srikondoji
07-02 03:04 PM
follow your lawyer's advice.
You can still be part of plaitiff, if you can show the proof of your expenses and proove that you had a material loss because of USCIS/DOS goof up.
--sri
Today morning when I was just adding the notarised birth affidavit that I had recievd last night from India and was leaving to fedex the papers to Nebraska, my lawyer called up and informed of the update and asked me not to send the app. Now after reading all the posts here, could someone advice if I should send the app- I mean if there is some re-thinking by USCIS, would they might say show us the sent reciept etc ???
Pls advice,
Thanks,
You can still be part of plaitiff, if you can show the proof of your expenses and proove that you had a material loss because of USCIS/DOS goof up.
--sri
Today morning when I was just adding the notarised birth affidavit that I had recievd last night from India and was leaving to fedex the papers to Nebraska, my lawyer called up and informed of the update and asked me not to send the app. Now after reading all the posts here, could someone advice if I should send the app- I mean if there is some re-thinking by USCIS, would they might say show us the sent reciept etc ???
Pls advice,
Thanks,
wallpaper Sniper Rifles!
lostinbeta
10-21 06:11 PM
Ummm, A big circle with some poofiness added....lol.
Voila... a dog bed.
Voila... a dog bed.
kirupa
01-22 01:35 AM
Ok, proper previews have been added thanks to krilnon! Click on the bolded View Entry link next to each entry to see it.
2011 Call of Duty: Black Ops
kshitijnt
04-18 06:55 PM
Today my wifes attorney informed her that her H1 was selected, non masters, non premium process. He also provided her a WAC number
more...
deecha
08-06 11:15 AM
My i-140 premium processing application was filed on the 22nd of June,2007 as indicated in the information below. The package & check were returned in the first week of July. A letter indicating the reason for remittance and return was that the labor cert. attached was a photocopy and not the original.
Now what does not make sense here is that the original labor was sent along with the original i140 application filed last year(in june 2006).
I called the USCIS info line and the rep. suggested that i could resend it with an explanation.
What concerns me is if i do resend it, would it be considered only after suspension of i140 premium is lifted or would it be considered as a case from last month and processed under premium.
I think you should resend the packet in with proof of prior mailing.
Now what does not make sense here is that the original labor was sent along with the original i140 application filed last year(in june 2006).
I called the USCIS info line and the rep. suggested that i could resend it with an explanation.
What concerns me is if i do resend it, would it be considered only after suspension of i140 premium is lifted or would it be considered as a case from last month and processed under premium.
I think you should resend the packet in with proof of prior mailing.
irrational
04-04 02:34 PM
Our company went with a cheapo attorney.
But, from the lessons I learnt over time, WE have to be monitoring all these even if there is an attorney, since ultimately its our life which will be miserable. :o
But, from the lessons I learnt over time, WE have to be monitoring all these even if there is an attorney, since ultimately its our life which will be miserable. :o
more...
tikka
05-29 09:08 PM
Donot forget to send the webfax :)
thanks
2750 web faxes have been sent! we are trying to get to 3,000.:)
thanks
2750 web faxes have been sent! we are trying to get to 3,000.:)
2010 Weapons List
krishna_brc
05-05 08:54 AM
Yes, we don't need original I-485 receipt notice to travel.
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
more...
vikramy
11-19 07:39 PM
^^^^
hair call of duty black ops guns
doubleyou
05-18 01:22 PM
Congressional Reply says that the applicant is pending completion of background check. Previous congressional reply was that the name check is completed.
AILA is not getting any response from USCIS as per the lawyer.
How to check on the status of background check.
AILA is not getting any response from USCIS as per the lawyer.
How to check on the status of background check.
more...
sunny1000
06-26 09:56 PM
Thanx once again Ms. Sen for you so valuable response. Is there anyways, you could tell me the email address. It will be then easy for me to talk to him when I have all the information. Another question, has the email to be sent out only by the lawyer, or the company can directly do that?
Thanx once again...
It is:
streamline.tsc@dhs.gov
There is a specific format to send this email. Here is the link to the PDF:
http://www.laborimmigration.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/tsc-streamline-procedure.pdf
Here is the original post:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/visa-bulletin-status-tracker-processing-times/22849-tsc-streamline-processing.html
Thanx once again...
It is:
streamline.tsc@dhs.gov
There is a specific format to send this email. Here is the link to the PDF:
http://www.laborimmigration.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/tsc-streamline-procedure.pdf
Here is the original post:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/visa-bulletin-status-tracker-processing-times/22849-tsc-streamline-processing.html
hot Call of Duty: Black Ops
gccovet
02-11 03:20 PM
Hi Folks,
What is the fastest and perhaps a little economic way to get documents over to chennai (Tamil Nadu) or Calicut (Kerala) from here in San Jose, ca.
USPS has this service called Express Mail ($27.95) or Priority Mail ($12.95)
I guess USPS is claiming 6-10 days (guess no gurantee) to india.
Other couriers seems to be $70+ (FedEx, UPS, DHL)..
Anyone has had good luck with USPS ? or do you suggest the couriers mentioned above ?
Need to get docs for an interview for parents on Feb 26th in Chennai...
Thanks in Advance for your reply !!
concatct bombino@ NY, their boys fly to India daily basis.
GCCOvet,
What is the fastest and perhaps a little economic way to get documents over to chennai (Tamil Nadu) or Calicut (Kerala) from here in San Jose, ca.
USPS has this service called Express Mail ($27.95) or Priority Mail ($12.95)
I guess USPS is claiming 6-10 days (guess no gurantee) to india.
Other couriers seems to be $70+ (FedEx, UPS, DHL)..
Anyone has had good luck with USPS ? or do you suggest the couriers mentioned above ?
Need to get docs for an interview for parents on Feb 26th in Chennai...
Thanks in Advance for your reply !!
concatct bombino@ NY, their boys fly to India daily basis.
GCCOvet,
more...
house reintroducing golden guns?
roseball
10-16 05:05 PM
Hi,
My green card petition was applied under "Computer and Information Systems Manager" job title. Recently, I get a full-time job offer from another employer with a much lesser salary but, considering the current job market and economy, I've no other option but to accept it. There's one little kink in this new situation: the title for the job I've applied for labor does not match with the one I'm offered (Software Engineer)
These are my questions:
1. Do I really need to apply AC21 now?
2. If I apply AC21 with Software Engineer title what could be the consequence
3. What if I try to get a letter from my new employer with job title as Computer and Information Systems Manager or some similar title. Do you think it'll work?
If anyone has better idea, please advise me. I'd really appreciate all your help.
Thank you very much...
Your new job duties and job code should be the same/similar to the one on your LC. You should pay more attention towards job duties and job code for AC21. Matching job titles are good to have, but not a must for AC21.
My green card petition was applied under "Computer and Information Systems Manager" job title. Recently, I get a full-time job offer from another employer with a much lesser salary but, considering the current job market and economy, I've no other option but to accept it. There's one little kink in this new situation: the title for the job I've applied for labor does not match with the one I'm offered (Software Engineer)
These are my questions:
1. Do I really need to apply AC21 now?
2. If I apply AC21 with Software Engineer title what could be the consequence
3. What if I try to get a letter from my new employer with job title as Computer and Information Systems Manager or some similar title. Do you think it'll work?
If anyone has better idea, please advise me. I'd really appreciate all your help.
Thank you very much...
Your new job duties and job code should be the same/similar to the one on your LC. You should pay more attention towards job duties and job code for AC21. Matching job titles are good to have, but not a must for AC21.
tattoo Call of Duty: Black Ops is
veni001
06-04 10:18 AM
This is the text that i see on Govtrack.us
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-1348
Are we missing some thing here, I see SKILL is part of this draft!!:confused:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-1348
Are we missing some thing here, I see SKILL is part of this draft!!:confused:
more...
pictures Call of Duty: Black Ops
GCMD0203
09-17 01:18 PM
Gurus please help
Hi,
I'm in the same boat as you (I140/I485/I131/I765 - filed concurrently). I'm trying to self file for my H1 extension. I was not sure about one question on form I-129 part 4.7 the question is
Have you ever filed an immigrant petition for any person in this petition?
Last year when I filed for H1 extension I had checked 'NO'
But now that I-140 is pending, I'm not sure if I should check 'YES' or 'NO'
I will appreciate if you can help me with this.
Thanks,
Hi,
I'm in the same boat as you (I140/I485/I131/I765 - filed concurrently). I'm trying to self file for my H1 extension. I was not sure about one question on form I-129 part 4.7 the question is
Have you ever filed an immigrant petition for any person in this petition?
Last year when I filed for H1 extension I had checked 'NO'
But now that I-140 is pending, I'm not sure if I should check 'YES' or 'NO'
I will appreciate if you can help me with this.
Thanks,
dresses Call of Duty: Black Ops
tnite
10-31 10:26 AM
4 months from now, there will be another rush for applications for EADs and people will be spending money for it. Everyone will be back on the forums talking about notices and late processing for these applications. Lot of people will have heartburns and their jobs can be in trouble if their EADs do not arrive on time.
We do not seem to look at the bleak picture ahead in future and are worrying about EADS, AP and notices now. The real problem is retrogression and not if TSC is slower than NSC or vice versa or receipt notices. (You will be surprised that people write to us telling us to focus lobbying efforts on making TSC faster than NSC since that is a big problem faced by millions of people)
The end result of this constant renewals of EAD and AP is heartache, frustration and loss of money for us. We ultimately lose if we do not wake up now and do something.
Unless this community is ready to raise its voice, nothing WILL be done for us in the near future.
You're right pappu, most folks only care about a short term solution to this problem. Even without this mess folks who had applied for EAD or AP sometimes got their documents late and they ended up taking unpaid leave from work to make sure they are not working illegally.
With so many apps in the pipeline, I just cant imagine the delays.Not that I am pessimistic but trying to be prepared for the worst.
And add to that the financial burden of applying ever year (approx $700) for applicant and derivative.That's something you could have saved, spent on your family instead ended up renewing the EAD/AP.
Just my 2 cents
We do not seem to look at the bleak picture ahead in future and are worrying about EADS, AP and notices now. The real problem is retrogression and not if TSC is slower than NSC or vice versa or receipt notices. (You will be surprised that people write to us telling us to focus lobbying efforts on making TSC faster than NSC since that is a big problem faced by millions of people)
The end result of this constant renewals of EAD and AP is heartache, frustration and loss of money for us. We ultimately lose if we do not wake up now and do something.
Unless this community is ready to raise its voice, nothing WILL be done for us in the near future.
You're right pappu, most folks only care about a short term solution to this problem. Even without this mess folks who had applied for EAD or AP sometimes got their documents late and they ended up taking unpaid leave from work to make sure they are not working illegally.
With so many apps in the pipeline, I just cant imagine the delays.Not that I am pessimistic but trying to be prepared for the worst.
And add to that the financial burden of applying ever year (approx $700) for applicant and derivative.That's something you could have saved, spent on your family instead ended up renewing the EAD/AP.
Just my 2 cents
more...
makeup COD: Black Ops Guide – For
navyug
04-02 12:09 AM
Company A has variety of legal problems with USCIS..not paying for people on bench and due to that my H1-B extension got affected and denied..it is a long list of 12 page denial..already filed ac21 with the other company..
You are fine as long as your I-140 with Company A is approved. Forget about the H-1B as the denial happened after you applied for adjustment of status. Also advise you not to reply to the 140 query regarding the substitution labor. Allow it to get denied. Yes your priority date will be Nov 2006 but atleast you are sure that you will get your GC eventually (provided you have maintained proper status from now until then). Use your AC21 to a stable company and live peacefully. Just remember to draw more than the promised wages on the labor of Company A until you get your GC.
You are fine as long as your I-140 with Company A is approved. Forget about the H-1B as the denial happened after you applied for adjustment of status. Also advise you not to reply to the 140 query regarding the substitution labor. Allow it to get denied. Yes your priority date will be Nov 2006 but atleast you are sure that you will get your GC eventually (provided you have maintained proper status from now until then). Use your AC21 to a stable company and live peacefully. Just remember to draw more than the promised wages on the labor of Company A until you get your GC.
girlfriend Call of Duty: Black Ops.
waitingnwaiting
01-21 08:00 AM
I had an appointment at Mumbai Consulate on Jan 5th , 7th year ext. Since my I 797 approval date and stamping date was too short ( 1-2 weeks ) USCIS or DOS failed to update info in PIMS on time. I got yellow slip after few basic questions and told to wait for 2-3 biz days. I informed my lawyer in USA and he made contact to DOS there and ask them to update record. Also I had renewed my Indian passport since I applied for I 797 so they had old pp no in record. Lady from DOS promised to work on my case but didn't give any definite time limit.
but I got reply from Consulate on 4th biz day. Submitted passport via local VFS office and with in 3 days got it back. I think if you contact DOS it would take less time , otherwise 2-3 weeks is normal and 4 weeks or longer is for some rare cases. As long as your history is clean nothing to worry even it takes 3-4 weeks.
Whom did the lawyer contact in DOS. Did he tell you? It will help if we know.
but I got reply from Consulate on 4th biz day. Submitted passport via local VFS office and with in 3 days got it back. I think if you contact DOS it would take less time , otherwise 2-3 weeks is normal and 4 weeks or longer is for some rare cases. As long as your history is clean nothing to worry even it takes 3-4 weeks.
Whom did the lawyer contact in DOS. Did he tell you? It will help if we know.
hairstyles on COD Black Ops weapons,
tdasara
02-11 07:14 PM
I was in the same situation.
My I-94 validity was till the end of my visa which was beyond my passport expiry.
My I-94 validity was till the end of my visa which was beyond my passport expiry.
cox
August 8th, 2005, 03:19 PM
That's awesome! What made you think of doing that?
Thanks, I was really happy it worked. I wanted to shoot the tide pool waves, and get this effect without having to wait for a "perfect" morning (you can accomplish the same thing just before dawn or after sunset). I am trained as a physicist, and crossed polarizers are a common method of managing light in physics experiments, so I decided to try that here. This technique allows for pretty much any exposure time, and I wanted like 20s to get several waves. A couple of words of caution if any of you want to try it too (and you are welcome to do so).
You can't use circular polarizers like most of us have for our autofocus DSLRs. Stacked C-polarizers don't black out, because they are both filtering the same light. You must buy linear polarizers. The good news is that they are cheap by comparison (<$50 ea).
Autofocus won't work worth a damn.
Adding two polarizers to the lens multiplies the internal reflections (I had problems with this, 3 or more reflections of the sun)
It vignettes at super-wide focal length on my zoom. I would always expect vignetting with a prime lens.
With two polarizers you get weird rainbow effects from diffraction, and the whole scene tends to the purple/UV. I suspect a lot of these pictures will look great in B&W.
There is a lot of potential here I think, and thanks all for the great ideas/suggestions on what else I can try. :)
Thanks, I was really happy it worked. I wanted to shoot the tide pool waves, and get this effect without having to wait for a "perfect" morning (you can accomplish the same thing just before dawn or after sunset). I am trained as a physicist, and crossed polarizers are a common method of managing light in physics experiments, so I decided to try that here. This technique allows for pretty much any exposure time, and I wanted like 20s to get several waves. A couple of words of caution if any of you want to try it too (and you are welcome to do so).
You can't use circular polarizers like most of us have for our autofocus DSLRs. Stacked C-polarizers don't black out, because they are both filtering the same light. You must buy linear polarizers. The good news is that they are cheap by comparison (<$50 ea).
Autofocus won't work worth a damn.
Adding two polarizers to the lens multiplies the internal reflections (I had problems with this, 3 or more reflections of the sun)
It vignettes at super-wide focal length on my zoom. I would always expect vignetting with a prime lens.
With two polarizers you get weird rainbow effects from diffraction, and the whole scene tends to the purple/UV. I suspect a lot of these pictures will look great in B&W.
There is a lot of potential here I think, and thanks all for the great ideas/suggestions on what else I can try. :)
gemini23
07-02 07:46 PM
Srikondoji,
the reference to mexicans here is defnintely uncalled for and has racist odor. You could have used "illegal immegrant" as they can be from any country in the world. I would expect a little maturity and humbleness from a senior member. my word of advice..dont be frustrated...this gc game needs lot more patience.
please apoligize and donate something to IV.
the reference to mexicans here is defnintely uncalled for and has racist odor. You could have used "illegal immegrant" as they can be from any country in the world. I would expect a little maturity and humbleness from a senior member. my word of advice..dont be frustrated...this gc game needs lot more patience.
please apoligize and donate something to IV.
