ramus
06-03 02:51 PM
If you don't like web-fax then you can make phone call or send email with your message in it. Also please contribute to IV.
What do you think?
I didnot like the webfax as it doesnot cover wishes of many people like me. People who have approved Perm should be allowed to file I140 and I1485 under old system even if Point Based system becomes law.
engineer
What do you think?
I didnot like the webfax as it doesnot cover wishes of many people like me. People who have approved Perm should be allowed to file I140 and I1485 under old system even if Point Based system becomes law.
engineer
wallpaper eyes set to kill alexia
chanduv23
12-24 08:44 PM
This thread has to stay on top
h4visa
07-27 01:26 PM
what H1 and H4 has to do? Once you start using EAD..your current status has no impact. On EAD, you can do multiple jobs but similiar description.
-M
what about H4? I believe no job description is required...rt? I mean once H4 gets EAD. Pls reply
-M
what about H4? I believe no job description is required...rt? I mean once H4 gets EAD. Pls reply
2011 Shane+mosley+tattoo+design
stupendousman11
09-24 01:43 PM
EB2 India from NC.
Filed EAD renewal at TSC (my 485, however, is pending at NSC) on Aug 6. RD Aug 7. No LUDs since the notice was issued.
EAD CPO email on 9/23 :)
Wife's EAD (applied together) still pending. No LUDs either.
Filed EAD renewal at TSC (my 485, however, is pending at NSC) on Aug 6. RD Aug 7. No LUDs since the notice was issued.
EAD CPO email on 9/23 :)
Wife's EAD (applied together) still pending. No LUDs either.
more...
calgirl
08-07 11:46 PM
When did you contact the Senators office and how long did they take to retrieve this information for you?
Thanks.
I have filed for my EAD and 485 in july 2007. I have not got my EAD due to Name check (dont know why they cannot issue EAD bcos of name check).
Well in my case USCIS did not give me any information.
So i had to call the senator office. Their office contacted the TSC, and got the information that my case is pending Name check.
Now i know my case is pending name check, whenever i call USCIS, they submit a request to provide me an update and ask me to call after 1 month, 2 months and like that.
So i have stopped calling USCIS and directly call the Senator office.
Infopass does not show any appointment dates in Altanta region. So i am relying on the Senator office.
So may be you can try calling the Senator office and ask them to followup with your case.
Thanks.
I have filed for my EAD and 485 in july 2007. I have not got my EAD due to Name check (dont know why they cannot issue EAD bcos of name check).
Well in my case USCIS did not give me any information.
So i had to call the senator office. Their office contacted the TSC, and got the information that my case is pending Name check.
Now i know my case is pending name check, whenever i call USCIS, they submit a request to provide me an update and ask me to call after 1 month, 2 months and like that.
So i have stopped calling USCIS and directly call the Senator office.
Infopass does not show any appointment dates in Altanta region. So i am relying on the Senator office.
So may be you can try calling the Senator office and ask them to followup with your case.
UniGum
09-21 02:45 PM
let us hope and pray bec will do something to finish this ASAP.... it's too much depressing....
more...
ronhira
08-20 02:11 PM
How about an apology from an Indian Prime Minister saying he is sorry that you were born in India and are not able to get greencard.
Why should USCIS apologize to you? Did USCIS force you to apply for Greencard?
I agree with rajuram. We are all tax payers. The whole concept of democracy is taxation with representation. People who get paid from my tax dollars are answerable to me as much as they are to anyone else. Even when cis is not forcing me to file gc, its still equally answerable to me for my tax dollars to tell me why they are not doing their jobs properly. And for that cis owes us all apology. What's wrong with that?
Why should USCIS apologize to you? Did USCIS force you to apply for Greencard?
I agree with rajuram. We are all tax payers. The whole concept of democracy is taxation with representation. People who get paid from my tax dollars are answerable to me as much as they are to anyone else. Even when cis is not forcing me to file gc, its still equally answerable to me for my tax dollars to tell me why they are not doing their jobs properly. And for that cis owes us all apology. What's wrong with that?
2010 enemy tattoo - Lacey Mosley -
jambapamba
07-05 12:53 PM
I think so too. They were sh*t scared on the number of apps they were going to receive. And just when they were increasing fees and wanting to show how their performance was going to improve, it became current. It would have been a bad rap for them and fee increase would not have been justifiable.
It is mostly be cause they wanted to teach a lesson to DOS for opening the floodgates. Also, backlogs are one key performance indicator for USCIS and is reported to congress. If 100k, plus people apply right away and another 300k in next couple of months, it would look bad on their records.
It is mostly be cause they wanted to teach a lesson to DOS for opening the floodgates. Also, backlogs are one key performance indicator for USCIS and is reported to congress. If 100k, plus people apply right away and another 300k in next couple of months, it would look bad on their records.
more...
SunnySurya
08-03 08:32 PM
Looks like they (TSC) are now processing July 3rd onwards. Any July 2nd filler , filled at TSC still waiting. Also do you know if your name check was cleared.
hair Lacey Mosley
xbohdpukc
03-05 08:53 PM
Fine by me if they do offer some SLA. That's always been missing. Thats what I exactly pointed out in my comment. If they were to return my money back if they do not meet their SLA, no one will have issues. or just have PP for almost everything and give equal importance to people who either value time or money.
The truth is that the intent of the Congress was for the fees to cover USCIS business expenses. If USCIS is able to show the Congress that their expenses at the current level are not covered in full by the current fees, new fees will be justified even without improved service quality according to the law. The problem is that the public doesn't know how much of USCIS expenses are going uncovered by the current fees structure. Had they disclosed that piece of information we probably wouldn't have had this discussion in the first place.
The truth is that the intent of the Congress was for the fees to cover USCIS business expenses. If USCIS is able to show the Congress that their expenses at the current level are not covered in full by the current fees, new fees will be justified even without improved service quality according to the law. The problem is that the public doesn't know how much of USCIS expenses are going uncovered by the current fees structure. Had they disclosed that piece of information we probably wouldn't have had this discussion in the first place.
more...
TeddyKoochu
09-25 11:34 AM
I won't be surprised if they pull a quick July 07 or something on those lines to collect more money for filing and renewal of EAD/ AP
I hope this happens, looks like in the current atmosphere there is a high likelihood of it happening as well. It will be a great step forward for people who missed Jul 07, it will be an opportunity for us to have EAD / AP and have a peep at the next step!
I hope this happens, looks like in the current atmosphere there is a high likelihood of it happening as well. It will be a great step forward for people who missed Jul 07, it will be an opportunity for us to have EAD / AP and have a peep at the next step!
hot good quotes for tattoos
tonyHK12
01-11 09:28 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
more...
house lacey mosley wedding
lagsam
04-10 11:20 PM
Hi I am planning for self filing EAD. I want to do e-file, but I heard that that if you are e-filing you need to go for finger printing. At the same time I also heard that no matter whether you go for e-filing or sending application to USCIS, if your finger printing is expired than you may need to go for the finger printing. Please suggest the best way to file for the EAD(I-765 form).
Als one more thing "Which USCIS Office?" section which date I need to put there.
I sent mine on April 5th and I sent it to the filing address in Arizona because I live in Colorado. Please check the new filing address. Good luck.
Als one more thing "Which USCIS Office?" section which date I need to put there.
I sent mine on April 5th and I sent it to the filing address in Arizona because I live in Colorado. Please check the new filing address. Good luck.
tattoo lacey mosley hairstyles
bluez25
08-26 02:57 PM
Category EB2
LC PD: FEB-2006
LC AD: Mar-2006
I-140 FD: 23-May-2006
I-140 RD/ND: 25-May-2006
I-140 LUD: 29-July-2006
I-140 RFE : 15 November 2006
I-140 Responded: 14 December 2006
I-140 AD: 11 Jan 2007
DS 230 Received in April 2007
DS 230 Submitted to NVC in May 2007
NVC forwarded the case to Chennai on June 5th 2007
chennai appointment August 11th
POE August 20th
Completed and waiting for the GC card to be mailed.
LC PD: FEB-2006
LC AD: Mar-2006
I-140 FD: 23-May-2006
I-140 RD/ND: 25-May-2006
I-140 LUD: 29-July-2006
I-140 RFE : 15 November 2006
I-140 Responded: 14 December 2006
I-140 AD: 11 Jan 2007
DS 230 Received in April 2007
DS 230 Submitted to NVC in May 2007
NVC forwarded the case to Chennai on June 5th 2007
chennai appointment August 11th
POE August 20th
Completed and waiting for the GC card to be mailed.
more...
pictures Lacey
chanduv23
09-15 10:12 PM
the ones I meet in DC. The ones I currently have, who did not make it to DC in spite of being aware about it, will no longer have me as a friend.
SAME HERE - THOSE WHO HAVE STOPPED CALLING ME BECAUSE THEY ARE AFRAID I WILL ASK THEM TO THE RALLY WILL NEVER BE MY FRIENDS ANYMORE.
SAME HERE - THOSE WHO HAVE STOPPED CALLING ME BECAUSE THEY ARE AFRAID I WILL ASK THEM TO THE RALLY WILL NEVER BE MY FRIENDS ANYMORE.
dresses which lacey mosley getting
nat23
03-14 02:19 PM
hello,
My mother has 10 yr multiple entry visa. She is planning to travel from Bangalore India to USA through Lufthansa Airways. She has a stop over at Frankfurt airport for about 3 hrs. Does she need to get a transit visa for that. Any recent experience or suggestion? Thanks.
When is your mother coming over? Whats her port of entry? My wife will be coming from Bangalore on May 20th through Lufthansa.
To answer your question: You DONT need a transit visa if you have a valid US visa.
My mother has 10 yr multiple entry visa. She is planning to travel from Bangalore India to USA through Lufthansa Airways. She has a stop over at Frankfurt airport for about 3 hrs. Does she need to get a transit visa for that. Any recent experience or suggestion? Thanks.
When is your mother coming over? Whats her port of entry? My wife will be coming from Bangalore on May 20th through Lufthansa.
To answer your question: You DONT need a transit visa if you have a valid US visa.
more...
makeup happylacey mosley-strum
abhijitp
06-21 02:48 PM
Also : 140 gets rejected in following cases:
1. Degree compatability
2. Exp + degree in EB2
3. Financial ability of firm - this only with bad records
i dont see any other reason why 140 should be rejected i am not over optimistic but any one can comment on these it would great.
BigBoy, it can get an RFE bcos of insufficient evidence to support "EB-2". A rejection can also happen for trivial reasons e.g. my labor cert was first rejected for a typo (incorrect date), and we had to re-file a week later.
I spoke to my attorney/HR and they are ok to premium process my first I-140 (which is categorized incorrectly as EB-3 by the paralegal, although the covering letter for that I-140 clearly says EB-2.)
But my Successor in interest application cannot be premium processed as the original labor app was attached to the first I-140. Apparently there is a rule you can only premium process an I-140 which has the original labor cert attached.
When I asked my attorney if USCIS will return the original labor cert at the end of the first I-140 decision, she said NO, it is not returned!! Is this true? I was hoping to at least get hold of that original labor cert, so that if the I-140 is somehow rejected then I could use the original labor cert to file a new I-140 successor in interest application under premium processing.
Comments/suggestions welcome.
Thanks!
Abhijit
1. Degree compatability
2. Exp + degree in EB2
3. Financial ability of firm - this only with bad records
i dont see any other reason why 140 should be rejected i am not over optimistic but any one can comment on these it would great.
BigBoy, it can get an RFE bcos of insufficient evidence to support "EB-2". A rejection can also happen for trivial reasons e.g. my labor cert was first rejected for a typo (incorrect date), and we had to re-file a week later.
I spoke to my attorney/HR and they are ok to premium process my first I-140 (which is categorized incorrectly as EB-3 by the paralegal, although the covering letter for that I-140 clearly says EB-2.)
But my Successor in interest application cannot be premium processed as the original labor app was attached to the first I-140. Apparently there is a rule you can only premium process an I-140 which has the original labor cert attached.
When I asked my attorney if USCIS will return the original labor cert at the end of the first I-140 decision, she said NO, it is not returned!! Is this true? I was hoping to at least get hold of that original labor cert, so that if the I-140 is somehow rejected then I could use the original labor cert to file a new I-140 successor in interest application under premium processing.
Comments/suggestions welcome.
Thanks!
Abhijit
girlfriend Lacey Mosley Pictures for one#39;s friends. (John 15:13) \\♥/\\♥/\\♥/ Jesus has
forgerator
11-11 11:49 AM
Thank you for the post. It is really helpful. May I know if the new job should be >=50% different from the current job (EB3) offer? Or it doesn�t matter because of the MS requirement?
Thank you
Project_A
It should be greater than 50% different if you wish to use the previous position's experience.
Here is how it happened in my case
Company 1 - 2yrs exp
Company 2 position 1 - 3 yrs exp
Company 2 position 2 - 0.5 yrs exp (I was able to only reclaim the 2yrs exp gained at company 1 but that along with my existing MS degree was enough for filing for EB2. In company 2 both position 1 and position 2 are similar so I could not use those 3 yrs for my EB2).
Thank you
Project_A
It should be greater than 50% different if you wish to use the previous position's experience.
Here is how it happened in my case
Company 1 - 2yrs exp
Company 2 position 1 - 3 yrs exp
Company 2 position 2 - 0.5 yrs exp (I was able to only reclaim the 2yrs exp gained at company 1 but that along with my existing MS degree was enough for filing for EB2. In company 2 both position 1 and position 2 are similar so I could not use those 3 yrs for my EB2).
hairstyles Flyleaf+lacey+mosley
frostrated
08-10 08:45 AM
Friends
This is my situation
My I 140 approved, my status is F1 COS to H1 B
My wife situation, B1 (Visitor) COS to H4.
Now we r planning to change my wife status from H4 TO F1.
Can anyone with their experience suggest How complicated is my Case!!!!
Can we file COS by ourself or do you suggest to Hire an Attorney.
Pl advice
Thanks
It is very easy and do not need a lawyer.
First get admission into a school and then provide your H4 documents and a letter stating that you do not intend to reside in the US post-completion of your education and that you want to return to your country.
The school will then send your documents to the USCIS for a COS from H4 to F1.
How do I know this? Coz I went thru this.
But remember, do not file your 485 as long as your wife is in school. Coz if you go on to an EAD status, it will be very difficult to convert your F1 spouse to EAD. Since you are EB3 wait until your wife completes her education, and either gets a H1 or H4 prior to submitting 485.
This is my situation
My I 140 approved, my status is F1 COS to H1 B
My wife situation, B1 (Visitor) COS to H4.
Now we r planning to change my wife status from H4 TO F1.
Can anyone with their experience suggest How complicated is my Case!!!!
Can we file COS by ourself or do you suggest to Hire an Attorney.
Pl advice
Thanks
It is very easy and do not need a lawyer.
First get admission into a school and then provide your H4 documents and a letter stating that you do not intend to reside in the US post-completion of your education and that you want to return to your country.
The school will then send your documents to the USCIS for a COS from H4 to F1.
How do I know this? Coz I went thru this.
But remember, do not file your 485 as long as your wife is in school. Coz if you go on to an EAD status, it will be very difficult to convert your F1 spouse to EAD. Since you are EB3 wait until your wife completes her education, and either gets a H1 or H4 prior to submitting 485.
aadimanav
10-26 01:43 AM
It looks like the posts under the IV Home Page Rcent Forum Posts Section no longer show up in descending order of last-update date. Is this intentional?
dhiru
08-19 12:45 PM
Good new... I went to the INFOPASS Washington Filed Office yesterday (walk-in) and told them that my EAD was expiring the same day and will loose my job if I dont get the EAD in next 5 days. The officer was very helpful and emailed the adjudicator to expedite the process. I received an update this morning saying that my EAD has been approved and the card is in production. Hopefully, I will get the EAD by next week and keep my job. Surprisingly the officer called me this morning to inform the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment