lrindy
09-27 08:33 AM
Hi All,
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
Don't worry about it. When you go to FP appointment point this out to IO. You are correct "usually" 099 for primary & 088 for dependents. The "A" number is assigned at I-140 approval; that is "usually" the number you have on your receipts & GC when issued.("A" number is Alien Registration number and NOT the actual visa. The "A" number will be assigned to a visa once you get approved for GC.) There have been a few people on various threads have this happen to them. Just let the IO at FP know and they will help you OR speak to your lawyer about it. Note: Some applicants actually end up with a different "A" number on GC approval all together. So don't sweat it!
Cheers,
LRIndy. I am not a lawyer always consult one before making a decision.
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
Don't worry about it. When you go to FP appointment point this out to IO. You are correct "usually" 099 for primary & 088 for dependents. The "A" number is assigned at I-140 approval; that is "usually" the number you have on your receipts & GC when issued.("A" number is Alien Registration number and NOT the actual visa. The "A" number will be assigned to a visa once you get approved for GC.) There have been a few people on various threads have this happen to them. Just let the IO at FP know and they will help you OR speak to your lawyer about it. Note: Some applicants actually end up with a different "A" number on GC approval all together. So don't sweat it!
Cheers,
LRIndy. I am not a lawyer always consult one before making a decision.
wallpaper new york knicks 2011 wallpaper
Blog Feeds
01-27 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
learning01
04-06 10:28 PM
In the evening, problems: a meltdown over process.
Two issues:
1. Democrats want to limit the number of amendments that can be debated on the deal. GOP opponents to the bipartisan deal have a slew of amendments they want to offer.
Durbin said an anticipated large number of amendments would be the equivalent of a filibuster.
Republicans, including Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who helped broker the bi-partisan immigration provisions, said this is an unfair demand from Democrats.
2. Democrats want Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Az.) to agree in advance who he will pick to be on an immigration bill House-Senate conference committee.
If the Senate passes an immigration bill, it will be vastly different from the measure the House passed on Dec. 16. The two versions would have to be reconciled if a bill is to get to the president to sign. A bill can be virtually rewritten at this stage.
``We are concerned whether or not this Congress will have the strength to go up against Jim Sensenbrenner,�� said Durbin.
Read my post in IV News Article Thread: (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=7424&postcount=164)
Two issues:
1. Democrats want to limit the number of amendments that can be debated on the deal. GOP opponents to the bipartisan deal have a slew of amendments they want to offer.
Durbin said an anticipated large number of amendments would be the equivalent of a filibuster.
Republicans, including Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who helped broker the bi-partisan immigration provisions, said this is an unfair demand from Democrats.
2. Democrats want Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Az.) to agree in advance who he will pick to be on an immigration bill House-Senate conference committee.
If the Senate passes an immigration bill, it will be vastly different from the measure the House passed on Dec. 16. The two versions would have to be reconciled if a bill is to get to the president to sign. A bill can be virtually rewritten at this stage.
``We are concerned whether or not this Congress will have the strength to go up against Jim Sensenbrenner,�� said Durbin.
Read my post in IV News Article Thread: (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=7424&postcount=164)
2011 New York Mets Wallpaper, Free Desktop Wallpaper, Download MLB Baseball
inskrish
08-04 11:45 PM
I got the magic mail today ---Card production ordered!!! Just for me.
The status of my wife's I485 remains the same ---> Received and pending?
Any one in similar situation?
Good to see a 2003 case is getting approved. I believe you are a TSC filer. Hope your wife's case get approved soon.:)
The status of my wife's I485 remains the same ---> Received and pending?
Any one in similar situation?
Good to see a 2003 case is getting approved. I believe you are a TSC filer. Hope your wife's case get approved soon.:)
more...
siddar
12-03 05:51 PM
Candidate should be physically present in USA, on the date of AP approval. Otherwise, that AP is not valid. When the candidate try to enter US, the IO will verify this information and may permit accordingly.
I-485 application considers abandoned, if a candidate leaves US without any valid Visa to re-enter. Remember, H1 / H4 cannot be stamped after I-485 approval.
I'm a layman like you, please consult an attorney.
I-485 application considers abandoned, if a candidate leaves US without any valid Visa to re-enter. Remember, H1 / H4 cannot be stamped after I-485 approval.
I'm a layman like you, please consult an attorney.
black_logs
05-23 08:19 AM
This is what we are doing every day. Our team & QGA are in constant touch with the offices of several senators. We are definitely concentrating on the 2 senators you have named here. We are very hopeful that something will come up soon. But again until it really comes to the floor all we can do is keep the hope and spirits high!!!!
- Why is it not possible for IV to convince brownback or cronyn to support in a amedment that backlog reduction section for legal immigrants could take effect immdiately. it looks like for legal immigrants except for sen.session no one opposes any provision.
Thanks
vikram
- Why is it not possible for IV to convince brownback or cronyn to support in a amedment that backlog reduction section for legal immigrants could take effect immdiately. it looks like for legal immigrants except for sen.session no one opposes any provision.
Thanks
vikram
more...
willgetgc2005
05-13 11:35 AM
All these articles say we are hoping to get citizenship. I think this word raises more shackeles than saying getting green card. Cmon, we are only thinking GC now. Ctizinship after 5 years is somewhat of a time bound process.
Why don these articles say we are waiting for GC. This atleast will be more palatable to the anti leagl immigration forces.More importanatly it refelects our true problem as of now.
__________________________________________________ _________
Does anyone have access to this article :
http://www.diversityinc.com/members/login.cfm?hpage=21367.cfm&CFID=1754493&CFTOKEN=26728028
It looks like favoring us ....
Why don these articles say we are waiting for GC. This atleast will be more palatable to the anti leagl immigration forces.More importanatly it refelects our true problem as of now.
__________________________________________________ _________
Does anyone have access to this article :
http://www.diversityinc.com/members/login.cfm?hpage=21367.cfm&CFID=1754493&CFTOKEN=26728028
It looks like favoring us ....
2010 New York Mets iPhone Wallpaper
a_yaja
07-30 03:43 PM
If you don't know the answer, please don't reply. Just because this person asked about getting GC through his/ her baby, it does not mean the person is here illegally or if even this person is in the US. I friend of mine died in an accident in Mumbai and he is survived by his wife and two kids (the kids were born here in the US). His wife asked me the same question and after asking my lawyer, I had to tell her that there is no way she can apply for GC through her children unless her children turn 21.
more...
gccube
04-21 12:39 PM
I got the Card Production Ordered e-mail today. No LUD even last night at 1 Am. Only one LUD today. My case is processed at Texas service center. And my receipt date is not with in their processing times.
Good luck to everyone.
Good luck to everyone.
hair New York Mets Wallpapers
howzatt
07-16 02:00 PM
Here is the update we have been waiting for
USCIS has announced that on Wed, Jul 18, 2007, from 9:00pm ET until Thur at 1:00am ET, the INFOPASS appointment system will be unavailable for a scheduled upgrade. USCIS customers will see some minor changes to the appointment screens on Thur, Jul 19, 2007. ;)
Thanks. If I read this correctly, it means that everyone is eligible to apply for 485.
USCIS has announced that on Wed, Jul 18, 2007, from 9:00pm ET until Thur at 1:00am ET, the INFOPASS appointment system will be unavailable for a scheduled upgrade. USCIS customers will see some minor changes to the appointment screens on Thur, Jul 19, 2007. ;)
Thanks. If I read this correctly, it means that everyone is eligible to apply for 485.
more...
kondur_007
02-15 06:26 PM
I have the same query:
Permit: using EAD and calling AC21
Role: exactly the same.
Salary: large difference (bayarea vs small city in under developed state) due to the prevailing wage at the new location is far lower.
Experts please advice.
As discussed above with cyrus mehta's blog: This is all discretionary:
My definition f discretionary: "You need a good lawyer which can wrap your sandwich in "golden wrap" and sell it for $45 instead of seeling it in a "brown bag" for $3.75. It's the same sandwich!!" It sounds harsh, but that's the reality when you deal with a demon called "Law and Lawyers".
Simple version: have it worded by a good lawyer to justify it and make it "same or similar". It is the "wrap" that determines the "price".
Good Luck.
Permit: using EAD and calling AC21
Role: exactly the same.
Salary: large difference (bayarea vs small city in under developed state) due to the prevailing wage at the new location is far lower.
Experts please advice.
As discussed above with cyrus mehta's blog: This is all discretionary:
My definition f discretionary: "You need a good lawyer which can wrap your sandwich in "golden wrap" and sell it for $45 instead of seeling it in a "brown bag" for $3.75. It's the same sandwich!!" It sounds harsh, but that's the reality when you deal with a demon called "Law and Lawyers".
Simple version: have it worded by a good lawyer to justify it and make it "same or similar". It is the "wrap" that determines the "price".
Good Luck.
hot new york knicks 2011
Munna Bhai
11-16 02:02 PM
what is the difference between visa bulletin and processing dates, how they are related.
Thanks,
Thanks,
more...
house new york knicks 2011 wallpaper
GCard_Dream
07-13 04:37 PM
This is one of the most funniest post I have seen today. Great job. You should send this classification to USCIS and ask them to process cases based on the number and color of dots each member has. Forget about EB1, EB2, and EB3. :D
Well.. the good news is that according your classification, no one is being deported or is a criminal. That's a relief. :D
By the way, I gave you a reputation point and now you are up to 2 green dots. You'll get your GC faster now. CONGRATULATIONS!
The software has an AI program that determines how likely you are to get a GC based on the info that you gave while registering and shows the square accordingly. So if you have
one green sqaure you will get it in 4-6 years
two green squares means 2-4 years
one red square means that your name is stuck in FBI name check and could take 6-8 years
two red squares means your deportation hearing is coming up any time now
three red squares means you are a most wanted criminal :D :D
Actually the square colors are determined by the judgment calls made fellow members. You can make this call by clicking on the weight scale image above each post. Now if only you would give me a favorable vote for explaining this in detail.:)
Well.. the good news is that according your classification, no one is being deported or is a criminal. That's a relief. :D
By the way, I gave you a reputation point and now you are up to 2 green dots. You'll get your GC faster now. CONGRATULATIONS!
The software has an AI program that determines how likely you are to get a GC based on the info that you gave while registering and shows the square accordingly. So if you have
one green sqaure you will get it in 4-6 years
two green squares means 2-4 years
one red square means that your name is stuck in FBI name check and could take 6-8 years
two red squares means your deportation hearing is coming up any time now
three red squares means you are a most wanted criminal :D :D
Actually the square colors are determined by the judgment calls made fellow members. You can make this call by clicking on the weight scale image above each post. Now if only you would give me a favorable vote for explaining this in detail.:)
tattoo new york mets logo wallpaper.
FredG
August 27th, 2004, 08:57 AM
I'm with Don.. although I have a camera in phone, it's got less resolution that a hungover coke bottle dipped in vaseline jelly peering through the polar ice cap after a three night binge on beer, whisky and crack. ...
resolution lower than a cockroaches left testicle and more shakey than a sneezing 99 year old geriatric having a seisure.....Rob, What have you been eating? :D
resolution lower than a cockroaches left testicle and more shakey than a sneezing 99 year old geriatric having a seisure.....Rob, What have you been eating? :D
more...
pictures new york mets logo wallpaper.
gc_check
02-11 12:14 PM
Thanks for the updates. There seems to be something happening at the least. Hopefully some thing works out to get the mess cleared.
dresses new york mets wallpaper. new
pappu
04-25 11:23 AM
Could you please update your profile so that it helps people tracking cases on IV tracker.
Thanks
Thanks
more...
makeup new york mets david wright
kpsm88
11-15 04:46 PM
ksahmed,
Can you tell me if the AP was received by your attorney today or by you directly..
Can you tell me if the AP was received by your attorney today or by you directly..
girlfriend new york yankees wallpaper
calif
12-07 04:16 PM
* * *
hairstyles new york mets logo wallpaper.
trs80
01-10 03:56 PM
Without a MS will be difficult to qualify for a EB2 position without a BS is imposible!
You have be waiting too much for your EB3 approval, I read that Chicago is working faster than Atlanta. Any update?
My company submited my PERM application for a EB2 position on december and I still waiting.
I copy your signature:)
Buena Suerte!
EB2, From: Dominican Republic. Residence: Puerto Rico
LC PERM - Atlanta PD: 12/2007: "In Process"
You have be waiting too much for your EB3 approval, I read that Chicago is working faster than Atlanta. Any update?
My company submited my PERM application for a EB2 position on december and I still waiting.
I copy your signature:)
Buena Suerte!
EB2, From: Dominican Republic. Residence: Puerto Rico
LC PERM - Atlanta PD: 12/2007: "In Process"
mambarg
07-27 06:58 PM
Is your question about Approved 140 or Pending 140.
I am also curious to know.
As far as I know, employer has to just send a letter to USCIS with the 140 receipt number which states that they want to revoke it and USCIS will locate the file with 485 and revoke it too.
Bad but what can we do ???????
I am also curious to know.
As far as I know, employer has to just send a letter to USCIS with the 140 receipt number which states that they want to revoke it and USCIS will locate the file with 485 and revoke it too.
Bad but what can we do ???????
fullerene
08-13 11:14 AM
From my notice the processing date is meaningless at TSC because the dates are mostly the processing windows. For example, I140 was Jan 13 in July notice, which was 6 months behind. If you take a look on AP and EAD, they were just 3 months behind.
It turns out to me that processing date is the date that you are entitled to make a phone call to request your status. You may be lucky to have your EAD in 1 or 2 months. But if you do not have it in three months, you can make a call to request a reason they can not deny your request. But if your date is later than the processing date, they may turn down your request or ask you to wait.
That's it!
It turns out to me that processing date is the date that you are entitled to make a phone call to request your status. You may be lucky to have your EAD in 1 or 2 months. But if you do not have it in three months, you can make a call to request a reason they can not deny your request. But if your date is later than the processing date, they may turn down your request or ask you to wait.
That's it!
No comments:
Post a Comment