pappu
06-24 05:48 PM
for all those whose lawyers allow multiple filings: what are you filling in for I-485 Part 3 section A "Have you ever before applied for permanent resident status in the U.S"?
In my case both applications are proceeding in parallel and I dont know which lawyer will end up filing first!
The one you apply next should should have the option checked.
Word of advice:
Understand the full implications if you want to file 2. I have gone into its details over the past week and this weekend, and would not advice someone to do it just for the heck of it. You should have VERY genuine reasons for it due to some risks involved. This is a grey area and there is no law for it or against it. There can be some risks and advantages.
In my case both applications are proceeding in parallel and I dont know which lawyer will end up filing first!
The one you apply next should should have the option checked.
Word of advice:
Understand the full implications if you want to file 2. I have gone into its details over the past week and this weekend, and would not advice someone to do it just for the heck of it. You should have VERY genuine reasons for it due to some risks involved. This is a grey area and there is no law for it or against it. There can be some risks and advantages.
wallpaper images Google 1337 Com
sri1309
08-22 07:31 AM
Flower campaign, I said this one week back and did not do anything on that but was requesting others to join. I did send letters twice to 6 address and sending cards again today.
How do we organize this flower camaign or anything . Shouldnt a core member start the initiative by listing the action on the headlines.
I am sure people are waiting to see Oct bulletin. But based on information we have, please be assured nothing good can be seen, unless a miracle. Wait for the next bulletin may not be as pleasant in case you are looking for a job (No I am not). Lets all shoot emails to CORE IV now, to request them to start a campaign. I think from our end that shoudl be the 1st step. Unless they get the group together, we will be headless chicken as someone said, writing in doifferent threads,
EB3-India needs to move atleast 3-4 years.
Sri,
$100.00
How do we organize this flower camaign or anything . Shouldnt a core member start the initiative by listing the action on the headlines.
I am sure people are waiting to see Oct bulletin. But based on information we have, please be assured nothing good can be seen, unless a miracle. Wait for the next bulletin may not be as pleasant in case you are looking for a job (No I am not). Lets all shoot emails to CORE IV now, to request them to start a campaign. I think from our end that shoudl be the 1st step. Unless they get the group together, we will be headless chicken as someone said, writing in doifferent threads,
EB3-India needs to move atleast 3-4 years.
Sri,
$100.00
seahawks
09-14 12:31 AM
you guys might want to talk to your attorneys. Most of the time attorneys ping with their contact in service centers and get some answers if it is still not receipted.
Most of them have an email id whom they contact and find out normally. I am not sure if service centers are responsive if there are huge amounts of data entry still going on.
Most of them have an email id whom they contact and find out normally. I am not sure if service centers are responsive if there are huge amounts of data entry still going on.
2011 wallpaper Google 1337 Pictures
eastindia
04-01 09:45 AM
Guys do not feed the freeloaders by telling anything you are reading in the donor forum. Let these people help themselves by signing up for recurring contributions if they want helpful nformation about their EB2 PD movemement. We are still not meeting of our advocacy day amount. It is all because most people want free lunches. This needs to stop. The 200 people going to DC tomorrow are going to speak for you and me for yours and mine greencard. They are taking time off and spending own money for you and me. Nothing is free in this world. IV is also doing this for you and me and we are taking it for granted. Let people do some good deed today if they want to know good information
more...
nish
06-16 10:09 AM
Thanks for your reply.
what is the meaning of staff augmentation case? He work at client place and client is administered project.The s/w tool is copyright by client.The reason for asking him to come back is that prior to this company he worked for another company for two years. He left his old company before 5 year. when he joined his current company he has provided all the document mentioned in checklist such as offer letter, exp and releiving letter and last two month pay stub and they did BG for same document.During 5 years career he worked for diff client and everytime they did BG for him before putting him in project and there was no problem happen in his BG. recently his current employer find something wrong about his prior company and they asked him to provide more evidance for prior company.now he don't have any contact of his prior employer and he does not have any more evidnace for showing their company.
Because of this reason they are asking him to come back home country from last two week.He told his company that he tryed to connect his prior employer but he can not make out and he don't have anything more to show the company.
Please suggest what he can do in this situation.
If anyone come across in this situation then please reply to my question.
Appericiate your help in advacne
what is the meaning of staff augmentation case? He work at client place and client is administered project.The s/w tool is copyright by client.The reason for asking him to come back is that prior to this company he worked for another company for two years. He left his old company before 5 year. when he joined his current company he has provided all the document mentioned in checklist such as offer letter, exp and releiving letter and last two month pay stub and they did BG for same document.During 5 years career he worked for diff client and everytime they did BG for him before putting him in project and there was no problem happen in his BG. recently his current employer find something wrong about his prior company and they asked him to provide more evidance for prior company.now he don't have any contact of his prior employer and he does not have any more evidnace for showing their company.
Because of this reason they are asking him to come back home country from last two week.He told his company that he tryed to connect his prior employer but he can not make out and he don't have anything more to show the company.
Please suggest what he can do in this situation.
If anyone come across in this situation then please reply to my question.
Appericiate your help in advacne
ganguteli
06-17 02:12 PM
Good job slumdogs. You are becoming a puppet of anti-immigrants. Today they are using you to throw your L1 brothers out. Tomorrow they will throw you out. There is fraud in H1 too. No visa is perfect. Just like no American citizen is perfect. 1 in 100 citizen has gone to jail.
If you have so much energy and motivation, why don't you go after anti-immigrants and expose their evil.
Educated idiots!
If you have so much energy and motivation, why don't you go after anti-immigrants and expose their evil.
Educated idiots!
more...
Prasad_FL
09-09 07:17 PM
I called all these numbers and talked to some and left messages for others.
When I called Lamar S. Smith(R-Texas, Ranking member 202-225-4236), the office staff gave me a judicial committee no 202-225 6906 to contact. I called that no and left a message.
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001
When I called Lamar S. Smith(R-Texas, Ranking member 202-225-4236), the office staff gave me a judicial committee no 202-225 6906 to contact. I called that no and left a message.
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001
2010 wallpaper Google 1337 Pictures
jsb
09-17 09:27 AM
Nothing, Zilch, Nada....My lawyer said that of the 40 applications they filed on July 2nd. they got RN for only 5 so..... Seems to be a very long wait
It is told that most of the July 2 filings are waiting, but July 17 filings have received RN. Perhaps it all depends where USCIS folks put bundles of applications initially meant for rejection/return. I am also one of the July 2 filers still waiting
It is told that most of the July 2 filings are waiting, but July 17 filings have received RN. Perhaps it all depends where USCIS folks put bundles of applications initially meant for rejection/return. I am also one of the July 2 filers still waiting
more...
bazuka6
08-09 10:58 PM
Amazed at the level of speculation, inspite of the detailed Procedures released by Rajiv Khanna ( and re posted by IV) .
I am one without an EVL, sent after new memo took effect , that has been recipted and finger printed.
So please read the 485 USCIS procedure again, and do not worry about sending endless 485s just because of lack of initial evidence
I doubt that. Medical was relaxed since it can take time for people to get the medicals done. Also immigration doctors were all busy at this time. So it is possible that people arent able to get the meds done by the Aug 17 deadline. The other documents like EVL shouldnt take this long. If the employer is willing to provide future employment to someone then it should be sent along with the application. Whether USCIS will relax for lack of Initial Evidence other than Medical is hard to say. It is always better to be safe than sorry.
I am one without an EVL, sent after new memo took effect , that has been recipted and finger printed.
So please read the 485 USCIS procedure again, and do not worry about sending endless 485s just because of lack of initial evidence
I doubt that. Medical was relaxed since it can take time for people to get the medicals done. Also immigration doctors were all busy at this time. So it is possible that people arent able to get the meds done by the Aug 17 deadline. The other documents like EVL shouldnt take this long. If the employer is willing to provide future employment to someone then it should be sent along with the application. Whether USCIS will relax for lack of Initial Evidence other than Medical is hard to say. It is always better to be safe than sorry.
hair Google 1337: 1337
esivaa
01-03 10:39 AM
Hi,
My wife attented interview on dec14th at Chennai counslate.
She did not receive the passport yet.
My wife attented interview on dec14th at Chennai counslate.
She did not receive the passport yet.
more...
Macaca
12-05 03:59 PM
JUAN GONZALEZ: Now, Lou, you�ve been well known for years now, especially dealing with the issue of American corporations exporting jobs and criticizing that whole process of exporting American jobs overseas.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And your�but also the criticism of it, that as I�ve seen it as, oftentimes does not deal with the impact so much of what this globalization on those countries themselves. In other words, you criticize NAFTA for sending so many jobs overseas, but not with the impact so much that it�s having on Mexico and on these other countries that are the other end of this free trade.
LOU DOBBS: Juan, that may be because I�m a television journalist, limited in my intellect, as well as my time.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, on this show, we don�t have commercials, so we have a lot of time to get into the issues.
LOU DOBBS: The reality is that, of course, NAFTA is, in my judgment, at least deleterious to the interests of the Mexican people and to the state of Mexico. One only has to look at the empty villages in particularly southern Mexico to examine the impact of the agricultural policies within NAFTA. One only has to look at the maquiladoras across northern Mexico to see the impact on a society that is already 50% impoverished, education levels still where they were thirty years ago in Mexico.
But my perspective is an American one. And I won�t presume to speak for Mexico, as Felipe Calderon does presume to speak to the United States for Americans on American policy. The reality is that NAFTA doesn�t work for this country. It doesn�t work for Mexico.
But I am not one of those people�as Amy was talking about, my detractors. The suggestion I�m anti-immigrant, for example, is absurd. I would support an increase in lawful immigration and have said so repeatedly and have no problem whatsoever with current levels of immigration, which, by the way, are the highest levels of immigration in the world�in fact, more than the rest of the world combined. We bring in more than two million people. But the issue is one that the United States does not have a foreign policy toward Mexico. We�re paternalistic and condescending toward Mexico in our dealings with Mexico, both corporately and politically. And it�s time for that to change.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And your�but also the criticism of it, that as I�ve seen it as, oftentimes does not deal with the impact so much of what this globalization on those countries themselves. In other words, you criticize NAFTA for sending so many jobs overseas, but not with the impact so much that it�s having on Mexico and on these other countries that are the other end of this free trade.
LOU DOBBS: Juan, that may be because I�m a television journalist, limited in my intellect, as well as my time.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, on this show, we don�t have commercials, so we have a lot of time to get into the issues.
LOU DOBBS: The reality is that, of course, NAFTA is, in my judgment, at least deleterious to the interests of the Mexican people and to the state of Mexico. One only has to look at the empty villages in particularly southern Mexico to examine the impact of the agricultural policies within NAFTA. One only has to look at the maquiladoras across northern Mexico to see the impact on a society that is already 50% impoverished, education levels still where they were thirty years ago in Mexico.
But my perspective is an American one. And I won�t presume to speak for Mexico, as Felipe Calderon does presume to speak to the United States for Americans on American policy. The reality is that NAFTA doesn�t work for this country. It doesn�t work for Mexico.
But I am not one of those people�as Amy was talking about, my detractors. The suggestion I�m anti-immigrant, for example, is absurd. I would support an increase in lawful immigration and have said so repeatedly and have no problem whatsoever with current levels of immigration, which, by the way, are the highest levels of immigration in the world�in fact, more than the rest of the world combined. We bring in more than two million people. But the issue is one that the United States does not have a foreign policy toward Mexico. We�re paternalistic and condescending toward Mexico in our dealings with Mexico, both corporately and politically. And it�s time for that to change.
hot Google Leet
SaiWelcome
01-04 02:30 PM
Thanks ChainReaction for sharing the article.
more...
house pictures Google 1337 Pictures
buckeye98
09-24 09:56 PM
add me to the R.Williams list
buckeye98 - 2nd July/7:55am/ R.Williams /I140 -NCS/ NO RN NO CC, NO DATA IN SYSTEM
I am really frustrated now. Whats the use of my doing every effort to make sure my application reaches the first day. Why is USCIS receipting cases from August when so many july 2 filers are still waiting? Should we all send some inquiry into our cases together?
buckeye98 - 2nd July/7:55am/ R.Williams /I140 -NCS/ NO RN NO CC, NO DATA IN SYSTEM
I am really frustrated now. Whats the use of my doing every effort to make sure my application reaches the first day. Why is USCIS receipting cases from August when so many july 2 filers are still waiting? Should we all send some inquiry into our cases together?
tattoo Google 1337: 1337
EB2IndianGC
09-21 04:08 PM
Finally, we got the approval emails for self & wife.
I had got an email from TSC.Ncscfollowup@dhs.gov last friday (09/17/2010) with the update below-
1: The review was complete
2: Visa numbers were requested 2 months ago and all security/prints are current
3: Files have been forwarded to officers for completion.
In my case the email to SCOPSSCATA@dhs.gov helped a lot. They in turn sent an email to TSC.Ncscfollowup@dhs.gov to step up the processing.
As others have mentioned IV has played a big part throughout this journey. Thank you again.
HEARTY CONGRATULATIONS to you and your family! It has been a long journey.
I agree with SKIDUDE, sending e-mail to SCOPSSCATA helps (but please send an e-mail to this, only if you have not received a response from TSC Followup for at least 3 weeks)
I had got an email from TSC.Ncscfollowup@dhs.gov last friday (09/17/2010) with the update below-
1: The review was complete
2: Visa numbers were requested 2 months ago and all security/prints are current
3: Files have been forwarded to officers for completion.
In my case the email to SCOPSSCATA@dhs.gov helped a lot. They in turn sent an email to TSC.Ncscfollowup@dhs.gov to step up the processing.
As others have mentioned IV has played a big part throughout this journey. Thank you again.
HEARTY CONGRATULATIONS to you and your family! It has been a long journey.
I agree with SKIDUDE, sending e-mail to SCOPSSCATA helps (but please send an e-mail to this, only if you have not received a response from TSC Followup for at least 3 weeks)
more...
pictures images Google 1337 Pictures
plp039
10-06 04:39 PM
hi,
my spouse and i are july 2 filers. our checks got cashed yesterday. the lawyer emailed us all the reciept numbers. however, when i check the status online, it says that "our applications were recieved on october 2nd". our laywer tells us that this is not accurate and once the actual reciepts get to her, she will confirm. we are hoping that oct 2 is just the notice date and they have 2 july as the actual date!
will update once i have all the reciepts.
my spouse and i are july 2 filers. our checks got cashed yesterday. the lawyer emailed us all the reciept numbers. however, when i check the status online, it says that "our applications were recieved on october 2nd". our laywer tells us that this is not accurate and once the actual reciepts get to her, she will confirm. we are hoping that oct 2 is just the notice date and they have 2 july as the actual date!
will update once i have all the reciepts.
dresses Google 1337: img 1337
ashokK
09-20 11:28 AM
All thanks goes to sanjayb who is maintaining the list. Please post info in following forum. He will add in list.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5935&page=295
Also send fax/email to congressmen/senator/Assit Chief of USCIS. I did my part.
CAdude, I did post in the the thread you gave me...Thanks
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5935&page=295
Also send fax/email to congressmen/senator/Assit Chief of USCIS. I did my part.
CAdude, I did post in the the thread you gave me...Thanks
more...
makeup makeup Google 1337 Hack Page
dilipcr
06-12 04:15 PM
I support you L1Fraud.
Guys: This has become a major problem at every place. If we do not take any action, every one of us will be replaced by these BIG outsource companies with L1 and B1.
I already reported this to ICE about violations of CTS which has placed their L1's at client's place for the past 2 years. And still they have several people.
You may not believe their pay. I do not want to put a number here and it will be a shame on CTS for misusing L1. They replaced 18 American Workers at my client's pace. Whatever you guys might think, this is a FRAUD.
This is exactly what I have been arguing for in another thread about the Grim visa numbers. I will fully support you in your cause and let me know if you need any help. I am a GC holder but I feel its my duty to report this fraud against all these outsourcing companies.
Guys: This has become a major problem at every place. If we do not take any action, every one of us will be replaced by these BIG outsource companies with L1 and B1.
I already reported this to ICE about violations of CTS which has placed their L1's at client's place for the past 2 years. And still they have several people.
You may not believe their pay. I do not want to put a number here and it will be a shame on CTS for misusing L1. They replaced 18 American Workers at my client's pace. Whatever you guys might think, this is a FRAUD.
This is exactly what I have been arguing for in another thread about the Grim visa numbers. I will fully support you in your cause and let me know if you need any help. I am a GC holder but I feel its my duty to report this fraud against all these outsourcing companies.
girlfriend Google Earth Pro 5.0.1337
GCWaiter03
05-25 06:22 PM
Hi Gurus,
I need some help with my situation:
After 5 years of waiting, my Labor got finally aproved thru Dallas BEC(EB3, RIR, PD: Oct'02). But my wife is in India on vacation and as per original plan will return middle of August.
1. What are my options so I can take advantage of the PD being current for me?
2. can I apply for I-140 and I-485 and then apply her I-485 when she returns?
Thanks.
gc_hopful
As per my knowledge, ask your wife to come back from India and file I-485 along with your petition by before Jun 30, 2007.
If you want to wait till she comes back from India you can, but at that time (in Aug ) Cutt-off dates should be current to your PD date, If not you CANNOT file I-485 to your wife.
Best of luck.
-- Remeber I am not lawyer. check with your attroney immideatly for the best option.
I need some help with my situation:
After 5 years of waiting, my Labor got finally aproved thru Dallas BEC(EB3, RIR, PD: Oct'02). But my wife is in India on vacation and as per original plan will return middle of August.
1. What are my options so I can take advantage of the PD being current for me?
2. can I apply for I-140 and I-485 and then apply her I-485 when she returns?
Thanks.
gc_hopful
As per my knowledge, ask your wife to come back from India and file I-485 along with your petition by before Jun 30, 2007.
If you want to wait till she comes back from India you can, but at that time (in Aug ) Cutt-off dates should be current to your PD date, If not you CANNOT file I-485 to your wife.
Best of luck.
-- Remeber I am not lawyer. check with your attroney immideatly for the best option.
hairstyles try typing “google 1337″
trueguy
08-20 01:23 PM
It looks like USCIS is interpreting the rule the way they like.
It looks to me that they have lots of pressure from big companies and they are approving their applications in Particular. e.g., EB2-I with PD of 2006 are getting approvals, however EB2-I with PD in 2004 are still waiting.
There is no FIFO here and there is no clear rule. They can do whatever they like.
I am EB3-I too, plz don't take me wrong.
It looks to me that they have lots of pressure from big companies and they are approving their applications in Particular. e.g., EB2-I with PD of 2006 are getting approvals, however EB2-I with PD in 2004 are still waiting.
There is no FIFO here and there is no clear rule. They can do whatever they like.
I am EB3-I too, plz don't take me wrong.
anura
04-04 03:16 PM
Did it suggest lots of denial rate on 140 (especially Eb1s)? And it is deterring 140 filing since Jan.? I believe all those lawyers, and bodyshops realize it.
Neither the denial nor the approval rates are significantly changed. However, the receipts have fallen. Look at that as many universities and private companies not hiring teaching and research specialists. So it seems like the economy is the deterrent.
Neither the denial nor the approval rates are significantly changed. However, the receipts have fallen. Look at that as many universities and private companies not hiring teaching and research specialists. So it seems like the economy is the deterrent.
gvenkat
09-23 08:08 PM
All we need is just 233,816(page 2) visas(forget about country limit, EB category etc). In that case in 2 years we will have 280,000(140,000 * 2) visas. So should we all get GC in two years with that logic.
If only USCIS can think along those lines. :confused:
If only USCIS can think along those lines. :confused:
0 comments:
Post a Comment