ashkam
12-21 07:46 AM
Now I am really afraid. G-325 form has section to provide last 5 jobs. Since I had a gap, I didn't provide the details for the year 2001. I am royally screwed now! :(
G-325 does not ask for last 5 jobs, only last 5 year jobs, so you should be okay.
G-325 does not ask for last 5 jobs, only last 5 year jobs, so you should be okay.
wallpaper Clipart 5
atleasth1b
08-22 05:13 PM
I am in a very Bad situation it seems, please help.
I am working in US on L1B visa and Wife on L2. then Wife got a Job and her employer filled her 485.
In the mean time I applied for H1 (through a consultant, to get out of the L1B company). Looks like the H1 Got Approved. Now, I think the problem is, If I switch to H1, then she will loose her job and our chance of Getting EAD will go.
I do NOT want to go for H1, but EAD Is important to me. Is there a Way I can keep my L1? (so that my wife can keep her job)
Please help
I am working in US on L1B visa and Wife on L2. then Wife got a Job and her employer filled her 485.
In the mean time I applied for H1 (through a consultant, to get out of the L1B company). Looks like the H1 Got Approved. Now, I think the problem is, If I switch to H1, then she will loose her job and our chance of Getting EAD will go.
I do NOT want to go for H1, but EAD Is important to me. Is there a Way I can keep my L1? (so that my wife can keep her job)
Please help
GCanyMinute
08-02 01:56 PM
Hi Guys I'm pretty new in all this and i've been following this discussion and perhaps someone can help me.... here is the question.... Do I have a visa number available ?? If so why am I waiting that long??
here is my story:
i'm EB3 world - got my labor pd is 05/2002, and I concurrent filled I-485/I-140 on 05/2003.... already made 2 fingerprints..... I-140 was approved on 12/2005 (TSC).... i renew my EAD every year since I filled.
if what you guys are saying is correct that in order to accept the I-485 to be filled USCIS need to have a visa number available to the applicant.... y am I still waiting?? :confused:
thanks for the help and i'm sorry in advance for my lack of knowledge :)
here is my story:
i'm EB3 world - got my labor pd is 05/2002, and I concurrent filled I-485/I-140 on 05/2003.... already made 2 fingerprints..... I-140 was approved on 12/2005 (TSC).... i renew my EAD every year since I filled.
if what you guys are saying is correct that in order to accept the I-485 to be filled USCIS need to have a visa number available to the applicant.... y am I still waiting?? :confused:
thanks for the help and i'm sorry in advance for my lack of knowledge :)
2011 Children Reading Clip Art
rock
06-22 10:54 PM
When you get 485 approval you will not need EAD or AP :D
It's OK to file for EAD and AP yourself, I did it 4 times but you need I-485 receipt notice and I-140 receipt and then approval notice to do that. So if you are wiling to wait till your lawyer get notices (it could be months for those who are filing in July) and your employer and lawyer will provide you a copy of all notices - it's fine to file yourself.
Hi voldemar,
I am also in the similar but not exact situation. Recently I changed the employer. My new employer is going to file I-140 and I-485 using the Labor substitution.I also want to file EAD and AP but the company attorney is saying it is safer to file the EAD and AP once the I-140 is approved. Can any one please answer this is true or not? Should I wait for I-140 to be approved or should I try convince the attorney to file EAD and AP also along with I-140 and I-485. I have one more question which is if We do not file the EAD and AP along with the I-485 and once the priority dates are retrogessed. Can we file EAD and AP even though the priority dates are not current and our I-485 is pending?
I would appreciate the answers and any official links if available.
Thanks
It's OK to file for EAD and AP yourself, I did it 4 times but you need I-485 receipt notice and I-140 receipt and then approval notice to do that. So if you are wiling to wait till your lawyer get notices (it could be months for those who are filing in July) and your employer and lawyer will provide you a copy of all notices - it's fine to file yourself.
Hi voldemar,
I am also in the similar but not exact situation. Recently I changed the employer. My new employer is going to file I-140 and I-485 using the Labor substitution.I also want to file EAD and AP but the company attorney is saying it is safer to file the EAD and AP once the I-140 is approved. Can any one please answer this is true or not? Should I wait for I-140 to be approved or should I try convince the attorney to file EAD and AP also along with I-140 and I-485. I have one more question which is if We do not file the EAD and AP along with the I-485 and once the priority dates are retrogessed. Can we file EAD and AP even though the priority dates are not current and our I-485 is pending?
I would appreciate the answers and any official links if available.
Thanks
more...
gc_bulgaria
09-27 11:34 AM
Well - though white racists may oppose - anything related to economy and development does go through.
I personally think that if this proposal goes through - EU will be the next melting pot.
Racism is there everywhere, we find it in US also, even in India, you find caste system and inter state racism. With rising opportunities, such things may not really be visible especially in places where there are free zones.
Does anyone has more info on this?
Few more links:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6992670
http://www.workpermit.com/news/2007_01_23/japan/immigrant_worker_shortage.htm
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/07/188
I personally think that if this proposal goes through - EU will be the next melting pot.
Racism is there everywhere, we find it in US also, even in India, you find caste system and inter state racism. With rising opportunities, such things may not really be visible especially in places where there are free zones.
Does anyone has more info on this?
Few more links:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6992670
http://www.workpermit.com/news/2007_01_23/japan/immigrant_worker_shortage.htm
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/07/188
Jaime
09-28 06:11 PM
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070926/eu_immigration.html?.v=1
more...
Openarms
10-16 05:09 PM
This is one of the most important issue on this forum that ever taken care. I will do send letter with in couple of days.
2010 Open Clip Art Library Themed
widad2020
01-16 04:37 PM
Good one man. I can see myself while reading your story.
more...
bobbydalal
08-21 04:32 PM
luvchoclates ,
Hi first of all hats off to u for what u doing for someone whom u r even not related. All i can say is its really hard for someof these pepole to b in ur shoes n do half not more of what u have done. All i can say is i know of a real top notch lawyer and who has got green card done for most of my employees and is really good at what she does. U can either email me at vaishconsulting@hotmail.com and ill give u her # and put in a word to her for u and go frm there.
all the best
Hi first of all hats off to u for what u doing for someone whom u r even not related. All i can say is its really hard for someof these pepole to b in ur shoes n do half not more of what u have done. All i can say is i know of a real top notch lawyer and who has got green card done for most of my employees and is really good at what she does. U can either email me at vaishconsulting@hotmail.com and ill give u her # and put in a word to her for u and go frm there.
all the best
hair clip art wedding cake
bskrishna
07-22 05:12 PM
So there is a good possibility that PD will not go back much in October 08 for EB2 I. There are about 40-50 k visa nos. EB2 I nos seem to be 20-30 k from about mid 2004 to mid 2006. CIS is capable of issuing 25k visas a month. So this could really happen...
if the visa nos left unused, spills over to FB, how the recapture bill can work, as the nos are being really used in FB. am I not seeing something here..?
if the visa nos left unused, spills over to FB, how the recapture bill can work, as the nos are being really used in FB. am I not seeing something here..?
more...
jitnair
08-13 05:05 PM
From all my analysis i had 20k-45k number in mind (for Aug/Sept). A large portion of it for EB2-I (could be as large as 25k for the whole year 2008)
sachug22 - Your's and vldrao's analysis has been right on the money.
Now it is all about 'how quickly' the USCIS can process these applications. Looking at last July, there is hope !
30K for EB2-I (Assuming rest goes to EB1,EB2-ROW,EB2-C) can be substantial.
sachug22 - Your's and vldrao's analysis has been right on the money.
Now it is all about 'how quickly' the USCIS can process these applications. Looking at last July, there is hope !
30K for EB2-I (Assuming rest goes to EB1,EB2-ROW,EB2-C) can be substantial.
hot Dragon Clipart #4596 by Dennis
ItIsNotFunny
10-16 09:24 AM
Guys,
Someone left a red dot on post with message: " tells of your lack of ideas".
I never said that this is the only option left and we have to do this. This was one of the proposal / suggestion. We welcomed other suggestions too! What I wanted and I still want is to do something, I wanted to have a brain storming so that we can come up with some better positive idea. This is not new. We had similar hurdles when tried to request people to promote HR 5882 and other events.
Above note is a sign of complete loser. This type of people don't have guts to come up in front and express their views because they really don't have guts to do anything. I am not ashamed that I proposed flower campaign where there are other possibly better options available.
I still strongly believe that doing something is always better than cursing something who is trying to do something or doing nothing.
Seriously, its not illegal lobbies that we are more threatened by. Its our own people.
Someone left a red dot on post with message: " tells of your lack of ideas".
I never said that this is the only option left and we have to do this. This was one of the proposal / suggestion. We welcomed other suggestions too! What I wanted and I still want is to do something, I wanted to have a brain storming so that we can come up with some better positive idea. This is not new. We had similar hurdles when tried to request people to promote HR 5882 and other events.
Above note is a sign of complete loser. This type of people don't have guts to come up in front and express their views because they really don't have guts to do anything. I am not ashamed that I proposed flower campaign where there are other possibly better options available.
I still strongly believe that doing something is always better than cursing something who is trying to do something or doing nothing.
Seriously, its not illegal lobbies that we are more threatened by. Its our own people.
more...
house Thumbs Up Smiley Clip Art.
Nil
03-17 12:10 PM
of course i would not vote for any preferential treatment of qualification over category.
But in case certain people are heard of separately (example: folks with US education or prior experience qualifying them for a different category, as also the number of years they have paid taxes), it will only benefit the remaining.
The Masters degree exemption / extra number of H1 visas actually do not overload the total number of visas available as an instance.
But in case certain people are heard of separately (example: folks with US education or prior experience qualifying them for a different category, as also the number of years they have paid taxes), it will only benefit the remaining.
The Masters degree exemption / extra number of H1 visas actually do not overload the total number of visas available as an instance.
tattoo Dragon Templates Clipart
natrajs
09-18 11:04 PM
It was amazing
more...
pictures clip art black white
mi2
01-17 03:43 PM
Setup through my bank.
Good job IV!
Good job IV!
dresses Free Chili Pepper Clip Art
inskrish
02-22 12:41 AM
is there not a better nuance way to divulge the details without revealing the source.
What if someone at DOS creates problem for this gentlemen for discussing the PD's with you ahead .
Please exercise caution
Excellent point. We need to make sure the 'information provider' is not victimized.
What if someone at DOS creates problem for this gentlemen for discussing the PD's with you ahead .
Please exercise caution
Excellent point. We need to make sure the 'information provider' is not victimized.
more...
makeup clip art hair styles
atlfp
03-15 11:27 PM
It has to do with the labor processing. Before PERM was implemented, Labor certificate took a long time for a lot of States. So a lot of EB2 people was stuck in the labor cerfiticate stage when EB2 was current. Now they've passed that stage and are waiting.
C'mon guys, what the hell have you been doing for so long?
I mean look at the archived Visa Bulletins, you observe the following:
1. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2003
2. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2004
3. EB2 was current for India till August 2005
4. After the retrogression in 2005, EB2 India moved up quickly through 2003-2004 to April 2004 by the beginning of 2007
5. Even after the summer 2007 fiasco (EB2 Current fro July, August 2007), the priority date for EB2 India moved to April 2004 and stayed there for 3 months
What more do you wish for?
I don't understand how there any can be anyone from 2004-2005 India still left in the EB2 category.
This is pathetic. What the hell have you been waiting for?
C'mon guys, what the hell have you been doing for so long?
I mean look at the archived Visa Bulletins, you observe the following:
1. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2003
2. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2004
3. EB2 was current for India till August 2005
4. After the retrogression in 2005, EB2 India moved up quickly through 2003-2004 to April 2004 by the beginning of 2007
5. Even after the summer 2007 fiasco (EB2 Current fro July, August 2007), the priority date for EB2 India moved to April 2004 and stayed there for 3 months
What more do you wish for?
I don't understand how there any can be anyone from 2004-2005 India still left in the EB2 category.
This is pathetic. What the hell have you been waiting for?
girlfriend Top Of The Stroke clip art
vandanaverdia
09-10 03:45 PM
You have to carry a stack load of papers, documents, etc every time you go for your visa stamping & back....
hairstyles to clipart, volleyball
Ramba
07-09 07:44 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
I feel that they did not violate any clause. Till June 30 which is end of third quarter, they are authorized to approve (3*27%*140K) 113,400. However they approved only 66,400 till May 31. That yields about 47,000 for June alone(10%+any number not used in previous months). The reamining visas are eligible for Jul 1, which is 13,000. Put together June and July1, it comes 60,000. Therefore they did not violate any law. This makes only 126,000. The remaining number was splitted for Consular processing.
my 2 cents...
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
I feel that they did not violate any clause. Till June 30 which is end of third quarter, they are authorized to approve (3*27%*140K) 113,400. However they approved only 66,400 till May 31. That yields about 47,000 for June alone(10%+any number not used in previous months). The reamining visas are eligible for Jul 1, which is 13,000. Put together June and July1, it comes 60,000. Therefore they did not violate any law. This makes only 126,000. The remaining number was splitted for Consular processing.
my 2 cents...
abhijitp
07-24 12:16 AM
Pappu, Others:
My lawyer confirmed they were "unable to" include the Employment Verification Letter along with the AOS/ EAD/ AP packet that was submitted in time to reach USCIS on July 2.
What are my options now? If you have any insight please let me know.
I was wondering about doing one or both of the following two things:
1. Send Employment Verification Letter even before Receipt Notice is received for I-485. This is likely to be lost in the mess that it is now, but does not hurt trying!
2. Prepare and send another I-485 with all documents including Employment Verification Letter. Even if this is not recommended by some lawyers, I would think this is better than simply relying on the "common" practice of issuing an RFE instead of outright rejecting the I-485.
Thanks!
My lawyer confirmed they were "unable to" include the Employment Verification Letter along with the AOS/ EAD/ AP packet that was submitted in time to reach USCIS on July 2.
What are my options now? If you have any insight please let me know.
I was wondering about doing one or both of the following two things:
1. Send Employment Verification Letter even before Receipt Notice is received for I-485. This is likely to be lost in the mess that it is now, but does not hurt trying!
2. Prepare and send another I-485 with all documents including Employment Verification Letter. Even if this is not recommended by some lawyers, I would think this is better than simply relying on the "common" practice of issuing an RFE instead of outright rejecting the I-485.
Thanks!
vdlrao
07-14 01:26 PM
link does not work
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR07.shtm
see table 6 in that link
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR07.shtm
see table 6 in that link
0 comments:
Post a Comment