qtoask
08-18 03:31 PM
Piyush,
Your dependents are "in status" as their I485 pending. donot worry about it. You will receive your card within 3-4 days.
Right now my parents in India are trying to seek help from local authority so as to say the ADM office - to get the certificate. I dont know how much this will work.........I will keep everyone posted.
Your dependents are "in status" as their I485 pending. donot worry about it. You will receive your card within 3-4 days.
Right now my parents in India are trying to seek help from local authority so as to say the ADM office - to get the certificate. I dont know how much this will work.........I will keep everyone posted.
wallpaper love poems for him that rhyme.
marty
03-16 06:32 PM
"One additional reason for making sure that you have a valid EAD at all times is so that you can claim unemployment benefits in the event you lose your job. H nonimmigrants do not qualify for unemployment insurance. If you have an EAD, however, and can be referred out for job interviews, you do qualify for UI, even if you don't yet have your green card."
The above is quite interesting. I saw people who were laid off and had question about applying for UI if they are on EAD and this answer explains it really well.
The above is quite interesting. I saw people who were laid off and had question about applying for UI if they are on EAD and this answer explains it really well.
krishna.ahd
12-21 06:51 PM
I was not bragging. I was just thinking out aloud, so to speak. Economic ups and downs like this this are a normal part of economic cycles in a capitalist economy. My observation is that IT industry is not as badly affected as other sectors. I have not seen people sitting without jobs for extended periods. I mean, some people do loose jobs but they get something else within a couple of weeks. That is pretty much normal functioning of markets.
Just quick question
Are you on the Moon or Mars ??
My team (reporting directly ) reduced from 14 to 8 , so are others within IT
Company termintaed the contract with Offshore prod support team of 20
Over all IT will be reduced by another 10% within 3 months
Just quick question
Are you on the Moon or Mars ??
My team (reporting directly ) reduced from 14 to 8 , so are others within IT
Company termintaed the contract with Offshore prod support team of 20
Over all IT will be reduced by another 10% within 3 months
2011 Love+poems+for+him+from+
qplearn
10-25 07:56 PM
The bulletin is 2 years old (if that is considered old, given the GC standards). However, no new bulletins have followed to void it. Unless I have been advising with the wrong lawyer and wrong GC applicants (many), there is no such thing as I-485 Approval before the name check is completed. Any third party would like to comment?
Of course, they will not "approve" your 485 before your name check is cleared. You misunderstood me or I was not clear. What I meant is this: if your name check is not cleared but all other work on 485 is finished (which I think I equated to clearing the 485 in my previous post; sorry), they will tell you on phone (if you inquire) that your 485-related stuff is complete, but we are waiting for the name check. (Also, they will wait for your PD to become current).
My main point in the original post was that if it takes them 2 yrs to check your name --- the name-checking process runs concurrently with the 485 process --- then the 485 is bound to be complete by the time your name check is cleared. The processing times of 485 can be gauged from the VSC (or relevant center's) bulletins. Those proc. times do NOT indicate the processing times for the name check. If the name check happens before the 485 process is cleared, great! If not, you wait for the name check; lots (and believe me tens of thousands) of people belong to the second group. Since this forum mostly has people stuck in the process at earlier stages, you are not going to find too many people with that kind of experience here.
So your respected lawyer is technically correct, but what he/she is saying can be very badly misleading!! One gets the impression that clearing the name check happens automatically with completing work on the 485 by USCIS.
Wait a minute; I thought the name check is part of the I485 approval (and for those who file I-140 and I-485 concurrently, part of the I-140 approval).
And the name check is certainly not a part of the 140 approval even if the 140 and 485 are submitted concurrently. If any lawyer is telling you this, please change him/her.
I hope what I said above makes sense :) Took me a long time to compose that ...:)
Of course, they will not "approve" your 485 before your name check is cleared. You misunderstood me or I was not clear. What I meant is this: if your name check is not cleared but all other work on 485 is finished (which I think I equated to clearing the 485 in my previous post; sorry), they will tell you on phone (if you inquire) that your 485-related stuff is complete, but we are waiting for the name check. (Also, they will wait for your PD to become current).
My main point in the original post was that if it takes them 2 yrs to check your name --- the name-checking process runs concurrently with the 485 process --- then the 485 is bound to be complete by the time your name check is cleared. The processing times of 485 can be gauged from the VSC (or relevant center's) bulletins. Those proc. times do NOT indicate the processing times for the name check. If the name check happens before the 485 process is cleared, great! If not, you wait for the name check; lots (and believe me tens of thousands) of people belong to the second group. Since this forum mostly has people stuck in the process at earlier stages, you are not going to find too many people with that kind of experience here.
So your respected lawyer is technically correct, but what he/she is saying can be very badly misleading!! One gets the impression that clearing the name check happens automatically with completing work on the 485 by USCIS.
Wait a minute; I thought the name check is part of the I485 approval (and for those who file I-140 and I-485 concurrently, part of the I-140 approval).
And the name check is certainly not a part of the 140 approval even if the 140 and 485 are submitted concurrently. If any lawyer is telling you this, please change him/her.
I hope what I said above makes sense :) Took me a long time to compose that ...:)
more...
qplearn
10-09 04:50 PM
that is a good guess - I hope it is correct.
However, whether the fees are being used for overtime or for more people working on a case, that means USCIS is understaffed and needs to hire more people. In that case, isn't it logical that they would increase fees across the board for all applications, not just PP? i.e. fee hikes would be for new applications to pay for the extra resources, and existing applications should be processed under a flat fee for all cases.
If they are claiming that those who pay extra fees are entitled to faster processing, ahead of the line, then that, my friend, is a bribe, whatever official term is used. Because otherwise if they were understaffed, which it appears they are, they would simply raise fees for all applications.
I can understand a corporation doing this, like getting your tax refunds processed faster through a company if you pay more, but imagine if IRS suggested they would process faster for an extra fee.
They cannot raise fees without providing extra service. USCIS does raise fees once in while though. But the PP fees bring in a very large amount of revenue in comparison to small increases in regular fees.
Also, for better service, people often pay more. I invariably pay more in an airplane to be in the first class. Not sure why USCIS cannot use that logic to make some more money. I don't think it is comparable to a bribe. But, I guess we will agree to disagree here.
However, whether the fees are being used for overtime or for more people working on a case, that means USCIS is understaffed and needs to hire more people. In that case, isn't it logical that they would increase fees across the board for all applications, not just PP? i.e. fee hikes would be for new applications to pay for the extra resources, and existing applications should be processed under a flat fee for all cases.
If they are claiming that those who pay extra fees are entitled to faster processing, ahead of the line, then that, my friend, is a bribe, whatever official term is used. Because otherwise if they were understaffed, which it appears they are, they would simply raise fees for all applications.
I can understand a corporation doing this, like getting your tax refunds processed faster through a company if you pay more, but imagine if IRS suggested they would process faster for an extra fee.
They cannot raise fees without providing extra service. USCIS does raise fees once in while though. But the PP fees bring in a very large amount of revenue in comparison to small increases in regular fees.
Also, for better service, people often pay more. I invariably pay more in an airplane to be in the first class. Not sure why USCIS cannot use that logic to make some more money. I don't think it is comparable to a bribe. But, I guess we will agree to disagree here.
GCwaitforever
01-25 01:02 PM
I do not know whether this is going to help IV raise more funds or not, which should be the bottom line for every effort spent at this crucial juncture.
My thoughts on this scheme - Instead of going to outside web sites, we can design a scheme locally ourselves.
Currently we have member information like EB2/EB3, what stage of GC processing etc ... We can add another read-only field to this information like range of contribution by the member. For example,
Platinum member > $1000
Gold member $501 - $1000
Silver member $251 - $500
Member $1 - $250
Non-contributing member $0
When IV can come up with member, senior member etc ... depending on number of posts by the member, even this categorization can be easily implemented in the database. The exact dollar amount need not be disclosed.
My thoughts on this scheme - Instead of going to outside web sites, we can design a scheme locally ourselves.
Currently we have member information like EB2/EB3, what stage of GC processing etc ... We can add another read-only field to this information like range of contribution by the member. For example,
Platinum member > $1000
Gold member $501 - $1000
Silver member $251 - $500
Member $1 - $250
Non-contributing member $0
When IV can come up with member, senior member etc ... depending on number of posts by the member, even this categorization can be easily implemented in the database. The exact dollar amount need not be disclosed.
more...
Appu
10-05 08:59 PM
Pappu, I sent you a PM
2010 LOVE POEMS FOR HIM THAT RHYME
hopefulgc
08-14 10:13 AM
Libra,
I think everybody here appreciates your effort to get people to contribute. But use of such demeaning language is simply uncalled for.
This approach will simply drive away new members and degrade IV's reputation.
Another question is how do you know if somebody has not contributed. Maybe they did, but just didn't update their signature.
I almost don't feel like visiting here anymore because of all this. Bu you know what, missions of IV are way more important to us.. so much that we are willing to put up with all this and help IV further its missions.
Maybe, we should explore other avenue of making money, like banner ads and targeted SE ads.
People who come here just to create threads and post all silly things need to get remind that this forum/organization is ran by members contribution, people like me who are contributing are allowing you to use this site. You better get this.
And somebody said it right, to contribute someone has to be huMAN.
I think everybody here appreciates your effort to get people to contribute. But use of such demeaning language is simply uncalled for.
This approach will simply drive away new members and degrade IV's reputation.
Another question is how do you know if somebody has not contributed. Maybe they did, but just didn't update their signature.
I almost don't feel like visiting here anymore because of all this. Bu you know what, missions of IV are way more important to us.. so much that we are willing to put up with all this and help IV further its missions.
Maybe, we should explore other avenue of making money, like banner ads and targeted SE ads.
People who come here just to create threads and post all silly things need to get remind that this forum/organization is ran by members contribution, people like me who are contributing are allowing you to use this site. You better get this.
And somebody said it right, to contribute someone has to be huMAN.
more...
doubleyou
03-01 12:55 PM
I am also in similar situation although no RFE yet. I have submitted a non-availability of birth certificate letter and affadivit of parents. I have the following questions
(1) Do we get the letter from the muncipal office from the place of birth or we can get from the muncipal office that we are presently residing. (birth was in UP , residing in TN)
(2)What is the letter for , is it for birth certificate or for non availability of birth certificate.
(3) Is there any body who has gotten a letter post a copy. (after removing personal details.)
(1) Do we get the letter from the muncipal office from the place of birth or we can get from the muncipal office that we are presently residing. (birth was in UP , residing in TN)
(2)What is the letter for , is it for birth certificate or for non availability of birth certificate.
(3) Is there any body who has gotten a letter post a copy. (after removing personal details.)
hair love poems 4 him. funny short
ivar
06-30 02:37 PM
My old I-140 is still active so it was safe while porting. I am not sure what happens if the old I-140 is revoked, sorry i don't have answer for this..
HI Ivar,
So in your case, did your older employer cancel or withdraw the I - 140 or it was active. Do you know if you can still port the priorty date if the I140 is withdrawn by the older employer. I have looked at most of the forums and haven't found a concrete answer to this question.
HI Ivar,
So in your case, did your older employer cancel or withdraw the I - 140 or it was active. Do you know if you can still port the priorty date if the I140 is withdrawn by the older employer. I have looked at most of the forums and haven't found a concrete answer to this question.
more...
485Mbe4001
11-30 07:16 PM
does anyone have the bill number that was passed by clinton to recapture visas from previous years. i wanted to know who the sponsors for the bill were. if its was a simple bill maybe the state chapters can talk to their congresspeople about passing something similar in the interim. it will reduce the waiting time for everybody and it is certainly non controversial...just thinking aloud.
hot love poems for him that rhyme.
zCool
03-09 03:17 AM
isn't ability to pay normally satisfied directly via paystubs and W2 when you have worked for the company. esp if company has already paid you for the period of say 1 yr then ability to pay is proven no?
more...
house love poems for her that rhyme.
LostInGCProcess
06-17 05:24 PM
I do not think this is standard. I worked for a consultant company for 7 years and never saw an agreement like that!!
Yes !!!Also to me, it feels very fishy. The topic of this document is very misleading too..."Time Sheet Agreement" and they have included all the 'bonded labor' clauses in it...Thats why I have posted it here in this forum to get some feedback from experienced people who might have come across these nonsense.
Yes !!!Also to me, it feels very fishy. The topic of this document is very misleading too..."Time Sheet Agreement" and they have included all the 'bonded labor' clauses in it...Thats why I have posted it here in this forum to get some feedback from experienced people who might have come across these nonsense.
tattoo girlfriend love poems for him
GCard_Dream
01-04 10:48 PM
Gentlemen, please do some research before posting questions that has been asked and answered many many times.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2664
good question,an update will be halpful, we also want to know how we can halp in short term to get the 485 relief?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2664
good question,an update will be halpful, we also want to know how we can halp in short term to get the 485 relief?
more...
pictures gangster love poems for her
goel_ar
05-11 03:57 PM
Below is data of PD from last four years for EB2-I - only for Jun, Jul & Aug.
Except July Fiasco , I don't see dates ever moving forward in July VB; but they do move in August VB.
Has anything changed in spillover laws in last 1 year - which will explain this no movement in July but in August?
Jun 06 : 01JAN03 | July 06 : 01JAN03 | August 06 : U ---> No change in July. Aug backward
Jun 07 : 01APR04 | July 07 : C | August 07 : U ---> July Fiasco
Jun 08 : 01APR04 | July 08 : 01APR04 | August 08 : 01JUN06 ---> No change in July. Aug forward
Jun 09 : 01JAN00 | July 09 : 01JAN00 | August 09 : 01OCT03 ---> No change in July. Aug forward
Jun 10 : 01FEB05 | July 10 : ?????? | August 10 : ???? ---> Do your really expect forward movement in July?
Except July Fiasco , I don't see dates ever moving forward in July VB; but they do move in August VB.
Has anything changed in spillover laws in last 1 year - which will explain this no movement in July but in August?
Jun 06 : 01JAN03 | July 06 : 01JAN03 | August 06 : U ---> No change in July. Aug backward
Jun 07 : 01APR04 | July 07 : C | August 07 : U ---> July Fiasco
Jun 08 : 01APR04 | July 08 : 01APR04 | August 08 : 01JUN06 ---> No change in July. Aug forward
Jun 09 : 01JAN00 | July 09 : 01JAN00 | August 09 : 01OCT03 ---> No change in July. Aug forward
Jun 10 : 01FEB05 | July 10 : ?????? | August 10 : ???? ---> Do your really expect forward movement in July?
dresses Rhyming Poems. My rhyming
gautamagg
07-20 02:27 AM
As some of you know that I don't really post on IV after the belittling of my posts and stand regarding F1 visas and support to Mr , I was asked by another IV loyalist friend who felt it was relevant I shared a letter I had sent to Mr. E Gonzalez over email yesterday as learnt of this issue yesterday.
Dear Mr. Gonzalez
I wanted to thank you for the announcement that has brought relief for many of us it is still the beginning of our fight for better processes and improved and updated laws for employment based green cards. I still don't see the light at the end of the tunnel with so many pending applications. I have already been 3 years in the process and my lawyers think I would be out for another 2 if not 3 after having gained premier advanced education from the US. The reasons are many fold. Some are process delays related and some due to statutory guidelines per the legislations. I wanted to document a few issues that if resolved can bring in a lot a relief. Also, I need to introduce you to an issue I was made aware of by a close friend who was surprisingly unhappy with yesterday's announcement.
Process delays on the part of USCIS have caused many delays in employment based visas to be issued. And based on how annual caps are counted and met, many EB based visas have been lost. (~500,000 in the last few years per the Ombudsman's office i.e. almost 4 years worth of visas). This has created a chicken and an egg problem. Because of the USCIS delays, the visa numbers have cumulatively got lost and there is no way to recapture them without a legislation change. No one seems to address the former issue. The Congress does not really have anything planned for the recapture to happen. As a result the 4 year backlog will become 5 and 5 will become 6 and so on. Not only are skilled workers left frustrated with stagnant careers, they are also left unheard and asked to look at other greener pastures outside of the US. This is hurting the US economy in many ways but one. Employers such as Microsoft are unable to retain people and therefore opening offices offshore - this will only promote job off shoring that middle class America is most worried about. Action needs to be taken on the part of the USCIS and Congress; else this situation will have ripple effects for many years to come that may reshape the American Society - more in negative ways than positive.
The next issue I wanted to discuss was something even crueler. Apparently people have been fighting for this issue from 1990 under many organizations with Unitefamilies.org being most active. Under the current legislation, a non immigrant long term visa holder such as F1, H1, L1, J1, etc. are allowed to immediately get their families (spouses and children) on similar dependent categories like F4, H4, etc. Also Green Card applicants can add the names of their spouses and children on their AOS applications (I-145) easily and create a primary-derivative pending application. But a Green Card holder who wishes to marry someone can not get his/ her spouse in the United States for over 6 years. The current legislation allows immediate family members such as spouse and children of citizens to be in the country in around 6 to 9 months but not so much for the permanent resident (PR). This leaves the PR holder with one of two options: live without family for 6 years or move with the family back to another country. The former is resulting in many broken families and against the American history that promotes family values. The latter is not feasible because PR laws require Green Card holders to be in the US for over 6 months a year to maintain the PR status. Is this really what our lawmakers want us to live with - 2 choices that change people's life for the worst?
On further understanding of the issue, I realize that legislation change is needed to allow reuniting families. This needs to be sorted out, I want the lawmakers to consider people who became PRs through an H1 or L1 employment route be given the benefit of getting their families more easily since they had those benefits when on the Non-Immigrant Visa. Then why stop a permanent resident from being with his/ her family? The lawmakers may be concerned that allowing all Green card holders to do so will increase the misuse of this option and promote marriages of convenience; but the beneficiaries through employment category should be allowed because they could avail of it while in the pending state in any case. This needs a legislation change and may address a big chunk of the issue at hand.
The one last scenario that I feel is a no brainier and needs no legislation change but more of a USCIS policy change is very straight forward and it becomes more relevant in this age of retrogression. This is the reason why my friend was unhappy and I have a feeling I may end up in this situation too and therefore will use myself as an example:
Based on yesterday's announcement I apply for my AOS. As mentioned in earlier emails the benefits of the AOS pending let me come out a of a stagnant career path. I am single and 30 years old. Since I do not have a wife, my application has no derivative. 2 months down the line I find the love of my life and get married in 3-4 months - before my AOS has been approved. Now I want to have my wife get the benefit of the AOS as well such that I can get her the Green Card too - to avoid the 6 year waiting time she will have if I apply after I get approved. But by then the retrogression dates move back again and my PD is not current anymore. Per the current USCIS process one can not apply for AOS if the date is not current. That process is also extrapolated to derivative applicants where the primary is pending and therefore the derivative has to wait for the dates to get current. The problem with this issue is that because no one has visibility into how USCIS approves application the primary may get approved as soon as the dates become current before the derivative could apply for the AOS. The derivative will not be able to apply for AOS and will have to go back of the country and wait outside for 6 years to file using the other path. Even though the marriage took place before the primary got approved but a process guideline prevents the derivative to apply. This is a very cruel process for people who are about to get married but do not want to risk a broken family and are delaying filing their AOS even though the visa bulletin allows them to. God knows when this window will open again. My friend has to choose between filing his own AOS or marriage. A simple process update can help us fix this situation. While the USCIS and people are still debating allowing filing of 485s with retrogressed PDs, this is a side issue that is recommending allowing filing of 485 for derivatives ASAP (instead of waiting for the primary's PD to become current again) if the 485 of the primary is already pending to avoid long waiting years for a couple to be together.
After hearing this issue, I am worried. My AOS was sent on Jul 2 and I am considering getting married by October. My PD is Dec 2004 EB2 India and may stay retrogressed for sometime. Per current process I will not be able to add my wife until my PD becomes current again and fear that my GC might get approved before I could do that...Ironically I am praying for a delay in my approval just so that I can build a family. This does not need a legislation change but a process review and change by the USCIS. This will help reduce the confusion on interfiled application and also reduce the strain on the 5-6 years of follow-on green cards.
Please feel free to contact me to further understand this issue. Read the following complicated analysis attorney Murthy has laid out to explain this situation: http://www.murthy.com/news/n_retspo.html
Thanks
Gautam
Dear Mr. Gonzalez
I wanted to thank you for the announcement that has brought relief for many of us it is still the beginning of our fight for better processes and improved and updated laws for employment based green cards. I still don't see the light at the end of the tunnel with so many pending applications. I have already been 3 years in the process and my lawyers think I would be out for another 2 if not 3 after having gained premier advanced education from the US. The reasons are many fold. Some are process delays related and some due to statutory guidelines per the legislations. I wanted to document a few issues that if resolved can bring in a lot a relief. Also, I need to introduce you to an issue I was made aware of by a close friend who was surprisingly unhappy with yesterday's announcement.
Process delays on the part of USCIS have caused many delays in employment based visas to be issued. And based on how annual caps are counted and met, many EB based visas have been lost. (~500,000 in the last few years per the Ombudsman's office i.e. almost 4 years worth of visas). This has created a chicken and an egg problem. Because of the USCIS delays, the visa numbers have cumulatively got lost and there is no way to recapture them without a legislation change. No one seems to address the former issue. The Congress does not really have anything planned for the recapture to happen. As a result the 4 year backlog will become 5 and 5 will become 6 and so on. Not only are skilled workers left frustrated with stagnant careers, they are also left unheard and asked to look at other greener pastures outside of the US. This is hurting the US economy in many ways but one. Employers such as Microsoft are unable to retain people and therefore opening offices offshore - this will only promote job off shoring that middle class America is most worried about. Action needs to be taken on the part of the USCIS and Congress; else this situation will have ripple effects for many years to come that may reshape the American Society - more in negative ways than positive.
The next issue I wanted to discuss was something even crueler. Apparently people have been fighting for this issue from 1990 under many organizations with Unitefamilies.org being most active. Under the current legislation, a non immigrant long term visa holder such as F1, H1, L1, J1, etc. are allowed to immediately get their families (spouses and children) on similar dependent categories like F4, H4, etc. Also Green Card applicants can add the names of their spouses and children on their AOS applications (I-145) easily and create a primary-derivative pending application. But a Green Card holder who wishes to marry someone can not get his/ her spouse in the United States for over 6 years. The current legislation allows immediate family members such as spouse and children of citizens to be in the country in around 6 to 9 months but not so much for the permanent resident (PR). This leaves the PR holder with one of two options: live without family for 6 years or move with the family back to another country. The former is resulting in many broken families and against the American history that promotes family values. The latter is not feasible because PR laws require Green Card holders to be in the US for over 6 months a year to maintain the PR status. Is this really what our lawmakers want us to live with - 2 choices that change people's life for the worst?
On further understanding of the issue, I realize that legislation change is needed to allow reuniting families. This needs to be sorted out, I want the lawmakers to consider people who became PRs through an H1 or L1 employment route be given the benefit of getting their families more easily since they had those benefits when on the Non-Immigrant Visa. Then why stop a permanent resident from being with his/ her family? The lawmakers may be concerned that allowing all Green card holders to do so will increase the misuse of this option and promote marriages of convenience; but the beneficiaries through employment category should be allowed because they could avail of it while in the pending state in any case. This needs a legislation change and may address a big chunk of the issue at hand.
The one last scenario that I feel is a no brainier and needs no legislation change but more of a USCIS policy change is very straight forward and it becomes more relevant in this age of retrogression. This is the reason why my friend was unhappy and I have a feeling I may end up in this situation too and therefore will use myself as an example:
Based on yesterday's announcement I apply for my AOS. As mentioned in earlier emails the benefits of the AOS pending let me come out a of a stagnant career path. I am single and 30 years old. Since I do not have a wife, my application has no derivative. 2 months down the line I find the love of my life and get married in 3-4 months - before my AOS has been approved. Now I want to have my wife get the benefit of the AOS as well such that I can get her the Green Card too - to avoid the 6 year waiting time she will have if I apply after I get approved. But by then the retrogression dates move back again and my PD is not current anymore. Per the current USCIS process one can not apply for AOS if the date is not current. That process is also extrapolated to derivative applicants where the primary is pending and therefore the derivative has to wait for the dates to get current. The problem with this issue is that because no one has visibility into how USCIS approves application the primary may get approved as soon as the dates become current before the derivative could apply for the AOS. The derivative will not be able to apply for AOS and will have to go back of the country and wait outside for 6 years to file using the other path. Even though the marriage took place before the primary got approved but a process guideline prevents the derivative to apply. This is a very cruel process for people who are about to get married but do not want to risk a broken family and are delaying filing their AOS even though the visa bulletin allows them to. God knows when this window will open again. My friend has to choose between filing his own AOS or marriage. A simple process update can help us fix this situation. While the USCIS and people are still debating allowing filing of 485s with retrogressed PDs, this is a side issue that is recommending allowing filing of 485 for derivatives ASAP (instead of waiting for the primary's PD to become current again) if the 485 of the primary is already pending to avoid long waiting years for a couple to be together.
After hearing this issue, I am worried. My AOS was sent on Jul 2 and I am considering getting married by October. My PD is Dec 2004 EB2 India and may stay retrogressed for sometime. Per current process I will not be able to add my wife until my PD becomes current again and fear that my GC might get approved before I could do that...Ironically I am praying for a delay in my approval just so that I can build a family. This does not need a legislation change but a process review and change by the USCIS. This will help reduce the confusion on interfiled application and also reduce the strain on the 5-6 years of follow-on green cards.
Please feel free to contact me to further understand this issue. Read the following complicated analysis attorney Murthy has laid out to explain this situation: http://www.murthy.com/news/n_retspo.html
Thanks
Gautam
more...
makeup love poems for her that rhyme.
vinicola78
11-04 02:17 PM
I am also trying to stay afloat through the very debatable AC21 process. Currently, my case is being handled by Ron Gotcher and I have been very happy with all the help and support so far. Not to mention, they are really reasonable.
girlfriend girlfriend love poems for him
bestofall
06-20 12:45 AM
Pappu , Thanks for update
I got info from Our FL State chapter ,
Thanks
BestOfAll
I got info from Our FL State chapter ,
Thanks
BestOfAll
hairstyles LOVE POEMS FOR HIM THAT RHYME
dixie
05-24 01:28 PM
done !!
gimme Green!!
07-15 04:11 PM
That is expected based on the number of I140s that would have been approved and ready for adjudication. Also, with priority dates moving forward, more applications from earlier dates come into play and the processing dates move back.
Hopefully, they start moving forward soon and go over the July / August 2007 hump.
With USCIS what isnt odd! :).
I managed to find the NSC processing time archive from AILA - http://aila.org/content/default.aspx?bc=1016|8767|6739
See the 485 EB based processing timeline.
12/15/2007 - 04/24/2007
01/15/2008 - 07/19/2007
02/15/2008 - 07/30/2007
03/15/2008 - ?
04/15/2008 - 07/11/2007
05/15/2008 - 07/14/2007
06/15/2008 - 07/28/2008
This means that even processing dates go back and forward like priority dates! I dont think the July status is posted yet, but this definitely is interesting.
Hopefully, they start moving forward soon and go over the July / August 2007 hump.
With USCIS what isnt odd! :).
I managed to find the NSC processing time archive from AILA - http://aila.org/content/default.aspx?bc=1016|8767|6739
See the 485 EB based processing timeline.
12/15/2007 - 04/24/2007
01/15/2008 - 07/19/2007
02/15/2008 - 07/30/2007
03/15/2008 - ?
04/15/2008 - 07/11/2007
05/15/2008 - 07/14/2007
06/15/2008 - 07/28/2008
This means that even processing dates go back and forward like priority dates! I dont think the July status is posted yet, but this definitely is interesting.
optimystic
09-19 06:52 PM
Reddog,
Smart.
It should be how many non-citizen children.
But you both missed one more applicant, the spouse.
The question should be,
Are you married and if so, how many children you have who are non-citizens. We do hope most of them should be unmarried:D.
Am I smart too..
:)
Sri.
Well the smart question would simply be a multiple choice
How many derivate/dependent applications filed along with your I-485 applications?
a) 1 (just spouse)
b) 2 (spouse + kid)
c) 3 (spouse + 2 kids)
4) I should get vasectomy
Peace. :)
Smart.
It should be how many non-citizen children.
But you both missed one more applicant, the spouse.
The question should be,
Are you married and if so, how many children you have who are non-citizens. We do hope most of them should be unmarried:D.
Am I smart too..
:)
Sri.
Well the smart question would simply be a multiple choice
How many derivate/dependent applications filed along with your I-485 applications?
a) 1 (just spouse)
b) 2 (spouse + kid)
c) 3 (spouse + 2 kids)
4) I should get vasectomy
Peace. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment