gcharry
11-11 07:46 PM
Hi, Last August 07, I have applied for 140 & 485 and have a priority date of Feb 2005. I got married in July 08. Now, I can't apply 485 for my spouse as dates are not current. My 140 got approved. I am just worried that My 485 might get approved before I could apply 485 for my spouse. And no one knows when 485 date will be current again. Any ideas? Any one is in my situation?
Thanks.
Thanks.
wallpaper pictures natalie portman ody
samiam
04-26 05:38 PM
Is there any law for disabled immigrant. I am 33 years old, and I am disabled, and I am here in US from 1998. I really want to settle down in one place, and it does not matter whether it is India or America but I think I have to make a choice right now, or my future will be a big question mark.
I have waited for a long time, thinking future will be bright, day by day I dont feel I will get my Green Card, So as my lost option I am wondering whether there is any option for disable immigrant? Any help is appreciated.
thanks
I have waited for a long time, thinking future will be bright, day by day I dont feel I will get my Green Card, So as my lost option I am wondering whether there is any option for disable immigrant? Any help is appreciated.
thanks
Blog Feeds
09-18 10:20 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
There has been a lot of talk recently about what might be included in an immigration reform bill. Will there be a legalization/amnesty/forgiveness of "lawbreakers" rule? Will there be an expansion of employment based and family based immigrant visa numbers to solve the economically devastating backlogs we currently deal with? Will there be a mandatory E-Verify component? Will there be an interior enforcement focus? Will there be even more fences?
The topic that seems to be lost in all this speculation is something I consider to be the overriding component of reform--the Key to holding a reform package together. I am speaking, of course, of Due Process Restoration. Anyone who deals with immigrants for any length of time is intimately familiar with the disaster that is our immigration enforcement system. It is not just that previous administrations have done a horrific job at the enforcement that should have been taking place, but rather, the missing component to that enforcement. When is the last time an ICE officer worried about Due Process considerations? What is really destroying immigrant families--how about 212(a)(9)(B) and (C)? What about the concept of "civil" detention in real jails with real criminals for non-criminal immigrants? What about the detention of Asylum Seekers? What about the ludicrous requirements of REAL ID for asylum seekers?
These are all only a few of the regular violations of concepts most American hold sacred. When you tell the 'average' American about the system immigrants actually have to deal with, most are appropriately appalled. It is to those Americans that we must speak. I believe that if Senator Schumer has the courage to include Due Process Restoration in his "Comprehensive" immigration reform bill, it will be tragically necessary for us to defend these Due Process provisions of the reform package.
Take a look at this video, and sign up to support including Due Process Restoration in a comprehensive immigration reform bill.
Restore Fairness: bring back due process to the immigration system (http://vimeo.com/6200660) from Breakthrough (http://vimeo.com/letsbreakthrough) on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/).
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-7017328086435157158?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/due-process-restoration-now.html)
There has been a lot of talk recently about what might be included in an immigration reform bill. Will there be a legalization/amnesty/forgiveness of "lawbreakers" rule? Will there be an expansion of employment based and family based immigrant visa numbers to solve the economically devastating backlogs we currently deal with? Will there be a mandatory E-Verify component? Will there be an interior enforcement focus? Will there be even more fences?
The topic that seems to be lost in all this speculation is something I consider to be the overriding component of reform--the Key to holding a reform package together. I am speaking, of course, of Due Process Restoration. Anyone who deals with immigrants for any length of time is intimately familiar with the disaster that is our immigration enforcement system. It is not just that previous administrations have done a horrific job at the enforcement that should have been taking place, but rather, the missing component to that enforcement. When is the last time an ICE officer worried about Due Process considerations? What is really destroying immigrant families--how about 212(a)(9)(B) and (C)? What about the concept of "civil" detention in real jails with real criminals for non-criminal immigrants? What about the detention of Asylum Seekers? What about the ludicrous requirements of REAL ID for asylum seekers?
These are all only a few of the regular violations of concepts most American hold sacred. When you tell the 'average' American about the system immigrants actually have to deal with, most are appropriately appalled. It is to those Americans that we must speak. I believe that if Senator Schumer has the courage to include Due Process Restoration in his "Comprehensive" immigration reform bill, it will be tragically necessary for us to defend these Due Process provisions of the reform package.
Take a look at this video, and sign up to support including Due Process Restoration in a comprehensive immigration reform bill.
Restore Fairness: bring back due process to the immigration system (http://vimeo.com/6200660) from Breakthrough (http://vimeo.com/letsbreakthrough) on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/).
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-7017328086435157158?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/due-process-restoration-now.html)
2011 natalie portman ody double.
Blog Feeds
07-08 11:30 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
Senator Sessions cannot leave his hands off of E-Verify. Now in "stealth" mode, Senator Sessions has slyly introduced an E-Verify amendment (SB 1371) during today's full Senate vote on the DHS appropriations bill.
The Sessions amendment calls for a permanent reauthorization of the Basic Pilot/E-Verify program, and mandates its use for all federal contractors and subcontractors - including the verification of all existing employees. This amounts to a massive expansion of a program that is still not ready for prime-time.
We must call our Senators and tell them to oppose this sneak attack by Senator Sessions for the following reasons:
It would impose exorbitant costs on businesses at a time when our economy is most vulnerable:
An economic analysis commissioned by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
concluded that the net societal costs of the program would be $10 billion a year
� a cost that would be felt disproportionately by small businesses. It would make Basic Pilot/E-Verify permanent without addressing its well documented database inaccuracies:
A 2007 independent evaluation of the program commissioned by DHS found that
the Basic Pilot/E-Verify database �is still not sufficiently up to date� to meet
the requirements for �accurate verification.�
SSA has estimated that if Basic Pilot/E-Verify were to become mandatory and
the databases were not improved, SSA database errors alone could result in 3.6
million workers a year being misidentified as not authorized for employment.
This would result in 6 out of every 100 workers having to visit an SSA office to
correct their records or lose their job.
It would force workers and businesses to pay a high price for Basic Pilot/E-Verify's inaccuracies:
Queries submitted to Basic Pilot/E-Verify by Intel Corporation in 2008 resulted
in nearly 13 percent of all workers being initially flagged as unauthorized for
employment. All of these workers were cleared by Basic Pilot/E-Verify as
work-authorized, but only after �significant investment of time and money�
and �lost productivity.�We urge all AILA members to call their Congressman today and oppose the Sessions amendment (SB 1371). Don't let Senator Session's stealth tactics create a nationwide crisis for employers!
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-5839069238864574507?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/there-he-goes-again-sessions-and-e.html)
Senator Sessions cannot leave his hands off of E-Verify. Now in "stealth" mode, Senator Sessions has slyly introduced an E-Verify amendment (SB 1371) during today's full Senate vote on the DHS appropriations bill.
The Sessions amendment calls for a permanent reauthorization of the Basic Pilot/E-Verify program, and mandates its use for all federal contractors and subcontractors - including the verification of all existing employees. This amounts to a massive expansion of a program that is still not ready for prime-time.
We must call our Senators and tell them to oppose this sneak attack by Senator Sessions for the following reasons:
It would impose exorbitant costs on businesses at a time when our economy is most vulnerable:
An economic analysis commissioned by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
concluded that the net societal costs of the program would be $10 billion a year
� a cost that would be felt disproportionately by small businesses. It would make Basic Pilot/E-Verify permanent without addressing its well documented database inaccuracies:
A 2007 independent evaluation of the program commissioned by DHS found that
the Basic Pilot/E-Verify database �is still not sufficiently up to date� to meet
the requirements for �accurate verification.�
SSA has estimated that if Basic Pilot/E-Verify were to become mandatory and
the databases were not improved, SSA database errors alone could result in 3.6
million workers a year being misidentified as not authorized for employment.
This would result in 6 out of every 100 workers having to visit an SSA office to
correct their records or lose their job.
It would force workers and businesses to pay a high price for Basic Pilot/E-Verify's inaccuracies:
Queries submitted to Basic Pilot/E-Verify by Intel Corporation in 2008 resulted
in nearly 13 percent of all workers being initially flagged as unauthorized for
employment. All of these workers were cleared by Basic Pilot/E-Verify as
work-authorized, but only after �significant investment of time and money�
and �lost productivity.�We urge all AILA members to call their Congressman today and oppose the Sessions amendment (SB 1371). Don't let Senator Session's stealth tactics create a nationwide crisis for employers!
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-5839069238864574507?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/there-he-goes-again-sessions-and-e.html)
more...
smrryl
01-07 09:19 AM
Hi,
I 've applied for my H1 extension in August 2009 (Just two weeks before my previous I-94 was expiring), after a month I have been facilitated with RFE for client letter. As usually my client denied providing me a letter and told me to contact primary vendor for any of this kind. Finally got a letter from primary vendor with roles and responsibilities of mine with very extended duration. RFE was answered with the primary vendor letter, and after couple weeks extension was denied.
Now my previous H1 got expired two months back, initially my employer told me that he will open MTR but attorney suggested that chances of MTR success is less and asked to file new application for extension. Another application (premium) was filed within 2 weeks of first application denial and after couple weeks my extension was approved.
1. will the period between initial H1 expirey date and approval of 2nd application for extension considered as "out of status" ?
2. Had to visit india and need to go for stamping, how is mexico in my case?
3. I heard that due to not having an entry in PIM, applications are kept pending for 4 to 6 days in india with 221g. How about mexico, will it be same?
Thanks in Advance.
smrryl
I 've applied for my H1 extension in August 2009 (Just two weeks before my previous I-94 was expiring), after a month I have been facilitated with RFE for client letter. As usually my client denied providing me a letter and told me to contact primary vendor for any of this kind. Finally got a letter from primary vendor with roles and responsibilities of mine with very extended duration. RFE was answered with the primary vendor letter, and after couple weeks extension was denied.
Now my previous H1 got expired two months back, initially my employer told me that he will open MTR but attorney suggested that chances of MTR success is less and asked to file new application for extension. Another application (premium) was filed within 2 weeks of first application denial and after couple weeks my extension was approved.
1. will the period between initial H1 expirey date and approval of 2nd application for extension considered as "out of status" ?
2. Had to visit india and need to go for stamping, how is mexico in my case?
3. I heard that due to not having an entry in PIM, applications are kept pending for 4 to 6 days in india with 221g. How about mexico, will it be same?
Thanks in Advance.
smrryl
JunRN
09-28 01:28 PM
I agree. For example, in Germany, it is hard to work if you do not speak German. Also in France and all others.
And even in Scotland, they speak different English there and you need to be there for many months before you get used to it.
And even in Scotland, they speak different English there and you need to be there for many months before you get used to it.
more...
sinemkeceli
01-26 08:39 PM
can you please let me know what is the meaning of oas ? and do you suggest me to do in order to continue my process in the legal way.
thank you so much
thank you so much
2010 natalie portman ody double.
fasterthanlight�
05-14 03:08 AM
Bahahah, I like it, but the "c" could be a little more pronounced.
more...
minimalist
01-11 05:26 AM
I probabably know the answer of this question but would still like to confirm, just to be sure:
- First I-797B Valid from Jan 2004 to Sep 2006 <- Note: wasn't for 3 years
- First Visa valid from Jul 2004 to Sep 2006
- 1st US Entry Date from Aug 2005 till present date
(been to india in Dec 2007 for 1 month for visa stamping)
- First i-94 valid from Aug 2005 to Sep 2006
-Extended I-797A from Sep 2006 to Jan 2009 <-Note: not extended for 3 yrs
-2nd Visa/I-94 valid from Dec 2007 to Jan 2009
My questions?
1. Can my H1B Visa be extended again? This will be my 2nd extension.
2. Till what Date can be extended?
a. Jan 2010 (6 yrs from 1st I-797)
b. Jul 2010 ( 6 yrs from 1st visa stamping)
c. Aug 2011 (6 yrs from 1st US entry)
Thanks a lot !
Meaning 6 yrs from 1st US entry subtracting the time you are out of USA for vacaion.
Meaning Sep 2011, if you were out of USA only for a month.
- First I-797B Valid from Jan 2004 to Sep 2006 <- Note: wasn't for 3 years
- First Visa valid from Jul 2004 to Sep 2006
- 1st US Entry Date from Aug 2005 till present date
(been to india in Dec 2007 for 1 month for visa stamping)
- First i-94 valid from Aug 2005 to Sep 2006
-Extended I-797A from Sep 2006 to Jan 2009 <-Note: not extended for 3 yrs
-2nd Visa/I-94 valid from Dec 2007 to Jan 2009
My questions?
1. Can my H1B Visa be extended again? This will be my 2nd extension.
2. Till what Date can be extended?
a. Jan 2010 (6 yrs from 1st I-797)
b. Jul 2010 ( 6 yrs from 1st visa stamping)
c. Aug 2011 (6 yrs from 1st US entry)
Thanks a lot !
Meaning 6 yrs from 1st US entry subtracting the time you are out of USA for vacaion.
Meaning Sep 2011, if you were out of USA only for a month.
hair Portman Body Double
gjain
11-03 08:30 PM
I am just wondering if notice date and receipt date combination means anything in terms of when the EAD will be processed?
I think so since lots of people with receipt date same as mine, who have their EADs approved had an earlier notice date .
Also other people with same notice date with EADs approved had an earlier receipt date.
Just trying to gather some evidence here.
Thanks.
I think so since lots of people with receipt date same as mine, who have their EADs approved had an earlier notice date .
Also other people with same notice date with EADs approved had an earlier receipt date.
Just trying to gather some evidence here.
Thanks.
more...
seemashah
02-21 04:26 PM
Hi:
I was working for Company A from 2000 to 2004. Company A applied for my GC in 2002. However, the company was not doing well until I left it. It was not paying me the salary which came out in PW. Company A continued with my GC processing and I filed for I140 and 485 last year in June. Now received the following RFE for I140:
Please submit documentary evidence that you, the petitioning employer, have the financial
ability to pay the wage/salary you offered the beneficiary. This evidence must show that you
have this financial capability on the date you fied the ETA with the Department of Labor and
cover up until the visa is issued. The petitioner may submit evidence that their net income is
equal to or greater than the proffered wage, evidence that the petitioner's net current assets
are equal to or greater than the proffered wage, or evidence that the petitioner not only is
employing the beneficiary but also has paid or is currently paying the proffered wage. The
service wil also consider copies of audited annual reports of the employer, or copies of
audited financial statements of the employer. Evidence is needed for 2002-2003.
Does anyone have some idea how to get the audited financial statements or audited annual reports?. I know that the company never had any audited reports. I had submitted the bank statements of the company and the tax returns with my I140. However, it seems that they want the audited reports. The company was not doing well in 2002/2003. However, it is doing well now. So any input will be highly appreciated.
I was working for Company A from 2000 to 2004. Company A applied for my GC in 2002. However, the company was not doing well until I left it. It was not paying me the salary which came out in PW. Company A continued with my GC processing and I filed for I140 and 485 last year in June. Now received the following RFE for I140:
Please submit documentary evidence that you, the petitioning employer, have the financial
ability to pay the wage/salary you offered the beneficiary. This evidence must show that you
have this financial capability on the date you fied the ETA with the Department of Labor and
cover up until the visa is issued. The petitioner may submit evidence that their net income is
equal to or greater than the proffered wage, evidence that the petitioner's net current assets
are equal to or greater than the proffered wage, or evidence that the petitioner not only is
employing the beneficiary but also has paid or is currently paying the proffered wage. The
service wil also consider copies of audited annual reports of the employer, or copies of
audited financial statements of the employer. Evidence is needed for 2002-2003.
Does anyone have some idea how to get the audited financial statements or audited annual reports?. I know that the company never had any audited reports. I had submitted the bank statements of the company and the tax returns with my I140. However, it seems that they want the audited reports. The company was not doing well in 2002/2003. However, it is doing well now. So any input will be highly appreciated.
hot BODY DOUBLE qui offre son
Joybose
08-08 10:19 AM
Surprisingly my wife and daughter's 485, EAD and AP checks were cashed yesterday and not mine.
July 2 filer
EB3
PD : Dec 2005.
labor approved dec 2005
I-140 approved jan 2005.
Which service center- Texas or Nebraska
July 2 filer
EB3
PD : Dec 2005.
labor approved dec 2005
I-140 approved jan 2005.
Which service center- Texas or Nebraska
more...
house as a ody double for her
kak1978
05-06 02:18 PM
Yes, You are eligible for In-state tuition. You may have to meet the domicle requirements of the state of Georgia though.
tattoo Body Double (1984)
wandmaker
08-26 10:49 PM
My limited understanding about the GC process is that from the day I-485 is filed, a person may change his/her job only after 180 days or more, and of course by filing AC 21.
Yes, you are correct.
Also, in case the I-485 does not get approved within the 180 days after filing, then how can a person change a job without having an EAD.
You can file for EAD along with 485 or after you file 485 - EAD will be issued within 90 days (as of writing w/ current processing times) from the date of filing. You can change job only after 180 days filing 485 - In order for you to work for another employer you need EAD
A person can EAD only once I-485 is approved? Is that correct.
You will get GC itself once 485 approved, there is no need for EAD - EAD is a temporary work permit set to expire in 1 or 2 years from the date of issue
Yes, you are correct.
Also, in case the I-485 does not get approved within the 180 days after filing, then how can a person change a job without having an EAD.
You can file for EAD along with 485 or after you file 485 - EAD will be issued within 90 days (as of writing w/ current processing times) from the date of filing. You can change job only after 180 days filing 485 - In order for you to work for another employer you need EAD
A person can EAD only once I-485 is approved? Is that correct.
You will get GC itself once 485 approved, there is no need for EAD - EAD is a temporary work permit set to expire in 1 or 2 years from the date of issue
more...
pictures The ody double has spoken to
vss
10-27 01:20 PM
What is the cost (Application fee, lawyer fee�) of filing AC21 when we change employer after filing I-485? Anybody who paid this recently, please let me know.
Thanks
Thanks
dresses water is a ody double,
mrsr
08-10 06:44 PM
Exactly, they are entering at least 5 thousand cases every day from last one week.but still we donot get our turn.so strange!
more...
makeup Coltrane#39;s ody double and
Saralayar
07-26 01:57 PM
Takes some time for RFE to come to the lawyer around 2 weeks or so.RFE might be on photographs or colour visa copy so chill.
Why do you need color visa copy?. Is it mandetory for AP? News for me.:confused:
Why do you need color visa copy?. Is it mandetory for AP? News for me.:confused:
girlfriend so she used a ody double.
pawelw
07-05 12:42 PM
Thanks for your replies.
Do you know what is a common practice of USCIS in case they don't find our reply to such RFE good enough? Do they follow up with another RFE or just deny I140? I'm trying to figure out how much time will I have to pack my stuff if things go really bad :).
Do you know what is a common practice of USCIS in case they don't find our reply to such RFE good enough? Do they follow up with another RFE or just deny I140? I'm trying to figure out how much time will I have to pack my stuff if things go really bad :).
hairstyles doesn#39;t want a ody double
Maverick_2008
04-14 03:32 PM
Friends, here are my details:
EB3, India
PD: Feb 03
140/485 applied concurrently on July 23, 07 at TSC
140/485 Notice Date (from TSC): Sept 17, 07
Now, initially TSC had a processing time of 6 months for 140. They then changed it to a specific date later on. As of March 15, 08, it's about Aug 15, 07. Following the last few months' trend, my observation is that I might hear about my 140 sometime this month. However, it's just a guess - it might take longer.
When I call the USCIS (or even my attorney), I'm usually told that the dates on the site are just an estimate and even if my case is outside of the processing time according to their own web site, I can't speak with an immigration officer or do anything more about it. Is it true? I mean, say if I don't hear about my 140 this month at all and if the TSC processing time for 140 marches ahead well beyond Sept 17, 07 (my notice date), I can't even speak with an immigration officer?
Thank you.
Maverick_2008
EB3, India
PD: Feb 03
140/485 applied concurrently on July 23, 07 at TSC
140/485 Notice Date (from TSC): Sept 17, 07
Now, initially TSC had a processing time of 6 months for 140. They then changed it to a specific date later on. As of March 15, 08, it's about Aug 15, 07. Following the last few months' trend, my observation is that I might hear about my 140 sometime this month. However, it's just a guess - it might take longer.
When I call the USCIS (or even my attorney), I'm usually told that the dates on the site are just an estimate and even if my case is outside of the processing time according to their own web site, I can't speak with an immigration officer or do anything more about it. Is it true? I mean, say if I don't hear about my 140 this month at all and if the TSC processing time for 140 marches ahead well beyond Sept 17, 07 (my notice date), I can't even speak with an immigration officer?
Thank you.
Maverick_2008
sgsvg
12-18 05:09 PM
You can't.. It's very risky and not worth the trouble.. I tried and got denied.
Is more than 6 yrs of IT experience from a non-computers engg background good for applying for EB2 position? Can you comment from your experience.
Is more than 6 yrs of IT experience from a non-computers engg background good for applying for EB2 position? Can you comment from your experience.
kirupa
07-03 01:30 AM
Krilnon is right. I will clarify the whole making t-shirts thing later, but in a nutshell, feel free to set up a store and resell your own t-shirts if you want. If the shirt design is kirupa.com related and I (and maybe a few others) think it looks cool, I'll feature it on the site as well.
I have no interest in selling t-shirts directly or taking a commission or anything like that. I'll simply point people to your store (cafepress, etc.) instead.
Cheers,
Kirupa :rabbit:
I have no interest in selling t-shirts directly or taking a commission or anything like that. I'll simply point people to your store (cafepress, etc.) instead.
Cheers,
Kirupa :rabbit: