illinois_alum
07-16 08:15 AM
Your company should be quite rich to keep paying for EAD's and AP's you don't need, with their periodical extensions, and also for your H1 renewals....
Don't know about his company...but the attorney definitely must be quite rich with all the legal charges :D
Don't know about his company...but the attorney definitely must be quite rich with all the legal charges :D
wallpaper high resolution wallpapers.
nomi
12-13 09:02 AM
No responses yet ...Oh come on guys ...YOU want to pay $10 now or want to wait for 10 years to get your GREEN CARD ???
InTheMoment
05-26 07:13 PM
Actually entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada and the coast.
I feel the 100 mile rule is very reasonable and Border Patrol has every right to conduct random searches, question or detain whoever they suspect is breaking the law. Since it is clear that they could do that in this area, it is absolutely no burden for me to carry my papers when traveling here. At least it is easy when I know where the enforcement will be tighter. Harassment... absolutely not! I would so encourage something similar in my own country :)
I myself was once stopped on a cold December night in 2003 in VT on I-91 by the border patrol and all 4 occupants in the car were questioned about citizenship. We showed our I-94's. We felt good that there is someone is actually doing the enforcement of immigration laws.
Found this when I googled. Borderpatrol seems to have the authority to do whatever they did within 100 miles off any international border. It falls under 8 CFR 287.1. Entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada.
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol608_2.htm
I feel the 100 mile rule is very reasonable and Border Patrol has every right to conduct random searches, question or detain whoever they suspect is breaking the law. Since it is clear that they could do that in this area, it is absolutely no burden for me to carry my papers when traveling here. At least it is easy when I know where the enforcement will be tighter. Harassment... absolutely not! I would so encourage something similar in my own country :)
I myself was once stopped on a cold December night in 2003 in VT on I-91 by the border patrol and all 4 occupants in the car were questioned about citizenship. We showed our I-94's. We felt good that there is someone is actually doing the enforcement of immigration laws.
Found this when I googled. Borderpatrol seems to have the authority to do whatever they did within 100 miles off any international border. It falls under 8 CFR 287.1. Entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada.
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol608_2.htm
2011 High resolution wallpaper.
unitednations
12-22 02:34 PM
this is our history...
1.was working with employer B in June 07(when PD was current for EB2/Oct 2003-India)...went to attorney to file 485 with approved 140 thru ex employer A. filled in all the paperwork for 485,but the attorney was asking for a current employment letter from B with exact skills mentioned on labor and the employer B was not ready to give such a letter and hence we planned to find a new employer and file for 485 in July.
2. In June end found this new current employer C and planned to file 485 in July and all the fiasco scene happened...anyway...in August we filed the 485 with a current employer letter from C with all the skills matching the labor..till here fine.
NOW...we got a copy of the bunch of 48 documents sent to INS from the atnys office...I had given the latest 325a form
current employer C : July 07 - current
employer B : Jan 2006 - June 2007
employer A : June 2003 - Dec 2005 (who filed for labor/i140)
the shitty paralegal now submitted the 325a from submitted in June 07 where the current employer B was the latest.... + the current employment letter of C + 485 employment offer letter from A
She had whitened out the date on the 325a form signed on June 07 and changed it to Aug 07 to my utter shock....
when I call back..she says we will handle any RFE's...
quite worried as the 325a form already says something like 'all info disclosed is truthful'... etc and the fine print..
pls post your thoughts and comments..
hope I dint confuse
Pretty confusing situation. Don't know why you even put in an experience letter from a company which doesn't have anything to do with the petition.
I am aware of a couple of cases where uscis did deny on such issues (g-325a not matching up with h-1b approvals, etc.). However, affidavits and such to say it was an honest mistake took care of the issue.
You might be able to appreciate this story:
I worked on an ability to pay case for a company in ohio. Person got approved and was then waiting for 485 approval.
He contacts me many months later and tells me that he got this rfe. The jest of the rfe was:
You claim to have never filed a 485 adjustment of status application. However; our search of records show that you filed a 485 on xxx date in xx office as a marriage base applicant. It appears that you are not eligible for a waiver of the interview requirement for adjustment of status.
Now; i truly believe that his current wife (from india) never knew about this marriage (his family and friends didn't know either). he tried to blame it on his lawyer that they never asked him and they just defaulted that he never filed for a 485. Pretty weak excuse. However; they responded to the 485 that everything was in such a rush to file the 485 that he didn't have a chance to look it all over and it was an honest mistake. He didn't get called for an interview and they approved his case.
Now; if the record of his marriage base application had shown that he was caught in fraudulent marriage; he never got divorced and re-married or there was something that went wrong with his earlier case then it may have been a different story. However; since nothing was wrong with that application; the officer let him off the hook because it was an honest mistake.
1.was working with employer B in June 07(when PD was current for EB2/Oct 2003-India)...went to attorney to file 485 with approved 140 thru ex employer A. filled in all the paperwork for 485,but the attorney was asking for a current employment letter from B with exact skills mentioned on labor and the employer B was not ready to give such a letter and hence we planned to find a new employer and file for 485 in July.
2. In June end found this new current employer C and planned to file 485 in July and all the fiasco scene happened...anyway...in August we filed the 485 with a current employer letter from C with all the skills matching the labor..till here fine.
NOW...we got a copy of the bunch of 48 documents sent to INS from the atnys office...I had given the latest 325a form
current employer C : July 07 - current
employer B : Jan 2006 - June 2007
employer A : June 2003 - Dec 2005 (who filed for labor/i140)
the shitty paralegal now submitted the 325a from submitted in June 07 where the current employer B was the latest.... + the current employment letter of C + 485 employment offer letter from A
She had whitened out the date on the 325a form signed on June 07 and changed it to Aug 07 to my utter shock....
when I call back..she says we will handle any RFE's...
quite worried as the 325a form already says something like 'all info disclosed is truthful'... etc and the fine print..
pls post your thoughts and comments..
hope I dint confuse
Pretty confusing situation. Don't know why you even put in an experience letter from a company which doesn't have anything to do with the petition.
I am aware of a couple of cases where uscis did deny on such issues (g-325a not matching up with h-1b approvals, etc.). However, affidavits and such to say it was an honest mistake took care of the issue.
You might be able to appreciate this story:
I worked on an ability to pay case for a company in ohio. Person got approved and was then waiting for 485 approval.
He contacts me many months later and tells me that he got this rfe. The jest of the rfe was:
You claim to have never filed a 485 adjustment of status application. However; our search of records show that you filed a 485 on xxx date in xx office as a marriage base applicant. It appears that you are not eligible for a waiver of the interview requirement for adjustment of status.
Now; i truly believe that his current wife (from india) never knew about this marriage (his family and friends didn't know either). he tried to blame it on his lawyer that they never asked him and they just defaulted that he never filed for a 485. Pretty weak excuse. However; they responded to the 485 that everything was in such a rush to file the 485 that he didn't have a chance to look it all over and it was an honest mistake. He didn't get called for an interview and they approved his case.
Now; if the record of his marriage base application had shown that he was caught in fraudulent marriage; he never got divorced and re-married or there was something that went wrong with his earlier case then it may have been a different story. However; since nothing was wrong with that application; the officer let him off the hook because it was an honest mistake.
more...
varshadas
12-14 08:20 PM
Except for myself and Rajeev, no one joined the conference call tonight. C'mmon guys, we need some action here. We all ought to participate in these calls. Writing emails, coming and posting I am in is not going to help. We have to take actions here. I will set up a conference call on another day next week and please make sure you all attend.
Thanks,
Varsha
Thanks,
Varsha
perm2gc
01-17 01:34 PM
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/immigrationforum/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/immigration-usa/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/immigration-usa/
more...
gimme_GC2006
05-12 02:48 PM
While I wait for GC and chewed up all finger nails, I thought its good time to think about adding a qualification to myself.
I do not want to spend rest of my life in development. :cool:
I was doing some research on Online MBA (no..not the diploma mills or degree printing ones)
My criteria was,
1) Institutions that require GMAT
2) AACSB Accredited
3) Has some sensible ranking in USNews or Financial Times or Business Week
4) Can be done without leaving current job (occasional visit to universities are fine with me)
Here are the universities I came up
1) Warrington College of Business, Florida (USNEWS ranking)
2) WP Carey, Arizona State University (USNEWS ranking)
3) Kelley Direct, Indiana University (highly regarded)
4) Penn State World Campus MBA
And then there are many $$ category colleges which I didnt bother to check..I can't pay those fees :)
Now, can any one suggest or comment or refer to any other college?
Also, what kind of disciplines we should check in an MBA..I dont know if MBA finance will be good..as such I have no preferences. (anything related to Investment banking etc will be good though)
I do not want to spend rest of my life in development. :cool:
I was doing some research on Online MBA (no..not the diploma mills or degree printing ones)
My criteria was,
1) Institutions that require GMAT
2) AACSB Accredited
3) Has some sensible ranking in USNews or Financial Times or Business Week
4) Can be done without leaving current job (occasional visit to universities are fine with me)
Here are the universities I came up
1) Warrington College of Business, Florida (USNEWS ranking)
2) WP Carey, Arizona State University (USNEWS ranking)
3) Kelley Direct, Indiana University (highly regarded)
4) Penn State World Campus MBA
And then there are many $$ category colleges which I didnt bother to check..I can't pay those fees :)
Now, can any one suggest or comment or refer to any other college?
Also, what kind of disciplines we should check in an MBA..I dont know if MBA finance will be good..as such I have no preferences. (anything related to Investment banking etc will be good though)
2010 hi res wallpaper
nixstor
07-03 05:25 PM
nixstor,
they have considerably raised the bar for EB1 A and EB1 b to discourage people applying, but I suspect that if you run a trend, EB1C is on the rise. I think you might be surprised about how often it does actually happen.
I half expect EB1 to be retrogressed at some point. There is a big backlog of pending !40's in EB1- NSC is running over a year behind.
albertpinto:
it's a whole of 365 days. people do it, i have seen it happen. what makes you think a big multinational has to send you to india? you could go to a european office, your family could stay behind, you could be sent to an english speaking country, kids could be young enough...there are a million ways to deal with this inconveneience when the rewards are clear. even now, people in consulting travel all the time, they are hardly home, so what's the huge difference in being across the pond (you get to travel back, your family gets to travel there)? sure, not for everyone, but when possible, this loophole is very much in use.
Paskal,
It is possible that EB1 C might become unavailable, because you might be looking at it more closer than I am. But I still find it hard to believe that an MNC will just create a phony Managerial position for every Joe Bloggs, an abuse similar to Labor substitution and satellite offices in states where labor processing was fast etc. Lets say an MNC really promoted some one to a position that qualifies for EB1, moves him out and moves him back, it is still by the book and can't be compared to labor sub, which were sold for money. Labor sub by itself is NO crime irrespective of what we think. The rampant abuse of it caused the demise. Same rule applies to some one who goes out and comes back as its all by the rules and no abuse is involved. In responding to the OP, My intention was to say that MNC's do not go to such an extent of creating a Managerial position that do not exist or have an employee do the same work in the name of managerial position. Some companies might have abused it in such way on few occasions, but thats definitely NOT a practice as rampant as Labor Sub's once was. If that were true and as easy as depicted, A lot of people & companies would have done it, by now. We don't need to teach the gamers. They are a step ahead in getting things done, if there is a way.
they have considerably raised the bar for EB1 A and EB1 b to discourage people applying, but I suspect that if you run a trend, EB1C is on the rise. I think you might be surprised about how often it does actually happen.
I half expect EB1 to be retrogressed at some point. There is a big backlog of pending !40's in EB1- NSC is running over a year behind.
albertpinto:
it's a whole of 365 days. people do it, i have seen it happen. what makes you think a big multinational has to send you to india? you could go to a european office, your family could stay behind, you could be sent to an english speaking country, kids could be young enough...there are a million ways to deal with this inconveneience when the rewards are clear. even now, people in consulting travel all the time, they are hardly home, so what's the huge difference in being across the pond (you get to travel back, your family gets to travel there)? sure, not for everyone, but when possible, this loophole is very much in use.
Paskal,
It is possible that EB1 C might become unavailable, because you might be looking at it more closer than I am. But I still find it hard to believe that an MNC will just create a phony Managerial position for every Joe Bloggs, an abuse similar to Labor substitution and satellite offices in states where labor processing was fast etc. Lets say an MNC really promoted some one to a position that qualifies for EB1, moves him out and moves him back, it is still by the book and can't be compared to labor sub, which were sold for money. Labor sub by itself is NO crime irrespective of what we think. The rampant abuse of it caused the demise. Same rule applies to some one who goes out and comes back as its all by the rules and no abuse is involved. In responding to the OP, My intention was to say that MNC's do not go to such an extent of creating a Managerial position that do not exist or have an employee do the same work in the name of managerial position. Some companies might have abused it in such way on few occasions, but thats definitely NOT a practice as rampant as Labor Sub's once was. If that were true and as easy as depicted, A lot of people & companies would have done it, by now. We don't need to teach the gamers. They are a step ahead in getting things done, if there is a way.
more...
nixstor
07-05 12:47 PM
Lets stop this thread and core decide about this ( who are running IV )
This is creating lots of discussions and nothing will come out apart from
wastage of our time... I mean we get attracted to a spicy thread like this automatically and the end result is 0
Spciy thread?? This is not spicy. This is serious stuff. I am not the OP, but the subject of the thread might be spicy to some folks. This discussion has come so many times. Atleast now we see that we have equal number of people split on both sides.
This is creating lots of discussions and nothing will come out apart from
wastage of our time... I mean we get attracted to a spicy thread like this automatically and the end result is 0
Spciy thread?? This is not spicy. This is serious stuff. I am not the OP, but the subject of the thread might be spicy to some folks. This discussion has come so many times. Atleast now we see that we have equal number of people split on both sides.
hair high res wallpaper.
jetguy777
03-09 12:53 PM
by the way shusterman predicted ROW will retrogress in his blog found at shusterman.com there was also an IV post about this (abbout somethin like shusterman got a call from clinton or something)..........
so what happened to the quareterly spill over ???????????
Last year's April visa bulletin contained the following note:
D. INDIA EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
"Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual �per-country� limit. It has been determined that based on the current level of demand being received, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices, there would be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment Second preference category. As a result, numbers have once again become available to the India Employment Second preference category. The rate of number use in the Employment Second preference category will continue to be monitored, and it may be necessary to make adjustments should the level of demand increase substantially. "
At the risk of stating the obvious there was not any spillover this month but there is hope that we may see spillover in future months.
so what happened to the quareterly spill over ???????????
Last year's April visa bulletin contained the following note:
D. INDIA EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
"Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual �per-country� limit. It has been determined that based on the current level of demand being received, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices, there would be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment Second preference category. As a result, numbers have once again become available to the India Employment Second preference category. The rate of number use in the Employment Second preference category will continue to be monitored, and it may be necessary to make adjustments should the level of demand increase substantially. "
At the risk of stating the obvious there was not any spillover this month but there is hope that we may see spillover in future months.
more...
H1bslave
09-26 09:56 AM
I think IV core must be taking some action in response to this CNN report. Does anyone know about action from core?
hot high res wallpaper. wallpaper
tomchi007
02-21 05:12 PM
Pardon my ignorance and pls help me understand, how does PD impact the mass 485 applications sent July/August 2007?
I thought the PD is only relevant for being able to apply for 485 and didnt matter if your 485 application had been received. Am I wrong?
I thought the PD is only relevant for being able to apply for 485 and didnt matter if your 485 application had been received. Am I wrong?
more...
house in high resolution,
aristotle
07-18 03:11 AM
Can all the July 2nd filers update this thread if
- you have your application rejected and returned.
OR
- you get a receipt number or have your check cashed.
Please login and subscribe to this thread.
- you have your application rejected and returned.
OR
- you get a receipt number or have your check cashed.
Please login and subscribe to this thread.
tattoo wallpaper high-res wallpapers,
calgirl
07-20 02:33 PM
Few employers and few lawyers didn't apply for EAD/AP on July 2nd. My employer said they applied for 485 but not EAD/AP. They will wait for receipt notice and then apply for EAD/AP.
After Aug 17th, can we still apply for EAD/AP knowing dates won't be current.
Thanks.
After Aug 17th, can we still apply for EAD/AP knowing dates won't be current.
Thanks.
more...
pictures high resolution wallpapers.
akela_topchi
02-18 06:04 PM
I think this bill is to legalize the illegals.
Powerful Hispanic caucus in Dem party would try every trick they can to legalize those who jumped the fence. Hispanics voted 4-1 for Obama so now they're in a better position to negotiate.
But, nobody is going to touch immigration before 2010 congressional elections - because (1) Economy (2) status quo favors Dems
Powerful Hispanic caucus in Dem party would try every trick they can to legalize those who jumped the fence. Hispanics voted 4-1 for Obama so now they're in a better position to negotiate.
But, nobody is going to touch immigration before 2010 congressional elections - because (1) Economy (2) status quo favors Dems
dresses High Resolution Wallpaper
ronhira
04-09 07:02 PM
- the problem is with the congress, not with cis
Congress did not ask USCIS/DOS to subtract dependent visa numbers from 140K. If USCIS/DOS excludes dependent numbers from 140k, congress cannot question that because law doesn't mandate to include the dependent numbers in 140K.
-y the hell do u blame cis...... r they not allocating 140K per year
If USCIS/DOS doesn't agree to change their administration policy to exclude dependent visas from 140K after seeing our backlog, then who else do we have to blame.
Yes they are allocating 140K per year. But to who? In my view to the same applicant; one for primary applicant, another for his spouse, another for his kid, ....
Most of us here are 'keyboard ninjas'. Only very few contribute in actions and that contribution is hidden under donor forums. Without awareness of the good things happening, these keyboard-ninjas are not going to contribute in actions.
We all understand that blaming is not going to help anyone. But what else to do.
u'r saying that all these years uscis & dos was misinterpreting the law for counting dependents in the 140K count..... well, what is the army of 10,000 impotent immigration lawyers doing for last 15 years..... i know they r all dumb & sleazy..... but if that were the case someone in that useless army of 10,000 would have cared to file a lawsuit or someone in congress would have questioned uscis/dos..... the fact that no one questioned or filed for a suit just proves that uscis is interpreting the law correctly..... as much as i would like...... i am actually not convinced that its uscis fault for counting depends.... again here its the fault of the congress for framing the law like the way it is....
there are sleazy immigration lawyers who throw out this bullshit material hoping that some of it will stick, & guys like will think they r the gods..... in that sense its our fault to play right into the hands of sleazy immigration lawyers.... here r some of the creepiest of things thrown by some of these scam artist lawyers -
- fix backlog without immigration bill
- vb dates all current in 2 months
- spillover crap (this one is my favorite)
all that i'm trying to say is that we can do lot of things.... and beating down on uscis/dos is the last thing we all want to do....... becoz otherwise we waste the energy from our frustration/anger @ the wrong target......
Congress did not ask USCIS/DOS to subtract dependent visa numbers from 140K. If USCIS/DOS excludes dependent numbers from 140k, congress cannot question that because law doesn't mandate to include the dependent numbers in 140K.
-y the hell do u blame cis...... r they not allocating 140K per year
If USCIS/DOS doesn't agree to change their administration policy to exclude dependent visas from 140K after seeing our backlog, then who else do we have to blame.
Yes they are allocating 140K per year. But to who? In my view to the same applicant; one for primary applicant, another for his spouse, another for his kid, ....
Most of us here are 'keyboard ninjas'. Only very few contribute in actions and that contribution is hidden under donor forums. Without awareness of the good things happening, these keyboard-ninjas are not going to contribute in actions.
We all understand that blaming is not going to help anyone. But what else to do.
u'r saying that all these years uscis & dos was misinterpreting the law for counting dependents in the 140K count..... well, what is the army of 10,000 impotent immigration lawyers doing for last 15 years..... i know they r all dumb & sleazy..... but if that were the case someone in that useless army of 10,000 would have cared to file a lawsuit or someone in congress would have questioned uscis/dos..... the fact that no one questioned or filed for a suit just proves that uscis is interpreting the law correctly..... as much as i would like...... i am actually not convinced that its uscis fault for counting depends.... again here its the fault of the congress for framing the law like the way it is....
there are sleazy immigration lawyers who throw out this bullshit material hoping that some of it will stick, & guys like will think they r the gods..... in that sense its our fault to play right into the hands of sleazy immigration lawyers.... here r some of the creepiest of things thrown by some of these scam artist lawyers -
- fix backlog without immigration bill
- vb dates all current in 2 months
- spillover crap (this one is my favorite)
all that i'm trying to say is that we can do lot of things.... and beating down on uscis/dos is the last thing we all want to do....... becoz otherwise we waste the energy from our frustration/anger @ the wrong target......
more...
makeup wallpaper, High quality
nlssubbu
09-24 01:55 PM
check with your attorney if a birth certificate issued by the consulate is ok
They provide it based on the passport - and then you may attach an affidavit
I do not think that USCIS accept the birth certificate provided by Consulate. You may either get an affidavit or can get a copy of the certificate truly attested from your birth place based on your birth records. If you do not have a birth certificate, you may also need a NC (No Certificate) from your local authority as a proof along with the affidavit.
They provide it based on the passport - and then you may attach an affidavit
I do not think that USCIS accept the birth certificate provided by Consulate. You may either get an affidavit or can get a copy of the certificate truly attested from your birth place based on your birth records. If you do not have a birth certificate, you may also need a NC (No Certificate) from your local authority as a proof along with the affidavit.
girlfriend Free High resolution nature
abracadabra102
07-01 04:18 PM
It is "petition". Thank you.
hairstyles Over 100 High Resolution
GCard_Dream
01-17 02:05 PM
:D I can understand your frustration and I am also surprised by the very slow response. As crucial as this year is for immigration reform, if members aren't committed for immigration reform and aren't helping monetarily and every other way possible, the GC saga will continue for years to come.
I thought everyone in this forum is high skilled and very well educated. Well that may be but if members who think that just checking this site for updates and not contributing for the cause in anyway will eventually bring the relief are not very smart, aren't thinking right.
Hoping for the best and just checking updates isn't the answer to retrogression; contribution is.
Yes it is upto members if they want this process to be like the greencard process and we can wait for years to get a bill passed. We represent a community of highly skilled and get paid above average (than average american) but If we want 20 opinions per month on what IV should focus on, we can get those right away. However $20 per month is difficult.
IV really want to go all out and use all resources to get the bill passed. We cannot do it without the support of all members.Pls. Visit this page http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=25
and start contributing today.
I thought everyone in this forum is high skilled and very well educated. Well that may be but if members who think that just checking this site for updates and not contributing for the cause in anyway will eventually bring the relief are not very smart, aren't thinking right.
Hoping for the best and just checking updates isn't the answer to retrogression; contribution is.
Yes it is upto members if they want this process to be like the greencard process and we can wait for years to get a bill passed. We represent a community of highly skilled and get paid above average (than average american) but If we want 20 opinions per month on what IV should focus on, we can get those right away. However $20 per month is difficult.
IV really want to go all out and use all resources to get the bill passed. We cannot do it without the support of all members.Pls. Visit this page http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=25
and start contributing today.
reachinus
02-17 07:07 PM
I have 16000 us airways miles in 2 accounts.
bigboy007
07-18 12:47 PM
I think all of us cautious at this time is very imp and we keep calling uscis pref next week so that we ensure we have enough backup avail and we have 30 days till.
0 comments:
Post a Comment