buehler
11-20 11:25 AM
Hmm interesting - I can smell CIR coffee brewing.
EB folks - brace for a bumpy ride
Secretaries are from the Executive Branch and are responsible for the execution of the laws and are not directly responsible for the creation of the laws. So we could expect Memos that are more favorable to us but I wouldn't hold my breath over CIR yet.
EB folks - brace for a bumpy ride
Secretaries are from the Executive Branch and are responsible for the execution of the laws and are not directly responsible for the creation of the laws. So we could expect Memos that are more favorable to us but I wouldn't hold my breath over CIR yet.
wallpaper sad love poems in marathi. sad love poems marathi. sad
binadh
10-15 03:23 PM
Just gotta call from the lawyer's office. PERM is approved today after more than 15 months. :D
Still waiting for the physical letter to arrive -- We'll see how many more hurdles are there. I'm just glad that I don't have to deal with DOL.
Original filing - Jun 17th 07
Query response - Nov 2nd 07
Approved - today
Filed at Atlanta service center
EB2 ROW
Thanks.
Still waiting for the physical letter to arrive -- We'll see how many more hurdles are there. I'm just glad that I don't have to deal with DOL.
Original filing - Jun 17th 07
Query response - Nov 2nd 07
Approved - today
Filed at Atlanta service center
EB2 ROW
Thanks.
SR2610
04-12 04:18 PM
There are some good and bad things.. If labor substitution is gone, less chances of fraud, most of backlogged labors go waste, which obviously reduces the retorgression. bad thing is 45 days rule, DOL itself cannot make out where the hell is the labor application, when they approved it and when they mailed it, how can they say that you need to apply for 140 with in 45 days :mad:
-SR
-SR
2011 sad love poems marathi. love
waitingnwaiting
01-25 09:51 PM
Can he add an amendment to divide spillover equally between EB2 and EB3 India. This will help a lot.
more...
srarao
07-19 07:04 PM
Hi
Any guys with RFE on this
Any guys with RFE on this
frostrated
03-16 03:06 PM
please see below.
Background:
My wife and I are currently working on EADs obtained through my previous employer filing for my green card (eb3 India, pri date: dec 2005), my wife is a dependant on this greencard petition. We last re-entered US using our AP. Two years ago, more than six months after my I-140 got approved, I changed my employer (to a similar position in the IT field itself) and my new (and current) employer filed for AC-21. They have also obtained a I-797 for me as a backup which I have used. Also prior to getting my EAD, my wife worked on an H1 visa for a year and then we got EAD, she has been working on that ever since. Our EAD was recently submitted for renewal and will be valid for the next two years.
I got accepted into a fulltime MBA program in the US, which I am planning to attend. This would mean that I quit my current job and after the two years in MBA I will be joining a different employer in a different field (ie: I will be moving out of IT into something like finance). I am assuming transition to F1 is out of question since I have shown immigration intent
Questions:
1) Will it be legal for me to go fulltime to school on an AOS pending status? Yes you can go to school while in AOS. But you cant go to school full time when in AOS if you are the primary applicant. You need to be still employed full time in your line of work.
2) Will I have trouble, re-entering the US on an AP if I travel overseas during the time I am enrolled in school? Yes. Your AP is no longer valid, as you are no more working for the sponsor of your permanent residency.
3) Can I use this EAD card to go for an internship between my first and second year (the job will not be IT)? Only if you are a dependent of the primary applicant.
4) Can I use this EAD card to work fulltime after MBA graduation, provided it is still valid for a few more months (the job will not be IT)? Only if you are a dependent of the primary applicant.
5) If my post-MBA employer files for a greencard for me in the new position which is different from IT, will I be able to use my old priority date of Dec 2005? Yes you can. You will need to file a new labor, and request that they use the old priority date. You can also file in EB2 and request they use the EB3 filing date of Dec 2005.
6) To mitigate risk, my wife is planning to go into H1 so that I can get an H4 if going to school on EAD doesn't work. Is this strategy to use H1 during school time (and travel overseas and re-enter using H4) and use EAD while internship safe? Using H1 on your wife, and you being on H4 is safe. But you cannot use the EAD anymore. Your EAD is tied to your employment, unless you are the dependent on the primary applicant for AOS.
7) If my wife cannot find a H1 job, can she work on her EAD while I am also using EAD to go to school. No. When you quit working and go to school, both of you are in illegal status. To remain in status, she either needs to convert to H1 or you need to convert to F1 and have her here as F2. Best bet, is for her to convert to H1 and you to either H4 or F1.
8) I am assuming that for any EAD based status to work, I need to have a future job offer in the same category. My current employer will not do that.I can get a future job offer from a small IT consulting firm in the same IT field for which my greencard application was filed for. Will that be good enough to keep my EAD alive while in school? No. For your EAD to be valid, you still need to be working. Stopping work does not enable you to continue to be in EAD status.
Thanks SO much for answering. I have this wonderful opportunity in front of me and I really hope immigration will not be a road block to achieve my dreams.
Background:
My wife and I are currently working on EADs obtained through my previous employer filing for my green card (eb3 India, pri date: dec 2005), my wife is a dependant on this greencard petition. We last re-entered US using our AP. Two years ago, more than six months after my I-140 got approved, I changed my employer (to a similar position in the IT field itself) and my new (and current) employer filed for AC-21. They have also obtained a I-797 for me as a backup which I have used. Also prior to getting my EAD, my wife worked on an H1 visa for a year and then we got EAD, she has been working on that ever since. Our EAD was recently submitted for renewal and will be valid for the next two years.
I got accepted into a fulltime MBA program in the US, which I am planning to attend. This would mean that I quit my current job and after the two years in MBA I will be joining a different employer in a different field (ie: I will be moving out of IT into something like finance). I am assuming transition to F1 is out of question since I have shown immigration intent
Questions:
1) Will it be legal for me to go fulltime to school on an AOS pending status? Yes you can go to school while in AOS. But you cant go to school full time when in AOS if you are the primary applicant. You need to be still employed full time in your line of work.
2) Will I have trouble, re-entering the US on an AP if I travel overseas during the time I am enrolled in school? Yes. Your AP is no longer valid, as you are no more working for the sponsor of your permanent residency.
3) Can I use this EAD card to go for an internship between my first and second year (the job will not be IT)? Only if you are a dependent of the primary applicant.
4) Can I use this EAD card to work fulltime after MBA graduation, provided it is still valid for a few more months (the job will not be IT)? Only if you are a dependent of the primary applicant.
5) If my post-MBA employer files for a greencard for me in the new position which is different from IT, will I be able to use my old priority date of Dec 2005? Yes you can. You will need to file a new labor, and request that they use the old priority date. You can also file in EB2 and request they use the EB3 filing date of Dec 2005.
6) To mitigate risk, my wife is planning to go into H1 so that I can get an H4 if going to school on EAD doesn't work. Is this strategy to use H1 during school time (and travel overseas and re-enter using H4) and use EAD while internship safe? Using H1 on your wife, and you being on H4 is safe. But you cannot use the EAD anymore. Your EAD is tied to your employment, unless you are the dependent on the primary applicant for AOS.
7) If my wife cannot find a H1 job, can she work on her EAD while I am also using EAD to go to school. No. When you quit working and go to school, both of you are in illegal status. To remain in status, she either needs to convert to H1 or you need to convert to F1 and have her here as F2. Best bet, is for her to convert to H1 and you to either H4 or F1.
8) I am assuming that for any EAD based status to work, I need to have a future job offer in the same category. My current employer will not do that.I can get a future job offer from a small IT consulting firm in the same IT field for which my greencard application was filed for. Will that be good enough to keep my EAD alive while in school? No. For your EAD to be valid, you still need to be working. Stopping work does not enable you to continue to be in EAD status.
Thanks SO much for answering. I have this wonderful opportunity in front of me and I really hope immigration will not be a road block to achieve my dreams.
more...
vdlrao
04-10 03:36 PM
Source?
2010 love poems marathi. sad love
pappu
07-29 11:45 AM
My son is an U.S citizen (4 years old) and my Attorney successfully filed a petion on behalf of me and mywife.
But that petion is based on EB2 :p
I did not understand your answer.
How come your 4 year old son apply in EB2 category and sponsor the parents. I know the application is for future employment. But this one is stretching too far? :)
But that petion is based on EB2 :p
I did not understand your answer.
How come your 4 year old son apply in EB2 category and sponsor the parents. I know the application is for future employment. But this one is stretching too far? :)
more...
satishku_2000
02-21 01:09 PM
I saw that in morning , trust me its one of those things I do on my laptop everyday in the morning.
I try to access the page now and it shows the old one ...hehe :mad: ..
Hopefully they are in the process of correcting/retracting ...
I try to access the page now and it shows the old one ...hehe :mad: ..
Hopefully they are in the process of correcting/retracting ...
hair sad love poems in hindi. sad
rkrishna123
10-17 03:10 PM
Thanks Vamsi for your advice....I have not checked with the CIS yet...i will do now. Thanks for your time
more...
boreal
02-25 08:02 PM
I would like to ask the same question but a bit more specific.
For someone who is an MBA (Finance) with 7-8 yrs of Financial and HR benefits experience who wants to move to IT or IT related field what would you advice would be the best field to move to or best certification to take ?
Thanks
Field to move to would probably be SAP/Oracle Financials/PeopleSoft ..
For someone who is an MBA (Finance) with 7-8 yrs of Financial and HR benefits experience who wants to move to IT or IT related field what would you advice would be the best field to move to or best certification to take ?
Thanks
Field to move to would probably be SAP/Oracle Financials/PeopleSoft ..
hot sad love poems marathi. sad
santb1975
02-15 05:41 PM
I will keep you posted on how this goes.
May you have plenty of supporters coming your way.
I am happy to report that one brave Dallas member called up and we both will be collecting letters at the DFW Temple on Sunday.
May you have plenty of supporters coming your way.
I am happy to report that one brave Dallas member called up and we both will be collecting letters at the DFW Temple on Sunday.
more...
house love poems in urdu language.
simple1
10-07 04:13 PM
Leave the usa immediatly. you are already out of status.
Consult your attorney before taking any decision.
hi,
I am in a similar situation.
I have a valid visa stamped on my passport till the sept 2010. And I moved to company B after I was let go by company A. The I 797 approval for company B I got did not have the I 94.
I got the approval yesterday with a letter saying that my extension of stay has been rejected.
The letter also said that I was staying in the country after my H1B with company A has been revoked, which is against the law. It is also mentioned that my I 129 has been mailed to the consulate of my choice(which is in India).
Does he mean that I need to attend the consulate to get my I 129? If so, has the visa stamp been revoked?
Is it ok if I attend the consulate in neighbouring countries like mexico or bahamas instead of going to India?
If the Visa stamping has not been revoked, can I just cross the border for an I 94 card?
Any advice is valuable to me.
Thanks in advance.
Consult your attorney before taking any decision.
hi,
I am in a similar situation.
I have a valid visa stamped on my passport till the sept 2010. And I moved to company B after I was let go by company A. The I 797 approval for company B I got did not have the I 94.
I got the approval yesterday with a letter saying that my extension of stay has been rejected.
The letter also said that I was staying in the country after my H1B with company A has been revoked, which is against the law. It is also mentioned that my I 129 has been mailed to the consulate of my choice(which is in India).
Does he mean that I need to attend the consulate to get my I 129? If so, has the visa stamp been revoked?
Is it ok if I attend the consulate in neighbouring countries like mexico or bahamas instead of going to India?
If the Visa stamping has not been revoked, can I just cross the border for an I 94 card?
Any advice is valuable to me.
Thanks in advance.
tattoo sad love poems marathi. love
sree_99
02-01 07:11 PM
Sorry, if this is already discussed mutiple times. I was not able to find any Info.
My Wife needs to travel to India urgently. She is currently on F1 Visa and has EAD and Advance Parole.
While Coming back is it required to use AP or can she come back on F1. Please help me with some info or pointers to exisitng threads discussing this are greatly appreciated
Thanks,
-Sree
My Wife needs to travel to India urgently. She is currently on F1 Visa and has EAD and Advance Parole.
While Coming back is it required to use AP or can she come back on F1. Please help me with some info or pointers to exisitng threads discussing this are greatly appreciated
Thanks,
-Sree
more...
pictures sad love poems in marathi
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
dresses sad love poems marathi
Sheila Danzig
07-26 07:30 AM
3+3 are routinely accepted. I would be shocked if this is the reason. You should know the reason very soon. I know it is very hard to wait, but there is no choice.
In my case, it was B.Sc + M.C.A (3 + 3) years education and applied it on EB2 Category. I know of a lot of cases with M.C.A approved on EB2 category. So, I am not sure if this would be reason for it.
In my case, it was B.Sc + M.C.A (3 + 3) years education and applied it on EB2 Category. I know of a lot of cases with M.C.A approved on EB2 category. So, I am not sure if this would be reason for it.
more...
makeup love poems marathi. sad love
ajju
10-13 05:57 PM
But ksircar, instead of accepting can't we raise red flags to USCIS?
This is going to be an issue for lot of folks who all filed for I-485 in the last year July fiasco. We will be forced renew every time. Only by giving 2 years is just a temporary postponement but not solving the real problem.
It is like Drivers Lincense renewal. If you have your documentation and you have been driving legally should be granted renewal instantly. Why can't they do the same thing with EAD?
agree.. 90 days is too much.. esp when just dates need to be extended.. In the first place.. it should be non-expiring .. something like valid with I-485 Receipt... and then when accepting EAD employer can check the I-485 status that its still pending... and any change will send email to the employer about 485 current status...
But then my dear.. where's the money...
Gov: Show me the money?
USCIS: let sdo 1 year EAD/AP renewal... and we can sit for 90 days on it for generating this much money... and find cheapest ways of printing the card and mailing... If errors happen we might get more money :-)
Gov: why are you not moving dates and making more money?
USCIS: Okay we'll issue 2year EAD and accept more new apps...
and so on...
This is going to be an issue for lot of folks who all filed for I-485 in the last year July fiasco. We will be forced renew every time. Only by giving 2 years is just a temporary postponement but not solving the real problem.
It is like Drivers Lincense renewal. If you have your documentation and you have been driving legally should be granted renewal instantly. Why can't they do the same thing with EAD?
agree.. 90 days is too much.. esp when just dates need to be extended.. In the first place.. it should be non-expiring .. something like valid with I-485 Receipt... and then when accepting EAD employer can check the I-485 status that its still pending... and any change will send email to the employer about 485 current status...
But then my dear.. where's the money...
Gov: Show me the money?
USCIS: let sdo 1 year EAD/AP renewal... and we can sit for 90 days on it for generating this much money... and find cheapest ways of printing the card and mailing... If errors happen we might get more money :-)
Gov: why are you not moving dates and making more money?
USCIS: Okay we'll issue 2year EAD and accept more new apps...
and so on...
girlfriend sad love poems in marathi.
SR2610
04-12 04:18 PM
There are some good and bad things.. If labor substitution is gone, less chances of fraud, most of backlogged labors go waste, which obviously reduces the retorgression. bad thing is 45 days rule, DOL itself cannot make out where the hell is the labor application, when they approved it and when they mailed it, how can they say that you need to apply for 140 with in 45 days :mad:
-SR
-SR
hairstyles sad love poems marathi. and
rnvd
10-30 04:41 PM
Hi rsdang,
Its not with AdvanceParole. Because i had I-94 mistake in the past. It may reflect in their systems but USCIS already apporoved my H1b.
Its not with AdvanceParole. Because i had I-94 mistake in the past. It may reflect in their systems but USCIS already apporoved my H1b.
pt326bc
09-27 10:36 AM
Same issue with me.
Different A# on I 140 and the I 485 receipt notice. The A# on the FP notice is the same as the I 485 receipt notice.
I have emailed the paralegal handling my case and she said she'll confirm with the lawyer and get back to me.
BTW my I 140 A# starts with 088 and the I 485 receipt notice starts with 094.
Don't know what that means.
Will keep you guys updated with whatever my lawyer sends me back.
Regards.
Different A# on I 140 and the I 485 receipt notice. The A# on the FP notice is the same as the I 485 receipt notice.
I have emailed the paralegal handling my case and she said she'll confirm with the lawyer and get back to me.
BTW my I 140 A# starts with 088 and the I 485 receipt notice starts with 094.
Don't know what that means.
Will keep you guys updated with whatever my lawyer sends me back.
Regards.
kumar1305
02-24 01:57 PM
I think that's what is happening. Few of the people already mentioned that they got the extension for the project period mentioned.
I do not personally know any one, this is all what I read or heard.
I do not personally know any one, this is all what I read or heard.
No comments:
Post a Comment