Templarian
03-18 01:13 PM
:lol: Thanks guys.
wallpaper Foot Tattoo Designs That Make
pd_recapturing
10-06 01:03 PM
Still do not know as to how to get a copy of I-140 approval notice from my employer. Can somebody suggest a way to ger it?
greencardfever
02-18 08:27 AM
Thanks a lot for all your answers!
2011 pictures Three big stars foot
GCBy3000
07-19 03:43 PM
Guys dont get trapped. Since USCIS is exposed now and forced to accept 1 million application for AOS, these things are coming up. USCIS and DHS are the pets of US Govt. Govt wont let them down under any circumstances.
Now that USCIS and DHS realized the moster coming on their head down the line in the name of GC / EAD / AP and they have maintained the lie with dis-honesty all these years that they could not process 485s because of the lack of resource, they have fallen flat on US Congress to bail them out. Whatever solutions they have had in their disposal all these years they are taking them out and discussing with congress. If they wanted to be really helpful to the highly skilled immigrants, they should have done this long back. All these days they all were anti-immigrants and the ex-director of USCIS was a active member of anti-immigrant community.
You dont have to do anything. Just sit and watch the fun with USCIS. They will come up with solutions and get it passed with congress and they know better than any one else that they are in trouble without solutions. Lots of LAWSUITS will follow in next few months if they dont do their job on time.
Now that USCIS and DHS realized the moster coming on their head down the line in the name of GC / EAD / AP and they have maintained the lie with dis-honesty all these years that they could not process 485s because of the lack of resource, they have fallen flat on US Congress to bail them out. Whatever solutions they have had in their disposal all these years they are taking them out and discussing with congress. If they wanted to be really helpful to the highly skilled immigrants, they should have done this long back. All these days they all were anti-immigrants and the ex-director of USCIS was a active member of anti-immigrant community.
You dont have to do anything. Just sit and watch the fun with USCIS. They will come up with solutions and get it passed with congress and they know better than any one else that they are in trouble without solutions. Lots of LAWSUITS will follow in next few months if they dont do their job on time.
more...
bugsbunny
05-05 12:43 PM
BB: Mind pointing out what exactly is suspicious about me or my question?
And Grrrrr why only for the benefit of "others"? And I thot we were "friends"..
the suspicious part was the "utter rascals"
lol u asked the question...i was politely restating it for others
And Grrrrr why only for the benefit of "others"? And I thot we were "friends"..
the suspicious part was the "utter rascals"
lol u asked the question...i was politely restating it for others
nixstor
01-22 01:12 PM
My wife's H4 extension is sitting in CSC and they are currently doing Oct 16th 06. Even though I gave my docs in mid nov, they ended up filing in Jan with a notice date of Jan 09/07.
My wife would like to move on to H1, she missed it last year as she was out of country. Does she need her H4 to be approved before she can apply for H1?
If I request a Premium Processing for my I 129, will that result in her application being approved along with mine. I 129 & 539 were filed together. It appears that I have to do mine as my DL expires in Apr 1st week and I dont see the H1 approval coming through. Does USCIS consider both different applications and ask for 2 different fees for PP?
Thanks
My wife would like to move on to H1, she missed it last year as she was out of country. Does she need her H4 to be approved before she can apply for H1?
If I request a Premium Processing for my I 129, will that result in her application being approved along with mine. I 129 & 539 were filed together. It appears that I have to do mine as my DL expires in Apr 1st week and I dont see the H1 approval coming through. Does USCIS consider both different applications and ask for 2 different fees for PP?
Thanks
more...
ebizash
07-09 09:36 PM
Thanks Kris, this gives me much needed relief!
2010 Foot tattoo designs for women
GCard_Dream
05-06 06:52 PM
Thank you all for providing some excellent information. Special thanks to members waitnwatch and fromnaija for providing Arizona specific information. I certainly think that I should take this further in light of all the new information. I even talked to my GC attorny and he also thinks that I should have have given resident status.
fromnaija,
The pdf file in your post indicates that you would qualify for in-state tuition if you have filed for GC. How does the university determine that you have filed for GC? After you have filed for labor or filed for 140 or only after filing of 485? Those 3 dates could be years apart and depending on how the university defines that you have filed for GC could determine the residency status. If you have any further information, please share.
waitnwatch,
Do you believe that Arizona Board of Regents is actually not abiding by the state statue "illegal immigration reform and immigrant responsibility act of 1996" ? I am trying to gather as many arguments as possible to support my case because after reading your post and few other posts, I am seriously considering filing an apeal and fight this unfair practice once and for all.
fromnaija,
The pdf file in your post indicates that you would qualify for in-state tuition if you have filed for GC. How does the university determine that you have filed for GC? After you have filed for labor or filed for 140 or only after filing of 485? Those 3 dates could be years apart and depending on how the university defines that you have filed for GC could determine the residency status. If you have any further information, please share.
waitnwatch,
Do you believe that Arizona Board of Regents is actually not abiding by the state statue "illegal immigration reform and immigrant responsibility act of 1996" ? I am trying to gather as many arguments as possible to support my case because after reading your post and few other posts, I am seriously considering filing an apeal and fight this unfair practice once and for all.
more...
pappu
09-22 06:30 PM
Obama declines using administrative action to push immigration reform
By Michael O'Brien
Excerpt:
President Obama suggested that he would not pursue reforms to the
immigration system through regulations or other administrative policies.
The president said it was important for immigration reform to go through
Congress, lest opponents of comprehensive reform use regulations as a
political opportunity.
"You know, it is a very difficult thing to do administratively, and because
we want comprehensive reform, and because we want the Dream Act, what we
don't want to do is give an excuse to the opposition to say, 'Obama's trying
to do an end-run around Congress,'" Obama
said during an interview on Telemundo ....
Obama has faced criticism from the Hispanic community for failing to follow
through on his pledge to reform the immigration system. He told members of
the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) last week, though, that he would not
"walk away" from reform, and called on Republicans to join him in passing
legislation.
But Republicans in the Senate have appeared unwilling to find middle ground
with the president over immigration. The Senate GOP has said it would oppose
including the Dream Act, a piece of immigration legislation favored by many
Democrats, in the Defense Authorization bill.
"It appears we're not going to get this done before the election," Obama
told Telemundo of the Dream Act. ...
"We've got to build a consensus around this country," said the president. "I
think we can."
For the full article:
Obama declines using administrative action to push immigration reform - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/120275-obama-declines-using)
-administrative-action-to-reform-immigration
By Michael O'Brien
Excerpt:
President Obama suggested that he would not pursue reforms to the
immigration system through regulations or other administrative policies.
The president said it was important for immigration reform to go through
Congress, lest opponents of comprehensive reform use regulations as a
political opportunity.
"You know, it is a very difficult thing to do administratively, and because
we want comprehensive reform, and because we want the Dream Act, what we
don't want to do is give an excuse to the opposition to say, 'Obama's trying
to do an end-run around Congress,'" Obama
said during an interview on Telemundo ....
Obama has faced criticism from the Hispanic community for failing to follow
through on his pledge to reform the immigration system. He told members of
the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) last week, though, that he would not
"walk away" from reform, and called on Republicans to join him in passing
legislation.
But Republicans in the Senate have appeared unwilling to find middle ground
with the president over immigration. The Senate GOP has said it would oppose
including the Dream Act, a piece of immigration legislation favored by many
Democrats, in the Defense Authorization bill.
"It appears we're not going to get this done before the election," Obama
told Telemundo of the Dream Act. ...
"We've got to build a consensus around this country," said the president. "I
think we can."
For the full article:
Obama declines using administrative action to push immigration reform - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/120275-obama-declines-using)
-administrative-action-to-reform-immigration
hair Foot Tattoos
learning01
05-26 07:56 AM
28.
16 Republicans and 12 Democrats.
Here is the Chicago Tribune editorial on the Senate CIR bill.
The Senate's better vision
Published May 26, 2006
.............
The Senate on a 62-36 vote Thursday approved a far better plan.
...................
This issue is too important for such heavy-handed partisanship. If the House fails to compromise to get an immigration law, it will reinforce the broad public impression that this GOP-led Congress can't get anything done.
..................
Against long odds, the Senate has produced a comprehensive immigration bill that looks beyond the House's one-dimensional solution. It deserves to be considered in good faith in conference committee. Building on the lessons of 20 years of failed immigration policy, the Senate bill represents our best chance yet to finally set things right. It's time for negotiation, not noise.
Copyright � 2006, Chicago Tribune
LINK (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0605260222may26,1,7539910.story?coll=chi-opinionfront-hed) at ChicagoTribune.com
Here is my guess on who will be in Conference from Senate side.
Sen.Specter, Sen.Cornyn, Sen.Kyl, Sen.Sessions, Sen.Brownback, Sen.Graham, Sen.Grassley, Sen.Kennedy, Sen.Durbin, Sen.Feinstein, Sen.Leahy, Sen.Feingold
16 Republicans and 12 Democrats.
Here is the Chicago Tribune editorial on the Senate CIR bill.
The Senate's better vision
Published May 26, 2006
.............
The Senate on a 62-36 vote Thursday approved a far better plan.
...................
This issue is too important for such heavy-handed partisanship. If the House fails to compromise to get an immigration law, it will reinforce the broad public impression that this GOP-led Congress can't get anything done.
..................
Against long odds, the Senate has produced a comprehensive immigration bill that looks beyond the House's one-dimensional solution. It deserves to be considered in good faith in conference committee. Building on the lessons of 20 years of failed immigration policy, the Senate bill represents our best chance yet to finally set things right. It's time for negotiation, not noise.
Copyright � 2006, Chicago Tribune
LINK (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0605260222may26,1,7539910.story?coll=chi-opinionfront-hed) at ChicagoTribune.com
Here is my guess on who will be in Conference from Senate side.
Sen.Specter, Sen.Cornyn, Sen.Kyl, Sen.Sessions, Sen.Brownback, Sen.Graham, Sen.Grassley, Sen.Kennedy, Sen.Durbin, Sen.Feinstein, Sen.Leahy, Sen.Feingold
more...
GotGC??
05-17 07:30 PM
I was in a similar, but slightly different, situation. I got my 3 year extension while my previous extension was still valid (a couple of days left).
So at the POE, the officer gave me on the I-94 a date that was 3 years from the date of entry (that's the max their system was designed to handle) and said that since I have the visa on the passport, the next time I reenter I would get the later date on the I-94.
Thanks fromnaija!
I just wanted to confirm this is possible and if somebody has any experience in doing this.
So at the POE, the officer gave me on the I-94 a date that was 3 years from the date of entry (that's the max their system was designed to handle) and said that since I have the visa on the passport, the next time I reenter I would get the later date on the I-94.
Thanks fromnaija!
I just wanted to confirm this is possible and if somebody has any experience in doing this.
hot small star tattoo on foot.
whitecollarslave
08-14 10:02 AM
I will be willing to join such a campaign.
EB2 India PD 12/05
EB2 India PD 12/05
more...
house stars tattoos on foot. small
greeku_veerudu
05-27 09:45 PM
Major flaw in your analogy is you failed to imply that only USCIS can produce TVs worldwide and it can produce only 140k of them for worldwide customers. Also they can only produce 7% of 140k for each country to fit each country's specifications. They sure will have customers, doesn't matter if their customer service sucks. Simple supply and demand theory.
tattoo Sexy Star Foot Tattoos Picture
neerajkandhari
12-17 07:52 AM
can I accept my salalry through 1099
or do still need to be paisd by W2
or do still need to be paisd by W2
more...
pictures Star tattoo on foot by
smsthss
12-03 09:34 AM
I got an RFE on Nov 15th for copies of my degree certificates and my attorney sent them in a few after getting the RFE notice. I had an LUD on Nov 30th (Date when they received response to RFE) saying case processing has resumed. I also have another LUD on Dec 2nd. But the status still says case processing resumed. Does anyone know why there are 2 LUD's even though the case status is the same. Does it mean anything?
any replies on this !!
any replies on this !!
dresses Foot Star Tattoos
GCEB2
08-13 02:53 PM
Can somebody update on this issue too� now that most of them are getting GC.
more...
makeup Star foot tattoo designs for
kondur_007
08-13 04:20 PM
Hi guys,
I dont want to duplicate, but I think following "cut and paste" from my previous post may be a fair thing to do; just for the information.
I am not a lawyer; but this is what I believe to the best of my knowledge:
1. If you never used AC21 (still working with the employer who sponsored I 140); your obligation at the time of GC approval is to have a "good faith intention to work with the same employer permanently". It is not clear in the law as to how would you prove that intention...most people say that you should work for some duration (6 months or 12 months at least...or something like that) after GC is approved to "show" your good faith intention.
2. If you ported to employer B using AC 21 (before the approval of GC); you have the same obligation to the new employer B and NO obligation to original I 140 sponsoring employer. (this is especially true if you informed USCIS of your porting and also true if you did not inform USCIS but law is less clear in the later scenario)
There is really no law that specifies the duration.
All it says is :"you should have intention to work for the GC sponsoring employer (or AC21 employer if you ported) permanently."
Intention is a state of mind and it can change!! also all these employments are at will, and so it is possible that you may not like that job! Or on the other hand employer may not like you and fire you in a week.
Bottomline: You will be fine under most circumstances. However, if the issue is raised at the time of naturalization, it would be much easier for you to explain/show that you did have intention to work for the employer if you actually work for the sponsoring employer for some duration (6 months, 1 year...all these are arbitrary numbers).
If you never worked for the sponsoring employer, you may not have a lot of grounds to show that entire GC was not a fraud...
Again, there is no clear law on this...
followup post:
I think there is a mix up here between two things:
180 day clock does start on the first day after filing 485, but that is for the purpose of AC21. Once you use AC21, then the next employer assumes the role of "your future permanent employer" and you should have "intent to permanently work for that(new, not the sponsoring) employer" AT the time of GC approval.
If you use change the employers 7 times using AC21 before your GC gets approved; you should have "intent to work permanently for the latest employer".
You are not bonded slaves. The only issue is that the "burden of proof" of proving the intent to work for such and such employer is on the GC beneficiary and not on USCIS. So in future, if USCIS questions (or CBP questions), it is YOU who has to prove that intent.
One scenario where you WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PROVE IT: if you never worked for the sponsoring employer.
One scenario where you WILL NOT HAVE A PROBLEM PROVING IT: if you worked with sponsoring (or latest AC21) employer after GC approval for some duration (60 days?? 90 days?? 6 months?? 1 year??)...no law on this.
This is the whole purpose of Labor Certification process and I140. And it applies to the categories of EB2 (except NIW) and EB3--any category that requires LC.
This is from my discussion in following thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=20403
I just put it here so that everyone would not have to try the link and may be this information is useful to someone.
Good Luck.
I dont want to duplicate, but I think following "cut and paste" from my previous post may be a fair thing to do; just for the information.
I am not a lawyer; but this is what I believe to the best of my knowledge:
1. If you never used AC21 (still working with the employer who sponsored I 140); your obligation at the time of GC approval is to have a "good faith intention to work with the same employer permanently". It is not clear in the law as to how would you prove that intention...most people say that you should work for some duration (6 months or 12 months at least...or something like that) after GC is approved to "show" your good faith intention.
2. If you ported to employer B using AC 21 (before the approval of GC); you have the same obligation to the new employer B and NO obligation to original I 140 sponsoring employer. (this is especially true if you informed USCIS of your porting and also true if you did not inform USCIS but law is less clear in the later scenario)
There is really no law that specifies the duration.
All it says is :"you should have intention to work for the GC sponsoring employer (or AC21 employer if you ported) permanently."
Intention is a state of mind and it can change!! also all these employments are at will, and so it is possible that you may not like that job! Or on the other hand employer may not like you and fire you in a week.
Bottomline: You will be fine under most circumstances. However, if the issue is raised at the time of naturalization, it would be much easier for you to explain/show that you did have intention to work for the employer if you actually work for the sponsoring employer for some duration (6 months, 1 year...all these are arbitrary numbers).
If you never worked for the sponsoring employer, you may not have a lot of grounds to show that entire GC was not a fraud...
Again, there is no clear law on this...
followup post:
I think there is a mix up here between two things:
180 day clock does start on the first day after filing 485, but that is for the purpose of AC21. Once you use AC21, then the next employer assumes the role of "your future permanent employer" and you should have "intent to permanently work for that(new, not the sponsoring) employer" AT the time of GC approval.
If you use change the employers 7 times using AC21 before your GC gets approved; you should have "intent to work permanently for the latest employer".
You are not bonded slaves. The only issue is that the "burden of proof" of proving the intent to work for such and such employer is on the GC beneficiary and not on USCIS. So in future, if USCIS questions (or CBP questions), it is YOU who has to prove that intent.
One scenario where you WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PROVE IT: if you never worked for the sponsoring employer.
One scenario where you WILL NOT HAVE A PROBLEM PROVING IT: if you worked with sponsoring (or latest AC21) employer after GC approval for some duration (60 days?? 90 days?? 6 months?? 1 year??)...no law on this.
This is the whole purpose of Labor Certification process and I140. And it applies to the categories of EB2 (except NIW) and EB3--any category that requires LC.
This is from my discussion in following thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=20403
I just put it here so that everyone would not have to try the link and may be this information is useful to someone.
Good Luck.
girlfriend Choosing the perfect star foot
bestin
10-09 04:09 PM
This month end my I-94 will be expiring and 2 months back I have changed my passport to a new one as it was expiring. I have renewed my H1 recently(15 days back) with the H1 extension I received new I-94, would that be sufficient or I have to go out and come in again for a new one
Thats sufficient.
Thats sufficient.
hairstyles Foot Tattoo Designs.
LONGGCQUE
06-22 09:57 AM
Copsmart/Frostrated/anilkumar0902/Uma001/desitechie/Optimist/Other Guru's,
Thanks in advance for any suggestions you can provide
Here is the current status:
- Consulted my lawyer and went thru all docs they submitted as part of my I140 package. On my last employer experience, found out that I had submitted only one affidavit from a co-worker and that would cover for less than 60 months of experience at my last my place.
- Came up with a list of some 30+ documents that include paystubs from US/India, W2/Form16's, letters submitted to CIS by previous company for new H1b back in 2003 and then for an extn in 2006, appreciation letters and other material on previous company letterhead. Discussed this with my lawyer
- Lawyer is of the opinion that we can prove our case of alternate evidence based on documents i am producing.
- Plan is to submit an affidavit from me that i was unable to get an exp. letter from my previous employer mentioning reasons on why its not possible, submit 2 affidavits from ex co-workers covering span of 63 months.
Based on your scenario or known people, can one of you respond to how should i approach following issues:
1) I am going to draft content for experience letter non-availability. I have mail trail from last 1 year following up on asking for details of $12K. Same mail mentions that am asking for experience letter and provident fund amount back from HR. Will it be a good idea to attach deputation letter mentioning 5 lac indian rupee to be paid for breach of terms and a 100 rupee bond paper contents which i signed before US deputation. Will it be Ok to mention that previous employer is asking for $12K settlement amount to provide experience letter and attach copies of bond and deputation note OR only mention that am unable to get experience letter and i have been following up with HR for last 1 year and attach email trail as evidence. Any pros and cons from CIS perspective on which approach to choose.
2) Any other documentation that needs to be submitted ? Supporting evidence alongwith company lawyer detailed letter, 2 affidavits from co-workers for skills and duration, self affidavit for experience letter not available will be -
> Paystubs from US/India, not for all 63 months but for some months in 2004/6/7/8.
> W2's for 2005/6/8.
> Form 16 for 2005-6/2007-8
> Offer letter, yearly appraisal letters, US deputation letters, appreciation letters, ID Cards, 3 Business cards showing change in designations.
Thanks in advance for any suggestions you can provide
Here is the current status:
- Consulted my lawyer and went thru all docs they submitted as part of my I140 package. On my last employer experience, found out that I had submitted only one affidavit from a co-worker and that would cover for less than 60 months of experience at my last my place.
- Came up with a list of some 30+ documents that include paystubs from US/India, W2/Form16's, letters submitted to CIS by previous company for new H1b back in 2003 and then for an extn in 2006, appreciation letters and other material on previous company letterhead. Discussed this with my lawyer
- Lawyer is of the opinion that we can prove our case of alternate evidence based on documents i am producing.
- Plan is to submit an affidavit from me that i was unable to get an exp. letter from my previous employer mentioning reasons on why its not possible, submit 2 affidavits from ex co-workers covering span of 63 months.
Based on your scenario or known people, can one of you respond to how should i approach following issues:
1) I am going to draft content for experience letter non-availability. I have mail trail from last 1 year following up on asking for details of $12K. Same mail mentions that am asking for experience letter and provident fund amount back from HR. Will it be a good idea to attach deputation letter mentioning 5 lac indian rupee to be paid for breach of terms and a 100 rupee bond paper contents which i signed before US deputation. Will it be Ok to mention that previous employer is asking for $12K settlement amount to provide experience letter and attach copies of bond and deputation note OR only mention that am unable to get experience letter and i have been following up with HR for last 1 year and attach email trail as evidence. Any pros and cons from CIS perspective on which approach to choose.
2) Any other documentation that needs to be submitted ? Supporting evidence alongwith company lawyer detailed letter, 2 affidavits from co-workers for skills and duration, self affidavit for experience letter not available will be -
> Paystubs from US/India, not for all 63 months but for some months in 2004/6/7/8.
> W2's for 2005/6/8.
> Form 16 for 2005-6/2007-8
> Offer letter, yearly appraisal letters, US deputation letters, appreciation letters, ID Cards, 3 Business cards showing change in designations.
rcr_bulk
07-17 03:14 PM
Processing time URL changed to https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/processTimesDisplay.do
I think they are updating the site. Look and fee has changed.
I think they are updating the site. Look and fee has changed.
cashah19
06-15 09:18 AM
I must say this is the best forum ever. You guys are simply great. It feels really good to get answers to these questions. Thanks to all of you.
At least I will have a holiday on my marriage...... :D
At least I will have a holiday on my marriage...... :D
No comments:
Post a Comment