Humhongekamyab
08-13 01:36 PM
Got Four Reds and "rupaki?" for the Raj Balsar thread :)
You are in favour of (posted) sports news and got four red. I am not in favor or (don't want such news posted) and got four reds.
I guess we cant make everybody happy.
You are in favour of (posted) sports news and got four red. I am not in favor or (don't want such news posted) and got four reds.
I guess we cant make everybody happy.
SNLive999
06-10 10:51 AM
Thanks Dhun Dhun....bumping it.....
maddipati1
04-23 04:23 PM
i was in the same situation. entered US with H1 visa. passport expiry in few months, so got I-94 for few months. got the new passport. drove to San Ysidro, crossed border and came back immediately. got the new I-94.
i have EAD/AP and lawyer suggested that i don't really need to get new I-94. but, since i have been using only H1 and not used EAD/AP so far, wanted to have a clean record.
parked behind jack in the box($5), walked outside on the bridge (no elevators) with 8 years worth of my immi dox, every doc i have so far. after exiting the bridge on Mexico side, took the other bridge towards left side to cross the road. after getting off this bridge u will see traffic going in to US. walked parallel to that towards US on footpath. found the lines of people going in and joined them.
only hiccup was, while coming back, just joined the lines going in, but didn't go to CBP office, where they issue the new I-94.
so, had to go back and go to the CBP office. The board outside CBP office reads 'PERMITS' in English and Spanish. Went in (hardly any line to wait) and got the new I-94. the officer at my window has no clue about what to do, literally nothing, may be under training. the officer sitting next to him, knows exactly what to do. so he helped issuing new I-94 and stamping on the new passport. then paid $6 at the cashier window across the hall. then joined the lines back.
the IO was very friendly and was reading out loud abt my company name, visa status etc, while i was explaining why i am there. then the usual baggage security check and back. if its not for the hiccup, it would only take an hour total.
.
i have EAD/AP and lawyer suggested that i don't really need to get new I-94. but, since i have been using only H1 and not used EAD/AP so far, wanted to have a clean record.
parked behind jack in the box($5), walked outside on the bridge (no elevators) with 8 years worth of my immi dox, every doc i have so far. after exiting the bridge on Mexico side, took the other bridge towards left side to cross the road. after getting off this bridge u will see traffic going in to US. walked parallel to that towards US on footpath. found the lines of people going in and joined them.
only hiccup was, while coming back, just joined the lines going in, but didn't go to CBP office, where they issue the new I-94.
so, had to go back and go to the CBP office. The board outside CBP office reads 'PERMITS' in English and Spanish. Went in (hardly any line to wait) and got the new I-94. the officer at my window has no clue about what to do, literally nothing, may be under training. the officer sitting next to him, knows exactly what to do. so he helped issuing new I-94 and stamping on the new passport. then paid $6 at the cashier window across the hall. then joined the lines back.
the IO was very friendly and was reading out loud abt my company name, visa status etc, while i was explaining why i am there. then the usual baggage security check and back. if its not for the hiccup, it would only take an hour total.
.
qualified_trash
01-01 12:03 AM
provided u workout with the employer that they don't cancel the 140 after u move or u cannot port the priority date ....
this is not true. you can port the I 140 even if the employer has USCIS cancel the I140.
you CANNOT port PD from an approved I140 if I140 was revoked due to fraud.
this is not true. you can port the I 140 even if the employer has USCIS cancel the I140.
you CANNOT port PD from an approved I140 if I140 was revoked due to fraud.
more...
itstimenow
08-07 11:06 PM
If all the documents are submitted - court related -- in that case are we good to go?
senthil1
05-14 06:07 PM
Actually they did not move purposefully. Demand slowed down for visa numbers because long time the date was not moved. Another point is Companies like TCS,WIPRO are not applying GC and they are the ones using more H1bs. It could move back when demand increases but not so much like 2005. So always waiting time for EB3 will be 3 to 6 years and Eb2 2 to 4 years.
Guys,
The timing of this visa bulletin is suspicious. Right at the nick of time, when the senate is discussing increasing EB quotas, this news comes in. Plus they are saying that there will be forward movement, in the EB cut-off dates in the coming months to rhyme with the current negotatitions in Congress on CIR/ SKIL.
IV should not step behind in their legislation efforts. Even, if visa bulletin dates are current today, they might retrogress later, when the I-485 application starts to process (Current I-485 processing time shows applications processing as of Sept. 10, 2006, which is 8 months before). No one knows, if eight months from now, the cut-off dates will retrogress further or advance, due to the BEC closing out in Sept. 2007 and PERM applications processed from March 2005 onwards.
Guys,
The timing of this visa bulletin is suspicious. Right at the nick of time, when the senate is discussing increasing EB quotas, this news comes in. Plus they are saying that there will be forward movement, in the EB cut-off dates in the coming months to rhyme with the current negotatitions in Congress on CIR/ SKIL.
IV should not step behind in their legislation efforts. Even, if visa bulletin dates are current today, they might retrogress later, when the I-485 application starts to process (Current I-485 processing time shows applications processing as of Sept. 10, 2006, which is 8 months before). No one knows, if eight months from now, the cut-off dates will retrogress further or advance, due to the BEC closing out in Sept. 2007 and PERM applications processed from March 2005 onwards.
more...
reddymjm
05-05 04:15 PM
i third that too
Dhundhun
06-07 04:55 PM
I recently renewed my license in Oklahoma and was surprised to find out that on top of shorter expiration date, now my license has “TEMPORARY” written across it. This is new rule that OK is applying for non-residents and non-citizens. Has any body else gone thru similar experience? I am outraged that now I will be discriminated every where. DL is used on day to day basis and every body will question me, suspect me as to why “TEMPORARY” is written on my DL. Even DL office was not sure when this new rule was implemented, how come police officers, general public will know about it. I feel ashamed to even show my DL now. I’ll get hard time getting loans etc b/c people will think I may move out any time as I am here “Temporarily”
Is it only Oklahoma or other states are doing the same? See the link below from official DPS link for sample of DL.
http://www.dps.state.ok.us/
I saw the pointer. In Oklahoma, lawmakers has taken a stand to mark DL with “TEMPORARY” to all non-citizens. They could have gived DL in different color to make it less harsh. It seems that this “TEMPORARY” marking will be even after getting GC, so this will remain for years and years to come.
As "imneedy" pointed, it is in NJ for the last few years, so we can expect this being done in other states.
Is there any change in layout expected after "real ID(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REAL_ID_Act)" implementation?
Is it only Oklahoma or other states are doing the same? See the link below from official DPS link for sample of DL.
http://www.dps.state.ok.us/
I saw the pointer. In Oklahoma, lawmakers has taken a stand to mark DL with “TEMPORARY” to all non-citizens. They could have gived DL in different color to make it less harsh. It seems that this “TEMPORARY” marking will be even after getting GC, so this will remain for years and years to come.
As "imneedy" pointed, it is in NJ for the last few years, so we can expect this being done in other states.
Is there any change in layout expected after "real ID(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REAL_ID_Act)" implementation?
more...
Pagal
01-18 06:41 AM
Hello,
Consult your lawyer on extensions and right paperwork..
IMHO, with right paperwork, no need to cancel the travel plans andor to worry about PoE... que sera sera...
Consult your lawyer on extensions and right paperwork..
IMHO, with right paperwork, no need to cancel the travel plans andor to worry about PoE... que sera sera...
setpit_gc
06-05 04:56 PM
I got another soft LUD today (06/05/2009)
more...
GCneeded
11-08 12:24 PM
Hello Everyone,
Thank you everyone for the responses.
RBharol, My parents did not overstay last time. Even though they have 10 yr multiple entry and 6-month validity on I-94, they stayed only for 3 months. My concern was that my brother who had sponsored their visa is not living in USA anymore and was questioning the validity of their visa.
I had posted this question on other forums and the general consensus has been that my parent�s visa is still valid and should not be a problem. I am trying to talk to a lawyer and will post the response I get.
Thank you everyone for the responses.
RBharol, My parents did not overstay last time. Even though they have 10 yr multiple entry and 6-month validity on I-94, they stayed only for 3 months. My concern was that my brother who had sponsored their visa is not living in USA anymore and was questioning the validity of their visa.
I had posted this question on other forums and the general consensus has been that my parent�s visa is still valid and should not be a problem. I am trying to talk to a lawyer and will post the response I get.
no-tec
10-22 08:20 PM
you insult me than ask how i make them? i made them with.umm.. like 30 pages of actionscript. dynamic imported avi masking techniques, ray traced beveled three-d modeling rendering teqniques. yoou know. the usual
more...
Jaime
09-05 04:53 PM
You are OK, the backlog is for Indians, Chinese, Filipinos and Mexicans
You can expect to get your green card in less than a year. Good for you!
What is amazing for example, is China! China-mainland can expect between 5-10 year wait times for a green card while China-Taiwan, China-Hong Kong and China-Macau can expect their green cards in less than one year, just like Egypt, and everyone else!
You can expect to get your green card in less than a year. Good for you!
What is amazing for example, is China! China-mainland can expect between 5-10 year wait times for a green card while China-Taiwan, China-Hong Kong and China-Macau can expect their green cards in less than one year, just like Egypt, and everyone else!
gimme_GC2006
09-13 06:50 PM
Lets get statistics on numbers on pending I-485 application for EB2-India by year of PD.
My PD is Aug 06 .. post yours :-)
good..poll...I hope every one votes..
{ Gave you a green }
My PD is Aug 06 .. post yours :-)
good..poll...I hope every one votes..
{ Gave you a green }
more...
optimystic
09-10 04:43 PM
Glad you liked my thoughts. Just felt this might be a novel and practical campaign rather than doing flowers again or something else.
I think IV can even have such cubes available as IV merchandice and people can donate via a 'Send a F cube to USCIS' button probably !
<< BEGIN: Shameless request :
If you liked my ideas please give me some green dots so I could become eligible for IV chat. :)
END : Shameless request >>
I think IV can even have such cubes available as IV merchandice and people can donate via a 'Send a F cube to USCIS' button probably !
<< BEGIN: Shameless request :
If you liked my ideas please give me some green dots so I could become eligible for IV chat. :)
END : Shameless request >>
Radhika
07-01 08:22 PM
Mostly of the people just think its just giving the annonymous name,phone numbers and getting the benefit of the decision .Please read these point and understand carefully before jumping.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs� adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding �discovery.�
http://www.murthy.com/current485/VisaBulletinFAQ6-29-07.pdf
Let them ask questions and many as RFEs. why to worry we are here as legal Immigrants. I am ready to take the pain which is far better. and it si best way to make them realize.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs� adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding �discovery.�
http://www.murthy.com/current485/VisaBulletinFAQ6-29-07.pdf
Let them ask questions and many as RFEs. why to worry we are here as legal Immigrants. I am ready to take the pain which is far better. and it si best way to make them realize.
more...
lazycis
02-14 04:42 PM
What a fabulous ruling this is.
One question for Lazycis:
# (3) actually reads "(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions for naturalization, particularly because Plaintiffs have already undergone a name check in order to achieve LPR status and will clear the “fingerprint check” described in the Memorandum of January 25, 2008.10 The fingerprint check will show whether an LPR who is applying for naturalization has had any contact with the criminal justice system that would warrant denial of the petition."
As far as I can tell even (1) and (2) only apply to Naturalization applicants.
So the question of the hour is: are (1) and (2) true for AOS cases? I am asking this question because to argue a case for compelling recapture you need an AOS version of Baylson's ruling + the Galvez-Howerton decision (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=223315&postcount=121). Only then can you say that there was affirmative misconduct in 2003 and hence compel recapture.
Great ruling. The analysis is totally applicable to AOS. Moreover, the government admitted that it was wrong in recent memo.
"In the context of removal proceedings, ICE has determined that FBI fingerprint checks and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) checks are the required checks for purposes of the applicable regulations."
Wait a minute, isn't immigration judge able to grant AOS in removal proceedings? It means that the DHS acknowledges that it wrongfully interpreted regulations for all these years and that name check is not required by law (at least for AOS) as we were saying all along!
I love also this part: "in the unlikely event that FBI name checks reveal actionable information".
As judge Baylson pointed out, "name check" is nowhere to found in laws and regs.
One question for Lazycis:
# (3) actually reads "(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions for naturalization, particularly because Plaintiffs have already undergone a name check in order to achieve LPR status and will clear the “fingerprint check” described in the Memorandum of January 25, 2008.10 The fingerprint check will show whether an LPR who is applying for naturalization has had any contact with the criminal justice system that would warrant denial of the petition."
As far as I can tell even (1) and (2) only apply to Naturalization applicants.
So the question of the hour is: are (1) and (2) true for AOS cases? I am asking this question because to argue a case for compelling recapture you need an AOS version of Baylson's ruling + the Galvez-Howerton decision (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=223315&postcount=121). Only then can you say that there was affirmative misconduct in 2003 and hence compel recapture.
Great ruling. The analysis is totally applicable to AOS. Moreover, the government admitted that it was wrong in recent memo.
"In the context of removal proceedings, ICE has determined that FBI fingerprint checks and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) checks are the required checks for purposes of the applicable regulations."
Wait a minute, isn't immigration judge able to grant AOS in removal proceedings? It means that the DHS acknowledges that it wrongfully interpreted regulations for all these years and that name check is not required by law (at least for AOS) as we were saying all along!
I love also this part: "in the unlikely event that FBI name checks reveal actionable information".
As judge Baylson pointed out, "name check" is nowhere to found in laws and regs.
pappu
06-12 05:27 PM
Under current scenario, How we (IV) can request to Fix issues of Legal Immigrants first before illegal immigrants (CIR)?
Check my detailed post on another thread
Check my detailed post on another thread
vasa
05-25 07:44 AM
Sent
setpit_gc
08-15 11:22 PM
Thanks for the replies. I am going to consult with an Attorney.
I wanted to get other valuable opinions.
I wanted to get other valuable opinions.
saibabu_d
07-12 01:30 AM
The following comment made by other member looks inappropriate to me:
"Schwarzenegger cares for Kali-4-nia. He should support legal immigrants as a lot of this community lives there. Where? In Kali-4-nia."
I learned that it is not difficult to meet governor; he also have good reputation with Bush ( so things might change in our favor).
"Schwarzenegger cares for Kali-4-nia. He should support legal immigrants as a lot of this community lives there. Where? In Kali-4-nia."
I learned that it is not difficult to meet governor; he also have good reputation with Bush ( so things might change in our favor).
0 comments:
Post a Comment