Sakthisagar
10-27 09:43 AM
to be 'fair' FOX is better in the sense we know what we are getting but if u look at NPR, CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, they make us believe they are giving out a balanced view of the world but they all have a 'liberal' agenda, to understand the issues better you have to listen to both sides of the argument, by criticizing FOX over and over in this forum we are shutting down cone side of the argument, many commentators on FOX expressed their supporting of legal immigration,
Legal immigration problem cannot be solved by these channels. FOX channel is extreme right when it comes to the matter and interests of one of the party Republican party and they are biased for Tea scum bag party. But when it comes to other countries right issue they become middle men and the saviours of democracy. Please see below how they address India's own Nationalist and valid issues.
Tensions Rise Between Hindu Radicals, Urbanites in Mumbai - FoxNews.com (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/10/26/tension-rises-hindu-radicals-urbanites-mumbai/)
any media in any country for that matter is biased, and mostly controlled by ruling party and their business interest. Never ever believe their analysis and take decisions.
Legal immigration problem cannot be solved by these channels. FOX channel is extreme right when it comes to the matter and interests of one of the party Republican party and they are biased for Tea scum bag party. But when it comes to other countries right issue they become middle men and the saviours of democracy. Please see below how they address India's own Nationalist and valid issues.
Tensions Rise Between Hindu Radicals, Urbanites in Mumbai - FoxNews.com (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/10/26/tension-rises-hindu-radicals-urbanites-mumbai/)
any media in any country for that matter is biased, and mostly controlled by ruling party and their business interest. Never ever believe their analysis and take decisions.
wallpaper small spaces bedroom
bombaysardar
07-26 11:40 PM
keep it up! :) :)
Norristown
12-24 11:50 AM
Before July fiasco by USCIS, I was used to check murthy.com.immigrationportal websites for info on immigration issues.
During the July fiasco IV is the only website which was updating with more confidence.
Later it became a addiction to check IV morning and evening.
GO IV GO IV....
During the July fiasco IV is the only website which was updating with more confidence.
Later it became a addiction to check IV morning and evening.
GO IV GO IV....
2011 Small bedroom furniture should
redgreen
06-21 07:28 PM
So much of misinformation by many 'legal advisors'!
Please note that:
1. Unemployment benefits is not a public charge.
2. For getting unemployment benefits one need not be a citizen/permanent resident.
3. You don't acquire illegal stay if you have a valid I-485 pending.
Please read relevant FAQs at the USCIS webpage.
Don't rely on advices from ignorants who try to scare people!
Please note that:
1. Unemployment benefits is not a public charge.
2. For getting unemployment benefits one need not be a citizen/permanent resident.
3. You don't acquire illegal stay if you have a valid I-485 pending.
Please read relevant FAQs at the USCIS webpage.
Don't rely on advices from ignorants who try to scare people!
more...
ksairi
08-17 02:06 PM
Most folks here would have used a lens to double check their APplns before mailing it.
If your friend wants to know ask him to join IV , why are you proxying for him > He shud be more worried than you. Pls talk to a professional lawyer on this situation, I am sure none of the folks here can advise on this,
If you do not know - that is fine , you should not confirm that no body in this forum can answer that.
Every body knows that lawer can advise, who ever browisng this forum they are browsing for the cause if any body know it they can answer right.
My friend - infact he his my room mate got an appointment with attorney after two weeks , becuase of the rush until 17th August, even he can able to contact the attorney over the phone.
He has requested me to post and search in the forums to get any possible answer before 17th so that he can re file . but the now that option is closed.
He his very busy with few productions issues at the site and he can not browse few sites from his office- including this immigrationvoice. he is already a member of this forrm, I am just trying to help him.
If you can not help your roomtae - how can you volunteer to unknown Immigration voice members.
Please don't give this kind of suggestions- every body knows. we are here for the cause. If you don't know that is it queep quiet. try to do research try to help if you willing for the cause. Ok.
If your friend wants to know ask him to join IV , why are you proxying for him > He shud be more worried than you. Pls talk to a professional lawyer on this situation, I am sure none of the folks here can advise on this,
If you do not know - that is fine , you should not confirm that no body in this forum can answer that.
Every body knows that lawer can advise, who ever browisng this forum they are browsing for the cause if any body know it they can answer right.
My friend - infact he his my room mate got an appointment with attorney after two weeks , becuase of the rush until 17th August, even he can able to contact the attorney over the phone.
He has requested me to post and search in the forums to get any possible answer before 17th so that he can re file . but the now that option is closed.
He his very busy with few productions issues at the site and he can not browse few sites from his office- including this immigrationvoice. he is already a member of this forrm, I am just trying to help him.
If you can not help your roomtae - how can you volunteer to unknown Immigration voice members.
Please don't give this kind of suggestions- every body knows. we are here for the cause. If you don't know that is it queep quiet. try to do research try to help if you willing for the cause. Ok.
greenguru
04-01 04:11 PM
EB3 Labor
I-140
I-485
Then
EB2 Labor
I-140
Cheers, gG
I-140
I-485
Then
EB2 Labor
I-140
Cheers, gG
more...
fromnaija
09-26 01:32 PM
Hi All,
My visa will expire (6 yrs completion) in the month of October 2007. What can I do next. Will I get an years extension based on the Green card filing. What is the standard procedure ?
CCC2006
Fiirst, I think you should have started a new thread with your question and not bury it under this discussion. Having said that, to get an extension after the six year H limit, you need to have labor certification application filed at least 365 days prior to your expiry date or alternatively have an immigrant petition approved on your behalf by that date.
My visa will expire (6 yrs completion) in the month of October 2007. What can I do next. Will I get an years extension based on the Green card filing. What is the standard procedure ?
CCC2006
Fiirst, I think you should have started a new thread with your question and not bury it under this discussion. Having said that, to get an extension after the six year H limit, you need to have labor certification application filed at least 365 days prior to your expiry date or alternatively have an immigrant petition approved on your behalf by that date.
2010 small space teen room design
pappu
04-10 02:19 PM
Please keep sending all bugs and requested features in a PM.
A few people are leading this effort and collecting the bugs and new features
Chanduv23, needhelp!, walking_dude and santb1975 are people you can PM and they will help make this tracker better
A few people are leading this effort and collecting the bugs and new features
Chanduv23, needhelp!, walking_dude and santb1975 are people you can PM and they will help make this tracker better
more...
Almond
07-13 09:17 AM
Damn I am going to be pissed off if he gets a green card before I do.
Pegasus you made my morning. I can't stop laughing at this:D
Pegasus you made my morning. I can't stop laughing at this:D
hair Clever Space Saving Ideas for
dupedinjuly
07-18 05:00 PM
You Status date needs to be before USCIS receipt date.
USCIS Receipt Date = Date the USCIS mail room assigns on the working day, when package is received.
Status date = I-94 Issue date.
You can come on August 15 at 11 pm, but if your filight is late by an hour then, you I-94 issue date will be Aug 16. ? You are cutting it too close.
I have not heard of them looking at time, they go by date. If you are in at 12:01 am then your date will be 8/16/07
Not clear if the I-94 is issued on Aug 16 and receipt date is Aug 16, then what will happen ?
It would be safe to mail the application on Aug 16 by Fedex with USCIS receipt date of Aug 17, it will take care, if your filight is delayed.
I-485 Courier Mailing address for Nebraska Service Center
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
( Ref: P. O. Box 87485 )
Lincoln, NE - 68508
Find out the right Courier address for your service center if its not Nebraska.
Could somebody explain to me, please, how is it working with the receipt date?
I will be going to my home country on July 21st and coming back on August 15th, 11:00 PM.......
.....my question is: if my lawyer will send the I-485 package on August 15, at 4 PM.....( and I arrive in U.S on August 15 but at 11:00 PM)...the package hits the Uscis on August 16......is it ok? when Uscis sees that I'm physically in U.S?......is it the date when the package hits Uscis or the date when the package was sent by the lawyer......what is the postal mark that Uscis takes into consideration?: the date when Fedex is sending the package( exact date of delivery) OR the date the package arrives at Uscis mailroom?
OR ...Uscis will look at the I-94( when I'm coming back the officer at the port of entry will give me a new I-94) and Uscis will see that I arrived on August 15, at 11:00 PM?
Could someone please clarify this as depending on this I have to change the schedule of my plane flight.
I would really appreciate this.
Thank you in advance!
USCIS Receipt Date = Date the USCIS mail room assigns on the working day, when package is received.
Status date = I-94 Issue date.
You can come on August 15 at 11 pm, but if your filight is late by an hour then, you I-94 issue date will be Aug 16. ? You are cutting it too close.
I have not heard of them looking at time, they go by date. If you are in at 12:01 am then your date will be 8/16/07
Not clear if the I-94 is issued on Aug 16 and receipt date is Aug 16, then what will happen ?
It would be safe to mail the application on Aug 16 by Fedex with USCIS receipt date of Aug 17, it will take care, if your filight is delayed.
I-485 Courier Mailing address for Nebraska Service Center
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
( Ref: P. O. Box 87485 )
Lincoln, NE - 68508
Find out the right Courier address for your service center if its not Nebraska.
Could somebody explain to me, please, how is it working with the receipt date?
I will be going to my home country on July 21st and coming back on August 15th, 11:00 PM.......
.....my question is: if my lawyer will send the I-485 package on August 15, at 4 PM.....( and I arrive in U.S on August 15 but at 11:00 PM)...the package hits the Uscis on August 16......is it ok? when Uscis sees that I'm physically in U.S?......is it the date when the package hits Uscis or the date when the package was sent by the lawyer......what is the postal mark that Uscis takes into consideration?: the date when Fedex is sending the package( exact date of delivery) OR the date the package arrives at Uscis mailroom?
OR ...Uscis will look at the I-94( when I'm coming back the officer at the port of entry will give me a new I-94) and Uscis will see that I arrived on August 15, at 11:00 PM?
Could someone please clarify this as depending on this I have to change the schedule of my plane flight.
I would really appreciate this.
Thank you in advance!
more...
Dhundhun
03-17 01:08 PM
According to IRS
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=179211,00.html
If any member has ITIN, economic stimulus package benefit will not be given.
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=179211,00.html
If any member has ITIN, economic stimulus package benefit will not be given.
hot edroom designs for small
STAmisha
11-15 01:06 AM
I head that Backlog centers is allowing people to convert their applications from TR to RIR. Can I know whats the process. I can ask my lawyer to do that
more...
house Good ideas to make a small
gc_chahiye
10-01 12:52 PM
They are not dumb , they might be already keeping a watch on you while on soil.
no the point is, CHECKING itself is taking 2-3 years. Why would they start keeping a watch on someone if he/she is not a suspect? There are literally millions of pending applications, they cant keep a watch on everyone.
The reason for slow name checks was discussed earlier somewhere (Ombudsmans report?): lack of resources and interest on the FBI side of things.
no the point is, CHECKING itself is taking 2-3 years. Why would they start keeping a watch on someone if he/she is not a suspect? There are literally millions of pending applications, they cant keep a watch on everyone.
The reason for slow name checks was discussed earlier somewhere (Ombudsmans report?): lack of resources and interest on the FBI side of things.
tattoo multifunction small room
vedicman
01-04 08:34 AM
Ten years ago, George W. Bush came to Washington as the first new president in a generation or more who had deep personal convictions about immigration policy and some plans for where he wanted to go with it. He wasn't alone. Lots of people in lots of places were ready to work on the issue: Republicans, Democrats, Hispanic advocates, business leaders, even the Mexican government.
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
more...
pictures Storage for your edroom
joshraj
10-03 11:46 AM
Starting the thread for tracking the receipt notices recd by applicants for applications recd by the center on July 27 2007. Please update the thread with receipt dates, issued center. Also highlight if your I-140 is approved or pending with the center name
dresses Small Bedroom Designs Photos
peer123
04-04 04:20 PM
1. Did you find have any issues when getting 485 approved.
---- Here most are with GC app pending. AC21 is being used by many only in the last two months.
2. Did you file AC21.
Yes
3. Does the job responsibility has to meet 100% word by word.
Not necessary
4. Has any one you applied for EAD extension on your own.
I did not apply for extension. But when my time comes I will do it on my own.
Lawyer cost is $300 per applicant per document (EAD and AP treated separately by lawyer and charged separately by lawyer.
5. Has any one got an RFE after changing the Job on EAD and submitting AC21. if so what kind of questions do they ask.
No RFE yet. I am not sure why they will ask question if you had worked for GC company > 180 days.
Thanks for your input, If other who have done it earlier and gotten their 485 approved please advise...
---- Here most are with GC app pending. AC21 is being used by many only in the last two months.
2. Did you file AC21.
Yes
3. Does the job responsibility has to meet 100% word by word.
Not necessary
4. Has any one you applied for EAD extension on your own.
I did not apply for extension. But when my time comes I will do it on my own.
Lawyer cost is $300 per applicant per document (EAD and AP treated separately by lawyer and charged separately by lawyer.
5. Has any one got an RFE after changing the Job on EAD and submitting AC21. if so what kind of questions do they ask.
No RFE yet. I am not sure why they will ask question if you had worked for GC company > 180 days.
Thanks for your input, If other who have done it earlier and gotten their 485 approved please advise...
more...
makeup decorating-small-edroom-ideas
we_r_d_world
10-19 12:30 PM
Look at the profile...... join date and no. of posts.
girlfriend house If you have small spaces
ramnadhan
12-13 04:49 PM
January 2008 Visa Bulletin and Predicament of Unmarried Indian EB-2
India has a tradition of family match-making marriage that more or less determines the timing of a marriage for a single person. When the EB visa numbers were open a few months ago, the unmarried single EB-2 worried about premature approval of their I-485 applications before they would have married and often talked about the way to delay approval of I-485 applications until they would marry. The January 2008 Visa Bulletin and the State Department prediction for the EB availability in coming months have removed such worry from these Indian professionals. However, in an unanticpated twist and irony of the development, they will instead face a different problem, to wit, their future spouses may not be able to apply for a following-to-join derivative EB immigrant visa benefits for a long time. Considering the amount of time the future spouse will have to wait to file for the immigrant benefits, it may be important for these EB-2 Indian professional to take at least two actions. These unmarried Indians have maintained a H-1B status to bring their future spouses in a H-4 visa status so that they are not separated after they marry. This strategy will become more real and critically important, meaning that they should keep staying on a H-1B status and not using EAD and AP. If they returned using AP, they may at some point of time, reinstate their H-1B status before their H-1B validity runs out. The other action which they should take is to file concurrent EB-2 and EB-3 I-140 petitions using the same EB-2 labor certification. Since the EB-3 is more favorable or at least will have a cut-off date rather than "unavailable," in certain situation they may maneuver the immigration rules that permit transfer of pending I-485 applications between EB-2 and EB-3 during the period when the visa numbers remain current for him/her. Such maneuver may at least allow the spouse to file I-485/EAD/AP. When EB-2 becomes more favorable, they may have to transfer the I-485 applications back to EB-2 petition. This maneuver is not a good option for everyone as it will require a log of juggling. However, some earlier priority date EB-2 Indians may dare to venture such juggling because of their unique circumstances that require filing of I-485 application for the spouse. It is something to think about and people should seek legal counsel.
I hope this info useful for our fellow members.
Thanks,
Ram
India has a tradition of family match-making marriage that more or less determines the timing of a marriage for a single person. When the EB visa numbers were open a few months ago, the unmarried single EB-2 worried about premature approval of their I-485 applications before they would have married and often talked about the way to delay approval of I-485 applications until they would marry. The January 2008 Visa Bulletin and the State Department prediction for the EB availability in coming months have removed such worry from these Indian professionals. However, in an unanticpated twist and irony of the development, they will instead face a different problem, to wit, their future spouses may not be able to apply for a following-to-join derivative EB immigrant visa benefits for a long time. Considering the amount of time the future spouse will have to wait to file for the immigrant benefits, it may be important for these EB-2 Indian professional to take at least two actions. These unmarried Indians have maintained a H-1B status to bring their future spouses in a H-4 visa status so that they are not separated after they marry. This strategy will become more real and critically important, meaning that they should keep staying on a H-1B status and not using EAD and AP. If they returned using AP, they may at some point of time, reinstate their H-1B status before their H-1B validity runs out. The other action which they should take is to file concurrent EB-2 and EB-3 I-140 petitions using the same EB-2 labor certification. Since the EB-3 is more favorable or at least will have a cut-off date rather than "unavailable," in certain situation they may maneuver the immigration rules that permit transfer of pending I-485 applications between EB-2 and EB-3 during the period when the visa numbers remain current for him/her. Such maneuver may at least allow the spouse to file I-485/EAD/AP. When EB-2 becomes more favorable, they may have to transfer the I-485 applications back to EB-2 petition. This maneuver is not a good option for everyone as it will require a log of juggling. However, some earlier priority date EB-2 Indians may dare to venture such juggling because of their unique circumstances that require filing of I-485 application for the spouse. It is something to think about and people should seek legal counsel.
I hope this info useful for our fellow members.
Thanks,
Ram
hairstyles edroom ideas for small spaces. Small Spaces Tall Desk design
seahawks
08-09 09:24 AM
Hello,
I did not see any posts regarding "1 year H1 extension approval when filed for 3 years". If this discussion is already in place, please point me to appropriate thread so that I could close this one.
I applied for 3 years H1 extension on 6/26/2007 with approved I-140. My priority date (EB3 -Sep 2003) was not current on 6/26/2007 when I applied for 3 year extension. I got an approval notice today which is valid for only one year. I want to know if this is an error from USCIS so that I could ask to ammend 2 more years.
Thanks!
unfortunately I missed the bus, we send all document May 29th and it reached USCIS CA on 30th, my pd was current for June bulletin and was approved 1 year extensions. I should have waited until Aug to file extensions, this is my 4th H1/H4 extension:( in 4 years.
I did not see any posts regarding "1 year H1 extension approval when filed for 3 years". If this discussion is already in place, please point me to appropriate thread so that I could close this one.
I applied for 3 years H1 extension on 6/26/2007 with approved I-140. My priority date (EB3 -Sep 2003) was not current on 6/26/2007 when I applied for 3 year extension. I got an approval notice today which is valid for only one year. I want to know if this is an error from USCIS so that I could ask to ammend 2 more years.
Thanks!
unfortunately I missed the bus, we send all document May 29th and it reached USCIS CA on 30th, my pd was current for June bulletin and was approved 1 year extensions. I should have waited until Aug to file extensions, this is my 4th H1/H4 extension:( in 4 years.
immi_2006
10-23 12:23 PM
If you are worrying about your GC costs then file it on your own. Its very easy. I filed 485 on my own along with EAD and AP. I got my receipt numbers, EAD, FP. I guess 140 needs to be filed my employer with help of Attorney. Or you can file with help of your employer.(i am not sure on this)
kunjirs
03-07 04:16 PM
MurthyDotCom : EAD Extension Delays - FAQs, Answers, Suggestions (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_eadmor.html)