GCBy3000
07-26 05:35 PM
Can IV send email todya to all TEXAS members if it supports this move since tomorrow is the last day for registration.
willwin
05-14 12:39 PM
I'm not sure what made you decide for CP. There maybe valid reasons or you maybe misguided.
I have heard some people use the CP route thinking that once the dates get current, they will get Green Card faster than AOS route. Some people use it as a back-up. But I am not sure what made you opt for this if you knew you will deny yourself EAD and AP benefits.
I was misguided.
But what about people with PD as early as 2002/2003? Or do we not have anyone with PD 2002/2003 who are pursuing CP?
I assume there could be 10 to 15% CP filers out of total, say, 400K pending 485 cases. So, between 40 to 50k CP filers. Not sure how many out of this would be India/China. Is this number not big enough for asking for some admin fix?
I know EAD is not for CP filers today. I also believe EAD is one of the things that USCIS can issue with an admin fix.
If DOS/USCIS know very well that this retrogression is gonna be there for the next 5-10 years and EB3 I have to wait for 10-15 years, does it not make sense to ask for a relief like EAD for CP filers?
I have heard some people use the CP route thinking that once the dates get current, they will get Green Card faster than AOS route. Some people use it as a back-up. But I am not sure what made you opt for this if you knew you will deny yourself EAD and AP benefits.
I was misguided.
But what about people with PD as early as 2002/2003? Or do we not have anyone with PD 2002/2003 who are pursuing CP?
I assume there could be 10 to 15% CP filers out of total, say, 400K pending 485 cases. So, between 40 to 50k CP filers. Not sure how many out of this would be India/China. Is this number not big enough for asking for some admin fix?
I know EAD is not for CP filers today. I also believe EAD is one of the things that USCIS can issue with an admin fix.
If DOS/USCIS know very well that this retrogression is gonna be there for the next 5-10 years and EB3 I have to wait for 10-15 years, does it not make sense to ask for a relief like EAD for CP filers?
gparr
September 7th, 2006, 08:05 AM
Jeff,
If your "hunk of junk" tripod wiggles, try using a remote release and/or use the timer to trip the shutter. "Hunk of junk" tripods that wiggle can also be stabilized by hanging a weight from the center column. A weight can be as simple as a small bag of sand or rocks.
Gary
If your "hunk of junk" tripod wiggles, try using a remote release and/or use the timer to trip the shutter. "Hunk of junk" tripods that wiggle can also be stabilized by hanging a weight from the center column. A weight can be as simple as a small bag of sand or rocks.
Gary
ameryki
07-21 03:28 PM
Please help called Customer Service and they were clueless!
more...
gc_check
03-13 10:30 PM
Please help! My I-485 was denied by a local USCIS officer because of visa availability. My case is EB2 PERM based and I filed I-485 in July 2007 when the visa number was available.
Apparently USCIS made a mistake if they have any knowledge of the wellknown visa bulletin fiasco of July 2007 (Visa bulletiin No. 107). What should I do to correct this? If I file a motion to reopen (MTR), it will cost me $1500 legal fee+$585 filing fee. Any suggestions are really appreciated.
Here is what it said:" At the time you filed your I-485, the Visa Bulletin of the Department of State provided that the employment based visas were unavailable for persons in your category. Section 245.2 of title 8 of the Code of Regulations (CFR) states, in part:'an immigration visa must be immediately available in order for an alien to properly file an adjustment application under section 245 of the Act," ...
http://www.murthy.com/mb_pdf/030609_P.html
See under Improper Denials of I-485 AOS on Priority Date Issue
Apparently USCIS made a mistake if they have any knowledge of the wellknown visa bulletin fiasco of July 2007 (Visa bulletiin No. 107). What should I do to correct this? If I file a motion to reopen (MTR), it will cost me $1500 legal fee+$585 filing fee. Any suggestions are really appreciated.
Here is what it said:" At the time you filed your I-485, the Visa Bulletin of the Department of State provided that the employment based visas were unavailable for persons in your category. Section 245.2 of title 8 of the Code of Regulations (CFR) states, in part:'an immigration visa must be immediately available in order for an alien to properly file an adjustment application under section 245 of the Act," ...
http://www.murthy.com/mb_pdf/030609_P.html
See under Improper Denials of I-485 AOS on Priority Date Issue
go_guy123
01-11 05:18 AM
Things r getting bad in the US...I'd suggest better move to Canada now and start a business if u have saved enough to start one. Wait for citizenship and come back later on a TN Visa which is valid forever (barring the pain of yearly extensions u shudn't have any other issue).
In the US u cud lose ur job anytime however stable it might look like now. Else what was the point in applying for Canadian PR and all the pains u took???
TN visa is now valid for 3 years (earlier it used to be for 1 year)
In the US u cud lose ur job anytime however stable it might look like now. Else what was the point in applying for Canadian PR and all the pains u took???
TN visa is now valid for 3 years (earlier it used to be for 1 year)
more...
go_guy123
03-12 03:33 PM
Surely we know each other then!! :)
Compared to US, Software Engg position in India sucks a lot. It makes sense only if you are a manager in India. I know batchmates went to work in Texas Instruments in Bangalore and after a year or 2 later, got frustrated with the insfrastructure etc there.
Compared to US, Software Engg position in India sucks a lot. It makes sense only if you are a manager in India. I know batchmates went to work in Texas Instruments in Bangalore and after a year or 2 later, got frustrated with the insfrastructure etc there.
sertasheep
04-03 05:51 PM
Jinger,
You will be able to plead hardship based on humanitarian grounds and family unity to get your spouse into the US, if you already have a GC provided the GC holder is doing work in the national interest of the US (physician, scientist, et al) .At least, there is a solution to this particular problem.
There is no solution, other than legislative change to the objectives listed by the IV team.
you should visit kamya.com for spouse related issues.
You will be able to plead hardship based on humanitarian grounds and family unity to get your spouse into the US, if you already have a GC provided the GC holder is doing work in the national interest of the US (physician, scientist, et al) .At least, there is a solution to this particular problem.
There is no solution, other than legislative change to the objectives listed by the IV team.
you should visit kamya.com for spouse related issues.
more...
bp333
09-25 01:12 PM
"july 12 2007" will be the important date. It will be there as an USCIS stamp in the App. You can re-submit this app in Oct 2007 even if there is no visa available for your PD in Oct, 2007. It will be treated as if it was received on "july 12 2007".
Thanks a lot.
Thanks a lot.
sunny1000
05-15 01:55 PM
Hi, Guys:
My old H-1b will expire on June 30 2007. My employer has applied the new H-1b extension, but it is still pending. I am planning to go back to my country this summer and try to apply for H-1 visa in US embassy in early June. My question is whether I can apply for H-1 visa using the old one (expire on June 30) while the new one is pending. How long will be my H-1 visa valid (usually 3-month in my country)? Will I get 3-month or till the expirating date(June 30)? Can I come back to US? Many thanks.
Since your current extn application is still pending, your new visa stamp would bear the june30 date, as far as I know. Talk to an attorney.
My old H-1b will expire on June 30 2007. My employer has applied the new H-1b extension, but it is still pending. I am planning to go back to my country this summer and try to apply for H-1 visa in US embassy in early June. My question is whether I can apply for H-1 visa using the old one (expire on June 30) while the new one is pending. How long will be my H-1 visa valid (usually 3-month in my country)? Will I get 3-month or till the expirating date(June 30)? Can I come back to US? Many thanks.
Since your current extn application is still pending, your new visa stamp would bear the june30 date, as far as I know. Talk to an attorney.
more...
sayantan76
09-24 11:39 AM
Guys, HR 5882 is having Total recapture of 550,000 visas (Employment Based + Family Based) . We all were hoping that this bill would pass, but it did not pass in Judiciary Committee so far. Probably because of opposition from some lawmakers, may be group of some people due to current state of Economy.
But How about, if we would just try for "Recapture for Employment Based visas , for Adjustment of Status" ( EB Visa recapture Numbers are arround 218,000). By this way, no American job would be taken away as this is just a recpture of visas for just Adjustment of Status. So, if we can drop Family Based Visa Recapture from the bill (approx.332,000 visa), this bill might pass in the congress. Looks like, we do not have any choice and bill might still have possibility of passing in lame duck session. Don't get me wrong, I also want to keep Family Based Visas in the Current State of HR 5882 Bill. But if we would be able to pass just recapture of Employment Based visas at this stage, Family based visas recapture can be taken up later on. This is just a thought. IV core group and members can discuss this idea for further action.
"WE" do not decide what to keep and what to drop from bills - Elected representatives of US citizens do!
All we can do (either directly or through paid lobbyists) is suggest some common-sensical options and appeal to reasonableness of the elected representatives - at the end of the day - they would listen to current voters or go by what would and would not sit well with their current voters
But How about, if we would just try for "Recapture for Employment Based visas , for Adjustment of Status" ( EB Visa recapture Numbers are arround 218,000). By this way, no American job would be taken away as this is just a recpture of visas for just Adjustment of Status. So, if we can drop Family Based Visa Recapture from the bill (approx.332,000 visa), this bill might pass in the congress. Looks like, we do not have any choice and bill might still have possibility of passing in lame duck session. Don't get me wrong, I also want to keep Family Based Visas in the Current State of HR 5882 Bill. But if we would be able to pass just recapture of Employment Based visas at this stage, Family based visas recapture can be taken up later on. This is just a thought. IV core group and members can discuss this idea for further action.
"WE" do not decide what to keep and what to drop from bills - Elected representatives of US citizens do!
All we can do (either directly or through paid lobbyists) is suggest some common-sensical options and appeal to reasonableness of the elected representatives - at the end of the day - they would listen to current voters or go by what would and would not sit well with their current voters
.jpg "I still don#39;t know what people")
tb2904
03-26 04:49 PM
Wow ! We are in wrong field :)
These folks are most likely doctors...doctors salaries are in that range.
These folks are most likely doctors...doctors salaries are in that range.
more...
gc0402
07-17 09:00 AM
Forgot/didn't know about A# mentioned on my I-140 approval and did not mention it on I-485 application/EAD/AP. will it be an issue??
If it is mentioned in I-140 approval, do we supposed to write in I-485 and other applications? As I understand, A# is registration # and which is assigned when I-485 is accepted? Please somebody confirm it.
If it is mentioned in I-140 approval, do we supposed to write in I-485 and other applications? As I understand, A# is registration # and which is assigned when I-485 is accepted? Please somebody confirm it.
sankap
10-28 12:01 PM
Skilled immigration: Green-card blues | The Economist (http://www.economist.com/node/17366155)
Skilled immigration
Green-card blues
A backlash against foreign workers dims business hopes for immigration reform
The Economist: October 30, 2010
Oct 28th 2010 | Washington, dc
BAD as relations are between business and the Democrats, immigration was supposed to be an exception. On that topic the two have long had a marriage of convenience, with business backing comprehensive reform in order to obtain more skilled foreign workers.
That, at least, was what was meant to happen. In March Chuck Schumer, a Democratic senator, and Lindsey Graham, a Republican, proposed a multi-faceted reform that would toughen border controls and create a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants while granting two longstanding goals of business: automatic green cards (that is, permanent residence) for students who earned advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or maths in America, and an elimination of country quotas on green cards. The quotas bear no relationship to demand, leaving backlogs of eight to ten years for applicants from China and India. Barack Obama immediately announced his support.
But the proposal never became a bill, much less law. Mr Graham developed cold feet and withdrew his support; he was concerned that the Democrats were moving too quickly, as the economic misery that has turned Americans against foreign trade spread to dislike of foreign workers. Last year Congress made it harder for banks that had received money from the Troubled Asset Relief Programme to hire workers on H-1B visas, the most popular type for skilled foreign workers. In January the Citizenship and Immigration Service barred the use of H-1Bs for workers based on a client�s premises instead of their own company�s, a move aimed at outsourcing companies, many of them based in India.
In August even Mr Schumer, needing to look tough on outsourcing, pushed through a bill sharply raising H-1B fees on firms that depend heavily on the visas. Perhaps the most naked election-year hostility to foreigners appeared during the debate in September over a Democratic bill in the Senate that would have rewarded companies for firing foreign-based workers and replacing them with Americans. Charles Grassley, a Republican senator, responded with a proposal to prohibit any company that had laid off Americans from hiring visa workers at all. The bill did not win enough votes to break a filibuster.
Tightened restrictions, political aggravation and economic conditions seem to be having an effect. In 2009 the number of employment-based green cards and H-1B visas was the lowest in years (see chart). It took an unusually long time for the quota of H-1Bs for the fiscal year that ended on September 30th to be used up. Several Indian outsourcing companies have made a point of boosting local hiring at American facilities.
This is partly the result of the recession, which has hurt demand for all types of workers. But in a recent report the Hamilton Project, a moderately liberal research group, notes that the number of foreign workers in America has been declining for some time. This might reflect America�s diminished appeal to the world�s most sought-after workers, as well as brightening prospects in their own countries. A survey for the pro-immigration Kauffman Foundation in 2007 found that only a tiny proportion of foreign students planned to stay in the United States. This almost certainly extracts an economic toll, since immigrants are more likely than others to start businesses or file patents.
America�s immigration policies have long put a higher priority on family reunification than on employment. Legal immigrants to the country are more likely to have failed to finish high school than either native-born Americans or immigrants to other English-speaking countries. Immigrants to Canada are far more likely to have a college degree.
Legislators from both parties have at various times advanced proposals that would smooth the way for skilled migrants, but they have usually foundered on the more intractable problem of dealing with illegal immigration. �These two issues can and should be separate,� says Michael Greenstone of the Hamilton Project. �We are giving up economic growth by putting the two issues together.�
Democratic Hispanic legislators oppose separating them for fear of losing business support for comprehensive reform. In principle, then, a Republican takeover of the House might increase the likelihood of a stand-alone bill on skilled immigration. That, however, is not the Republicans� priority. Lamar Smith, the Republican who would probably become chairman of the House judiciary committee, is more focused on deporting illegal immigrants and strengthening the border.
Still, it would be premature to write off the odds of immigration reform. If Mr Obama is to accomplish anything in the next Congress, he needs to find common ground with Republicans on something. Business-friendly immigration reform might just qualify.
Skilled immigration
Green-card blues
A backlash against foreign workers dims business hopes for immigration reform
The Economist: October 30, 2010
Oct 28th 2010 | Washington, dc
BAD as relations are between business and the Democrats, immigration was supposed to be an exception. On that topic the two have long had a marriage of convenience, with business backing comprehensive reform in order to obtain more skilled foreign workers.
That, at least, was what was meant to happen. In March Chuck Schumer, a Democratic senator, and Lindsey Graham, a Republican, proposed a multi-faceted reform that would toughen border controls and create a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants while granting two longstanding goals of business: automatic green cards (that is, permanent residence) for students who earned advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or maths in America, and an elimination of country quotas on green cards. The quotas bear no relationship to demand, leaving backlogs of eight to ten years for applicants from China and India. Barack Obama immediately announced his support.
But the proposal never became a bill, much less law. Mr Graham developed cold feet and withdrew his support; he was concerned that the Democrats were moving too quickly, as the economic misery that has turned Americans against foreign trade spread to dislike of foreign workers. Last year Congress made it harder for banks that had received money from the Troubled Asset Relief Programme to hire workers on H-1B visas, the most popular type for skilled foreign workers. In January the Citizenship and Immigration Service barred the use of H-1Bs for workers based on a client�s premises instead of their own company�s, a move aimed at outsourcing companies, many of them based in India.
In August even Mr Schumer, needing to look tough on outsourcing, pushed through a bill sharply raising H-1B fees on firms that depend heavily on the visas. Perhaps the most naked election-year hostility to foreigners appeared during the debate in September over a Democratic bill in the Senate that would have rewarded companies for firing foreign-based workers and replacing them with Americans. Charles Grassley, a Republican senator, responded with a proposal to prohibit any company that had laid off Americans from hiring visa workers at all. The bill did not win enough votes to break a filibuster.
Tightened restrictions, political aggravation and economic conditions seem to be having an effect. In 2009 the number of employment-based green cards and H-1B visas was the lowest in years (see chart). It took an unusually long time for the quota of H-1Bs for the fiscal year that ended on September 30th to be used up. Several Indian outsourcing companies have made a point of boosting local hiring at American facilities.
This is partly the result of the recession, which has hurt demand for all types of workers. But in a recent report the Hamilton Project, a moderately liberal research group, notes that the number of foreign workers in America has been declining for some time. This might reflect America�s diminished appeal to the world�s most sought-after workers, as well as brightening prospects in their own countries. A survey for the pro-immigration Kauffman Foundation in 2007 found that only a tiny proportion of foreign students planned to stay in the United States. This almost certainly extracts an economic toll, since immigrants are more likely than others to start businesses or file patents.
America�s immigration policies have long put a higher priority on family reunification than on employment. Legal immigrants to the country are more likely to have failed to finish high school than either native-born Americans or immigrants to other English-speaking countries. Immigrants to Canada are far more likely to have a college degree.
Legislators from both parties have at various times advanced proposals that would smooth the way for skilled migrants, but they have usually foundered on the more intractable problem of dealing with illegal immigration. �These two issues can and should be separate,� says Michael Greenstone of the Hamilton Project. �We are giving up economic growth by putting the two issues together.�
Democratic Hispanic legislators oppose separating them for fear of losing business support for comprehensive reform. In principle, then, a Republican takeover of the House might increase the likelihood of a stand-alone bill on skilled immigration. That, however, is not the Republicans� priority. Lamar Smith, the Republican who would probably become chairman of the House judiciary committee, is more focused on deporting illegal immigrants and strengthening the border.
Still, it would be premature to write off the odds of immigration reform. If Mr Obama is to accomplish anything in the next Congress, he needs to find common ground with Republicans on something. Business-friendly immigration reform might just qualify.
more...
dchamero
09-25 12:56 PM
excuse my ignorance.... how do you know a lawyer is blacklisted? where did you go to check for that?
Thanks
Thanks
IVLageRaho
09-23 04:40 PM
Hello,
We were current in the July bulletin (PD Dec 04, EB3 India) but did not apply for AP along with 485. I sent the AP application on Aug 16, after over-the-phone assurances from USCIS that I can apply with old fees as long as the application is post marked before Aug 17.
The application was not delivered for some reason on the 17, although I sent next-day express, but on the 20th. The application was returned citing incorrect fees.
I read in a thread on IV that such cases can be addressed to a specific officer, with clear instructions to the mailroom that they should not open/process the application. But inspite of a long search, I could not find that thread again.
Could someone please point me to the correct thread, or to any information about this exceptional process ? Can I speak directly to this officer ?
Thanks for your help.
I also my filed my 765 and 131(AP) on 15th August and they received it on 16th August. My 485 filed by attorny on 12 th July. I my slef applied EAD & 131.
on 12th Sep uscis refused my file 765 & 131 and sent it to me to my home address as I filed it.
on the same day I type a covering letter in think blue color paper - mentioning .
ATTN: CRU Supervisor - Case Improperly Rejected for Fees.
And I explained in the covering letter the amount of the fees paid and the date the case was received.
When you recieve your file back there should be fedex receipt with the file . don't tocuh any thing just add the cover letter - put the refused papers in one envelop and after you sealed the envlop - attach the covering letter on the envolop put them together in fedex cover and send it again.
I have sent my package on 12th evening it self on the same day when I received it. with over night option that has been received by the uscis on 13th Sep and - I got the receipt notices on 21st - the receipt date they mentioned on the receipt is 13th July, which is actuly receipt date for 485.
Best of luck
See the question number three answer by murthy -
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_faqrec.html
We were current in the July bulletin (PD Dec 04, EB3 India) but did not apply for AP along with 485. I sent the AP application on Aug 16, after over-the-phone assurances from USCIS that I can apply with old fees as long as the application is post marked before Aug 17.
The application was not delivered for some reason on the 17, although I sent next-day express, but on the 20th. The application was returned citing incorrect fees.
I read in a thread on IV that such cases can be addressed to a specific officer, with clear instructions to the mailroom that they should not open/process the application. But inspite of a long search, I could not find that thread again.
Could someone please point me to the correct thread, or to any information about this exceptional process ? Can I speak directly to this officer ?
Thanks for your help.
I also my filed my 765 and 131(AP) on 15th August and they received it on 16th August. My 485 filed by attorny on 12 th July. I my slef applied EAD & 131.
on 12th Sep uscis refused my file 765 & 131 and sent it to me to my home address as I filed it.
on the same day I type a covering letter in think blue color paper - mentioning .
ATTN: CRU Supervisor - Case Improperly Rejected for Fees.
And I explained in the covering letter the amount of the fees paid and the date the case was received.
When you recieve your file back there should be fedex receipt with the file . don't tocuh any thing just add the cover letter - put the refused papers in one envelop and after you sealed the envlop - attach the covering letter on the envolop put them together in fedex cover and send it again.
I have sent my package on 12th evening it self on the same day when I received it. with over night option that has been received by the uscis on 13th Sep and - I got the receipt notices on 21st - the receipt date they mentioned on the receipt is 13th July, which is actuly receipt date for 485.
Best of luck
See the question number three answer by murthy -
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_faqrec.html
more...
northstar1
07-26 02:25 PM
My company is going through a merger and it will be complete by third qtr of this year. I already filed my AOS on July 2nd.
I was told by my immigration attorney that if a buyer (new company) takeover all the immigration liabilities then I don't need to file an amendment. Is this correct?
yeah but the question is - assuming your PD becomes current and a visa number is available, will your i-485 be skipped over due to this new successor in interest i-140 pending approval, or is it simply looked at as supporting evidence, since you had a prior approved i-140, and the i-485 is therefore adjudicated.
What i'm trying to figure out is how the successor in interest i-140's are processed.
I was told by my immigration attorney that if a buyer (new company) takeover all the immigration liabilities then I don't need to file an amendment. Is this correct?
yeah but the question is - assuming your PD becomes current and a visa number is available, will your i-485 be skipped over due to this new successor in interest i-140 pending approval, or is it simply looked at as supporting evidence, since you had a prior approved i-140, and the i-485 is therefore adjudicated.
What i'm trying to figure out is how the successor in interest i-140's are processed.
gc_lover
07-24 07:36 AM
^^^^
amitjoey
01-04 04:10 PM
I know we missed the Dec 31st goal, but sounds like we brought in new members at a faster pace than in the past.
Hopefully all these new memebers will be active participants and donors.
Thanks for your quote, just the same thought on my mind.
Hopefully all these new memebers will be active participants and donors.
Thanks for your quote, just the same thought on my mind.
Anil_s
07-01 02:19 PM
Hi Ari,
Generally the L1 is approved for 3 years.Why it was 1 year in my case?
Anil
Generally the L1 is approved for 3 years.Why it was 1 year in my case?
Anil
uma001
05-04 04:40 PM
I was working on a company A(on H1B visa) and left 7 month back. While working on Company A, I was in a project in Company C through another Company B. I actually joined company B to avoid this chain. Company A released me after agreeing for his cut for 4 month, and then $2 per hour until the project ends. This was agreed by an e-mail between me and Company A. I stopped paying the company after 4 month of his cut.
Now the company A has sent me a mail that they want a confirmation mail from Company B that my project ended. If no confirmation email, then they will send me a legal notice.
Not sure what the employment laws are. Could you please advice?
According to your post, according to the agreement between you and company A, you need to pay $2 per hour until the project ends. Why did you stop paying after 4 months of his cut. I guess the project is still going rt. So Company A wants to make sure that project ended. Company A is right. If your project is still going, you need to pay him $2 per hour until it ends.
Now the company A has sent me a mail that they want a confirmation mail from Company B that my project ended. If no confirmation email, then they will send me a legal notice.
Not sure what the employment laws are. Could you please advice?
According to your post, according to the agreement between you and company A, you need to pay $2 per hour until the project ends. Why did you stop paying after 4 months of his cut. I guess the project is still going rt. So Company A wants to make sure that project ended. Company A is right. If your project is still going, you need to pay him $2 per hour until it ends.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar