ragz4u
04-01 03:42 PM
Please call/email your friends too
wallpaper ugly person ever
edaltsis
08-11 05:10 PM
If you have an approved I-140 and the job description matches that of your Labor, you shouldn't have any issues. The job title shouldn't matter either, it's all in the description/role/responsibilities and the technology. If the technology/tool changes then it's an issue because the Labor you have tells that there is a shortage of people in that area.
Good Luck!
Good Luck!
smuggymba
05-12 10:09 AM
We as a community have not even done 5 % of the hard work that DREAM act advocates have done. So such provisions are well deserved by them for the hard work they have done. If we had done enough work for our provisions, there is no doubt our provisions would have seen the day. You need to do some search on all the DREAM act advocates have done in the last few years to reach where they are now. And then compare it our community effort and you will get the answers.
We recently had an advocacy day. How many of you contributed to it. We failed to even reach a modest budget goal for such a big event. So there is no point blaming undocumented. We need to first blame ourselves for doing nothing.
Only 200 ppl contributed and now 20 new memebers from July 2007 show up everyday in the prediction thread wanting to be current.
I believe there is a mini-advocacy in July - do we need to contribute for that. Any other details?
We recently had an advocacy day. How many of you contributed to it. We failed to even reach a modest budget goal for such a big event. So there is no point blaming undocumented. We need to first blame ourselves for doing nothing.
Only 200 ppl contributed and now 20 new memebers from July 2007 show up everyday in the prediction thread wanting to be current.
I believe there is a mini-advocacy in July - do we need to contribute for that. Any other details?
2011 ugly person laughing. laughing
nrk
10-29 05:52 PM
My info pass appointment is tomorrow.
when is ur info pass appointment?
when is ur info pass appointment?
more...
nirav_patel
08-10 01:11 AM
me too.
EB2 PD - March 2004
I485 - RD - July 27 2007
EB2 PD - March 2004
I485 - RD - July 27 2007
H1B-GC
05-15 12:28 PM
Case Rejected because of Incorrect Fee
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am asking this question in this thread as i dont know how to start new thread.
Hi
My spouse's employer had applied for H1 this year and he got a receipt number. But the check has not been encashed. Now when I checked the status in website it says the following:
------------
Application Type: I129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER
Current Status: Case Rejected because of Incorrect Fee
On April 30, 2008, we determined that this I129 PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER was not properly filed because you submitted incorrect fee. Therefore, we have rejected your case and returned it to you with all supporting materials, along with the fee. Please follow the instructions on the notice to submit the case with correct fee.
------------
Employer is yet to get the documents back. He checked his records and says there is no mistake from their side including fee...
The question here is:
1. what does case rejection means? - Is it end of it or can it be reapplied with correct fee/ other supporting docs, it at all thats the case
2. If there is no mistake from employer side in filing,and if it is a kind of adminstrative mistake from USCIS side, can it be resubmitted?
I am confused...
Appreciate your inputs
Thanks
NH123,
can you pls. open a New Thread and post your Query please. This Thread is used for a different reason.
Thanks!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am asking this question in this thread as i dont know how to start new thread.
Hi
My spouse's employer had applied for H1 this year and he got a receipt number. But the check has not been encashed. Now when I checked the status in website it says the following:
------------
Application Type: I129, PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER
Current Status: Case Rejected because of Incorrect Fee
On April 30, 2008, we determined that this I129 PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER was not properly filed because you submitted incorrect fee. Therefore, we have rejected your case and returned it to you with all supporting materials, along with the fee. Please follow the instructions on the notice to submit the case with correct fee.
------------
Employer is yet to get the documents back. He checked his records and says there is no mistake from their side including fee...
The question here is:
1. what does case rejection means? - Is it end of it or can it be reapplied with correct fee/ other supporting docs, it at all thats the case
2. If there is no mistake from employer side in filing,and if it is a kind of adminstrative mistake from USCIS side, can it be resubmitted?
I am confused...
Appreciate your inputs
Thanks
NH123,
can you pls. open a New Thread and post your Query please. This Thread is used for a different reason.
Thanks!
more...
MDix
11-04 10:46 AM
Upcoming month's visa bulletin: December 2009 (coming soon)
Visa Bulletin (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_1360.html)
Visa Bulletin (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_1360.html)
2010 tattoo ugly person ever.
saibalagi
08-22 12:49 PM
08/22/2007: October 2007 EB Visa Bulletin Prediction of AILA
Based on the discussion with Charlie Oppenheim, Chief of Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting, DOS, the AILA has just released the following predictions:
EB-1 (All Countries): Closely match to September 2007 VB
EB-2 (All Countries): Closely match to September 2007 VB
EB-3 (All Countries): Similar to January 2007 VB
EB-3EW (All Countries): 10/01/2001
EB-4: N/A
EB-5: C
Please stay tuned.
Based on the discussion with Charlie Oppenheim, Chief of Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting, DOS, the AILA has just released the following predictions:
EB-1 (All Countries): Closely match to September 2007 VB
EB-2 (All Countries): Closely match to September 2007 VB
EB-3 (All Countries): Similar to January 2007 VB
EB-3EW (All Countries): 10/01/2001
EB-4: N/A
EB-5: C
Please stay tuned.
more...
yabadaba
07-06 03:08 PM
they have daily podcasts of the news... we can watch it on those
hair ugly person laughing.
lazycis
02-28 01:49 PM
Can you please let us know the URL for the latest name check FAQ posted today.
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=17312&d=1204204596
Questions & Answers
BACKGROUND CHECK POLICY UPDATE
Q1. What applications are affected by this policy change?
A1. Applications included in this policy are:
• I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status;
• I-601, Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility;
• I-687, Application for Status as a Temporary Resident Under Section 245A of the Immigration and Nationality Act; and
• I-698, Application to Adjust from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of Public Law 99-603).
Q2. How has USCIS changed its national security requirements?
A2. USCIS has not changed its background check policies for naturalization applications. Recently, the agency did modify its existing guidance for certain applications (see above) where the immigration laws allow for the detention and removal of individuals if actionable information from a FBI name check response is received after approval. No application for lawful permanent residence will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably. (Please refer to the USCIS Immigration Security Checks fact sheet on the USCIS website for more information.)
Q3. How has USCIS changed its adjudications requirements?
A3. For these forms, including applications for lawful permanent residence, USCIS will adjudicate the application based on all required evidence outlined in applicable law and regulation if the application is otherwise approvable, outside of normal processing times, and the FBI name check request has been pending for more than 180 days.
(more)
Q4. What happens if USCIS later receives adverse information from an FBI name check?
A4. In the unlikely event that Department of Homeland Security, (DHS) receives actionable adverse information from the FBI name check after the application is adjudicated, DHS may detain the applicant and initiate removal proceedings.
Q5. Why is this policy being implemented?
A5. This policy change responds to a 2005 DHS Inspector General recommendation that USCIS better align its background check screening policies with those of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Q6. Is this policy consistent with the national security priorities of USCIS and the Department of Homeland Security?
A6. Yes. Applications for lawful permanent residence will not be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably. In addition, in the unlikely event that DHS receives actionable adverse information after the application is approved, removal proceedings may be initiated.
Q7. How many applications for lawful permanent residence are immediately affected by this policy change?
A7. USCIS is aware of approximately 47,000 applications for permanent residence (I-485) cases that are otherwise approvable but have an FBI name check pending. A portion of these cases are both outside normal processing times and have an FBI name check that has been pending for more than 180 days. These cases will be subject to processing under the new policy. USCIS anticipates the majority of the cases that can now be adjudicated will be processed by mid-March 2008.
Q8. Does this policy change affect naturalization applications?
A8. No. There is no change in the requirement that FBI name check, FBI fingerprint and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check results be obtained and resolved prior to the adjudication of an Application for Naturalization (N-400).
Q9. How long will it take for USCIS to work through the cases affected by the policy change?
A9. USCIS has begun identifying cases affected by this policy modification in each field office and service center. Each office will evaluate the pending cases and will adjust their workload accordingly. USCIS anticipates the majority of the cases subject to this policy modification will be processed by mid-March 2008. We recommend customers wait until March 10 before inquiring about their cases. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate pending cases.
(more)
Q10. The memorandum identifies I-485, I-601, I-687 and I-698 forms. Is there a plan to include other forms, specifically nonimmigrant and naturalization, in this policy?
A10. No.
Q11. Should customers contact USCIS through the 1-800 customer service number or make an INFOPASS appointment to visit their local office if their case is outside of normal processing times and they believe their application meets the criteria of this new policy?
A11. For pending applications outside of normal processing times, we recommend that customers wait until March 10, 2008, before inquiring about cases affected by this policy modification. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate the relevant pending cases. If no action is taken by mid-March, we recommend inquiring with the USCIS customer service line at 1-800-375-5283. This procedure is for customers who have been previously informed that their case is pending due to the FBI name check. (Cases that are still pending within the processing times will be completed when the related adjudication actions are completed.)
Q12. Will USCIS automatically notify an applicant to appear at an Application Support Center, (ASC) if his or her fingerprints have expired?
A12. Applicants will be notified through an appointment notice if new or updated fingerprint checks are needed.
– USCIS –
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=17312&d=1204204596
Questions & Answers
BACKGROUND CHECK POLICY UPDATE
Q1. What applications are affected by this policy change?
A1. Applications included in this policy are:
• I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status;
• I-601, Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility;
• I-687, Application for Status as a Temporary Resident Under Section 245A of the Immigration and Nationality Act; and
• I-698, Application to Adjust from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of Public Law 99-603).
Q2. How has USCIS changed its national security requirements?
A2. USCIS has not changed its background check policies for naturalization applications. Recently, the agency did modify its existing guidance for certain applications (see above) where the immigration laws allow for the detention and removal of individuals if actionable information from a FBI name check response is received after approval. No application for lawful permanent residence will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably. (Please refer to the USCIS Immigration Security Checks fact sheet on the USCIS website for more information.)
Q3. How has USCIS changed its adjudications requirements?
A3. For these forms, including applications for lawful permanent residence, USCIS will adjudicate the application based on all required evidence outlined in applicable law and regulation if the application is otherwise approvable, outside of normal processing times, and the FBI name check request has been pending for more than 180 days.
(more)
Q4. What happens if USCIS later receives adverse information from an FBI name check?
A4. In the unlikely event that Department of Homeland Security, (DHS) receives actionable adverse information from the FBI name check after the application is adjudicated, DHS may detain the applicant and initiate removal proceedings.
Q5. Why is this policy being implemented?
A5. This policy change responds to a 2005 DHS Inspector General recommendation that USCIS better align its background check screening policies with those of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Q6. Is this policy consistent with the national security priorities of USCIS and the Department of Homeland Security?
A6. Yes. Applications for lawful permanent residence will not be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably. In addition, in the unlikely event that DHS receives actionable adverse information after the application is approved, removal proceedings may be initiated.
Q7. How many applications for lawful permanent residence are immediately affected by this policy change?
A7. USCIS is aware of approximately 47,000 applications for permanent residence (I-485) cases that are otherwise approvable but have an FBI name check pending. A portion of these cases are both outside normal processing times and have an FBI name check that has been pending for more than 180 days. These cases will be subject to processing under the new policy. USCIS anticipates the majority of the cases that can now be adjudicated will be processed by mid-March 2008.
Q8. Does this policy change affect naturalization applications?
A8. No. There is no change in the requirement that FBI name check, FBI fingerprint and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check results be obtained and resolved prior to the adjudication of an Application for Naturalization (N-400).
Q9. How long will it take for USCIS to work through the cases affected by the policy change?
A9. USCIS has begun identifying cases affected by this policy modification in each field office and service center. Each office will evaluate the pending cases and will adjust their workload accordingly. USCIS anticipates the majority of the cases subject to this policy modification will be processed by mid-March 2008. We recommend customers wait until March 10 before inquiring about their cases. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate pending cases.
(more)
Q10. The memorandum identifies I-485, I-601, I-687 and I-698 forms. Is there a plan to include other forms, specifically nonimmigrant and naturalization, in this policy?
A10. No.
Q11. Should customers contact USCIS through the 1-800 customer service number or make an INFOPASS appointment to visit their local office if their case is outside of normal processing times and they believe their application meets the criteria of this new policy?
A11. For pending applications outside of normal processing times, we recommend that customers wait until March 10, 2008, before inquiring about cases affected by this policy modification. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate the relevant pending cases. If no action is taken by mid-March, we recommend inquiring with the USCIS customer service line at 1-800-375-5283. This procedure is for customers who have been previously informed that their case is pending due to the FBI name check. (Cases that are still pending within the processing times will be completed when the related adjudication actions are completed.)
Q12. Will USCIS automatically notify an applicant to appear at an Application Support Center, (ASC) if his or her fingerprints have expired?
A12. Applicants will be notified through an appointment notice if new or updated fingerprint checks are needed.
– USCIS –
more...
gcsngh
08-31 08:22 PM
Most of us Indians..sad to say are self centred...chicken hearted community...awakening has to come from inside...you can take the horse to the pond but cannot force it to drink it...:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
hot ugly person laughing. Am I the only person laughing
tiinap
04-08 04:35 PM
Very interesting:
They say that they will run Master's cap first, then put the leftovers into regular cap lottery pool. But it would be better for master's degree holders if they did it the other way around!
We know the master's odds are better than general pool odds. Maybe about 50% vs. 25% this year.
Think through the math! It would be more advantageous for Master's degree holders to go through the general lottery first, and only if they lose in general be put into master's lottery. Maybe there would be less than 20,000 general lottery losers with advanced degree, then there would be no need for another lottery, they would automatically get the 20,000 that's allocated for them.
Is USCIS trying to screw Master's holders on purpose, or are they just bad at math and screwed them due to ignorance?
The spirit of the whole master's cap law is to give master's holders an advantage. USCIS had a choice here of giving a small advantage (master's lottery first, then general) or big advantage (general lottery first, then master's) and they chose the smaller advantage.
The whole fact that we're here thinking about the odds, just like horsebetting, is of course ludicrous in itself.
Good luck to everyone in the lottery.
They say that they will run Master's cap first, then put the leftovers into regular cap lottery pool. But it would be better for master's degree holders if they did it the other way around!
We know the master's odds are better than general pool odds. Maybe about 50% vs. 25% this year.
Think through the math! It would be more advantageous for Master's degree holders to go through the general lottery first, and only if they lose in general be put into master's lottery. Maybe there would be less than 20,000 general lottery losers with advanced degree, then there would be no need for another lottery, they would automatically get the 20,000 that's allocated for them.
Is USCIS trying to screw Master's holders on purpose, or are they just bad at math and screwed them due to ignorance?
The spirit of the whole master's cap law is to give master's holders an advantage. USCIS had a choice here of giving a small advantage (master's lottery first, then general) or big advantage (general lottery first, then master's) and they chose the smaller advantage.
The whole fact that we're here thinking about the odds, just like horsebetting, is of course ludicrous in itself.
Good luck to everyone in the lottery.
more...
house Helping Ugly People Have Sex
gsc999
10-11 05:20 PM
I have sent a mail to the moderator of my region group to include my name and will particpate actively.
Great! I hope others on this thread will follow your lead.
Great! I hope others on this thread will follow your lead.
tattoo Tweet This Post. israel-
mammoy2k
12-28 10:38 AM
Anyone invoking AC21 with unapproved I-140?
Hello Guys,
I am planning to utilize AC21. My PD is OCT 2005, EB2 India, I-140 was approved in June 2006 and I-485 filed on 2nd July 2007.
The question I have is if my current employer can do anything, I mean anything at all, now?
Thank you.
Hello Guys,
I am planning to utilize AC21. My PD is OCT 2005, EB2 India, I-140 was approved in June 2006 and I-485 filed on 2nd July 2007.
The question I have is if my current employer can do anything, I mean anything at all, now?
Thank you.
more...
pictures ugly person laughing. ugly person ever. be seen as ugly person. be seen
Dhundhun
07-19 05:59 PM
"Follow to join" provides derivatives opportunity to join beneficiary within 6 months (spouse and kids).
dresses ugly person laughing.
getgreensoon
01-25 03:28 PM
Full Disclosure.. I am an Indian
Very glad to see that these people have been caught by the law enforcement agents. These are the people who care candidates for EB1 category for greencards. As most of these join the fake IT bodyshops and show multinational executive experience on their resume. This is not the only university where you see people from Andhra Pradesh misusing law, there are many universities in the same business. I hope to see more enforement like this. I wish the USCIS and other related agencies crack down on the misuse of credential in the greencard process. Most of the IT people with fake experience and reporting structure should be punished for violating law and legitimate people with US education should get their right place in the waiting list.
My wife is on H4 visa and looking for opportunities. She gets calls from all these consultant who ask her to get on to F1 visa at some community college and then use CPT/OPT for working on their projects.....when i came to this country to study at a top ranked university, i thought F1 visa is for higher education...now it is used in community colleges. New learning everyday!!
Hope to see more crackdowns .....
Very glad to see that these people have been caught by the law enforcement agents. These are the people who care candidates for EB1 category for greencards. As most of these join the fake IT bodyshops and show multinational executive experience on their resume. This is not the only university where you see people from Andhra Pradesh misusing law, there are many universities in the same business. I hope to see more enforement like this. I wish the USCIS and other related agencies crack down on the misuse of credential in the greencard process. Most of the IT people with fake experience and reporting structure should be punished for violating law and legitimate people with US education should get their right place in the waiting list.
My wife is on H4 visa and looking for opportunities. She gets calls from all these consultant who ask her to get on to F1 visa at some community college and then use CPT/OPT for working on their projects.....when i came to this country to study at a top ranked university, i thought F1 visa is for higher education...now it is used in community colleges. New learning everyday!!
Hope to see more crackdowns .....
more...
makeup ugly person ever. ugly person
bkarnik
04-12 11:27 AM
The only leeway USCIS has w.r.t EADs are the duration of the EADs and not the timing of the issue of the EAD. The fact that the EAD can be given only after the I485 is filed is governed by the INA.
Further the grant of EADs in all the eligible categories is more or less the same. Even if the timing of the grant of the EAD were in USCIS hands, it is hard to request an alternative interpretation of the regulation in some cases (eg after I-140) while retaining the same interpretation for other categories (eg EAD after completion of Education). This just opens up a lot of loopholes.
ON top of all this we have to take into consideration the huge inherent inertia of the USCIS to change. As already pointed out the only recourse available would be to change the law of the land, on which path we are already traversing.
Werc:
Thanks for your post. However, as per my original post, could you indicate the section where in the INA does it mention when employment authorization can be given? In fact, the first line in the in the paper in the link included by Bee in his post, clearly mentions that "...nowhere in the statutes or regulations, is there a reference to a work permit" (i.e. an EAD as clarified later in the document).
As you mention later in your post, yes it is hard to get something from USCIS, but should we shy away from something just because it is hard? Also, as the same document (posted by BEE) mentions, the reasons for issuing an EAD are varied.
But let us take the specific case you mentioned, a student can work up to 12 months after his graduation. This time frame is provided for multiple reasons, the main one being to give the student to find employment in his related field of education and for the employer to evaluate him and process his adjustment of status. Without the EAD, the student would have to find employment and adjust his status within 2 months or be out of status. BUT the EAD also provides the student the choice of changing employers without losing his status.
Now, coming to the issue of EAD after I-140 or after I-485...By submitting the I-140 the employer is not only asking the USCIS to approve the need (as certified by the DOL) of a alien as a permanent worker, the employer is also providing the USCIS with particulars of the alien who will be hired. Therefore, by approving the I-140, the USCIS is not only approving the need of the employer, it is also approving the alien for the job. This is also supported by the fact that the USCIS allows concurrent filing of I-140 and I-485 if the priority date is current for that particular country/category. Hence, an EAD after I-140 not only allows the employer to hire an alien already in the company, it also allows the alien who might be working for an employer other than the one which applied for the I-140 to switch jobs, without worrying about being out-of-status, if he is very close to finishing his 6years on an H1B. For an alien who is outside the country when his I-140 is approved (very rare case, but possible), he can enter the US on an H1B sponsored by the petitioning employer and then apply for an EAD for himself and his dependents while waiting for the visa number to be available and file his I-485. BUT the EAD also gives the alien the chance to find another willing employer within 6 months for similar job descriptions and within the same geographic area without being out of status and preserve the priority date rather than worry about losing his status if something unfortunate happens to the petitioning employer (ENRON, MCI, etc.)
Whether, this will be successful or not is another question. But unless you try you can never be sure. Before 1969, a man on the moon was an impossibility but it happened :) Changing the law is the NEED of the day and we should be pursuing it to the full extent of our capabilities for LONG term relief. But, asking the agencies who interpret the existing laws and apply them to reconsider will not and should not in any way hamper our efforts in this. Rather this is something that is a SHORT term relief that in no way goes against the word of the law or against the intent of Congress when it passed the law.
Well, since this has been an long post, I will call it my 4 cents.:D Thoughts, comments and brickbats are, as usual, welcome.
Further the grant of EADs in all the eligible categories is more or less the same. Even if the timing of the grant of the EAD were in USCIS hands, it is hard to request an alternative interpretation of the regulation in some cases (eg after I-140) while retaining the same interpretation for other categories (eg EAD after completion of Education). This just opens up a lot of loopholes.
ON top of all this we have to take into consideration the huge inherent inertia of the USCIS to change. As already pointed out the only recourse available would be to change the law of the land, on which path we are already traversing.
Werc:
Thanks for your post. However, as per my original post, could you indicate the section where in the INA does it mention when employment authorization can be given? In fact, the first line in the in the paper in the link included by Bee in his post, clearly mentions that "...nowhere in the statutes or regulations, is there a reference to a work permit" (i.e. an EAD as clarified later in the document).
As you mention later in your post, yes it is hard to get something from USCIS, but should we shy away from something just because it is hard? Also, as the same document (posted by BEE) mentions, the reasons for issuing an EAD are varied.
But let us take the specific case you mentioned, a student can work up to 12 months after his graduation. This time frame is provided for multiple reasons, the main one being to give the student to find employment in his related field of education and for the employer to evaluate him and process his adjustment of status. Without the EAD, the student would have to find employment and adjust his status within 2 months or be out of status. BUT the EAD also provides the student the choice of changing employers without losing his status.
Now, coming to the issue of EAD after I-140 or after I-485...By submitting the I-140 the employer is not only asking the USCIS to approve the need (as certified by the DOL) of a alien as a permanent worker, the employer is also providing the USCIS with particulars of the alien who will be hired. Therefore, by approving the I-140, the USCIS is not only approving the need of the employer, it is also approving the alien for the job. This is also supported by the fact that the USCIS allows concurrent filing of I-140 and I-485 if the priority date is current for that particular country/category. Hence, an EAD after I-140 not only allows the employer to hire an alien already in the company, it also allows the alien who might be working for an employer other than the one which applied for the I-140 to switch jobs, without worrying about being out-of-status, if he is very close to finishing his 6years on an H1B. For an alien who is outside the country when his I-140 is approved (very rare case, but possible), he can enter the US on an H1B sponsored by the petitioning employer and then apply for an EAD for himself and his dependents while waiting for the visa number to be available and file his I-485. BUT the EAD also gives the alien the chance to find another willing employer within 6 months for similar job descriptions and within the same geographic area without being out of status and preserve the priority date rather than worry about losing his status if something unfortunate happens to the petitioning employer (ENRON, MCI, etc.)
Whether, this will be successful or not is another question. But unless you try you can never be sure. Before 1969, a man on the moon was an impossibility but it happened :) Changing the law is the NEED of the day and we should be pursuing it to the full extent of our capabilities for LONG term relief. But, asking the agencies who interpret the existing laws and apply them to reconsider will not and should not in any way hamper our efforts in this. Rather this is something that is a SHORT term relief that in no way goes against the word of the law or against the intent of Congress when it passed the law.
Well, since this has been an long post, I will call it my 4 cents.:D Thoughts, comments and brickbats are, as usual, welcome.
girlfriend ugly person laughing. ugly
HarshJ
10-02 01:22 PM
Hi,
Filed at NSC on Jul 21st. Received as per FedEx receipt on Jul 23rd. Transferred I-485s, EADs and APs applications from NSC to CSC.
Received EADs and APs on Sept 25th from CSC.
Sept 18th notice received that I-485s have been moved back from CSC to NSC.
Rceipt date for transfer notice is Sept 18th. Dont see my actual Jul 23rd date anywhere.
When I posted this on , posters suggested that there is a "Receipt Notice" versus a "Transfer Notice".
My lawyer received the receipt notice. Will check with him about the Receipt date on that notice and post later today.
Any other ideas what this all means would be appreciated.
Seems like a ping pong ball being hit from one center to another with no result
:(
Filed at NSC on Jul 21st. Received as per FedEx receipt on Jul 23rd. Transferred I-485s, EADs and APs applications from NSC to CSC.
Received EADs and APs on Sept 25th from CSC.
Sept 18th notice received that I-485s have been moved back from CSC to NSC.
Rceipt date for transfer notice is Sept 18th. Dont see my actual Jul 23rd date anywhere.
When I posted this on , posters suggested that there is a "Receipt Notice" versus a "Transfer Notice".
My lawyer received the receipt notice. Will check with him about the Receipt date on that notice and post later today.
Any other ideas what this all means would be appreciated.
Seems like a ping pong ball being hit from one center to another with no result
:(
hairstyles ugly person laughing. Why would that man laugh in
gimme_GC2006
08-21 11:14 AM
Let me gather all the info first and I can disclose everything here. Meanwhile please come up with any other suggestions if any.
Are you planning to take action against attorney as well?
Even though it may not be illegal for him to not to respond to you, but it clearly proves that attorney is aware, that your life is being screwed by not filing 485.
I am sure there exists some ethical responsbilities for them too, Did you check with the Bar association helpdesk (or anyone there) where your attorney is registered?
Also, please post attorney's details also whenever you think its time to disclose
:cool:
Are you planning to take action against attorney as well?
Even though it may not be illegal for him to not to respond to you, but it clearly proves that attorney is aware, that your life is being screwed by not filing 485.
I am sure there exists some ethical responsbilities for them too, Did you check with the Bar association helpdesk (or anyone there) where your attorney is registered?
Also, please post attorney's details also whenever you think its time to disclose
:cool:
kak1978
11-03 09:49 AM
Today I was talking to IO in Texas service center, during discussion I told her that India dates might retrogress.. can you please expedite my case. For that she replied that " that's what they are doing"
I am not sure how reliable is this and on what she has in her mind.. Just wanted to share the information. Don't give me RED for this.
May be she meant that they are trying to expedite your case.
I am not sure how reliable is this and on what she has in her mind.. Just wanted to share the information. Don't give me RED for this.
May be she meant that they are trying to expedite your case.
GCHPLC
11-29 07:52 PM
From ILW:
FBI name check delays that have stalled benefit applications may soon be a thing of the past. We understand that the Executive branch will soon provide name check clearances within a prescribed amount of time. If the clearance is not completed within the designated timeframe, the benefit will be approved by USCIS while the FBI continues to work on the security process in parallel. The rationale to move tothis new process is not just better customer service for benefits applicants but also because it will enhance national security(our security demands that the bad guys be apprehended, not merely be denied immigration benefits). The background for this change of heart by the Executive branch is the fact that many federal courts have been coming down hard on excessive name checkdelays by the FBI. In fact, not only have some courts ordered expedited name check completions but in some cases courts have suggested that the courts have and would use their authority to adjudicate petitions if the Executive branch could not get itsact together. The attorneys and litigants who have sought federal court relief over these last several years deserve credit forforcing the Executive branch to adopt a more effective policy in this area (when it does happen, hopefully very soon).
I'm wondering where did you get this information?
FBI name check delays that have stalled benefit applications may soon be a thing of the past. We understand that the Executive branch will soon provide name check clearances within a prescribed amount of time. If the clearance is not completed within the designated timeframe, the benefit will be approved by USCIS while the FBI continues to work on the security process in parallel. The rationale to move tothis new process is not just better customer service for benefits applicants but also because it will enhance national security(our security demands that the bad guys be apprehended, not merely be denied immigration benefits). The background for this change of heart by the Executive branch is the fact that many federal courts have been coming down hard on excessive name checkdelays by the FBI. In fact, not only have some courts ordered expedited name check completions but in some cases courts have suggested that the courts have and would use their authority to adjudicate petitions if the Executive branch could not get itsact together. The attorneys and litigants who have sought federal court relief over these last several years deserve credit forforcing the Executive branch to adopt a more effective policy in this area (when it does happen, hopefully very soon).
I'm wondering where did you get this information?
