eb3_nepa
07-16 12:52 AM
I think immigration voice should ensure that concurrent filing of I-140 and I-485 is removed.
And why exactly should ImmigrationVoice do that?? Concurrent filing is HIGHLY beneficial to most people here!
And why exactly should ImmigrationVoice do that?? Concurrent filing is HIGHLY beneficial to most people here!
wallpaper fauxhawk hairstyle_26.
asharda
02-04 12:43 AM
Hi all,
I am from Grand Rapids. I'd like to help.
I think, It would be a good idea to get an approximate count of legal immigrants who are stuck in the GC process in Michigan. We should use these numbers to write to our Senator and make them feel that the State of Michigan is not about americans only, its about us as well.
What are you thoughts? Amit, do you want me to email you on your email address?
thanks
Akhilesh.
I am from Grand Rapids. I'd like to help.
I think, It would be a good idea to get an approximate count of legal immigrants who are stuck in the GC process in Michigan. We should use these numbers to write to our Senator and make them feel that the State of Michigan is not about americans only, its about us as well.
What are you thoughts? Amit, do you want me to email you on your email address?
thanks
Akhilesh.
prolegalimmi
10-02 03:50 PM
Some scenarios to consider
1. If 140 is approved and its been 6 months since date of 485 application and your company who sponsored is not revoking 140, then ability to pay might not matter and you don't care since you can use AC21
2. If 140 is approved and it has not been 6 months since 485 application date and you are on good terms with and your employer is not going to revoke your 140 , take an unpaid vacation to fill the 6 months gap if you can, then you are still safe to use AC21.
3. If your 140 is not approved but you have passed the 180 days litmus test and you use AC21 to move to another employer then the ability to pay might come in to picture if any RFE is done by USCIS.
4. If 140 is not approved and you have not passed 180 days its a variation of the 2nd case and if you can pull it off you can use AC21 and work elsewhere later.
there might be other scenarios but consider each of them carefully before making the decision. While it might seem a simple decision having come so far in your journey you don't want to make as wrong decision only to rue it.
- good luck
Hello Krishnam
I have a I-485 pending, and there is a chance I may be laid off after 180 days. Would I have to have another similar job offer at hand, or can I still continue looking for a job after 180 days of I-485 till I find one ?
Thank you for your help.
1. If 140 is approved and its been 6 months since date of 485 application and your company who sponsored is not revoking 140, then ability to pay might not matter and you don't care since you can use AC21
2. If 140 is approved and it has not been 6 months since 485 application date and you are on good terms with and your employer is not going to revoke your 140 , take an unpaid vacation to fill the 6 months gap if you can, then you are still safe to use AC21.
3. If your 140 is not approved but you have passed the 180 days litmus test and you use AC21 to move to another employer then the ability to pay might come in to picture if any RFE is done by USCIS.
4. If 140 is not approved and you have not passed 180 days its a variation of the 2nd case and if you can pull it off you can use AC21 and work elsewhere later.
there might be other scenarios but consider each of them carefully before making the decision. While it might seem a simple decision having come so far in your journey you don't want to make as wrong decision only to rue it.
- good luck
Hello Krishnam
I have a I-485 pending, and there is a chance I may be laid off after 180 days. Would I have to have another similar job offer at hand, or can I still continue looking for a job after 180 days of I-485 till I find one ?
Thank you for your help.
2011 fauxhawk hairstyle_26. cool emo love backgrounds. cool emo love backgrounds.
meridiani.planum
04-03 06:44 PM
Thanks for the reply but how did you conclude 'Future AC21 Changes' will be retroactive?
again from the same Murthy article:
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_porret.html
When explaining the risk of potentially stricter AC21 regulations to I-485 applicants, we are frequently asked, "If I change jobs under AC21 and the regulations are released after that, they won't apply to me, right?" Unfortunately, this is not correct. While it is not possible to predict the content or effective date of any future regulations, they will likely apply at the time of adjudicating the I-485 application, and not just when the job change occurs. In a hypothetical example, if new regulations were to limit the percentage of acceptable salary difference, or prevent multiple portings, the officer adjudicating the I-485 could decide that the job change violates the regulations, even if the change occurred months or years before the new regulations were issued.
again from the same Murthy article:
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_porret.html
When explaining the risk of potentially stricter AC21 regulations to I-485 applicants, we are frequently asked, "If I change jobs under AC21 and the regulations are released after that, they won't apply to me, right?" Unfortunately, this is not correct. While it is not possible to predict the content or effective date of any future regulations, they will likely apply at the time of adjudicating the I-485 application, and not just when the job change occurs. In a hypothetical example, if new regulations were to limit the percentage of acceptable salary difference, or prevent multiple portings, the officer adjudicating the I-485 could decide that the job change violates the regulations, even if the change occurred months or years before the new regulations were issued.
more...
chanduv23
09-19 12:43 AM
Yes, it was amazing effort.
I am glad that I was a part of it.
Thanks to everyone who came and to everyone who wholeheartedly supported the rally though they were not able to attend.
I am glad that I was a part of it.
Thanks to everyone who came and to everyone who wholeheartedly supported the rally though they were not able to attend.
newbie2020
06-10 04:30 PM
Albert pinto ko Ghussa kyun aata hain.. ;)
just kidding..
just kidding..
more...
ghost
03-31 01:18 PM
Done
2010 fauxhawk hairstyle_26. dragonette hello. Free “Hello” Bootleg! Free “Hello”
styrum
05-30 07:41 PM
way to go... What optimism!!!
Guys instead of being a pessimistic, lets all be optimistic and hope for the best case scenario.
I am optimistic. I have a US Masters in Physics and have worked for 5 years here. The F4 grandfathering is my big hope. I just explained "why"...
Guys instead of being a pessimistic, lets all be optimistic and hope for the best case scenario.
I am optimistic. I have a US Masters in Physics and have worked for 5 years here. The F4 grandfathering is my big hope. I just explained "why"...
more...
asiandude2
03-07 10:11 AM
anyone has any suggestions.
hair fauxhawk hairstyle_26. nature wallpaper 1080p. Full HD Wallpapers 1080p;
saketkapur
12-07 12:16 PM
So you apply about 4 months in advance? Are you then not losing about 3 months of your previous validity due to this practice?
not sure what you mean.
If your new validity date starts before the current one expires then yes you might lose the time depending on how fast your EAD was approved.
In my experience there has been no consistency in the issuance of the validity date in the past. I have received cards where the new validity date has been the day after my current EAD expired thereby me not losing any time and there have been times when I have lost time due to new validity date being prior to my current one expiring.
As per USCIS rules you can apply for renewal 120 days before your current one expires and not before that. Remember you can also apply for renewal a day before or even after expiry, its just that you cannot work as long as you do not have a valid EAD(or other work permit like H1B, L1 etc).
So as long as you are not at the risk of losing your job due to no EAD in hand I guess you can apply anytime once your 120 day window kicks in.
PS:Above is just my understanding of the system and should not be taken as legal advise. For any clarifications please consult your attorney.
not sure what you mean.
If your new validity date starts before the current one expires then yes you might lose the time depending on how fast your EAD was approved.
In my experience there has been no consistency in the issuance of the validity date in the past. I have received cards where the new validity date has been the day after my current EAD expired thereby me not losing any time and there have been times when I have lost time due to new validity date being prior to my current one expiring.
As per USCIS rules you can apply for renewal 120 days before your current one expires and not before that. Remember you can also apply for renewal a day before or even after expiry, its just that you cannot work as long as you do not have a valid EAD(or other work permit like H1B, L1 etc).
So as long as you are not at the risk of losing your job due to no EAD in hand I guess you can apply anytime once your 120 day window kicks in.
PS:Above is just my understanding of the system and should not be taken as legal advise. For any clarifications please consult your attorney.
more...
h1techSlave
04-01 02:53 PM
I wanted to know if any one's online status changed after FP is completed.
I had an LUD on my record after my lawyer sent the clarification to USCIS. But the status remains the same as ".... Case in suspense". Did any one's status came to Pending or a less ominous one?
I had an LUD on my record after my lawyer sent the clarification to USCIS. But the status remains the same as ".... Case in suspense". Did any one's status came to Pending or a less ominous one?
hot fauxhawk hairstyle_26. vista wallpaper. best vista wallpaper. best vista
milind70
10-05 02:26 PM
I received IRS tax audit check for year 2005 last week. I guess mostly I can defend my audit and I have scheduled an appointment with IRS tax manager for next week
However god forbid if I have to pay penalty on audit,I was wondering this would impact anything on my 485 process. Does it have any impact
Appreciate your thoughts.
If anyone faced this problem please, please give ur ideas
No relation between these IRS checks and 485 process
However god forbid if I have to pay penalty on audit,I was wondering this would impact anything on my 485 process. Does it have any impact
Appreciate your thoughts.
If anyone faced this problem please, please give ur ideas
No relation between these IRS checks and 485 process
more...
house fauxhawk hairstyle_26. desktop wallpaper natural_10.
willIWill
10-20 12:19 PM
GC_Wow,
Why haven't you filed for H1 extn? You need your H1 if you want to bring your future wife inside US. If you have an approved I-140, use it to get a 3 year H1 Extn if not you can get 1 year extn based on labor filing.
Do not, I mean DO NOT lose your H1 status if you want bring your future wife into US as a dependent.
WIW
Why haven't you filed for H1 extn? You need your H1 if you want to bring your future wife inside US. If you have an approved I-140, use it to get a 3 year H1 Extn if not you can get 1 year extn based on labor filing.
Do not, I mean DO NOT lose your H1 status if you want bring your future wife into US as a dependent.
WIW
tattoo fauxhawk hairstyle_26. we must
gccovet
06-13 01:24 PM
Folks:
I am one of the frustrated ones under EB-3 (India) with a PD of Jul 2003. My case is as follows:
I had 3.5 years of experience + MBA from India when I joined the current Job in 2001.
I applied for my GC in 2003 and the lawyer said since my MBA was not relevant for the current job (software engineer) and since my experience before the current job was less than 5 years, I should apply EB-3.
Currently, I have 11 years of experience (out of which 7.5 is with the current employer from whom I have applied for GC) and I have moved to Business Development that uses my MBA quals.
Can I change to EB-2? What do I need to do? What are the risks?
Any/all pointers will be appreciated
Karthik,
(I am not expert) but I believe , you have to refile (New application) under EB2 catagory and port the EB3 date to EB2.
GCCovet
I am one of the frustrated ones under EB-3 (India) with a PD of Jul 2003. My case is as follows:
I had 3.5 years of experience + MBA from India when I joined the current Job in 2001.
I applied for my GC in 2003 and the lawyer said since my MBA was not relevant for the current job (software engineer) and since my experience before the current job was less than 5 years, I should apply EB-3.
Currently, I have 11 years of experience (out of which 7.5 is with the current employer from whom I have applied for GC) and I have moved to Business Development that uses my MBA quals.
Can I change to EB-2? What do I need to do? What are the risks?
Any/all pointers will be appreciated
Karthik,
(I am not expert) but I believe , you have to refile (New application) under EB2 catagory and port the EB3 date to EB2.
GCCovet
more...
pictures fauxhawk hairstyle_26. tornado alley map. Kansas was tornado alley?
pappu
02-23 08:07 AM
Even mighty economist prints article saying that immigration reform is knocking at the door , am not sure without a paid subscription whether u can read this , am positng the link and cannot copy paste the article as that will surely be a copyright violation . http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8746356
Immigration
One more shove
Feb 22nd 2007 | WASHINGTON, DC
From The Economist print edition
Congress is once again preparing to deal with the immigration mess
THE most dismal failure of the dismal 109th Congress was the non-reform of immigration. This is one of America's most chronic problems, with 12m illegal immigrants living in the shadows, more streaming over the border every day and many border towns buckling under the strain of so many non-citizens. Public pressure to “do something” is intense.
George Bush pushed hard for “comprehensive” immigration reform (meaning a combination of a path to citizenship for illegals and tougher border enforcement). John McCain and Teddy Kennedy crafted a bipartisan bill that passed the Senate by 62 to 36. But then the Republican-dominated House wrecked the whole thing in a fit of crude nativism.
Thankfully, the reformers have not been deterred. There has been a great deal of “scurrying about” behind the scenes, according to one insider. An odd coalition of business groups, trade unions and civil-rights organisations is pushing hard for reform under the umbrella of the Alliance for Immigration Reform 2007. An equally odd coalition of White House operatives, Democratic leaders and reform-minded Republicans is also working in the same direction. A new version of the McCain-Kennedy bill could be launched as early as mid-March. And Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell, the two parties' leaders in the Senate, have said that immigration will be one of the first ten bills they will consider. This time the chances of success are higher than last.
The main reason is the new Democratic majority in the House. The most virulent opposition to reform came from Republican House members who were obsessed with cracking down on illegals and building a 700-mile (1,125km) fence along the border with Mexico. Now that the Democrats are in the majority, Zoe Lofgren, the head of the sub-committee on immigration, thinks a deal is at least a possibility.
The reformers are also adopting a tougher tone. The new McCain-Kennedy bill will put more emphasis on beefing up the border, punishing errant employers, enforcing the law and assimilating new immigrants. It will also try to rebut Republican charges that it rewards lawbreaking and offers amnesty. Two current ideas are to impose a hefty fine (up to $5,000) on illegal immigrants who want to become legal, and to make illegals return to their countries of origin (“touching base”, in the jargon) in order to apply for legal entry.
The reason for this toughness is that comprehensive reform has little chance of passing both Houses on the backs of Democrats alone. A significant number of so-called blue-dog Democrats from conservative districts have every reason to steer clear of such controversial legislation. There is also a strong undercurrent of protectionism in the Democratic Party, which suspects immigrants of holding down American wages and stealing American jobs. Insiders calculate that they need about 20 Republican votes in the Senate and 40 in the House.
The reformers will have to overcome some big political and practical problems. Why should Democrats co-operate with Mr Bush on immigration, when they can wait until they capture the White House in 2008 and solidify their lead among immigrants for a generation to come? And why should congressional Republicans change their minds on this most emotive of issues? The vast majority of these members represent white conservative voters who regard immigration reform as a reward for breaking the law and a guarantee of the “Mexification” of American culture. The minority who represent more mixed districts are well aware that 70% of Latinos voted Democratic in 2006.
The practical problem is that the proposed bill will become so tough that it is self-defeating. Why should illegal immigrants come out of the shadows if they have to “touch base” and put themselves in the hands of America's notoriously slow and inept bureaucracy? And why, for that matter, should liberal interest groups support a bill that might seem punitive?
AP
Still, it would be a mistake to write the reformers off. The Democratic leadership risks provoking a backlash if it refuses to put its weight behind the bill, particularly among Latinos, who desperately want the mess cleared up. And the Republican Party also contains some powerful pro-immigration forces. American business strongly favours immigration reform: parts of the economy such as hotels and agribusiness depend on immigrant labour. “Big tent” Republicans also favour reform.
Karl Rove, Mr Bush's chief strategist, has long pointed out that it is stupid to alienate America's fastest-growing minority—particularly one as culturally conservative as the Latinos. In a swathe of states that Republicans need to retain the presidency, their numbers are crucial: New Mexico is 43% Latino, Texas 35%, Nevada 24%, Florida and Colorado 20%.
The November elections have also strengthened the hand of the big-tent Republicans. Several high-profile immigrant-bashers, such as Arizona's J.D. Hayworth and Indiana's John Hostetler, lost their elections. And John Boehner, who was one of only 17 House Republicans to vote against the party's border-protection act, has become minority leader.
Over the next few months everything will depend on the delicate politics of bipartisanship. Immigration reform gives both sides the chance to blame the other for failure. But it also gives both sides a chance to share the praise for a wrenching but necessary reform. The stakes for everybody involved, not least 12m illegal immigrants, could hardly be higher.
===
Letters to the editor
Send an e-mail to letters@economist.com to comment on this article you have read in The Economist or on Economist.com requesting them to cover IV and its issues
Immigration
One more shove
Feb 22nd 2007 | WASHINGTON, DC
From The Economist print edition
Congress is once again preparing to deal with the immigration mess
THE most dismal failure of the dismal 109th Congress was the non-reform of immigration. This is one of America's most chronic problems, with 12m illegal immigrants living in the shadows, more streaming over the border every day and many border towns buckling under the strain of so many non-citizens. Public pressure to “do something” is intense.
George Bush pushed hard for “comprehensive” immigration reform (meaning a combination of a path to citizenship for illegals and tougher border enforcement). John McCain and Teddy Kennedy crafted a bipartisan bill that passed the Senate by 62 to 36. But then the Republican-dominated House wrecked the whole thing in a fit of crude nativism.
Thankfully, the reformers have not been deterred. There has been a great deal of “scurrying about” behind the scenes, according to one insider. An odd coalition of business groups, trade unions and civil-rights organisations is pushing hard for reform under the umbrella of the Alliance for Immigration Reform 2007. An equally odd coalition of White House operatives, Democratic leaders and reform-minded Republicans is also working in the same direction. A new version of the McCain-Kennedy bill could be launched as early as mid-March. And Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell, the two parties' leaders in the Senate, have said that immigration will be one of the first ten bills they will consider. This time the chances of success are higher than last.
The main reason is the new Democratic majority in the House. The most virulent opposition to reform came from Republican House members who were obsessed with cracking down on illegals and building a 700-mile (1,125km) fence along the border with Mexico. Now that the Democrats are in the majority, Zoe Lofgren, the head of the sub-committee on immigration, thinks a deal is at least a possibility.
The reformers are also adopting a tougher tone. The new McCain-Kennedy bill will put more emphasis on beefing up the border, punishing errant employers, enforcing the law and assimilating new immigrants. It will also try to rebut Republican charges that it rewards lawbreaking and offers amnesty. Two current ideas are to impose a hefty fine (up to $5,000) on illegal immigrants who want to become legal, and to make illegals return to their countries of origin (“touching base”, in the jargon) in order to apply for legal entry.
The reason for this toughness is that comprehensive reform has little chance of passing both Houses on the backs of Democrats alone. A significant number of so-called blue-dog Democrats from conservative districts have every reason to steer clear of such controversial legislation. There is also a strong undercurrent of protectionism in the Democratic Party, which suspects immigrants of holding down American wages and stealing American jobs. Insiders calculate that they need about 20 Republican votes in the Senate and 40 in the House.
The reformers will have to overcome some big political and practical problems. Why should Democrats co-operate with Mr Bush on immigration, when they can wait until they capture the White House in 2008 and solidify their lead among immigrants for a generation to come? And why should congressional Republicans change their minds on this most emotive of issues? The vast majority of these members represent white conservative voters who regard immigration reform as a reward for breaking the law and a guarantee of the “Mexification” of American culture. The minority who represent more mixed districts are well aware that 70% of Latinos voted Democratic in 2006.
The practical problem is that the proposed bill will become so tough that it is self-defeating. Why should illegal immigrants come out of the shadows if they have to “touch base” and put themselves in the hands of America's notoriously slow and inept bureaucracy? And why, for that matter, should liberal interest groups support a bill that might seem punitive?
AP
Still, it would be a mistake to write the reformers off. The Democratic leadership risks provoking a backlash if it refuses to put its weight behind the bill, particularly among Latinos, who desperately want the mess cleared up. And the Republican Party also contains some powerful pro-immigration forces. American business strongly favours immigration reform: parts of the economy such as hotels and agribusiness depend on immigrant labour. “Big tent” Republicans also favour reform.
Karl Rove, Mr Bush's chief strategist, has long pointed out that it is stupid to alienate America's fastest-growing minority—particularly one as culturally conservative as the Latinos. In a swathe of states that Republicans need to retain the presidency, their numbers are crucial: New Mexico is 43% Latino, Texas 35%, Nevada 24%, Florida and Colorado 20%.
The November elections have also strengthened the hand of the big-tent Republicans. Several high-profile immigrant-bashers, such as Arizona's J.D. Hayworth and Indiana's John Hostetler, lost their elections. And John Boehner, who was one of only 17 House Republicans to vote against the party's border-protection act, has become minority leader.
Over the next few months everything will depend on the delicate politics of bipartisanship. Immigration reform gives both sides the chance to blame the other for failure. But it also gives both sides a chance to share the praise for a wrenching but necessary reform. The stakes for everybody involved, not least 12m illegal immigrants, could hardly be higher.
===
Letters to the editor
Send an e-mail to letters@economist.com to comment on this article you have read in The Economist or on Economist.com requesting them to cover IV and its issues
dresses fauxhawk hairstyle_26. heidi montag plastic surgery
go_guy123
11-16 09:49 AM
If the masters degree is from tier 1 or 2 schools I support else NO!
what do you mean by tier 1/2 ...who will give those ranking...you ?
what do you mean by tier 1/2 ...who will give those ranking...you ?
more...
makeup fauxhawk hairstyle_26. dragonette hello. Dragonette – Hello; Dragonette
optimist578
01-22 11:10 PM
I also want to know the same...
Please, anyone??
As long as she is in status, she can apply for a visa change. What is her status on the day she files for H1 ? If it is legal (H4 has not expired et al) , things should be fine.
Please, anyone??
As long as she is in status, she can apply for a visa change. What is her status on the day she files for H1 ? If it is legal (H4 has not expired et al) , things should be fine.
girlfriend fauxhawk hairstyle_26. tween
coolduggar
09-28 05:05 PM
Hello All ,
My application for i485 , i765 and i131 was recvd in Lincoln,Nebraska on July 23 , 2007. (Sent by my company's attorney on July 21) . I have been waiting for over 2 months for any updates or receipt notice but nothing so far . After reading some forums in this website , i called USCIS (number from USCIS website) and got my case escalated to an officer who asked my last name ,first name , date of birth and coutry of birth . He gave me all the three receipt numbers for AOS , AP and EAD . All the receipts numbers are starting with WAC meaning the cases were xferred from Nebraska to California Service Center . When i looked at online status of i485 case , it says the case is xferred to Nebraska since it is in their jurisdiction . The other two cases for EAD and AP are pending . I still have not recvd any receipt notices from my attorney . So , i guess everyone who is waiting for their receipt notices might want to call USCIS and get their numbers .
My application for i485 , i765 and i131 was recvd in Lincoln,Nebraska on July 23 , 2007. (Sent by my company's attorney on July 21) . I have been waiting for over 2 months for any updates or receipt notice but nothing so far . After reading some forums in this website , i called USCIS (number from USCIS website) and got my case escalated to an officer who asked my last name ,first name , date of birth and coutry of birth . He gave me all the three receipt numbers for AOS , AP and EAD . All the receipts numbers are starting with WAC meaning the cases were xferred from Nebraska to California Service Center . When i looked at online status of i485 case , it says the case is xferred to Nebraska since it is in their jurisdiction . The other two cases for EAD and AP are pending . I still have not recvd any receipt notices from my attorney . So , i guess everyone who is waiting for their receipt notices might want to call USCIS and get their numbers .
hairstyles fauxhawk hairstyle_26. nature wallpaper 1080p. Hd Nature Wallpaper 1080p.
virald
10-04 11:07 AM
Anyone can throw light into this one. Can we track APs now for NSC.
NSC is receipting late and also their AP documents are mailed very late. Please let us know when we receive our AP document after getting the receipts? for eg. 10 days, 20 days etc..
It will help lot of us who want to make some travel plans.. [some like us are eagerly waiting for past 4 yrs!!!]
Thanks to IV and all the members
I don't think anyone will be able to predict when someone will get AP approved. USCIS has mentioned that they are concentrating on EAD more than anything else (read AP). Also, unlike TSC, NSC only issued receipts so I suppose they are issuing EAD's now. AP seems far away. Even TSC is behind in processing AP.
NSC is receipting late and also their AP documents are mailed very late. Please let us know when we receive our AP document after getting the receipts? for eg. 10 days, 20 days etc..
It will help lot of us who want to make some travel plans.. [some like us are eagerly waiting for past 4 yrs!!!]
Thanks to IV and all the members
I don't think anyone will be able to predict when someone will get AP approved. USCIS has mentioned that they are concentrating on EAD more than anything else (read AP). Also, unlike TSC, NSC only issued receipts so I suppose they are issuing EAD's now. AP seems far away. Even TSC is behind in processing AP.
Leo07
12-10 09:26 PM
I missed the train too...Now I don't want to miss the omnibus.
Please contribute to IV and reach your goal!!!
This thread is started to just gather the list of people who have approved Labor as on 31st Jul,2007 and could not file I-485 for various reasons like out of country,Not married, Employer did not file or Lawyer delayed etc.
Thanks
Ram
---------
EB3 India PD Feb,2006
Please contribute to IV and reach your goal!!!
This thread is started to just gather the list of people who have approved Labor as on 31st Jul,2007 and could not file I-485 for various reasons like out of country,Not married, Employer did not file or Lawyer delayed etc.
Thanks
Ram
---------
EB3 India PD Feb,2006
desi3933
02-11 06:41 AM
Would request you to elaborate a bit.
Note that I am not using either my EAD or my AP. All I am using is H1-B and my Canadian Passport to enter and leave US. Most people on the Canadian US border to that.
Also, I commute to US everyday to work, which is less than an interval of 12 hours.
Your input is greatly appreciate. Thank you.
Using H1-B or AP does not make a difference. Filing I-485 implies that you have a residence here in the US.
Having said that, typically, trips outside US that lasts less than 24 hours are not counted. That way, daily trips could be OK. However, may I ask, where do you spend your weekend?
It comes down to this question. Are you residing in US? The burden of proof is on beneficiary (I-485 applicant).
I would suggest that you should consider getting second opinion from a reputed attorney.
Hope that helps.
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
Note that I am not using either my EAD or my AP. All I am using is H1-B and my Canadian Passport to enter and leave US. Most people on the Canadian US border to that.
Also, I commute to US everyday to work, which is less than an interval of 12 hours.
Your input is greatly appreciate. Thank you.
Using H1-B or AP does not make a difference. Filing I-485 implies that you have a residence here in the US.
Having said that, typically, trips outside US that lasts less than 24 hours are not counted. That way, daily trips could be OK. However, may I ask, where do you spend your weekend?
It comes down to this question. Are you residing in US? The burden of proof is on beneficiary (I-485 applicant).
I would suggest that you should consider getting second opinion from a reputed attorney.
Hope that helps.
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
0 comments:
Post a Comment