gc_buddy
01-08 07:36 PM
He can send the I-94 to the nearest consulate by mail and a brief letter with all the details.
My friend while leaving US he did not surrender the I-94 card. Actually he forgot it at home and the airlines allowed him to board plane without surrendering I-94. What should he do now? Guru's does any one have any experience with such situation? Please help
My friend while leaving US he did not surrender the I-94 card. Actually he forgot it at home and the airlines allowed him to board plane without surrendering I-94. What should he do now? Guru's does any one have any experience with such situation? Please help
wallpaper My Husband Pimps Me Out Tattoo
bkarnik
09-19 06:26 PM
Recently, I heard the same thing from someone else (was it stucklabor??). It appears that USCIS is being proactive and granting three year approvals once I-140 has been approved. So, there is a chance that this is what happened in your case too.
Either way, since, this appears to work in your favor, I would suggest sending this question for the lawyer call. If it is accepted and answered, it will be posted on the forum so that you and others in similar situation get a definite reply.
Bkarnik.
Either way, since, this appears to work in your favor, I would suggest sending this question for the lawyer call. If it is accepted and answered, it will be posted on the forum so that you and others in similar situation get a definite reply.
Bkarnik.
nixstor
08-24 04:14 PM
Did you consider the 20k cap for Masters students? If they can plan to graduate in summer instead of spring they can safely use all OPT and get H1B with out pain. I know many guys who didnt use all of OPT (used half of it) and landed on H1B to be in status. I agree with the loan situation you mentioned though.
I think thats what SKIL is trying to do by making OPT 2 yrs. It gives the much needed leeway for students to move from F1 to H1 and finding a better employer instead of running to consultants for H1B.
B T W Are you the same guy who was looking for Pre approved labor on the other site.
I think thats what SKIL is trying to do by making OPT 2 yrs. It gives the much needed leeway for students to move from F1 to H1 and finding a better employer instead of running to consultants for H1B.
B T W Are you the same guy who was looking for Pre approved labor on the other site.
2011 Tattoos gone wrong: So wrong
santb1975
02-15 01:38 PM
We have two more weeks for this campaign.
BUMP for our Dear friends and wishing for more participation
4 people confirmed for this event so far
BUMP for our Dear friends and wishing for more participation
4 people confirmed for this event so far
more...
jgh_res
05-17 10:01 AM
Here is the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
needhelp!
08-31 12:38 AM
Just like there can be no rally without IV members,
There can be no (hypothetical) country without IV members
There can be no (hypothetical) country without IV members
more...
jsb
09-09 12:57 PM
No, Did not port to EB3, He is EB3, Filed for 485 in July '07 fiasco. He is consulting his attorney to see, what to do about the unusual approval. Also did not receive the FP, after filing for 485 in July '07 until last month, when they did the first FP mid-august. Pretty sure about that, from what I heard from my friend.
If case is approved, there is no need to do anything about what you call an unusual approval. Legally, an I-485 can be filed only when visa is immediately available (although we know that is not the case), which he/she did (based on his PD being current when he/she filed his/her I-485). What happens thereafter is all internal matter of USCIS. As far as an I-485 filer is concerned, his/her case is in the works until is approved.
If case is approved, there is no need to do anything about what you call an unusual approval. Legally, an I-485 can be filed only when visa is immediately available (although we know that is not the case), which he/she did (based on his PD being current when he/she filed his/her I-485). What happens thereafter is all internal matter of USCIS. As far as an I-485 filer is concerned, his/her case is in the works until is approved.
2010 memory tattoo gone wrong;
Madhuri
07-11 11:02 PM
If this is true it's really horrible and scary that this gov. agency is handling our applications.
This is beginning to look more and more like a organized and deliberate attempt to block people from filing for AOS.If the mysterious "knowledgeable official" quoted on the website can be summoned in court- that would be game over for the USCIS right there......
http://www.usimmlaw.com/current_information.htm
Copying the contents of the website below :
Visa numbers WERE available July 2nd!!
We have confirmed with a knowledgeable official in the Department of State Visa Office that USCIS was requesting visa numbers on Sunday July 1st, and Monday morning July 2nd - and that visa numbers were still being issued as late as the morning of July 2nd!
In fact, close to 30,000 visa numbers were requested and issued in July - through the morning of July 2nd. And we believe that many - if not most - of the requests made in the first two days of July were for applicants whose priority dates were not current in June!
So how can USCIS refuse to accept I-485 filings received BEFORE the State Department issued its notice that all visa numbers had been used???? We have not yet confirmed the return of any I-485s filed in July. But we do know that applications were reaching the USCIS before the State Department announcement - and while the USCIS was frantically working to use up the entire year's allocation.
USCIS did not use all visa numbers before July 2nd.
Did USCIS actually use the visa numbers it requested????
Historically, the USCIS doesn't request a visa number from the Department of State until it is ready to grant the adjustment of status application. US Consuls overseas request visa numbers the month before they intend to issue the immigrant visa. This is the reason why consuls return about ten percent of the visa numbers requested - and why USCIS does not generally return any numbers.
In fact, in making allocations of visa numbers, the Department of State factors in an expected return rate for consuls - but not for the USCIS. And the USCIS - before this June - used about 85% of the total immigrant visa numbers available.
However, already this month, the USCIS has been returning visa numbers. This confirms our earlier suspicion that the only way the USCIS could request 68,000 visa numbers in a matter of weeks was to request them in advance of adjudicating cases.
We believe USCIS exhausted the visa numbers by simply requesting them - not by using them. If so, and for reasons we will post shortly, we believe that over 30,000 visa numbers requested by USCIS will go unused - and will be wasted this year!
This is beginning to look more and more like a organized and deliberate attempt to block people from filing for AOS.If the mysterious "knowledgeable official" quoted on the website can be summoned in court- that would be game over for the USCIS right there......
http://www.usimmlaw.com/current_information.htm
Copying the contents of the website below :
Visa numbers WERE available July 2nd!!
We have confirmed with a knowledgeable official in the Department of State Visa Office that USCIS was requesting visa numbers on Sunday July 1st, and Monday morning July 2nd - and that visa numbers were still being issued as late as the morning of July 2nd!
In fact, close to 30,000 visa numbers were requested and issued in July - through the morning of July 2nd. And we believe that many - if not most - of the requests made in the first two days of July were for applicants whose priority dates were not current in June!
So how can USCIS refuse to accept I-485 filings received BEFORE the State Department issued its notice that all visa numbers had been used???? We have not yet confirmed the return of any I-485s filed in July. But we do know that applications were reaching the USCIS before the State Department announcement - and while the USCIS was frantically working to use up the entire year's allocation.
USCIS did not use all visa numbers before July 2nd.
Did USCIS actually use the visa numbers it requested????
Historically, the USCIS doesn't request a visa number from the Department of State until it is ready to grant the adjustment of status application. US Consuls overseas request visa numbers the month before they intend to issue the immigrant visa. This is the reason why consuls return about ten percent of the visa numbers requested - and why USCIS does not generally return any numbers.
In fact, in making allocations of visa numbers, the Department of State factors in an expected return rate for consuls - but not for the USCIS. And the USCIS - before this June - used about 85% of the total immigrant visa numbers available.
However, already this month, the USCIS has been returning visa numbers. This confirms our earlier suspicion that the only way the USCIS could request 68,000 visa numbers in a matter of weeks was to request them in advance of adjudicating cases.
We believe USCIS exhausted the visa numbers by simply requesting them - not by using them. If so, and for reasons we will post shortly, we believe that over 30,000 visa numbers requested by USCIS will go unused - and will be wasted this year!
more...
leoindiano
03-17 12:35 PM
I have a priority date of March 2004 (EB2 India) and I am still waiting for my Green Card. I think majority of the 2004 filers are in the same boat except for a lucky few who were able to get the green card after the July fiasco.
So don't buildup your hopes too high. I firmly beleive that very soon there will be a repeat of what we saw last year in July and the green cards will be distributed once again out of order.
So if you are one of those luck ones, you might get it.
Good Luck!!
You must have applied for I-485 after july 1st, correct?
So don't buildup your hopes too high. I firmly beleive that very soon there will be a repeat of what we saw last year in July and the green cards will be distributed once again out of order.
So if you are one of those luck ones, you might get it.
Good Luck!!
You must have applied for I-485 after july 1st, correct?
hair images tattoos gone bad.
aph0025
01-20 03:02 PM
Hi Amul,
Congratulations! Yes, it does mean your visa transfer went through. You will receive a new I797, with your current employer details on it.
Update:
I am the guy who started this thread. I was worried about not having paystubs from my previous H1B holder, and if that would affect my chances of H1B transfer with this other company I am with right now. My transfer got approved in TWO days (during mid Dec. last year). Yes, I did go through premium processing, but approval in TWO days! That was great.
Anyway, can anyone tell me where I go from here? To be precise, what is the maximum time limit to go for stamping to a visa consulate? Please advice.
Congratulations! Yes, it does mean your visa transfer went through. You will receive a new I797, with your current employer details on it.
Update:
I am the guy who started this thread. I was worried about not having paystubs from my previous H1B holder, and if that would affect my chances of H1B transfer with this other company I am with right now. My transfer got approved in TWO days (during mid Dec. last year). Yes, I did go through premium processing, but approval in TWO days! That was great.
Anyway, can anyone tell me where I go from here? To be precise, what is the maximum time limit to go for stamping to a visa consulate? Please advice.
more...
-3.jpg "tattoo gone bad. tattoos gone")
viper673
06-07 11:03 AM
I got an RFE letter yesterday asking me to provide 1040 and W-2's from 1999.
I will be digging in my papers and boxes to see if I still have copies of my 1999 and 2000 returns.
The IRS does not keep records of 1040's for more than 7 years and when I called them they said they don't think they'll have a record of 1999.
I'm hoping that I will find my 1999 return, but what if I don't? Has anybody here been asked to provide returns going that far? especially for an Employment-based application?
The funny thing is that in 1999 and 2000 I was on an F1 visa as a student and I did have a graduate assistantship. I started employment in 2001.
I feel like the officer is trying to make it extremely hard for me to get my status adjusted....
PS: I received this RFE after the fact that I went for an interview at the local office and was told that "all my paper work is good and I should receive my card in the mail once the security check was cleared"; which I verified it was cleared a few days after the interview..
I will be digging in my papers and boxes to see if I still have copies of my 1999 and 2000 returns.
The IRS does not keep records of 1040's for more than 7 years and when I called them they said they don't think they'll have a record of 1999.
I'm hoping that I will find my 1999 return, but what if I don't? Has anybody here been asked to provide returns going that far? especially for an Employment-based application?
The funny thing is that in 1999 and 2000 I was on an F1 visa as a student and I did have a graduate assistantship. I started employment in 2001.
I feel like the officer is trying to make it extremely hard for me to get my status adjusted....
PS: I received this RFE after the fact that I went for an interview at the local office and was told that "all my paper work is good and I should receive my card in the mail once the security check was cleared"; which I verified it was cleared a few days after the interview..
hot tattoo gone wrong.
c9411010
08-04 03:29 PM
guys many of us are considering going back to india.. any idea on whether those who have 40 credits will be eligible for social security from india...
also any adivice o what is the best way to transfer 401 to india.. withdraw immeditately or wait till 591/2 years..
also any adivice o what is the best way to transfer 401 to india.. withdraw immeditately or wait till 591/2 years..
more...
house some tattoos gone wrong.
jsb
01-27 12:53 PM
Hi,
If anybody has used a lawyer for AC21, please post the lawyer details and their cost.
Thank you.
Question is why do you need a lawyer for AC21. It does not require any action, unless USCIS asks for confirmation of same/similar job offer. In any case, if you choose to take some action, just send copy of new job offer to UCSIC (by your your new employer that they have a job for you when you get your GC). The letter should have job details same/similar to what you were sponsored for.
When lawyers want to do this, they do so only to make some money.
If anybody has used a lawyer for AC21, please post the lawyer details and their cost.
Thank you.
Question is why do you need a lawyer for AC21. It does not require any action, unless USCIS asks for confirmation of same/similar job offer. In any case, if you choose to take some action, just send copy of new job offer to UCSIC (by your your new employer that they have a job for you when you get your GC). The letter should have job details same/similar to what you were sponsored for.
When lawyers want to do this, they do so only to make some money.
tattoo What does Beyonce#39;s Tattoo
guyfromsg
07-19 05:41 PM
Thanks for ur reply..anyone else has any input on this??
From Greg's blog
>>greg, i filed today and tx has jurisdiction over my area but i sent it to nebraska....will that cause a delay or will it be bad for my file?<<
You should be fine. You have your choice up until month's end.
From Greg's blog
>>greg, i filed today and tx has jurisdiction over my area but i sent it to nebraska....will that cause a delay or will it be bad for my file?<<
You should be fine. You have your choice up until month's end.
more...
pictures Artist Tattoo Gone Bad
dbevis
May 23rd, 2005, 05:43 AM
Of the 3 the first one is my pick. Nature has little regard for keeping things level and plumb, so the shot has a slightly tilted feel to it. On the second one, it feels a bit cramped and probably would have benefitted by a bit more of the sky - perhaps by shooting from a lower angle.
dresses tattoos gone bad.
go_gc_way
05-13 10:25 AM
That's really an idea , need a thought by all... pros and cons.
Specially a forum like IV, and then I believe it will be another effort to get it there.
Given retrogression has some what a known issue, does any one think ... this will be mentioned any way in the address.
Specially a forum like IV, and then I believe it will be another effort to get it there.
Given retrogression has some what a known issue, does any one think ... this will be mentioned any way in the address.
more...
makeup Star Tattoos Gone Wrong Tattoo
DallasBlue
07-14 08:27 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...d.php?p=113476
girlfriend Tattoos Gone Bad
days_go_by
08-23 04:52 PM
in EB3, EB2 and EB1
--
140K visas in total,.8 and there is a 7% country ceiling (7 or 10% I am not sure), so apporx 9.8K visas per year max for a country.
And divide those numbers equally in Eb1, 2 and 3, and this includes spouse and children.
So, approx 4K primiary applicants (assuming that there are 1.5 dependents per primary applicant).
If the number of visas remain available (let's say Eb1 was not used up it tricles down to Eb2 then to Eb3) or rest of the world visas remain avialalble they can be given to retrogressed countries.
Also, previous year's unused visas were captured and used in 2005, that's why the actual number of visas given to Indians can vary every year.
But if all the coutries are retrogressed as now, then Indians would not gain any extra visas, restricting to 14K annual limit.
Please correct me if I am mistaken.
Regards,
dgb.
--
140K visas in total,.8 and there is a 7% country ceiling (7 or 10% I am not sure), so apporx 9.8K visas per year max for a country.
And divide those numbers equally in Eb1, 2 and 3, and this includes spouse and children.
So, approx 4K primiary applicants (assuming that there are 1.5 dependents per primary applicant).
If the number of visas remain available (let's say Eb1 was not used up it tricles down to Eb2 then to Eb3) or rest of the world visas remain avialalble they can be given to retrogressed countries.
Also, previous year's unused visas were captured and used in 2005, that's why the actual number of visas given to Indians can vary every year.
But if all the coutries are retrogressed as now, then Indians would not gain any extra visas, restricting to 14K annual limit.
Please correct me if I am mistaken.
Regards,
dgb.
hairstyles tattoo gone bad. tattoos gone
dskhabra
08-13 04:02 PM
What if
India is going to charge
IBM,
Accenture,
EDS,
Microsoft,
Google,
Cisco,
Intel,
Motorola,
Facebook,
Goldman Sachs,
Morgan Stanley,
etc., companies to fund for securing all state borders and states from bomb blasts from terrorists.They do not know how much they want to collect. Still counting , because India had heavy losses because of these blasts.
I am sure India will do something similar if more than 50% employees of these companies are NON-INDIANS....
India is going to charge
IBM,
Accenture,
EDS,
Microsoft,
Google,
Cisco,
Intel,
Motorola,
Facebook,
Goldman Sachs,
Morgan Stanley,
etc., companies to fund for securing all state borders and states from bomb blasts from terrorists.They do not know how much they want to collect. Still counting , because India had heavy losses because of these blasts.
I am sure India will do something similar if more than 50% employees of these companies are NON-INDIANS....
BigMouth
12-11 07:43 AM
guys, do u see any issues/problems on Landing Canada while pending 485 and coming back on AP.
I have my valid H1b renewed but visa expired on my passport and my spouse has valid AP. I heard that there is a problem on US immigration process if you have Canadian PR during your 485 pending?? IS anybody gone thourgh in this situation???
I have my valid H1b renewed but visa expired on my passport and my spouse has valid AP. I heard that there is a problem on US immigration process if you have Canadian PR during your 485 pending?? IS anybody gone thourgh in this situation???
GoneSouth
07-17 03:51 PM
So do I actually have to be in the US to mail in the AOS forms (I-485s)? I've been a legal US resident for years on an H1-B, and have been fortunate to have never had out-of-status issues or anything like that. BUT, as it happens, I'm up in Canada on vacation at the moment, planning to return next week. I've never had to get a visa stamp or surrender I-94 or any of that stuf.
Do I need to actually be back in the US before lawyer sends in AOS forms ? Or is it sufficient that I'm a resident and will be back in the US once the AOS is processed.
- GS
Do I need to actually be back in the US before lawyer sends in AOS forms ? Or is it sufficient that I'm a resident and will be back in the US once the AOS is processed.
- GS
No comments:
Post a Comment