rb_248
10-19 04:27 PM
Did you have to change your address while you switched jo?. And if you had changed address, did you inform USCIS. I am trying to find out if address chnge is what triggers RFE for job switch. Also were you on H1B or using EAD with previous employer.
I moved out of state. I owned a home and it took a while to sell. So I stayed at a temporary facility. So effectively I retained the same address. But, we got the cards just before we sold the house. So the answer to your question is No I did not inform USCIS. But, I had a justification not to inform the USCIS.
I moved out of state. I owned a home and it took a while to sell. So I stayed at a temporary facility. So effectively I retained the same address. But, we got the cards just before we sold the house. So the answer to your question is No I did not inform USCIS. But, I had a justification not to inform the USCIS.
wallpaper house The #39;Jersey Shore#39;
singhsa3
08-19 12:48 PM
Yep, just passed level III , today. Now will start applying for the charter.
good to find a fellow CFA candidate/member here... are you done with the exams?
good to find a fellow CFA candidate/member here... are you done with the exams?
GEEVER
January 31st, 2008, 12:42 AM
One piece of advice might be to go for something much less expensive first, to see if you actually like digital photography - the second hand prices are pretty abysmal for these things, so unless you think you are a really good salesman when it comes to selling your old stuff on E-bay or such, it would be less of a risk to you to get either a used P&S or a new, less expensive model.
There are many things that make a difference between a DSLR and a "Advanced P&S" (Pro-sumer P&S or whatever you like to call the category that the Sony ends up in). But in the end, there's only a few of those that actually show in the photos:
1. noise levels - the smaller sensor on the P&S (about half the size compared to the DSLR) means more noise in the picture, especially at high ISO [when you take pictures in rather dark circumstancs].
2. The flexibility in focal length - the P&S has a fixed optical system, you can't really change it [yes, you can buy extra lenses to screw on the front and such, but it's really not that great]. This shows up, usually, more at the wide-angle end than on the telephoto end. The Sony here has a 31-465mm equivalent lens. That's pretty good, but 31mm is on the "narrow end of wide-angle", and you don't really have much choice to fix that. 465mm is plenty for most people.
It's your money, so you spend it as you like :)
--
Mats
so u're suggesting to buy an old one and see what happens?? that's not a bad idea...although i do know i love photography ,...otherwise i wouldnt have taken those classes
There are many things that make a difference between a DSLR and a "Advanced P&S" (Pro-sumer P&S or whatever you like to call the category that the Sony ends up in). But in the end, there's only a few of those that actually show in the photos:
1. noise levels - the smaller sensor on the P&S (about half the size compared to the DSLR) means more noise in the picture, especially at high ISO [when you take pictures in rather dark circumstancs].
2. The flexibility in focal length - the P&S has a fixed optical system, you can't really change it [yes, you can buy extra lenses to screw on the front and such, but it's really not that great]. This shows up, usually, more at the wide-angle end than on the telephoto end. The Sony here has a 31-465mm equivalent lens. That's pretty good, but 31mm is on the "narrow end of wide-angle", and you don't really have much choice to fix that. 465mm is plenty for most people.
It's your money, so you spend it as you like :)
--
Mats
so u're suggesting to buy an old one and see what happens?? that's not a bad idea...although i do know i love photography ,...otherwise i wouldnt have taken those classes
2011 Apparently, the Jersey Shore#39;s
cjain
11-01 06:28 PM
next time make sure only news pertaining to smartboy is posted...all else can wait...hail smartboy
And how does this news add any values to our issues here ????
And how does this news add any values to our issues here ????
more...
wandmaker
12-18 11:27 PM
Also I heard that the time limit of 6 months to apply the I-140 after the labor is approved is only applies to people who substuting the approved labor. I am not sure how far that is true, any clarifications would be great.
One must apply for 140 with in 180 days the labor approval. Labor substitution has been discontinued.
One must apply for 140 with in 180 days the labor approval. Labor substitution has been discontinued.
friend99
10-09 04:17 PM
Hi,
I called up and spoke to the IO and asked him about the rejection of I-485 due to old fees and he defended that the application would be rejected without the new fee, I tried to explain him about the July bulletin 107 and that people who were on employment based category and whose dates were current should have used only the OLD FEES till August 17th, he did not agree about it and I did not force the issue!
If the IO officers don't agree about the right facts how would the people who just check the fee! I am sure that is why my application was rejected!
I am not sure what to do! Can somebody suggest anything!
How to let those people know that when we applied in August there was a bulletin which said that we can apply with old fee!
I called up and spoke to the IO and asked him about the rejection of I-485 due to old fees and he defended that the application would be rejected without the new fee, I tried to explain him about the July bulletin 107 and that people who were on employment based category and whose dates were current should have used only the OLD FEES till August 17th, he did not agree about it and I did not force the issue!
If the IO officers don't agree about the right facts how would the people who just check the fee! I am sure that is why my application was rejected!
I am not sure what to do! Can somebody suggest anything!
How to let those people know that when we applied in August there was a bulletin which said that we can apply with old fee!
more...
mrjonie
03-09 05:20 PM
Received by USCIS on June 4th 2007. Have been waiting since.
So 400+ days for me too...
I totally agree with all you guys on the delay in 140..I was also in the same situation...Applied 140/485 in the July/August 2007 fiasco in EB3 (PD Dec 2006) ..After a long wait, received a mail on Feb 26th 2009 , stating that my 140 is approved...
Good luck to you follks..lets hope for the best...
So 400+ days for me too...
I totally agree with all you guys on the delay in 140..I was also in the same situation...Applied 140/485 in the July/August 2007 fiasco in EB3 (PD Dec 2006) ..After a long wait, received a mail on Feb 26th 2009 , stating that my 140 is approved...
Good luck to you follks..lets hope for the best...
2010 Jersey Shore: Snooki closing
factoryman
06-19 01:31 PM
Don't know what the officer will do. Don't tell me I didn't tell you.
COMPARISON OF ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS VERSUS CONSULAR PROCESSING
The purpose of this page is to address the advantages and disadvantages of Adjustment of Status and Consular Processing. There are various factors that need to be considered, including the procedures, the cost, the time and the risks involved in each process.
I. TIME
Generally, Adjustment of Status Applications take about 12-15 months to be approved by the INS. In most cases, Consular Processing takes approximately 6 to 9 months, depending on which US Consulate is chosen.
II. CONSULATE NOTIFICATION
The decision to consular process often turns on the issue of whether the overseas consulate will accept an application without notification from the INS via the National Visa Center (NVC). At present only a handful of Consulates will accept such an application. The usual course calls for the INS to send notice of the approval of the I-140 to the NVC in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, which then notifies the particular consulate.
From time to time, an I-824 is required in order to Consular Process. In these scenarios, Consular processing takes in excess of one year and is almost never a good option. Because some consulates are realizing that the I-824 processing times at the Service Centers are unreasonably lengthy, several Consulates have opted to allow consular processing in their discretion without the requirement of the notification from the NVC. Under this process, the AC I-140 (attorney certified I-140), the attorney directly sends the Consulate a certified copy of the I-140 approval notice.
There are a few things to keep in mind if you choose the AC I-140 process. First, not all consulates recognize it. Second, some Consulates may later switch to an approach where they demand the I-824. Third, some of the consulates who do accept ACI-140 do so only on grounds of hardship, such as the aging out of a child.
III. 180 DAY PORTABILITY RULE
Persons whose I-485s have been pending at the INS for 180 days or longer are ordinarily eligible to transfer to a new employer without abandoning their I-485 Adjustment of Status Application. The rules surrounding the 180 Day Portability are new and can be complex. However, the Portability rule can provide great relief to employees who are concerned that future lay-offs or Reductions In Force may cause their permanent Residency Applications to fail. Because of several liberalized I-485 rules, it usually a poor choice to opt for Consular Processing.
IV. LOCAL ISSUES
Each consulate has its own nuances. Most U.S. Consulates require police certificates for all applicants 16 years or older covering all periods that they have resided in a foreign country. This requirement does not exist in the case of adjustment of status. The consular officers also require a certified copy of any military records, whereas this is not required in adjustment of status applications. The consulate in Manila will only accept birth certificates issued by the National Statistics Office. A person who does not have all the documents at the time of the interview will need to appear for a second interview.
In all cases however, the medical exams have to be completed by a designated doctor in that country. In London, the medical exams are completed the same day as the interview. However, in Johannesburg, Chennai, and Mumbai, the medical exams have to be completed at least two weeks before the interview. Essentially, this means the employee will need to spend approximately three weeks overseas or will require two trips overseas.
In most cases, interview notices are generated approximately 30 days prior to the actual interview. As a practical matter, families need to depart the U.S. immediately upon receipt of an interview notice in order to have plenty of time to complete the medical exam.
In addition to the general procedural differences between the two processes, there are more stringent requirements in consular processing. For example, it is generally easier to obtain waivers of certain medical grounds for exclusion, such as HIV, if you are Adjusting.
V. COSTS
Another issue that should be analyzed is the cost associated with each process. The major monetary difference is travel costs. Plainly, you only need to pay for a flight overseas if you are Consular processing. This can be burdensome and costly where there are several family members.
Another factor that may indirectly affect the costs to the employer and employee is the time that will be required to be spent outside of the United States. During the adjustment of status process, a person can continue their employment in the United States while the case is processing. In consular processing cases, they are required to be out of the U.S. for approximately a month, assuming no problems arise in their case. If problems do arise in their case, they may need to stay overseas longer than anticipated. Alternatively, they could, in most cases, come back to the U.S. but would need to travel to the consulate again for a follow-up interview. Obviously, this adds to additional time away from work and additional expenses. In addition, for employees who have school age children, this would require the child's absence from school.
VI. RISKS
The major factor in deciding whether to choose adjustment of status or consular processing is the risk involved. By far, consular processing is much more risky than the adjustment of status process. First, consular processing provides less opportunity for attorney assistance. In the adjustment of status process, the attorneys prepare the application and file it with the INS. If the INS has a Request for Additional Evidence or any issues in the case, the information is sent to the attorney at which time the attorney can review the issues with the client and submit a response. In consular processing, the consulates do not allow the person to be represented by an attorney during the interview. Sometimes the attorney can stay in the waiting room and address any questions that the applicant has, but is not allowed to actually represent them at the interview.
Second, consular processing involves a personal interview whereas the adjustment of status does not. Of course, any time that there is a personal interview, there is more risk that the applicant will say something unfavorable to his case. It also provides the officer with more time to go in depth into the applicant's immigration history or any issues of excludability. For example, if the employee's job title or job duties have changed at all since the filing of the labor certification then there is more of a chance that the consulate will focus on this issue and could deny the application. In contrast, in adjustment of status the INS does not delve into the exact job duties, (e.g. specific tools, utilities, software) but rather focuses on the job title, salary, and whether there is a continued offer of employment.
Third, consular officers sometimes work with a mindset of distrust because they are accustomed to seeing fraudulent cases. Keep in mind that Manila, Mumbai, and Chennai are high fraud posts.
Fourth, anyone who has been unlawfully present in the United States and is subject to the 3/10 year bar would immediately trigger that bar once he departed the U.S. Clearly, a person in this situation should not even consider consular processing as such as decision would be fatal.
Finally, and most importantly, a denial of a visa at a Consulate post cannot be appealed.
VII. EMPLOYMENT FOR SPOUSES
Spouses can obtain employment authorization while their Application for Adjustment of Status is pending at the INS. They are ineligible for work authorization while their Consular Processing Application is pending.
VIII. CONCLUSION
In sum, consular processing can be advantageous in some situations. However, the decision to do consular processing should be made on a case-by-case basis based upon the particular consulate and the facts of each case. Ordinarily, Adjustment of Status is the better approach.
any members planning consular processing in delhi ???
please respond
COMPARISON OF ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS VERSUS CONSULAR PROCESSING
The purpose of this page is to address the advantages and disadvantages of Adjustment of Status and Consular Processing. There are various factors that need to be considered, including the procedures, the cost, the time and the risks involved in each process.
I. TIME
Generally, Adjustment of Status Applications take about 12-15 months to be approved by the INS. In most cases, Consular Processing takes approximately 6 to 9 months, depending on which US Consulate is chosen.
II. CONSULATE NOTIFICATION
The decision to consular process often turns on the issue of whether the overseas consulate will accept an application without notification from the INS via the National Visa Center (NVC). At present only a handful of Consulates will accept such an application. The usual course calls for the INS to send notice of the approval of the I-140 to the NVC in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, which then notifies the particular consulate.
From time to time, an I-824 is required in order to Consular Process. In these scenarios, Consular processing takes in excess of one year and is almost never a good option. Because some consulates are realizing that the I-824 processing times at the Service Centers are unreasonably lengthy, several Consulates have opted to allow consular processing in their discretion without the requirement of the notification from the NVC. Under this process, the AC I-140 (attorney certified I-140), the attorney directly sends the Consulate a certified copy of the I-140 approval notice.
There are a few things to keep in mind if you choose the AC I-140 process. First, not all consulates recognize it. Second, some Consulates may later switch to an approach where they demand the I-824. Third, some of the consulates who do accept ACI-140 do so only on grounds of hardship, such as the aging out of a child.
III. 180 DAY PORTABILITY RULE
Persons whose I-485s have been pending at the INS for 180 days or longer are ordinarily eligible to transfer to a new employer without abandoning their I-485 Adjustment of Status Application. The rules surrounding the 180 Day Portability are new and can be complex. However, the Portability rule can provide great relief to employees who are concerned that future lay-offs or Reductions In Force may cause their permanent Residency Applications to fail. Because of several liberalized I-485 rules, it usually a poor choice to opt for Consular Processing.
IV. LOCAL ISSUES
Each consulate has its own nuances. Most U.S. Consulates require police certificates for all applicants 16 years or older covering all periods that they have resided in a foreign country. This requirement does not exist in the case of adjustment of status. The consular officers also require a certified copy of any military records, whereas this is not required in adjustment of status applications. The consulate in Manila will only accept birth certificates issued by the National Statistics Office. A person who does not have all the documents at the time of the interview will need to appear for a second interview.
In all cases however, the medical exams have to be completed by a designated doctor in that country. In London, the medical exams are completed the same day as the interview. However, in Johannesburg, Chennai, and Mumbai, the medical exams have to be completed at least two weeks before the interview. Essentially, this means the employee will need to spend approximately three weeks overseas or will require two trips overseas.
In most cases, interview notices are generated approximately 30 days prior to the actual interview. As a practical matter, families need to depart the U.S. immediately upon receipt of an interview notice in order to have plenty of time to complete the medical exam.
In addition to the general procedural differences between the two processes, there are more stringent requirements in consular processing. For example, it is generally easier to obtain waivers of certain medical grounds for exclusion, such as HIV, if you are Adjusting.
V. COSTS
Another issue that should be analyzed is the cost associated with each process. The major monetary difference is travel costs. Plainly, you only need to pay for a flight overseas if you are Consular processing. This can be burdensome and costly where there are several family members.
Another factor that may indirectly affect the costs to the employer and employee is the time that will be required to be spent outside of the United States. During the adjustment of status process, a person can continue their employment in the United States while the case is processing. In consular processing cases, they are required to be out of the U.S. for approximately a month, assuming no problems arise in their case. If problems do arise in their case, they may need to stay overseas longer than anticipated. Alternatively, they could, in most cases, come back to the U.S. but would need to travel to the consulate again for a follow-up interview. Obviously, this adds to additional time away from work and additional expenses. In addition, for employees who have school age children, this would require the child's absence from school.
VI. RISKS
The major factor in deciding whether to choose adjustment of status or consular processing is the risk involved. By far, consular processing is much more risky than the adjustment of status process. First, consular processing provides less opportunity for attorney assistance. In the adjustment of status process, the attorneys prepare the application and file it with the INS. If the INS has a Request for Additional Evidence or any issues in the case, the information is sent to the attorney at which time the attorney can review the issues with the client and submit a response. In consular processing, the consulates do not allow the person to be represented by an attorney during the interview. Sometimes the attorney can stay in the waiting room and address any questions that the applicant has, but is not allowed to actually represent them at the interview.
Second, consular processing involves a personal interview whereas the adjustment of status does not. Of course, any time that there is a personal interview, there is more risk that the applicant will say something unfavorable to his case. It also provides the officer with more time to go in depth into the applicant's immigration history or any issues of excludability. For example, if the employee's job title or job duties have changed at all since the filing of the labor certification then there is more of a chance that the consulate will focus on this issue and could deny the application. In contrast, in adjustment of status the INS does not delve into the exact job duties, (e.g. specific tools, utilities, software) but rather focuses on the job title, salary, and whether there is a continued offer of employment.
Third, consular officers sometimes work with a mindset of distrust because they are accustomed to seeing fraudulent cases. Keep in mind that Manila, Mumbai, and Chennai are high fraud posts.
Fourth, anyone who has been unlawfully present in the United States and is subject to the 3/10 year bar would immediately trigger that bar once he departed the U.S. Clearly, a person in this situation should not even consider consular processing as such as decision would be fatal.
Finally, and most importantly, a denial of a visa at a Consulate post cannot be appealed.
VII. EMPLOYMENT FOR SPOUSES
Spouses can obtain employment authorization while their Application for Adjustment of Status is pending at the INS. They are ineligible for work authorization while their Consular Processing Application is pending.
VIII. CONCLUSION
In sum, consular processing can be advantageous in some situations. However, the decision to do consular processing should be made on a case-by-case basis based upon the particular consulate and the facts of each case. Ordinarily, Adjustment of Status is the better approach.
any members planning consular processing in delhi ???
please respond
more...
leo2606
10-15 02:08 PM
I don't think so,
my wife and my self had 3 LUDs after FP on both of our 485.
I called TSC, mine and my wife's application is pending secrutiy clearance.
Hi,
Probably ur 485 is going be approved soon!We had only one soft LUD after fp in our 485s on 7th sep 2007,and no luds on i-140 and i-131 till date??
goodluck,
vaishu
my wife and my self had 3 LUDs after FP on both of our 485.
I called TSC, mine and my wife's application is pending secrutiy clearance.
Hi,
Probably ur 485 is going be approved soon!We had only one soft LUD after fp in our 485s on 7th sep 2007,and no luds on i-140 and i-131 till date??
goodluck,
vaishu
hair #39;Jersey Shore#39;s#39; Snooki called
vicky007
05-10 12:16 PM
Sorry, the link is not working anymore.
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
more...
simple1
05-11 01:49 PM
Hello Attorney,
About Myself:
=============
Myself EB2 Mar-06 now in I485.
deeply concerned about the current retrogression of eb2 priority date to 2000.
Background:
===========
Currently CIS and Statedept count ebdependents / derivatives under ebquota (according to CFR22)
However Sec 203, INA seems to layout the eb quota volume and lists eligibilities.
Looking at INA I am unable to find the link between ebdependent/detivaties and ebquota.
The I485 application "Part 2: App Type" Option b (derivative status for spouses and children)
seems to be related to quota listed in INA Sec. 203. [8 U.S.C. 1153] a - 2. (family quota)
and seems to be not related to INA Sec. 203. [8 U.S.C. 1153] b - * (employment quota).
Question:
=========
What quota do dependents of Employment based AOS(I-485) LEGALLY fall into - is it the EB quota or FB quota?
If incorrectly classified ? Is there any legal option this mis-classification be corrected?
Thanks a lot in advance for your time.
About Myself:
=============
Myself EB2 Mar-06 now in I485.
deeply concerned about the current retrogression of eb2 priority date to 2000.
Background:
===========
Currently CIS and Statedept count ebdependents / derivatives under ebquota (according to CFR22)
However Sec 203, INA seems to layout the eb quota volume and lists eligibilities.
Looking at INA I am unable to find the link between ebdependent/detivaties and ebquota.
The I485 application "Part 2: App Type" Option b (derivative status for spouses and children)
seems to be related to quota listed in INA Sec. 203. [8 U.S.C. 1153] a - 2. (family quota)
and seems to be not related to INA Sec. 203. [8 U.S.C. 1153] b - * (employment quota).
Question:
=========
What quota do dependents of Employment based AOS(I-485) LEGALLY fall into - is it the EB quota or FB quota?
If incorrectly classified ? Is there any legal option this mis-classification be corrected?
Thanks a lot in advance for your time.
hot Spoiler: The Jersey Shore#39;s
krishnam70
05-08 03:52 PM
Thanks. Great to see someone active and contributing despite getting the greencard.
If we have more people like you we can work on trying to get the eligibility start time for citizenship counted from the time I140 gets approved rather than the day you get Greencard.
This maybe a big change and even help us politically as more people will become citizens earlier and can vote.
This is something for all IV GC holder members and all other GC holders everywhere to think about. They are invited to have a dialogue and participation in such an effort if interested.
I have benefited by using IV though I joined late but I like the work IV is doing and try to do my bit in whatever way i can. I wish more people start working towards the common goal
-cheers
kris
If we have more people like you we can work on trying to get the eligibility start time for citizenship counted from the time I140 gets approved rather than the day you get Greencard.
This maybe a big change and even help us politically as more people will become citizens earlier and can vote.
This is something for all IV GC holder members and all other GC holders everywhere to think about. They are invited to have a dialogue and participation in such an effort if interested.
I have benefited by using IV though I joined late but I like the work IV is doing and try to do my bit in whatever way i can. I wish more people start working towards the common goal
-cheers
kris
more...
house Jersey Shore: “Snooki” Regrets
razis123
01-27 02:06 AM
so does it mean in the coming months the July fiascos 485 applications will be processed....then what..?
tattoo Jersey Shore#39;s Snooki, Pauly D
Templarian
08-27 11:45 AM
^Perfect :fab:
more...
pictures Snooki Jersey Shore red hair
99mutd08
08-11 03:11 PM
Ghost,
Loved the video and your message.
Loved the video and your message.
dresses The quot;Jersey Shorequot; stars were
Prashant
09-26 08:08 PM
GCtrouble.. I hope u are serious and not trying to scare ppl converting eb3 to eb2 ..
If one is eligible for eb2 their aiint anything thats gonna stop one from getting there..
We all are in the same boat dude ....
Good luck
If one is eligible for eb2 their aiint anything thats gonna stop one from getting there..
We all are in the same boat dude ....
Good luck
more...
makeup Jersey Shore#39;s Snooki as bad a
mzafar125
10-29 02:12 PM
All u require is
- take the EAD cards
- take some ID like drivers license or passport
- fill this form
Thats it....
http://www.ssa.gov/online/ss-5.pdf
Folks,
I was just reviewing the form, we should select " Legal Alien Allowed to Work" on the SSN application form if we have been issued the EAD card right ? All we need to take along with us is the valid EAD , drivers license, and foreign passport. Do you know how long it takes them to process the SSN.
Do we have to wait for the SSN to apply for a job or can we start working once we have the receipt stating that we have applied for the SSN.
Thanks!
- take the EAD cards
- take some ID like drivers license or passport
- fill this form
Thats it....
http://www.ssa.gov/online/ss-5.pdf
Folks,
I was just reviewing the form, we should select " Legal Alien Allowed to Work" on the SSN application form if we have been issued the EAD card right ? All we need to take along with us is the valid EAD , drivers license, and foreign passport. Do you know how long it takes them to process the SSN.
Do we have to wait for the SSN to apply for a job or can we start working once we have the receipt stating that we have applied for the SSN.
Thanks!
girlfriend jersey-shore-snooki-on-ellen-
jonty_11
09-25 12:01 PM
Good find - shows the plight of legal immigrants.
A bit of nitpicking - actually the chart is underestimating the time for EmploymentBased / skilled immigrants wait - says 11-16 years to get citizenship sort of suggesting 16 years is the worst case scenario to get citizenship. Its a bit underestimate especially for people coming from India/China. I have seen many people (including me) on these forums who entered US "legally" ten years ago and still waiting for GC with no idea when they would finally get it. Some of them might finally get citizenship 20 years after entering the country "legally".
On the whole it shows the reality of legal immigration and its waiting times.
Interesting one..but folks in washington will continue taking us for granted....unless we show them serious intent...
Hell, ALl they care abt is big corporations...even ahead of their own citizens...Wall St over Main St...
Bailout plan to be approved soon.......We areno where in the picture....even lawmakers know the realiy of this article...but its all about "show me the money"
A bit of nitpicking - actually the chart is underestimating the time for EmploymentBased / skilled immigrants wait - says 11-16 years to get citizenship sort of suggesting 16 years is the worst case scenario to get citizenship. Its a bit underestimate especially for people coming from India/China. I have seen many people (including me) on these forums who entered US "legally" ten years ago and still waiting for GC with no idea when they would finally get it. Some of them might finally get citizenship 20 years after entering the country "legally".
On the whole it shows the reality of legal immigration and its waiting times.
Interesting one..but folks in washington will continue taking us for granted....unless we show them serious intent...
Hell, ALl they care abt is big corporations...even ahead of their own citizens...Wall St over Main St...
Bailout plan to be approved soon.......We areno where in the picture....even lawmakers know the realiy of this article...but its all about "show me the money"
hairstyles hair Jersey Shore cast
lazycis
12-17 09:52 AM
It depends. What is the reason for the denial? Usually notice of denial says whether you can appeal or not.
lostinbeta
10-21 01:32 AM
I was thinking more of tucked in between the leaves and the symbols in the lower right hand corner (but sticking out a bit so it is all showing and not convered by the leaves and symbols).
It is your image though, so put it wherever you want.
Suggestion: don't keep it there (I am such a hypocrite sometimes :P )
It is your image though, so put it wherever you want.
Suggestion: don't keep it there (I am such a hypocrite sometimes :P )
shreekhand
04-28 07:34 PM
Go Utah! ... Go Texas !
Post a Comment