setpit_gc
04-22 02:15 AM
Hi
I am on H1 and have approved EAD.
Do I need to send H1 copy or EAD copy along with other documents for AP renewal?
Thanks for your help!.
I am on H1 and have approved EAD.
Do I need to send H1 copy or EAD copy along with other documents for AP renewal?
Thanks for your help!.
wallpaper Swarm of Butterflies in Flight
Macaca
09-26 12:19 PM
Please send a thank you email to the reporter....
Eilene Zimmerman
freelance journalist
v and f: 619.582.2192
ezimmerman@sbcglobal.net
This will be a great gesture on IV's part.
Ask her to write separately about us and mention IV! It appears the mistake was not intensional.
Stay in touch with her. We will need her later!
Eilene Zimmerman
freelance journalist
v and f: 619.582.2192
ezimmerman@sbcglobal.net
This will be a great gesture on IV's part.
Ask her to write separately about us and mention IV! It appears the mistake was not intensional.
Stay in touch with her. We will need her later!
jkays94
07-10 02:39 AM
It seems several persons are already discrediting the lawsuit and from the comments I have seen, it is apparent that some have not read the entire complaint.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
2011 quot;Swarmquot; by Kelvin Hudson
dish
07-16 06:22 PM
From now on every year, we should send a copy of I797 (H1B) and our tax records to each and every senator and house representative so that they do not get carried away by the misinterpreted facts presented to them by Lou Dobbs, NumbersUSA, Programmers Guild and FAIRUS.
more...
nlssubbu
09-28 06:20 PM
Sorry about the generalization. I was refering to Senthil1 kind of folks, not folks like you. Thanks for all the support. My friend got a green card as recently as a month back, he struggled for a long time before he got one, I asked him if he wants to come for the rally and he told me "MRRRRRRRR I GOT MY GREEN CARD, YOU ARE ASKING THE WRONG PERSON FOR THE RALLY" and the same person told me "SOMETHING MUST HAPPEN TO THESE ROTTEN CONSULTING COMPANIES, THEY ARE RUINING THE SYSTEM" he got his GC from a small consulting company and after getting his GC he says these companies must not exist - he wants to shut thee door behind him
These kind of people need to realise that they were in the same boat and just got across the shore. It does not mean that they should not help such people for a good cause. I hope that the current list of GC seekers do not fall in to such category in future. There are only a very few who lead by example and it is better to follow a good example. (That is why they are called leaders). I hope you can ignore these kind of people.
Thanks
These kind of people need to realise that they were in the same boat and just got across the shore. It does not mean that they should not help such people for a good cause. I hope that the current list of GC seekers do not fall in to such category in future. There are only a very few who lead by example and it is better to follow a good example. (That is why they are called leaders). I hope you can ignore these kind of people.
Thanks
anilsal
12-12 01:17 PM
If the attorneys have determined that there needs to be a INA change to allow I-485 filing during retrogression, has anybody bothered to find out what USCIS interpretation is?
USCIS interpretation can be binding!
USCIS interpretation can be binding!
more...
Macaca
04-04 10:49 AM
We already have a campaign to call legislators. Please call the legisltaors and inform them about these issues. Thanks!
2010 There#39;s also a utterfly on
ramus
07-02 08:20 PM
Just 700 so far.. Don't seem like we will be even close to 5000 by 10...
Members who contributed please ask others to contribute now..
Members who contributed please ask others to contribute now..
more...
thepaew
05-26 04:51 PM
We were traveling the Montr�al on Friday and saw this too. The Border Patrol had set up a roadblock on I-93 S and were stopping everyone.
While on the way back from White Mountains in NH, our car was stopped on I-93 south by the US border patrol. They were stopping every single vehicle to question. They had over a dozen Govt vehicles with 40-50 people in uniform. My buddy was driving.
Officer : Sir what is your status in the US ?
Buddy: I am on L1 visa
I: H1B
buddy's wife: L2
my wife: H4
officer: is anyone US citizen ?
I: my son is (he was sitting in the car seat)
Officer: (to my buddy) Is your visa still valid ?
Buddy: yes
officer: do you have documents to prove your status?
buddy: i have some papers in my bag which in the the trunk
officer: can you show me?
(buddy got out showed him tax papers and answered some questions)
officer: did they not tell you you are supposed to carry your papers while travelling?
buddy: I came over a year ago so i don't remember
officer: I am letting you go, but i could have fined you $2000; $500 for each pasenger with no papers.
I was so pissed off by this experience, clearly they are doing this to harrase immigrants. theoratically even if I am going for a walk i am supposed to carry immigration papers because a border patrol officer, in theory, could asks me for my papers ?
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/immigration_Border_flyer.pdf
I have decided that if anyone ask me such a stupid question again inside the US and i am just going to remain silent even if that means they detain me for some time.
While on the way back from White Mountains in NH, our car was stopped on I-93 south by the US border patrol. They were stopping every single vehicle to question. They had over a dozen Govt vehicles with 40-50 people in uniform. My buddy was driving.
Officer : Sir what is your status in the US ?
Buddy: I am on L1 visa
I: H1B
buddy's wife: L2
my wife: H4
officer: is anyone US citizen ?
I: my son is (he was sitting in the car seat)
Officer: (to my buddy) Is your visa still valid ?
Buddy: yes
officer: do you have documents to prove your status?
buddy: i have some papers in my bag which in the the trunk
officer: can you show me?
(buddy got out showed him tax papers and answered some questions)
officer: did they not tell you you are supposed to carry your papers while travelling?
buddy: I came over a year ago so i don't remember
officer: I am letting you go, but i could have fined you $2000; $500 for each pasenger with no papers.
I was so pissed off by this experience, clearly they are doing this to harrase immigrants. theoratically even if I am going for a walk i am supposed to carry immigration papers because a border patrol officer, in theory, could asks me for my papers ?
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/immigration_Border_flyer.pdf
I have decided that if anyone ask me such a stupid question again inside the US and i am just going to remain silent even if that means they detain me for some time.
hair Swarm, dyed velvet, 29x34
Jaime
09-13 03:47 AM
Tens of thousands guys! We can do this!!!!! All of you within driving or train distance of DC, see you there guys!!!!!!
more...
laborchic
09-12 11:06 AM
So many people in NJ Thread... How many are coming for the rallly....
Please forrward the Businessweek article to everyone.. This may give us a good bump in increasing the attendance..
Please forrward the Businessweek article to everyone.. This may give us a good bump in increasing the attendance..
hot Mexico#39;s monarch utterfly
srkamath
07-13 12:27 PM
But where are we getting these numbers like say 20k visas are available for EB2..
DOS / USCIS in their congressional testimony in May, stated that they have used up ~ 65% of the 140k EB numbers by April - that left us with ~ 49 k unused then.
Shortly thereafter, the VB said all the allotable numbers for EB3 had been used up and that all EB1 spillover and EB2 ROW leftovers will go to EB2 retrogressed countries.
DOS / USCIS in their congressional testimony in May, stated that they have used up ~ 65% of the 140k EB numbers by April - that left us with ~ 49 k unused then.
Shortly thereafter, the VB said all the allotable numbers for EB3 had been used up and that all EB1 spillover and EB2 ROW leftovers will go to EB2 retrogressed countries.
more...
house swarm of utterflies.
feedfront
09-21 12:23 PM
Hi Guys,
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Also they sent the RFE to my previous employer's attorney even though my current employer's attorney had sent the new G-28 forms. Can my current attorney respond to the RFE or will the response get rejected because USCIS still has old attorney on file.
Thanks.
Don't worry too much, just follow the instructions and respond. Well, I will suggest to use your current employer and their attorney as paperword will be smooth, efficient and fast.
You can hold your H1 transfer for a week or two till you don't respond.
I think your attorney (whoever you pick to work on RFE) will definitely mention AC-21 to keep it issueless.
I have also switched my employer and not filed AC-21. I've been sent RFE and that's what my attorney will do (I assume). I had asked him before (after switching job) if I needed to file AC21 letter. He said it's not mandatory and added that it can be handled if any RFEs are issued. Well, I did not send AC21 because he was asking for fee and I did not want to DIY project on such important. He's my previous employer's attorney.
I think for these RFEs you don't need great attorney as case is not complex. I think anything will work as long as you've not misused any GC's requirements.
Good Luck!
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Also they sent the RFE to my previous employer's attorney even though my current employer's attorney had sent the new G-28 forms. Can my current attorney respond to the RFE or will the response get rejected because USCIS still has old attorney on file.
Thanks.
Don't worry too much, just follow the instructions and respond. Well, I will suggest to use your current employer and their attorney as paperword will be smooth, efficient and fast.
You can hold your H1 transfer for a week or two till you don't respond.
I think your attorney (whoever you pick to work on RFE) will definitely mention AC-21 to keep it issueless.
I have also switched my employer and not filed AC-21. I've been sent RFE and that's what my attorney will do (I assume). I had asked him before (after switching job) if I needed to file AC21 letter. He said it's not mandatory and added that it can be handled if any RFEs are issued. Well, I did not send AC21 because he was asking for fee and I did not want to DIY project on such important. He's my previous employer's attorney.
I think for these RFEs you don't need great attorney as case is not complex. I think anything will work as long as you've not misused any GC's requirements.
Good Luck!
tattoo 3D on the utterflies
ZigZag
07-13 03:28 PM
See the attachment which I had come across in this forum and saved it
Hope this is helpful.
Hope this is helpful.
more...
pictures Swarm of Butterflies
sbabunle
12-26 07:48 PM
Munna Bhai
I talked to Atty Murthy's office about the same issue. They said that
they had couple of experience where I140 revoked. But USCIS honored
the original PD. But atty says that its kinda grey area. They could insist
that if I140 is revoked, new PD could be your change of employement date.
It depends on the officer . Some of them could honor PD. Some of them insist to the newer PD. Or some other officer may flip a coin and chose one. It will all depend on your luck.
good luck
babu
I talked to Atty Murthy's office about the same issue. They said that
they had couple of experience where I140 revoked. But USCIS honored
the original PD. But atty says that its kinda grey area. They could insist
that if I140 is revoked, new PD could be your change of employement date.
It depends on the officer . Some of them could honor PD. Some of them insist to the newer PD. Or some other officer may flip a coin and chose one. It will all depend on your luck.
good luck
babu
dresses swarm of utterflies.
shyamkishore
02-07 07:05 PM
My Dear IV Members,
I would like to open up my house for IV members during the advocacy days. I live in Herndon, VA about 25 miles from DC. I can accommodate up to 3 or 4 members if they can manage. DC is pretty much commutable from my house using the public transport.
Due to my work situation at present I am not sure if I will be able to participate actively. But I will be trying my best to at least make it for a day.
Regards,
Shyam
I would like to open up my house for IV members during the advocacy days. I live in Herndon, VA about 25 miles from DC. I can accommodate up to 3 or 4 members if they can manage. DC is pretty much commutable from my house using the public transport.
Due to my work situation at present I am not sure if I will be able to participate actively. But I will be trying my best to at least make it for a day.
Regards,
Shyam
more...
makeup swarm of utterflies
mariner5555
02-14 06:31 AM
Canuck,
There is no divide and rule policy by US as giving H1 does not mean that you have to file for Immigration, It is the choice of the person to get immigrated to US and US has set some policies by quota system. If you don't like it then no one is forcing you to stay back (US will say that if u sue USCIS).
Thought to chip in my 2 cents as you are showing similarities of british raj and US. First of all it was the fault of the kings in India during that time who were not united enough to kick them out.
Cheers
permfiling
EB2 -INDIA
N Cal Chapter maybe there is no divide and rule - but definitely when they thought of country limits - they must have debated and come to conclusion that there should not be domination from one country (as one country people can become powerful - demand more etc) .so in a way it is divide. but in this age - country limits dont make sense. the problem is laws dont change easily.
There is no divide and rule policy by US as giving H1 does not mean that you have to file for Immigration, It is the choice of the person to get immigrated to US and US has set some policies by quota system. If you don't like it then no one is forcing you to stay back (US will say that if u sue USCIS).
Thought to chip in my 2 cents as you are showing similarities of british raj and US. First of all it was the fault of the kings in India during that time who were not united enough to kick them out.
Cheers
permfiling
EB2 -INDIA
N Cal Chapter maybe there is no divide and rule - but definitely when they thought of country limits - they must have debated and come to conclusion that there should not be domination from one country (as one country people can become powerful - demand more etc) .so in a way it is divide. but in this age - country limits dont make sense. the problem is laws dont change easily.
girlfriend A common blue utterfly.
signifer123
02-16 01:02 PM
Lol only one person i know of said they were giving up man, i just have to replan my look for mine
hairstyles a swarm of utterflies
zerozerozeven
03-09 12:17 PM
let the waiting start for the May bulletin....
at0474
12-21 07:56 PM
lazycis,
According to 245(k), does it mean that "unauthorized stay" (or stay with expired I-94) of more than 1 year is wiped out if a nonimmigrant went out of the country, entered back with a new I-94 and maintained legal status ever since? He/she should not have any problems in adjusting status with 485?
I like your insight into immigration policies and the way you express them.
Thanks.
According to 245(k), does it mean that "unauthorized stay" (or stay with expired I-94) of more than 1 year is wiped out if a nonimmigrant went out of the country, entered back with a new I-94 and maintained legal status ever since? He/she should not have any problems in adjusting status with 485?
I like your insight into immigration policies and the way you express them.
Thanks.
rpuja
07-28 04:08 PM
please let me know how to close the thread. I do not want divide IV.