Jaime
09-28 06:11 PM
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070926/eu_immigration.html?.v=1
wallpaper tips for overweight women
eb3_nepa
07-01 09:40 PM
At this time, IV is analyzing the impact of the speculation around the July visa bulletin closure, and is reaching out to attorneys, including AILA and planning next steps. tomorrow being a working day will also help us get more information and opportunity to reach appropriate levels of government . We will share more information with you as soon as there are developments. In the meanwhile, you should go about business as usual, and file your 485/140 applications as planned.
IMPORTANT: At this time, you are encouraged to update your user profiles on IV with the most current information and the best way to reach you. If we have an urgent action item, we may also send newsletters to all members.
What exactly CAN the IV core even do about this? I mean no disrespect here, I am just trying to imagine how IV can even help with this issue?
IMPORTANT: At this time, you are encouraged to update your user profiles on IV with the most current information and the best way to reach you. If we have an urgent action item, we may also send newsletters to all members.
What exactly CAN the IV core even do about this? I mean no disrespect here, I am just trying to imagine how IV can even help with this issue?
sbabunle
01-03 06:15 PM
I was trying to find out chinese portals, but no luck. I dont have any chinese friends who are stuck in this EB mess. Are we trying to get any chinese, philippino members?
2011 Overweight s hairstyles athe
laudo
09-28 08:34 PM
I finally got my green card after starting the process 3 years ago (most of the delay was because of a slight mistake of the part of my employee - a university - on the interpretation of how much experience I had and how much experience I was supposed to have to be an acceptable candidate for the job). Anyway, I filed the I-485 last February and received the green card last week. Meanwhile, the USCIS requested additional evidence twice, which probably delayed the decision by 1 to 2 months: first, they inquired on the legal status of my stay in the US - I came as a ph.d. student in 2000, requiring me to send copies of I-20s, I-94s, passport, visas, and a letter detailing dates and place of entry to and exit from the US; second, they requested evidence on bona fide marriage (we got married at the end of 2006), so I had to send our joint rent, insurances, credit card, and bank account contracts.
So this was my experience. Took some time, but it was successful. My advice for self-filing is that you send all of this together with the I-485 to avoid delays with these request for additional evidence.
By the way, I'm from Brazil and I'm an assistant professor in a state university.
Last, I'd like to thank everybody who provides helpful information in this forum.
So this was my experience. Took some time, but it was successful. My advice for self-filing is that you send all of this together with the I-485 to avoid delays with these request for additional evidence.
By the way, I'm from Brazil and I'm an assistant professor in a state university.
Last, I'd like to thank everybody who provides helpful information in this forum.
more...
alterego
07-15 11:03 AM
If your ex-employer already revoked I-140, how can he give employment verification letter now? He is saying that he is no-longer intend to employ you in the revokation , on the other hand he is giving offer letter now. It is contradictory; it will appear to CIS that you & your employer is doing fradulant practice. If the I-140 was already revoked, then there is no use from it, unless if it is revoked after 180 days of your 485 pending. If it is revoked after 180 days, you can use your new employment to port the job based on AC21 to keep the 485 valid. Otherwise forget it.
Speak with a lawyer. Your lawyer may be able to file a response, stating that the job offer stands and that the petition was withdrawn in error. Ac21 does not protect you, so I do not see any other options here. However, as tricky as this situation is, you should not take the advise of any of the posters here. Use these responses only to have an intelligent discussion with a good immigration attorney. The worst outcome of all for you would be a rejection for fraud or willful misrepresentation, in which case your future petitions would be in jeopardy and you would be unable to retain your PD also.
Speak with a lawyer. Your lawyer may be able to file a response, stating that the job offer stands and that the petition was withdrawn in error. Ac21 does not protect you, so I do not see any other options here. However, as tricky as this situation is, you should not take the advise of any of the posters here. Use these responses only to have an intelligent discussion with a good immigration attorney. The worst outcome of all for you would be a rejection for fraud or willful misrepresentation, in which case your future petitions would be in jeopardy and you would be unable to retain your PD also.
feedfront
09-17 03:37 PM
When they issue RFE, does the case status online shows Card/Document production?.
My online status still shows 'Request For Evidence'. In one way, it is less disturbing than yours. Good Luck!
My online status still shows 'Request For Evidence'. In one way, it is less disturbing than yours. Good Luck!
more...
sprash
02-02 01:42 PM
Out of status is usually checked until date of I-485 filing. One exception being working without valid and active EAD when I-485 is pending.
H1 status, one should be paid what is mention in H1 LCA and it is not related to LC Salary for green card. LC Salary comes into picture for ability-to-pay issues.
Thanks for your inputs Desi.
I have been following this thread with great interest. I'm the guy who posted the RFE scans on Pg1.
In my case the RFE was issued 1.5 years after filing for AOS (I filed in July 07 and this RFE was on Oct 08). Also, I'm not the only person who got this. I know many folks who work for big companies like Intel etc, who got such an RFE.
Also if I remember correctly, Belle on Murthy Forums (who also seems in the know) mentioned that one must be employed at all times on EAD. I didn't find any specific timeframe -- most people said you could get into trouble if an RFE (such as mine) is raised and you're out of a job. On the other hand, it is might be safe till such an RFE is issued (???)
I tried to look for that thread, but couldn't find it. However I did find another similar thread on which she (he?) has said the same thing:
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=9941019581&r=3791069581#3791069581
In tumultuous times such as these, I would expect USCIS to raise many more such RFEs.
H1 status, one should be paid what is mention in H1 LCA and it is not related to LC Salary for green card. LC Salary comes into picture for ability-to-pay issues.
Thanks for your inputs Desi.
I have been following this thread with great interest. I'm the guy who posted the RFE scans on Pg1.
In my case the RFE was issued 1.5 years after filing for AOS (I filed in July 07 and this RFE was on Oct 08). Also, I'm not the only person who got this. I know many folks who work for big companies like Intel etc, who got such an RFE.
Also if I remember correctly, Belle on Murthy Forums (who also seems in the know) mentioned that one must be employed at all times on EAD. I didn't find any specific timeframe -- most people said you could get into trouble if an RFE (such as mine) is raised and you're out of a job. On the other hand, it is might be safe till such an RFE is issued (???)
I tried to look for that thread, but couldn't find it. However I did find another similar thread on which she (he?) has said the same thing:
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=9941019581&r=3791069581#3791069581
In tumultuous times such as these, I would expect USCIS to raise many more such RFEs.
2010 hairstyles for overweight
aquarianf
08-03 02:42 PM
According to the person I spoke to:
1. I will be issued an RFE if my AOS packet did not contain the EVL
2. Once the A# is issued, that means the application has been accepted, so no outright rejection can happen, however RFEs can be issued at a later date.
Did you ask if you can send EVE separately by quoting receipt number or A# well before they issue any RFE on this?
1. I will be issued an RFE if my AOS packet did not contain the EVL
2. Once the A# is issued, that means the application has been accepted, so no outright rejection can happen, however RFEs can be issued at a later date.
Did you ask if you can send EVE separately by quoting receipt number or A# well before they issue any RFE on this?
more...
delhiguy
07-04 08:03 PM
Excellent
I agree with you 100 % , I believe having excessive media coverage and lawsuits , would bring the GC number and process in the open , and most americans would oppose the GC as they oppose H1B.
If i was a american i would surely be happy with USCIS/DOS creating so much trouble for the immigrants to my country , who i believe are taking my job.
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
I agree with you 100 % , I believe having excessive media coverage and lawsuits , would bring the GC number and process in the open , and most americans would oppose the GC as they oppose H1B.
If i was a american i would surely be happy with USCIS/DOS creating so much trouble for the immigrants to my country , who i believe are taking my job.
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
hair hair styles for overweight
dilvahabilyeha
06-18 02:23 PM
Hi friends,
Here is what my lawyer sent me! Forwarding to you all so that you can get some idea what they are planning to do. Of Course she is charging me 250$ for this info!. I am sharing this as you have contributed and Will contribute to IV.
------------------Here is the lawyer email---------------------
As you know, you and your wife will be able to file your applications to adjust status to permanent residence in July 2007. You will need to prepare the following for your adjustment applications:
1. Form I-485, Application to Adjust Status. You can find this Form on the Internet here:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485.pdf
Please complete this form in draft format for you and your wife. Please write "unknown" instead of leaving questions unanswered.
2. Form G-325, Biographic Information. You can find this Form on the Internet here:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/g-325a.pdf
Please complete this form in draft format for you and your wife. Please write "unknown" instead of leaving questions unanswered.
3. Photographs. You and your wife must each have six color photographs taken in accordance with the photo specifications that you will find here:
http://travel.state.gov/passport/guide/composition/composition_874.html
4. Passports, Forms I-94 and Nonimmigrant Visa Documents. Please send us a copy of every page, including any blank pages, of each of your current and any prior passports. Please also include copies (front and back) of each of your Forms I-94. Please make sure that the date and place of entry on the I-94 copies are clearly legible.
5. Birth and Marriage Certificates. Please send us a copy of your and your wife�s birth certificates and of your marriage certificate. If your birth certificates do not contain your name, your date and place of birth, and both of your parents' names, you will probably have to get affidavits from parents or older family members to fill in the blanks. We will review your documents and let you know if affidavits will be needed.
6. Medical Exams. You each must have a medical exam done by a CIS approved physician. It is my understanding that it is already becoming difficult to get appointments with these physicians. You can locate these physicians at this website:
https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=offices.type&OfficeLocator.office_type=CIV
The exam will include a blood test for AIDS and other diseases, a physical exam, and a skin test, and perhaps a chest x-ray, for tuberculosis. The physician will complete the forms and return them in sealed envelopes. The envelopes must remain sealed.
Immigration law requires that you submit proof of vaccinations with your applications for adjustment of status. You will find the vaccination sheet that the CIS physician must complete and enclose with your medicals here:
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/pdf/ti-03/appdx-a_693vacc.pdf
Please take proof of your prior vaccinations to the medical exams. If you do not have proof of prior vaccinations, you will probably have to receive those vaccinations at this time. If that is the case, it may be more cost effective to have the vaccinations done before you go for the examinations and then take evidence of those vaccinations to the CIS physician.
7. Identification Documents. Please send us two color, slightly enlarged copies of your and your wife�s drivers licenses or other photo ID, with the photos as clear as possible.
8. Employment Verification Letter. I will forward a format for this letter to your employer.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Here is what my lawyer sent me! Forwarding to you all so that you can get some idea what they are planning to do. Of Course she is charging me 250$ for this info!. I am sharing this as you have contributed and Will contribute to IV.
------------------Here is the lawyer email---------------------
As you know, you and your wife will be able to file your applications to adjust status to permanent residence in July 2007. You will need to prepare the following for your adjustment applications:
1. Form I-485, Application to Adjust Status. You can find this Form on the Internet here:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485.pdf
Please complete this form in draft format for you and your wife. Please write "unknown" instead of leaving questions unanswered.
2. Form G-325, Biographic Information. You can find this Form on the Internet here:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/g-325a.pdf
Please complete this form in draft format for you and your wife. Please write "unknown" instead of leaving questions unanswered.
3. Photographs. You and your wife must each have six color photographs taken in accordance with the photo specifications that you will find here:
http://travel.state.gov/passport/guide/composition/composition_874.html
4. Passports, Forms I-94 and Nonimmigrant Visa Documents. Please send us a copy of every page, including any blank pages, of each of your current and any prior passports. Please also include copies (front and back) of each of your Forms I-94. Please make sure that the date and place of entry on the I-94 copies are clearly legible.
5. Birth and Marriage Certificates. Please send us a copy of your and your wife�s birth certificates and of your marriage certificate. If your birth certificates do not contain your name, your date and place of birth, and both of your parents' names, you will probably have to get affidavits from parents or older family members to fill in the blanks. We will review your documents and let you know if affidavits will be needed.
6. Medical Exams. You each must have a medical exam done by a CIS approved physician. It is my understanding that it is already becoming difficult to get appointments with these physicians. You can locate these physicians at this website:
https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=offices.type&OfficeLocator.office_type=CIV
The exam will include a blood test for AIDS and other diseases, a physical exam, and a skin test, and perhaps a chest x-ray, for tuberculosis. The physician will complete the forms and return them in sealed envelopes. The envelopes must remain sealed.
Immigration law requires that you submit proof of vaccinations with your applications for adjustment of status. You will find the vaccination sheet that the CIS physician must complete and enclose with your medicals here:
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/pdf/ti-03/appdx-a_693vacc.pdf
Please take proof of your prior vaccinations to the medical exams. If you do not have proof of prior vaccinations, you will probably have to receive those vaccinations at this time. If that is the case, it may be more cost effective to have the vaccinations done before you go for the examinations and then take evidence of those vaccinations to the CIS physician.
7. Identification Documents. Please send us two color, slightly enlarged copies of your and your wife�s drivers licenses or other photo ID, with the photos as clear as possible.
8. Employment Verification Letter. I will forward a format for this letter to your employer.
---------------------------------------------------------------
more...
AirWaterandGC
07-15 02:20 PM
How much time do you have to respond to the RFE ? Do you have to provide pay stubs too from your old employer ?
I filed for 485 during July 2007. My 140 was already approved. Due to some problems I quit my employer in August 2007. My previous employer was a desi blood sucker. I was fed up & decided to quit after working for him for 3 years. I applied for H1 transfer with a new employer based on approved 140. I got H1 approval for another 3 years. Currently I am working for the new H1 sponsoring employer. I also received an EAD card based on pending 485 for one year. I didnt notify USICS of job change in July.
I applied for EAD extension this year. The application for EAD extension is pending. I got a following RFE on my 485:
Please state whether or not you are currently working for your I-140 petitioner.
You must submit a currently dated letter from you permanent employer, describing your present job duties & position in the organization, your proferred position (if different from your current one), the date you began employement & the offered salary & wage. The letter must also indicate whether the terms & conditions of your employement based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I am not in good terms with my previous employer so I cant ask him for a letter. I can ask my new employer for such a letter.
Will USCIS come to know I quite Employer A before completing 180 days?
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
What document should I send to USCIS now?
I filed for 485 during July 2007. My 140 was already approved. Due to some problems I quit my employer in August 2007. My previous employer was a desi blood sucker. I was fed up & decided to quit after working for him for 3 years. I applied for H1 transfer with a new employer based on approved 140. I got H1 approval for another 3 years. Currently I am working for the new H1 sponsoring employer. I also received an EAD card based on pending 485 for one year. I didnt notify USICS of job change in July.
I applied for EAD extension this year. The application for EAD extension is pending. I got a following RFE on my 485:
Please state whether or not you are currently working for your I-140 petitioner.
You must submit a currently dated letter from you permanent employer, describing your present job duties & position in the organization, your proferred position (if different from your current one), the date you began employement & the offered salary & wage. The letter must also indicate whether the terms & conditions of your employement based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I am not in good terms with my previous employer so I cant ask him for a letter. I can ask my new employer for such a letter.
Will USCIS come to know I quite Employer A before completing 180 days?
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
What document should I send to USCIS now?
hot hairstyles for fat people
Kodi
04-01 06:24 PM
Thank you so much.
So is it correct if I take the annual salary and divide by 52 and then by 40 to get the hourly basis?
So is it correct if I take the annual salary and divide by 52 and then by 40 to get the hourly basis?
more...
house Best Hairstyle For Overweight
eeezzz
03-04 03:39 PM
According to Mr. Gotcher (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4409)
Here are of the 5th and 6th paragraphs from Visa Quotas section at the very first post.
In addition to the �fall down� numbers, there are also �spill over� numbers. That is, to the extent that the worldwide category does not use all of the numbers available to it, the remaining numbers spill over and become available to the countries that are impacted by the single country limit.
In order for there to be spill over numbers, however, the worldwide third preference category much be �current� (that is, it may not have a cutoff date). When this happens, then unused worldwide numbers spill over and become available for applicants affected by the single country limit.
Here are of the 5th and 6th paragraphs from Visa Quotas section at the very first post.
In addition to the �fall down� numbers, there are also �spill over� numbers. That is, to the extent that the worldwide category does not use all of the numbers available to it, the remaining numbers spill over and become available to the countries that are impacted by the single country limit.
In order for there to be spill over numbers, however, the worldwide third preference category much be �current� (that is, it may not have a cutoff date). When this happens, then unused worldwide numbers spill over and become available for applicants affected by the single country limit.
tattoo Hairstyles Ideas For
brawn81
11-06 11:50 AM
Hi,
Can somebody paste the sample letter that needed to be sent because I cant open in office.
Thanks,
brawn.
Can somebody paste the sample letter that needed to be sent because I cant open in office.
Thanks,
brawn.
more...
pictures hairstyles for fat people
crystal
07-02 10:00 AM
Currently Active Users: 1800 (489 members and 1311 guests)
Most users ever online was 1,801, Today at 09:58 AM.
Most users ever online was 1,801, Today at 09:58 AM.
dresses hairstyles overweight pictures
desi3933
02-03 01:04 PM
desi3933,
Thanks for your response. I did little digging on the H1 LCA front.Here's what I found out and I have one question too.
....
....
Do you have any idea ,in case of RFE, what happens if we just send W2 without LCA/ with latest LCA?
Thank you.
Like I said before, W2 should be good enough. If you get employment letter for that period, that will be better.
Typically LCAs are not needed, unless asked to prove H1-B status for job location and other related issues.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
Thanks for your response. I did little digging on the H1 LCA front.Here's what I found out and I have one question too.
....
....
Do you have any idea ,in case of RFE, what happens if we just send W2 without LCA/ with latest LCA?
Thank you.
Like I said before, W2 should be good enough. If you get employment letter for that period, that will be better.
Typically LCAs are not needed, unless asked to prove H1-B status for job location and other related issues.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
more...
makeup Hairstyles For Overweight
snathan
02-24 12:17 PM
i'm on L1B visa.I came to US on L1B in 2005 with one year petition and got extension
for 3 years. meanwhile i left to India in June 2007. And then i came back with new L1B petiotion in Oct 2007 which is valid till Sep-2010.Now my question is
1) Is my L1B stay reached to maximum or do i still have 2 years left with my new L1B.
2) If i apply for H1 this year how many years of stay i'll get with H1B.
Please help me with this madam as soon as possible.
Thanks in Advance.
If you apply for H1B, you will only whatever left in L1B and not six years.
for 3 years. meanwhile i left to India in June 2007. And then i came back with new L1B petiotion in Oct 2007 which is valid till Sep-2010.Now my question is
1) Is my L1B stay reached to maximum or do i still have 2 years left with my new L1B.
2) If i apply for H1 this year how many years of stay i'll get with H1B.
Please help me with this madam as soon as possible.
Thanks in Advance.
If you apply for H1B, you will only whatever left in L1B and not six years.
girlfriend hairstyles for overweight
ashkam
01-30 02:54 PM
So, basically anyone laid off on I485 pending without a job is accumulating "out of status" days.That's your opinion?
If you are I-485 pending, you are not out of status regardless of whether you have a job or not.
If you are I-485 pending, you are not out of status regardless of whether you have a job or not.
hairstyles Round face hairstyles
nixstor
07-03 02:26 PM
this does happen- for people in the US already. larger companies find it convenient to simply send the employee out for asactly 365 days and then transfer them back. and Viola! you are in the front of the line!
all legal...but one of the various problems that cause the system to be clogged.
I am not debating it whether it can happen at all or not, whether its right or wrong. I should have worded it better in my previous post. It can happen, but not many who are already in the US do this. If it were equally rampant like the labor substitution, EB1 cannot be current for long time. While some one can go this route, they are paying a significant amount of Salary (possibly Spouse's salary as well), Family upheaval for an year and many other things as a premium. Not all people have the chance to do so and can afford to do so, if they have a chance. We are not seeing any clogs in EB1. Are we?
all legal...but one of the various problems that cause the system to be clogged.
I am not debating it whether it can happen at all or not, whether its right or wrong. I should have worded it better in my previous post. It can happen, but not many who are already in the US do this. If it were equally rampant like the labor substitution, EB1 cannot be current for long time. While some one can go this route, they are paying a significant amount of Salary (possibly Spouse's salary as well), Family upheaval for an year and many other things as a premium. Not all people have the chance to do so and can afford to do so, if they have a chance. We are not seeing any clogs in EB1. Are we?
sanju
04-04 03:43 PM
You are confused on this. IEEE is against increase of H1B visas. They have never said anything about GCs. If they have, show me where.
That is a good question. And here is a reply to that.
Why does IEEE oppose H1? Because its members do not like competition from people whose profile match IV members i.e. people on H1B. If IEEE would be in love with green card and people waiting on green card, they would not support John Miano and his testimony. IEEE-USA's memberships consist of middle aged racist engineers who cannot keep up with the competition from mostly Asian younger workers. In the 80s and 90s, they were talking about globalization and its benefits as they got a jump start to get most of the global work. Now, other people in other nations have caught up and same globalization is causing them to pee in their pants. They understand that globalization is good for the country and the society. But what is good for the nation is not always good for each and every individual. So to save their lazy ass, they now want protection from their government, without realizing that if they get the protection they are seeking, they will not be able to enjoy that protection for very long as the companies will be compelled to look for more efficient and cost effective ways to do work.
Anyways, answer to your question is in your question i.e. How could someone be against H1b and for green card?
That is a good question. And here is a reply to that.
Why does IEEE oppose H1? Because its members do not like competition from people whose profile match IV members i.e. people on H1B. If IEEE would be in love with green card and people waiting on green card, they would not support John Miano and his testimony. IEEE-USA's memberships consist of middle aged racist engineers who cannot keep up with the competition from mostly Asian younger workers. In the 80s and 90s, they were talking about globalization and its benefits as they got a jump start to get most of the global work. Now, other people in other nations have caught up and same globalization is causing them to pee in their pants. They understand that globalization is good for the country and the society. But what is good for the nation is not always good for each and every individual. So to save their lazy ass, they now want protection from their government, without realizing that if they get the protection they are seeking, they will not be able to enjoy that protection for very long as the companies will be compelled to look for more efficient and cost effective ways to do work.
Anyways, answer to your question is in your question i.e. How could someone be against H1b and for green card?
Jitamitra
06-08 06:04 PM
Same old stuff. I dont see a light at the end of the tunnel till some immigration reform bill gets shoved in or a comprehensive immigration bill is introduced.
The obama administration is not in a mood to touch immigration and we live to be scape goats of policies back from 90's.
The obama administration is not in a mood to touch immigration and we live to be scape goats of policies back from 90's.
0 comments:
Post a Comment