abhijitp
07-23 07:37 PM
When we emailed him about our concerns regarding this issue his response was the following:
I have won many cases without it. It�s not something we need to worry about at this point b/c we don�t have receipts yet. If immigration needs it they will likely request it.
To tell you the truth I'm still very worried.
The cited press releases do clearly say that they MAY deny an AOS application. What disturbs me is... why on earth should someone NOT obey the instructions which are clearly laid out on the front pages of the I-485 application forms? Is there a benefit to NOT submitting the employment letter?
I have won many cases without it. It�s not something we need to worry about at this point b/c we don�t have receipts yet. If immigration needs it they will likely request it.
To tell you the truth I'm still very worried.
The cited press releases do clearly say that they MAY deny an AOS application. What disturbs me is... why on earth should someone NOT obey the instructions which are clearly laid out on the front pages of the I-485 application forms? Is there a benefit to NOT submitting the employment letter?
wallpaper selena gomez and justin bieber
Lasantha
03-07 10:26 AM
Is it true that in some cases after you file for AC21, CIS would send a RFE for the financial details of the new company (to stablish that the new company can pay you - company tax details).
I think I heard this on the last IV attorney conference call with Attorney Prashanti. So if that's is true, what if the company does not want to send this kind of confidential information to a third party attorney (your attorney)?
Or if the company is a big one they may not want to help you with these details at all. You know, they may not want to be bothered with that sort of hassle.
Have any of you heard of a case where CIS asked for ability to pay supporting information for AC21?
I think I heard this on the last IV attorney conference call with Attorney Prashanti. So if that's is true, what if the company does not want to send this kind of confidential information to a third party attorney (your attorney)?
Or if the company is a big one they may not want to help you with these details at all. You know, they may not want to be bothered with that sort of hassle.
Have any of you heard of a case where CIS asked for ability to pay supporting information for AC21?
ssdtm
01-31 03:15 PM
What if the H4 candidate recieves H1 but decides not to start a job at all. What will be his/her status in that case? H4 or H1?
2011 justin-dec justinjustin ieber month over Justin+ieber+2009+wallpaper
jcgc
02-21 10:43 AM
NOT EVERYONE REGISTERS AT THESE POS SITES. lol
C'mon be realistic.
Exactly...If everyone registers, then we wouldnt need to estimate any ratios. Would we?
Also even when people do register their case on this site, not many register their dependents cases.
in FY08 we know for sure that EB2 Inida quota has been consumed. That gives a definite number of approvals to use for estimation. When i estimate that represents 6.75% of these cases (all cases upto Dec03), this ratio is a reasonable estimate of all the people who do not register.
C'mon be realistic.
Exactly...If everyone registers, then we wouldnt need to estimate any ratios. Would we?
Also even when people do register their case on this site, not many register their dependents cases.
in FY08 we know for sure that EB2 Inida quota has been consumed. That gives a definite number of approvals to use for estimation. When i estimate that represents 6.75% of these cases (all cases upto Dec03), this ratio is a reasonable estimate of all the people who do not register.
more...
lahiribaba
02-05 11:35 PM
like minded folks, please post your ideas.
This time to ombudsman office and to the white house. I have seen no other campaign been so successful like what we did in July 2007 that made USCIS reverse their decision.The whole point of this is to make a point to the ones who have the power to change things.
This time to ombudsman office and to the white house. I have seen no other campaign been so successful like what we did in July 2007 that made USCIS reverse their decision.The whole point of this is to make a point to the ones who have the power to change things.
reddymjm
09-10 01:10 PM
If there are no I-485 pending for EB2 I/C then the demand goes to zero (unless DOS/USCIS uses pending I-140s to decide demand). And if demand < supply then the category goes to current (atleast per the explanation in the demand data document).And definitely if EB2 I/C folks post July 2007 are allowed to file I-485 then USCIS will realize demand is not zero but say 50K. Then again next month PD goes back to late 2007.
I think visa numbers are assigned to I-485 before they are processed for demand data purposes, otherwise the demand data prior to CY 2006 for EB2 I will not be zero with some people with 05 PDs still waiting for GCs. But, again this is all speculation and the situation will be clear by Sep 2011 when almost all of EB2I/C pending I-485s will have been cleared.
There are 34k pending EB3 I and C till 2007. As per the quarterly quota both I and C get 750 a quarter which should place EB2 I and C in pending status. Coming to the last quarter yes they can Put all Current. Its all USCIS anything can happen.
I think visa numbers are assigned to I-485 before they are processed for demand data purposes, otherwise the demand data prior to CY 2006 for EB2 I will not be zero with some people with 05 PDs still waiting for GCs. But, again this is all speculation and the situation will be clear by Sep 2011 when almost all of EB2I/C pending I-485s will have been cleared.
There are 34k pending EB3 I and C till 2007. As per the quarterly quota both I and C get 750 a quarter which should place EB2 I and C in pending status. Coming to the last quarter yes they can Put all Current. Its all USCIS anything can happen.
more...
Lasantha
07-29 01:04 PM
I would definitely drink this beer if I can get my hands on it. Hopefully it will give me some brains! :D
2010 Allbum Justin Bieber
rajkr
06-11 11:48 AM
Everyone is again talking about ifs and buts. Guys why do not you put your hard work on what is more important than what is never ever going to happen. People with a GC, if this Bill passes, they are not going to renew your GC also. How's about that? People with a US citizenship, with previous GC status, they will not renew the USA passport, if this Bill passes. How's about that?
So forget all these bogus bills, and support our main agenda, which is to remove the Backlogs. If you do not have any new news, then sit idle, but please do not spread these bogus out-of-world stories.
So forget all these bogus bills, and support our main agenda, which is to remove the Backlogs. If you do not have any new news, then sit idle, but please do not spread these bogus out-of-world stories.
more...
thomachan72
11-11 03:59 PM
I am surprised that this thread is still active. Usually by this time somebody from the core group puts a statement and that usually closes the discussion. I am sure this will happen soon since atleast a few posters have been requesting asistance from Pappu regarding this issue. I am just waiting for that post to come...dont know when. Hey pappu why are you taking so long......why dont you post and tell all our friends who are currently so emotional about the reality of pursuing the legal option...
hair justin bieber wallpaper
logiclife
12-20 07:55 PM
<If anything like out of status or unauthorized employed happened before your last legal entry into USA (whether is more than 180 days or less than 180 days) IT DOES NOT MATTER and you can adjust status. You are fine. What's important is that "out of status" and "unauthorized stay" periods must not happen after you last entered USA and after you filed your 485 - and if it does happen, then it should be less than 180 days.>
So, logiclife, going with your above statement, I don't have any problem with my adustment of status? My last legal entry to the U.S was Mar, 2006. I applied for AOS in July, 2007. Can you point to any USCIS memo/documents stating the above facts? I was out of status in the year 2001 (more than 180 days).
This is not based on any memo. Its in the immigration and nationality act. That is even better because it wont change without an act of congress. Its rock solid. Memos and field manual can be changed by USCIS and they dont need change in laws. To change or edit 245(k), you need change in laws, which needs an act of congress. So the whole thing is on rock solid grounds.
The section is 8 USC � 1255 (k). Also known as 245(k).
Here is how to find the text of 245(k) on USCIS website:
1. Go to USCIS.gov
2. Go to "Laws and Regulations" menu item on top menu.
3. Click on "Immigration and Nationality Act" on the left menu.
4. Click on the link that says "Immigration and Nationality Act" below the 2 paragraph lecture.
5. Scroll down to Chapter 5 and go to "Act 245". DONT GO to "Act 245A".
6. Under Act 245, go to section (k), the lowercase k.
You will read this :
(k) 7/ An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 101(a)(27)(C) , under section 203(b)(4) ) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8), 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.
Another link is here http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
Go to (k) -lowercase k.
So, logiclife, going with your above statement, I don't have any problem with my adustment of status? My last legal entry to the U.S was Mar, 2006. I applied for AOS in July, 2007. Can you point to any USCIS memo/documents stating the above facts? I was out of status in the year 2001 (more than 180 days).
This is not based on any memo. Its in the immigration and nationality act. That is even better because it wont change without an act of congress. Its rock solid. Memos and field manual can be changed by USCIS and they dont need change in laws. To change or edit 245(k), you need change in laws, which needs an act of congress. So the whole thing is on rock solid grounds.
The section is 8 USC � 1255 (k). Also known as 245(k).
Here is how to find the text of 245(k) on USCIS website:
1. Go to USCIS.gov
2. Go to "Laws and Regulations" menu item on top menu.
3. Click on "Immigration and Nationality Act" on the left menu.
4. Click on the link that says "Immigration and Nationality Act" below the 2 paragraph lecture.
5. Scroll down to Chapter 5 and go to "Act 245". DONT GO to "Act 245A".
6. Under Act 245, go to section (k), the lowercase k.
You will read this :
(k) 7/ An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 101(a)(27)(C) , under section 203(b)(4) ) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8), 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.
Another link is here http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
Go to (k) -lowercase k.
more...
Dakota Newfie
07-03 06:22 AM
...that the system is severely backlogged and needs repair but to say it is unfair to limit the number of immigrants from one country does not make sense. Removing the per country limit would allow one or two countries to dominate the EB system because their high populations allow them to produce more skilled labor. So removing the per country limit would remove the "bias" off these countries and move it to the ones with lower populations; so, in essence the discrimination would be reversed? Maybe a point-based system that incorporates a per country score would be better?
hot justin bieber 2009 wallpaper. justin bieber 2009 wallpaper.
h1techSlave
03-17 02:04 PM
Including spillover generally EB3-I clears up around 5000 visas per year on average ( Though theoratically stuck at 3300-3500). 3 visas per applicant is at bit high end. I would not assume everybody is married AND have child.. I would put that around 1.75. But, yes, even if select these new parameters than also it would take years..Theoratically, ofcourse:):)
Based on your assumptions, it would take around 2 years to reach Dec 2003 for EB3-India.
# of visas required = 5000 or 6000 * 1.75 = 8750 or 10, 500
# of visas available = 5000
# years of wait until Dec 2003 = 1.75 to 2.1 years.
Based on your assumptions, it would take around 2 years to reach Dec 2003 for EB3-India.
# of visas required = 5000 or 6000 * 1.75 = 8750 or 10, 500
# of visas available = 5000
# years of wait until Dec 2003 = 1.75 to 2.1 years.
more...
house justin bieber wallpapers 2010.
bigboy007
06-10 08:43 PM
I disagree that it effects EB Community for EAD holders. COming on to options if the amendment stands it might take the form of TARP - God Forbid. Everyone of us predicted Financial industry has so much clout etc.. but those days are gone. I think US companies have decided to bend to laws and find ways to overcome them.
Reg. Options : we are here to earn bread. Just FYI for countries like Canada they have already closed gates. for Ppl who already have PR's over there life is not easy as "is" here right now in getting jobs. Moving the all operations to different country is only possible for companies like Microsoft. not all. btw no one will hire undocumented.
So we need to really motivate ourselves and friends against this headless draft version. This is not first time it came in to light everytime there was a immigration issue it used to come on top. But it failed as climate was cordial for immigrants or economy was good. Things have changed far far beyond in 2008 and TARP bill restrictions is one example where companies decided not to hire H1B at all (mostly) even it applies to TARP recipients.
My thoughts.
Guys,
Don't fire up on my comments given below.
I agree that ALL of us irrespective of EB category will be impacted if this proposed bill becomes a law.
Just step back and think for a minute, what is the impact on the US companies due to inability of his bright workers to continue working in US? Will US businesses sit tight without raising any concerns? No way...
This is just an eyewash to get political mileage. No matter what degree of love-hate relationship exists between voters and politicians. Certainly, political power cannot, and never will, have a brazen bill such as this, that will hurt American economy more than anything.
Let's assume for a moment that hypothetically this becomes law...
What will we do? Some of common options:
- Move to immigrant friendly country, OR
- Return to mother land, OR
- Company will move its operation, and you, to continue its operations, OR
- look at alternate legal ways to stay in this country until situation changes, OR
- Become undocumented alien :D
Guys, we still have options but US of A has too much at stake to make this text into a law.
Please don't get me wrong, I am in the same boat as all of you. It's just my 2 cents.
bhattji
Reg. Options : we are here to earn bread. Just FYI for countries like Canada they have already closed gates. for Ppl who already have PR's over there life is not easy as "is" here right now in getting jobs. Moving the all operations to different country is only possible for companies like Microsoft. not all. btw no one will hire undocumented.
So we need to really motivate ourselves and friends against this headless draft version. This is not first time it came in to light everytime there was a immigration issue it used to come on top. But it failed as climate was cordial for immigrants or economy was good. Things have changed far far beyond in 2008 and TARP bill restrictions is one example where companies decided not to hire H1B at all (mostly) even it applies to TARP recipients.
My thoughts.
Guys,
Don't fire up on my comments given below.
I agree that ALL of us irrespective of EB category will be impacted if this proposed bill becomes a law.
Just step back and think for a minute, what is the impact on the US companies due to inability of his bright workers to continue working in US? Will US businesses sit tight without raising any concerns? No way...
This is just an eyewash to get political mileage. No matter what degree of love-hate relationship exists between voters and politicians. Certainly, political power cannot, and never will, have a brazen bill such as this, that will hurt American economy more than anything.
Let's assume for a moment that hypothetically this becomes law...
What will we do? Some of common options:
- Move to immigrant friendly country, OR
- Return to mother land, OR
- Company will move its operation, and you, to continue its operations, OR
- look at alternate legal ways to stay in this country until situation changes, OR
- Become undocumented alien :D
Guys, we still have options but US of A has too much at stake to make this text into a law.
Please don't get me wrong, I am in the same boat as all of you. It's just my 2 cents.
bhattji
tattoo justin bieber 2009 wallpaper. justin bieber 2009 wallpaper.
prem_goel
07-12 08:15 PM
Spillover happens quarterly, but the visas are allocated in the last quarter! This is because the retrogressed countries are allocated their regular quota every quarter and the extra visas must be allocated based on the priority date, irrespective of the country! It would be difficult to allocate in the earlier quarters to achieve this!
So looking at the demand data used for determining Aug bulletin,
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
how far do you think it'll progress next month?
So looking at the demand data used for determining Aug bulletin,
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
how far do you think it'll progress next month?
more...
pictures makeup justin bieber 2009
sbeyyala
01-17 03:10 PM
signed up for $20 per month though paypal.
dresses Submitted: November 10, 2009
spicy_guy
07-27 05:45 PM
Everest Consulting Group Inc is really good. I know them personally for more than 10 years now & they do what they say and do NOT torture their employees like many other consulting firms. I just got my GC thru them :)
I hope this helps somebody & please let me know if I can be any further help!
Thanks.
Ramesh.
I just remember. It sounds like an radio ad by a talk radio host, Sean Hennity, Rush limbaugh, etc :D
"Axis Bank is great. They are the bay are experts. I know them personally. I worked with them for years, etc. etc..." :D :D
Just kidding...
I hope this helps somebody & please let me know if I can be any further help!
Thanks.
Ramesh.
I just remember. It sounds like an radio ad by a talk radio host, Sean Hennity, Rush limbaugh, etc :D
"Axis Bank is great. They are the bay are experts. I know them personally. I worked with them for years, etc. etc..." :D :D
Just kidding...
more...
makeup justin bieber 2009 wallpaper. justin bieber 2009 wallpaper.
grinch
03-07 07:43 PM
Aw darn!
It's alright nirvana, yet I think the only people in this right now are me, sun, eilsoe, and spark?
It's alright nirvana, yet I think the only people in this right now are me, sun, eilsoe, and spark?
girlfriend justin bieber 2009 wallpaper.
paskal
07-03 09:13 PM
If this is true, then everyone who thinks this is unfair must write letters to USCIS, Ombudsman, WH etc
USCIS does not read our forums and will not take action from a forum post.
If you see something wrong, and you feel strongly about it, Do not let it happen.
In hindsight I think we should have done it for labor substitution too.
nixstor, you right of course. i was not comparing it to labor sub, just pointing out that there are a myriad of loopholes. the EB1C is hardly meant for employees already here- sending them out and bringing them back is legal- yet its very much a loophole being exploited. in many cases - again just my anecdotal observation, the position is not just a fake manager- yet the position is not the real "concept" of a multinational manager either. i have seen attorneys in big corporate firms getting EB1c by this method.
i do believe though that over time USCIS has become aware of this activity. A little skimming of EB1c posts on reveals a great deal of new scrutiny for the EB1c 1-140 petitions. The same is true when an entirely new employee is being brought in. they are asking a lot of questions on company structures, hierarchy and individual roles and responsibilities....
USCIS does not read our forums and will not take action from a forum post.
If you see something wrong, and you feel strongly about it, Do not let it happen.
In hindsight I think we should have done it for labor substitution too.
nixstor, you right of course. i was not comparing it to labor sub, just pointing out that there are a myriad of loopholes. the EB1C is hardly meant for employees already here- sending them out and bringing them back is legal- yet its very much a loophole being exploited. in many cases - again just my anecdotal observation, the position is not just a fake manager- yet the position is not the real "concept" of a multinational manager either. i have seen attorneys in big corporate firms getting EB1c by this method.
i do believe though that over time USCIS has become aware of this activity. A little skimming of EB1c posts on reveals a great deal of new scrutiny for the EB1c 1-140 petitions. The same is true when an entirely new employee is being brought in. they are asking a lot of questions on company structures, hierarchy and individual roles and responsibilities....
hairstyles Justin Bieber Wallpaper justin
GCard_Dream
11-17 05:44 PM
What do you mean by "Most people have run out of H1B and will have to change jobs on the extensions"? I thought that as long as you have a approved I-140, you could continue to extend your H1-B beyond the 6 years while you are waiting for your PD to be current. Isn't this true? Please explain.
That's probably the path most people with (EB3 2003 onwards/EB2 2004 onwards) will take from now on. The only hurdle is there is no clarity about the law regarding H1B extensions granted on an approved I-140. Most people have run out of H1B and will have to change jobs on the extensions. I hope USCIS issues a clear guidance on this issue. Also you might not have to let go of the priority date if your company is kind enough.
That's probably the path most people with (EB3 2003 onwards/EB2 2004 onwards) will take from now on. The only hurdle is there is no clarity about the law regarding H1B extensions granted on an approved I-140. Most people have run out of H1B and will have to change jobs on the extensions. I hope USCIS issues a clear guidance on this issue. Also you might not have to let go of the priority date if your company is kind enough.
coopheal
04-11 04:00 PM
This was not inferred from Mexico EB3. I was explaining why EB3 Mexico became unavailable. Any category becoming U is nothing alarming. It just means there are no more visas available for that category for that year.
As for April 2001, it is the dreaded date for EB3-I India. The reason being all 245(i) applicants had a PD of April-2001 or earlier. If you haven't read 245(i) and its impact on EB3-I, please educate yourself regarding 245(i).
any category of EB3 or EB2 type going unavailable in May bulletin is alarming.
Most of us were under assumption that USCIS/DOS were keeping tight control on number of applications available..... USCIS and DOS has not given any other reason to believe otherwise...
However, this assumption proves wrong for Mexico and hence could turn out to be wrong for India as well. This has severe consequences on the VB dates movements...
It would mean DOS is actually approving lot more (double/triple the monthly rate) EB3-I applications and these applications are coming from Consulate Processing and those unaccounted for application in field offices.
so when most of us would be expecting EB3-I to be mid Oct or Nov it could turn unavailable.....
As for April 2001, it is the dreaded date for EB3-I India. The reason being all 245(i) applicants had a PD of April-2001 or earlier. If you haven't read 245(i) and its impact on EB3-I, please educate yourself regarding 245(i).
any category of EB3 or EB2 type going unavailable in May bulletin is alarming.
Most of us were under assumption that USCIS/DOS were keeping tight control on number of applications available..... USCIS and DOS has not given any other reason to believe otherwise...
However, this assumption proves wrong for Mexico and hence could turn out to be wrong for India as well. This has severe consequences on the VB dates movements...
It would mean DOS is actually approving lot more (double/triple the monthly rate) EB3-I applications and these applications are coming from Consulate Processing and those unaccounted for application in field offices.
so when most of us would be expecting EB3-I to be mid Oct or Nov it could turn unavailable.....
GC_dd
06-11 11:56 AM
done
No comments:
Post a Comment