EndlessWait
12-06 07:35 AM
Hello I opened 2 SRs 4 weeks ago. Yesterday I got two notices from USCIS.
My wife got finger printing notice but my notice says that "USCIS will notify me of biometrics when the appointment is available". Its so weird. I'm the prime applicant. Anybody any ideas? My lawyer said wait for 1 month. I spoke to USCIS customer service and they said wait for next month and open another SR.
My case was filed at NSC , then went to CSC and then transferred to NSC.
Anybody any ideas? Have they heard of cases where dependants are getting FP while Primary is waiting.
My wife got finger printing notice but my notice says that "USCIS will notify me of biometrics when the appointment is available". Its so weird. I'm the prime applicant. Anybody any ideas? My lawyer said wait for 1 month. I spoke to USCIS customer service and they said wait for next month and open another SR.
My case was filed at NSC , then went to CSC and then transferred to NSC.
Anybody any ideas? Have they heard of cases where dependants are getting FP while Primary is waiting.
wallpaper The term sexy tattoos
Googler
02-14 04:24 PM
"Based on a review of the facts and bedrock principles of administrative agency law, the Court finds that USCIS�s name check requirement has
(1) never been authorized by Congress;
(2) is not mentioned or contemplated by any fair reading of the current USCIS regulations; and
(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions..."
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%202-8-08.pdf
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.
(1) never been authorized by Congress;
(2) is not mentioned or contemplated by any fair reading of the current USCIS regulations; and
(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions..."
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%202-8-08.pdf
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.
needhelp!
10-22 08:13 PM
sw33t volunteering for this event coming all the way from San Antonio..
I know there are tons of IV members from DFW.
Please volunteer. need help!
I know there are tons of IV members from DFW.
Please volunteer. need help!
2011 skin rip tattoos
rockstart
10-23 01:59 PM
No point worrying over past. Go ahed and file a AR11 ASAP to make sure from now on USCIS has your updated address. In case in future this becomes an issue then contact a lawyer and try to resolve it.
But moving forward all non immigrants as well as GC holders should make sure they do not miss this important obligation to inform USCIS within 10 days of move. It is easy process and saves lots of trouble later on.
But moving forward all non immigrants as well as GC holders should make sure they do not miss this important obligation to inform USCIS within 10 days of move. It is easy process and saves lots of trouble later on.
more...
krupa
04-29 03:24 AM
I do not think that you have any issues to work on W2 with an end client or with any other consulting company. Since you have completed six months period with your present employer, who supported to file GC , from the date filing I 485, there should not be any issues at all. Also filing AC21 is optional. If you are on bench your first option should be to find a project ASAP.
Why do you do not want to file AC21, do you have any apprhencion or any specific reason ?
Regarding your first question : QUOTE [Could any one please answer my questions about my RFE on I 485?]
Many applicants got same RFE. I believe no body knows accurately reason for this type of RFE. There may be valid reason for this type of RFE , that 485 applicant is on bench for a long period , left USA surrendering I94 , Employer might have cancelled H1 visa and even some applicant got RFE without of any of these reasons.
Why do you do not want to file AC21, do you have any apprhencion or any specific reason ?
Regarding your first question : QUOTE [Could any one please answer my questions about my RFE on I 485?]
Many applicants got same RFE. I believe no body knows accurately reason for this type of RFE. There may be valid reason for this type of RFE , that 485 applicant is on bench for a long period , left USA surrendering I94 , Employer might have cancelled H1 visa and even some applicant got RFE without of any of these reasons.
Green06
10-15 11:35 AM
DMV laws vary from State to State. When I lived in CA they gave me 5+ yrs of DL but In my home state of Minnesota DMV puts status chek date on the DL which is the date of the I94 expiration. They send a letter at home to show the proof of extension otherwise the DL will be cancelled. I am planning to get it extended by using EAD (i haven't received EAD yet and my H1b extension is being applied). I read on Murthy's site that using EAD for DMV pupose doesn't affect the H1b status.
more...
shivarajan
03-17 08:00 PM
EAD etc. are only supplementing documentation which the underwriting agency may or may not look. The real thingy is ur cashdown, credit score (time of accounts in good standing) & W2's. We went with ING with absolutely no problems whatsoever (yes the market was not good at that time) and got a better interest rate with no questions asked (ead, gc etc.), we both ver in h1's when v applied!
2010 gray skin rip incredible
morchu
08-02 01:14 AM
I believe it is worth the 180 days wait. And AC-21 is practical for a lot of situations. Anyway you dont really have to wait 180 days, if you can convince the current employer not to revoke the 140 (at least for the next 180 days).
My answer should have been different if you were not eligible to file 485.
Also give some serious thoughts about filing 485 before marriage. If you are unlucky enough, it can have serious side-effects.
EB3 with PD of July 2006. I-140 Approved. 485 +EAD+AP filed 2 weeks ago.
I was contemplating on job change before dates became current in June and decision to accept 485....
Now that 485 is filed and this DUST has settled, wondering whether all this is worth the wait. (even 180 days).
Currently in my 5th year of H1b, by waiting out the 6 months, I'll also get 3 yr h1b ext. (and hopefully ead by then).
So is waiting 180 days the best choice? or screw all this and change! (I dunno if this AC21 etc etc is practical...same job description etc)
(I am single and those complexities are not to be considered I guess yet.
Plan is to try and change jobs on H1b and use EAD only if there is a dire need like layoff to find another job quicker)
My answer should have been different if you were not eligible to file 485.
Also give some serious thoughts about filing 485 before marriage. If you are unlucky enough, it can have serious side-effects.
EB3 with PD of July 2006. I-140 Approved. 485 +EAD+AP filed 2 weeks ago.
I was contemplating on job change before dates became current in June and decision to accept 485....
Now that 485 is filed and this DUST has settled, wondering whether all this is worth the wait. (even 180 days).
Currently in my 5th year of H1b, by waiting out the 6 months, I'll also get 3 yr h1b ext. (and hopefully ead by then).
So is waiting 180 days the best choice? or screw all this and change! (I dunno if this AC21 etc etc is practical...same job description etc)
(I am single and those complexities are not to be considered I guess yet.
Plan is to try and change jobs on H1b and use EAD only if there is a dire need like layoff to find another job quicker)
more...
mallu
09-26 10:03 PM
Thanks. But GC still sucks because of the long process. Good Luck to everyone.
PD - 04/2002
EB3 - ROW
I-485 RD - 03/2007
I-485 AD - 09/2007
Congrats. So you are an old timer, with PD 2002. (Being from ROW) you luckily escaped the name check torture.
I am also a relatively old timer ( PD Nov. 2002 ). Unfortunately stuck in namecheck since Aug.2006. My fellow Indians say , i can just sit like this for another 2 - 3 years in name check :-(
PD - 04/2002
EB3 - ROW
I-485 RD - 03/2007
I-485 AD - 09/2007
Congrats. So you are an old timer, with PD 2002. (Being from ROW) you luckily escaped the name check torture.
I am also a relatively old timer ( PD Nov. 2002 ). Unfortunately stuck in namecheck since Aug.2006. My fellow Indians say , i can just sit like this for another 2 - 3 years in name check :-(
hair aussi flag skin rip tattoo on
SDdesi
08-06 04:43 PM
Which center? TSC/NSC ??
more...
NO_Free_Rider
09-14 12:47 PM
Looks like your I140s denied for ability to pay (based on the RFEs). But also you were paid more than the prevailing wages! Per my exp, even if company makes loss, but you were getting paid, it shouldn't be a reason for denial.
I came to US on H1B in 2000. I have an engineering degree (10+2+4) from a premier institute in India in Information Systems. Before coming to US I worked for an MNC for 4+ years. I am with the current employer since 2003. Following are my case details.
Case 1:
EB2 Labor filed: April 2005
Labor Approved: December 2005
I-140 Filed: January 2006
RFE for Ability 2 pay and RFE replied.
I-140 Denied: August 2007
Never recieved the denial notice as per the lawyer
Case 2:
EB2 Labor filed: August 2005
Labor Approved: January 2006
I-140 Filed: August 2007 (I checked the status online and informed the lawyer who immediately filed for this I-140 basing on the approved labor)
I-485 Filed: August 2007
RFE for W2/wages company tax information etc that were replied on time.
I-140 Denied Sep 2009
EAD valid till October: 2010
AP Valid till Feb 2010
H1 B 8th year extension filed: July 2008 (There was a mistake during the filing as the reference was made to denied I-140 instead of the pending one)
Extension Denied based on Case 1 I-140: October 2008
I-290B Appeal to commissioner filed and pending as of date
Case 3:
Pending EB2 labor since October 2008.
I am paid more than the prevailing wages. Now the question is:
1. Should I file for MTR/Appeal (we still haven't recieved the denial notice).
2. I believe it is just a matter of time before I-485 status changes to denied. Will the EAD/AP become invalid as well?
3. If MTR/Appeal is filed for I-140, can I still continue working?
Any thoughts or suggestions will be appreciated.
I came to US on H1B in 2000. I have an engineering degree (10+2+4) from a premier institute in India in Information Systems. Before coming to US I worked for an MNC for 4+ years. I am with the current employer since 2003. Following are my case details.
Case 1:
EB2 Labor filed: April 2005
Labor Approved: December 2005
I-140 Filed: January 2006
RFE for Ability 2 pay and RFE replied.
I-140 Denied: August 2007
Never recieved the denial notice as per the lawyer
Case 2:
EB2 Labor filed: August 2005
Labor Approved: January 2006
I-140 Filed: August 2007 (I checked the status online and informed the lawyer who immediately filed for this I-140 basing on the approved labor)
I-485 Filed: August 2007
RFE for W2/wages company tax information etc that were replied on time.
I-140 Denied Sep 2009
EAD valid till October: 2010
AP Valid till Feb 2010
H1 B 8th year extension filed: July 2008 (There was a mistake during the filing as the reference was made to denied I-140 instead of the pending one)
Extension Denied based on Case 1 I-140: October 2008
I-290B Appeal to commissioner filed and pending as of date
Case 3:
Pending EB2 labor since October 2008.
I am paid more than the prevailing wages. Now the question is:
1. Should I file for MTR/Appeal (we still haven't recieved the denial notice).
2. I believe it is just a matter of time before I-485 status changes to denied. Will the EAD/AP become invalid as well?
3. If MTR/Appeal is filed for I-140, can I still continue working?
Any thoughts or suggestions will be appreciated.
hot Green Monster Skin Rip Tattoo
mambarg
07-20 08:40 AM
My attorney said e-notice is fine and applied.
but in enotice it is written
Please note that this e-mail message is being sent as a
courtesy and cannot be used as evidence of nonimmigrant
status. Nor can this message be used as evidence to procure
an immigrant visa
I am worried if my packages comes back after aug 17?
but in enotice it is written
Please note that this e-mail message is being sent as a
courtesy and cannot be used as evidence of nonimmigrant
status. Nor can this message be used as evidence to procure
an immigrant visa
I am worried if my packages comes back after aug 17?
more...
house Heart tattoo design with
learning01
02-25 05:03 PM
This is the most compelling piece I read about why this country should do more for scientists and engineers who are on temporary work visas. Read it till the end and enjoy.
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
tattoo cool rip tattoos
nabs501
07-17 06:07 PM
If his fiance is in the US, then it's easy. Just do a court marriage; get the marriage certificate and file for I485.
If his fiance is abroad then he can make a trip; get married and take her back to US and file. Remember, all the applicants need to be present in the US to file AoS.
If she does not have a visa to come to the US; then just wait...
I dont think it makes sense to file now; get married and re-file again. It's also risky just to some extent if his application is approved before ge get married.
Also, just a friendly suggeston:
Ask him to join IV :)
If his fiance is abroad then he can make a trip; get married and take her back to US and file. Remember, all the applicants need to be present in the US to file AoS.
If she does not have a visa to come to the US; then just wait...
I dont think it makes sense to file now; get married and re-file again. It's also risky just to some extent if his application is approved before ge get married.
Also, just a friendly suggeston:
Ask him to join IV :)
more...
pictures Skin Rip Tattoo Designs
gc@waiting
07-25 06:17 AM
Can someone shed some light as to what exactly are the things checked and the steps in 140 processing? Is it one's education credentials or employer history and/or ability to employ/pay etc?
dresses 3d tattoo
Z.Liu
06-18 05:52 PM
Hi, Guys,
My attorney just emailed me a list of items he needs from me for filing 485. The list is surprisingly short. Is this package really sufficient?
******requested for 485 filing*************
For your wife:
1. Marriage certificate, w/English translation
2. Birth certificate w/ English translation
3. Biographical information page, and date of issuance/expiration page, from current passport
4. Copy of her current visa
5. Copies of other US visas you have had
6. Current I-94 card
7. Passport entry stamp from last entry into the United States
8. Six (6) passport photos
For you:
1. Birth certificate, w/ English translation
2. Six (6) passport photos
3. Last two (2) paycheck stubs
**********************************************
*medical exam forms also asked separately.
My condition: filing with current employer. I-140 was recently approved.
Thanks alot.
:cool:
My attorney just emailed me a list of items he needs from me for filing 485. The list is surprisingly short. Is this package really sufficient?
******requested for 485 filing*************
For your wife:
1. Marriage certificate, w/English translation
2. Birth certificate w/ English translation
3. Biographical information page, and date of issuance/expiration page, from current passport
4. Copy of her current visa
5. Copies of other US visas you have had
6. Current I-94 card
7. Passport entry stamp from last entry into the United States
8. Six (6) passport photos
For you:
1. Birth certificate, w/ English translation
2. Six (6) passport photos
3. Last two (2) paycheck stubs
**********************************************
*medical exam forms also asked separately.
My condition: filing with current employer. I-140 was recently approved.
Thanks alot.
:cool:
more...
makeup Artist: Flames - Skin Flixx
mavrick
06-02 05:38 PM
My H1 B Visa and my wife's H4 is being transfered to a new employer. We filed under premium processing last friday (30th May). We have a family emergency and my question is whether my wife can travel to India before our applications are approved. I will remain in the country. Only she will be travelling. Your inputs will be much appreciated in this trying time.
girlfriend skin rip tattoos.
itstimenow
08-08 12:12 AM
hey Ration_Card - if u don't mind.. let's talk in private - just wanted to see and check few things on my side. Hope it's not a problem to you? where are you located? let me know.
hairstyles skin rip tattoo
Ann Ruben
01-08 09:39 PM
Unfortunately, your new wife cannot file the I-485 until your PD becomes current. Because she cannot file her I-485, she will not be entitled to an EAD based on having a pending I-485. If your new wife's country of birth is not the same as yours, you both may benefit from quota cross-chargeability rules.
India76
07-16 09:30 PM
guys....please answer...
like many of you i am waiting to file my I-485. My attorney didn't file mine once news was out on july 2nd. and now i am going to india on 19th July as my mother is in serious condition and coming back on 3rd august.
If DHS/USCIS announce that we can file AOS in july, what are my options? can my attorney file my papers when i am in india?
like many of you i am waiting to file my I-485. My attorney didn't file mine once news was out on july 2nd. and now i am going to india on 19th July as my mother is in serious condition and coming back on 3rd august.
If DHS/USCIS announce that we can file AOS in july, what are my options? can my attorney file my papers when i am in india?
jags_e
08-30 02:58 PM
There is a main article on the reverse brain drain in EE Times and it mentions the IV's September 18 rally too.
The link is http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=314X3PTACJUWMQSNDLOSK HSCJUNN2JVN;?articleID=201802703
EE Times: Latest News
Green-card red tape sends valuable engineers packing
Disenchanted with life in immigration limbo, San Antonio resident Praveen Arumbakkam is abandoning his American dream and returning to his native India.
A senior programmer at a fast-growing IT company, Arumbakkam volunteered for the Red Cross in Texas after Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005. He worked on disaster recovery management software to locate displaced persons, track donations and organize aid distribution.
He had hoped to start a nonprofit disaster recovery management solutions company in the United States, but now he's decided he doesn't want to wait any longer for his green card.
When professionals such as Arumbakkam give up on the States, it creates serious economic consequences, said Vivek Wadhwa, lead author of a study on the subject released last week.
"We've set the stage here for a massive reverse brain drain," said Wadhwa, Wertheim Fellow at Harvard Law School's Labor and Worklife Program.
By the end of fiscal 2006, half a million foreign nationals living in the U.S. were waiting for employment-based green cards, according to the study, released by the nonprofit Kauffman Foundation. Titled "Intellectual Property, the Immigration Backlog, and a Reverse Brain-Drain," the study was based on research by Duke, Harvard and New York University. If spouses and children are included, the number exceeds 1 million.
The study looked at the three main types of employment-based green cards, which cover skill-based immigrants and their immediate families. Including pros- pective immigrants awaiting U.S. legal permanent resident status but living abroad, the numbers hit almost 600,000 in the first group and almost 1.2 million in the second.
The number of available green cards in the three categories totals approximately 120,000. "If there are over a million persons in line for 120,000 visas a year, then we have already mortgaged almost nine years' worth of employment visas," said study author Guillermina Jasso, an NYU sociology professor.
The report also notes that foreign nationals were listed as inventors or co-inventors on 25.6 percent of the international-patent app-lications filed from the United States in 2006, up from 7.6 percent in 1998.
U.S. companies bring in many highly skilled foreigners on temporary visas and train them in U.S. business practices, noted Wadhwa, an executive in residence at Duke University's Pratt School of Engineering. Those workers are then forced to leave, and "they become our competitors. That's as stupid as it gets," he said. "How can this country be so dumb as to bring people in on temporary visas, train them in our way of doing business and then send them back to compete with us?"
Many in the engineering profession argue that American tech employers take advantage of the work visa system for their own benefit. They state that though there is plenty of American engineering talent available, employers use the programs to hire cheaper foreign labor.
And others counter the concern that large numbers of foreign residents will depart America. Most immigrants who have waited years for green cards will remain firm in their resolve, given the time and effort they have already invested, believes Norm Matloff, a computer science professor at the University of California at Davis. "People are here because they want to be here," he said. "They place a high value on immigrating."
But while Arumbakkam wants to be here, he has had enough of waiting. And his story is typical of those foreign-born tech professionals who return home.
In July 2001, the then 27-year-old Arumbakkam arrived on a student visa to get his master's in information technology at Clarkson University in Potsdam, New York. He has a bachelor's degree from the highly ranked University of Madras in southern India.
Arumbakkam said he "pretty much loved the society and the infrastructure for advanced education" in the States. In the post-Sept. 11 climate toward foreigners, however, he found it difficult to get work. After sending out countless resumes, he took an internship in Baltimore, followed by a job in Michigan.
That post didn't bring him any closer to his goal of permanent residency, however. He next took a job in San Antonio and insisted his employer secure him a green card. About that time, the government established an "application backlog elimination" center. "My application went straight into this chasm. I don't know what happened after that," he said. "That was pretty much a blow."
In 2005, he landed his current job, where he's happy with the work environment and the salary. His employer applied for a green card when the government rolled out an online system that was supposed to streamline the process.
But since then, with two applications in the works, Arumbakkam has been waiting-and waiting. In the meantime, his work status can't change, meaning no pay raises or promotions.
Page 2 of 2
Arumbakkam knows plenty of others in the same boat. In early 2006, he ran across Immigration Voice, a nonprofit national group that supports changes in immigration law affecting highly skilled workers. The 22,000-member organization includes professionals in a wide range of fields, from engineers and doctors to architects. Many have families, and all are stuck in the legal process.
"I heard horror stories," said Arumbakkam. One is the tale of a quality assurance engineer employed by a midsized consulting firm in Oklahoma working with Fortune 50 companies. The Indian engineer was hired at a salary that was 30 percent lower than he expected. This was in exchange for the promise that his employer would file a green card application. He was told the money would go to attorneys' fees.
For four years, the engineer asked about his application and was repeatedly told it was coming along. The employer blamed the slow progress on the law firm. In fact, the employer had never filed the application. Finally, the engineer found other work and restarted his efforts to obtain permanent residence.
In another case, a senior strategic projects manager who has an engineering background and is working for a Fortune 100 company has been waiting 13 years for his green card, Arumbakkam said.
That manager, also Indian, applied for permanent residency in Canada at the same time he applied for it in the States. After 18 months, Canada offered it to him and his family. His wife and children moved to Vancouver, B.C., where he visits regularly while waiting for a change in his U.S. residency status.
Indians in the United States often have too much trust in their employers and lack knowledge of resources that could help them understand their immigration options, Arumbakkam said. He plans to attend an Immigration Voice rally in Washington on Sept. 18 to urge congressional action on immigration.
But he isn't optimistic. "I just feel that I'm getting pushed further down as far as my career is concerned," he said.
...................
The link is http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=314X3PTACJUWMQSNDLOSK HSCJUNN2JVN;?articleID=201802703
EE Times: Latest News
Green-card red tape sends valuable engineers packing
Disenchanted with life in immigration limbo, San Antonio resident Praveen Arumbakkam is abandoning his American dream and returning to his native India.
A senior programmer at a fast-growing IT company, Arumbakkam volunteered for the Red Cross in Texas after Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005. He worked on disaster recovery management software to locate displaced persons, track donations and organize aid distribution.
He had hoped to start a nonprofit disaster recovery management solutions company in the United States, but now he's decided he doesn't want to wait any longer for his green card.
When professionals such as Arumbakkam give up on the States, it creates serious economic consequences, said Vivek Wadhwa, lead author of a study on the subject released last week.
"We've set the stage here for a massive reverse brain drain," said Wadhwa, Wertheim Fellow at Harvard Law School's Labor and Worklife Program.
By the end of fiscal 2006, half a million foreign nationals living in the U.S. were waiting for employment-based green cards, according to the study, released by the nonprofit Kauffman Foundation. Titled "Intellectual Property, the Immigration Backlog, and a Reverse Brain-Drain," the study was based on research by Duke, Harvard and New York University. If spouses and children are included, the number exceeds 1 million.
The study looked at the three main types of employment-based green cards, which cover skill-based immigrants and their immediate families. Including pros- pective immigrants awaiting U.S. legal permanent resident status but living abroad, the numbers hit almost 600,000 in the first group and almost 1.2 million in the second.
The number of available green cards in the three categories totals approximately 120,000. "If there are over a million persons in line for 120,000 visas a year, then we have already mortgaged almost nine years' worth of employment visas," said study author Guillermina Jasso, an NYU sociology professor.
The report also notes that foreign nationals were listed as inventors or co-inventors on 25.6 percent of the international-patent app-lications filed from the United States in 2006, up from 7.6 percent in 1998.
U.S. companies bring in many highly skilled foreigners on temporary visas and train them in U.S. business practices, noted Wadhwa, an executive in residence at Duke University's Pratt School of Engineering. Those workers are then forced to leave, and "they become our competitors. That's as stupid as it gets," he said. "How can this country be so dumb as to bring people in on temporary visas, train them in our way of doing business and then send them back to compete with us?"
Many in the engineering profession argue that American tech employers take advantage of the work visa system for their own benefit. They state that though there is plenty of American engineering talent available, employers use the programs to hire cheaper foreign labor.
And others counter the concern that large numbers of foreign residents will depart America. Most immigrants who have waited years for green cards will remain firm in their resolve, given the time and effort they have already invested, believes Norm Matloff, a computer science professor at the University of California at Davis. "People are here because they want to be here," he said. "They place a high value on immigrating."
But while Arumbakkam wants to be here, he has had enough of waiting. And his story is typical of those foreign-born tech professionals who return home.
In July 2001, the then 27-year-old Arumbakkam arrived on a student visa to get his master's in information technology at Clarkson University in Potsdam, New York. He has a bachelor's degree from the highly ranked University of Madras in southern India.
Arumbakkam said he "pretty much loved the society and the infrastructure for advanced education" in the States. In the post-Sept. 11 climate toward foreigners, however, he found it difficult to get work. After sending out countless resumes, he took an internship in Baltimore, followed by a job in Michigan.
That post didn't bring him any closer to his goal of permanent residency, however. He next took a job in San Antonio and insisted his employer secure him a green card. About that time, the government established an "application backlog elimination" center. "My application went straight into this chasm. I don't know what happened after that," he said. "That was pretty much a blow."
In 2005, he landed his current job, where he's happy with the work environment and the salary. His employer applied for a green card when the government rolled out an online system that was supposed to streamline the process.
But since then, with two applications in the works, Arumbakkam has been waiting-and waiting. In the meantime, his work status can't change, meaning no pay raises or promotions.
Page 2 of 2
Arumbakkam knows plenty of others in the same boat. In early 2006, he ran across Immigration Voice, a nonprofit national group that supports changes in immigration law affecting highly skilled workers. The 22,000-member organization includes professionals in a wide range of fields, from engineers and doctors to architects. Many have families, and all are stuck in the legal process.
"I heard horror stories," said Arumbakkam. One is the tale of a quality assurance engineer employed by a midsized consulting firm in Oklahoma working with Fortune 50 companies. The Indian engineer was hired at a salary that was 30 percent lower than he expected. This was in exchange for the promise that his employer would file a green card application. He was told the money would go to attorneys' fees.
For four years, the engineer asked about his application and was repeatedly told it was coming along. The employer blamed the slow progress on the law firm. In fact, the employer had never filed the application. Finally, the engineer found other work and restarted his efforts to obtain permanent residence.
In another case, a senior strategic projects manager who has an engineering background and is working for a Fortune 100 company has been waiting 13 years for his green card, Arumbakkam said.
That manager, also Indian, applied for permanent residency in Canada at the same time he applied for it in the States. After 18 months, Canada offered it to him and his family. His wife and children moved to Vancouver, B.C., where he visits regularly while waiting for a change in his U.S. residency status.
Indians in the United States often have too much trust in their employers and lack knowledge of resources that could help them understand their immigration options, Arumbakkam said. He plans to attend an Immigration Voice rally in Washington on Sept. 18 to urge congressional action on immigration.
But he isn't optimistic. "I just feel that I'm getting pushed further down as far as my career is concerned," he said.
...................
אין תגובות:
הוסף רשומת תגובה