singhsa3
02-21 01:59 PM
EB1 quota 40K a year..
wallpaper Yellowstone National Park:
go_gc_way
02-02 02:08 PM
Gentlemen,
I visited a link that was posted long time back ... the count on each link increases every day.
for example the following thread is accessed nearly 90 times, many more will visit it sure.
http://www.indiagrid.com/cgi-bin/viewarticle.cgi?dmmy=ok&postid=6560&stq=&cat=art
GIVE IT ANOTHER SHOT , POST IN ANOTHER WEB SITE.
Increase IV membership, imagine another 10k joining you in the effort and keep it going, all the time
I visited a link that was posted long time back ... the count on each link increases every day.
for example the following thread is accessed nearly 90 times, many more will visit it sure.
http://www.indiagrid.com/cgi-bin/viewarticle.cgi?dmmy=ok&postid=6560&stq=&cat=art
GIVE IT ANOTHER SHOT , POST IN ANOTHER WEB SITE.
Increase IV membership, imagine another 10k joining you in the effort and keep it going, all the time
sammas
07-12 04:41 PM
Sorry to say this but 1st March is not considered. Hopefully your PD will be current in next Sep 2010 bulletin. Good Luck!
2011 5 Beartooth Pass, Yellowstone
shamu
01-17 02:10 AM
............
I got my priorities set now & believe me getting a GC has become my last priority ...................
And tomorrow the day starts again with a snooze ahwwwww…
I read your story (every line and every word) and portray my self in that but few small changes.
Very recently even I have learn't that GC is important, but not that important than your life, kids, parents,...
but I would certainly pray for you to get a job ASAP. I know the pain.
I got my priorities set now & believe me getting a GC has become my last priority ...................
And tomorrow the day starts again with a snooze ahwwwww…
I read your story (every line and every word) and portray my self in that but few small changes.
Very recently even I have learn't that GC is important, but not that important than your life, kids, parents,...
but I would certainly pray for you to get a job ASAP. I know the pain.
more...
sanjay02
03-17 09:08 PM
Hi
I have the following questions about I-131.
On I-131
Part 4. Information about your proposed travel.?
Can I answer to visit parents?
I have the following questions about I-131.
On I-131
Part 4. Information about your proposed travel.?
Can I answer to visit parents?
Macaca
01-18 10:56 AM
BY THE END OF THE YEAR I WOULD HAVE CONTRIBUTED AROUND $2700 TO IV
Shame on you if a member plans to contribute $2700 and you have contributed less then 10% (= $270). You are benefiting equally.
Shame on you if a member plans to contribute $2700 and you have contributed less then 10% (= $270). You are benefiting equally.
more...
jungalee43
06-11 09:45 AM
Done.
2010 Free Yellowstone Email
chmur
09-11 09:44 AM
The actual backlog at beginning of 2010 is 200K (pending I-485) + all EB2 I/C and EB3 waiting to file I-485 from 2007-2010. The no of folks in EB2I/C and EB3 ROW from 2007-2010 will be about 80-100K. So instead of 2-3 years , overflow will start reaching EB3 in ~ 5 years.
Yes @the beginning of 2010 - 200 K . Now ~@160 K. The flood gates will not open at least for another year. Just like 2009-210, 2010-11 will see significant reduction in backlog , so next year at this time we may be @120 range. That's when it is very close to EB3-I.
Now problem with your analysis is you assume that USCIS will open the flood gates and make EB2-I current letting in all the applications from 2007 -2010 in one shot. That is questionable, especially since they got burnt in 2007 . They will gradually open the gates . And 70-80 K EB2 and EB3-ROW applications between 2007 -2010 sounds little high.
So I do think we will start burning the Eb3-I backlog with 2-3 years, by 5 years all categories will be current.
And one thing that has not got enough press here is , how the EB3-ROW has got significant overflow in the last two months though EB2- I/C are no where near current. Per common understanding , they should not get a single overflow till EB2 is current .
Street Justice ??
Yes @the beginning of 2010 - 200 K . Now ~@160 K. The flood gates will not open at least for another year. Just like 2009-210, 2010-11 will see significant reduction in backlog , so next year at this time we may be @120 range. That's when it is very close to EB3-I.
Now problem with your analysis is you assume that USCIS will open the flood gates and make EB2-I current letting in all the applications from 2007 -2010 in one shot. That is questionable, especially since they got burnt in 2007 . They will gradually open the gates . And 70-80 K EB2 and EB3-ROW applications between 2007 -2010 sounds little high.
So I do think we will start burning the Eb3-I backlog with 2-3 years, by 5 years all categories will be current.
And one thing that has not got enough press here is , how the EB3-ROW has got significant overflow in the last two months though EB2- I/C are no where near current. Per common understanding , they should not get a single overflow till EB2 is current .
Street Justice ??
more...
desi3933
05-26 05:18 PM
The applicant was found to be inadmissible pursuant to section 212(a(6)(C)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), for falsely claiming to be a U.S. citizen.
http://www.uscis.gov/err/H4%20-%20Application%20for%20Reentry%20after%20Removal%2 0or%20Aggravated%20Felony%20Conviction/Decisions_Issued_in_2008/Jun162008_07H4212.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/err/H4%20-%20Application%20for%20Reentry%20after%20Removal%2 0or%20Aggravated%20Felony%20Conviction/Decisions_Issued_in_2008/Jun162008_07H4212.pdf
hair yellowstone national park
delax
07-13 09:49 AM
go figure..u jacko.. this forum is not give publicty to lawyers.
pls close this thread
Appreciate your comment - :) A healthy debate is beyond your reach and the ability to appreciate another view point seems to be completely missing. The last time I checked a forum is precisely for that - I am not defending or promoting anybody - Please - lets stick to Gandhian principles when we deal with each other not just with USCIS :)
pls close this thread
Appreciate your comment - :) A healthy debate is beyond your reach and the ability to appreciate another view point seems to be completely missing. The last time I checked a forum is precisely for that - I am not defending or promoting anybody - Please - lets stick to Gandhian principles when we deal with each other not just with USCIS :)
more...
chanduv23
03-17 10:08 AM
Substitute labors for EB2 should not IMPACT the delay more than 3 to 6 months. The reason is total EB2 labor india cases approved in 2004 itself is 3500(Straight out of DOL database, published on this forum last year). Some of these cases may have been substituted, worst case, lets say 100% of them applied to I-485. Now the number is 3 times that of 3500. that is 10500(including spouse and 1 child on average).
Another thing you need to consider is If anycase had a PD before sept 2004 and was filed for I-485 before July 2007. That must have got the approval unless there was a namecheck delay.
That should reduce the number to half., 5500(including dependent cases). This is my educated guess, Please dont pick on me. It wont help anybody.
Below are 3 categories left as per my analysis....
1) the applications filed in or after july 2007 OR
2) applications had a PD after sept 2004
3) Namecheck delayed cases.
Chances are that the volume of Subsitutions and porting PD is massive in July , 2007. Almost every Tom, Dick and Harry filed for 485 at that time. News spread like wild fire about the availability of visas and lawyers and consulting companies wanted to do maximum utilization and maximum business. People applied substituted labors for their cousins, friends etc.... and got EAD and AP, May not be working for the sponsering employer.
Another thing you need to consider is If anycase had a PD before sept 2004 and was filed for I-485 before July 2007. That must have got the approval unless there was a namecheck delay.
That should reduce the number to half., 5500(including dependent cases). This is my educated guess, Please dont pick on me. It wont help anybody.
Below are 3 categories left as per my analysis....
1) the applications filed in or after july 2007 OR
2) applications had a PD after sept 2004
3) Namecheck delayed cases.
Chances are that the volume of Subsitutions and porting PD is massive in July , 2007. Almost every Tom, Dick and Harry filed for 485 at that time. News spread like wild fire about the availability of visas and lawyers and consulting companies wanted to do maximum utilization and maximum business. People applied substituted labors for their cousins, friends etc.... and got EAD and AP, May not be working for the sponsering employer.
hot of Yellowstone give birth
ramus
07-05 03:56 PM
Thanks Pappu for update..
Can we get some fund from new members or old members who are just sitting on side line and watching it from there.
Man, $2500 only. That is really pathetic.
Can we get some fund from new members or old members who are just sitting on side line and watching it from there.
Man, $2500 only. That is really pathetic.
more...
house yellowstone wallpaper. wallpaper for desktop; wallpaper for desktop
Jaime
09-10 04:23 PM
Let's not waste this opportunity!!! Let's go guys!!!! Getting to DC requires a sacrifice, but you will be SO glad you went once you see how great we can make it!!!! We can only make it great is you come though!!!
tattoo Pictures – wallpaper 03
StarSun
03-15 10:11 AM
Volunteers, please contact Vin13, if you know of any member willing to make the trip to DC for all 3 or 4 days from the west and mid west regions. He has enough air miles for a couple of tickets.
more...
pictures Bull Elk, Yellowstone National
swo
08-15 08:14 PM
It's very easy to forget that PDs can swing by YEARS at a time. (4 years in the case of the July Bulletin!) Things could easily swing back a year or two in only a month or two.
You can predict to your hearts content but I wouldn't get too hinged on those predictions.
Fact is that we were expecting Us and many were NOT Us. Similarly, PDs in October could be brought forward if there are insuffient applications ready for visas in some categories (ie ROW) in October.
Also remember that the number of newly filed EB applicaitons will be far, FAR less in coming months. Only PERM labors are done now and those will all have late PDs that will be ineligible for a long time. As a result, I think bulletins will start to become more consistent as the predictions of become more reliable after a couple of months of volatility in October.
The only real unknown after getting all the 485 data entry done is going to be the FBI namecheck factor.
You can predict to your hearts content but I wouldn't get too hinged on those predictions.
Fact is that we were expecting Us and many were NOT Us. Similarly, PDs in October could be brought forward if there are insuffient applications ready for visas in some categories (ie ROW) in October.
Also remember that the number of newly filed EB applicaitons will be far, FAR less in coming months. Only PERM labors are done now and those will all have late PDs that will be ineligible for a long time. As a result, I think bulletins will start to become more consistent as the predictions of become more reliable after a couple of months of volatility in October.
The only real unknown after getting all the 485 data entry done is going to be the FBI namecheck factor.
dresses yellowstone wallpaper.
Jaime
09-11 04:39 PM
Once for all, let's get this thing over NOW!!!
LET'S GO TO DC NOW, OR WAIT FOREVER TO BE FREE!!!!!
Well Said! The Time is NOW guys! Later will be just too late! Thing of your future and your children's future!!! Everyone to DC!!!!!!!!!!
LET'S GO TO DC NOW, OR WAIT FOREVER TO BE FREE!!!!!
Well Said! The Time is NOW guys! Later will be just too late! Thing of your future and your children's future!!! Everyone to DC!!!!!!!!!!
more...
makeup Yellowstone National Park
logiclife
12-20 04:54 PM
Please lookup 245(k).
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if—
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days—
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission.
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if—
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days—
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission.
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
girlfriend Hydrothermal Pool, Yellowstone
alterego
07-14 09:37 PM
The fundamental rule (for getting GC) is the longterm intent of having permanent employment relationship between employer and employee at the time of filing 140 and 485 (see the Q&A). The intet has to be "at the time of filing" only. The employee has worked 3 years in H1B for thr sponser. It clearly establishes the both party's intent at the time of filing. So, even if the employer revokes his approved 140, he is 100% safe.
I do not think what you are saying is correct. Ac21 does not allow you to leave before 180 days of your 485 filing.
The RFE is trying to determine whether your former employer holds a bonafide future job open for you or not. If he/she does not then your application is not valid in your circumstances from what I know.
If you get a letter from him/her then that should be adequate, however you will also need to start work with that employer for a reasonable time afterward to be within the law.
If as the poster above said the intent has to be there at the time of filing, then it would be easy for everyone to intend whatever the needed at the time of filing and then change their minds. It does not work that way.
The revocation of the 140 would not have been a problem if it happened after the 180 days, but would be an issue now.
I can see you are in a difficult spot. I would definitely suggest you stay honest, since they have all of your filing records etc. and if you fudge it, your petition can be denied for fraud, which could harm future applications.
Rather than relying on the advise here, you should seek out a good attorney experienced in AC21.
I do not think what you are saying is correct. Ac21 does not allow you to leave before 180 days of your 485 filing.
The RFE is trying to determine whether your former employer holds a bonafide future job open for you or not. If he/she does not then your application is not valid in your circumstances from what I know.
If you get a letter from him/her then that should be adequate, however you will also need to start work with that employer for a reasonable time afterward to be within the law.
If as the poster above said the intent has to be there at the time of filing, then it would be easy for everyone to intend whatever the needed at the time of filing and then change their minds. It does not work that way.
The revocation of the 140 would not have been a problem if it happened after the 180 days, but would be an issue now.
I can see you are in a difficult spot. I would definitely suggest you stay honest, since they have all of your filing records etc. and if you fudge it, your petition can be denied for fraud, which could harm future applications.
Rather than relying on the advise here, you should seek out a good attorney experienced in AC21.
hairstyles Picture 5, -, Yellowstone
GCNaseeb
10-12 09:20 PM
See signature
Macaca
09-26 09:41 PM
Here's a classic example ..
If you look at the other threads on this forum you have people against the Durban bill coz it affects F-1 students . There is another section which is against Grassley coz it'll affect Consultants trying to get H1-B. I do understand Grassley's bill can have many implications and need to be opposed, but the focus still has to be towards alleviating the Employment based GC issues.
I don't think CNN is to be faulted that much coz IV itself has lost its focus towards Employment Based Green Cards. period. thats what is started out to be and needs to come back on that track instead of trying to act as a platform for all Legal Immigration issues.
Simply put IV is " EB-1/2/3- related org" ok..ok.. add in those millionaires who put in a million dollars for GC too.
The point to be made is simple. Over last few months IV members, as an organization, with all it's diverse members and even more diverse immigration problems, in general have moved towards having an opinion and pushing an agenda in a direction which may affect H1-B, F1 visas and not directly EB Green cards.
It would be more prudent if the message sent across is simple-- rather than use the term generic term of legal immigrants - it should focus towards EB-Green cards, coz very few (other than the stuck )understand that H1-B is non-immigrant visa and try to club the whole GC + H1B issue together.
From CNN's point of view (and the whole world) the Legal immigrants are GC, H1, F1, B1, L1, etc .. the onus is on IV to clear that IV stands for EB based GCs. period. Use the term "Immigrant" wisely and sparsely.
senthil1 makes more sense then this!
If you look at the other threads on this forum you have people against the Durban bill coz it affects F-1 students . There is another section which is against Grassley coz it'll affect Consultants trying to get H1-B. I do understand Grassley's bill can have many implications and need to be opposed, but the focus still has to be towards alleviating the Employment based GC issues.
I don't think CNN is to be faulted that much coz IV itself has lost its focus towards Employment Based Green Cards. period. thats what is started out to be and needs to come back on that track instead of trying to act as a platform for all Legal Immigration issues.
Simply put IV is " EB-1/2/3- related org" ok..ok.. add in those millionaires who put in a million dollars for GC too.
The point to be made is simple. Over last few months IV members, as an organization, with all it's diverse members and even more diverse immigration problems, in general have moved towards having an opinion and pushing an agenda in a direction which may affect H1-B, F1 visas and not directly EB Green cards.
It would be more prudent if the message sent across is simple-- rather than use the term generic term of legal immigrants - it should focus towards EB-Green cards, coz very few (other than the stuck )understand that H1-B is non-immigrant visa and try to club the whole GC + H1B issue together.
From CNN's point of view (and the whole world) the Legal immigrants are GC, H1, F1, B1, L1, etc .. the onus is on IV to clear that IV stands for EB based GCs. period. Use the term "Immigrant" wisely and sparsely.
senthil1 makes more sense then this!
GCNirvana007
10-10 01:33 PM
Just to avoid all this , You can say I'm a US citizen and move on. They cannot ask for any verification can they?
No how about carry the documents which is required by LAW rather your criminal suggestion?
Its simple, its LAW. They have clearly stated to carry. Just carry the damn documents and get over it. I see it amusing people whining about this. Its not like they are raping you. They are asking questions which they are entitled to. If someone crosses the line, then yes we can take it up on them.
No how about carry the documents which is required by LAW rather your criminal suggestion?
Its simple, its LAW. They have clearly stated to carry. Just carry the damn documents and get over it. I see it amusing people whining about this. Its not like they are raping you. They are asking questions which they are entitled to. If someone crosses the line, then yes we can take it up on them.
No comments:
Post a Comment