thomachan72
07-13 09:20 AM
Do any of you think that the dates will move forward next month? Looking at the backlog numbers published by USCIS, I think they moved as far as they could to make use of all the available visas. I am thinking that the move next month might be only a few days or a month at the max. USCIS mentioned last month that we could expect the dates to be March/April 06 at the end of this fiscal year. Will this mean that EB2I will hold out at March / April 06 for the next fiscal year?
Interesting question. You are probably quite accurate but there still remains some hope of a few months movement:D:D
Interesting question. You are probably quite accurate but there still remains some hope of a few months movement:D:D
wallpaper believes plastic surgery
snathan
08-21 12:27 PM
I did not marry the man I was engaged to. I came here initially for ONE month and was approved at the airport customs terminal to stay that long. When I got here, it was for a visit with my fiance only. Unfortunately, things did not work out and we broke it off. Thank God! However, I was staying with his uncle and aunt, and they had a disabled man in the house. HE turned out to be my sponsor when they asked me to care for him while they were doing long haul trucking. I agreed to do this and we immediately contacted USCIS to get instructions on what needed to be filed first. With that information in hand, we filed everything they requested. All the stuff on the RFE I received has never been mentioned before now and if it had, it would have been filed along with the rest. There are tons of applications, how is one supposed to know what to file and when if there are no specific instructions? I have gone through all the copies we have of all the required applications and I still do not see anything where all these other forms were to be filed along with the I-485.
Nothing was done illegally. He filed the application on my behalf, signed, sealed and delivered it himself. I did not do this on my own, I just signed whatever I was required to sign, he did the rest.
If all of this was illegal, then why was I not informed of this nearly 6 years ago when we filed the first application? Seems a bit odd that if I was illegal and they know where I am and who I live with that they wouldn't be quick to throw me out, but they have not done so.
My former fiance has nothing to do with this, I never intended to stay here when I first came, it was merely a visit but circumstances were such that I was needed at a moment's notice so we filed the necessary paperwork as quickly as possible and thought we were doing the right thing. No one has ever said otherwise until now and I think that is rather unfair to spring it all on me at this point and expect me to get it all done within 30 days. I know I am not the only applicant out there and I realize there is a huge backlog of other applications, I'm not that stupid to think that they will make me a priority, but one measly letter informing me that I was here illegally sometime over a 6 year period is not asking to much is it? Why would they send me all the other Notices of Action if I was here illegally and they knew it?
Something is terribly screwed up and I guess I have no choice but to find an attorney who can deal with this mess.
I couldnt understand if you are coming under employment/family based green card or illegal. There is huge backlog and people are waiting around ten years to get the GC. So there is no point in blaming USCIS. You need to contact the top notch Immigration attorney asap. I dont think anyone here would be able to help you in your situation. DON'T waste your time here.
Nothing was done illegally. He filed the application on my behalf, signed, sealed and delivered it himself. I did not do this on my own, I just signed whatever I was required to sign, he did the rest.
If all of this was illegal, then why was I not informed of this nearly 6 years ago when we filed the first application? Seems a bit odd that if I was illegal and they know where I am and who I live with that they wouldn't be quick to throw me out, but they have not done so.
My former fiance has nothing to do with this, I never intended to stay here when I first came, it was merely a visit but circumstances were such that I was needed at a moment's notice so we filed the necessary paperwork as quickly as possible and thought we were doing the right thing. No one has ever said otherwise until now and I think that is rather unfair to spring it all on me at this point and expect me to get it all done within 30 days. I know I am not the only applicant out there and I realize there is a huge backlog of other applications, I'm not that stupid to think that they will make me a priority, but one measly letter informing me that I was here illegally sometime over a 6 year period is not asking to much is it? Why would they send me all the other Notices of Action if I was here illegally and they knew it?
Something is terribly screwed up and I guess I have no choice but to find an attorney who can deal with this mess.
I couldnt understand if you are coming under employment/family based green card or illegal. There is huge backlog and people are waiting around ten years to get the GC. So there is no point in blaming USCIS. You need to contact the top notch Immigration attorney asap. I dont think anyone here would be able to help you in your situation. DON'T waste your time here.
GCard_Dream
09-18 12:23 PM
Did you tell that to John McCain? He still believes that fundamentals of this economy are still very strong. I sometime wonder if he is getting it confused with Chinese economy.
If you have been following the news this week, the economy is really in trouble. Specifically financial and insurance sector. Dow plunged around 900 + points in last 2 days.
If you have been following the news this week, the economy is really in trouble. Specifically financial and insurance sector. Dow plunged around 900 + points in last 2 days.
2011 awful plastic surgery paris
gapala
05-28 07:20 PM
Look how irresponsible the officers have become now a days.. they lie.. intemidate and harass the people... feels like 3rd world country... unbelievable!
Here's the story.. http://www.newson6.com/Global/story.asp?S=10440200
PADEN, Oklahoma -- An Oklahoma Highway Patrol trooper and a paramedic were caught on tape scuffling Sunday while a patient was being taken to the hospital.
The fight happened on Highway 62, near Paden, after a OHP and first responders argued over a close call on the road.
OHP alleges that one of the paramedics on the video assaulted the trooper, but the assault was not caught on tape.
"We're like trying to tell the guy, 'Dude, my mom is in the back,' and my stepdad was like, 'My wife is in the back. Can we do this at the hospital?'" said Kenyada Davis.
Kenyada Davis' mother was the woman in the back of the ambulance being treated for heat exhaustion.
He was able to shoot the altercation with his cell phone's camera.
Davis said it all started because the ambulance failed to yield to OHP troopers, who were en route to a call along highway 62 in Paden.
Davis said the driver of the ambulance was trying to avoid hitting a car that slowed down and wasn't aware of troopers nearby until it was too late.
"He slowed down, and as the car was getting over, that's when he passed us," Davis said. "I didn't hear him."
But after OHP troopers finished their official business, they pulled the Creek Nation ambulance over. One of the troopers chided Paul for failing to yield.
Once the ambulance was pulled over, Davis pulled out his phone and shot video of the scene.
Video is here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KluItc365hU
Here's the story.. http://www.newson6.com/Global/story.asp?S=10440200
PADEN, Oklahoma -- An Oklahoma Highway Patrol trooper and a paramedic were caught on tape scuffling Sunday while a patient was being taken to the hospital.
The fight happened on Highway 62, near Paden, after a OHP and first responders argued over a close call on the road.
OHP alleges that one of the paramedics on the video assaulted the trooper, but the assault was not caught on tape.
"We're like trying to tell the guy, 'Dude, my mom is in the back,' and my stepdad was like, 'My wife is in the back. Can we do this at the hospital?'" said Kenyada Davis.
Kenyada Davis' mother was the woman in the back of the ambulance being treated for heat exhaustion.
He was able to shoot the altercation with his cell phone's camera.
Davis said it all started because the ambulance failed to yield to OHP troopers, who were en route to a call along highway 62 in Paden.
Davis said the driver of the ambulance was trying to avoid hitting a car that slowed down and wasn't aware of troopers nearby until it was too late.
"He slowed down, and as the car was getting over, that's when he passed us," Davis said. "I didn't hear him."
But after OHP troopers finished their official business, they pulled the Creek Nation ambulance over. One of the troopers chided Paul for failing to yield.
Once the ambulance was pulled over, Davis pulled out his phone and shot video of the scene.
Video is here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KluItc365hU
more...
tooclose
07-13 09:47 AM
Thanks...Excerpt from the same document
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st, 8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the fourteenth under the 8th, etc.)
Source please... or are you just kidding ?
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st, 8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the fourteenth under the 8th, etc.)
Source please... or are you just kidding ?
lazycis
12-20 08:54 PM
I think so. I went in an out of country 4 times. 2 Indian trips and 2 Canadian trips.
That's just another proof. A person who accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presence is inadmissible into the US (at least for 3 years).
That's just another proof. A person who accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presence is inadmissible into the US (at least for 3 years).
more...
bidhanc
07-18 10:18 AM
Please explain Greg's comment,
"We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing."
Shouldn't any application rejected on July 2nd have already reached our lawyer's office by now?
Also, if my appliction, filled on July 2nd,reached 11:34 AM CST, has not been returned yet, shouldn't we assume that it will be accepted?
Is it not possible to re-submit the documents all over, even though USCIS might be holding on to our first applications of July 2nd?
What are the ramifications (if any) of doing this?
"We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing."
Shouldn't any application rejected on July 2nd have already reached our lawyer's office by now?
Also, if my appliction, filled on July 2nd,reached 11:34 AM CST, has not been returned yet, shouldn't we assume that it will be accepted?
Is it not possible to re-submit the documents all over, even though USCIS might be holding on to our first applications of July 2nd?
What are the ramifications (if any) of doing this?
2010 awful plastic surgery sells
feedfront
11-02 12:43 PM
RFE : Sep 10 2010,
Did you receive physical card?
Did you receive physical card?
more...
Desertfox
12-10 07:01 PM
I am on L1 & my I-94 is expiring in a month from now on 11 Dec 2007 . I have applied for my L-Extenstion and is pending for approval.
Given this case - can my wife apply for a EAD with the current L1 approved document (expiring on 11 Dec 2007( and add my L-Extension approval papers later on?
There seems to be a three month delay in getting the EAD - hence wanted to initiate the process earlier and not till my L-Extension papers come-in
Please help me ASAP.
Sriram
My spouse got EAD from similar situation. Your wife should file I-765 for L-2 based EAD along with the receipt notice (I-797) of your I-129 (L-1 extension application). She should mail a I-765 hardcopy application to USCIS. USCIS will get back to you with RFE after 45-60 days for your I-129 approval notice (i.e. principal applicant's L-1 extension approval). BTW... hasn't she already filed for I-539 this way?
Given this case - can my wife apply for a EAD with the current L1 approved document (expiring on 11 Dec 2007( and add my L-Extension approval papers later on?
There seems to be a three month delay in getting the EAD - hence wanted to initiate the process earlier and not till my L-Extension papers come-in
Please help me ASAP.
Sriram
My spouse got EAD from similar situation. Your wife should file I-765 for L-2 based EAD along with the receipt notice (I-797) of your I-129 (L-1 extension application). She should mail a I-765 hardcopy application to USCIS. USCIS will get back to you with RFE after 45-60 days for your I-129 approval notice (i.e. principal applicant's L-1 extension approval). BTW... hasn't she already filed for I-539 this way?
hair Blog Review: Awful Plastic
va_jan_03
12-13 09:44 AM
I am sure the IV core would have thought about this option of contacting USCIS and let them know the problems because of retrogression.
But I like the idea of collecting 10$ for the fax and creating awareness. Lets move.
But I like the idea of collecting 10$ for the fax and creating awareness. Lets move.
more...
satdal
01-17 03:59 PM
Just signed up for $20 Recurring Monthly. The video presentation is simply fabulous. Great Job by Aman, as always !
Here are the details of the subscription --- Subscription#S-5SV04028RR209515C.
Subscription Payment Sent (ID #2DU65702LW627190T)
Here are the details of the subscription --- Subscription#S-5SV04028RR209515C.
Subscription Payment Sent (ID #2DU65702LW627190T)
hot http://www.awfulplasticsurgery
msgrewal81
02-18 06:04 PM
I agree. it makes things easier for illegals and difficult(LC process) for legals.
I have Punjabi background. My uncles came to this country illegally. they always make fun of me that why I came legally. They were all given green cards by Reagan and Clinton.:mad:
I have Punjabi background. My uncles came to this country illegally. they always make fun of me that why I came legally. They were all given green cards by Reagan and Clinton.:mad:
more...
house Awful Plastic Surgery
carpediem
06-08 11:32 PM
I was thinking about the inconsistencies pointed out in Mr Oppenheim's interview by some people. My personal opinion is that he may be like some managers in the industry. Managers may not understand the deep down nitty-gritties of their projects. But usually they do understand the broad/big picture of the things their teams are working on.
Mr Oppenheim may have some facts wrong but I am sure he doesn't have the big picture wrong. My 2c. Finally it's just an opinion.
Mr Oppenheim may have some facts wrong but I am sure he doesn't have the big picture wrong. My 2c. Finally it's just an opinion.
tattoo awful plastic surgery Is
yetanotherguyinline
06-11 03:27 PM
Letter printed out and mailed via snail mail.
more...
pictures Plastic Surgery Gone Bad:
lkapildev
02-20 03:37 PM
Dude. I am *so* not Ron Gotcher. :)
He was rushing and didn't give me any specifics for EB-3 India.
You should respect his opnion & valuable comments. WHatever he says make senes. I belive him.
He was rushing and didn't give me any specifics for EB-3 India.
You should respect his opnion & valuable comments. WHatever he says make senes. I belive him.
dresses the worst plastic surgery?
vsrinir
11-11 04:47 PM
Immigration Reform Rally Planned For January
11/11/2008 2:57 PM ET
TOP MARKET NEWS
(RTTNews) - A coalition of immigrant advocacy organizations is planning a mass rally in Washington on the first full day of the Obama Administration to push for immigration reform.
Hoping to draw tens of thousands of immigrants and supporters from around the country and around the region, coalition leaders said they would push the new Congress and administration for "just" and "humane" reform of the nation's immigration laws.
"We are looking for humane immigration reform … less punitive laws," said Jessica Alvarez, co-chairwoman of the National Capital Immigrant Coalition.
Alvarez said the coalition is hoping to build on the electoral efforts of the immigrant community, noting that the Latino vote was up 30 percent this year from the 2004 presidential election.
"The immigrant community has embraced the spirit of hope and democracy surrounding this historic election," Alvarez said. "We helped them get here. We also need our issues addressed."
Speaking with RTTNews after a press conference to announce the rally, Alvarez conceded that immigration reform has been a "thorny" issue that could be difficult for the Obama Administration to tackle early on.
However, she argued that immigration issues are central to the country's economic recovery.
"The economy's priorities are around families, around jobs, around the welfare of our communities," Alvarez said. "That's exactly what immigration reform will bring to our communities."
She added, "Immigration reform will bring a clear picture for our economy."
In addition to a less punitive attitude for those who have entered the country illegally, the coalition is also seeking stricter enforcement of labor laws to reduce incentives for employers to exploit immigrants, said Angelica Salas of the Fair Immigration Reform Movement.
"We want more enforcement of labor laws. That way you take away the advantage of unscrupulous employers and put everybody on a level playing field," she said.
by RTT Staff Writer
http://www.rttnews.com/Content/PoliticalNews.aspx?Node=B1&Id=772155
11/11/2008 2:57 PM ET
TOP MARKET NEWS
(RTTNews) - A coalition of immigrant advocacy organizations is planning a mass rally in Washington on the first full day of the Obama Administration to push for immigration reform.
Hoping to draw tens of thousands of immigrants and supporters from around the country and around the region, coalition leaders said they would push the new Congress and administration for "just" and "humane" reform of the nation's immigration laws.
"We are looking for humane immigration reform … less punitive laws," said Jessica Alvarez, co-chairwoman of the National Capital Immigrant Coalition.
Alvarez said the coalition is hoping to build on the electoral efforts of the immigrant community, noting that the Latino vote was up 30 percent this year from the 2004 presidential election.
"The immigrant community has embraced the spirit of hope and democracy surrounding this historic election," Alvarez said. "We helped them get here. We also need our issues addressed."
Speaking with RTTNews after a press conference to announce the rally, Alvarez conceded that immigration reform has been a "thorny" issue that could be difficult for the Obama Administration to tackle early on.
However, she argued that immigration issues are central to the country's economic recovery.
"The economy's priorities are around families, around jobs, around the welfare of our communities," Alvarez said. "That's exactly what immigration reform will bring to our communities."
She added, "Immigration reform will bring a clear picture for our economy."
In addition to a less punitive attitude for those who have entered the country illegally, the coalition is also seeking stricter enforcement of labor laws to reduce incentives for employers to exploit immigrants, said Angelica Salas of the Fair Immigration Reform Movement.
"We want more enforcement of labor laws. That way you take away the advantage of unscrupulous employers and put everybody on a level playing field," she said.
by RTT Staff Writer
http://www.rttnews.com/Content/PoliticalNews.aspx?Node=B1&Id=772155
more...
makeup anymore plastic surgery!
battineni
09-09 12:44 PM
Number of VISA numbers are same for EB2 I and EB3 I or not???
If in case same....why we not getting any approvals for EB3 compare to EB2?
I can understand why EB3 in 2001 and EB2 in 2006..
but my question is .... why Eb3 is not moving when EB2 is moving?
=====
Note: I'm not saying anything against EB2 people....I'm just comparing.
=====
If in case same....why we not getting any approvals for EB3 compare to EB2?
I can understand why EB3 in 2001 and EB2 in 2006..
but my question is .... why Eb3 is not moving when EB2 is moving?
=====
Note: I'm not saying anything against EB2 people....I'm just comparing.
=====
girlfriend Bad Plastic Surgery
senthil1
04-03 08:46 PM
What is the meaning of this?
The bill also includes a variety of other provisions, including one that would prohibit employers from hiring H-1B workers and then outsourcing them to other businesses and another that would require companies to pay prevailing wages to both H-1B and L-1 visa holders
Is that means Bodyshopping cannot be done by H1 or L1?
?? A new bill in senate to reform H1B ???
I was just watching LuDobb's show on CNN and saw a clip on a proposed bill (being prepared by Sen.Durbin and another whose name I forgot) to revamp/reform H1B program. From the brief discussion, got the impression that the bill is more concentrated on controlling the h1B program with more checks and rules etc. Obviously Dobbs liked it - not sure if there are any other measures in that bill. Also not sure why another bill if CIR/STRIVE act is in works which is supposed to cover all immigration issues. Anyone else saw any related news elsewhere?
Also saw this article (sorry if its already discussed somewhere):
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/03/HNsenateh1bbill_1.html
The bill also includes a variety of other provisions, including one that would prohibit employers from hiring H-1B workers and then outsourcing them to other businesses and another that would require companies to pay prevailing wages to both H-1B and L-1 visa holders
Is that means Bodyshopping cannot be done by H1 or L1?
?? A new bill in senate to reform H1B ???
I was just watching LuDobb's show on CNN and saw a clip on a proposed bill (being prepared by Sen.Durbin and another whose name I forgot) to revamp/reform H1B program. From the brief discussion, got the impression that the bill is more concentrated on controlling the h1B program with more checks and rules etc. Obviously Dobbs liked it - not sure if there are any other measures in that bill. Also not sure why another bill if CIR/STRIVE act is in works which is supposed to cover all immigration issues. Anyone else saw any related news elsewhere?
Also saw this article (sorry if its already discussed somewhere):
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/03/HNsenateh1bbill_1.html
hairstyles of awful plastic surgery
.soulty
03-11 12:14 AM
bluesund.. your wireframes are different than the final render?
Ramba
07-14 10:02 PM
--
I do not think what you are saying is correct. Ac21 does not allow you to leave before 180 days of your 485 filing.
Have you read the USCIS question? If not, read few times to understand how your interpretation is wrong.
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
The bottom line is if his approved 140 is not revoked with in 180 days of filing the 485, his 485 is still valid even if ported the job with in a month after filing 485.
The RFE is trying to determine whether your former employer holds a bonafide future job open for you or not. If he/she does not then your application is not valid in your circumstances from what I know.
If you get a letter from him/her then that should be adequate, however you will also need to start work with that employer for a reasonable time afterward to be within the law.
If as you say the intent has to be there at the time of filing, then it would be easy for everyone to intend whatever the needed at the time of filing and then change their minds. It does not work that way.
The revocation of the 140 would not have been a problem if it happened after the 180 days, but would be an issue now.
I can see you are in a difficult spot. I would definitely suggest you stay honest, since they have all of your filing records etc. and if you fudge it, your petition can be denied for fraud, which could harm future applications.
Rather than relying on the advise here, you should seek out a good attorney experienced in AC21.
I do not think what you are saying is correct. Ac21 does not allow you to leave before 180 days of your 485 filing.
Have you read the USCIS question? If not, read few times to understand how your interpretation is wrong.
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
The bottom line is if his approved 140 is not revoked with in 180 days of filing the 485, his 485 is still valid even if ported the job with in a month after filing 485.
The RFE is trying to determine whether your former employer holds a bonafide future job open for you or not. If he/she does not then your application is not valid in your circumstances from what I know.
If you get a letter from him/her then that should be adequate, however you will also need to start work with that employer for a reasonable time afterward to be within the law.
If as you say the intent has to be there at the time of filing, then it would be easy for everyone to intend whatever the needed at the time of filing and then change their minds. It does not work that way.
The revocation of the 140 would not have been a problem if it happened after the 180 days, but would be an issue now.
I can see you are in a difficult spot. I would definitely suggest you stay honest, since they have all of your filing records etc. and if you fudge it, your petition can be denied for fraud, which could harm future applications.
Rather than relying on the advise here, you should seek out a good attorney experienced in AC21.
indianabacklog
04-07 09:53 AM
From a logical perspective how many people arrive on flights which just happen to arrive during regular business hours so employers can be contacted?? Even if you do arrive in the middle of the day the chances are the phone would not be manned at that precise moment the POE officer chooses to call.
If there would be any doubt the POE officer would pass the individual onto secondary inspection for them to take care of things.
Another observation, why are H1B holders in line in front of green card holders. Did the green card holders just happen to want to join the long line or did the visa holder decide they could go in the short line at immigration?
Just some thoughts after reading these sort of posts.
Another one, how on earth does an employer know that there is a US citizen that could do the job spontaneously when the POE officer just happened to call them???
Until I see a real story that can be verified I doubt what I am reading is true.
If there would be any doubt the POE officer would pass the individual onto secondary inspection for them to take care of things.
Another observation, why are H1B holders in line in front of green card holders. Did the green card holders just happen to want to join the long line or did the visa holder decide they could go in the short line at immigration?
Just some thoughts after reading these sort of posts.
Another one, how on earth does an employer know that there is a US citizen that could do the job spontaneously when the POE officer just happened to call them???
Until I see a real story that can be verified I doubt what I am reading is true.
No comments:
Post a Comment