jonty_11
03-26 04:09 PM
Didnt USCIS issue a Memo or something stating only one h1B filing per person?
wallpaper dresses in target market
nixstor
04-06 01:13 PM
In that case I would say go for PhD. Directly file GC under EB1 - no hassle no retrogression :)
Myth: Phd's do not automatically qualify for EB1
Fact/Reality: Lot of Phd's on the forum are in EB2.
Myth: Phd's do not automatically qualify for EB1
Fact/Reality: Lot of Phd's on the forum are in EB2.
wandmaker
11-27 08:55 PM
Just sent in $50 to donations@immigrationvoice.org thru paypal.
2011 a single target market.
MahaBharatGC
12-03 05:19 PM
When you get chance, is it possible to post list of documents you produced (indicating original such as employment verification) and copies.
Thanks for sharing info and best of luck!
We had our AOS interview this week at LA USCIS office. We are EB2-I, PD 02/06, Filed 08/07, RD 10/07, I-140 approved 12/06. Reason for interview was a double failure to get clear FPs for spouse. This necessitates a police clearance certificate from the city of residence and upon our lawyer's advise, we went armed with two of these, one from each of the two cities we have lived in during the 5 previous years.
Getting a Police Clearance Certificate entails just going and requesting it at their counter. Their charges are reasonable ($11 and $19.50 for us) and in one case we got it after a few minutes of wait and in the other, had to return the next day to collect it.
We reached a couple of minutes late at the mapped location of the USCIS building, courtesy our unfamiliarity with downtown areas including LA and terrible freeway traffic. I dropped off my spouse and kid at a building which had bold signs saying "Passport", "Immigration" and like (on our right as we went on Los Angeles St from Aliso St to Temple St). I went to find a parking space meanwhile. Just as I was returning from an uncomfortably long circuitous tour of the area, I got a call from my spouse telling me that that building was not the right one. Our GPS had finished guidance just at that particular crossing (Los Angeles St and Temple St) btw. Through some good people there, we got a clue about the long lines in a nearby building (diagonally across), which is where I dropped them off then and again went on a parking hunt. I wish I had also carried a map printout of this area.
I managed to find a parking some 6 blocks away and was walking back with some bags which is when my spouse called to say that this was indeed the right building and gave me further directions.
I sprinted across a narrow side street when it was bereft of traffic even though the pedestrian light was unfavorable. This act of mine earned me a citation from a peace officer obviously watching from a hiding place for people who are more used to pedestrian crossings with buttons. Here I was just not sure as to when to expect the light to turn in my favor, with obvious thoughts of the delay playing on my mind. Thankfully, I still reached upstairs well before our names were called.
The security at the downstairs entrance was airport-like except that they did not ask me to take my shoes off. They allowed me everything I was carrying including my cellphone and laptop.
I duly reached the waiting room upstairs and found my family. By this time, my spouse had already submitted the interview notices to the personnel there. Our lawyer had advised us to stick a note therewith saying that all of us are a family and should therefore be seen together. We forgot this but my spouse mentioned this verbally. This had the desired effect, thankfully.
After a wait of about 2 hours, we were called up and went inside to an IO's office. I do have to mention here that the security officer outside was very nice and friendly.
The IO was courteous and asked us to take an oath of truth before we sat down. She asked us if we had our attorney with us. Since we did not, she made us sign a waiver saying that we did not object to being interviewed sans our attorney. She then proceeded to ask us for our government-issued IDs. We handed her our Indian passports and California DLs. She went through our applications and asked us simple questions like:
..What is your child's name?
..How old is your child? (two separate times from each of us)
..What is your child's DOB?
..What is your home address? (two separate times from each of us)
..What is your home phone number? (two separate times from each of us)
..What do you do for your employer? Describe.
..Does your job require you to have the educational qualification that you have? Why?
..What is your father's full name?
..What is your mothers full name?
..What is your DOB?
..When does your H1B visa expire?
..When did you last enter the US? (It helped us tremendously that we had a prepared note of our arrival-departure record)
The IO then took out the original I-94s from our passports and stapled them to our files. She then observed that both of us were on H1B and had had I-140s from our respective employers. She said that the other I-140 process (which is pending btw) could not be kept alive while the beneficiary was getting their AOS as a dependent on their spouse's process. She had us write a letter requesting withdrawal of that I-140 process, which she said she will keep on hold till we got our immigrant visas.
Some documents that she asked for copies of from us included paystubs from 3 previous months, letter of employment verification from our employers, university degrees (or diplomas as she called them), our and our kid's birth certificates and our marriage certificate. We voluntarily put our mortgage statements on the table which she did not take more than a cursory glance at.
She did not ask us for our tax returns, joint photographs or university transcripts. However, it is always better to have these around, imho.
We were missing some documents, so she permitted us to go out for a couple of hours to get their copies and grab some lunch. She handed us a signed form which she instructed us to show the security personnel for them to either let us in or to drop off the document copies for her. In this case, she did see us again even though we were delayed by an extra 20 minutes.
The IO then let us know that all processing was done from our side and all that we needed to do was to wait for our priority date to become current, which is when the USCIS would allot us the immigrant visas. We could also, if we so wished, make an inquiry with the USCIS once our date became current, she said.
She then returned us all our originals (I wish I had made a checklist of these for my ease). Courtesy a wonderful post on IV by gimme_GC2006, I remembered to ask the IO for our original I-94s. She asked us if we intended traveling before we got our green cards. I replied that we had no existing plans but that this was probably the only time we were getting to meet her. She smiled at that and gave us back our I-94s after making copies for herself. I requested a copy from her of the letter for I-140 withdrawal and she obliged.
That was it. She wished us good luck and we thanked her. The security officer outside was once again his pleasant self and we walked out feeling elated.
I have some useful information for folks who go to the USCIS office on 300 N Los Angeles St in LA. If you take the Los Angeles St exit from US-101, you will cross Aliso St followed by Temple St. This USCIS building is the one on your left side as you go from Aliso to Temple. There is an underground parking for LA mall bang opposite the USCIS building before you hit Temple St. After you pass Aliso, turn to your right into this parking. You can take the escalator up later and then cross Los Angeles St on foot to reach USCIS. I advise to not disregard the pedestrian lights in this area as police officers aggressively monitor and cite jaywalkers here.
If the LA parking lot is full, continue on Los Angeles St past Temple and turn left on to First St. Keep going for about a quarter mile and you will find parking on your right. This place is $6.00 for the day. Unfortunately I forgot the cross street here but if you hit Alameda St on First St, you would have gone too far. From Google maps, it appears that that cross street is Central Ave. You will see large parking signs as you approach this decrepit unkempt street-level parking yard.
There is another parking option which you would prefer over this however. Go from Aliso toward Temple on Los Angeles St. Turn left on Temple and you will find this $8.00 parking immediately past San Pedro St. If you find this lot full, go on down to Alameda St, turn right and then right again on First St to find the $6.00 parking lot.
If you need help with documents, there is a post office store which even does photographs, in the LA mall across from the USCIS building. If you need internet access, your best bets are Fedex Kinko's and Office Depot on the crossing of Second St and Central Ave. Kinko's is on the NW corner and Office Depot is on the NE corner. This Office Depot has a Starbucks next to it. Parking at Office Depot is decent and free with validation. Office Depot will give you free wifi but they do not broadcast their SSID and I do not feel it ethical to disclose it here. Just go talk to them if you need it. It is slow though, like 11 Mbps. Office Depot will accept emailed docs from you to print right away and also will accept faxes for you. It is a very hospitable place for someone who gets nightmares in downtown areas.
You can find some passable eating joints in the LA mall area across from USCIS building.
Hope this post comes in handy for people. Good luck folks.
Thanks for sharing info and best of luck!
We had our AOS interview this week at LA USCIS office. We are EB2-I, PD 02/06, Filed 08/07, RD 10/07, I-140 approved 12/06. Reason for interview was a double failure to get clear FPs for spouse. This necessitates a police clearance certificate from the city of residence and upon our lawyer's advise, we went armed with two of these, one from each of the two cities we have lived in during the 5 previous years.
Getting a Police Clearance Certificate entails just going and requesting it at their counter. Their charges are reasonable ($11 and $19.50 for us) and in one case we got it after a few minutes of wait and in the other, had to return the next day to collect it.
We reached a couple of minutes late at the mapped location of the USCIS building, courtesy our unfamiliarity with downtown areas including LA and terrible freeway traffic. I dropped off my spouse and kid at a building which had bold signs saying "Passport", "Immigration" and like (on our right as we went on Los Angeles St from Aliso St to Temple St). I went to find a parking space meanwhile. Just as I was returning from an uncomfortably long circuitous tour of the area, I got a call from my spouse telling me that that building was not the right one. Our GPS had finished guidance just at that particular crossing (Los Angeles St and Temple St) btw. Through some good people there, we got a clue about the long lines in a nearby building (diagonally across), which is where I dropped them off then and again went on a parking hunt. I wish I had also carried a map printout of this area.
I managed to find a parking some 6 blocks away and was walking back with some bags which is when my spouse called to say that this was indeed the right building and gave me further directions.
I sprinted across a narrow side street when it was bereft of traffic even though the pedestrian light was unfavorable. This act of mine earned me a citation from a peace officer obviously watching from a hiding place for people who are more used to pedestrian crossings with buttons. Here I was just not sure as to when to expect the light to turn in my favor, with obvious thoughts of the delay playing on my mind. Thankfully, I still reached upstairs well before our names were called.
The security at the downstairs entrance was airport-like except that they did not ask me to take my shoes off. They allowed me everything I was carrying including my cellphone and laptop.
I duly reached the waiting room upstairs and found my family. By this time, my spouse had already submitted the interview notices to the personnel there. Our lawyer had advised us to stick a note therewith saying that all of us are a family and should therefore be seen together. We forgot this but my spouse mentioned this verbally. This had the desired effect, thankfully.
After a wait of about 2 hours, we were called up and went inside to an IO's office. I do have to mention here that the security officer outside was very nice and friendly.
The IO was courteous and asked us to take an oath of truth before we sat down. She asked us if we had our attorney with us. Since we did not, she made us sign a waiver saying that we did not object to being interviewed sans our attorney. She then proceeded to ask us for our government-issued IDs. We handed her our Indian passports and California DLs. She went through our applications and asked us simple questions like:
..What is your child's name?
..How old is your child? (two separate times from each of us)
..What is your child's DOB?
..What is your home address? (two separate times from each of us)
..What is your home phone number? (two separate times from each of us)
..What do you do for your employer? Describe.
..Does your job require you to have the educational qualification that you have? Why?
..What is your father's full name?
..What is your mothers full name?
..What is your DOB?
..When does your H1B visa expire?
..When did you last enter the US? (It helped us tremendously that we had a prepared note of our arrival-departure record)
The IO then took out the original I-94s from our passports and stapled them to our files. She then observed that both of us were on H1B and had had I-140s from our respective employers. She said that the other I-140 process (which is pending btw) could not be kept alive while the beneficiary was getting their AOS as a dependent on their spouse's process. She had us write a letter requesting withdrawal of that I-140 process, which she said she will keep on hold till we got our immigrant visas.
Some documents that she asked for copies of from us included paystubs from 3 previous months, letter of employment verification from our employers, university degrees (or diplomas as she called them), our and our kid's birth certificates and our marriage certificate. We voluntarily put our mortgage statements on the table which she did not take more than a cursory glance at.
She did not ask us for our tax returns, joint photographs or university transcripts. However, it is always better to have these around, imho.
We were missing some documents, so she permitted us to go out for a couple of hours to get their copies and grab some lunch. She handed us a signed form which she instructed us to show the security personnel for them to either let us in or to drop off the document copies for her. In this case, she did see us again even though we were delayed by an extra 20 minutes.
The IO then let us know that all processing was done from our side and all that we needed to do was to wait for our priority date to become current, which is when the USCIS would allot us the immigrant visas. We could also, if we so wished, make an inquiry with the USCIS once our date became current, she said.
She then returned us all our originals (I wish I had made a checklist of these for my ease). Courtesy a wonderful post on IV by gimme_GC2006, I remembered to ask the IO for our original I-94s. She asked us if we intended traveling before we got our green cards. I replied that we had no existing plans but that this was probably the only time we were getting to meet her. She smiled at that and gave us back our I-94s after making copies for herself. I requested a copy from her of the letter for I-140 withdrawal and she obliged.
That was it. She wished us good luck and we thanked her. The security officer outside was once again his pleasant self and we walked out feeling elated.
I have some useful information for folks who go to the USCIS office on 300 N Los Angeles St in LA. If you take the Los Angeles St exit from US-101, you will cross Aliso St followed by Temple St. This USCIS building is the one on your left side as you go from Aliso to Temple. There is an underground parking for LA mall bang opposite the USCIS building before you hit Temple St. After you pass Aliso, turn to your right into this parking. You can take the escalator up later and then cross Los Angeles St on foot to reach USCIS. I advise to not disregard the pedestrian lights in this area as police officers aggressively monitor and cite jaywalkers here.
If the LA parking lot is full, continue on Los Angeles St past Temple and turn left on to First St. Keep going for about a quarter mile and you will find parking on your right. This place is $6.00 for the day. Unfortunately I forgot the cross street here but if you hit Alameda St on First St, you would have gone too far. From Google maps, it appears that that cross street is Central Ave. You will see large parking signs as you approach this decrepit unkempt street-level parking yard.
There is another parking option which you would prefer over this however. Go from Aliso toward Temple on Los Angeles St. Turn left on Temple and you will find this $8.00 parking immediately past San Pedro St. If you find this lot full, go on down to Alameda St, turn right and then right again on First St to find the $6.00 parking lot.
If you need help with documents, there is a post office store which even does photographs, in the LA mall across from the USCIS building. If you need internet access, your best bets are Fedex Kinko's and Office Depot on the crossing of Second St and Central Ave. Kinko's is on the NW corner and Office Depot is on the NE corner. This Office Depot has a Starbucks next to it. Parking at Office Depot is decent and free with validation. Office Depot will give you free wifi but they do not broadcast their SSID and I do not feel it ethical to disclose it here. Just go talk to them if you need it. It is slow though, like 11 Mbps. Office Depot will accept emailed docs from you to print right away and also will accept faxes for you. It is a very hospitable place for someone who gets nightmares in downtown areas.
You can find some passable eating joints in the LA mall area across from USCIS building.
Hope this post comes in handy for people. Good luck folks.
more...
pappu
12-20 03:49 PM
Made another $100 contribution through Paypal.
Transaction ID: 7RL94888U3632145P
Those of you who have not contributed yet, please do so ASAP. Please contribute to this worthy cause.
Nag
Thanks for your contribution
Transaction ID: 7RL94888U3632145P
Those of you who have not contributed yet, please do so ASAP. Please contribute to this worthy cause.
Nag
Thanks for your contribution
a1b2c3
08-21 11:54 PM
Guys chill out...go out for a movie or something.
This is not in anyone's control.
If EB2 visa numbers get exhausted, new visa numbers will be allocated again.
I'm pretty sure within EB3 dates are also going to move forward.
This is not in anyone's control.
If EB2 visa numbers get exhausted, new visa numbers will be allocated again.
I'm pretty sure within EB3 dates are also going to move forward.
more...
reedandbamboo
09-13 04:18 PM
I think you mistyped it in your PM.
2010 your market segment who is
vicks_don
04-11 09:19 AM
USCIS UPDATES COUNT OF FY 2008 H-1B CAP FILINGS
WASHINGTON � U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced an updated number of
filings today as the counting of H-1B petitions received on April 2 and 3 continues. On April 3, USCIS
announced that it had received enough petitions to meet the congressionally mandated cap for fiscal year
2008 (FY 2008) and that it would conduct a computer-generated random selection of cap-subject petitions
filed on Monday (April 2) and Tuesday (April 3) to determine which cases would be accepted for processing.
As of April 9, USCIS has determined that approximately 119,193 of the H-1B petitions received on April 2
and 3 are subject to the FY 2008 congressionally mandated cap.
USCIS received on April 2 and 3 a total of approximately 12,989 cases requesting an exemption from the FY
2008 H-1B cap because they were filed on behalf of aliens holding a master�s degree or higher from a U.S.
institution. USCIS can now announce that the cap of 20,000 on these exempt cases remains open and that
USCIS will continue to monitor these filings.
USCIS will provide regular updates as the processing of FY 2008 H-1B cap cases continues.
Is this the final number or interim number while the counting is going on.
WASHINGTON � U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced an updated number of
filings today as the counting of H-1B petitions received on April 2 and 3 continues. On April 3, USCIS
announced that it had received enough petitions to meet the congressionally mandated cap for fiscal year
2008 (FY 2008) and that it would conduct a computer-generated random selection of cap-subject petitions
filed on Monday (April 2) and Tuesday (April 3) to determine which cases would be accepted for processing.
As of April 9, USCIS has determined that approximately 119,193 of the H-1B petitions received on April 2
and 3 are subject to the FY 2008 congressionally mandated cap.
USCIS received on April 2 and 3 a total of approximately 12,989 cases requesting an exemption from the FY
2008 H-1B cap because they were filed on behalf of aliens holding a master�s degree or higher from a U.S.
institution. USCIS can now announce that the cap of 20,000 on these exempt cases remains open and that
USCIS will continue to monitor these filings.
USCIS will provide regular updates as the processing of FY 2008 H-1B cap cases continues.
Is this the final number or interim number while the counting is going on.
more...
gcisadawg
04-14 12:43 AM
Labor substitution may be legal but it is unethical. When everything depends on when you join the queue, how can one cut the line?
Whereas EB3 to EB2 porting is both legal and ethical. When you have a EB3 applicant that is waiting in line for 8 years, he/she had already gathered that much experience based on his long wait. Also, if you look at EB2, it is one of the highly abused category. The EB3 applicant who started in 2001 has joined the line half a decade before the one with 2006 Eb2 PD. One can't really accuse him/her for cutting the line just like one can about substitutes! If the EB3 porting case deserves merit, then I strongly support it!
My intention is not to to start a fight. But we need to see the true picture. Without acknowledging the problem how can we fix it?
Bottom line, GC abuses need to stop and we should fight for it as much as we fight for our rights to get GC!
As expected,I got a red dot on my post. And as usual, it was anonymous!
Pls. come out in open to share your views!
Whereas EB3 to EB2 porting is both legal and ethical. When you have a EB3 applicant that is waiting in line for 8 years, he/she had already gathered that much experience based on his long wait. Also, if you look at EB2, it is one of the highly abused category. The EB3 applicant who started in 2001 has joined the line half a decade before the one with 2006 Eb2 PD. One can't really accuse him/her for cutting the line just like one can about substitutes! If the EB3 porting case deserves merit, then I strongly support it!
My intention is not to to start a fight. But we need to see the true picture. Without acknowledging the problem how can we fix it?
Bottom line, GC abuses need to stop and we should fight for it as much as we fight for our rights to get GC!
As expected,I got a red dot on my post. And as usual, it was anonymous!
Pls. come out in open to share your views!
hair Market Segmentation
chintu25
03-09 10:46 AM
Wait for today EOB .... if you do not get a reply from IV go for the Paypal account. Nothing wrong in that
more...
reedandbamboo
09-11 12:40 AM
Sweet_jungle and Bawa,
Thank you for your initiative. After the raised and dashed hopes over the past 2-3 months (August, Sept & Oct 2008 visa bulletins) I am BLOODY angry about this RIDICULOUSLY fecked up system!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why the hell am I subjecting myself to this indignity!!
Here is a letter I drafted that I'd like to send to the Ombudsman .. could you'll help me edit/revise the content and also, please provide me with the contact info for the ombudsman?
we could also write letters to highlight this to Congresswoman Lofgren as well as publish it in media outlets?
Thanks!
Sir/Madam,
On behalf of the Indian legal immigrant community in the United States of America, I am
writing to highlight the ongoing egregious inefficiencies in the immigration �services�
provided by the USCIS and the DOS. There have been numerous times when there have been erratic movements in the published visa bulletin dates. As a result the DOS either under- or over-estimates the number of applicants available for adjustment of status. When the date moves forward by too large a window, USCIS tends to approve the more recent applications as opposed to the ones that were filed earlier. Let me explain with an example: in the July 2008 visa bulletin, the cut-off date for the India EB2 category was 01 April 2004. A month later, the cut-off date for Indian EB2 applicants abruptly moved forward two years and was set at 01 June 2006. Instead of approving applicants who applied in 2004 and 2005, USCIS approved applicants from 2006. Where is the justice in that???
Indian employment-based immigrants are tax-paying, law-abiding, educated individuals contributing to America�s knowledge economy - yet we have been subjected to the worst aspects of the US employment-based immigration system. These include:
1) Extended wait times at each step of the immigration process.
2) Lack of transparency on the part of USCIS.
3) Lost opportunities owing to the lack of job portability during the process (a time period spanning an average of five years, whereas an applicant from any country besides India gets his/her PR card in under two years).
While we are grateful for the opportunity to partake in the American dream, it is ironic that we arrive in America and find that our freedom is shackled � we are bound to our sponsoring employer from the start to the end of this extremely lengthy process. Although legal immigration reform is our ongoing aim, for now, we sincerely request you to investigate the process whereby the monthly visa bulletin is set and to ensure FIFO (first in, first out) adjustment so that those of us who have been waiting longer receive attention prior to those who have applied later.
Thanking you,
Thank you for your initiative. After the raised and dashed hopes over the past 2-3 months (August, Sept & Oct 2008 visa bulletins) I am BLOODY angry about this RIDICULOUSLY fecked up system!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why the hell am I subjecting myself to this indignity!!
Here is a letter I drafted that I'd like to send to the Ombudsman .. could you'll help me edit/revise the content and also, please provide me with the contact info for the ombudsman?
we could also write letters to highlight this to Congresswoman Lofgren as well as publish it in media outlets?
Thanks!
Sir/Madam,
On behalf of the Indian legal immigrant community in the United States of America, I am
writing to highlight the ongoing egregious inefficiencies in the immigration �services�
provided by the USCIS and the DOS. There have been numerous times when there have been erratic movements in the published visa bulletin dates. As a result the DOS either under- or over-estimates the number of applicants available for adjustment of status. When the date moves forward by too large a window, USCIS tends to approve the more recent applications as opposed to the ones that were filed earlier. Let me explain with an example: in the July 2008 visa bulletin, the cut-off date for the India EB2 category was 01 April 2004. A month later, the cut-off date for Indian EB2 applicants abruptly moved forward two years and was set at 01 June 2006. Instead of approving applicants who applied in 2004 and 2005, USCIS approved applicants from 2006. Where is the justice in that???
Indian employment-based immigrants are tax-paying, law-abiding, educated individuals contributing to America�s knowledge economy - yet we have been subjected to the worst aspects of the US employment-based immigration system. These include:
1) Extended wait times at each step of the immigration process.
2) Lack of transparency on the part of USCIS.
3) Lost opportunities owing to the lack of job portability during the process (a time period spanning an average of five years, whereas an applicant from any country besides India gets his/her PR card in under two years).
While we are grateful for the opportunity to partake in the American dream, it is ironic that we arrive in America and find that our freedom is shackled � we are bound to our sponsoring employer from the start to the end of this extremely lengthy process. Although legal immigration reform is our ongoing aim, for now, we sincerely request you to investigate the process whereby the monthly visa bulletin is set and to ensure FIFO (first in, first out) adjustment so that those of us who have been waiting longer receive attention prior to those who have applied later.
Thanking you,
hot wallpaper target market
kams
06-20 10:03 AM
Sent you a PM, can you reply back.
Replied.
Replied.
more...
house The target market segment
santb1975
11-29 07:51 PM
We have 1485$ holiday contributions so far and one 50$ contribution on this thread. We need more.
Here is something to read for you:
IV in 5/2006:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=948&highlight=manager%27s+amendment
About 4000 members, 2800 of which had not contributed anything, and even then IV managed to pull off this amazing feat.
This amendment was PASSED although the CIR bill failed to survive.
In other words, if there had been a bill only to address EB GC reforms, there was a great chance YOU would be able to file for your I-485 even if your PD was not current!
IV in 11/2007:
1) IV has 25000+ members.
2) The EB GC reforms proposed and passed as an amendment in mid-2006 are long overdue!
3) IV has gathered a lot of admiration and attention after the flower campaign/ SJ Rally-> leading to the July VB reversal, and of course the DC rally!
Even if 2500 of them pay $50 a month, IV would have a steady flow of $125000 a month for lobbying efforts.
Just imagine what IV could accomplish in the next few months, if only people realized how important it is for them to sign up for monthly contributions!
Think about it!
Thanks!
Here is something to read for you:
IV in 5/2006:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=948&highlight=manager%27s+amendment
About 4000 members, 2800 of which had not contributed anything, and even then IV managed to pull off this amazing feat.
This amendment was PASSED although the CIR bill failed to survive.
In other words, if there had been a bill only to address EB GC reforms, there was a great chance YOU would be able to file for your I-485 even if your PD was not current!
IV in 11/2007:
1) IV has 25000+ members.
2) The EB GC reforms proposed and passed as an amendment in mid-2006 are long overdue!
3) IV has gathered a lot of admiration and attention after the flower campaign/ SJ Rally-> leading to the July VB reversal, and of course the DC rally!
Even if 2500 of them pay $50 a month, IV would have a steady flow of $125000 a month for lobbying efforts.
Just imagine what IV could accomplish in the next few months, if only people realized how important it is for them to sign up for monthly contributions!
Think about it!
Thanks!
tattoo your market segmentation
pappu
12-03 08:30 AM
$2535 so far
We have a goal of 30K by the end of this month. This is what we need to invest in the omnibus bill Lobbying efforts.
We have a goal of 30K by the end of this month. This is what we need to invest in the omnibus bill Lobbying efforts.
more...
pictures different market segments
gimme_GC2006
08-25 04:37 PM
Thanks to all of you.
Yes...please keep a print out of July interim memo (if you have to go to an interview)
when I went for the interview, I have truck load of documents..everyone was looking wierd at us..
They didnt check any Tax returns, bank statements..BUT DO TAKE THEM.
may be she didnt check them because I had a big bump around filing date.
Yes...please keep a print out of July interim memo (if you have to go to an interview)
when I went for the interview, I have truck load of documents..everyone was looking wierd at us..
They didnt check any Tax returns, bank statements..BUT DO TAKE THEM.
may be she didnt check them because I had a big bump around filing date.
dresses target market segments.
qasleuth
02-27 02:31 PM
I am going to take the liberty of putting together an agenda for the conference call, just to make it more productive. I can play scribe for the call.
The call will be for a maximum of 60 mins, unless someone wants to take it longer than that.
1. Quick introductions - State your name - GC application stage. - 10 mins
2. Brainstorming session -- 20 mins
2. Volunteers who want to be part of the smaller sub-group need to come forward. -- 5 mins
This is purely to get thoughts/ideas streamlined. Everybody needs to chip in once the action plans are drafted.
3. Volunteers to exchange contact information. -- 10 mins
4. Miscellaneous -- 15 mins (if needed)
Please add more items if you feel they are necessary.
I will try to scrape all the ideas generated in this thread and will summarize for the call. If anyone wants to post more ideas/comments/suggestions/criticisms, go right ahead and post.
The call will be for a maximum of 60 mins, unless someone wants to take it longer than that.
1. Quick introductions - State your name - GC application stage. - 10 mins
2. Brainstorming session -- 20 mins
2. Volunteers who want to be part of the smaller sub-group need to come forward. -- 5 mins
This is purely to get thoughts/ideas streamlined. Everybody needs to chip in once the action plans are drafted.
3. Volunteers to exchange contact information. -- 10 mins
4. Miscellaneous -- 15 mins (if needed)
Please add more items if you feel they are necessary.
I will try to scrape all the ideas generated in this thread and will summarize for the call. If anyone wants to post more ideas/comments/suggestions/criticisms, go right ahead and post.
more...
makeup 4.1 Market Segmentation
sabhayk
04-30 09:52 AM
Guys,
I applied that way. I had to take the letter of completion from the school. Luckily I had a research credit to which I got a grade for and it completed my degree requirements. So I got the letter from the school as my lawyer said that I could not file for H1B Masters cap otherwise.
They had filed me for the 65000 regular cap before but they told me that I could apply for the Masters cap only if I have the letter, I got it from the school.
But there is a catch here. Due to all this I have two different dates on my OPT and H1b for finishing up the requirements and hence my OPT is bound to get rejected I think since it would be saying that I graduate in May and my H1B would say that I finished in April.
Trying to figure out if there is a way to stay here in US without having OPT. or else go back and get the visa stamped.
I applied that way. I had to take the letter of completion from the school. Luckily I had a research credit to which I got a grade for and it completed my degree requirements. So I got the letter from the school as my lawyer said that I could not file for H1B Masters cap otherwise.
They had filed me for the 65000 regular cap before but they told me that I could apply for the Masters cap only if I have the letter, I got it from the school.
But there is a catch here. Due to all this I have two different dates on my OPT and H1b for finishing up the requirements and hence my OPT is bound to get rejected I think since it would be saying that I graduate in May and my H1B would say that I finished in April.
Trying to figure out if there is a way to stay here in US without having OPT. or else go back and get the visa stamped.
girlfriend of the target market.
rajnag21
07-21 12:48 PM
Yes; he was out of status from March 2003. However; he had a valid I-94 card until February 2004. He didn't have a valid I-94 from February 2004 until april 2004.
once;he left and re-entered then the out of status time was finished. Since he didn't overstay his I-94 card by more then 180 days then he is not subject to the 3 year bar.
If his I-94 card expired in March 2003 then he would have had unlawful presence from that date forward and since it was more then one year then he would have been subject to 10 year bar.
UnitedNations,
I know I should be asking my lawyer this but what if i94 has been expired from past 3 monthsi.e., from april 2007 , the person has applied for seventh year extension of h1b visa in feb 2007 but it has not come through yet, and they have already done concurrent filing of 140 and 485 in July.
In this situation what does the person (with h4 dependent in the same situation) do ?
Is this a solution:
Make h1 premium now and get the 797 approval, wait for 485 receipt and then go to Canada for getting h1 visa stamping and new I94 card ?
Please advise. Appreciate any suggestions you can give with your limited time :)
Is there a better solution ?
once;he left and re-entered then the out of status time was finished. Since he didn't overstay his I-94 card by more then 180 days then he is not subject to the 3 year bar.
If his I-94 card expired in March 2003 then he would have had unlawful presence from that date forward and since it was more then one year then he would have been subject to 10 year bar.
UnitedNations,
I know I should be asking my lawyer this but what if i94 has been expired from past 3 monthsi.e., from april 2007 , the person has applied for seventh year extension of h1b visa in feb 2007 but it has not come through yet, and they have already done concurrent filing of 140 and 485 in July.
In this situation what does the person (with h4 dependent in the same situation) do ?
Is this a solution:
Make h1 premium now and get the 797 approval, wait for 485 receipt and then go to Canada for getting h1 visa stamping and new I94 card ?
Please advise. Appreciate any suggestions you can give with your limited time :)
Is there a better solution ?
hairstyles To get this target market we
Ramba
02-25 04:22 PM
The concept of pre-approval/pre-adjudication have been practiced by USCIS since 2005. Though, it is not in their law or SOP or regulations, they are practicing now and before for ease of operation in processing the 485s. As per their current official rule, if a visa number is not immediatly available, the 485 shoul be kept in abayance (not to be processed) till VN again available. But practically it is not possible for them to follow. For example, suddenly, if DOS releases 60,000 visas in a month (like july 07 fiasco), they can not process and approve 60,000 485s in a month, if they keep those files in abayance. I think, they are still processing and pre-approving the 485s during retrogression. The concept of pre-approval in a silent internal procedure. They may pre-approve all the cases. However, they always has a right to check the applicant's eligibility for the approval of 485 at the date of approval of 485. One can not expect them not to send RFE/NOID after it is pre-approved. Unless the law changes drasticlly, it is not a easily achaivable benefit to introduce new immigrat status "pre-approved adjustment cases"for long waiting 485 folks. They clearly argue that benefit of AC21,EAD and AP itseltf a great benefit for 485 folks. There are only 3 immigrant catagory in the law. 1. Non-immingarts 2. Immigrants and 3. Pending to adjust status. Pending to adjust status it self a fluid temporary status as the stay in this status is autorized by attorney genreral. It is not a visa status like H1B or green card. In order to bring a new catagory in this status, I think they need to change the INA.
santb1975
11-29 02:27 PM
We need committed Members like you
Signed up for $50 monthly recurring contributions.
Together, we can do it! Go IV!
Signed up for $50 monthly recurring contributions.
Together, we can do it! Go IV!
antihero
04-12 09:19 AM
Come to think of it, this idea has potential to fly. We can ask CIS to make the date of I-140 filing as the PD for substituted labor case. This will ensure that PD will move forward smoothly till July 07 at least. That will cover most of the long standing ( and long suffering) GC applicants and bring them relief. This will not have any other impact on the number of outstanding apps or available visa numbers etc. I guess this change in PD assignment logic can be done by CIS without the need of any new legislation.
The idea inherently appeals to those who believe in fair play. How do we take this forward.
I do agree with you, USCIS honors the old PD on the Labor, not the I-140 filing date.
Dont know the exact rule on the labor substitution cases, but i know for sure people who applied in 2007 with old sub labor PDs from 2000 and 2001 received their GCs. I would simply call them lucky as they found the Employers who took advantagfe of the sub labor rule and filed their petitions before the sunset date of July 16th 2007.
Lets hope USCIS do their job and approves only the genuine lab sub cases.
For rest of us who were the victims of backlog elimination centre and then the stupid July 2007 fiasco of making very EB category current, its just our bad luck, in backlog centre too DoL processed our apps out of order and now USCIS doing the same thing.
The idea inherently appeals to those who believe in fair play. How do we take this forward.
I do agree with you, USCIS honors the old PD on the Labor, not the I-140 filing date.
Dont know the exact rule on the labor substitution cases, but i know for sure people who applied in 2007 with old sub labor PDs from 2000 and 2001 received their GCs. I would simply call them lucky as they found the Employers who took advantagfe of the sub labor rule and filed their petitions before the sunset date of July 16th 2007.
Lets hope USCIS do their job and approves only the genuine lab sub cases.
For rest of us who were the victims of backlog elimination centre and then the stupid July 2007 fiasco of making very EB category current, its just our bad luck, in backlog centre too DoL processed our apps out of order and now USCIS doing the same thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment