saketkapur
12-02 06:58 PM
This in from Ron Gotcher website....I guess they are reading our letters.....
Good news concerning AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We received some very good news over the weekend. In October and November, our office was contacted by a number of adjustment of status applicants who had received denials based on "revocations" of their approved I-140 petitions by former employers. All of these applicants had AOS applications that had been pending for more than 180 days before they left their sponsoring employers. They also had approved I-140 petitions. Nonetheless, vindictive employers in each case attempted to revoke the approved I-140 petitions. The CIS accepted these "revocations" and promptly denied the AOS applications. We were contacted by six different individuals with these types of cases and we filed motions to reconsider in their cases.
Earlier, in September, we handled this type of case and the MTR was granted and the denial successfully reversed. This happened before any of these October/November cases came in or were filed.
I was disappointed to see that the CIS was still attempting to deny cases on this basis. There is absolutely no law to support this type of denial and, in fact, such denials are directly contrary to both statutory law and explicit CIS policy.
I was gratified to see that all six of the MTRs we field in October/November were granted and the denials reversed. I am also encouraged that the CIS accepted our request to reopen the denials of the dependents as well, on their own motion, and spare the pricipal applicants the cost of paying filing fees for MTRs for the denials of dependents' AOS applications.
I hope this means that the supervisors at the service centers involved are now aware of the blatant illegality of these types of denials and will put and end to them in the future. We can only hope that we have seen an end to this nonsense.
__________________
Good news concerning AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We received some very good news over the weekend. In October and November, our office was contacted by a number of adjustment of status applicants who had received denials based on "revocations" of their approved I-140 petitions by former employers. All of these applicants had AOS applications that had been pending for more than 180 days before they left their sponsoring employers. They also had approved I-140 petitions. Nonetheless, vindictive employers in each case attempted to revoke the approved I-140 petitions. The CIS accepted these "revocations" and promptly denied the AOS applications. We were contacted by six different individuals with these types of cases and we filed motions to reconsider in their cases.
Earlier, in September, we handled this type of case and the MTR was granted and the denial successfully reversed. This happened before any of these October/November cases came in or were filed.
I was disappointed to see that the CIS was still attempting to deny cases on this basis. There is absolutely no law to support this type of denial and, in fact, such denials are directly contrary to both statutory law and explicit CIS policy.
I was gratified to see that all six of the MTRs we field in October/November were granted and the denials reversed. I am also encouraged that the CIS accepted our request to reopen the denials of the dependents as well, on their own motion, and spare the pricipal applicants the cost of paying filing fees for MTRs for the denials of dependents' AOS applications.
I hope this means that the supervisors at the service centers involved are now aware of the blatant illegality of these types of denials and will put and end to them in the future. We can only hope that we have seen an end to this nonsense.
__________________
wallpaper Check out our guide! Alyson
corleone
11-02 10:42 AM
See signature for details:
xgoogle
06-25 07:59 AM
So we can apply for an EAD and AP renewal when the time comes on our own?
Also is AC-21 filing involved in this case?
And would my current employer need to do anything or need to not do anything?
Thanks,
Also is AC-21 filing involved in this case?
And would my current employer need to do anything or need to not do anything?
Thanks,
2011 Aly Michalka Wallpaper: Amanda
a_yaja
02-04 05:09 PM
I guess you should be good with your AP . But also there was a thread about one of the IV'ians AP experience at SFO. Please read that so can understand what AP is for and when it can be used as per the IO at SFO airport
I don't think that having AP you can bypass your criminal record. The officer at the POE will have to make the determination if you are eligible or not. I recently read (I don't have the link to back it up) that a Vietnameese lady well in her 40s who had a green card (she was not a citizen) had a drug possession (it was not even possession with intent to sell) conviction and that the officer at the POE told her that she was inadmissible and that she had to go back from where she came.
The only people who are granted entry without any questions irrespective of anything in their background are US citizens. Everyone else can be refused entry at the POE if found inadmissible.
I am not sure if spouse battery qualifies as a deportable offense. If it does, I would expect that there will be problems at the POE on the way back.
Consult your attorney and see what he/ she says. If domestic battery is a deportable offense, even a green card may not help you.
I don't think that having AP you can bypass your criminal record. The officer at the POE will have to make the determination if you are eligible or not. I recently read (I don't have the link to back it up) that a Vietnameese lady well in her 40s who had a green card (she was not a citizen) had a drug possession (it was not even possession with intent to sell) conviction and that the officer at the POE told her that she was inadmissible and that she had to go back from where she came.
The only people who are granted entry without any questions irrespective of anything in their background are US citizens. Everyone else can be refused entry at the POE if found inadmissible.
I am not sure if spouse battery qualifies as a deportable offense. If it does, I would expect that there will be problems at the POE on the way back.
Consult your attorney and see what he/ she says. If domestic battery is a deportable offense, even a green card may not help you.
more...
chanduv23
01-10 09:13 AM
We need every member in the tri state area to attend this. Please show your support
Dhundhun
03-29 09:51 PM
---
God forbid, even if they deny your H1B visa from your new employer, you should still be able to return to the US on the expired H1B visa since you made an honest H1B visa trip.
How come sareesh will return on expired Visa (12/09/2006)?
God forbid, even if they deny your H1B visa from your new employer, you should still be able to return to the US on the expired H1B visa since you made an honest H1B visa trip.
How come sareesh will return on expired Visa (12/09/2006)?
more...
Gigantic697
10-20 02:43 PM
Anyone guys...?
I've to decide fast what to do....get the H4 stamped from India or do the COS from US. If we go to India and get the H4 stamping there is a chance that the consulate people might ask about H1 and if they found that my wife was out of status they might bar her from entering US.
let me know if anyone has the same case or gone through this.
Thanks
I've to decide fast what to do....get the H4 stamped from India or do the COS from US. If we go to India and get the H4 stamping there is a chance that the consulate people might ask about H1 and if they found that my wife was out of status they might bar her from entering US.
let me know if anyone has the same case or gone through this.
Thanks
2010 Aly Michalka Photos
eb3India
04-08 10:50 AM
Tell him that this is NOT India or any other country where they can do 10 things to get votes. I heard this from one guy who is on EAD and thinks something will happen in the election year. purely ludacris..
it means you don't have any experience in US politics, your relative is right election year is going to play some rule in immigration politics, democrats are pitching of hispanic votes they will try to do everything possible to get their vote, but main concern here is American public are against increase in any form of immigration. so odds are itz going to be counter productive for us as our case always depends on illegals.
so your relative is right but itz better for you to change job and get along with your life, if they laws are changed for better you can start your GC with new company and get it without losing lot of time, if not atleast your going to make good money
it means you don't have any experience in US politics, your relative is right election year is going to play some rule in immigration politics, democrats are pitching of hispanic votes they will try to do everything possible to get their vote, but main concern here is American public are against increase in any form of immigration. so odds are itz going to be counter productive for us as our case always depends on illegals.
so your relative is right but itz better for you to change job and get along with your life, if they laws are changed for better you can start your GC with new company and get it without losing lot of time, if not atleast your going to make good money
more...
cchaitu
07-24 04:34 PM
Hi,
If I have a permanent offer after 180 days of Receipt date (I 485)...
Is this offer should be in the same location (state) where my labor got filed ???
Please advice...
Thanks
Please Advice
If I have a permanent offer after 180 days of Receipt date (I 485)...
Is this offer should be in the same location (state) where my labor got filed ???
Please advice...
Thanks
Please Advice
hair pictures Alyson Michalka
GCHope2011
11-05 08:16 AM
Please read the editorial from today's WSJ by John Boehner. We should adjust our thinking to this reality and try to eat the elephant one bite at a time. Trying to swallow anything all at once is certainly not John Boehner's idea of legislation.
================================================== =====
I grew up in a small house on a hill in Cincinnati, Ohio, with 11 brothers and sisters. My dad ran a bar, Andy's Caf�, that my grandfather Andrew Boehner opened in 1938. We didn't have much but were thankful for what we had. And we didn't think much about Washington.
That changed when I got involved with a small business, which I eventually built into a successful enterprise. I saw firsthand how government throws obstacles in the way of job-creation and stifles our prosperity. It prompted me to get involved in my government, and eventually took me to Congress.
Millions of Americans have had a similar experience. They look at Washington and see an arrogance of power. They see a Congress that doesn't listen, that is ruled by leaders who seem out of touch and dismissive, even disdainful, of the anger that Americans feel toward their government and the challenges they face in an economy struggling to create jobs.
The political landscape has been permanently reshaped over the past two years. Overreaching by elected officials�in the form of pork-laden "stimulus" spending, permanent bailouts, and policies that force responsible taxpayers to subsidize irresponsible behavior�has awakened something deep in our national character. This has led to a surge of activism by citizens demanding smaller, more accountable government and a repudiation of Washington in Tuesday's elections.
Tired of politicians who refuse to listen, Americans who previously were not involved or minimally involved in the political process are now helping to drive it. While their backgrounds are as diverse as the country itself, their message to Washington is the same: Government leaders are servants of the people; the people are not servants of their government.
View Full Image
David Klein
The members of the 112th Congress must heed this message if there is to be any hope of repairing the shattered bonds of trust between the American people and their elected leaders. And that begins with the speaker of the House, who as leader of the institution must lead by example.
Accordingly, there are several steps I believe the next speaker should be prepared to take immediately. Among them:
� No earmarks. Earmarks have become a symbol of a broken Washington, and an entire lobbying industry has been created around them. The speaker of the House shouldn't use the power of the office to raid the federal Treasury for pork-barrel projects. To the contrary, the speaker should be an advocate for ending the current earmark process, and should adhere to a personal no-earmarks policy that stands as an example for all members of Congress to follow.
I have maintained a no-earmarks policy throughout my time of service in Congress. I believe the House must adopt a moratorium on all earmarks as a signal of our commitment to ending business as usual in the spending process.
� Let Americans read bills before they are brought to a vote. The speaker of the House should not allow any bill to come to a vote that has not been posted publicly online for at least three days. Members of Congress and the American people must have the opportunity to read it.
Similarly, the speaker should insist that every bill include a clause citing where in the Constitution Congress is given the power to pass it. Bills that can't pass this test shouldn't get a vote. House Republicans' new governing agenda, "A Pledge to America," calls for the speaker to implement such reforms immediately.
� No more "comprehensive" bills. The next speaker should put an end to so-called comprehensive bills with thousands of pages of legislative text that make it easy to hide spending projects and job-killing policies. President Obama's massive "stimulus" and health-care bills, written behind closed doors with minimal public scrutiny, were the last straw for many Americans. The American people are not well-served by "comprehensive," and they are rightly suspicious of the adjective.
� No more bills written behind closed doors in the speaker's office. Bills should be written by legislators in committee in plain public view. Issues should be advanced one at a time, and the speaker should place an emphasis on smaller, more focused legislation that is properly scrutinized, constitutionally sound, and consistent with Americans' demand for a less-costly, less-intrusive government.
The speaker of the House, like all members of Congress, is a servant of the American people. The individual entrusted with that high honor and responsibility should act accordingly. A speaker's mission should not be to consolidate power in the speaker's office, but rather to ensure that elected officials uphold their oath to defend the Constitution and the American people we serve. If a speaker carries out that mission successfully, the result should be legislation that better reflects the considerable challenges we face as a nation.
The American people deserve a majority in Congress that listens to the people, focuses on their priorities and honors their demands for smaller, more accountable government. Accountability starts at the top, in the office of the speaker.
Mr. Boehner, a congressman representing Ohio's Eighth District since 1991, is the House Republican leader.
================================================== =====
I grew up in a small house on a hill in Cincinnati, Ohio, with 11 brothers and sisters. My dad ran a bar, Andy's Caf�, that my grandfather Andrew Boehner opened in 1938. We didn't have much but were thankful for what we had. And we didn't think much about Washington.
That changed when I got involved with a small business, which I eventually built into a successful enterprise. I saw firsthand how government throws obstacles in the way of job-creation and stifles our prosperity. It prompted me to get involved in my government, and eventually took me to Congress.
Millions of Americans have had a similar experience. They look at Washington and see an arrogance of power. They see a Congress that doesn't listen, that is ruled by leaders who seem out of touch and dismissive, even disdainful, of the anger that Americans feel toward their government and the challenges they face in an economy struggling to create jobs.
The political landscape has been permanently reshaped over the past two years. Overreaching by elected officials�in the form of pork-laden "stimulus" spending, permanent bailouts, and policies that force responsible taxpayers to subsidize irresponsible behavior�has awakened something deep in our national character. This has led to a surge of activism by citizens demanding smaller, more accountable government and a repudiation of Washington in Tuesday's elections.
Tired of politicians who refuse to listen, Americans who previously were not involved or minimally involved in the political process are now helping to drive it. While their backgrounds are as diverse as the country itself, their message to Washington is the same: Government leaders are servants of the people; the people are not servants of their government.
View Full Image
David Klein
The members of the 112th Congress must heed this message if there is to be any hope of repairing the shattered bonds of trust between the American people and their elected leaders. And that begins with the speaker of the House, who as leader of the institution must lead by example.
Accordingly, there are several steps I believe the next speaker should be prepared to take immediately. Among them:
� No earmarks. Earmarks have become a symbol of a broken Washington, and an entire lobbying industry has been created around them. The speaker of the House shouldn't use the power of the office to raid the federal Treasury for pork-barrel projects. To the contrary, the speaker should be an advocate for ending the current earmark process, and should adhere to a personal no-earmarks policy that stands as an example for all members of Congress to follow.
I have maintained a no-earmarks policy throughout my time of service in Congress. I believe the House must adopt a moratorium on all earmarks as a signal of our commitment to ending business as usual in the spending process.
� Let Americans read bills before they are brought to a vote. The speaker of the House should not allow any bill to come to a vote that has not been posted publicly online for at least three days. Members of Congress and the American people must have the opportunity to read it.
Similarly, the speaker should insist that every bill include a clause citing where in the Constitution Congress is given the power to pass it. Bills that can't pass this test shouldn't get a vote. House Republicans' new governing agenda, "A Pledge to America," calls for the speaker to implement such reforms immediately.
� No more "comprehensive" bills. The next speaker should put an end to so-called comprehensive bills with thousands of pages of legislative text that make it easy to hide spending projects and job-killing policies. President Obama's massive "stimulus" and health-care bills, written behind closed doors with minimal public scrutiny, were the last straw for many Americans. The American people are not well-served by "comprehensive," and they are rightly suspicious of the adjective.
� No more bills written behind closed doors in the speaker's office. Bills should be written by legislators in committee in plain public view. Issues should be advanced one at a time, and the speaker should place an emphasis on smaller, more focused legislation that is properly scrutinized, constitutionally sound, and consistent with Americans' demand for a less-costly, less-intrusive government.
The speaker of the House, like all members of Congress, is a servant of the American people. The individual entrusted with that high honor and responsibility should act accordingly. A speaker's mission should not be to consolidate power in the speaker's office, but rather to ensure that elected officials uphold their oath to defend the Constitution and the American people we serve. If a speaker carries out that mission successfully, the result should be legislation that better reflects the considerable challenges we face as a nation.
The American people deserve a majority in Congress that listens to the people, focuses on their priorities and honors their demands for smaller, more accountable government. Accountability starts at the top, in the office of the speaker.
Mr. Boehner, a congressman representing Ohio's Eighth District since 1991, is the House Republican leader.
more...
rbharol
11-08 10:50 AM
Hi,
My parents got 10 year multiple entry US visa 2 years back. My brother who was residing here had sent the required documents and applied the visitor visa. My parents had visited me then for 3 months. Now I am planning to get my parents to US. But my brother no longer lives in USA. Is my parent�s visitor visa still valid since my brother is not residing here or should I re apply for my parents visitors visa. Any help or suggestions are appreciated. Thanks in advance.
This is really a very bad and sorry situation to be in.
I am feeling very bad after reading this.
This is unnecessary harrasment.
It is fault on your part too. They should not have overstayed and should have
filed for extension if they had to.
Best bet is to hire a good lawyer quickly.
Good luck.
Let me know if we can help. Send me PM if you need help of any kind.
I am in San Francisco area.
My parents got 10 year multiple entry US visa 2 years back. My brother who was residing here had sent the required documents and applied the visitor visa. My parents had visited me then for 3 months. Now I am planning to get my parents to US. But my brother no longer lives in USA. Is my parent�s visitor visa still valid since my brother is not residing here or should I re apply for my parents visitors visa. Any help or suggestions are appreciated. Thanks in advance.
This is really a very bad and sorry situation to be in.
I am feeling very bad after reading this.
This is unnecessary harrasment.
It is fault on your part too. They should not have overstayed and should have
filed for extension if they had to.
Best bet is to hire a good lawyer quickly.
Good luck.
Let me know if we can help. Send me PM if you need help of any kind.
I am in San Francisco area.
hot Alyson Michalka wallpapers
little_willy
08-15 11:28 PM
^^^^^^^^^
more...
house Alyson Michalka wallpaper:
WeShallOvercome
07-23 03:36 PM
yellow :D
My lawyer is not telling me the color of the envelope.
Will my application be rejected ? :D :D :D
My lawyer is not telling me the color of the envelope.
Will my application be rejected ? :D :D :D
tattoo hairstyles alyson michalka
Robert Kumar
02-12 02:51 PM
Why dont you consider one of attorney offices that provide free call services to IV members. That would help you as well as help IV community. May be you can consider Prashanthi Reddy or Raj at Shusterman or Siskind Law firm.
I would love to, as it will help IV community also, but unfortunately it is not very easy in a company to request change of lawyer when the lawyer is good one. I see from many comments here that the Chugh Firm is a good one. And the employer also feels the same. So what grounds can I request them change their processes which they are following for nearly 200 employees. It will be hard. Cant even ask..
I would love to, as it will help IV community also, but unfortunately it is not very easy in a company to request change of lawyer when the lawyer is good one. I see from many comments here that the Chugh Firm is a good one. And the employer also feels the same. So what grounds can I request them change their processes which they are following for nearly 200 employees. It will be hard. Cant even ask..
more...
pictures Aly Michalka Wallpaper Images:
gaffarkhan
07-16 02:03 PM
Sent I-140 on October 2nd. Status showing as it's recd. Anybody's I-140 approved in that range?
Thanks,
GK
Thanks,
GK
dresses aly michalka wallpaper.
HV000
04-15 10:20 AM
CONGRATS! One more approval from TSC.
more...
makeup Alyson Michalka PSP Wallpaper
sanju_dba
04-20 10:25 AM
I donot encourage IV'ans to participate in this march.
It means Join hands with Illegals for noreason.
No matter "how" loud / "what" you scream in this march it will be heard as "give amnesty".
It means Join hands with Illegals for noreason.
No matter "how" loud / "what" you scream in this march it will be heard as "give amnesty".
girlfriend It features Aly Michalka in it
kshitijnt
02-10 07:46 PM
Forget about it. USCIS will waste 3699 more visas this year on and show anti immigrants that they have done something for them.
hairstyles previous wallpaper middot; Alyson-Michalka Wallpaper at 1024x768
n2b
08-02 09:35 AM
if you can convince the current employer not to revoke the 140 (at least for the next 180 days).
Is this true? If the employer agrees to not invoke I140 for next 180 days, I can start working for another company tomorrow without affecting my 485 application?
Wouldn't you need to show paystubs or something, for 180 days, for the company that filed your I485?
Thank you!!
Is this true? If the employer agrees to not invoke I140 for next 180 days, I can start working for another company tomorrow without affecting my 485 application?
Wouldn't you need to show paystubs or something, for 180 days, for the company that filed your I485?
Thank you!!
pinky001
09-18 03:51 AM
I am planning to attend an Visa interview, at present I am on H4 status.
My case is: Gor H4 in sept 2006 - April 2008, and got stamping
Later got H1 from Oct 2007 to oct 2010, and got stamping
Present Got H4 from sept 2009 to may 2011 and no stamping yet and hence planning to go for stamping
Question 1) But when I am selcting the appontment date it ask's for a question
" Are you applying for same visa class that expired in the last 12 months?" so In my case would it be yes or no?
2) Does H4 and H1 come under same Visa Class?
please reply ASAP, As I am planning to schedule an appt immediately
I am planning to attend an Visa interview, at present I am on H4 status.
My case is: Gor H4 in sept 2006 - April 2008, and got stamping
Later got H1 from Oct 2007 to oct 2010, and got stamping
Present Got H4 from sept 2009 to may 2011 and no stamping yet and hence planning to go for stamping
Question 1) But when I am selcting the appontment date it ask's for a question
" Are you applying for same visa class that expired in the last 12 months?" so In my case would it be yes or no?
2) Does H4 and H1 come under same Visa Class?
please reply ASAP, As I am planning to schedule an appt immediately
My case is: Gor H4 in sept 2006 - April 2008, and got stamping
Later got H1 from Oct 2007 to oct 2010, and got stamping
Present Got H4 from sept 2009 to may 2011 and no stamping yet and hence planning to go for stamping
Question 1) But when I am selcting the appontment date it ask's for a question
" Are you applying for same visa class that expired in the last 12 months?" so In my case would it be yes or no?
2) Does H4 and H1 come under same Visa Class?
please reply ASAP, As I am planning to schedule an appt immediately
I am planning to attend an Visa interview, at present I am on H4 status.
My case is: Gor H4 in sept 2006 - April 2008, and got stamping
Later got H1 from Oct 2007 to oct 2010, and got stamping
Present Got H4 from sept 2009 to may 2011 and no stamping yet and hence planning to go for stamping
Question 1) But when I am selcting the appontment date it ask's for a question
" Are you applying for same visa class that expired in the last 12 months?" so In my case would it be yes or no?
2) Does H4 and H1 come under same Visa Class?
please reply ASAP, As I am planning to schedule an appt immediately
sidd_k2002
02-11 07:46 PM
eyeswe:
Thanks for your detail explanation. I dont have any siblings in India, and i am an alone child. Regarding my savings, i have been a full time employee of the company for which i work since i was on my CPT and now as i am on my OPT. Now the question to me is that since i have about 16k dollars in my saving account right now, should i sponsor them based on my OPT or should i just remit all the amount back to india back into my fathers account, and ask him to self sponsor him.
I have heard that the visa officer does ask you about the transactions that are fairly big and failry recent ones. Woudnt it create a further doubt if i transfer this savings back to my fathers account, and be in more problem.
Please Guys , if you can share your advice here, it would be really helpful for me here. I really dont want my parents visa to get rejected the third time.
Sidd
Thanks for your detail explanation. I dont have any siblings in India, and i am an alone child. Regarding my savings, i have been a full time employee of the company for which i work since i was on my CPT and now as i am on my OPT. Now the question to me is that since i have about 16k dollars in my saving account right now, should i sponsor them based on my OPT or should i just remit all the amount back to india back into my fathers account, and ask him to self sponsor him.
I have heard that the visa officer does ask you about the transactions that are fairly big and failry recent ones. Woudnt it create a further doubt if i transfer this savings back to my fathers account, and be in more problem.
Please Guys , if you can share your advice here, it would be really helpful for me here. I really dont want my parents visa to get rejected the third time.
Sidd
No comments:
Post a Comment