masterji
08-09 05:43 PM
Thank you prabasiodia.
So, the people who filed 485 let's say during July 2007, MAY change jobs when they start receiving GCs during 2010? Is this correct?
I think these memos might have been dissected a thousand times, but here they are:
Continuing validity of I-140: http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/I140_AC21_8403.pdf
AC21 guidelines: http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21intrm051205.pdf
It's clear that the stress is on "intent". If at the filing of I-485, both the employer and the employee had the intent, it's fine. The only restriction is, one may not be looking for "same or similar" job at the time of I-485 adjudication. Why this restriction is even there is beyond me. It doesn't clearly state how much time after the adjudication, you should not be looking.
Of course, the lawyers seem to be on the cautious side. Read the last sentence under intent in the following site (AC21: Changing employer while waiting for pending adjustment of status (http://www..com/greencard/adjustmentofstatus/changing-employer.html) ). It says that ...theoretically, USCIS might be able to revisit the adjudication of I-485 and initiate revocation processing.
This inference is without any attribution.
Then again, I couldn't find a single case where the I-485 was revoked because of suspected fraud in "Intent". We do need clarification from USCIS on this.
So, the people who filed 485 let's say during July 2007, MAY change jobs when they start receiving GCs during 2010? Is this correct?
I think these memos might have been dissected a thousand times, but here they are:
Continuing validity of I-140: http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/I140_AC21_8403.pdf
AC21 guidelines: http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21intrm051205.pdf
It's clear that the stress is on "intent". If at the filing of I-485, both the employer and the employee had the intent, it's fine. The only restriction is, one may not be looking for "same or similar" job at the time of I-485 adjudication. Why this restriction is even there is beyond me. It doesn't clearly state how much time after the adjudication, you should not be looking.
Of course, the lawyers seem to be on the cautious side. Read the last sentence under intent in the following site (AC21: Changing employer while waiting for pending adjustment of status (http://www..com/greencard/adjustmentofstatus/changing-employer.html) ). It says that ...theoretically, USCIS might be able to revisit the adjudication of I-485 and initiate revocation processing.
This inference is without any attribution.
Then again, I couldn't find a single case where the I-485 was revoked because of suspected fraud in "Intent". We do need clarification from USCIS on this.
wallpaper Vin Diesel as Dominic Toretto
chanduv23
05-13 12:01 PM
Folks - here is what you all do.
Please contact the Ombudsman's office. Fill out the form 7001 and explain the issue in detail and attach copies of your MTR submissions, notices etc....
Contact your Senators - go to their websites and look for constituent services and follow what is there on their website.
Contact your Congresman - usually congressman's office will give more personal attention. I recommend that you personally go to COngressman's office and talk to the immigration expert there. They will help.
Also, please feel free to contact IV with the issue. You can sed me an email and I will forward it to IV core to see what can be done.
Please contact the Ombudsman's office. Fill out the form 7001 and explain the issue in detail and attach copies of your MTR submissions, notices etc....
Contact your Senators - go to their websites and look for constituent services and follow what is there on their website.
Contact your Congresman - usually congressman's office will give more personal attention. I recommend that you personally go to COngressman's office and talk to the immigration expert there. They will help.
Also, please feel free to contact IV with the issue. You can sed me an email and I will forward it to IV core to see what can be done.
vvr
05-20 02:21 AM
Way to shine guys ! Any more suggestions for a "brand new" quota ?
2011 vin diesel body 2011.
ireddy
08-22 01:58 PM
They worked enough for this year and they have lot to do. According to my guess they have the following pending work.
1. Issue Receipts (Sep/October)
2. Issue EAD cards for approx 300,000 applicants? (October/November/December)
3. Issues AP for 300,000 (October/November/December)
On top of this they need to celebrate thanksgiving and christmas like every citizen. So don't expect too much from them for this year.
If at all there is some momement in EB numbers, that will happen only between Jan-March(before H1-B madness starts).
Good luck !
I think you missed a new one (in news today)
- Issue new Green Cards for 750,000 (cards without expiration dates have to be replaced)
1. Issue Receipts (Sep/October)
2. Issue EAD cards for approx 300,000 applicants? (October/November/December)
3. Issues AP for 300,000 (October/November/December)
On top of this they need to celebrate thanksgiving and christmas like every citizen. So don't expect too much from them for this year.
If at all there is some momement in EB numbers, that will happen only between Jan-March(before H1-B madness starts).
Good luck !
I think you missed a new one (in news today)
- Issue new Green Cards for 750,000 (cards without expiration dates have to be replaced)
more...
skynet2500
11-25 04:12 PM
Thanks Pappu and IV. the data looks very rosy for EB2 I. I hope it is accurate..:)
thakurrajiv
07-02 03:10 PM
My company paid for attorney fees. I dont know the amount for that.
My pocket expense
$380 - medical tests
$60 - photographs
$50 - mailing fees.
Obviously, no money can account for the mental torture I and my family have been going through once we learned about visa bulletion revision rumors.
My pocket expense
$380 - medical tests
$60 - photographs
$50 - mailing fees.
Obviously, no money can account for the mental torture I and my family have been going through once we learned about visa bulletion revision rumors.
more...
decastod
05-15 01:12 PM
All,
This is a very good news that I have heard since last July. I am not sure if MBA's will also be condidered as part of this bill. I have paid around $90 K from my pocket, to get my MBA from Duke.
If that is the case then I would recommend that anyone who has any kind of support from their employer (or even without it) should get a masters degree as soon as possible. This will not only increase our value but will also shorten the queue.... just my 2 cents.
This is a very good news that I have heard since last July. I am not sure if MBA's will also be condidered as part of this bill. I have paid around $90 K from my pocket, to get my MBA from Duke.
If that is the case then I would recommend that anyone who has any kind of support from their employer (or even without it) should get a masters degree as soon as possible. This will not only increase our value but will also shorten the queue.... just my 2 cents.
2010 vin diesel body 2011.
sheela
02-21 08:45 AM
This is the most bizarre thing I ever heard w.r.to immigration. Usually the IO schedules an interview at one of the local offices or at one of the CBP (Customs and Border Patrol) offices. Atleast in San Francisco, both USCIS and CBP offices are located in the same building.
This happened to me and I may try to summarize my experience here. OP relax . PM me if you want to.
I Filed EB2i AOS in 07/07. Got a phone call at home (sometime in sep07). I was at work so my wife was the one who recd call and gave them my work ph#. Guy called at work, introduced himself and asked for time to visit me. We fixed up next morning . It was a kind of tense night. I had not informed my attorney about this- thinking it a part of background checks.
Next morning, an officer in plain bussiness dress showed up at exact time, introduced and gave me his bussiness card and presented his official ID card.
He spent some 45 minutes or so., and had several questions of personal nature about family and friends and money transmitted to india over the years (He had a complete list of transfers)
It was all serious questions but in a very casual/relaxed atmosphere (Nothing like allegations/judgemental).
This all ended very well. Saying GOOD LUCK to GREEN CARD.
Btw: I arrived in 2000 , worked for the same university until then.
This happened to me and I may try to summarize my experience here. OP relax . PM me if you want to.
I Filed EB2i AOS in 07/07. Got a phone call at home (sometime in sep07). I was at work so my wife was the one who recd call and gave them my work ph#. Guy called at work, introduced himself and asked for time to visit me. We fixed up next morning . It was a kind of tense night. I had not informed my attorney about this- thinking it a part of background checks.
Next morning, an officer in plain bussiness dress showed up at exact time, introduced and gave me his bussiness card and presented his official ID card.
He spent some 45 minutes or so., and had several questions of personal nature about family and friends and money transmitted to india over the years (He had a complete list of transfers)
It was all serious questions but in a very casual/relaxed atmosphere (Nothing like allegations/judgemental).
This all ended very well. Saying GOOD LUCK to GREEN CARD.
Btw: I arrived in 2000 , worked for the same university until then.
more...
CMM66
04-03 11:40 AM
Sent faxes # 10 and #11
hair vin diesel body 2011. vin
gc28262
03-27 11:07 AM
Sure, why not. An immigrant who is not in valid status is one who is legally not allowed to be in the country. Therefore he is a security threat. If somebody who should not be allowed in your house were in your house, you would consider him to be a security threat, wouldn't you? Am I missing something here?
Yes you are. That was just a blanket statement. I need some logical reasoning from your side.
"somebody who should not be allowed in your house" is not necessarily a security threat.
The fact that "somebody is allowed to be in the house" doesn't mean that he is a safe person to be around.
The condition "whether one is allowed/not allowed to be in the house" does not have a direct relation to the security aspect.
Yes you are. That was just a blanket statement. I need some logical reasoning from your side.
"somebody who should not be allowed in your house" is not necessarily a security threat.
The fact that "somebody is allowed to be in the house" doesn't mean that he is a safe person to be around.
The condition "whether one is allowed/not allowed to be in the house" does not have a direct relation to the security aspect.
more...
gc_check
11-14 10:11 AM
AP is sent to the lawyer if you filed the G328
Not always true, I've filed G-28 in my case, but received the AP at my residence address. Have friends/colleagues who had received AP at the attorney address. So it is kinda random. No logic behind this.
It is important we get the document.
Not always true, I've filed G-28 in my case, but received the AP at my residence address. Have friends/colleagues who had received AP at the attorney address. So it is kinda random. No logic behind this.
It is important we get the document.
hot Vin Diesel Break Dance Video
Tito_ortiz
12-04 04:46 PM
Bring it on !! Hurray !!
This appeared in todays Business Standard Newspaper in India. Atleast, the issue came up for discussion.
Here it is.
--------
The United States today indicated that it was willing to consider setting up of a joint technical working group to address the issues coming in the way of finalising a totalisation agreement with India.
New Delhi, on its part, has made it clear that it is not agreeable to the US stance of linking the requirement for a social security net as a precursor to finalising the agreement. India also made clear that it was adopting a calibrated approach to further opening up of the retail and financial services sector.
Indians working in the US have to mandatorily contribute to social security benefits but are unable to repatriate the same when they leave the US, in the absence of a totalisation agreement between the two countries.
The issue was discussed at a meeting of US Under Secretary for International Trade Franklin Lavin and Commerce Secretary G K Pillai in the capital. Commerce ministry officials said the Indian side pointed out that New Delhi had signed totalisation agreements with countries like Belgium and France, which had not set any pre-conditions.
�It was pointed out that India, which is a developing country, effectively gives a grant of $500 million to the US in the absence of a totalisation agreement. The US has indicated that it will soon have a video conferencing on the matter with senior Indian officials,� an official said.
In response to the US demand for further opening up of the financial services sector, the commerce ministry pointed out that India was adopting a calibrated approach on the matter.
�It was pointed out that the Reserve Bank of India has finalised a road map for the gradual opening up of the sector by 2008,� an official said, adding that New Delhi raised the issue of absence of a level-playing field for financial institutions in the US.
�A foreign bank wanting to open more branches in India only needs to obtain the permission of the Reserve bank of India. However, an Indian bank wanting to open up branches in the US has to go through the American federal system and then a state regulatory system,� an official said.
Banks like State Bank of India and ICICI have long pending applications for opening more branches in the US.
India also raised the issue of extending protection to its traditional knowledge under the patent regime in the US.
This appeared in todays Business Standard Newspaper in India. Atleast, the issue came up for discussion.
Here it is.
--------
The United States today indicated that it was willing to consider setting up of a joint technical working group to address the issues coming in the way of finalising a totalisation agreement with India.
New Delhi, on its part, has made it clear that it is not agreeable to the US stance of linking the requirement for a social security net as a precursor to finalising the agreement. India also made clear that it was adopting a calibrated approach to further opening up of the retail and financial services sector.
Indians working in the US have to mandatorily contribute to social security benefits but are unable to repatriate the same when they leave the US, in the absence of a totalisation agreement between the two countries.
The issue was discussed at a meeting of US Under Secretary for International Trade Franklin Lavin and Commerce Secretary G K Pillai in the capital. Commerce ministry officials said the Indian side pointed out that New Delhi had signed totalisation agreements with countries like Belgium and France, which had not set any pre-conditions.
�It was pointed out that India, which is a developing country, effectively gives a grant of $500 million to the US in the absence of a totalisation agreement. The US has indicated that it will soon have a video conferencing on the matter with senior Indian officials,� an official said.
In response to the US demand for further opening up of the financial services sector, the commerce ministry pointed out that India was adopting a calibrated approach on the matter.
�It was pointed out that the Reserve Bank of India has finalised a road map for the gradual opening up of the sector by 2008,� an official said, adding that New Delhi raised the issue of absence of a level-playing field for financial institutions in the US.
�A foreign bank wanting to open more branches in India only needs to obtain the permission of the Reserve bank of India. However, an Indian bank wanting to open up branches in the US has to go through the American federal system and then a state regulatory system,� an official said.
Banks like State Bank of India and ICICI have long pending applications for opening more branches in the US.
India also raised the issue of extending protection to its traditional knowledge under the patent regime in the US.
more...
house Vin Diesel hit his Facebook
admin
03-16 11:41 AM
Anything delay is the bad news !!! We do not have patience. Even single day delay is like dying for us.
All,
Do not despair yet. We were repeatedly told that bills take a lot of time to pass. Never the less we'll keep working on this bill and this also precisely why we're not pinning all of our hopes on only the Comprehensive Immigration Bill. We also have the PACE bill and the TALENT bill, which can bring a lot of relief to us.
All,
Do not despair yet. We were repeatedly told that bills take a lot of time to pass. Never the less we'll keep working on this bill and this also precisely why we're not pinning all of our hopes on only the Comprehensive Immigration Bill. We also have the PACE bill and the TALENT bill, which can bring a lot of relief to us.
tattoo vin diesel body stats. the new Vin Diesel movie; the new Vin Diesel movie
mammoy2k
06-05 03:43 PM
You can read it 10 ways, but the CIS has only one interpretation(see bold below).
An un-adjudicated Form I-140 petition is not made valid merely through the act of filing the petition with USCIS or through the passage of 180 days. Rather, the petition must have been filed on behalf of an alien who was entitled to the employment-based classification at the time that the petition was filed, and therefore must be approved prior to a favorable determination of a �106(c) AC21 portability request.
I guess it is the same thing as earlier memo. They are saying that merely 180 days have passed since filing does not provide AC21 benefit. To determine AC21 benefit the petiton must be approved. So based on earlier memo, USCIS would see whther petiton can be approved. If yes then they will evaluate AC21. If not, then you got a problem.
An un-adjudicated Form I-140 petition is not made valid merely through the act of filing the petition with USCIS or through the passage of 180 days. Rather, the petition must have been filed on behalf of an alien who was entitled to the employment-based classification at the time that the petition was filed, and therefore must be approved prior to a favorable determination of a �106(c) AC21 portability request.
I guess it is the same thing as earlier memo. They are saying that merely 180 days have passed since filing does not provide AC21 benefit. To determine AC21 benefit the petiton must be approved. So based on earlier memo, USCIS would see whther petiton can be approved. If yes then they will evaluate AC21. If not, then you got a problem.
more...
pictures hot vin diesel body 2011. vin
pappu
11-06 03:59 PM
Sometime this month!!
Let me narrow it down
' First half of this month'. :D
Let me narrow it down
' First half of this month'. :D
dresses Vin Diesel (Fas Five)
Jaime
09-06 03:02 PM
We who are stuck in the long waits, it's time for us to rise to the ocassion, attend the rally and untsick ourselves from this, if no one else does it. Only we can free ourselves and get what is only fair! The right to contribute with our skills!
more...
makeup dana delany ody of proof
alterego
07-06 02:18 PM
Immigration Voice member Dr. Murtaza Bahrainwala, who was also quoted in the New York times article today about the July Visa bulletin fiasco and the resulting fallout from it, will be on NBC nightly news with Brian Williams tonight around 5:30 Central time.
The interview also has snippets of interview with USCIS officer as Brian Williams has interviewed USCIS over this issue also. So its a "must watch" thing.
This will be on NBC and that's good coz you dont even need cable to watch this. In your local area, the NBC channel affiliate will be broadcasting the "Nightly news" with Brian Williams.
Local times may vary depending on your local NBC affiliate. Its most likely 5:30 Central time tonight but check your local listings.
Thanks to Dr. Bahrainwala for the interview.
Wow. Very visible place to get on the radar. Can't wait to see it.
If I remember correct in the NYT article, he has spent something like 11yrs waiting to just file the 485.
I hope, really hope that out of all this we can atleast get a visa recapture legislation. It can be considered as undoing the inefficiency of the USCIS over the years.
It will help everyone in the EB line at every stage in many ways.
The interview also has snippets of interview with USCIS officer as Brian Williams has interviewed USCIS over this issue also. So its a "must watch" thing.
This will be on NBC and that's good coz you dont even need cable to watch this. In your local area, the NBC channel affiliate will be broadcasting the "Nightly news" with Brian Williams.
Local times may vary depending on your local NBC affiliate. Its most likely 5:30 Central time tonight but check your local listings.
Thanks to Dr. Bahrainwala for the interview.
Wow. Very visible place to get on the radar. Can't wait to see it.
If I remember correct in the NYT article, he has spent something like 11yrs waiting to just file the 485.
I hope, really hope that out of all this we can atleast get a visa recapture legislation. It can be considered as undoing the inefficiency of the USCIS over the years.
It will help everyone in the EB line at every stage in many ways.
girlfriend hot vin diesel body 2011. vin
ck_b2001
01-26 09:32 PM
Hi,
I am planning to accept an offer from a company that will also sponsor my H1. All the terms & conditions look fine to me and their seems to be no bond.
However, the offer letter has a clause that is a bit strange and raised some doubts in my mind. Experienced people please comment and let me know if it has a risky hidden meaning. Please note I am not going to take any trainings and would start to work immediately with one of their clients. The clause goes like this.
"Employee acknowledges that the Company may invest significant sums to train and educate Employee and the Company�s investment in Employee would be jeopardized if Employee were to leave the company�s employment prior to the Company�s receipt of the benefits of such training and education. Employee hereby agrees to refund to the Company all amounts expended by the Company in the immediately preceding 12 months for education or training of the Employee if Employee resigns from the employment with the Company or is terminated by the Company for gross neglect of duty, material breach of the Letter or this Agreement or conviction or plea of guilty or no contests to a felony. Employee authorizes the Company to deduct and withhold such payment in full from any compensation or other amounts otherwise owed or payable to Employee. The payments will be due within 30 days of
termination of the employment."
In my company if they transfer you with-in company and pay all moving which can total to 25-30 k, they say that if you leave with-in 12 month of moving you have to pay back moving expenses. If company terminate you before 12 months, they will move you back and pay for your expenses.
It may be a standard clause if it is only valid for first 12 month. May be they spend $$$$$ on training but i am pretty sure they'll have hard time enforcing it.
I am planning to accept an offer from a company that will also sponsor my H1. All the terms & conditions look fine to me and their seems to be no bond.
However, the offer letter has a clause that is a bit strange and raised some doubts in my mind. Experienced people please comment and let me know if it has a risky hidden meaning. Please note I am not going to take any trainings and would start to work immediately with one of their clients. The clause goes like this.
"Employee acknowledges that the Company may invest significant sums to train and educate Employee and the Company�s investment in Employee would be jeopardized if Employee were to leave the company�s employment prior to the Company�s receipt of the benefits of such training and education. Employee hereby agrees to refund to the Company all amounts expended by the Company in the immediately preceding 12 months for education or training of the Employee if Employee resigns from the employment with the Company or is terminated by the Company for gross neglect of duty, material breach of the Letter or this Agreement or conviction or plea of guilty or no contests to a felony. Employee authorizes the Company to deduct and withhold such payment in full from any compensation or other amounts otherwise owed or payable to Employee. The payments will be due within 30 days of
termination of the employment."
In my company if they transfer you with-in company and pay all moving which can total to 25-30 k, they say that if you leave with-in 12 month of moving you have to pay back moving expenses. If company terminate you before 12 months, they will move you back and pay for your expenses.
It may be a standard clause if it is only valid for first 12 month. May be they spend $$$$$ on training but i am pretty sure they'll have hard time enforcing it.
hairstyles tattoo vin diesel body 2011.
h1techSlave
11-09 02:16 PM
AP applied at: NSE.
on: Sept 7th.
mode of application: online + mail in all copies via good old USPS.
Status on 11/09: Card production.
No physical card yet, but so far so good.
on: Sept 7th.
mode of application: online + mail in all copies via good old USPS.
Status on 11/09: Card production.
No physical card yet, but so far so good.
plassey
08-22 03:25 PM
I can guarantee that u r screwed for next 3+ years if it was EB2 and next 6+ years if it was EB3.
Well, go ahead and cry in the bathroom now instead of actively supporting IV.
My PD is Aug 2005. My employer by mistake sent the 485 application on June 27 and USCIS received on June 28. Today Aug 21, I received the rejected 485 full package back. Employer is following up whether it can sent back. Anybody has any idea of any luck in this case, or has to wait till dates are current again?:mad:
Well, go ahead and cry in the bathroom now instead of actively supporting IV.
My PD is Aug 2005. My employer by mistake sent the 485 application on June 27 and USCIS received on June 28. Today Aug 21, I received the rejected 485 full package back. Employer is following up whether it can sent back. Anybody has any idea of any luck in this case, or has to wait till dates are current again?:mad:
kumar1
01-04 01:21 PM
You can bring UP TO 4 spouses on H4 visa. That's why it is called H4. Similarly on F2, you can only bring 2 spouses, Ah...students do not make that kind of money to support more than 2 spouses. USCIS thinks so much about us.
I am just talking out of my A**.
I am just talking out of my A**.