GreenCard4US
08-21 10:53 PM
The RFE is not unusual, they are sending RFE's on all pending I-485 applications in an attempt to pre-process the applications and have them ready before the priority date becomes available.
Even though the beneficiary does not have to be working for the GC sponsoring company and the offer of employment can be a future offer, i always advice my clients to work for the sponsoring employer, if possible, otherwise the USCIS might raise the issue of the validity of the job offer, they have done this in the past. I also always advice clients to do AC-21 whenever they can, rather than depend on future employment.
It is difficult to predict what the Officers decision will be and what factors he will look at, and your attorney is not wrong in his response, however if you were my client i would advice you to use AC-21. The USCIS has not indicated that AC-21 has to be invoked as soon as you join the new employer, no deadline for invoking AC-21. However, you should have a GC sponsor at all times to keep your GC alive. In your case, company A was your sponsor until the time that company C has agreed to be your sponsor and invoke AC-21.
It is also good to invoke AC-21 because at the time of filing for citizenship they will see if you worked for your sponsoring employer for at least 6 months after getting the GC and if you did not, they will ask why dint you.
Further Questions:
Can I invoke AC21 now when an RFE is pending? Also, since I had already joined company C when I applied for 485, can I still invoke AC21. Do I reply to the RFE first and then invoke AC 21 or as part of RFE can I invoke AC21? Thanks again.
The dates in the first couple of sentences are all messed up ( came to US through Company A in June 2007 and was with them until Dec 2006...........I joined Company B in Jan of 2007(change of H1) and was with them until April of 2007. )
It would help to answer if you can correct the dates.
Even though the beneficiary does not have to be working for the GC sponsoring company and the offer of employment can be a future offer, i always advice my clients to work for the sponsoring employer, if possible, otherwise the USCIS might raise the issue of the validity of the job offer, they have done this in the past. I also always advice clients to do AC-21 whenever they can, rather than depend on future employment.
It is difficult to predict what the Officers decision will be and what factors he will look at, and your attorney is not wrong in his response, however if you were my client i would advice you to use AC-21. The USCIS has not indicated that AC-21 has to be invoked as soon as you join the new employer, no deadline for invoking AC-21. However, you should have a GC sponsor at all times to keep your GC alive. In your case, company A was your sponsor until the time that company C has agreed to be your sponsor and invoke AC-21.
It is also good to invoke AC-21 because at the time of filing for citizenship they will see if you worked for your sponsoring employer for at least 6 months after getting the GC and if you did not, they will ask why dint you.
Further Questions:
Can I invoke AC21 now when an RFE is pending? Also, since I had already joined company C when I applied for 485, can I still invoke AC21. Do I reply to the RFE first and then invoke AC 21 or as part of RFE can I invoke AC21? Thanks again.
The dates in the first couple of sentences are all messed up ( came to US through Company A in June 2007 and was with them until Dec 2006...........I joined Company B in Jan of 2007(change of H1) and was with them until April of 2007. )
It would help to answer if you can correct the dates.
wallpaper Art Styles » Picasso
akhilmahajan
02-04 11:06 AM
Yes i did. It was the same way for my dad when i was on H-1B.
I sent him the copies of my 140, 485, and EAD and also an employment letter from my new employer , as i have used AC-21.
He was asked what i am doing and he told them i am working for XYX company and has also filed his GC. The office said all the best to him and granted my dad a 10 year multiple visa. If you have any questions, please send me a message.
I hope this helps.
GO IV GO. TOGETHER WE CAN.
I sent him the copies of my 140, 485, and EAD and also an employment letter from my new employer , as i have used AC-21.
He was asked what i am doing and he told them i am working for XYX company and has also filed his GC. The office said all the best to him and granted my dad a 10 year multiple visa. If you have any questions, please send me a message.
I hope this helps.
GO IV GO. TOGETHER WE CAN.
webm
04-22 03:13 PM
its good to see data like this after a while...if nothing else...it provides a snapshot of where we are.
yeh true...
yeh true...
2011 Art Review | #39;Picasso and
ardnahc
08-14 01:45 PM
That's an eternal open question all of us have here :-)
To be honest, I don't know, but based on the what I read, I gathered that it is the notice date. But the bottomline is - we all know - even USCIS knows - ITS RANDOM PROCESSING!!
Thanks
To be honest, I don't know, but based on the what I read, I gathered that it is the notice date. But the bottomline is - we all know - even USCIS knows - ITS RANDOM PROCESSING!!
Thanks
more...
Blog Feeds
04-26 11:30 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
All eyes are on Governor Jan Brewer today.
On her desk is SB 1070, an anti-immigrant bill which would effectively make all Latinos the target of arrest or interrogation, whether or not they are U.S. citizens, lawful immigrants, or undocumented foreign nationals. Indeed, such a hate-motivated bill may well compel all Latinos to pack up and leave the state. Brewer's choice is clear to anyone who cherishes freedom and democracy�veto SB 1070, and toss it into the dust bin of history where it belongs, together with Jim Crow, the Nazi Nuremberg laws, and South African Apartheid.
But, believe it or not, the Governor is actually considering signing this venomous bill into law. Last night, in yet another surreal Arizona moment Governor Brewer addressed the 41st annual Chicanos Por La Causa anniversary dinner amid calls in the audience for her to veto SB 1070 and surrounded by protesters that chanted and marched outside the Sheraton Phoenix Downtown Hotel where the dinner was held. At the dinner, organization board chairwoman Erica Gonzalez-Melendez urged Brewer to veto "the most hateful piece of legislation directed at Latinos" aptly pointing out that SB 1070 will do nothing to fix our broken immigration system and only "panders to the racist fear mongers of our state." But, Governor Brewer refused to say what she would do, invoking political-speak instead, "I am not prepared to announce a decision on Senate Bill 1070," she said. "What I decide will be based on what's right for Arizona." http://bit.ly/96KJlT. (Note to reader: there have been several surreal moments in Arizona this week. On Monday Senator John McCain, who once described himself as a "maverick" and champion of comprehensive immigration reform, told Fox News host Bill O'Reilly that "the drivers of cars with illegals in it ... are intentionally causing accidents on the freeway." Then on Tuesday an Arizona state House committee approved a measure which would force President Obama to show his birth certificate if he runs for re-election. http://huff.to/9bfpzg)
What is right for Arizona is for Governor Brewer to jealously protect the rights of all its citizens and follow the U.S. Constitution, not turn Arizona into the Fourth Reich. Let's be frank, by passing SB 1070 lawmakers have sold out Arizona taxpayers in a cynical effort to garner votes and look tough. The bill does nothing to build a functional immigration system, secure the border nor rid the state of dangerous criminals. Nor does it protect the wages and working conditions of US workers. Instead, it targets day laborers and ordinary citizens whose appearance might raise "reasonable suspicion" of unlawful immigration status in the mind of a police officer. If Governor Brewer signs SB 1070, people in Arizona with foreign sounding accents or who don't "look American" had better not run into the wrong cop (or even the right cop) because the law mandates they prove they are here legally.
SB 1070 is not the product thoughtful policy making; it is hate speech masquerading as legislation. This sounds extreme until you read SB 1070 which is a hodgepodge of mean spirited provisions that will effectively transform Arizona into a police state for anyone whose skin is a shade other than white. The bill's effect may very well be to make Arizona "Latino Free" and force those who stay behind�U.S. citizens included�to feel like hunted criminals. Frankly, there is no other way to describe SB 1070 which would make not having immigration documents a state crime, allow law enforcement officers to arrest anyone who could not immediately prove they were in the U.S. legally, and subject a brown-skinned person who leaves home without a wallet to arrest. Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles was hardly exaggerating when he compared SB 1070 to "German Nazi and Russian Communist techniques whereby people are required to turn one another in to the authorities on any suspicion of documentation." http://bit.ly/9ZIQ9K.
SB 1070's outright decimation of civil liberties and American values aside, Governor Brewer's signature on the bill will likely reek economic devastation on Arizona, costing its taxpayers billions in lost revenue. The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) reported this week that "if significant numbers of immigrants and Latinos are actually persuaded to leave the state because of this new law, they will take their tax dollars, businesses, and purchasing power with them. The University of Arizona's Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy estimates that the total economic output attributable to Arizona's immigrant workers was $44 billion in 2004, which sustained roughly 400,000 full-time jobs. Furthermore, over 35,000 businesses in Arizona are Latino-owned and had sales and receipts of $4.3 billion and employed 39,363 people in 2002, the last year for which data is available. The Perryman Group estimates that if all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Arizona, the state would lose $26.4 billion in economic activity, $11.7 billion in gross state product, and approximately 140,324 jobs, even accounting for adequate market adjustment time. Putting economic contributions of this magnitude at risk during a time of recession would not serve Arizona well." And this loss of revenue to the hard working taxpayers of Arizona does not take into account the cost of defending the inevitable lawsuits that will be brought against the state for civil rights and other violations. According to the IPC, "Arizona would probably face a costly slew of lawsuits on behalf of legal immigrants and native-born Latinos who feel they have been unjustly targeted" leading to millions of dollars in expenditures. http://bit.ly/dbguDK.
As I wrote previously on this blog, SB 1070 is not the problem. It is an awful symptom of the failure of the Administration and Congress to enact immigration reform. In the void, local and state authorities have run roughshod over the civil liberties we cherish as a nation. What we see today is a perfect storm of crises�ICE's neglect and abuse of immigrant detainees which has culminated in 107 deaths in immigration detention since 2003, the serious civil rights abuses in the notorious 287(g) program which is administered by ICE and "deputizes" state and local law enforcement agencies to enforce immigration law, and an immigration bureaucracy that thumbs its nose at the needs of American business and families. As a nation we must demand that Congress and the Administration put politics aside and get to the hard work of building a safe, orderly, fair, and functional immigration policy designed to protect civil liberties and serve the needs of all Americans.
As for today, Governor Brewer has a choice. She can succumb to hatred and fear by signing SB 1070 or allowing it to become law without her signature (it is hard to say which would be more cowardly). Or she can show uncommon political courage and veto the bill, thereby drawing a line in the Arizona desert over which racism, intolerance, and injustice dare not cross.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-3162775922361590244?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/04/arizona-governor-jan-brewers-choice.html)
All eyes are on Governor Jan Brewer today.
On her desk is SB 1070, an anti-immigrant bill which would effectively make all Latinos the target of arrest or interrogation, whether or not they are U.S. citizens, lawful immigrants, or undocumented foreign nationals. Indeed, such a hate-motivated bill may well compel all Latinos to pack up and leave the state. Brewer's choice is clear to anyone who cherishes freedom and democracy�veto SB 1070, and toss it into the dust bin of history where it belongs, together with Jim Crow, the Nazi Nuremberg laws, and South African Apartheid.
But, believe it or not, the Governor is actually considering signing this venomous bill into law. Last night, in yet another surreal Arizona moment Governor Brewer addressed the 41st annual Chicanos Por La Causa anniversary dinner amid calls in the audience for her to veto SB 1070 and surrounded by protesters that chanted and marched outside the Sheraton Phoenix Downtown Hotel where the dinner was held. At the dinner, organization board chairwoman Erica Gonzalez-Melendez urged Brewer to veto "the most hateful piece of legislation directed at Latinos" aptly pointing out that SB 1070 will do nothing to fix our broken immigration system and only "panders to the racist fear mongers of our state." But, Governor Brewer refused to say what she would do, invoking political-speak instead, "I am not prepared to announce a decision on Senate Bill 1070," she said. "What I decide will be based on what's right for Arizona." http://bit.ly/96KJlT. (Note to reader: there have been several surreal moments in Arizona this week. On Monday Senator John McCain, who once described himself as a "maverick" and champion of comprehensive immigration reform, told Fox News host Bill O'Reilly that "the drivers of cars with illegals in it ... are intentionally causing accidents on the freeway." Then on Tuesday an Arizona state House committee approved a measure which would force President Obama to show his birth certificate if he runs for re-election. http://huff.to/9bfpzg)
What is right for Arizona is for Governor Brewer to jealously protect the rights of all its citizens and follow the U.S. Constitution, not turn Arizona into the Fourth Reich. Let's be frank, by passing SB 1070 lawmakers have sold out Arizona taxpayers in a cynical effort to garner votes and look tough. The bill does nothing to build a functional immigration system, secure the border nor rid the state of dangerous criminals. Nor does it protect the wages and working conditions of US workers. Instead, it targets day laborers and ordinary citizens whose appearance might raise "reasonable suspicion" of unlawful immigration status in the mind of a police officer. If Governor Brewer signs SB 1070, people in Arizona with foreign sounding accents or who don't "look American" had better not run into the wrong cop (or even the right cop) because the law mandates they prove they are here legally.
SB 1070 is not the product thoughtful policy making; it is hate speech masquerading as legislation. This sounds extreme until you read SB 1070 which is a hodgepodge of mean spirited provisions that will effectively transform Arizona into a police state for anyone whose skin is a shade other than white. The bill's effect may very well be to make Arizona "Latino Free" and force those who stay behind�U.S. citizens included�to feel like hunted criminals. Frankly, there is no other way to describe SB 1070 which would make not having immigration documents a state crime, allow law enforcement officers to arrest anyone who could not immediately prove they were in the U.S. legally, and subject a brown-skinned person who leaves home without a wallet to arrest. Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles was hardly exaggerating when he compared SB 1070 to "German Nazi and Russian Communist techniques whereby people are required to turn one another in to the authorities on any suspicion of documentation." http://bit.ly/9ZIQ9K.
SB 1070's outright decimation of civil liberties and American values aside, Governor Brewer's signature on the bill will likely reek economic devastation on Arizona, costing its taxpayers billions in lost revenue. The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) reported this week that "if significant numbers of immigrants and Latinos are actually persuaded to leave the state because of this new law, they will take their tax dollars, businesses, and purchasing power with them. The University of Arizona's Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy estimates that the total economic output attributable to Arizona's immigrant workers was $44 billion in 2004, which sustained roughly 400,000 full-time jobs. Furthermore, over 35,000 businesses in Arizona are Latino-owned and had sales and receipts of $4.3 billion and employed 39,363 people in 2002, the last year for which data is available. The Perryman Group estimates that if all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Arizona, the state would lose $26.4 billion in economic activity, $11.7 billion in gross state product, and approximately 140,324 jobs, even accounting for adequate market adjustment time. Putting economic contributions of this magnitude at risk during a time of recession would not serve Arizona well." And this loss of revenue to the hard working taxpayers of Arizona does not take into account the cost of defending the inevitable lawsuits that will be brought against the state for civil rights and other violations. According to the IPC, "Arizona would probably face a costly slew of lawsuits on behalf of legal immigrants and native-born Latinos who feel they have been unjustly targeted" leading to millions of dollars in expenditures. http://bit.ly/dbguDK.
As I wrote previously on this blog, SB 1070 is not the problem. It is an awful symptom of the failure of the Administration and Congress to enact immigration reform. In the void, local and state authorities have run roughshod over the civil liberties we cherish as a nation. What we see today is a perfect storm of crises�ICE's neglect and abuse of immigrant detainees which has culminated in 107 deaths in immigration detention since 2003, the serious civil rights abuses in the notorious 287(g) program which is administered by ICE and "deputizes" state and local law enforcement agencies to enforce immigration law, and an immigration bureaucracy that thumbs its nose at the needs of American business and families. As a nation we must demand that Congress and the Administration put politics aside and get to the hard work of building a safe, orderly, fair, and functional immigration policy designed to protect civil liberties and serve the needs of all Americans.
As for today, Governor Brewer has a choice. She can succumb to hatred and fear by signing SB 1070 or allowing it to become law without her signature (it is hard to say which would be more cowardly). Or she can show uncommon political courage and veto the bill, thereby drawing a line in the Arizona desert over which racism, intolerance, and injustice dare not cross.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-3162775922361590244?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/04/arizona-governor-jan-brewers-choice.html)
sk2006
03-01 05:21 PM
Friends,
I have Canada PR since October 2006. In October this year I will complete 3 years since landing in Canada. The rule to maintain PR is that one should live in Canada for at least 2 years in a 5 year period. Since I have not lived in Canada more that a couple of weeks since landing, will I be allowed to move to Canada after completing 3 years outside Canada or will I be sent back from the border? Has anyone moved to Canada after living outside for more than 3 years since landing? Please advise.
Thanks.
Sometime back when I inquired the same, I was told that canada is lenient about this rule and there were instances when people were allowed to come even after staying more than 3 years outside canada but then recently somebody told me that they are becoming more strict now.
I have Canada PR since October 2006. In October this year I will complete 3 years since landing in Canada. The rule to maintain PR is that one should live in Canada for at least 2 years in a 5 year period. Since I have not lived in Canada more that a couple of weeks since landing, will I be allowed to move to Canada after completing 3 years outside Canada or will I be sent back from the border? Has anyone moved to Canada after living outside for more than 3 years since landing? Please advise.
Thanks.
Sometime back when I inquired the same, I was told that canada is lenient about this rule and there were instances when people were allowed to come even after staying more than 3 years outside canada but then recently somebody told me that they are becoming more strict now.
more...
GC08
06-19 07:28 PM
Sorry if this is too basic. But can anyone tell me if passport photos taken from Kinko's will work for filing 485, AP, EAD, etc.?
Someone told me that USCIS does not accept digital photos or the digital photos have to meet certain quality requirement (something like that). I went to Kinko's near by and found out their pictures were digital too. So wondering if anyone had any problems with that (like USCIS rejection of the photos).
Thanks in advance!
Someone told me that USCIS does not accept digital photos or the digital photos have to meet certain quality requirement (something like that). I went to Kinko's near by and found out their pictures were digital too. So wondering if anyone had any problems with that (like USCIS rejection of the photos).
Thanks in advance!
2010 Famous Spanish artist - 20th
number30
10-08 02:01 AM
My son is a US citizen/passport holder and we are planning on applying for a PIO for him at the SFO consulate. I have the following questions on how he could use the PIO card
1. How can he use the PIO card to enter and exit India?
a. Does he simply show the PIO card, US passport to enter and exit India?
2. Incase if the PIO card processing takes a lot of time I know that he can apply for visa. I was wondering anyone has experience on how visa could be applied if PIO processing takes a long time at the SFO consulate.
a. Do they return the PIO application and its supporting documents before visa could be applied?
b. Should a new visa application+visa supporting documents need to be resent for getting a Indian visa?
For PIO Usually it takes two weeks if you go personally. They will will tell you the date upfront. For PIO They do not take original passport. Hence you can apply for the visa even two days before departure.
Just FYI While applying for PIO or Visa both mom and dad needs to sign otherwise they will send it back.
1. How can he use the PIO card to enter and exit India?
a. Does he simply show the PIO card, US passport to enter and exit India?
2. Incase if the PIO card processing takes a lot of time I know that he can apply for visa. I was wondering anyone has experience on how visa could be applied if PIO processing takes a long time at the SFO consulate.
a. Do they return the PIO application and its supporting documents before visa could be applied?
b. Should a new visa application+visa supporting documents need to be resent for getting a Indian visa?
For PIO Usually it takes two weeks if you go personally. They will will tell you the date upfront. For PIO They do not take original passport. Hence you can apply for the visa even two days before departure.
Just FYI While applying for PIO or Visa both mom and dad needs to sign otherwise they will send it back.
more...
prout02
11-26 01:14 PM
I don't have an answer to your question, but it seems a Cognovit Promisory Note could exist only between a creditor and debtor, not between an employer and employee.
I am really surprised your employer went to this circuitous way to bond you for your employment obligation. Do take your note's language and consult a good attorney. This is some uncharted territory. Shows how creative these unscrupulous employers are. Still you may have a way out, if you can prove it is employment obligation related.
Hi,
My employer "ABC" (Consultancy) based in Ohio made me sign a Cognovit Promissory Note for 'X' amount ( where 'X' is a pretty large amount) on my arrival to US on H1-B visa earlier this year. I've been associated with him for less than an year now.
Question:
Does this note have any significance according to US law, esp. Ohio?
If I plan to move from this consultancy, can this note be held as a Legal Document and any legal action taken against me based on this note?
What is my way out of this?
I would be highly obliged if anyone can provide any help on this matter.
Regards
Chint001
I am really surprised your employer went to this circuitous way to bond you for your employment obligation. Do take your note's language and consult a good attorney. This is some uncharted territory. Shows how creative these unscrupulous employers are. Still you may have a way out, if you can prove it is employment obligation related.
Hi,
My employer "ABC" (Consultancy) based in Ohio made me sign a Cognovit Promissory Note for 'X' amount ( where 'X' is a pretty large amount) on my arrival to US on H1-B visa earlier this year. I've been associated with him for less than an year now.
Question:
Does this note have any significance according to US law, esp. Ohio?
If I plan to move from this consultancy, can this note be held as a Legal Document and any legal action taken against me based on this note?
What is my way out of this?
I would be highly obliged if anyone can provide any help on this matter.
Regards
Chint001
hair artists throughout history
maddipati1
01-12 11:13 AM
nice combo, SS and jealous of others who grow, if ur not WLPOS urself u wud've grown too :) if u have any clue abt jul07 fiasco and aftermath u wudnt be believin 'all izz well' like an ostrich :) 'all izz well' only makes Amir a few mil$s. u still have no clue why i have to even bother to respond to u, do u?
more...
sounakc
05-12 01:13 PM
however, i will appreciate if you can tell me if these are the only required
1. Measles/ Mumps/ Rubella - Adult
2. Varicella
3. Hepatitis B - Adult
and the following tests
1. Tuberulosis - Tubercolin Skin Test
2. Serologic Test for Syphilis - RPR Screen
3. Serologic Test for HIV Antibody - HIV AB Screen
1. Measles/ Mumps/ Rubella - Adult
2. Varicella
3. Hepatitis B - Adult
and the following tests
1. Tuberulosis - Tubercolin Skin Test
2. Serologic Test for Syphilis - RPR Screen
3. Serologic Test for HIV Antibody - HIV AB Screen
hot http://www.metmuseum.org/TOAH/
gapala
06-04 01:08 PM
Guys, there is nothing to be excited about for EB folks in this bill.. This appears to help FB folks and in the name of re-union, which is a good thing ofcourse but, for us.. If I read between the lines, I have a bad feeling... Are they trying to re-capture the EB wasted visa numbers along with FB wasted and allocate all those to FB folks? :confused:
Let the EB folks live this same life?
God knows...
Let the EB folks live this same life?
God knows...
more...
house this Picasso artist study!
kprgroup
04-03 04:40 PM
The RFE is about on what basis i am eligible to extend H1B?. I sent copy of my 485 receipt and MTR copy & letter from my current employer explaining my 485 is pending more than 365 days and AC21 we requested for H1 extension.I thought i am going to get only one year but ..got 3 year extension.If you need more details PM me your phone or email .Will glad to help you
Good Luck
KPR
Good Luck
KPR
tattoo Picasso#39;s cubist quot;3 Musiciansquot;
bp333
11-26 09:21 AM
That is GREAT!
I can understand what you have gone through and it must be a big relief for you !
Can you tell us when did you resubmit your application and what fee did they accept..old or new. A friend of mine resubmitted his application a few days ago with new fee... his original app was rejected earlier because his attorney sent thre wrong fee amount...(neither new nor old..)
Good luck and enjoy the feleing now
We submitted the application with checks covering the old fee, also included an additional check to make up the difference for new fee. USCIS has cashed in all the checks (new fee).
I can understand what you have gone through and it must be a big relief for you !
Can you tell us when did you resubmit your application and what fee did they accept..old or new. A friend of mine resubmitted his application a few days ago with new fee... his original app was rejected earlier because his attorney sent thre wrong fee amount...(neither new nor old..)
Good luck and enjoy the feleing now
We submitted the application with checks covering the old fee, also included an additional check to make up the difference for new fee. USCIS has cashed in all the checks (new fee).
more...
pictures Pablo Picasso cubist style
humdesi
05-31 08:53 PM
A friend of mine just came from India. Works for a bodyshopper. He is transferring to L-1A so that he can file in EB-1 multinational manager. Is this possible? What are the minimum requirements for EB-1?
If it is possible this guy will be laughing a year from now, gc in hand, while we all fume and fret over retrogression, labor, i-140 etc..
If it is possible this guy will be laughing a year from now, gc in hand, while we all fume and fret over retrogression, labor, i-140 etc..
dresses Pablo Picasso quot;The Artist and
gc28262
09-01 06:27 PM
I'm in the same hole. Oct'2003 is my PD EB2I. had interview 3 months back. Was waiting so eagerly for this day. no update on my case. While I see Dec'2004 cases getting approved. Why can't USCIS do some organization and issue green card purely by priority dates rather than at the mercy of the officer. Why should they make lives of poor immigrants and green card applicants as miserable and touch as possible? Can't do anything more than feeling bad. :-(
If your PD is current, try creating a service request. This will force IO to look at your case. If it is ready for approval, he would probably approve it.
If your PD is current, try creating a service request. This will force IO to look at your case. If it is ready for approval, he would probably approve it.
more...
makeup Pablo Picasso artist and model
sathishav
02-25 10:23 AM
Guys,
Would it be of benefit, if USCIS sends us a notice when our petition is "Pre-adjudicated; awaiting visa number"? So, we can at least be in peace and go on with our life?
Also, I see there is a suggestion to NOT count Dependants in the VISA numbers, since they are not counted for other visa (H1) status. Its a very good suggestion. We just have to be ready with the counter-argument, if we are told, H1 Dependant is H4 and not eligible to work. However, once GC is approved, that spouse gets equivalent benefits and hence its counted.
Would it be of benefit, if USCIS sends us a notice when our petition is "Pre-adjudicated; awaiting visa number"? So, we can at least be in peace and go on with our life?
Also, I see there is a suggestion to NOT count Dependants in the VISA numbers, since they are not counted for other visa (H1) status. Its a very good suggestion. We just have to be ready with the counter-argument, if we are told, H1 Dependant is H4 and not eligible to work. However, once GC is approved, that spouse gets equivalent benefits and hence its counted.
girlfriend PIcasso Fine Art Print
Outkastpb231
11-02 03:51 PM
Without trying to sound too harsh, I think my dog could knock up something more worth going freelance about. :D
No hard feelings. I just really need to get back on my feet, since I am relatively busy I just got my own place, and I really need an idea to set me in motion. I am not a spontaneous artist in any sense at all.
No hard feelings. I just really need to get back on my feet, since I am relatively busy I just got my own place, and I really need an idea to set me in motion. I am not a spontaneous artist in any sense at all.
hairstyles Pablo Picasso artist and model
n2b
04-18 04:42 PM
the main grey area for n2b is --
but in his case, he jumped to EAD (lost his nonimmigrant status temporarily) and is trying to jump back to H1 status.
See the thin is as far as the status goes I believe one is not on Immigrant status unless one gets the GC; and their are only two statuses, Immigrant and Non-Immigrant for us (or I guess illegal, which we are not for sure)!!
So do you think using EAD gives a person an Immigrant status in turn losing his non-immigrant status?
but in his case, he jumped to EAD (lost his nonimmigrant status temporarily) and is trying to jump back to H1 status.
See the thin is as far as the status goes I believe one is not on Immigrant status unless one gets the GC; and their are only two statuses, Immigrant and Non-Immigrant for us (or I guess illegal, which we are not for sure)!!
So do you think using EAD gives a person an Immigrant status in turn losing his non-immigrant status?
walker15
02-01 09:34 AM
I used Rajiv Khanna and Amarnath Gowda(www.gowda.com). They both were good and will provide satisfactory service.
getgc2008
02-29 04:08 PM
My I140 is approved, 180 days complete and looking to change jobs in May/June.
I have another 2 months with the present client. I want to Use AC21 but not inform USCIS. Does filing G28 and changing lawyer trigger a notice to my present company lawyer?
I have another 2 months with the present client. I want to Use AC21 but not inform USCIS. Does filing G28 and changing lawyer trigger a notice to my present company lawyer?
No comments:
Post a Comment