santb1975
02-13 03:06 PM
I support having ongoing discussions with USCIS and having an amicable relationship with them. We should work hard to make the letter campaign successful. We have 30000 members but less than 2000 letters so far. While some volunteers are working tirelessly to make the letter campaign successful some do not want to take part in it at all because the Template's we have out there are asking for their Name, Address and Telephone Number. it is not a joke to mail out a letter to the president on which the signature of the person is not comprehendable and there is no Full Name, Adress and Telephone number. I spent hours last weekend answering people's questions about letter campaign but all I get in return is recommendations on what else I can do. There were no letters after all that. I totally support Walking_Dude on this.
Raising 30K in 7 days was possible. it was made possible by 300 members. I still remember having a conversation with a gentleman at a mela (US Citizen and a white american) who said funds should not be a problem for you guys. You have 25,000 members and you all make good money. On any day you can all contribute 10$ and raise 250k. I wish. That will be my dream come true. I am one of those volunteers who worked very tirelessly to make 30k happen in 7 days. it is fun to be an active IV volunteer. I know a few people in our Local Chapter who spend their money for local chapter activities in addition to their monthly contributions. We have less than 10 members in our chapter who do that. I can totally understand when they tell me sometimes that have been spending a lot of their own money and taking the lead this for an year and half and are getting burned and want to take a step back now since we do not have new people stepping forward to help. Atleast they promised to take part in action items for sure.
I apologize for my venting today
Raising 30K in 7 days was possible. it was made possible by 300 members. I still remember having a conversation with a gentleman at a mela (US Citizen and a white american) who said funds should not be a problem for you guys. You have 25,000 members and you all make good money. On any day you can all contribute 10$ and raise 250k. I wish. That will be my dream come true. I am one of those volunteers who worked very tirelessly to make 30k happen in 7 days. it is fun to be an active IV volunteer. I know a few people in our Local Chapter who spend their money for local chapter activities in addition to their monthly contributions. We have less than 10 members in our chapter who do that. I can totally understand when they tell me sometimes that have been spending a lot of their own money and taking the lead this for an year and half and are getting burned and want to take a step back now since we do not have new people stepping forward to help. Atleast they promised to take part in action items for sure.
I apologize for my venting today
wallpaper Wiz Khalifa and Amber Rose
meridiani.planum
07-30 06:31 AM
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5766
posted 07-24 09:59 AM
Ron Gotcher has some thoughts on India E2 movement over the next two months.
More and more, I see people posting messages containing the unspoken assumption that since the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward, it is likely to move forward further in the coming months. This is a false hope.
Even with a cutoff date in early 2003, the CIS has sufficient inventory of Indian E2 adjustments on file to use up the remaining inventory of E2 visas for this fiscal year. The reason that the Visa Office advanced the priority date is to move it up to the point where overseas consular posts can take up the slack left by the CIS's inability to close out enough cases and avoid wasting visas this year.
The CIS inventory of pending cases is massive. If there were no quota at all - if everyone were suddenly "current" - and no new cases were filed after today, it would still take the CIS four to five years to close out all of the pending cases that they already have in their inventory.
Overseas consular posts maintain inventories of cases as well. When the priority date for a particular case starts to edge forward and it appears that the applicant may become "current' in the not too distant future, the applicant is told to submit all required supporting documents to the post or the NVC. When this is done, the applicant is reported to the Visa Office as being "documentarily qualified." This means that the case is in a position where an immigrant visa can be issued to the applicant as soon as a visa number becomes available.
The inventory of documentarily qualified cases with current priority dates at a consular post never exceeds that post's ability to process all such cases within sixty days. Consular posts have very high bandwidth processing capabilities. No matter how many cases become current, they are able to process all of them within sixty days.
The reason that the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward is that the Visa Office fears that the CIS will not be able to adjudicate enough adjustment of status applications to exhaust the annual quota. They have advanced the cutoff date in order to make more cases overseas eligible for final processing.
This means that overseas consular posts have exhausted their inventories of Indian E2 cases with priority dates earlier than 2006 and the Visa Office had to move the cutoff date forward in order to make more cases eligible to be closed out.
This does not mean that the CIS has closed out all of the pre-2006 cases pending in their inventory. Far from it. When the new fiscal year starts, Indian E2 is likely to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003. This is roughly the point reached by the CIS in processing their inventory of pending cases.
Please understand that this is a temporary phenomenon and due entirely to the difference in the processing capabilities of the CIS and the overseas consular posts.
I hope this clarifies matters.
Ron Gotcher
this makes no sense (with all due respect to Mr Gotcher). He basically claims that PD has been moved to allow CP cases to be processed faster to avoid visa number wastage.. However he also says that there is a huge backlog of AOS cases. Looking at how many CP cases are being called for interview in mumbai and delhi (low hundreds) I dont see how CP alone can help avoid a big wastage of visas. If USCIS is still 20k short, then its the massive pile of AOS cases they should be using, just like they did last year.
Also, if they waste visa numbers this year, it would be really gross incompetence. EB2-India has gone all the way from 2000 to 2006 this year. They slack off at the start of the year, then scramble in the end. I dont know why they follow this approach knowing full well that right at the end it puts them in a soup.
posted 07-24 09:59 AM
Ron Gotcher has some thoughts on India E2 movement over the next two months.
More and more, I see people posting messages containing the unspoken assumption that since the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward, it is likely to move forward further in the coming months. This is a false hope.
Even with a cutoff date in early 2003, the CIS has sufficient inventory of Indian E2 adjustments on file to use up the remaining inventory of E2 visas for this fiscal year. The reason that the Visa Office advanced the priority date is to move it up to the point where overseas consular posts can take up the slack left by the CIS's inability to close out enough cases and avoid wasting visas this year.
The CIS inventory of pending cases is massive. If there were no quota at all - if everyone were suddenly "current" - and no new cases were filed after today, it would still take the CIS four to five years to close out all of the pending cases that they already have in their inventory.
Overseas consular posts maintain inventories of cases as well. When the priority date for a particular case starts to edge forward and it appears that the applicant may become "current' in the not too distant future, the applicant is told to submit all required supporting documents to the post or the NVC. When this is done, the applicant is reported to the Visa Office as being "documentarily qualified." This means that the case is in a position where an immigrant visa can be issued to the applicant as soon as a visa number becomes available.
The inventory of documentarily qualified cases with current priority dates at a consular post never exceeds that post's ability to process all such cases within sixty days. Consular posts have very high bandwidth processing capabilities. No matter how many cases become current, they are able to process all of them within sixty days.
The reason that the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward is that the Visa Office fears that the CIS will not be able to adjudicate enough adjustment of status applications to exhaust the annual quota. They have advanced the cutoff date in order to make more cases overseas eligible for final processing.
This means that overseas consular posts have exhausted their inventories of Indian E2 cases with priority dates earlier than 2006 and the Visa Office had to move the cutoff date forward in order to make more cases eligible to be closed out.
This does not mean that the CIS has closed out all of the pre-2006 cases pending in their inventory. Far from it. When the new fiscal year starts, Indian E2 is likely to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003. This is roughly the point reached by the CIS in processing their inventory of pending cases.
Please understand that this is a temporary phenomenon and due entirely to the difference in the processing capabilities of the CIS and the overseas consular posts.
I hope this clarifies matters.
Ron Gotcher
this makes no sense (with all due respect to Mr Gotcher). He basically claims that PD has been moved to allow CP cases to be processed faster to avoid visa number wastage.. However he also says that there is a huge backlog of AOS cases. Looking at how many CP cases are being called for interview in mumbai and delhi (low hundreds) I dont see how CP alone can help avoid a big wastage of visas. If USCIS is still 20k short, then its the massive pile of AOS cases they should be using, just like they did last year.
Also, if they waste visa numbers this year, it would be really gross incompetence. EB2-India has gone all the way from 2000 to 2006 this year. They slack off at the start of the year, then scramble in the end. I dont know why they follow this approach knowing full well that right at the end it puts them in a soup.
olivetheoil
02-13 10:13 PM
Count me in!
2011 His girlfriend Amber Rose
sai
02-06 12:46 PM
I dont think there will be a change to already in pipeline cases. Lets wait and see .:)
more...
mirage
04-01 03:59 PM
It doesn't cost you anything to make promises, also people are used to being ditched by politicians, so they don't complaint. I guess mostly people feel satisfied by just getting the glimpse of you if you are a celeberity, otherwise why would anybody vote for Sanjay Dutt(thank God Supreme court banned him) ? Govinda, Dharmendra, Jayapradha have proved to be worst MPs for their constituencies...Mirage, thanks for the correction..
wondering what he is going to promise to people of Moradabad !?!
wondering what he is going to promise to people of Moradabad !?!
amsgc
07-04 12:30 PM
What is $170 and $180? I got this number from my attorney.
However, we are getting conflicting #s on application fee!
Please resolve these #s. Lawyer fees vary. So we can give least and max #s.
There should be no discrepancy in the application fee - I pulled out these numbers from www.uscis.gov.
EAD (I-765): $180
AP (I-131): $170
As for lawyer fees, it varies by State, Experience, Number of dependents, and Reputation. I think the $2000 is representative of lawyer fees for primary applicant plus 1 dependent. I spoke to a lawyer in California who charges around $1700 for I-485/AP/EAD, and multiply that by the number of dependents. Another one on the east coast said $2000 for primary and spouse.
If you go for I-140/I-485, then lawyer fees for 1 applicant can go up to $4000 easy.
However, we are getting conflicting #s on application fee!
Please resolve these #s. Lawyer fees vary. So we can give least and max #s.
There should be no discrepancy in the application fee - I pulled out these numbers from www.uscis.gov.
EAD (I-765): $180
AP (I-131): $170
As for lawyer fees, it varies by State, Experience, Number of dependents, and Reputation. I think the $2000 is representative of lawyer fees for primary applicant plus 1 dependent. I spoke to a lawyer in California who charges around $1700 for I-485/AP/EAD, and multiply that by the number of dependents. Another one on the east coast said $2000 for primary and spouse.
If you go for I-140/I-485, then lawyer fees for 1 applicant can go up to $4000 easy.
more...
chanduv23
06-27 11:26 PM
First, prove there is a god.
Is there a birth certificate somewhere? Was it registered timely and does it have the First Name and Last Name for mother father and son?
Maybe he can get 2 affidavits instead of birth certificate
Is there a birth certificate somewhere? Was it registered timely and does it have the First Name and Last Name for mother father and son?
Maybe he can get 2 affidavits instead of birth certificate
2010 Wiz Khalifa speaks on dating
iv_only_hope
02-13 10:31 AM
You are right chanduv. If ppl are not even participating in letter campaign itself what to expect abt all this lawsuit stuff.
more...
gagbag
07-11 12:55 PM
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2007,0710-lee.shtm
hair Amber Rose, who is allegedly
sundarpn
01-13 04:13 PM
All is well :)
Is this already passed or is it something they are comtemplating?
Is this already passed or is it something they are comtemplating?
more...
WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC
07-21 02:13 PM
Please for GOD SAKE understand that this is an immigration Portal.
Not a fish market where we can discuss the prices of item at different stores.
Please stop this Admin
Not a fish market where we can discuss the prices of item at different stores.
Please stop this Admin
hot Amber Rose! Wiz amp; I Love each
bfadlia
02-16 02:53 PM
I beleive Kuhelica and bfadlia have been planted by anti-immigrants to spread poison and hate in people's mind. looking at the number of posts they have posted, it seems like they are new members who are out there to sabotage the reforms that we have been talking about.
We do not have to spend our energy and time answering each and every post of theirs. they do not deserve our time nor they are intelligent enough to rationalise.
I and a couple of us have been repeatedly telling that we do not want ROW people to be affected nor we want country quota to be removed, but they have been targetting our race, our country, it has jealously writ all over... Just ignore them and move on. the more forward we move the more backward they stay..
man.. u can click on a user and see all the posts he sent, so good luck
i must have joined two years and participated in topics all this time so that i today i get a chance to destroy IV.. plz put down the 007 book and listen for once..
u can't see that people started belittling ROWs here first.. then i admit it's a waste of time to try to reason with u
We do not have to spend our energy and time answering each and every post of theirs. they do not deserve our time nor they are intelligent enough to rationalise.
I and a couple of us have been repeatedly telling that we do not want ROW people to be affected nor we want country quota to be removed, but they have been targetting our race, our country, it has jealously writ all over... Just ignore them and move on. the more forward we move the more backward they stay..
man.. u can click on a user and see all the posts he sent, so good luck
i must have joined two years and participated in topics all this time so that i today i get a chance to destroy IV.. plz put down the 007 book and listen for once..
u can't see that people started belittling ROWs here first.. then i admit it's a waste of time to try to reason with u
more...
house 2011 wiz khalifa amber rose
ras
07-06 02:49 AM
Is there certain minimum numbers of days one has to stay with the sponsoring company after getting the Green Card.
In my case I have been working with my current employer since Sept-2001 (almost 7 years).
Green card labor started in Dec-2001 and I-485 was filed in May and approved June, 2008.
I was in the middle of using AC21 just before my GC got approved, hence this urgency.
I think if you are with the employer and your GC got approved. You probably ought to work for the employer atleast for 6 months to one year. If you could have used AC 21 already before approval then things would have been different.
In my case I have been working with my current employer since Sept-2001 (almost 7 years).
Green card labor started in Dec-2001 and I-485 was filed in May and approved June, 2008.
I was in the middle of using AC21 just before my GC got approved, hence this urgency.
I think if you are with the employer and your GC got approved. You probably ought to work for the employer atleast for 6 months to one year. If you could have used AC 21 already before approval then things would have been different.
tattoo AmberRose WizKhalifa Twitter
gimme_GC2006
08-17 02:14 PM
I think this is blown out of proportion.
First thing what exactly "detention" means? Did they tie him up upside down for 2 hrs?
May be they took him to a room, where he waited along with the common man..in India politicians and filmli ones may get to jump the lines and get special treatment..so they never knew what it is like standing in the line.
SRK should use his common sense and keep quiet rather than making a fuss out of nothing..he is not APJ kalam to demand or deserve special treatment.
I remember last year, there was a news about SRK making noise in one of the European airports where he was not allowed to board the flight ahead of others and he argued with airlines staff that "I am SRK".
Note: I am not a fan of SRK..was never and will never be. I am Aamir Khan's fan :)
First thing what exactly "detention" means? Did they tie him up upside down for 2 hrs?
May be they took him to a room, where he waited along with the common man..in India politicians and filmli ones may get to jump the lines and get special treatment..so they never knew what it is like standing in the line.
SRK should use his common sense and keep quiet rather than making a fuss out of nothing..he is not APJ kalam to demand or deserve special treatment.
I remember last year, there was a news about SRK making noise in one of the European airports where he was not allowed to board the flight ahead of others and he argued with airlines staff that "I am SRK".
Note: I am not a fan of SRK..was never and will never be. I am Aamir Khan's fan :)
more...
pictures is now dating Amber Rose.
dealsnet
09-04 07:55 PM
CHANDUV23 THE TERRORIST:
It is easy to locate him in New York and give his details to FBI to check his links to underworld, VHP terrorists, and all other things. Your wife is doing residency. Right??
Hang on, you will be caught before you got GC and will be deported.
Wow Mr. Chandu.....Procliaming that he is has access to Admin rights and saying that he is not compromising on the security aspect as this is not YSR forum.....
This AH has revealed someones full name publicly where no one knows how to do that...except Admins....
Thats it Guys.......I'm out of this....
If I'm CHANDUV23, I would have retaliated from my posts so far...Looks like "_TrueFacts" is more offended than "CHANDUV23" offcourse we know both are same.....
Hats off Man....
It is easy to locate him in New York and give his details to FBI to check his links to underworld, VHP terrorists, and all other things. Your wife is doing residency. Right??
Hang on, you will be caught before you got GC and will be deported.
Wow Mr. Chandu.....Procliaming that he is has access to Admin rights and saying that he is not compromising on the security aspect as this is not YSR forum.....
This AH has revealed someones full name publicly where no one knows how to do that...except Admins....
Thats it Guys.......I'm out of this....
If I'm CHANDUV23, I would have retaliated from my posts so far...Looks like "_TrueFacts" is more offended than "CHANDUV23" offcourse we know both are same.....
Hats off Man....
dresses amber rose and wiz khalifa
test101
07-04 10:33 AM
I have more emial addresses if you want them.....
2020@abc.com
360@cnn.com
48hours@cbsnews.com
60m@cbsnews.com
aaron.brown@turner.com
aaron.zitner@latimes.com
abc.news.magazines@abc.com
abenfer@salon.com
abenitez@univision.net
abramowitz@washpost.com
abramsreport@msnbc.com
achenbachj@washpost.com
ahrensf@washpost.com
aizenmann@washpost.com
alan.miller@latimes.com
alan@alan.com
alastair@scoop.co.nz
alevin@usatoday.com
allenh@washpost.com
allenm@washpost.com
amity.shlaes@ft.com
amontgomery@salon.com
andrea.koppel@turner.com
andrew@scoop.co.nz
aradelat@gns.gannett.com
aranam@washpost.com
areiter@salon.com
argetsinger@washpost.com
armstrongs@csps.com
arshad.mohammed@reuters.com
asherm@washpost.com
astone@usatoday.com
ataylor@npr.org
atc@npr.org
axtmank@csps.com
ayork@salon.com
bakerp@washpost.com
balzd@washpost.com
barbara.serrano@latimes.com
barbashf@washpost.com
barkerk@washpost.com
barkinr@washpost.com
barrj@washpost.com
barrs@washpost.com
barry.siegel@latimes.com
bduffy@usnews.com
bersellie@washpost.com
betsy.fischer@nbc.com
beyersd@washpost.com
bill.rempel@latimes.com
bill.schneider@turner.com
billy.house@arizonarepublic.com
bjapsen@tribune.com
blumj@washpost.com
bnaylor@npr.org
bnichols@usatoday.com
bobherb@nytimes.com
boehlert@salon.com
bonesteelm@washpost.com
boustanyn@washpost.com
bpc@cbsnews.com
bredemeier@washpost.com
brelis@globe.com
brennanp@washpost.com
brian_hill@metronetworks.com
brian.williams@msnbc.com
brinkerbob@aol.com
brooksd@washpost.com
browar57@aol.com
brownw@washpost.com
bruce.morton@turner.com
bslavin@usatoday.com
bsteigerwald@tribweb.com
burns@nytimes.com
buzzflash@buzzflash.com
bwelch@usatoday.com
bwilson@npr.org
bwyman@salon.com
candy.crowley@turner.com
carlsonp@washpost.com
carol.lin@turner.com
castanedar@washpost.com
cavendishs@washpost.com
cchocano@salon.com
ccolin@salon.com
cflintoff@npr.org
cgarrett@tribune.com
chandlerc@washpost.com
chans@washpost.com
charlierose@pbs.org
cheaterry@washpost.com
chinnid@csps.com
chod@washpost.com
chris.matthews@msnbc.com
chuck.babbington@washingtonpost.com
cj@msnbc.com
claiborneb@washpost.com
clarkp@washpost.com
cochs@ap.org
cohensh@washpost.com
cohnd@washpost.com
colmes@foxnews.com
comments@foxnews.com
connectionweb@wbur.bu.edu
contact@pacifica.org
cookd@csps.com
coopermana@washpost.com
copelandl@washpost.com
corrections@npr.org
countdown@msnbc.com
crossfire@cnn.com
csimpson@tribune.com
cushman@nytimes.com
cweiser@gns.gannett.com
cwindham@npr.org
dabrahms@gns.gannett.com
dabrooks@nytimes.com
dakirk@nytimes.com
danschiedel@kozk.pbs.org
dardalan@npr.org
daryl@salon.com
daryn.kagan@turner.com
dasang@nytimes.com
dastor@editorandpublisher.com
dateline@nbc.com
davenportc@washpost.com
2020@abc.com
360@cnn.com
48hours@cbsnews.com
60m@cbsnews.com
aaron.brown@turner.com
aaron.zitner@latimes.com
abc.news.magazines@abc.com
abenfer@salon.com
abenitez@univision.net
abramowitz@washpost.com
abramsreport@msnbc.com
achenbachj@washpost.com
ahrensf@washpost.com
aizenmann@washpost.com
alan.miller@latimes.com
alan@alan.com
alastair@scoop.co.nz
alevin@usatoday.com
allenh@washpost.com
allenm@washpost.com
amity.shlaes@ft.com
amontgomery@salon.com
andrea.koppel@turner.com
andrew@scoop.co.nz
aradelat@gns.gannett.com
aranam@washpost.com
areiter@salon.com
argetsinger@washpost.com
armstrongs@csps.com
arshad.mohammed@reuters.com
asherm@washpost.com
astone@usatoday.com
ataylor@npr.org
atc@npr.org
axtmank@csps.com
ayork@salon.com
bakerp@washpost.com
balzd@washpost.com
barbara.serrano@latimes.com
barbashf@washpost.com
barkerk@washpost.com
barkinr@washpost.com
barrj@washpost.com
barrs@washpost.com
barry.siegel@latimes.com
bduffy@usnews.com
bersellie@washpost.com
betsy.fischer@nbc.com
beyersd@washpost.com
bill.rempel@latimes.com
bill.schneider@turner.com
billy.house@arizonarepublic.com
bjapsen@tribune.com
blumj@washpost.com
bnaylor@npr.org
bnichols@usatoday.com
bobherb@nytimes.com
boehlert@salon.com
bonesteelm@washpost.com
boustanyn@washpost.com
bpc@cbsnews.com
bredemeier@washpost.com
brelis@globe.com
brennanp@washpost.com
brian_hill@metronetworks.com
brian.williams@msnbc.com
brinkerbob@aol.com
brooksd@washpost.com
browar57@aol.com
brownw@washpost.com
bruce.morton@turner.com
bslavin@usatoday.com
bsteigerwald@tribweb.com
burns@nytimes.com
buzzflash@buzzflash.com
bwelch@usatoday.com
bwilson@npr.org
bwyman@salon.com
candy.crowley@turner.com
carlsonp@washpost.com
carol.lin@turner.com
castanedar@washpost.com
cavendishs@washpost.com
cchocano@salon.com
ccolin@salon.com
cflintoff@npr.org
cgarrett@tribune.com
chandlerc@washpost.com
chans@washpost.com
charlierose@pbs.org
cheaterry@washpost.com
chinnid@csps.com
chod@washpost.com
chris.matthews@msnbc.com
chuck.babbington@washingtonpost.com
cj@msnbc.com
claiborneb@washpost.com
clarkp@washpost.com
cochs@ap.org
cohensh@washpost.com
cohnd@washpost.com
colmes@foxnews.com
comments@foxnews.com
connectionweb@wbur.bu.edu
contact@pacifica.org
cookd@csps.com
coopermana@washpost.com
copelandl@washpost.com
corrections@npr.org
countdown@msnbc.com
crossfire@cnn.com
csimpson@tribune.com
cushman@nytimes.com
cweiser@gns.gannett.com
cwindham@npr.org
dabrahms@gns.gannett.com
dabrooks@nytimes.com
dakirk@nytimes.com
danschiedel@kozk.pbs.org
dardalan@npr.org
daryl@salon.com
daryn.kagan@turner.com
dasang@nytimes.com
dastor@editorandpublisher.com
dateline@nbc.com
davenportc@washpost.com
more...
makeup wiz khalifa and amber rose
Imm_Exploited
07-25 12:26 AM
cal_dood & meekdesi
Which country do you guys belong to and why are you here?
Appreciate your honest and decent response. Thanks
Which country do you guys belong to and why are you here?
Appreciate your honest and decent response. Thanks
girlfriend Amber Rose, Kissing girls?
unitednations
02-13 12:08 PM
I'm not sure that your numbers add up. There's no guarantee that anybody would receive a green card before their 90 or 180 day I-94 expires. Leaving the US and reentering to remain in status then runs the risk of putting immigration application in danger. In reality - PERM takes a couple of months to complete with advertising, interviewing, preparing documents and filing. The I-140/485 process takes another 6-8 months assuming that there are no RFEs and your case is processed in the faster service centers. This timescale only works for ROW applicants if they meet the EB-2 standard. This is not an easy standard to meet for many people who have worked at the same employer for a number of years.
On a separate note, CIS is supposed to meet a standard where most green card applications are evaluated within less than a year. They claim to meet this standard by quickly approving applications whose dates are current and then not including backlogged applications in their calculations. One more example of fuzzy math at the CIS...
This is how the law works:
To file I-485; one has to be admissable and in non immigrant status(not subject to J-1 requirements, no major medical issues, no serious criminal issue). If there is a labor and priority date is current then you go straight to 140/485.
many times a company may have already filed a labor for you before you even get into USA.
There is protection of 245k which basically gives a buffer of 6 months. Essentially; one can file a 485 if they were out of status; worked without authorization or were in non immigrant status within six months of filing 485.
So what this means is if your I-94 card expires in March 31, 2007; you have protection to file 485 until about September 30, 2007. There is more then enough time to be able to file the 485. The big hiccup happens if the priority date moves backwards and you can't file the 485.
Last year there were a few people who had posted on immigration.com who had their 485's retruned by uscis. They came on visitor visa and labor approved but filed in eb3. Their stupid lawyers didn't realize the dates were retrogressed or when they started the process there was word of law change and they figured that by the time labor cleared; the visa dates would be current.
I wouldn't fight this much; it is well established that people do this and it goes on. This is one of the reasons why I was pretty much against filing 485 without priority date being current. There would be a mass flood of people who would file. People who currently file in political asylum or get married to us citizens or people who have family sponsorship and are waiting visa dates would all flip over to employment base and would cause millions of applications with never ending retrogression. it would have pretty much been a disaster.
On a separate note, CIS is supposed to meet a standard where most green card applications are evaluated within less than a year. They claim to meet this standard by quickly approving applications whose dates are current and then not including backlogged applications in their calculations. One more example of fuzzy math at the CIS...
This is how the law works:
To file I-485; one has to be admissable and in non immigrant status(not subject to J-1 requirements, no major medical issues, no serious criminal issue). If there is a labor and priority date is current then you go straight to 140/485.
many times a company may have already filed a labor for you before you even get into USA.
There is protection of 245k which basically gives a buffer of 6 months. Essentially; one can file a 485 if they were out of status; worked without authorization or were in non immigrant status within six months of filing 485.
So what this means is if your I-94 card expires in March 31, 2007; you have protection to file 485 until about September 30, 2007. There is more then enough time to be able to file the 485. The big hiccup happens if the priority date moves backwards and you can't file the 485.
Last year there were a few people who had posted on immigration.com who had their 485's retruned by uscis. They came on visitor visa and labor approved but filed in eb3. Their stupid lawyers didn't realize the dates were retrogressed or when they started the process there was word of law change and they figured that by the time labor cleared; the visa dates would be current.
I wouldn't fight this much; it is well established that people do this and it goes on. This is one of the reasons why I was pretty much against filing 485 without priority date being current. There would be a mass flood of people who would file. People who currently file in political asylum or get married to us citizens or people who have family sponsorship and are waiting visa dates would all flip over to employment base and would cause millions of applications with never ending retrogression. it would have pretty much been a disaster.
hairstyles wiz-khalifa-amber-rose-wiz
bitu72
10-03 06:20 PM
1. You said Original Transcripts( i think you meant notarized copies of my transcripts)
2. How did you guys get experience letter from current employer, probably by saying we are getting visa for our parent to come here... any other ideas???
3. There are certain requirement for pictures to be taken, is it possible to get from walgreens or walmart.
THERE IS ALSO A REQUEST FOR IDENTITY CARD AE THEY ASKING FOR SSN NUMBER IN THERE OR SOMETHING ELSE
2. How did you guys get experience letter from current employer, probably by saying we are getting visa for our parent to come here... any other ideas???
3. There are certain requirement for pictures to be taken, is it possible to get from walgreens or walmart.
THERE IS ALSO A REQUEST FOR IDENTITY CARD AE THEY ASKING FOR SSN NUMBER IN THERE OR SOMETHING ELSE
gc_lover
06-27 03:54 PM
So with Oct 07...new year starts for the Visa gain...so will the dates starting moving forward by Nov07
Dates are already current. How much forward you want these dates to move. I don't think it will go in future :)
Dates are already current. How much forward you want these dates to move. I don't think it will go in future :)
mihird
05-10 05:06 PM
There is a lot of debate going on here, about how Canada and Australia have a better immigration system because they are points-based self-petition systems compared to employer-petition system here in US.
....
If I score 100 points out of required 50 or 60 points for Canada, its all meaningless if I am inept and cannot get a job. However, I would contribute to my own well-being and to the workforce and economy if I can find a job and an employer willing to petition, even if I score 25 points out of required 50 or 60.
You are missing a point here though...having gone through the Canadian point system myself back in the late 90s, the Canadian point system gives you added points for having current employment in your intended occupation.
When you don't have employment, you lose those points, and have to rely on other aspects of your profile to compensate for that..it is another story that their point system is lax enough to qualify most MS and PhD people even when they don't have current employment.
Ph.Ds driving cabs in Canada is the same as immigrant doctors working as nurses or lab technicians in the US.
I will disagree with you. Employer sponsored path to permenant residency is certainly not the best. Firstly, if the average time to process an application is 5-7 years, expecting a person to shackled in the same job for that long is absurd...and for that matter, that job remaining steady and available for that long is equally an absurb assumption..
There may be unemployed Ph Ds is Canada but they are no different from the thousands of underemployed H1-B immigrants in the US, not being able to make career moves because of the employer sponsored petitiions..
My .02 cents..
....
If I score 100 points out of required 50 or 60 points for Canada, its all meaningless if I am inept and cannot get a job. However, I would contribute to my own well-being and to the workforce and economy if I can find a job and an employer willing to petition, even if I score 25 points out of required 50 or 60.
You are missing a point here though...having gone through the Canadian point system myself back in the late 90s, the Canadian point system gives you added points for having current employment in your intended occupation.
When you don't have employment, you lose those points, and have to rely on other aspects of your profile to compensate for that..it is another story that their point system is lax enough to qualify most MS and PhD people even when they don't have current employment.
Ph.Ds driving cabs in Canada is the same as immigrant doctors working as nurses or lab technicians in the US.
I will disagree with you. Employer sponsored path to permenant residency is certainly not the best. Firstly, if the average time to process an application is 5-7 years, expecting a person to shackled in the same job for that long is absurd...and for that matter, that job remaining steady and available for that long is equally an absurb assumption..
There may be unemployed Ph Ds is Canada but they are no different from the thousands of underemployed H1-B immigrants in the US, not being able to make career moves because of the employer sponsored petitiions..
My .02 cents..
No comments:
Post a Comment