singhsa3
05-01 11:29 AM
Thats exactly my plan. It will be accompanied by covering letter, a spreadsheet and a recommendation.
I will be sending mainly to DOS , DHS and USCIS
singhsa3:
What you may want to do is, write to the NEW Director, with your proposal and also send a copy to all the senators who have recently proposed new EB related immigration bills. This might make an impact...
I will be sending mainly to DOS , DHS and USCIS
singhsa3:
What you may want to do is, write to the NEW Director, with your proposal and also send a copy to all the senators who have recently proposed new EB related immigration bills. This might make an impact...
wallpaper Large teased hairstyle want to
lsuk
07-21 07:17 PM
EAD is usually issued only for one year but USCIS has the option to issue EADs for a longer period of time based on this regulation:
"DHS on July 30, 2004 published an interim regulation that amends 8 CFR sec. 274a3. USCIS now has authority to issue EADs for periods greater than one year. This regulation recognizes the system is overburdened. However, USCIS has not implemented this reform probably due to the potential revenue loss."
Source: "Immigration and Nationality Law Handbook 2007 Edition", published by AILA
This can be done without changing the law. If USCIS is afraid to lose its revenue they can change for 2 or 3 years ahead. I believe this may be a good choice for people whose visa number will not be available for several years. Any comments?
"DHS on July 30, 2004 published an interim regulation that amends 8 CFR sec. 274a3. USCIS now has authority to issue EADs for periods greater than one year. This regulation recognizes the system is overburdened. However, USCIS has not implemented this reform probably due to the potential revenue loss."
Source: "Immigration and Nationality Law Handbook 2007 Edition", published by AILA
This can be done without changing the law. If USCIS is afraid to lose its revenue they can change for 2 or 3 years ahead. I believe this may be a good choice for people whose visa number will not be available for several years. Any comments?
tnite
08-03 10:28 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes080307.pdf
Per this press note, Nebraska has issued receipts for I-485 upto July 11 and Texas 26th June....
maybe they meant 07/1/2007
Per this press note, Nebraska has issued receipts for I-485 upto July 11 and Texas 26th June....
maybe they meant 07/1/2007
2011 Teased+hairstyles+for+long
ivgclive
08-23 06:14 PM
I lost the hope of GC after working 10 years in US because my GC is not approving.
Is it possible to file case against my employer and ask to return money that they deduct from me for GC and the % that they earned from me in last 8 years. I joined my employer for smooth GC process but even my I140 is not approved. My labor went to backlog. Once labor approved than I140 is pending for last 30 months. USCIS is trying to find out that my company is legitimate or not.
Do not argue how I know that I140 is pending because of company. Please let what is process to inform USCIS about my employer. My company files GC so that no one should leave the company. Employer gives hope about GC but I140 never approves. What all evidence I have to collect so that I can prove against my employer. Please suggest.
You have rights to ask the above items. But it can not be done thru USCIS.
You should hire a good lawer and proceed thru court.
Good luck.
PS: If you fail, please come back and ask how to get all the money you paid to the lawer and the court.
Is it possible to file case against my employer and ask to return money that they deduct from me for GC and the % that they earned from me in last 8 years. I joined my employer for smooth GC process but even my I140 is not approved. My labor went to backlog. Once labor approved than I140 is pending for last 30 months. USCIS is trying to find out that my company is legitimate or not.
Do not argue how I know that I140 is pending because of company. Please let what is process to inform USCIS about my employer. My company files GC so that no one should leave the company. Employer gives hope about GC but I140 never approves. What all evidence I have to collect so that I can prove against my employer. Please suggest.
You have rights to ask the above items. But it can not be done thru USCIS.
You should hire a good lawer and proceed thru court.
Good luck.
PS: If you fail, please come back and ask how to get all the money you paid to the lawer and the court.
more...
drona
09-10 02:19 PM
We've had 19 members join WA State Chapter in the past two days, let's keep it going. Please get active in your state chapter and help IV succeed.
lostinbeta
10-14 02:17 AM
You mean a paw print?
more...
BMS1
08-02 11:24 PM
In my opinion USCIS is not very strict on the RFE deadlines. I was late by 3 days for an RFE on my I140. They accepted. But that was more than a year ago. May be, it depends on officer.
2010 Mariska Hargitay Hairstyle
pasupuleti
02-13 05:04 PM
We met our san jose(CA) congressman Mike Honda (http://honda.house.gov/). We had good session with his staff. His office is in the process of writting a letter to Backlog centers asking them for speeding up approvals.Their office is well aware of backlog issues. Once they get a response back from DOL, they would let us know.
more...
pragir
12-11 01:57 PM
Mohit, when you invoke AC21 your job profile needs to be same as that listed on the job description on your LC. As long as your new company is willing to declare that your new job profile matches the one on your LC, you should be ok.
I am not a lawyer, please consult one.
I am not a lawyer, please consult one.
hair Teased hairstyle best
aadimanav
12-20 07:08 PM
Nonsense.
...........her case got approved in mistake and doesnt want to draw attention to that fact. So she is trying to divert attention by saying "oh, we got our GC by expedite request, but I wont tell you what the expedite request was"........ problems.
If someone "doesn't want to draw attention" then why would (s)he login to and mention the Approval Date?
...........her case got approved in mistake and doesnt want to draw attention to that fact. So she is trying to divert attention by saying "oh, we got our GC by expedite request, but I wont tell you what the expedite request was"........ problems.
If someone "doesn't want to draw attention" then why would (s)he login to and mention the Approval Date?
more...
starseed
07-20 06:10 PM
LOL! I did that already in May and the Local office IO was so incredibly RUDE and unhelpful. She told me absolutely nothing other than confusing me by saying my application was being processed on the East Coast and it would be another 3 months or so....... Bet she was just looking at the "EAC" in my receipt # to come up with "East Coast". I confirmed today it is definitely at TSC.
hot with this teased hairstyle
amit_sp
07-16 09:29 AM
Hello: Here's the original article.
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB118455917060167397-lMyQjAxMDE3ODE0NjUxNTY5Wj.html
see Greg Siskind's blog :
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
An alert reader sent me the following this morning. Miriam Jordan of the WSJ is reporting
Looking to resolve a messy immigration tangle, the U.S. government is close to announcing that it will accept at least some applications for work-based green cards that were filed by thousands of skilled workers in early July at the government's invitation and then abruptly rejected.
This would be hugely disappointing news if true and, according to a source, this was NOT the deal on the table over the weekend. It also will fail to address the three crises facing USCIS:
- fighting multiple lawsuits including at least two class action matters
- staving off congressional hearings and the release of embarrassing documents
- answering press inquiries over why USCIS skipped security clearances during a time when the US is under threat of a major terrorist attack
One would hope that common sense would outweigh USCIS' anti-immigrant instincts. Like an addict that's out of control, it's time for an intervention.
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB118455917060167397-lMyQjAxMDE3ODE0NjUxNTY5Wj.html
see Greg Siskind's blog :
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
An alert reader sent me the following this morning. Miriam Jordan of the WSJ is reporting
Looking to resolve a messy immigration tangle, the U.S. government is close to announcing that it will accept at least some applications for work-based green cards that were filed by thousands of skilled workers in early July at the government's invitation and then abruptly rejected.
This would be hugely disappointing news if true and, according to a source, this was NOT the deal on the table over the weekend. It also will fail to address the three crises facing USCIS:
- fighting multiple lawsuits including at least two class action matters
- staving off congressional hearings and the release of embarrassing documents
- answering press inquiries over why USCIS skipped security clearances during a time when the US is under threat of a major terrorist attack
One would hope that common sense would outweigh USCIS' anti-immigrant instincts. Like an addict that's out of control, it's time for an intervention.
more...
house high updo hairstyle while
nk2
08-04 12:58 PM
EB3 I - I140 pending , applied on 8/9/2007...sorry for the typo from the subject
jay75, if you want to can change it, go to edit post, advanced and change the subject
jay75, if you want to can change it, go to edit post, advanced and change the subject
tattoo Daniel#39;s teased hairstyle
TigerAmit
09-23 03:07 PM
Dear Guru's
I got rejection notice from TSC for a valid I-485 application stating that "A Visa number is not available at the present time".
However, I have two I-140 approved one in EB3 with 10-Nov-2004 as PD and another I-140 in EB2 category with 10-Aug-2007 as PD.
It is evident that Based on 10-Nov-2004 my PD is current and my application highlighted the same in bright cover sheet and my application still got rejected.
based on notice we filed the same application back and this time CC'd to ombudsman emphasizing the same fact for PD.
Its been a week we respond to rejection notice and haven't got either acceptance or rejection letter. and haven't heard back from ombudsman.
I am optimistic and would wait to get the response but I am worried since only 5 business days left before the dates get retrogressed.
I would like to know what actions do I need to take "while the date is current"; so that I can pursue my case further after 9/30/2008.
Is there anyway I can talk to ombudsman office and get personal attention to my case.
Guru's please help me out with your experience and ideas.
I got rejection notice from TSC for a valid I-485 application stating that "A Visa number is not available at the present time".
However, I have two I-140 approved one in EB3 with 10-Nov-2004 as PD and another I-140 in EB2 category with 10-Aug-2007 as PD.
It is evident that Based on 10-Nov-2004 my PD is current and my application highlighted the same in bright cover sheet and my application still got rejected.
based on notice we filed the same application back and this time CC'd to ombudsman emphasizing the same fact for PD.
Its been a week we respond to rejection notice and haven't got either acceptance or rejection letter. and haven't heard back from ombudsman.
I am optimistic and would wait to get the response but I am worried since only 5 business days left before the dates get retrogressed.
I would like to know what actions do I need to take "while the date is current"; so that I can pursue my case further after 9/30/2008.
Is there anyway I can talk to ombudsman office and get personal attention to my case.
Guru's please help me out with your experience and ideas.
more...
pictures Hairstyle: your 1980′s big
bomber
08-16 06:28 PM
Does anyone have any idea what the code stands for.
485 RD 7/2
ND 7/30
FP date 8/28 for both me any my husband
FP code 3
Code 3 means "Fingerprinting, signatures and photos will be taken"
485 RD 7/2
ND 7/30
FP date 8/28 for both me any my husband
FP code 3
Code 3 means "Fingerprinting, signatures and photos will be taken"
dresses Jessica Alba Hairstyle
polapragada
10-23 05:56 PM
This seems pretty amazing. I wonder how it will play out in action.
"On October 20, the Senate followed the House of Representatives in voting to protect surviving family members when either the petitioner or the principal beneficiary of a petition dies. President Obama is expected to sign this legislation shortly.
Presently, the law provides that when the petitioner or the principal beneficiary dies, so does the petition. Typically, if the beneficiaries are present in the U.S., their applications for adjustment of status are denied and they are placed in removal proceedings.
* WHO WILL BENEFIT FROM THE NEW LAW?
Not only does the new law eliminate the infamous "widow penalty", it does so much more!
When either the petitioner or the principal beneficiary dies in a wide variety of instances, the law acts to protect the surviving family members:
There are few options for surviving relatives:
For example, there is a section of the law which provides that a surviving spouse of a U.S. citizen can self-petition for permanent residence, but only if the marriage occurred at least two years before the petitioner's death.
There is also a regulation which provides that where the petitioner of a family-based petition dies before the beneficiaries of the petition became permanent residents, the beneficiaries may request that the USCIS reinstate the petition for "humanitarian" reasons.
1) Parents, spouses and children of a U.S. citizen with pending or approved petitions;
2) Beneficiaries, principal or derivative, of pending or approved family-based petitions;
3) Beneficiaries, principals or derivative, of pending or approved employment-based petitions;
4) Beneficiaries, principal or derivative, of pending or approved asylee/refugee relative petitions;
5) Nonimmigrants entitled to "T" (trafficking victims) or "U" (crime victims) status.
Since the waiting times for family-based and employment-based preference can range up to between five and 22 years, often petitioners and principal beneficiaries die before the beneficiaries of the petition can obtain permanent residence.
........
* EXAMPLE #4 - Employment-Based Petition
Dr. Kumar is a physician born in India. His wife and daughter reside with him in the U.S. He is in H-1B status. His wife and daughter are in H-4 status. Dr. Kumar completed his medical residency in the U.S. on a J-1 visa. Then, for three years, he worked in a medically-underserved area in H-1B status. In 2006, his employer submitted a PERM application on his behalf. It was approved in the Spring of 2007. In July 2007, when all the employment-based numbers became current, Dr. Kumar's employer submitted an EB-2 visa petition on his behalf. Simultaneously, Dr. Kumar, his wife and daughter all applied for adjustment of status. Then his priority date retrogressed. In 2009, Dr. Kumar was killed by a drunk driver. Under present law, the visa petition would be revoked. Under the new law, Dr. Kumar's wife and daughter would be permitted to continue with their applications to adjust status. The visa petition could only be revoked if the USCIS determined that its continued approval would not be "in the public interest".
* CONCLUSION
The new law will provide immigration benefits to "survivors" in various types of immigration cases where either the petitioner or the principal beneficiary dies before the other family members are able to become permanent residents.
However, the law is complex, and the extent of its benefits will not be known until after the USCIS and the State Department promulgate regulations, or issue memos, explaining how they plan to implement the new law."
http://shusterman.typepad.com/nation...y-members.html
It is very good law...Thanks for sharing..
"On October 20, the Senate followed the House of Representatives in voting to protect surviving family members when either the petitioner or the principal beneficiary of a petition dies. President Obama is expected to sign this legislation shortly.
Presently, the law provides that when the petitioner or the principal beneficiary dies, so does the petition. Typically, if the beneficiaries are present in the U.S., their applications for adjustment of status are denied and they are placed in removal proceedings.
* WHO WILL BENEFIT FROM THE NEW LAW?
Not only does the new law eliminate the infamous "widow penalty", it does so much more!
When either the petitioner or the principal beneficiary dies in a wide variety of instances, the law acts to protect the surviving family members:
There are few options for surviving relatives:
For example, there is a section of the law which provides that a surviving spouse of a U.S. citizen can self-petition for permanent residence, but only if the marriage occurred at least two years before the petitioner's death.
There is also a regulation which provides that where the petitioner of a family-based petition dies before the beneficiaries of the petition became permanent residents, the beneficiaries may request that the USCIS reinstate the petition for "humanitarian" reasons.
1) Parents, spouses and children of a U.S. citizen with pending or approved petitions;
2) Beneficiaries, principal or derivative, of pending or approved family-based petitions;
3) Beneficiaries, principals or derivative, of pending or approved employment-based petitions;
4) Beneficiaries, principal or derivative, of pending or approved asylee/refugee relative petitions;
5) Nonimmigrants entitled to "T" (trafficking victims) or "U" (crime victims) status.
Since the waiting times for family-based and employment-based preference can range up to between five and 22 years, often petitioners and principal beneficiaries die before the beneficiaries of the petition can obtain permanent residence.
........
* EXAMPLE #4 - Employment-Based Petition
Dr. Kumar is a physician born in India. His wife and daughter reside with him in the U.S. He is in H-1B status. His wife and daughter are in H-4 status. Dr. Kumar completed his medical residency in the U.S. on a J-1 visa. Then, for three years, he worked in a medically-underserved area in H-1B status. In 2006, his employer submitted a PERM application on his behalf. It was approved in the Spring of 2007. In July 2007, when all the employment-based numbers became current, Dr. Kumar's employer submitted an EB-2 visa petition on his behalf. Simultaneously, Dr. Kumar, his wife and daughter all applied for adjustment of status. Then his priority date retrogressed. In 2009, Dr. Kumar was killed by a drunk driver. Under present law, the visa petition would be revoked. Under the new law, Dr. Kumar's wife and daughter would be permitted to continue with their applications to adjust status. The visa petition could only be revoked if the USCIS determined that its continued approval would not be "in the public interest".
* CONCLUSION
The new law will provide immigration benefits to "survivors" in various types of immigration cases where either the petitioner or the principal beneficiary dies before the other family members are able to become permanent residents.
However, the law is complex, and the extent of its benefits will not be known until after the USCIS and the State Department promulgate regulations, or issue memos, explaining how they plan to implement the new law."
http://shusterman.typepad.com/nation...y-members.html
It is very good law...Thanks for sharing..
more...
makeup soft sexy teased hairstyle
mnq1979
10-22 03:50 PM
^^^^
girlfriend grecian hairstyles.
surabhi
05-29 08:21 PM
I have been working for a University for the last 3 yrs(2005-2008). The H1 they have is quota exempted and is non transferable. In 2006 a consultant A offered me a job and filed for H1b in the quota it has got approved.But due to certain reasons i have not joined them and still continued it the university job. In 2008 i got an another job oppurtunity with an another consultant B. They filed a H1 transfer from company A to Company B ,showing my university h1 that i am still in status.This H1 application by company B got denied and i have left the university job. Can i join the company A because they have an H1 approved in my name in oct 2006. I contacted consultant A and they still have not cancelled the H1 they have in my name.
Thank you for the help
YOu were in status until you were with the University. Did you start working with Company B pending approval. In that case you MAY be in status while you were working there. You are certainly out of status since your h1b is denied. Make sure you are not accumulating > 180 days.
USCIS denial seem to be consistent with the fact that you cannot transfer from cap-exempt to cap based job. Even though you petitioned from Company A to B, your H1 in use was from the University.
It should be possible to go back to Company A, assuming it is still valid and it has I-94 attached to it. The case is slightly complex, and a paid telephone consultation with a good attorney will be money well spent.
Thank you for the help
YOu were in status until you were with the University. Did you start working with Company B pending approval. In that case you MAY be in status while you were working there. You are certainly out of status since your h1b is denied. Make sure you are not accumulating > 180 days.
USCIS denial seem to be consistent with the fact that you cannot transfer from cap-exempt to cap based job. Even though you petitioned from Company A to B, your H1 in use was from the University.
It should be possible to go back to Company A, assuming it is still valid and it has I-94 attached to it. The case is slightly complex, and a paid telephone consultation with a good attorney will be money well spent.
hairstyles under: Elegant Hairstyles
immigrationvoice1
01-31 09:36 PM
Has anyone analyzed who would be an ideal president from our point of view? Does IV endorse any candidate?
In my opinion IV should not be "endorsing" any candidate and one among the many reasons could be, none of the members of IV have voting rights in this country! Why should IV even think of endorsing anyone in this scenario ?
I guess what you meant to ask was who amongst the current contestants does the IV leadership thinks would be pro legal highly skilled immigrant if he/she happens to get elected to the White House.
Please correct me if I am wrong with the above.
In my opinion IV should not be "endorsing" any candidate and one among the many reasons could be, none of the members of IV have voting rights in this country! Why should IV even think of endorsing anyone in this scenario ?
I guess what you meant to ask was who amongst the current contestants does the IV leadership thinks would be pro legal highly skilled immigrant if he/she happens to get elected to the White House.
Please correct me if I am wrong with the above.
aray
09-16 02:48 PM
There is no risk. I recently traveled and came back on AP and I changed jobs and no longer work with sponsoring employer.
There is always a nut case if you are not lucky and will probably cause some grief, but will not stop you from entering US.
surabhi,
At the Port of Entry, were you asked if you are still working for the GC sponsoring employer? Did you have to show any documentation from new employer?
I am planning to travel to India in December on AP. I recently changed jobs.
Thanks in advance.
There is always a nut case if you are not lucky and will probably cause some grief, but will not stop you from entering US.
surabhi,
At the Port of Entry, were you asked if you are still working for the GC sponsoring employer? Did you have to show any documentation from new employer?
I am planning to travel to India in December on AP. I recently changed jobs.
Thanks in advance.
Adam
08-26 11:42 AM
I spent about 15 minutes the other night trying to make C3-PO smilie to go with :rd: I found it tough if you wanna give it a shot.
