ps57002
01-30 04:49 PM
oops wrong post
wallpaper Justin Bieber -My World 2.0
guygeek007
07-26 09:41 AM
Lapisguy,
You can file for 485 concurrently while your 140 application is pending. Your attorney should be advising you accordingly.
You can file for 485 concurrently while your 140 application is pending. Your attorney should be advising you accordingly.
HumHongeKamiyab
11-15 12:46 PM
You dont have to go for stamping. While crossing the border tell the US officer that you are going to use "Automatic Visa revalidation", and hence dont want to submit your I 94. When you come back to USA just have your I 797 (Notice of approval) ready. I have been to canada in feb this year and came back with the expired visa on my passport.
You might want to call the US airport where you are first landing after returning back from canada, and talk to the immigration officer there..
I got canadian greencard and running out of time to land there before my medical examination expires.
On top of this I don't have any visa left on my h-1b and there are no dates available at American embasies in Canada during Nov and Dec to get h-1b visa stamped.
Can I land in Canada and expect to return safe with no h-1b visa left. I am worried that my I-94 will be snatched at the border and not allowed to enter back into US.
Please share your experiences and suggest me the safe thing to do.
You might want to call the US airport where you are first landing after returning back from canada, and talk to the immigration officer there..
I got canadian greencard and running out of time to land there before my medical examination expires.
On top of this I don't have any visa left on my h-1b and there are no dates available at American embasies in Canada during Nov and Dec to get h-1b visa stamped.
Can I land in Canada and expect to return safe with no h-1b visa left. I am worried that my I-94 will be snatched at the border and not allowed to enter back into US.
Please share your experiences and suggest me the safe thing to do.
2011 Pray years, canadian teenager
inskrish
08-31 01:39 AM
So.. if anyone has the info on how to register a new country, I'd like to know.
Registering a new country? I hope you are not kidding, needhelp!:)
Regards,
IK
Registering a new country? I hope you are not kidding, needhelp!:)
Regards,
IK
more...
GcSTART1
09-01 02:13 PM
You may not use AC-21 AOS portability for future employment green cards. This is because the start date of employment on your AC-21 letter(from I assume your current employer) should be 180 days after filing of your future employment 485. Since you have been working for your current employer prior to that - USCIS will deny your 485
I a in similar situation My I 140 is approved from previous employer (company A) if the employer agrees to go forward with I 485 , Can I still work for Compnay B and use Ac21.
For AC21 does the jobs exactly have to match with the technoligies mentioned in labor , Or a generic job descirption of Software developer will be taken in to considerarion.
I a in similar situation My I 140 is approved from previous employer (company A) if the employer agrees to go forward with I 485 , Can I still work for Compnay B and use Ac21.
For AC21 does the jobs exactly have to match with the technoligies mentioned in labor , Or a generic job descirption of Software developer will be taken in to considerarion.
sc3
01-09 12:43 PM
No the current one!
No, you are supposed to return all I-94s!!.
No, you are supposed to return all I-94s!!.
more...
iwantmygreen
04-22 08:29 PM
Has anybody got any experience where an approved 140 was revoked by employer. The 485 is pending.
2010 of justin bieber music
brb2
11-08 06:31 PM
remember the bulk of the pending AOS are from retrogressed countries. So even those from ROW who have not yet filed (and may do so next few years) need to be added to the "pending AOS" in order to obtain the 'real' que size of pending AOS applications.
more...
looneytunezez
04-08 04:17 PM
Employment-based: At this time the amount of demand being received in the Employment First preference is extremely low compared with that of recent years. Absent an immediate and dramatic increase in demand, this category will remain “Current” for all countries. It also appears unlikely that a Second preference cut-off date will be imposed for any countries other than China and India, where demand is extremely high. Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off date movement each month during the coming months are as follows:
Employment Second: Demand by applicants who are “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is very high, but the exact amount is not known. Such “upgrades” are in addition to the known demand already reported, and make it very difficult to predict ultimate demand based on forward movement of the China and India cut-off dates. While thousands of “otherwise unused” numbers will be available for potential use without regard to the China and India Employment Second preference per-country annual limits, it is not known how the “upgrades” will ultimately impact the cut-offs for those two countries. (The allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers is discussed below.)
China: none to three weeks expected through July. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
India: One or more weeks, possibly followed by additional movement if demand remains stable. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
Employment Third:
Worldwide: three to six weeks
China: one to three weeks
India: none to two weeks
Mexico: although continued forward movement is expected, no specific projections are possible at this time.
Philippines: three to six weeks
Please be advised that the above ranges are estimates based upon the current demand patterns, and are subject to fluctuations during the coming months. The cut-off dates for upcoming months cannot be guaranteed, and no assumptions should be made until the formal dates are announced.
Allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers in accordance with Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 202(a)(5)
INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand in a calendar quarter will be insufficient to use all available numbers in an Employment preference, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. Based on current levels of demand, there will be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment First and Second preferences. Such numbers may be allocated without regard to per-country limits, once a country has reached its preference annual limit. Since under INA Section 203(e) such numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability, greater number use by one country would indicate greater demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates. Based on amount and priority dates of pending demand and year-to-date number use, a different cut-off date could be applied to each oversubscribed country, for the purpose of assuring that the maximum amount of available numbers will be used. Note that a cut-off date imposed to control the use of “otherwise unused” numbers could be earlier than the cut-off date established to control number use under a quarterly or per-country annual limit. For example, at present the India Employment Second preference cut-off date governs the use of numbers under Section 202(a)(5), India having reached its Employment Second annual limit; the China Employment Second preference cut-off date governs number use under the quarterly limit, since China has not yet reached its Employment Second annual limit.
The rate of number use under Section 202(a)(5) is continually monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for the oversubscribed countries. This helps assure that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while insuring that numbers also remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
As mentioned earlier, the number of applicants who may be “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is unknown. As a result, the cut-off date which governs use of Section 202(a)(5) numbers has been advanced more rapidly than normal, in an attempt to ascertain the amount of “upgrade” demand in the pipeline while at the same time administering use of the available numbers. This action risks a surge in demand that could adversely impact the cut-off date later in the fiscal year. However, it also limits the possibility that potential demand would not materialize and the annual limit would not be reached due to lack of cut-off date movement.
Employment Second: Demand by applicants who are “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is very high, but the exact amount is not known. Such “upgrades” are in addition to the known demand already reported, and make it very difficult to predict ultimate demand based on forward movement of the China and India cut-off dates. While thousands of “otherwise unused” numbers will be available for potential use without regard to the China and India Employment Second preference per-country annual limits, it is not known how the “upgrades” will ultimately impact the cut-offs for those two countries. (The allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers is discussed below.)
China: none to three weeks expected through July. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
India: One or more weeks, possibly followed by additional movement if demand remains stable. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
Employment Third:
Worldwide: three to six weeks
China: one to three weeks
India: none to two weeks
Mexico: although continued forward movement is expected, no specific projections are possible at this time.
Philippines: three to six weeks
Please be advised that the above ranges are estimates based upon the current demand patterns, and are subject to fluctuations during the coming months. The cut-off dates for upcoming months cannot be guaranteed, and no assumptions should be made until the formal dates are announced.
Allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers in accordance with Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 202(a)(5)
INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand in a calendar quarter will be insufficient to use all available numbers in an Employment preference, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. Based on current levels of demand, there will be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment First and Second preferences. Such numbers may be allocated without regard to per-country limits, once a country has reached its preference annual limit. Since under INA Section 203(e) such numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability, greater number use by one country would indicate greater demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates. Based on amount and priority dates of pending demand and year-to-date number use, a different cut-off date could be applied to each oversubscribed country, for the purpose of assuring that the maximum amount of available numbers will be used. Note that a cut-off date imposed to control the use of “otherwise unused” numbers could be earlier than the cut-off date established to control number use under a quarterly or per-country annual limit. For example, at present the India Employment Second preference cut-off date governs the use of numbers under Section 202(a)(5), India having reached its Employment Second annual limit; the China Employment Second preference cut-off date governs number use under the quarterly limit, since China has not yet reached its Employment Second annual limit.
The rate of number use under Section 202(a)(5) is continually monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for the oversubscribed countries. This helps assure that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while insuring that numbers also remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
As mentioned earlier, the number of applicants who may be “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is unknown. As a result, the cut-off date which governs use of Section 202(a)(5) numbers has been advanced more rapidly than normal, in an attempt to ascertain the amount of “upgrade” demand in the pipeline while at the same time administering use of the available numbers. This action risks a surge in demand that could adversely impact the cut-off date later in the fiscal year. However, it also limits the possibility that potential demand would not materialize and the annual limit would not be reached due to lack of cut-off date movement.
hair Pray i lose my ringtone get
raju123
06-26 02:51 PM
Numberusa reported following possible 24 amendments and Cantwell/Kyl amendment is not there. I hope this news is not right.
Democratic Amendments
* Dodd-Menendez S.A. 1199: would increase the annual cap on green cards for parents and extend the parent visitor visa.
* Webb S.A. 1313: Community ties for [amnesty]
* Baucus-Tester S.A. 1236: would strike all reference[s] to REAL ID.
* Sanders-Grassley S.A. 1332 : prohibits companies that have announced mass lay-offs from receiving any new visas, unless these companies could prove that overall employment at their companies would not be reduced by these lay-offs.
* Byrd-Gregg-Cochran S.A. 1344: adds a $500 fee to obtain [amnesty] and sets aside the revenues collected in order to fund border and interior enforcement.
* Menendez-Obama-Feingold S.A. 1317: increases family points in merit system
* Brown S.A. 1340: requires that before employers can be approved to employ Y-1 workers, they must have listed the specific job opportunity with the state employment service agency.
* McCaskill S.A. 1468: increases ban on federal contracts, grants or cooperative agreements to employers who are repeat violators of hiring immigrants who are not authorized to work
* Levin-Brownback S.A.1486: gives access to Iraqis to apply for refugee status under existing U.S. law.
* Leahy S.A. 1386: protect scholars who have been persecuted in their home countries on account of their beliefs, scholarship, or identity.
* Schumer: provides for tamper-proof biometric social security cards
* Boxer S.A. 1198: reduces Y visa cap by number of Y workers who overstay
Republican Amendments
* Alexander S.A. 1161: requires DHS and the Department of State to notify a foreign embassy when one of their nationals has become a U.S. citizen
* Bond S.A. 1255: prohibits green cards for [illegal aliens granted amnesty]
* Coleman S.A. 1473: outlaws state and local policies that prevent public officials * including police and health and safety workers (except for emergency medical assistance)*from inquiring about the immigration status of those they serve if there is �probable cause� to believe the individual being questioned is undocumented.
* Domenici S.A. 1335/1258: increases Federal judgeships
* Ensign S.A. 1490: redetermines work history for current beneficiaries of social security depending on their citizenship status
* Graham S.A. 1465: enforcement. Still being drafted.
* Grassley-Baucus-Obama S.A. 1441: strikes and replaces Title III on employer enforcement
* Hutchinson S.A. 1440: changes the �touchback� requirement from the time of applying for adjustment of status, as it currently stands in the Senate proposed bill, to the time of applying for the Z visa. Increases the number of individuals required to touchback
* Thune S.A. 1174: prevents [illegal aliens] from [being granted amnesty] until all triggers have been met.
* Chambliss S.A. 1318: Totalization agreements
* Isakson S.A. 1282: Preemption/Home Depot
* Graham: Criminal penalties/mandatory minimums for overstays
There is a news in news article thread that Senators Cantwell & Kyl have proposed a amendment which will open up a parallel employer sponsored GC path. Anyone has information regarding this amendment?
Democratic Amendments
* Dodd-Menendez S.A. 1199: would increase the annual cap on green cards for parents and extend the parent visitor visa.
* Webb S.A. 1313: Community ties for [amnesty]
* Baucus-Tester S.A. 1236: would strike all reference[s] to REAL ID.
* Sanders-Grassley S.A. 1332 : prohibits companies that have announced mass lay-offs from receiving any new visas, unless these companies could prove that overall employment at their companies would not be reduced by these lay-offs.
* Byrd-Gregg-Cochran S.A. 1344: adds a $500 fee to obtain [amnesty] and sets aside the revenues collected in order to fund border and interior enforcement.
* Menendez-Obama-Feingold S.A. 1317: increases family points in merit system
* Brown S.A. 1340: requires that before employers can be approved to employ Y-1 workers, they must have listed the specific job opportunity with the state employment service agency.
* McCaskill S.A. 1468: increases ban on federal contracts, grants or cooperative agreements to employers who are repeat violators of hiring immigrants who are not authorized to work
* Levin-Brownback S.A.1486: gives access to Iraqis to apply for refugee status under existing U.S. law.
* Leahy S.A. 1386: protect scholars who have been persecuted in their home countries on account of their beliefs, scholarship, or identity.
* Schumer: provides for tamper-proof biometric social security cards
* Boxer S.A. 1198: reduces Y visa cap by number of Y workers who overstay
Republican Amendments
* Alexander S.A. 1161: requires DHS and the Department of State to notify a foreign embassy when one of their nationals has become a U.S. citizen
* Bond S.A. 1255: prohibits green cards for [illegal aliens granted amnesty]
* Coleman S.A. 1473: outlaws state and local policies that prevent public officials * including police and health and safety workers (except for emergency medical assistance)*from inquiring about the immigration status of those they serve if there is �probable cause� to believe the individual being questioned is undocumented.
* Domenici S.A. 1335/1258: increases Federal judgeships
* Ensign S.A. 1490: redetermines work history for current beneficiaries of social security depending on their citizenship status
* Graham S.A. 1465: enforcement. Still being drafted.
* Grassley-Baucus-Obama S.A. 1441: strikes and replaces Title III on employer enforcement
* Hutchinson S.A. 1440: changes the �touchback� requirement from the time of applying for adjustment of status, as it currently stands in the Senate proposed bill, to the time of applying for the Z visa. Increases the number of individuals required to touchback
* Thune S.A. 1174: prevents [illegal aliens] from [being granted amnesty] until all triggers have been met.
* Chambliss S.A. 1318: Totalization agreements
* Isakson S.A. 1282: Preemption/Home Depot
* Graham: Criminal penalties/mandatory minimums for overstays
There is a news in news article thread that Senators Cantwell & Kyl have proposed a amendment which will open up a parallel employer sponsored GC path. Anyone has information regarding this amendment?
more...
whoever
01-31 02:46 PM
how can one get copy of i140? does it not belong to the company?
hot Musicwatch the justin smile,
arrarrgee
07-13 11:29 AM
Read on CNN that west coast is hitting 125 in some places...if thats the case guess you guys should be good not wearing any suits...would look odd:eek:
Its a good idea but make sure you guyz are comfortable. It must be hot out there.
Its a good idea but make sure you guyz are comfortable. It must be hot out there.
more...
house For Pray by justin bieber
singhsa3
07-20 01:37 PM
This may be a serious issue. Consult a lawyer. Receipting may take a while.
I sent in form G-325 for both me and my wife along with my I-485 instead of the G-325A as required on I-485 instructions by oversight. What do you guys recommend I do? Should I send in a new application or just send in the G-325A form with a letter stating the issue? Please help.
I sent in form G-325 for both me and my wife along with my I-485 instead of the G-325A as required on I-485 instructions by oversight. What do you guys recommend I do? Should I send in a new application or just send in the G-325A form with a letter stating the issue? Please help.
tattoo Justin Bieber Pray Offi.
surabhi
04-08 05:24 AM
This is serious and could affect quite a few.
Summary: you could be affected if ALL of the folllowing is true
1)you have a PD before July 16, 2007 ( likely case is EB3 I/C 2002/2003 PD)
2) you have left your original employer ( whether you stayed for 180 days after I-485 application to comply with AC-21 rule doesnt matter)
3) your original employer has used your labor to subsititute some on else ( before July 16,2007)
Remember you are affected even though you are the original beneficiary.
How did this case happen?
This happend because USCIS not following LIFO processing
1. The original applicat applied labor in April 2001
2. Labor approved in Jan 2002
3. Original applicant applied I-140 in April 2002
4. i-140 approved in July 2002
5. Original applicant applies for I-485 in Dec 2002
In Jan 2004, after more than year ( > 180 days and Ac-21 was enacted), original applicant leaves the employer, presuming that she is safe and covered under Ac-21
Employer promptly writes to USCIS asking to revoke I-140. The employer goes ahead and uses the labor for another person and files I-140
The USCIS apprves I-140 and subsequently I-485 for the subsituted beneficiary.
So how could USCIS approve a I-485 that was filed at least 18 months later than the original applicant. ( May be the subsituted applicant was from different chargeability country and hence could ge approved??)
Now the original applicant is screwed because USCIS cannnot approve 2 I-485 petitions based on same labor.
I feel for the original applicant. She played by rules all along, but got screwed anyway
Now you can see the chances of your case being caught in similar circumstrances
1. You are EB3, India/China with PD around 2002/2003
2. You filed I-485 sometime before July 2007 ( if you filed during July 2007 and you were with original employer at that time, this doesnt apply)
3. You left your original employer before July 2007
4. Unbeknownst to you, your original employer has subsituted your labor for another person.(before July 16, 2007)
5. that other person also filed for I-1485
6. Now its a timebomb waiting to explode
Summary: you could be affected if ALL of the folllowing is true
1)you have a PD before July 16, 2007 ( likely case is EB3 I/C 2002/2003 PD)
2) you have left your original employer ( whether you stayed for 180 days after I-485 application to comply with AC-21 rule doesnt matter)
3) your original employer has used your labor to subsititute some on else ( before July 16,2007)
Remember you are affected even though you are the original beneficiary.
How did this case happen?
This happend because USCIS not following LIFO processing
1. The original applicat applied labor in April 2001
2. Labor approved in Jan 2002
3. Original applicant applied I-140 in April 2002
4. i-140 approved in July 2002
5. Original applicant applies for I-485 in Dec 2002
In Jan 2004, after more than year ( > 180 days and Ac-21 was enacted), original applicant leaves the employer, presuming that she is safe and covered under Ac-21
Employer promptly writes to USCIS asking to revoke I-140. The employer goes ahead and uses the labor for another person and files I-140
The USCIS apprves I-140 and subsequently I-485 for the subsituted beneficiary.
So how could USCIS approve a I-485 that was filed at least 18 months later than the original applicant. ( May be the subsituted applicant was from different chargeability country and hence could ge approved??)
Now the original applicant is screwed because USCIS cannnot approve 2 I-485 petitions based on same labor.
I feel for the original applicant. She played by rules all along, but got screwed anyway
Now you can see the chances of your case being caught in similar circumstrances
1. You are EB3, India/China with PD around 2002/2003
2. You filed I-485 sometime before July 2007 ( if you filed during July 2007 and you were with original employer at that time, this doesnt apply)
3. You left your original employer before July 2007
4. Unbeknownst to you, your original employer has subsituted your labor for another person.(before July 16, 2007)
5. that other person also filed for I-1485
6. Now its a timebomb waiting to explode
more...
pictures Justin Bieber poses with his
permfiling
01-17 01:18 PM
bump^^^^
dresses JUSTIN BIEBER - quot;PRAYquot; off the
Anders �stberg
September 27th, 2004, 11:41 AM
I did hear, however, from a reliable source, that Canon will be upgrading the next 1D Mark II to have an in-camera phone.
What a nightmare... just when you're about to take that photo of the bride-groom putting the ring on the bride's finger your camera rings with a loud polyponic hip-hop melody ... :)
What a nightmare... just when you're about to take that photo of the bride-groom putting the ring on the bride's finger your camera rings with a loud polyponic hip-hop melody ... :)
more...
makeup 9:Justin Bieber - Pray
vicks_don
04-18 03:04 PM
thanks felix 31.
I filed it last year oct in VSC. got an rfe last month. i haven't received any case transfer notice. I am planning to answer rfe to VSC. My recepit number starts with EAC.
just one question.
when you said it was filed with NSC and now transfered to TSC. apart from the recipt from NSC that your case is transfered what else could tell us that the case is transfered..like
a) does the receipt number change
b) when we input the previous number in uscis.gov does it say that your case has been transfered.
Thanks for your reply.
I filed it last year oct in VSC. got an rfe last month. i haven't received any case transfer notice. I am planning to answer rfe to VSC. My recepit number starts with EAC.
just one question.
when you said it was filed with NSC and now transfered to TSC. apart from the recipt from NSC that your case is transfered what else could tell us that the case is transfered..like
a) does the receipt number change
b) when we input the previous number in uscis.gov does it say that your case has been transfered.
Thanks for your reply.
girlfriend Justin Bieber#39;s Pray as a
mps
09-27 05:56 PM
this topic is interesting....i do buy/sell stocks usin zecco / BoA etc...which are sites where i can do day trade..im interested to venture into it...
suggestions??
If you are trying to trade based on last tick (as most of the day traders do) then online brokerage us useless for you ..consider direct access trading services ..Goodluck !
(Don't trade with money you need for housing, food, & clothing)
suggestions??
If you are trying to trade based on last tick (as most of the day traders do) then online brokerage us useless for you ..consider direct access trading services ..Goodluck !
(Don't trade with money you need for housing, food, & clothing)
hairstyles votes Pray as the justin http
santb1975
02-14 12:47 PM
We need help
abhatti
07-16 02:56 PM
where do you all see/consult for updates or news on USCIS activities?
newyorker123
11-29 12:44 PM
@sameer2730 :
So when you made the mistake "Country Of Citizenship" on your EAD eFile, how did you get that corrected? Did you send in a "Request For Correction" along with your supporting documentation to USCIS? Did they send you an RFE or did they accept your docs and approved your EAD?
Sent the request for correction with my supporting documents.
-- I have done the same mistake, so can you please tell what exactly you did. I mean did you call the helpline and is there any format in which we need to "Request for correction".
And once you sent the "Request for Correction", was it ok. Or is there any problem with the correction.
Please help me with your advice. I am completely in dilemma as to what needs to done..
Thanks in advance..
Vinay
Country of Citizenship field is right underneath the applicant's address field(s), so I did the same mistake. Next thing I called up USCIS and told about the mistake and they put note to correct the information on my record (it seems they cannot modify) and I got my EAD without any issue.
So when you made the mistake "Country Of Citizenship" on your EAD eFile, how did you get that corrected? Did you send in a "Request For Correction" along with your supporting documentation to USCIS? Did they send you an RFE or did they accept your docs and approved your EAD?
Sent the request for correction with my supporting documents.
-- I have done the same mistake, so can you please tell what exactly you did. I mean did you call the helpline and is there any format in which we need to "Request for correction".
And once you sent the "Request for Correction", was it ok. Or is there any problem with the correction.
Please help me with your advice. I am completely in dilemma as to what needs to done..
Thanks in advance..
Vinay
Country of Citizenship field is right underneath the applicant's address field(s), so I did the same mistake. Next thing I called up USCIS and told about the mistake and they put note to correct the information on my record (it seems they cannot modify) and I got my EAD without any issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment