Hydro
03-10 11:59 PM
Helo Im messaging from India,
I found this site useful so I joined in here, but since they did not have India in the listing I added Calfornia. I have a F2B immigration visa pending filed by my parents in the US. I had interview in Chennai, India on Sep 2007. I fell short of some docs and submitted those on 28 Dec 2007 and was given 221g and told my case will be held up due to administrative processing.
I wanted to know if this new name check ruling helps me in any way. Also how long more should I expect to wait for the visa.
Thanx
Hydro
I found this site useful so I joined in here, but since they did not have India in the listing I added Calfornia. I have a F2B immigration visa pending filed by my parents in the US. I had interview in Chennai, India on Sep 2007. I fell short of some docs and submitted those on 28 Dec 2007 and was given 221g and told my case will be held up due to administrative processing.
I wanted to know if this new name check ruling helps me in any way. Also how long more should I expect to wait for the visa.
Thanx
Hydro
wallpaper hair Mitsubishi Evo 9 MR
venky08
12-28 01:38 PM
Does this mean that you cannot have 6-9 years extension of H1B for the new employer and you must use the EAD after six years if you are changing jobs?
There are more risks in using AC21 before 140 approval.
Read the Aytes memo of Dec 2005 regarding portability before 140 approval. There is all kinds of things that can go wrong if you port off to a new employer before 140 approval.
Other than employer withdrawing 140, the other issues are that if there is an RFE on your 140 and you have already used portability and ported off to new employer using EAD, then what would you do if that 140 doesnt get approved. Because if your H1 6 years have been used up, you are on EAD status, and your underlying 140 tied to 485 doesnt get approved, then it means you are out of status and you are out of luck. You cant even stay here to appeal the whole thing, you have to pack up and go back.
There are more risks in using AC21 before 140 approval.
Read the Aytes memo of Dec 2005 regarding portability before 140 approval. There is all kinds of things that can go wrong if you port off to a new employer before 140 approval.
Other than employer withdrawing 140, the other issues are that if there is an RFE on your 140 and you have already used portability and ported off to new employer using EAD, then what would you do if that 140 doesnt get approved. Because if your H1 6 years have been used up, you are on EAD status, and your underlying 140 tied to 485 doesnt get approved, then it means you are out of status and you are out of luck. You cant even stay here to appeal the whole thing, you have to pack up and go back.
pappu
01-11 06:04 AM
Pls let us know if you have participated in the campaign:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16506
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16506
2011 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution 9
BharatPremi
11-06 07:42 PM
On a side note, I was wondering what happens to derivative/secondary beneficiaries 485 applications if the primary beneficiary is stuck in name check.....If secondary beneficiaries are cleared and primary is not, then does USCIS approve GCs for secondary beneficiaries..
No.. They are also stuck till primary gets clear.
No.. They are also stuck till primary gets clear.
more...
nixstor
07-07 06:24 PM
Condi Rice burshed the question about the DOS and USCIS fiasco. Bill CLinton has rightly said recently ..Law is minor obscacle for this administration.
I missed it. Any links to the video?
I missed it. Any links to the video?
sanjay
01-05 01:52 PM
Only reason I am taking PMP course is because my company provides assistance in fees if its related to my project or helpful to company growth.
I really preferred to do MBA from college instead of PMP but due to company policy had to stick with PMP.
points given by FinalGC are certainly true to most of them.
I really preferred to do MBA from college instead of PMP but due to company policy had to stick with PMP.
points given by FinalGC are certainly true to most of them.
more...
se_vnt3
02-27 03:55 PM
My husband and son are being discriminated against for having an Alien wife and mother.
If an Alien deported with drug-related offences of more than 30 grams of Marijuana, like me, solicits a Non-Immigrant Visa to visit in the U.S. at the same time my husband or son solicit an Immigrant Visa for me to remain in the U.S. with them, the Alien will be granted her Non-Immigrant Visa and my husband�s or my son�s request will never be acknowledged.
This is our story: Everything we ever learned from the U.S. about truth and justice is suddenly being deprived of any meaning by the U.S. itself. The hardest part for us is believing that everything we�ve based our lives on � the American way, has no merit.
I was deported from the United States of America on February 18, 2005. I lived there nearly 30 years since I was 20 months old, when my mother crossed the Rio Grande into the country with me illegally. I was given an opportunity to become legal under the NACARA law but was to afraid of being deported like Maricela Soza was under the same law and didn�t go through with the entire process. I have both a husband and a son who are U.S. citizens but I am permanently prohibited by Immigration law from immigrating to the United States, while at the same time I am allowed to visit. Due to my drug-related offence of more than 30 grams of Marijuana. It�s Immigration law�s contradicting policies which I find disturbing.
U.S. Immigration is concerned with their citizens� welfare but it is denying my husband�s and my son�s requests to have me back by their side for good. Although Immigration law will value my wish to receive admission into the United States. Needless to say I prefer returning, immigrating and remaining in the country by my family�s side. That�s not taking into account the fact that I am still homesick and continue experiencing culture shock in Nicaragua. What the Department of Homeland Security is doing to my family and I is cruel, inhumane and unpatriotic. No free country�s government has any business deciding how families should be formed or whose personal choice is agreeable or not. Like that of my son�s and husband�s choice to overlook my shortcomings and begin our lives over together again.
The 212(d)(3) Waiver allows a visitor�s visa into the U.S. to be issued to an Alien like me if I show evidence of rehabilitation such as becoming a practicing professional with a U.S. job offer. Sometimes with lone proof of a bank savings account, school registration and satisfactory travel record. On the other hand there isn�t one waiver available for United States Citizens who wish to rebuild their lives with an Alien deported for any drug-related offence of more than 30 grams of Marijuana. Not only are my son�s and my husband�s needs being ignored but my needs are being placed before their own. An act I dare name TREASON.
How much more is the United States citizens� welfare secured if an Alien with an undesirable drug history enters the United States merely to visit and not to immigrate? Shouldn�t all United States citizens� needs and rights within and from their country � such as my husband�s and my son�s, come before any Alien�s need or right to receive admission into the U.S., including my own? Also, shouldn�t Family-Based Immigration take first place over �Alien travel� for any reason?
I regret to say it�s these types of injustices with devastating consequences to the recipient�s and his/her immediate relatives� personal lives remaining raveled, much more unacknowledged that play a large role in the cause for conflict concerning disloyalty toward the U.S. and unpopularity of the U.S. among U.S. citizens and foreign nationals inside and outside of the United States. I trust that once this oversight is brought to DHS�s attention they will not knowingly continue punishing my husband and my son for loving me, an Alien who once stumbled while attempting to survive in the U.S..
I�m afraid to imagine how many individuals involved in cases like my family�s and mine go on thinking that the U.S. is a bad country for having the audacity to pass judgment on them. I�ve had to believe there�s a glitch somewhere in immigration law caused by simple human error. I can�t accept that the U.S. I grew to know as a loving, Christian country with caring values is intentionally causing my loved ones and I grief. It goes without saying that as much as the United States has a duty to protect its citizens it also has a duty to be equally diplomatic toward foreigners and not continue persecuting the one or the other long after any condemning sentence has been exacted and executed. I know the United States of America will do right by my son, my husband, me, and the rest of its citizens and foreign nationals in our predicament.
We want the 212(d)(3) Non-Immigrant Visas Waiver made into an Immigrant Visas Waiver for Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens to make sure United States citizens receive competent protection from the Department of Homeland Security and adequate protection from the United States of America.
My husband and son believe a Waiver should be available to me and I believe their Freedom Of Belief civil liberty is being violated because their belief is being discriminated against. My needs are being placed before their own. I am not able to immigrate to the U.S. because immigration law doesn�t allow me a Waiver enabling my husband or son to claim me successfully. If I had a Waiver available to me they wouldn�t have to be at this crossroads making their case public in the courts, therefore their Right To Privacy is also being violated as a result of their belief being discriminated against. I couldn�t live with myself if I don�t speak out, they�re attempting to do the same for me. We don�t want to cause any problems, we just want to move on with our lives.
If an Alien deported with drug-related offences of more than 30 grams of Marijuana, like me, solicits a Non-Immigrant Visa to visit in the U.S. at the same time my husband or son solicit an Immigrant Visa for me to remain in the U.S. with them, the Alien will be granted her Non-Immigrant Visa and my husband�s or my son�s request will never be acknowledged.
This is our story: Everything we ever learned from the U.S. about truth and justice is suddenly being deprived of any meaning by the U.S. itself. The hardest part for us is believing that everything we�ve based our lives on � the American way, has no merit.
I was deported from the United States of America on February 18, 2005. I lived there nearly 30 years since I was 20 months old, when my mother crossed the Rio Grande into the country with me illegally. I was given an opportunity to become legal under the NACARA law but was to afraid of being deported like Maricela Soza was under the same law and didn�t go through with the entire process. I have both a husband and a son who are U.S. citizens but I am permanently prohibited by Immigration law from immigrating to the United States, while at the same time I am allowed to visit. Due to my drug-related offence of more than 30 grams of Marijuana. It�s Immigration law�s contradicting policies which I find disturbing.
U.S. Immigration is concerned with their citizens� welfare but it is denying my husband�s and my son�s requests to have me back by their side for good. Although Immigration law will value my wish to receive admission into the United States. Needless to say I prefer returning, immigrating and remaining in the country by my family�s side. That�s not taking into account the fact that I am still homesick and continue experiencing culture shock in Nicaragua. What the Department of Homeland Security is doing to my family and I is cruel, inhumane and unpatriotic. No free country�s government has any business deciding how families should be formed or whose personal choice is agreeable or not. Like that of my son�s and husband�s choice to overlook my shortcomings and begin our lives over together again.
The 212(d)(3) Waiver allows a visitor�s visa into the U.S. to be issued to an Alien like me if I show evidence of rehabilitation such as becoming a practicing professional with a U.S. job offer. Sometimes with lone proof of a bank savings account, school registration and satisfactory travel record. On the other hand there isn�t one waiver available for United States Citizens who wish to rebuild their lives with an Alien deported for any drug-related offence of more than 30 grams of Marijuana. Not only are my son�s and my husband�s needs being ignored but my needs are being placed before their own. An act I dare name TREASON.
How much more is the United States citizens� welfare secured if an Alien with an undesirable drug history enters the United States merely to visit and not to immigrate? Shouldn�t all United States citizens� needs and rights within and from their country � such as my husband�s and my son�s, come before any Alien�s need or right to receive admission into the U.S., including my own? Also, shouldn�t Family-Based Immigration take first place over �Alien travel� for any reason?
I regret to say it�s these types of injustices with devastating consequences to the recipient�s and his/her immediate relatives� personal lives remaining raveled, much more unacknowledged that play a large role in the cause for conflict concerning disloyalty toward the U.S. and unpopularity of the U.S. among U.S. citizens and foreign nationals inside and outside of the United States. I trust that once this oversight is brought to DHS�s attention they will not knowingly continue punishing my husband and my son for loving me, an Alien who once stumbled while attempting to survive in the U.S..
I�m afraid to imagine how many individuals involved in cases like my family�s and mine go on thinking that the U.S. is a bad country for having the audacity to pass judgment on them. I�ve had to believe there�s a glitch somewhere in immigration law caused by simple human error. I can�t accept that the U.S. I grew to know as a loving, Christian country with caring values is intentionally causing my loved ones and I grief. It goes without saying that as much as the United States has a duty to protect its citizens it also has a duty to be equally diplomatic toward foreigners and not continue persecuting the one or the other long after any condemning sentence has been exacted and executed. I know the United States of America will do right by my son, my husband, me, and the rest of its citizens and foreign nationals in our predicament.
We want the 212(d)(3) Non-Immigrant Visas Waiver made into an Immigrant Visas Waiver for Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens to make sure United States citizens receive competent protection from the Department of Homeland Security and adequate protection from the United States of America.
My husband and son believe a Waiver should be available to me and I believe their Freedom Of Belief civil liberty is being violated because their belief is being discriminated against. My needs are being placed before their own. I am not able to immigrate to the U.S. because immigration law doesn�t allow me a Waiver enabling my husband or son to claim me successfully. If I had a Waiver available to me they wouldn�t have to be at this crossroads making their case public in the courts, therefore their Right To Privacy is also being violated as a result of their belief being discriminated against. I couldn�t live with myself if I don�t speak out, they�re attempting to do the same for me. We don�t want to cause any problems, we just want to move on with our lives.
2010 Mitsubishi Evolution 9.
bindas74
06-10 12:50 PM
As per this everyone who got pre-adjudicated would be receiving their GC in FY2010. But, there are people from EB3I with PD as late as 2007 who got RFEs recently and got their cases pre-adjudicated( I am one of them even though my PD is March 2003 and when I called up NSC, they said my case was pre-adjudicated and waiting for a Visa number ).
With EB3I staying at 1 Nov 2001 when the new FY2010 quota starts in October doesnt match to what Ron Gotcher says.
Anyone have any opinion?
http://imminfo.com/Newsletter/2009-AILA/Likely_visa_bulletin_cutoff_date_movement.html
Likely Visa Bulletin cutoff date movement
Information provided at the 2009 AILA Annual Conference gives us some insight into likely Visa Bulletin cutoff date movement over the next year. Historically, the INS/CIS have treated filing backlog information as a matter of national security - refusing to release any information. Recently, however, cracks have started to appear in that wall.
We know that the 2007 filing surge resulted in an enormous number of cases submitted to the CIS. The actual number of new I-485s filed is unknown, but estimates range from 350,000 to 500,000. We also know that the CIS, having the fear of God put into them by the State Department in 2007, finally increased their level of production and began adjudicating cases at a pace sufficient to use up each year's quota and not waste any allocated visa numbers through non-use.
At this year's conference, the CIS representatives made several statements which, if true, give us hope for a return to sanity soon. They alleged that they have completed enough EB I-485 cases this year to exhaust the EB quota (140,000). They also alleged that they will soon have completed the "pre-adjudication" of another "110,000 to 120,000" cases to be used against the quota for the next fiscal year (Oct. 1, 2009 - Sept. 30, 2010). Finally, they represented that these adjudication would "pretty much exhaust" the inventory of pending EB I-485 cases at the TSC and NSC.
If these statements are true, then the end of the current mess is in sight.
If the CIS really has wiped out its processing backlog, then when the "pre-adjudicated" cases are given visa numbers in the next fiscal year, cutoff dates should advance rapidly. At a minimum, we should see them return to February 2007 levels, if not closer.
Implicit in this recital of statistics by the CIS personnel is the likelihood that they denied a truly massive number of pending I-485 applications. Before anyone panics, those denials should have been sent out already and are not out there just waiting to ruin someone's day. Only by assuming a very large number of denials does the math make any sense. Without them, you cannot reconcile the large volume of filings with the volume of approvals.
Once these pending cases are closed out, the known "demand" for EB visas will be much smaller and the Visa Office will be able to move priority dates up quickly; in some cases by years.
Another factor to be taken into account is the number of people who have lost their jobs between August 17, 2007 and whenever the cutoff dates cross that chronological line again. In years past, if there were 100,000 applicants with priority dates between August, 2007 and today, we could expect to see at least 90,000 applications. Today, with the economy being what it is, I think the figure is probably closer to 50,000. These are all people who were not eligible for AC21 because they had not filed for adjustment of status. If true, this means that cutoff dates will advance more rapidly than normal after the "2007 deluge" cases are resolved.
Of course, all of this becomes academic if CIR is passed. In that case, all priority dates will become "current" overnight and remain that way for years.
The State Department official at the AILA conference said that we can likely expect to see the following cutoff dates in the October, 2009 Visa Bulletin:
EB2 Worldwide: Current
EB2 China and India: Outlook is "grim" and there may be further retrogressions until later in the fiscal year.
EB3 Worldwide: June 1, 2005
EB3 China: March 1, 2003
EB3 India: November 1, 2001
EB3 Mexico: March 1, 2003
These estimates are just that - estimates. They are, however, estimates from the Department of State.
Where numbers move after October 1st will depend entirely upon the demand presented by the CIS. If, in fact, they have pre-adjudicated as many as 120,000 EB AOS cases, then it is unlikely that we will see much additional forward movement until the fourth quarter of the fiscal year (July - Sept., 2010). As discussed previously, however, once we get over this large bump in the road next year, we can expect to see a rapid advance in cutoff date movement.
Copyright � 2009 The Gotcher Law Group, PC - All Rights Reserved
With EB3I staying at 1 Nov 2001 when the new FY2010 quota starts in October doesnt match to what Ron Gotcher says.
Anyone have any opinion?
http://imminfo.com/Newsletter/2009-AILA/Likely_visa_bulletin_cutoff_date_movement.html
Likely Visa Bulletin cutoff date movement
Information provided at the 2009 AILA Annual Conference gives us some insight into likely Visa Bulletin cutoff date movement over the next year. Historically, the INS/CIS have treated filing backlog information as a matter of national security - refusing to release any information. Recently, however, cracks have started to appear in that wall.
We know that the 2007 filing surge resulted in an enormous number of cases submitted to the CIS. The actual number of new I-485s filed is unknown, but estimates range from 350,000 to 500,000. We also know that the CIS, having the fear of God put into them by the State Department in 2007, finally increased their level of production and began adjudicating cases at a pace sufficient to use up each year's quota and not waste any allocated visa numbers through non-use.
At this year's conference, the CIS representatives made several statements which, if true, give us hope for a return to sanity soon. They alleged that they have completed enough EB I-485 cases this year to exhaust the EB quota (140,000). They also alleged that they will soon have completed the "pre-adjudication" of another "110,000 to 120,000" cases to be used against the quota for the next fiscal year (Oct. 1, 2009 - Sept. 30, 2010). Finally, they represented that these adjudication would "pretty much exhaust" the inventory of pending EB I-485 cases at the TSC and NSC.
If these statements are true, then the end of the current mess is in sight.
If the CIS really has wiped out its processing backlog, then when the "pre-adjudicated" cases are given visa numbers in the next fiscal year, cutoff dates should advance rapidly. At a minimum, we should see them return to February 2007 levels, if not closer.
Implicit in this recital of statistics by the CIS personnel is the likelihood that they denied a truly massive number of pending I-485 applications. Before anyone panics, those denials should have been sent out already and are not out there just waiting to ruin someone's day. Only by assuming a very large number of denials does the math make any sense. Without them, you cannot reconcile the large volume of filings with the volume of approvals.
Once these pending cases are closed out, the known "demand" for EB visas will be much smaller and the Visa Office will be able to move priority dates up quickly; in some cases by years.
Another factor to be taken into account is the number of people who have lost their jobs between August 17, 2007 and whenever the cutoff dates cross that chronological line again. In years past, if there were 100,000 applicants with priority dates between August, 2007 and today, we could expect to see at least 90,000 applications. Today, with the economy being what it is, I think the figure is probably closer to 50,000. These are all people who were not eligible for AC21 because they had not filed for adjustment of status. If true, this means that cutoff dates will advance more rapidly than normal after the "2007 deluge" cases are resolved.
Of course, all of this becomes academic if CIR is passed. In that case, all priority dates will become "current" overnight and remain that way for years.
The State Department official at the AILA conference said that we can likely expect to see the following cutoff dates in the October, 2009 Visa Bulletin:
EB2 Worldwide: Current
EB2 China and India: Outlook is "grim" and there may be further retrogressions until later in the fiscal year.
EB3 Worldwide: June 1, 2005
EB3 China: March 1, 2003
EB3 India: November 1, 2001
EB3 Mexico: March 1, 2003
These estimates are just that - estimates. They are, however, estimates from the Department of State.
Where numbers move after October 1st will depend entirely upon the demand presented by the CIS. If, in fact, they have pre-adjudicated as many as 120,000 EB AOS cases, then it is unlikely that we will see much additional forward movement until the fourth quarter of the fiscal year (July - Sept., 2010). As discussed previously, however, once we get over this large bump in the road next year, we can expect to see a rapid advance in cutoff date movement.
Copyright � 2009 The Gotcher Law Group, PC - All Rights Reserved
more...
satish_hello
08-22 11:04 PM
Just Thought
There is 200k application without 140 approval, this is including july filers.
there is lot of chnace for those who got their I-140 approved, even their PD '2006.
you can see people getting approved PD'2005 EB2 cases, even then VB says now 2004'apr for EB2.They are not processing based on PD now and in future also i gues.Since we have already filed.PD will restrict only to File I-485 in future.
I think EB2-jan2007 and EB3-Aprl2005 in October VB
- satish
There is 200k application without 140 approval, this is including july filers.
there is lot of chnace for those who got their I-140 approved, even their PD '2006.
you can see people getting approved PD'2005 EB2 cases, even then VB says now 2004'apr for EB2.They are not processing based on PD now and in future also i gues.Since we have already filed.PD will restrict only to File I-485 in future.
I think EB2-jan2007 and EB3-Aprl2005 in October VB
- satish
hair Mitsubishi Evo 9 Catback
Slave_2k
11-30 11:33 PM
Hi Pappu!
First of all... a big thank you for all the time you have spent to come up with such an excellent analysis of the data available in the public domain. Your effort and the effort of the senior members is like leading a freedom struggle. If you guys were born in India before 1947, I am sure you would have been one of the well known freedom fighters.
Anyway.... I have a small clarification. It'll be great if you could take that issue up with the USCIS contacts you guys have.
If you see from that inventory document, there are entries in the year 2008 and 2009 for I-485 backlog. The Visa Bullettin fiasco happend in July 2007. After that for EB-3 India the date was never current. It has retrogressed consistently since then. How was it possible even for one EB-3 India application to be filed in the years 2008 and 2009? or for that matter anytime after Aug-2007?
Can you please try to get the answer for that?
GO IV!!
- Modern SLAVE
First of all... a big thank you for all the time you have spent to come up with such an excellent analysis of the data available in the public domain. Your effort and the effort of the senior members is like leading a freedom struggle. If you guys were born in India before 1947, I am sure you would have been one of the well known freedom fighters.
Anyway.... I have a small clarification. It'll be great if you could take that issue up with the USCIS contacts you guys have.
If you see from that inventory document, there are entries in the year 2008 and 2009 for I-485 backlog. The Visa Bullettin fiasco happend in July 2007. After that for EB-3 India the date was never current. It has retrogressed consistently since then. How was it possible even for one EB-3 India application to be filed in the years 2008 and 2009? or for that matter anytime after Aug-2007?
Can you please try to get the answer for that?
GO IV!!
- Modern SLAVE
more...
stupendousman11
01-12 11:55 AM
Slight clarification to the new regulations:
Based on the "If they return from the USA after having used the visa" exemption, you don't need a transit visa for the USA-Germany-India leg. But for the return you'll either need an AP+transit visa OR a valid USA visa.
This exemption (and regulation) is the same as that for France. And I just traveled to India and back (in Dec2010) through Paris on expired USA visa and therefore know the above to be true (at least for France).
Based on the "If they return from the USA after having used the visa" exemption, you don't need a transit visa for the USA-Germany-India leg. But for the return you'll either need an AP+transit visa OR a valid USA visa.
This exemption (and regulation) is the same as that for France. And I just traveled to India and back (in Dec2010) through Paris on expired USA visa and therefore know the above to be true (at least for France).
hot Mitsubishi Nimbus 4G63 DOHC
msyedy
05-22 03:04 PM
I wonder what our children and grandchildren will learn from all these. When they grow up and know that their parents had to go through this mess while waiting to be accepted legally for xxxx number of years and some people got the "grand reward" of being illegal for many years!! These CIRcus operators will be responsible for the loss of "very little" moral left in this country. GOD BLESS AMERICA.
They are saying that all those people who were illegal before 1st of Jan 2007 are eligible for Z visa. We all are currently in legal status.
They are saying that all those people who were illegal before 1st of Jan 2007 are eligible for Z visa. We all are currently in legal status.
more...
house Mitsubishi evo 9
willwin
06-05 09:59 AM
I am not sure. Here is what my opinion is :
I think he posts spicy messages on his forum to market himself. He uses strong language against USCIS to gain support from his prospective clients.
Has he ever stood up for immigrants other than writing strong worded posts? Give me examples as I do not know any? I may be wrong in my assumption.
I am sorry but I don't agree with you.
He never said he was running a charity for immigrants or an active supporter of IV.
Despite, he has been helping several immigrants with very apt and prompt replies to several questions (most of them very basic and repetitive) and if that is a way to attract new clients, I don't see anything wrong in that approach. After all, it is his business and he is using his own website to promote his business!
Above all, his views on USCIS is very logic to me especially his way of reasoning retrogression. He says VISA cut off date movement is inversely proportional to USCIS efficiency. The higher their efficiency, lower the movement and vice versa.
I think he posts spicy messages on his forum to market himself. He uses strong language against USCIS to gain support from his prospective clients.
Has he ever stood up for immigrants other than writing strong worded posts? Give me examples as I do not know any? I may be wrong in my assumption.
I am sorry but I don't agree with you.
He never said he was running a charity for immigrants or an active supporter of IV.
Despite, he has been helping several immigrants with very apt and prompt replies to several questions (most of them very basic and repetitive) and if that is a way to attract new clients, I don't see anything wrong in that approach. After all, it is his business and he is using his own website to promote his business!
Above all, his views on USCIS is very logic to me especially his way of reasoning retrogression. He says VISA cut off date movement is inversely proportional to USCIS efficiency. The higher their efficiency, lower the movement and vice versa.
tattoo mitsubishi evo 9 rally.
viv24
05-26 12:13 AM
My problem is that, i have approved h1b, went for stamping to canada, got stuck there for 60 days under 221g, the consulate has still my stamping pending,meanwhile to protect my job i used my AP.
my questions, do i have use ead or can stay in h1b when the stamping is pending.
my questions, do i have use ead or can stay in h1b when the stamping is pending.
more...
pictures Difference in the Evo 8 9.8
new_horizon
12-14 10:11 AM
For how long is USCIS issuing the EAD & AP these days?
dresses mitsubishi evo 9 rally.
calif
12-04 01:17 PM
was it EB2 or EB3?
My EB2 was rejected initially but later approved due to Sheila's evalaution of my CA degree equivalent to master's degree. I did not know her but my lawyer insisted to get it done through her. She was good for me.
My EB2 was rejected initially but later approved due to Sheila's evalaution of my CA degree equivalent to master's degree. I did not know her but my lawyer insisted to get it done through her. She was good for me.
more...
makeup Category: Mitsubishi Evo 9
abcdefgh
03-21 11:59 AM
I will be availble to meet NJ lawmakers, Please guide.
girlfriend Mitsubishi Evo 9
SEP03NY
12-20 12:07 PM
If someoe is on H1B then he converted to H4. Then He converted to H1B.
He didnot leave(USA) the country any time. How his time calculated.
Thanks
He didnot leave(USA) the country any time. How his time calculated.
Thanks
hairstyles hot 03-06 EVO8/EVO9 MR JDM JP
xeixas
08-08 06:14 PM
You can change you job after 180 days with an approved i-140. And job description and duties should be same or similar. So would you say the job duties are same/similar?
Does that mean 180 after the I140 is approved or 180 after the RN of the I485 as long as the I140 is approved? (Even if it has been approved for only 2 months)
Does that mean 180 after the I140 is approved or 180 after the RN of the I485 as long as the I140 is approved? (Even if it has been approved for only 2 months)
DSJ
06-20 01:25 PM
I was saying all those things if the reason was money. If that is not the case then I am wrong, I am not an expert in suggesting different lawyer.
I have no issues giving the lawyer what ever they want, if I can be assured that I will be getting good service for what I paid . If the law firm has a history of delays & screw ups etc, I do not see a reason why we have to pay hefty fees to get screwed in the end. There are a lot of stories where people have been screwed due to paralegal mistakes. We have waited so many years and I would like to control my destiny at least now. People have different opinions. Thats just how I feel.
Every one is talking about potential RFE's and seeking lawyers help in that case. What will any one do if they an free RFE after180 days of receipt notice and you are no longer with the company? What kind of RFE's are people getting if they are using EAD instead of H1B? Do they get any in the first place? Can some one who has been on EAD and received RFE's shed some light?
Thanks
I have no issues giving the lawyer what ever they want, if I can be assured that I will be getting good service for what I paid . If the law firm has a history of delays & screw ups etc, I do not see a reason why we have to pay hefty fees to get screwed in the end. There are a lot of stories where people have been screwed due to paralegal mistakes. We have waited so many years and I would like to control my destiny at least now. People have different opinions. Thats just how I feel.
Every one is talking about potential RFE's and seeking lawyers help in that case. What will any one do if they an free RFE after180 days of receipt notice and you are no longer with the company? What kind of RFE's are people getting if they are using EAD instead of H1B? Do they get any in the first place? Can some one who has been on EAD and received RFE's shed some light?
Thanks
eb3_nepa
12-04 08:06 PM
I'll belive it when i actually SEE it happen. Rediff and TOI report all sorts of stuff that is sometimes far from the truth. Remember when the bill was introduced in senate and was being debated, they published that the H1B increase bill has been passed! Let us get official word that this has happened and we can be happy after that.
No comments:
Post a Comment