good attorney....
If you are paying out of your pocket, you can go to college on H4..
Student loans are not available on H4...No financial aid of any kind would be available on H4...
Transferring from H1 to H4 should be quick....I would not bother to file in premium...You are to stop working anyway....Just getting an application receipt should be good enough to start college....If the college allows, you can start college immediately....USCIS never objects to you going to college
as long as you can pay....
I know all this because I did the research when my wife started her college..Should finish this may..
2011 love you poems quotes. love
McGuffin
02-23 02:17 PM
Yeah, I need a set done date, I might not be able to get this one done.
more...
canleo98
11-22 02:24 AM
I am unable to find USCIS internal I-140 adjudication manual. This could be my lifeline. Someone please provide link for it. Thanks!
Here is your lifeline :D :) :
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/afm_ch22_091206R.pdf
Here is your lifeline :D :) :
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/afm_ch22_091206R.pdf
pitha
02-21 04:05 PM
I agree with you but I am not frustrated but pointing out the realities. See what happenned to labor substitution. People misused it and the end result is there in no labor substitution any more. The way people are misusing eb2 it is just a matter of time when it would be almost impossible to get eb2 even for genuine job requirement. USCIS and DOL know what happenning with EB2 and they will crack down.
pitha...while i bear the frustration of the doors slamming on my face in october 2005 (eb2 was current prior to that) for the sheer fact that i had an incompetent attorney during the initial days when my LC process started.....i would not go far as saying that the porters have "cheated" the system.
The law via Chintakuntla provided that a person with a bachelors degree and 5 years experience is equal to an advanced degree holder.
All the porters are doing is following the law. Its frustrating to people like you and me, but its their right. If i was in their position and the law allowed me to take advantage of a provision of this nature, I would gladly take it.
pitha...while i bear the frustration of the doors slamming on my face in october 2005 (eb2 was current prior to that) for the sheer fact that i had an incompetent attorney during the initial days when my LC process started.....i would not go far as saying that the porters have "cheated" the system.
The law via Chintakuntla provided that a person with a bachelors degree and 5 years experience is equal to an advanced degree holder.
All the porters are doing is following the law. Its frustrating to people like you and me, but its their right. If i was in their position and the law allowed me to take advantage of a provision of this nature, I would gladly take it.
more...
seahawks
07-25 01:47 AM
Dude/Dudette, I give up. The alien's eligibility and admissibility is decided at I-485 stage - FBI name checks, medical tests ring a bell? The law explicitly states that visa number availabililty is a pre-requisite for the adjustment of status application in 245(a)(3). If you can't understand - or choose to refuse to understand - plain English, have fun arguing with yourself.
I concur, otherwise there won't be a IV forum or confusion and pain that everyone going through retrogession is facing, will we?
I concur, otherwise there won't be a IV forum or confusion and pain that everyone going through retrogession is facing, will we?
2010 love you poems quotes. cute i
alterego
07-04 08:31 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS’s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
more...
abhijitp
07-25 05:14 PM
This is not new but only Lawyers and the employers who filed your GC knows what position and job duties on which they applied your GC.
Position and job duties on which they applied your GC = whatever they said in your PERM/ labor cert application. If they make a change to that during the I-140 or I-485 stage, that itself will lead to RFE, if not to rejection! Some of us may not have the copy of the labor cert/PERM approval, but if so, one should try to look for the form that you (hopefully) reviewed during the first stage. For PERM this is ETA form 9089.
Position and job duties on which they applied your GC = whatever they said in your PERM/ labor cert application. If they make a change to that during the I-140 or I-485 stage, that itself will lead to RFE, if not to rejection! Some of us may not have the copy of the labor cert/PERM approval, but if so, one should try to look for the form that you (hopefully) reviewed during the first stage. For PERM this is ETA form 9089.
hair i love you poems and quotes. i
srr_2007
04-01 11:34 AM
This is the new trend among the Desi consulting firms in NJ area. I don�t know about other areas. These days they don't want to hire a person with tons of experience. Because the experienced ask more benefits and can't be exploited to the same extend as an F1 OPT candidate.
Recently I spoke with many Desi consulting companies to change my job and most of them were offering less than what I get today. Later, I spoke to the consultants on bench/training and learned about the OPT candidates.
Another thing, at the client site if you are a Corp candidate then they don't believe your resume and expect you to prove yourself at the work. Not a problem for an experience candidate to prove his or her capabilities, but the whole process shatters your morale and at some point it becomes a problem.
Recently I spoke with many Desi consulting companies to change my job and most of them were offering less than what I get today. Later, I spoke to the consultants on bench/training and learned about the OPT candidates.
Another thing, at the client site if you are a Corp candidate then they don't believe your resume and expect you to prove yourself at the work. Not a problem for an experience candidate to prove his or her capabilities, but the whole process shatters your morale and at some point it becomes a problem.
more...
varshadas
12-13 09:39 AM
I have scheduled the conference. This is a free conference. I set it up at 9.00 PM on 12/14/2006 since we have to dial a long distance number and our cell phone charges would be free at that time.
Conference Details
Date: Thursday, December 14, 2006
Start Time: 9:00 PM Eastern Std Time
End Time: 10:55 PM Eastern Std Time
Participants: 25
Type of Conference Web-Scheduled Standard
Dial-in Number: 1-605-725-1900 (South Dakota)
Organizer Access Code: *938581 (you must include the leading star key)
Participant Access Code 73141
Thanks,
Varsha
Conference Details
Date: Thursday, December 14, 2006
Start Time: 9:00 PM Eastern Std Time
End Time: 10:55 PM Eastern Std Time
Participants: 25
Type of Conference Web-Scheduled Standard
Dial-in Number: 1-605-725-1900 (South Dakota)
Organizer Access Code: *938581 (you must include the leading star key)
Participant Access Code 73141
Thanks,
Varsha
hot love you poems quotes. love
Mr.Z
12-10 05:32 PM
Hi friends,
I need your help!!!
I'm here at California with L-2 visa. I can stay legally in US but i can not get a SSN number, i can work too.But For a driver license they ask for SSN. Do i still get the Driver License or no?
Thank you very much...
Anyone:confused::confused:
I need your help!!!
I'm here at California with L-2 visa. I can stay legally in US but i can not get a SSN number, i can work too.But For a driver license they ask for SSN. Do i still get the Driver License or no?
Thank you very much...
Anyone:confused::confused:
more...
house i love you poems and quotes
GCBy3000
07-12 11:32 PM
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
tattoo dresses Love You Poems Quotes.
vamsi_poondla
09-26 10:00 AM
I think IV core must be taking some action in response to this CNN report. Does anyone know about action from core?
You are also part of IV. You can stand up for any such mis-information and educate rather than waiting for Core team to do something (they may have other priorities)
Let us all send an email to the editor from the link on the page and protest. Let us see if CNN publishes an errata.
You are also part of IV. You can stand up for any such mis-information and educate rather than waiting for Core team to do something (they may have other priorities)
Let us all send an email to the editor from the link on the page and protest. Let us see if CNN publishes an errata.
more...
pictures 2011 love you poems quotes.
msgrewal81
02-19 12:11 AM
If you are lazy enough to contact your representative and Obama, you should not complain for not getting your voice heard. Each and every email matter. Also contact Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D, TX-18] on her website. contact all. It wont take 5 minutes.
Dear (Congressman/woman, Pres. Obama):
Recently an immigration bill was presented in the congress. The HR 264 is embarrassing for legal immigrants.
1) People who are illegal here for more than 5 years will get green card/path to citizenship but people who are legally here for 4 years and 11 months gets nothing.
2) HR 264 says "continuous presence of 5 years". Of course illegal immigrants can't leave the country and they will fulfill this requirement, but legal immigrants can leave country so might have left country for even 3 or 4 months in last 5-6 years to visit home country or any other reason including business. Although brief discontinuity is said to be okay but what if some legal immigrant leave country to be his/her parents for 2 months in last 5 years? So, this continuous presence rule is tailor cut to include illegal immigrants and exclude legal immigrants.
Is this what law abiding get when they follow rules? I request you to make sure that legal immigrants are ahead of illegals in every way. An illegal should not be awarded for being in US for 5 years while a legal, law abiding, tax paying legal immigrant is offered nothing for being in US for 3 or 4 years.
Kind regards
(Your name)
https://writerep.house.gov/htbin/wrep_save
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Now click on the links above and copy paste this stuff there. IT IS IMPORTANT....
Dear (Congressman/woman, Pres. Obama):
Recently an immigration bill was presented in the congress. The HR 264 is embarrassing for legal immigrants.
1) People who are illegal here for more than 5 years will get green card/path to citizenship but people who are legally here for 4 years and 11 months gets nothing.
2) HR 264 says "continuous presence of 5 years". Of course illegal immigrants can't leave the country and they will fulfill this requirement, but legal immigrants can leave country so might have left country for even 3 or 4 months in last 5-6 years to visit home country or any other reason including business. Although brief discontinuity is said to be okay but what if some legal immigrant leave country to be his/her parents for 2 months in last 5 years? So, this continuous presence rule is tailor cut to include illegal immigrants and exclude legal immigrants.
Is this what law abiding get when they follow rules? I request you to make sure that legal immigrants are ahead of illegals in every way. An illegal should not be awarded for being in US for 5 years while a legal, law abiding, tax paying legal immigrant is offered nothing for being in US for 3 or 4 years.
Kind regards
(Your name)
https://writerep.house.gov/htbin/wrep_save
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Now click on the links above and copy paste this stuff there. IT IS IMPORTANT....
dresses love you poems quotes. love
3d Nirvana
03-13 11:04 PM
woa.... didn't some votes disapear?! I could have sworn grinch had 6 votes..
more...
makeup i love you baby boy poems. i
masaternyc
03-16 05:55 PM
Infinite_Patience_GC,
Most of these labor substitutes are sold/bought by these so called software consultancies(illegal dhanda) to so called software professionals and should be investigated and prosecuted to the full extent of law.
Most of these labor substitutes are sold/bought by these so called software consultancies(illegal dhanda) to so called software professionals and should be investigated and prosecuted to the full extent of law.
girlfriend love you poems quotes. love
abd
09-23 12:20 PM
Just when i was wondering that we will have to wait till OCt 1 when new visa are avialable... I saw your message... If i was you i will wait too for next 5/6 days you have till oct to respond.
Does that mean there is still hope that we may see some activity on the cases who have responsed to RFEs or we have to wait till OCt 1 Chewing our nails?
We got approval email for myself + spouse and daughter today. I had waited for this since 2002. :)
Your Case Status: Card/ Document Production
On September 23, 2010, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service at 1-800-375-5283.
This step applies to applications that result in an applicant receiving a card (such as a "green card") or other document (such as a naturalization certificate, employment authorization document, travel document, or advance parole). Applications will be in this step from the time the order to produce the card/document is given until the card/document is produced and mailed to the applicant. You can expect to receive your card/document within 30 days of the approval of your application.
If you do not receive your document, please contact our National Customer Service Center at 1-800-375-5283.
Does that mean there is still hope that we may see some activity on the cases who have responsed to RFEs or we have to wait till OCt 1 Chewing our nails?
We got approval email for myself + spouse and daughter today. I had waited for this since 2002. :)
Your Case Status: Card/ Document Production
On September 23, 2010, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service at 1-800-375-5283.
This step applies to applications that result in an applicant receiving a card (such as a "green card") or other document (such as a naturalization certificate, employment authorization document, travel document, or advance parole). Applications will be in this step from the time the order to produce the card/document is given until the card/document is produced and mailed to the applicant. You can expect to receive your card/document within 30 days of the approval of your application.
If you do not receive your document, please contact our National Customer Service Center at 1-800-375-5283.
hairstyles love you poems quotes. i love
DSLStart
02-16 12:43 PM
You can usually get good flight deals for BWI (Baltimore airport). There is metro bus service (http://www.wmata.com/bus/timetables/md/b30.pdf)connecting from BWI to Greenbelt metro station.
has metro access. Baltimore has MARC but it won't be that frequent and cost effective.
has metro access. Baltimore has MARC but it won't be that frequent and cost effective.
desi3933
01-30 02:54 PM
Ok.......
So if I am understanding this correctly, the time from when I entered US on AP (Dec 08 till today), I am considered out of status?
NO. You are not out of status because of AP entry.
From what I understood it is ok to not be working while on AOS having entered on AP.
Correct. However, USCIS looks for your status history since last entry on non-immigrant visa. 245(k) covers only 180 days for status violation for such period.
Example
Mr Chanakya Pandit (fictitious name) has filed for eb-3 India in July 2007 for I-485. He has PD of Sep 2005 (not current).
Mr Pandit entered last on H1 visa on Jan 21st 2006 and he is working for ABC company. As per H1 LCA, his salary is 65k and he is getting paid 62k.
He entered on USA using AP in Oct 2008. He is using EAD to work.
Since he was getting paid less athn H1 salary, he is out of status since Jan 21st 2006 and he has accumulating out of status days until date of I-485 filing. If this out of status > 180 days, his I-485 can be denied just on this basis alone.
If person is out of status for more than 180 days at thetime of filing for I-485, he can denied entry even on AP. Read your AP document, it mentions warning about of out of status right there.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
So if I am understanding this correctly, the time from when I entered US on AP (Dec 08 till today), I am considered out of status?
NO. You are not out of status because of AP entry.
From what I understood it is ok to not be working while on AOS having entered on AP.
Correct. However, USCIS looks for your status history since last entry on non-immigrant visa. 245(k) covers only 180 days for status violation for such period.
Example
Mr Chanakya Pandit (fictitious name) has filed for eb-3 India in July 2007 for I-485. He has PD of Sep 2005 (not current).
Mr Pandit entered last on H1 visa on Jan 21st 2006 and he is working for ABC company. As per H1 LCA, his salary is 65k and he is getting paid 62k.
He entered on USA using AP in Oct 2008. He is using EAD to work.
Since he was getting paid less athn H1 salary, he is out of status since Jan 21st 2006 and he has accumulating out of status days until date of I-485 filing. If this out of status > 180 days, his I-485 can be denied just on this basis alone.
If person is out of status for more than 180 days at thetime of filing for I-485, he can denied entry even on AP. Read your AP document, it mentions warning about of out of status right there.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
akred
01-28 11:23 AM
If the country cap was supposed to increase diversity, lets have a country cap based on the person's race. Or lets have a single country cap for the EU. The fact that political integration in Europe has lagged behind China and India is being used by the restrictionists to limit immigration from the 3rd world.
Anyway, point is the immigration system overall is broken. IV should seriously consider making common cause with the lobby for undocumented immigrants. The way I see it, my H4 wife is an illegal immigrant now since she volunteered at some place in exchange for reduced fees.
Anyway, point is the immigration system overall is broken. IV should seriously consider making common cause with the lobby for undocumented immigrants. The way I see it, my H4 wife is an illegal immigrant now since she volunteered at some place in exchange for reduced fees.