vandanaverdia
09-10 04:26 PM
I am in line for the green card for years & the wait is endless..... This is my chance to ease me....
Come join hands....
Come join hands....
wallpaper kate middleton underwear model
lazycis
12-21 06:14 PM
This is from Murthy chat.
Question: If in the past I have been out of H1B status for 6 months (I-94 not expired), is this going to hurt my GC (or any new petitions to change / extend / adjust status)?
Answer: A person who fails to maintain status for over 180 days may have a problem obtaining the approval of the I-485, which allows a maximum of 180 days for one to be out of status under Section 245(k) of the INA, unless the person is covered under 245(i) of the INA. Sometimes, though, the fault of the employer in not paying the salary while the person is considered an employee may not pose a problem but at other times it may pose a problem. Not having pay stubs will certainly adversely impact the ability to obtain an extension or change of status from the USCIS. Jun-20-2005.
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
If you did not work because your H1-B petitioning employer did not provide a work for you, that's not your fault. Employer should be penalized for it, not you.
Also, read 8 USC 1255(k)
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if�
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days�
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien�s admission.
Translation: if you did not violate status after your last entry before filing I-485, you are good to go. Have a happy holidays! :D
Question: If in the past I have been out of H1B status for 6 months (I-94 not expired), is this going to hurt my GC (or any new petitions to change / extend / adjust status)?
Answer: A person who fails to maintain status for over 180 days may have a problem obtaining the approval of the I-485, which allows a maximum of 180 days for one to be out of status under Section 245(k) of the INA, unless the person is covered under 245(i) of the INA. Sometimes, though, the fault of the employer in not paying the salary while the person is considered an employee may not pose a problem but at other times it may pose a problem. Not having pay stubs will certainly adversely impact the ability to obtain an extension or change of status from the USCIS. Jun-20-2005.
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
If you did not work because your H1-B petitioning employer did not provide a work for you, that's not your fault. Employer should be penalized for it, not you.
Also, read 8 USC 1255(k)
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if�
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days�
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien�s admission.
Translation: if you did not violate status after your last entry before filing I-485, you are good to go. Have a happy holidays! :D
virald
07-18 12:08 AM
Continuing on this forum with more generic title
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10383
Per Greg Siskind -- July 2nd filers might have to file again, as all July 2nd application were rejected. Check out the link below as well as the comment section for the blog
Greg Siskind is reporting the following about July2nd rejection here
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/faqs-part-1.html
part of above post --
USCIS did not state how cases filed and rejected on the 2nd are to be handled other than to say that properly filed applications would be accepted. This presumably covers the many cases filed after the second that were held, but it doesn�t explain what will happen to the cases received earlier. We hope USCIS will issue special instructions to issue July 2nd receipt dates to those who are able to document they attempted to file. We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing. Hopefully, again, USCIS will institute a process for such individuals to avoid being penalized.
USCIS has not announced any details yet on how it will determine which cases get 2007 visa numbers that might still be available. We also don�t know yet how cases will be processed that are not in the batch of cases that get green card numbers this year. For those who will have to get numbers in future years, applications should be worked by the order of the priority date. So applicants with labor certifications approved some time back, for example, should go before people in the same category with later priority dates.
For individuals filing cases not requiring a labor certification (such as Schedule A cases and national interest waivers), the priority date is the date of filing. Because there may be hundreds of thousands of applications received between July 2nd and August 17th with many of these cases not requiring a labor certification, the date during this six week period a case is filed could make a big difference in terms of when a case will complete processing. And, again, getting that July 2nd priority date for those who filed early and were rejected could make a big difference in when their cases are ultimately processed through to completion.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10383
Per Greg Siskind -- July 2nd filers might have to file again, as all July 2nd application were rejected. Check out the link below as well as the comment section for the blog
Greg Siskind is reporting the following about July2nd rejection here
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/faqs-part-1.html
part of above post --
USCIS did not state how cases filed and rejected on the 2nd are to be handled other than to say that properly filed applications would be accepted. This presumably covers the many cases filed after the second that were held, but it doesn�t explain what will happen to the cases received earlier. We hope USCIS will issue special instructions to issue July 2nd receipt dates to those who are able to document they attempted to file. We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing. Hopefully, again, USCIS will institute a process for such individuals to avoid being penalized.
USCIS has not announced any details yet on how it will determine which cases get 2007 visa numbers that might still be available. We also don�t know yet how cases will be processed that are not in the batch of cases that get green card numbers this year. For those who will have to get numbers in future years, applications should be worked by the order of the priority date. So applicants with labor certifications approved some time back, for example, should go before people in the same category with later priority dates.
For individuals filing cases not requiring a labor certification (such as Schedule A cases and national interest waivers), the priority date is the date of filing. Because there may be hundreds of thousands of applications received between July 2nd and August 17th with many of these cases not requiring a labor certification, the date during this six week period a case is filed could make a big difference in terms of when a case will complete processing. And, again, getting that July 2nd priority date for those who filed early and were rejected could make a big difference in when their cases are ultimately processed through to completion.
2011 2010 kate middleton modelling
rbalaji5
09-19 10:17 AM
Silicon Valley - The best place for these kind of effort..:)
more...
dealsnet
03-19 10:07 AM
85,000 PERM cases certified in 2007. 2007 is a typical heavy filing year still...
One year 140,000 EB based visas available. If some how some of the back logs are eliminated, the future looks good as 140K for a year and less than 100K labor certifications per year. If the USCIS process with maximum visa/year, it is possible.
http://www.usavisanow.com/perm07.pdf
see a chart
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pezNTiCXNupwoSrZGE4kqcg&gid=1
One year 140,000 EB based visas available. If some how some of the back logs are eliminated, the future looks good as 140K for a year and less than 100K labor certifications per year. If the USCIS process with maximum visa/year, it is possible.
http://www.usavisanow.com/perm07.pdf
see a chart
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pezNTiCXNupwoSrZGE4kqcg&gid=1
indianindian2006
07-14 05:52 PM
PD: Jan 2006
Category: EB2
As suggested by many you should talk to a attorney.You are covered by AC21,also on your point of not working with your ex-employer for 180 days again a smart attorney could guide you thru this as sometimes green card can be filed for future employment after the green card is approved.
Best of luck.
Category: EB2
As suggested by many you should talk to a attorney.You are covered by AC21,also on your point of not working with your ex-employer for 180 days again a smart attorney could guide you thru this as sometimes green card can be filed for future employment after the green card is approved.
Best of luck.
more...
GC_US_64
12-26 03:58 PM
We cannot save for our children's college in college savings plan as every plan needs a GC.
2010 kate middleton modelling
Hassan11
03-18 01:00 PM
Link is here: http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=26
Ron Gotcher said on his reply to some readers questions:
The mystery is solved. I have corresponded with Charlie Oppenheim in the Visa Office. He confirmed that the 27% limit does apply. He explained that during this fiscal year, the CIS consumed an unusually large number of Indian EB2 visas, thus making the category unavailable despite a retrogression in the cuoff date which was intended to hold number use within the limit.
He said that based on his discussions with the CIS, he was informed that the CIS did not feel that the current amount of pending Indian first preference demand would be insufficient to use all available numbers under the limit. Therefore, he allowed some of those numbers to fall down into Indian second preference.
So, the Indian second preference numbers used to establish a cutoff date for April are coming from left over Indian first preference, not worldwide numbers.
__________________
Ron Gotcher said on his reply to some readers questions:
The mystery is solved. I have corresponded with Charlie Oppenheim in the Visa Office. He confirmed that the 27% limit does apply. He explained that during this fiscal year, the CIS consumed an unusually large number of Indian EB2 visas, thus making the category unavailable despite a retrogression in the cuoff date which was intended to hold number use within the limit.
He said that based on his discussions with the CIS, he was informed that the CIS did not feel that the current amount of pending Indian first preference demand would be insufficient to use all available numbers under the limit. Therefore, he allowed some of those numbers to fall down into Indian second preference.
So, the Indian second preference numbers used to establish a cutoff date for April are coming from left over Indian first preference, not worldwide numbers.
__________________
more...
the_googly
11-13 11:09 AM
Not sure if we can conclude that there has been NO spillover. The dates have not moved back (retrogressed). You need more visa numbers than the quota - even to hold the dates. The only way to find out is to get the pending visa numbers report.
hair 2010 kate middleton modelling
moonrah
07-02 10:23 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again - I don't see how the per country limit is unfair! It was set up so that immigrants from ALL nations would have EQUAL opportunity to immigrate to the U.S. and to prevent any one (or two) countries from monopolizing the visa numbers. Getting rid of the per country limit would most certainly lead to immigration from a limited number of sources (countries) and thus jeopardize the diversity of the immigration process. Getting rid of it would be like robbing Peter to pay Paul because those countries who are severely retrogressed now would only see limited benefits and those who are not all that retrogressed would fall backwards - is that fair!? It seems these forms are dominated by "certain" groups who have their own agenda and don't really care about ROW! It makes me feel uncomfortable being an IV member from ROW!
Whatever you are saying is true for Family based categories. Employement category is defined to have skilled immigrants to help US businesses, that is why it is called employment based category. Let me explain you what you are saying. You are saying that I will ask compnay A to wait for five years to give promotion to person X, because quotas for his country are not available, and until he gets his green card he can not get promotion, instead give promotion to person Y which is less qualified but can get green card next month since his country has quotas available. Now does it make sense for company A to give promotion to less qualified person just because person X can not get his green card? Company won't do that and will end up sponsoring another qualified person. Or let me explain you in different way. If certain company has need for specific skill for long term and provided that there are not enough citizens to do that job, in this case company has to sponsor an immigrant, but since the requirement is for long term, company doesn't want him to be on immigrant visa for long term because sponsoring immigrant visa means money and more liability. In this case, even though company has much better match from a country whose immigrant visa are not available for many years, company might end up taking immigrant who is less qualified for the job. And company might say that, we can not take you since you won't be able to get green card for many years. If company does that then it would be an discrimination, but company doesn't have any choice.
Initially, it would have been good idea to have country limits because nobody was anticipating this kind of backlogs. But in current situation it doesn't make sense to keep it like that way. Goverment understands it, but they don't want to do anything because this has become political issue because of groups which represent illegal immigrants. With time goverment and companies have to be practicle and change policies or laws. This has been happening and it should happen, particularly when it doesn't make sense. For goverment diversity is important but for company getting job done is more important. And primary purpose of EB category is to get things done.
Whatever you are saying is true for Family based categories. Employement category is defined to have skilled immigrants to help US businesses, that is why it is called employment based category. Let me explain you what you are saying. You are saying that I will ask compnay A to wait for five years to give promotion to person X, because quotas for his country are not available, and until he gets his green card he can not get promotion, instead give promotion to person Y which is less qualified but can get green card next month since his country has quotas available. Now does it make sense for company A to give promotion to less qualified person just because person X can not get his green card? Company won't do that and will end up sponsoring another qualified person. Or let me explain you in different way. If certain company has need for specific skill for long term and provided that there are not enough citizens to do that job, in this case company has to sponsor an immigrant, but since the requirement is for long term, company doesn't want him to be on immigrant visa for long term because sponsoring immigrant visa means money and more liability. In this case, even though company has much better match from a country whose immigrant visa are not available for many years, company might end up taking immigrant who is less qualified for the job. And company might say that, we can not take you since you won't be able to get green card for many years. If company does that then it would be an discrimination, but company doesn't have any choice.
Initially, it would have been good idea to have country limits because nobody was anticipating this kind of backlogs. But in current situation it doesn't make sense to keep it like that way. Goverment understands it, but they don't want to do anything because this has become political issue because of groups which represent illegal immigrants. With time goverment and companies have to be practicle and change policies or laws. This has been happening and it should happen, particularly when it doesn't make sense. For goverment diversity is important but for company getting job done is more important. And primary purpose of EB category is to get things done.
more...
bharani
11-04 11:31 AM
Nrc2008064195
hot kate middleton modeling
go_gc_way
01-04 04:18 PM
Posted on immigration.about.com
http://forums.about.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ab-immigration&tid=13888
Thanks we_can, I was searching for this thread.
http://forums.about.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ab-immigration&tid=13888
Thanks we_can, I was searching for this thread.
more...
house kate middleton modelling underwear. kate middleton modelling
BlueSunD
03-11 04:10 PM
You like it? Thanks! Please don�t hate Maya :P, be patient. At first it�s a bit of trial & error, if you started using Max before Maya (I did :)) you�ll know how easy it was doing light linking. But this feature seems to be hard to find if you don�t know where to look, or is it? Give me a minute, I�ll tell you how.
tattoo kate middleton modelling
msyedy
06-12 09:04 AM
our chances of getting some relief are better if infact CIR dies. if cir dies there might be a chance for SKIL bill.Even if SKIL is not taken up no bill is better than this CIR authored by ron hira aka kennedy, durbin and kyl.
Pitha (Shree)
I see what you are thinking, but EB3india is correct. In CIR or never.
I agree with him that we need to get a new stratergy to handle this.
I do not know why IV core has not spoken after this bill died. When CIR came to the Senate floor with all these restrictions, Logiclife mentioned something
like we should become illegals.
He must have been kidding but one could see the fact that the illegals were the ones who were getting the benefits.
I want to hear a similar statement from them, let us see........
Pitha (Shree)
I see what you are thinking, but EB3india is correct. In CIR or never.
I agree with him that we need to get a new stratergy to handle this.
I do not know why IV core has not spoken after this bill died. When CIR came to the Senate floor with all these restrictions, Logiclife mentioned something
like we should become illegals.
He must have been kidding but one could see the fact that the illegals were the ones who were getting the benefits.
I want to hear a similar statement from them, let us see........
more...
pictures kate middleton modeling
iamgsprabhu
10-15 02:55 PM
Kindly download the Attached Doc.
dresses kate middleton modelling
sonia_sd
03-09 01:47 PM
A country that was built on immigrants paying with lifes of future immigrants - i dont know when this drama ends !!!
more...
makeup house kate middleton modelling
conundrum
10-31 05:59 PM
Received letter from USCIS regarding the FOIA.
NRC2008063282
The request has been placed in the complex track!
NRC2008063282
The request has been placed in the complex track!
girlfriend In March 27, 2002, Kate and
DarkChild
02-16 07:01 AM
my motto is "don't start anything you can't possibly win" so i'm not gonna start on this man, that is just sick...
hairstyles kate middleton underwear model
when
02-20 03:47 PM
When EB3 India........:(:confused:
ganguteli
04-03 12:26 PM
Hello there,
Please contact me at fermion_boson@ymail.com if you are interested to take part in efforts to re-capture unused visa numbers for EB categories.
Let's do this NOW.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield" --Lord Tennyson in "Ulysses"
Dude complete your profile first if you want to be taken seriously.
I would be hesitant to write to some anonymous email id.
Please contact me at fermion_boson@ymail.com if you are interested to take part in efforts to re-capture unused visa numbers for EB categories.
Let's do this NOW.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield" --Lord Tennyson in "Ulysses"
Dude complete your profile first if you want to be taken seriously.
I would be hesitant to write to some anonymous email id.
sc3
10-16 01:49 PM
yesterday some one left a red saying "go and sleep in your bedroom or something like that" :D,
(which I find hilarious..because I don't exactly sleep on my couch :D:D)
then some left a green saying "nullifying red".
folks, I didn't leave a red for anyone (who cares abt them anyways)...don't assume immediately that I reacted.
giving either reds or greens will not impact anyone's gc process..or change their PDs!
Like itsnotfunny says, if you agree/disagree say it so. gave itsnotfunny a green to nullify the red.
let me reiterate though, that I am completely opposed to flower campaign because once bitten, twice shy.
USCIS has lot of autonomy and there is every likely of a repeat i.e july 07 part 2 as a reaction to gandhigiri part 2
instead focus on other avenues, there is an excellent thread on FOIA in addition to the other avenues
First: Disabuse yourself of the notion that Gandhigiri had anything to do with the backtrack of the July 07 fiasco. There were other more pressing (and effective) organizations that helped reverse the situation.
Second: What happened (the flood of applications) were definitely caused by an ill thought Visa bulletin, but USCIS had no control over the massive amount of applications that they had to deal with. Even commercial operations (amazon etc) break down when overloaded. So to put extensive blame on USCIS for the "reaction" (I assume you are talking about the backlogs) is not right.
(which I find hilarious..because I don't exactly sleep on my couch :D:D)
then some left a green saying "nullifying red".
folks, I didn't leave a red for anyone (who cares abt them anyways)...don't assume immediately that I reacted.
giving either reds or greens will not impact anyone's gc process..or change their PDs!
Like itsnotfunny says, if you agree/disagree say it so. gave itsnotfunny a green to nullify the red.
let me reiterate though, that I am completely opposed to flower campaign because once bitten, twice shy.
USCIS has lot of autonomy and there is every likely of a repeat i.e july 07 part 2 as a reaction to gandhigiri part 2
instead focus on other avenues, there is an excellent thread on FOIA in addition to the other avenues
First: Disabuse yourself of the notion that Gandhigiri had anything to do with the backtrack of the July 07 fiasco. There were other more pressing (and effective) organizations that helped reverse the situation.
Second: What happened (the flood of applications) were definitely caused by an ill thought Visa bulletin, but USCIS had no control over the massive amount of applications that they had to deal with. Even commercial operations (amazon etc) break down when overloaded. So to put extensive blame on USCIS for the "reaction" (I assume you are talking about the backlogs) is not right.
Post a Comment