setpit_gc
06-03 01:56 PM
TSC received my RFE response on 05/27/2009.
I got 1st LUD on 05/31/2009 with message change.
I got 2 soft lud on 06/02/2009 and 06/03/2009.
I got 1st LUD on 05/31/2009 with message change.
I got 2 soft lud on 06/02/2009 and 06/03/2009.
wallpaper hot Crazy Gothic Hairstyles goth makeup for men. how to gothic makeup.
drirshad
07-01 06:20 PM
For all the nights of no sleep and days of uncertainty. Ready to go to the end of the tunnel this time .....
mnkaushik
10-14 12:19 PM
It does not matter once you get your green card. Those restrictions are till you get the green card. For now, she has no restrictions. But as the person earlier pointed out if she applies for your gc, it will take 5 years if she is just green card holder but it will only take 6 months to a year, if she is a citizen.
Now, if you both decide to live outside of US, then you need to look into what are the residency requirements for her to keep her green card status. If that is of interest to you.
Now, if you both decide to live outside of US, then you need to look into what are the residency requirements for her to keep her green card status. If that is of interest to you.
2011 goth makeup for men. goth makeup styles. goth
funny
09-22 04:04 PM
Keep that cell phone handy and take 20 mins from your time today..
more...
lazycis
02-14 04:48 PM
Violation of regulations is also affirmative misconduct.
Here is an extract from my brief
8 CFR � 103.2(b)(18), titled �Withholding adjudication�:
�A district director may authorize withholding adjudication of a visa petition or other application if the district director determines that an investigation has been undertaken involving a matter relating to eligibility or the exercise of discretion, where applicable, in connection with the application or petition, and that the disclosure of information to the applicant or petitioner in connection with the adjudication of the application or petition would prejudice the ongoing investigation.
If an investigation has been undertaken and has not been completed within one year of its inception, the district director shall review the matter and determine whether adjudication of the petition or application should be held in abeyance for six months or until the investigation is completed, whichever comes sooner. If, after six months of the district director�s determination, the investigation has not been completed, the matter shall be reviewed again by the district director and, if he/she concludes that more time is needed to complete the investigation, adjudication may be held in abeyance for up to another six months. If the investigation is not completed at the end of that time, the matter shall be referred to the regional commissioner, who may authorize that adjudication be held in abeyance for another six months. Thereafter, if the Associate Commissioner, Examinations, with the concurrence of the Associate Commissioner, Enforcement, determines it is necessary to continue to withhold adjudication pending completion of the investigation, he/she shall review that determination every six months.�
The legal alien�s application has been pending for over 2.5 years at the time of filing his complaint with the District Court. So, according to the requirements of 8 CFR � 103.2(b)(18), his application should have been reviewed twice by the USCIS district director (at 1 and 1.5 year marks), once by the USCIS regional commissioner (at 2 year mark) and once by the Associate Commissioner, Examinations, with the concurrence of the Associate Commissioner, Enforcement. There is no evidence on record that these procedures have been followed. Therefore, the USCIS have violated the Federal regulations and �unlawfully withheld� adjudication of the legal alien�s application. Furthermore, 8 CFR � 103.2(b)(18) is not part of the Subchapter II of the Chapter 12 of the INA, therefore jurisdictional bar of � 242(a)(2)(B)(ii) does not preclude review of the withholding of adjudication.
Here is an extract from my brief
8 CFR � 103.2(b)(18), titled �Withholding adjudication�:
�A district director may authorize withholding adjudication of a visa petition or other application if the district director determines that an investigation has been undertaken involving a matter relating to eligibility or the exercise of discretion, where applicable, in connection with the application or petition, and that the disclosure of information to the applicant or petitioner in connection with the adjudication of the application or petition would prejudice the ongoing investigation.
If an investigation has been undertaken and has not been completed within one year of its inception, the district director shall review the matter and determine whether adjudication of the petition or application should be held in abeyance for six months or until the investigation is completed, whichever comes sooner. If, after six months of the district director�s determination, the investigation has not been completed, the matter shall be reviewed again by the district director and, if he/she concludes that more time is needed to complete the investigation, adjudication may be held in abeyance for up to another six months. If the investigation is not completed at the end of that time, the matter shall be referred to the regional commissioner, who may authorize that adjudication be held in abeyance for another six months. Thereafter, if the Associate Commissioner, Examinations, with the concurrence of the Associate Commissioner, Enforcement, determines it is necessary to continue to withhold adjudication pending completion of the investigation, he/she shall review that determination every six months.�
The legal alien�s application has been pending for over 2.5 years at the time of filing his complaint with the District Court. So, according to the requirements of 8 CFR � 103.2(b)(18), his application should have been reviewed twice by the USCIS district director (at 1 and 1.5 year marks), once by the USCIS regional commissioner (at 2 year mark) and once by the Associate Commissioner, Examinations, with the concurrence of the Associate Commissioner, Enforcement. There is no evidence on record that these procedures have been followed. Therefore, the USCIS have violated the Federal regulations and �unlawfully withheld� adjudication of the legal alien�s application. Furthermore, 8 CFR � 103.2(b)(18) is not part of the Subchapter II of the Chapter 12 of the INA, therefore jurisdictional bar of � 242(a)(2)(B)(ii) does not preclude review of the withholding of adjudication.
jetr
08-27 12:25 PM
Can you please Post the Dates of when you applied for I-140 & when you were APPROVED.
Thx
140 Applied - 10/18/2007
140 Approved - 08/02/2008
H1 6 yr expiry - 03/23/2009
Thx
140 Applied - 10/18/2007
140 Approved - 08/02/2008
H1 6 yr expiry - 03/23/2009
more...
bindas74
02-05 12:33 PM
As per my understanding, since you filed for 485 before August 17, 2007 you have to pay renewal fees for EAD/AP. ONLY if you have filed for 485 after August 17 2007 you don't have to pay renewal fees for EAD/AP.
What matters here is when you filed your 485. It does not matter when you applied for EAD/AP as these are based on your 485.
Hi Prasadn,
Thanks for the reply. That sucks if I have to pay again::((
I read somewhere that if we apply with the latest fees, we dont have to pay again.
Can any one else please confirm?
Regards
What matters here is when you filed your 485. It does not matter when you applied for EAD/AP as these are based on your 485.
Hi Prasadn,
Thanks for the reply. That sucks if I have to pay again::((
I read somewhere that if we apply with the latest fees, we dont have to pay again.
Can any one else please confirm?
Regards
2010 makeup goth makeup men. goth
malibuguy007
03-17 01:18 PM
I took out a mortgage with BOA while on EAD. Initially they said they don't recognize EAD but after talking to a supervisor they proceeded with approving the loan. So I do not see any issues.
more...
ups
03-27 02:42 PM
Could you please link the relevant information.It would be nice to know about it.
thx
http://murthy.com/news/UDh1iii.html
If you go outside of US for more than one year than only you will be count against quota.If you were on H1 and stopped working for more than one year and still in US than also you are not counted in quota.
thx
http://murthy.com/news/UDh1iii.html
If you go outside of US for more than one year than only you will be count against quota.If you were on H1 and stopped working for more than one year and still in US than also you are not counted in quota.
hair Gothic Makeup Pictures
waiting4gc
07-18 03:06 PM
As long as you file I 140 as soon as your labor is approved. Spouse has nothing to do with application till it hits the 485 stage so you can file your 485 later.
Make sure you file your 140 in the regular channels and it should take some time to get approved.
Even if you decide to change jobs, after 140 is approved, the priority date is yours. So if you have a copy of the approved I 140 when you change jobs, you have to start the process all over again but by submitting the approved I 140 from previous company, you can maintain the priority date.
Hello guys,
First of all thank you very much for your answers in advance.
I am currently on H1-B (valid till 2010) and recently applied for PERM LC. I work for a non-profit organization and the category is EB-2. Nationality: Turkey.
I was planning to go for my GC but my plans have recently changed. I am planning to get married in 2009 Summer (earlier is not possible). I have done my research and found out that if I receive my GC before I get married, it will be very difficult to get my spouse here.
I am expecting to get the LC in about 4 months. Then, most probably I can file I-140 and I-485 concurrently as the visa numbers will be available for my case. However, I am not planning to do it anymore due to the reasons mentioned above.
So, here are my questions:
Now, the new rule tells that LC certification must be used within 180 days. So, can I just file I-140 while single and even though my visa numbers are current for I-485 (Can I seperate I-140 and I-485 and save I-1485 for after marriage - Summer 2009). Does it matter for the purposes of I-140, if I am single - and then add my spouse to I-485 in the US (She will be on H-4 with me here)?
I am not planning to change my job. So, would my I-140 have an expiration date?
Do you have any other suggestions? Thank you!
Make sure you file your 140 in the regular channels and it should take some time to get approved.
Even if you decide to change jobs, after 140 is approved, the priority date is yours. So if you have a copy of the approved I 140 when you change jobs, you have to start the process all over again but by submitting the approved I 140 from previous company, you can maintain the priority date.
Hello guys,
First of all thank you very much for your answers in advance.
I am currently on H1-B (valid till 2010) and recently applied for PERM LC. I work for a non-profit organization and the category is EB-2. Nationality: Turkey.
I was planning to go for my GC but my plans have recently changed. I am planning to get married in 2009 Summer (earlier is not possible). I have done my research and found out that if I receive my GC before I get married, it will be very difficult to get my spouse here.
I am expecting to get the LC in about 4 months. Then, most probably I can file I-140 and I-485 concurrently as the visa numbers will be available for my case. However, I am not planning to do it anymore due to the reasons mentioned above.
So, here are my questions:
Now, the new rule tells that LC certification must be used within 180 days. So, can I just file I-140 while single and even though my visa numbers are current for I-485 (Can I seperate I-140 and I-485 and save I-1485 for after marriage - Summer 2009). Does it matter for the purposes of I-140, if I am single - and then add my spouse to I-485 in the US (She will be on H-4 with me here)?
I am not planning to change my job. So, would my I-140 have an expiration date?
Do you have any other suggestions? Thank you!
more...
bsbawa10
08-14 11:11 PM
dude, there's gibberish in the sheet.............is this the right link?
Some people are not acting responsibly on the data. I made changes now. I brought the data back and also you will have to login into your gmail account now tobe able to make changes.
My humble request to all please act responsibly.
Do not edit somebody elses data.
Do not add/delete/modify any column.
Do not sort the data. If you really feel the urge, import it to your local computer and then sort it.
I will sort the data according to PD periodically.
You can add your own row at the end . Also please please do not sort the data.
Some people are not acting responsibly on the data. I made changes now. I brought the data back and also you will have to login into your gmail account now tobe able to make changes.
My humble request to all please act responsibly.
Do not edit somebody elses data.
Do not add/delete/modify any column.
Do not sort the data. If you really feel the urge, import it to your local computer and then sort it.
I will sort the data according to PD periodically.
You can add your own row at the end . Also please please do not sort the data.
hot how to gothic makeup. new goth
newuser
03-13 01:57 PM
FBI Arrests DC Official (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/03/fbi-arrests-dc.html)
Why do you have to open a thread that has no relevance to what we discuss here on IV. Please don't try to sensationalize everything. There were references to this news in other threads already.
Admin - Please delete this thread as this was discussed in other threads.
Why do you have to open a thread that has no relevance to what we discuss here on IV. Please don't try to sensationalize everything. There were references to this news in other threads already.
Admin - Please delete this thread as this was discussed in other threads.
more...
house goth makeup for men.
learning01
02-25 05:03 PM
This is the most compelling piece I read about why this country should do more for scientists and engineers who are on temporary work visas. Read it till the end and enjoy.
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
tattoo goth makeup for men. Gothic Makeup Tips; Gothic Makeup Tips. pvhemanth
bpratap
02-03 11:05 PM
Juz curious if there is an option to get a Visitor visa without attesting the interview at consulate.
some Travel agents have told My brother in law that they can arrange for Visitor visa without going to consulate. To my knowledge its not possible. one have to attend an Interview at the consulate and do finger prints to get a visa.
Anybody have any similar experience / information ?
some Travel agents have told My brother in law that they can arrange for Visitor visa without going to consulate. To my knowledge its not possible. one have to attend an Interview at the consulate and do finger prints to get a visa.
Anybody have any similar experience / information ?
more...
pictures wallpaper goth makeup styles. goth makeup for men.
watertown
03-11 11:50 AM
Guys, I've aske this in another board but does anyone know any good attorney in Boston area who can handle WOM/ AC21 like stuff?
My company lawyer doesn't even bother to reply my e-mail!!!! Thats Todd and Weld
My company lawyer doesn't even bother to reply my e-mail!!!! Thats Todd and Weld
dresses wallpaper goth makeup for men.
GCwaitforever
06-20 03:35 PM
My mistake. Gsc999 has to refile with new employer and port old portability.
more...
makeup Goth Makeup
Humhongekamyab
06-06 02:58 PM
Are there any specific links for complaining to these agencies?
See the 4th message in the thread.
See the 4th message in the thread.
girlfriend Fall-Winter 2009 Goth Makeup
Aura M.
01-15 04:29 PM
I am in the same boat. They are taking way too long to process H1-B extensions.
Guys please advised how is the process for the extension...
I need to do mine.... Please I know my company will need to do, I just need the steps. I'm not willing to pay a lawyer for this also...
Tks for any info.....
Guys please advised how is the process for the extension...
I need to do mine.... Please I know my company will need to do, I just need the steps. I'm not willing to pay a lawyer for this also...
Tks for any info.....
hairstyles a fondness for goth makeup
PDOCT05
10-30 04:40 PM
Update to my case. Submitted Originally on July 2nd for I-140/I-1485. USCIS Sent back everything on Aug�28 stating Original Labor missing. Attorney sent back the case on Sep 11th with a cover letter that the labor could be requested by USCIS to DOL. The copy of ETA9089 & certified online copy was attached with the original case. I was hoping that they will accept the case this time as I have seen similar cases where they accept the case and issue RFE at a later date. Attorney also mentioned that he got receipts for similar cases like this.
Today- USCIS returned back the application (both I-140 & I-1485) with the letter saying that the dates are not current even though the date stamped was July 2nd on the case. I talked to attorney and he is planning to send the case back to them giving examples on the similar cases and putting a strong cover letter. The final plan of action still needs to be finalized. Looks like I am the unlucky one presently from the batch of 400 K applications. I don�t know how to express my pain, agony frustration I have gone through the last 4 months. I don�t have words to express myself but just feel so terribly sad and disappointed from this whole process I have been going through... I am also planning to contact the local senators /congressman and sought their help & attention.
I am very sorry to see this happened to you. Please talk to your lawyer and ask him to handle it good. Contacting local senators/Congressman will help you..good luck.
Today- USCIS returned back the application (both I-140 & I-1485) with the letter saying that the dates are not current even though the date stamped was July 2nd on the case. I talked to attorney and he is planning to send the case back to them giving examples on the similar cases and putting a strong cover letter. The final plan of action still needs to be finalized. Looks like I am the unlucky one presently from the batch of 400 K applications. I don�t know how to express my pain, agony frustration I have gone through the last 4 months. I don�t have words to express myself but just feel so terribly sad and disappointed from this whole process I have been going through... I am also planning to contact the local senators /congressman and sought their help & attention.
I am very sorry to see this happened to you. Please talk to your lawyer and ask him to handle it good. Contacting local senators/Congressman will help you..good luck.
sweet_jungle
12-29 05:10 PM
Like all July 2 filers, I will now become eligible for AC-21.
My I-140 has been approved long back.
However, I do not have a copy of approved I-140.
If i Change, I will change using H1 and not EAD.
In the new company, will I be able to get a 3 year extension with ONLY I-485 receipt?
I am retrogressed and so technically should be able to get 3 year ext.But, the only way to prove it is through I-140 approval copy which I do not have.
If anybody has changed using H1 transfer and only I-485 receipt, please let me know whether you got 1 year extension or 3 year extension.
My I-140 has been approved long back.
However, I do not have a copy of approved I-140.
If i Change, I will change using H1 and not EAD.
In the new company, will I be able to get a 3 year extension with ONLY I-485 receipt?
I am retrogressed and so technically should be able to get 3 year ext.But, the only way to prove it is through I-140 approval copy which I do not have.
If anybody has changed using H1 transfer and only I-485 receipt, please let me know whether you got 1 year extension or 3 year extension.
iv_newbie_2007
09-17 11:28 AM
Many people here believe that if a person on H4 has an approved H-1B w/ COS from Oct 1, and that person does not really work starting from Oct 1, then he/she falls out-of-status. In our case, my wife is on H4 currently and I am on H-1B, and both of us have AOS/EAD pending.
Now, if she works for 1 month and decides to take a break, and stay home on EAD, is she still out-of-status?
I must be missing something here; because I was under the impression that if a person (derivative, and not primary applicant) has EAD, then it does not matter if he/she works or not. Then how is it that the person can fall out-of-status he/she does not go to work from Oct 1 even though H-1B w/ COS is approved?
Now, if she works for 1 month and decides to take a break, and stay home on EAD, is she still out-of-status?
I must be missing something here; because I was under the impression that if a person (derivative, and not primary applicant) has EAD, then it does not matter if he/she works or not. Then how is it that the person can fall out-of-status he/she does not go to work from Oct 1 even though H-1B w/ COS is approved?
No comments:
Post a Comment