JeffDG
01-31 02:00 PM
Don't worry about the text of the bill, it's purely a placeholder for something to be introduced as an amendment later.
The text of the bill has two section: Sec 1: Title, Sec 2: Sense of the Senate, neither of which carry any force of law.
The text of the bill has two section: Sec 1: Title, Sec 2: Sense of the Senate, neither of which carry any force of law.
wallpaper http
krishna_brc
05-05 08:54 AM
Yes, we don't need original I-485 receipt notice to travel.
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
hydubadi
03-31 02:13 AM
Hello frnds,
Just today, started new contract job at Clients place with big consulting firm on EAD. On my first day in the evening I got a call from consulting firm saying my back ground check have criminal record from state of Idaho. Till now I never ever was involved in any kind of criminal act. They asked me to stop going to work till it is resolved. consulting firm says all the states and federal agencies cleared me where I last lived, except state of idaho where i worked for 5 months.
Frnds please help! how should I resolve this issue. I have signed a 6 month rental lease, Left my H1B employer depending on this job. More over to all this we are expecting our first child and my wife doesnt have insurence. I was so happy I got this break but now this false check.
Please let me know if any one was in this situation and got out of it successfully.
Thanks,
Hydubadi.:confused:
Just today, started new contract job at Clients place with big consulting firm on EAD. On my first day in the evening I got a call from consulting firm saying my back ground check have criminal record from state of Idaho. Till now I never ever was involved in any kind of criminal act. They asked me to stop going to work till it is resolved. consulting firm says all the states and federal agencies cleared me where I last lived, except state of idaho where i worked for 5 months.
Frnds please help! how should I resolve this issue. I have signed a 6 month rental lease, Left my H1B employer depending on this job. More over to all this we are expecting our first child and my wife doesnt have insurence. I was so happy I got this break but now this false check.
Please let me know if any one was in this situation and got out of it successfully.
Thanks,
Hydubadi.:confused:
2011 kate hudson 2011.
singhsa3
09-05 11:47 AM
Please visit this site http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html . You will see that STRIVE bill is about to be introduced in both houses. Also notice that this bill is a bipartisan bill with Democrats in the lead. This increase chances of its success.
Note that though it is a comprehensive immigration reform bill but it does have some positive provisions, which greatly affect us. For example: The effective yearly green cards will be increased from 140K per year to 290K *2.5 = 725K, where 2.5 is the multiplier for spouse and children as they will be exempted from the quota.
In simple terms, priority dates will become current as soon as the bill passes.
Unfortunately, the bill needs to be passed by certain majority and there are three categories of people who will vote on this a) In favor b) Not in favor c) Haven’t decided yet. Category “C” are the ones that need to be convinced to vote in favor of the bill.
One of the goals of the Sep 18th rally is to meet with the category “c” lawmakers and try bringing then on our side. But if our number is not large enough they will most likely be voting Nay and hence defeating the bill.
So think and act….
Note that though it is a comprehensive immigration reform bill but it does have some positive provisions, which greatly affect us. For example: The effective yearly green cards will be increased from 140K per year to 290K *2.5 = 725K, where 2.5 is the multiplier for spouse and children as they will be exempted from the quota.
In simple terms, priority dates will become current as soon as the bill passes.
Unfortunately, the bill needs to be passed by certain majority and there are three categories of people who will vote on this a) In favor b) Not in favor c) Haven’t decided yet. Category “C” are the ones that need to be convinced to vote in favor of the bill.
One of the goals of the Sep 18th rally is to meet with the category “c” lawmakers and try bringing then on our side. But if our number is not large enough they will most likely be voting Nay and hence defeating the bill.
So think and act….
more...
Pagal
09-08 02:06 PM
Hello,
You can work with your HR and lawyers in creating a better job description. Here are some points that I would consider in creating a job description that is honest and flexible...
1. Job should be for future placement (say, in 3-5 years time)
2. Job should offer you reasonable career and skill growth
3. Job should not be constrained to a single geographic location in US
4. Job title should match one of the broad skill categories of DOL (this would allow you to change jobs without having to worry about implications on labor certification)
All the best...
You can work with your HR and lawyers in creating a better job description. Here are some points that I would consider in creating a job description that is honest and flexible...
1. Job should be for future placement (say, in 3-5 years time)
2. Job should offer you reasonable career and skill growth
3. Job should not be constrained to a single geographic location in US
4. Job title should match one of the broad skill categories of DOL (this would allow you to change jobs without having to worry about implications on labor certification)
All the best...
amit_sp
07-16 09:29 AM
Hello: Here's the original article.
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB118455917060167397-lMyQjAxMDE3ODE0NjUxNTY5Wj.html
see Greg Siskind's blog :
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
An alert reader sent me the following this morning. Miriam Jordan of the WSJ is reporting
Looking to resolve a messy immigration tangle, the U.S. government is close to announcing that it will accept at least some applications for work-based green cards that were filed by thousands of skilled workers in early July at the government's invitation and then abruptly rejected.
This would be hugely disappointing news if true and, according to a source, this was NOT the deal on the table over the weekend. It also will fail to address the three crises facing USCIS:
- fighting multiple lawsuits including at least two class action matters
- staving off congressional hearings and the release of embarrassing documents
- answering press inquiries over why USCIS skipped security clearances during a time when the US is under threat of a major terrorist attack
One would hope that common sense would outweigh USCIS' anti-immigrant instincts. Like an addict that's out of control, it's time for an intervention.
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB118455917060167397-lMyQjAxMDE3ODE0NjUxNTY5Wj.html
see Greg Siskind's blog :
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
An alert reader sent me the following this morning. Miriam Jordan of the WSJ is reporting
Looking to resolve a messy immigration tangle, the U.S. government is close to announcing that it will accept at least some applications for work-based green cards that were filed by thousands of skilled workers in early July at the government's invitation and then abruptly rejected.
This would be hugely disappointing news if true and, according to a source, this was NOT the deal on the table over the weekend. It also will fail to address the three crises facing USCIS:
- fighting multiple lawsuits including at least two class action matters
- staving off congressional hearings and the release of embarrassing documents
- answering press inquiries over why USCIS skipped security clearances during a time when the US is under threat of a major terrorist attack
One would hope that common sense would outweigh USCIS' anti-immigrant instincts. Like an addict that's out of control, it's time for an intervention.
more...
venetian
07-06 12:16 PM
Thanks to wandmaker & acecupid for the response.
2010 A tangent is gothic or punk
priderock
08-06 11:55 AM
My i-140 premium processing application was filed on the 22nd of June,2007 as indicated in the information below. The package & check were returned in the first week of July. A letter indicating the reason for remittance and return was that the labor cert. attached was a photocopy and not the original.
Now what does not make sense here is that the original labor was sent along with the original i140 application filed last year(in june 2006).
I called the USCIS info line and the rep. suggested that i could resend it with an explanation.
What concerns me is if i do resend it, would it be considered only after suspension of i140 premium is lifted or would it be considered as a case from last month and processed under premium.
My lawyer told me that 140 PP can't be filed with a copy of LC. They say you can only file regular processing if you don't have the original LC.
She said, it requires some additional processing by USCIS in case of copy of LC that requires more time and therefore they can't process it in 15 days.
Now what does not make sense here is that the original labor was sent along with the original i140 application filed last year(in june 2006).
I called the USCIS info line and the rep. suggested that i could resend it with an explanation.
What concerns me is if i do resend it, would it be considered only after suspension of i140 premium is lifted or would it be considered as a case from last month and processed under premium.
My lawyer told me that 140 PP can't be filed with a copy of LC. They say you can only file regular processing if you don't have the original LC.
She said, it requires some additional processing by USCIS in case of copy of LC that requires more time and therefore they can't process it in 15 days.
more...
immi_enthu
08-10 05:03 PM
Guys,
I am happy to share with you all that I applied my 485 on 1 week of June and it got approved today.
My PD was dec 2005. eb3. India.
Thought i would share with you all.:)
but all this mustang can do is f*rt . Did you guys notice the 'oo00 ' in the ID :D
I am happy to share with you all that I applied my 485 on 1 week of June and it got approved today.
My PD was dec 2005. eb3. India.
Thought i would share with you all.:)
but all this mustang can do is f*rt . Did you guys notice the 'oo00 ' in the ID :D
hair Elegant hairstyle
Legal
07-26 12:32 PM
very good idea! We should fight..
This time they can not say they can not say unrelated immigration issue should not be attached to a spending bill.
If this claim is made again by immigration restrictionists, then the "more visas for crab pickers" deal should also go:D
This time they can not say they can not say unrelated immigration issue should not be attached to a spending bill.
If this claim is made again by immigration restrictionists, then the "more visas for crab pickers" deal should also go:D
more...
actonwang
06-16 02:05 PM
it sounds like PD is a MUST for approval but for actual processing order , as in backlog queue, it seems purely by luck :(
hot 3b Hair cuts - images -
leoindiano
08-28 10:50 AM
Pappu,
I am not a recurring payment subscriber. I dont want to be. I still contributed 600$. That is like a monthly contribution of 25$ for 2 years. I am not sure why i have to explain this.
Only recurring subscribers are Donors? Is that a new definition?
I am not a recurring payment subscriber. I dont want to be. I still contributed 600$. That is like a monthly contribution of 25$ for 2 years. I am not sure why i have to explain this.
Only recurring subscribers are Donors? Is that a new definition?
more...
house Women Medium Hairstyles
GCWhru
05-28 01:35 PM
Greatly apprecite if anyone can give their inputs...
I have PD with dec 2006 and 140 approved. Filed 485 in July 2007. For october 2008 I will be done with 4 years of H1b. I am single and I may not get married untill later 2009 due to some family responsibalities. I am kind of concered about 485 getting approval by then which might jeoperdise my spouse visa later. Based on the present processing speed, mine might take minmum 2 years. But bit concerend what if USCICS make a mistake in processing 485 in terms of picking 485 from a later date and approving it?
So my query is...
1. If I now withdraw my 485 and later change company. SHould I again get a new labor and i140 approved with new company to file for 485.( Here I understand I can port my PD.).
Any inputs will be greatly apprecited....
I think you are fine having a Dec 2006 priority date, you can take a risk, probability of getting approval is less than 1%.
One of my friend with Sep 2003 PD, getting married on August and he is taking risk and praying God that his GC should not get approved before his marriage.
I have PD with dec 2006 and 140 approved. Filed 485 in July 2007. For october 2008 I will be done with 4 years of H1b. I am single and I may not get married untill later 2009 due to some family responsibalities. I am kind of concered about 485 getting approval by then which might jeoperdise my spouse visa later. Based on the present processing speed, mine might take minmum 2 years. But bit concerend what if USCICS make a mistake in processing 485 in terms of picking 485 from a later date and approving it?
So my query is...
1. If I now withdraw my 485 and later change company. SHould I again get a new labor and i140 approved with new company to file for 485.( Here I understand I can port my PD.).
Any inputs will be greatly apprecited....
I think you are fine having a Dec 2006 priority date, you can take a risk, probability of getting approval is less than 1%.
One of my friend with Sep 2003 PD, getting married on August and he is taking risk and praying God that his GC should not get approved before his marriage.
tattoo celebrity bangs hairstyles_21. bridal hairstyles; bridal hairstyles
vxg
09-10 03:46 PM
I'm in the same boat. Got my CPO mail 2 hrs after filing an SR last week, but still waiting for my better half to get the approval. I had filed a separate SR for her and it returned with a standard "will get back in 60 days" response. Oh well, after waiting many years I can wait a few more days...
On a brighter side since your wife is derivative on your case even without GC she can work on EAD and can work any job no AC21 or what is written as job responsibilities in labor cert hassle. Though it is still some financial pain to renew EAD and AP. Good luck.
On a brighter side since your wife is derivative on your case even without GC she can work on EAD and can work any job no AC21 or what is written as job responsibilities in labor cert hassle. Though it is still some financial pain to renew EAD and AP. Good luck.
more...
pictures Gallery
DirCls
07-15 08:05 AM
They are entitled fro thier opinior and so are we as immigrants.
We are doing a great job so far, but have to do better.
Long live IV Core and its members!
We are doing a great job so far, but have to do better.
Long live IV Core and its members!
dresses 2008 Homecoming Hairstyles
iwantgc
05-08 10:51 AM
Thanks for your opinion.
I would also appreciate if someone could provide me some notes before I call them at 12 noon.
Thank you in advance.
I would also appreciate if someone could provide me some notes before I call them at 12 noon.
Thank you in advance.
more...
makeup Simple Long Hairstyles, Simple
DyersEve
10-21 01:05 AM
Alright i did a little work on the picture, and im not sure if it is better or worse so tell me what you guys think.
http://teamnerd.tripod.com/random/images2.txt
http://teamnerd.tripod.com/random/images2.txt
girlfriend Veronica Lake was known for
%252520with%252520Highlight%252520in%252520613%252520(Light%252520Blonde).jpg "medium-hairstyles-21.")
indiancitizen77
09-27 09:00 PM
My lawyer had also said the same thing. You can get an extension of H based on your husbands approved I140.
Njdude26, Was the H extension your attorney mentioned for H4 or H1. Did the attorney elaborate any precedents for H1 extensions based on an approved I-140? Thanks
Njdude26, Was the H extension your attorney mentioned for H4 or H1. Did the attorney elaborate any precedents for H1 extensions based on an approved I-140? Thanks
hairstyles Weird hairstyles
tabletpc
08-27 02:06 PM
Krishnam70,
Thanks for the details. I still have some questions and would like to clarify with you.. Was wondering if you could provide me u r contact number or email id.
Thanks
Thanks for the details. I still have some questions and would like to clarify with you.. Was wondering if you could provide me u r contact number or email id.
Thanks
reddymjm
04-17 03:48 PM
As per today I have an H1b visa, I have my I140 approved, and my 6th year ends on April 25, 2008. My actual employer have gave me a contract that says that upon I become a permanent resident i will have to work for him for 5 years, then if I quit after the 5th year or before I will not able to work on the same industry on all the united states, also mention what my salary would be but there is no mention of increase. Since I will have to wait until my residence at least 3 more years, that means that I will have to work on these conditions for 8 or 9 years.!!!!
I do not know what to do , this is almost illegal (I think !), do I have time to change employer and do again my visa, and I140, so I don't lost status ??
If you have a copy of ur LC and I140 you are good to go. Any one can get a 3 year extension on an approved I140. If the rule comes in that you should use ur labor within 45 days of approval. There is nothing ur employer can do to you. If you do not have a copy try getting a copy of your labor and I140.
I do not know what to do , this is almost illegal (I think !), do I have time to change employer and do again my visa, and I140, so I don't lost status ??
If you have a copy of ur LC and I140 you are good to go. Any one can get a 3 year extension on an approved I140. If the rule comes in that you should use ur labor within 45 days of approval. There is nothing ur employer can do to you. If you do not have a copy try getting a copy of your labor and I140.
cjain
11-01 06:28 PM
next time make sure only news pertaining to smartboy is posted...all else can wait...hail smartboy
And how does this news add any values to our issues here ????
And how does this news add any values to our issues here ????
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий