gvenkat
05-20 04:33 PM
President Obama recently mentioned plans for holding a White House meeting to discuss proceeding with immigration reform legislation. And now he is keeping that promise by setting June 8th, just three weeks from now, to hold the meeting. According to Politico: "The meeting will be an opportunity to launch a policy conversation that we hope will be able to start a debate that will take place in Congress later in the year," the official, who asked not to be named, said. Asked if the session would be billed as a summit or a forum, like similar meetings on health care...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/05/obama-sets-date-for-immigration-reform-white-house-conversation.html)
Good if at all anything thats our only hope. If there is only amnesty for illegals atleast we can be illegals rightfully.. like overstay or even not be on H1.. etc... :D:D
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/05/obama-sets-date-for-immigration-reform-white-house-conversation.html)
Good if at all anything thats our only hope. If there is only amnesty for illegals atleast we can be illegals rightfully.. like overstay or even not be on H1.. etc... :D:D
neeidd
10-15 11:42 PM
Not sure what they do in the secondary inspection.. In my case they asked no questions at all.. Just asked me to sit and wait while they entered / checked something in their system. I was in and out within 20 mnts.
Thanks for your response
Thanks for your response
.jpg "funny quotes about snow days.")
chanduv23
09-14 11:54 AM
Lou Dobbs And His Anti Immigrant Cronjies Already Spreading Roumors That Lot Of Immigrants From Countries Like India Are Illegal.
Lets Shut Their Mouths.
If We Are Quiet, We Will Be Labelled By Lou, Ron Hira, Roy Beck, John Miano In Whatever Terms They Want To Label Us.
Lets Shut Their Mouths.
If We Are Quiet, We Will Be Labelled By Lou, Ron Hira, Roy Beck, John Miano In Whatever Terms They Want To Label Us.
insbaby
08-10 08:06 AM
It needs action - not talk.
Many a times employer create a position that requires just Bachelor's degree, BUT a Bachelor's person can't really do that job. Eventually a Master's person (or B.S. + 5 yr experience) fills that up, not knowing that he will be shoved in EB3.
Is it the employer's responsibility to consider in which Green Card Category the employee will fall in future before puts ad.?
Bachelor degree would be enough to do the job if EB3 has a PD around 2005/2006/Current.
Many a times employer create a position that requires just Bachelor's degree, BUT a Bachelor's person can't really do that job. Eventually a Master's person (or B.S. + 5 yr experience) fills that up, not knowing that he will be shoved in EB3.
Is it the employer's responsibility to consider in which Green Card Category the employee will fall in future before puts ad.?
Bachelor degree would be enough to do the job if EB3 has a PD around 2005/2006/Current.
more...
gc28262
07-28 01:48 PM
Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_arizona_immigration;_ylt=AgcIIY.ht_GJNzOqM3G8sH 6s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNta2N1b3FnBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNz I4L3VzX2FyaXpvbmFfaW1taWdyYXRpb24EY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBv cHVsYXIEY3BvcwMyBHBvcwM3BHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW 5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNqdWRnZWJsb2Nrc3A-)
PHOENIX – A federal judge dealt a serious rebuke to Arizona's immigration law on Wednesday when she put most of the crackdown on hold just hours before it was to take effect.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton sets up a lengthy legal battle as Arizona fights to enact the nation's toughest-in-the-nation law. Republican Gov. Jan Brewer said the state likely appeal the ruling and seek to get the judge's order overturned.
But for now, opponents of the law have prevailed: The provisions that angered opponents will not take effect, including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.
The judge also delayed parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places — a move aimed at day laborers. In addition, the judge blocked officers from making warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants.
"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," Bolton, a Clinton appointee, said in her decision.
She said the controversial sections should be put on hold until the courts resolve the issues. Other provisions of the law, many of them procedural and slight revisions to existing Arizona immigration statute, will go into effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday.
The law was signed by Brewer in April and immediately revived the national debate on immigration, making it a hot-button issue in the midterm elections. The law has inspired similar law elsewhere, prompted a boycott against the state and led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave the state.
Lawyers for the state contend the law was a constitutionally sound attempt by Arizona to assist federal immigration agents and lessen border woes such as the heavy costs for educating, jailing and providing health care for illegal immigrants. Arizona is the busiest gateway into the country for illegal immigrants, and the border is awash in drugs and smugglers that the state badly wants to stop.
"It's a temporary bump in the road, we will move forward, and I'm sure that after consultation with our counsel we will appeal," Brewer told the Associated Press. "The bottom line is we've known all along that it is The responsibility of the feds and they haven't done their job so we were going to help them do that."
The ruling came just as police were making last-minute preparations to begin enforcement of the law and protesters were planning large demonstrations against the measure. At least one group planned to block access to federal offices, daring officers to ask them about their immigration status.
In a sign of the international interest in the law, about 100 protesters in Mexico City who had gathered in front of the U.S. Embassy broke into cheers when speakers told them about the federal judge's ruling. The demonstrators had been monitoring the news on a laptop computer on the stage.
The crowed clapped and started chanting, "Migrants, hang on, the people are rising up!"
Gisela and Eduardo Diaz went to the Mexican consulate in Phoenix on Wednesday seeking advice because they were worried about what would happen to their 3-year-old granddaughter if they were pulled over by police and taken to a detention center.
"I knew the judge would say that part of the law was just not right," said Diaz, a 50-year-old from Mexico City who came to Arizona on a since-expired tourist visa in 1989. "It's the part we were worried about. This is a big relief for us."
Opponents argued the law would lead to racial profiling, conflict with federal immigration law and distract local police from fighting more serious crimes. The U.S. Justice Department, civil rights groups and a Phoenix police officer had asked the judge for an injunction to prevent the law from being enforced.
"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. She added that a requirement of the law that police determine the immigration status of all arrested people will prompt legal immigrants to be "swept up by this requirement."
Federal authorities who are trying to overturn the law have argued that letting the Arizona law stand would create a patchwork of immigration laws nationwide that would needlessly complicate the foreign relations of the United States. Federal lawyers said the law is disrupting U.S. relations with Mexico and other countries and would burden the agency that responds to immigration-status inquiries.
Bolton noted that the expected increase in immigration checks from Arizona will divert federal resources away from other priorities and said the federal government has shown that it's likely to succeed on its claim that such mandatory checks under the Arizona law would be trumped by federal law.
Responding to the ruling, Justice Department spokeswoman Hannah August said that the agency understands the frustration of Arizona residents with the immigration system. She added that a wide range of state and local policies would seriously disrupt federal immigration enforcement.
Brewer's lawyers said Arizona shouldn't have to suffer from America's broken immigration system when it has 15,000 police officers who can arrest illegal immigrants.
Brewer is running for another term in November and has seen her political fortunes rise because of the law's popularity among conservatives. It's not yet clear how the ruling will affect her campaign, but her opponent was quick to pounce.
"Jan Brewer played politics with immigration, and she lost," Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat. "It is time to look beyond election year grandstanding and begin to repair the damage to Arizona's image and economy."
Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the law's top supporters, said he was disappointed by the ruling and that he expects it to ultimately end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
"I don't think the judge's statements in the hearings justify this ruling," Kavanagh said. "I don't think the law justified her injunction."
PHOENIX – A federal judge dealt a serious rebuke to Arizona's immigration law on Wednesday when she put most of the crackdown on hold just hours before it was to take effect.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton sets up a lengthy legal battle as Arizona fights to enact the nation's toughest-in-the-nation law. Republican Gov. Jan Brewer said the state likely appeal the ruling and seek to get the judge's order overturned.
But for now, opponents of the law have prevailed: The provisions that angered opponents will not take effect, including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.
The judge also delayed parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places — a move aimed at day laborers. In addition, the judge blocked officers from making warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants.
"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," Bolton, a Clinton appointee, said in her decision.
She said the controversial sections should be put on hold until the courts resolve the issues. Other provisions of the law, many of them procedural and slight revisions to existing Arizona immigration statute, will go into effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday.
The law was signed by Brewer in April and immediately revived the national debate on immigration, making it a hot-button issue in the midterm elections. The law has inspired similar law elsewhere, prompted a boycott against the state and led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave the state.
Lawyers for the state contend the law was a constitutionally sound attempt by Arizona to assist federal immigration agents and lessen border woes such as the heavy costs for educating, jailing and providing health care for illegal immigrants. Arizona is the busiest gateway into the country for illegal immigrants, and the border is awash in drugs and smugglers that the state badly wants to stop.
"It's a temporary bump in the road, we will move forward, and I'm sure that after consultation with our counsel we will appeal," Brewer told the Associated Press. "The bottom line is we've known all along that it is The responsibility of the feds and they haven't done their job so we were going to help them do that."
The ruling came just as police were making last-minute preparations to begin enforcement of the law and protesters were planning large demonstrations against the measure. At least one group planned to block access to federal offices, daring officers to ask them about their immigration status.
In a sign of the international interest in the law, about 100 protesters in Mexico City who had gathered in front of the U.S. Embassy broke into cheers when speakers told them about the federal judge's ruling. The demonstrators had been monitoring the news on a laptop computer on the stage.
The crowed clapped and started chanting, "Migrants, hang on, the people are rising up!"
Gisela and Eduardo Diaz went to the Mexican consulate in Phoenix on Wednesday seeking advice because they were worried about what would happen to their 3-year-old granddaughter if they were pulled over by police and taken to a detention center.
"I knew the judge would say that part of the law was just not right," said Diaz, a 50-year-old from Mexico City who came to Arizona on a since-expired tourist visa in 1989. "It's the part we were worried about. This is a big relief for us."
Opponents argued the law would lead to racial profiling, conflict with federal immigration law and distract local police from fighting more serious crimes. The U.S. Justice Department, civil rights groups and a Phoenix police officer had asked the judge for an injunction to prevent the law from being enforced.
"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. She added that a requirement of the law that police determine the immigration status of all arrested people will prompt legal immigrants to be "swept up by this requirement."
Federal authorities who are trying to overturn the law have argued that letting the Arizona law stand would create a patchwork of immigration laws nationwide that would needlessly complicate the foreign relations of the United States. Federal lawyers said the law is disrupting U.S. relations with Mexico and other countries and would burden the agency that responds to immigration-status inquiries.
Bolton noted that the expected increase in immigration checks from Arizona will divert federal resources away from other priorities and said the federal government has shown that it's likely to succeed on its claim that such mandatory checks under the Arizona law would be trumped by federal law.
Responding to the ruling, Justice Department spokeswoman Hannah August said that the agency understands the frustration of Arizona residents with the immigration system. She added that a wide range of state and local policies would seriously disrupt federal immigration enforcement.
Brewer's lawyers said Arizona shouldn't have to suffer from America's broken immigration system when it has 15,000 police officers who can arrest illegal immigrants.
Brewer is running for another term in November and has seen her political fortunes rise because of the law's popularity among conservatives. It's not yet clear how the ruling will affect her campaign, but her opponent was quick to pounce.
"Jan Brewer played politics with immigration, and she lost," Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat. "It is time to look beyond election year grandstanding and begin to repair the damage to Arizona's image and economy."
Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the law's top supporters, said he was disappointed by the ruling and that he expects it to ultimately end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
"I don't think the judge's statements in the hearings justify this ruling," Kavanagh said. "I don't think the law justified her injunction."
lvinaykumar
09-07 08:29 PM
Well me almost in the same boat, have not applied EB2 140 yet, not sure what the process is
more...
perm2gc
07-13 12:08 PM
I had to generate paystubs for my wife from Jan 07 to May 07 due to recent USCIS goof up. She started working from May 07. However all the paystubs generated ( 5) , have a pay period from 05/01 - 05/31 and pay date is 07/11
Does anyone know if it is ok to have the 5 paystubs with the same pay period. The Lca talks about salary per year. The employers claims that it is ok. What should I do in this case. Any suggestions are highly appreciated.
what do you mean by USCIS goof up...if your wife had job..her employer might have generated pay stubs.The pay stubs your employer generated are illegal as per IRS..Don't try to over smart and send them to USCIS as they are cross checking with IRS.
Does anyone know if it is ok to have the 5 paystubs with the same pay period. The Lca talks about salary per year. The employers claims that it is ok. What should I do in this case. Any suggestions are highly appreciated.
what do you mean by USCIS goof up...if your wife had job..her employer might have generated pay stubs.The pay stubs your employer generated are illegal as per IRS..Don't try to over smart and send them to USCIS as they are cross checking with IRS.
newyorker123
09-28 10:53 AM
Yes. You can file another FOIA to get the I-140 approval notice.
You want to specify that you're looking for a copy of I-797 of the I-140 approval for receipt number LINXXXXXXXXXX. That should get you the approval notice.
A friend filed the FOIA with this verbiage and it worked for him. Of-course, he had to reference his Alien number etc... in the G-639 form.
I hope this helps.
Thanks friend, I already know the A# so I will just put it in.
You want to specify that you're looking for a copy of I-797 of the I-140 approval for receipt number LINXXXXXXXXXX. That should get you the approval notice.
A friend filed the FOIA with this verbiage and it worked for him. Of-course, he had to reference his Alien number etc... in the G-639 form.
I hope this helps.
Thanks friend, I already know the A# so I will just put it in.
more...
peer123
06-13 07:52 AM
IV core shud approach republicans who are saying no amnesty to law breakers.
Let us approach them and convince them to bring amendments to reward law abiding people like us.
Great point.. core team should develop a strategy and share it with entire group as to how they are working towards getting these ammendments in and whom are they approaching ....
Let us approach them and convince them to bring amendments to reward law abiding people like us.
Great point.. core team should develop a strategy and share it with entire group as to how they are working towards getting these ammendments in and whom are they approaching ....
kumar1305
01-20 01:31 PM
All those guys are gone. Were we late coming to the USA?
more...
Ramba
05-21 06:09 PM
We are chasing behind so many stuffs at this important time. We should forget about the merits or demerits of point system. It can be good or bad. We should forget about how Z visa holders get more benefit than us. It is something not in our control and big politics behind everything in the bill. Therefore, we should not concentrate on this as it is not our objective. We should focus only to eliminate retro in EB ASAP. We should try to bring a simple amendment to the bill, so that retrogression in current EB ends ASAP.
A simple thing to do is do not change drastically current form of bill. Don�t waste time on analyzing or chasing behind merits and demerits in H,Y,Z visas or all other positive or negative stuffs in this bill.
We should have only one focus. Eliminate EB retro first. For that a simple amendment will be, 242K visa is open to both old EB and newly created merit system. That�s all. This amendment will eliminate the retro immediately. All other discussions and efforts are waste of time and energy
A simple thing to do is do not change drastically current form of bill. Don�t waste time on analyzing or chasing behind merits and demerits in H,Y,Z visas or all other positive or negative stuffs in this bill.
We should have only one focus. Eliminate EB retro first. For that a simple amendment will be, 242K visa is open to both old EB and newly created merit system. That�s all. This amendment will eliminate the retro immediately. All other discussions and efforts are waste of time and energy
surya.kant
06-19 01:16 PM
Hi,
I received an RFE on my H1-B application this year with the following questions. My H1-B sponsorer is currently discussing with the attorneys to better handle this situation. I would appreciate if someone can respond me how to handle this scenario properly.
Following are the context from the RFE document.
---------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is in receipt of your Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I-129). Additional evidence is required in order to process your application:
Y ur company provides IT Consulting services. The record does not establish where, when, or for whom the beneficiary will work. USCIS regulations at 8 CFR part 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) provide that an H petition which requires services to be performed in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services to be provided.
Submit an itinerary of the work sites the beneficiary is assigned to, to include specific dates, locations, and the name of each work site where the beneficiary�s services will be delivered.
Submit a letter from each work site that identifies the name of the project and beneficiary is assigned to, the name of the vendor through whom the beneficiary�s services are provided, and whether the work site has the ability to assign the beneficiary to a different employer. Each letter must provide the address and telephone number where a contact can be reached.
For each of the beneficiary�s work assignments, identify the succession of consulting or staffing businesses involved in the assignment of the beneficiary to each ultimate work location. Include the related succession of contracts and work orders. The contracts and work orders must provide the address and telephone number where a contact can be reached. All contracts must be signed.
For each of the beneficiary�s work assignments, submit a letter from the business with ultimate control and authority over the beneficiary�s work. The letter must address the title and duties of the beneficiary�s position, the minimum education requirement for the contracted position, and the name and title of the person who primarily supervises or will supervise the beneficiary at the work site. This information is necessary to determine whether the actual duties to be performed under contract for an end client are duties associated with the specialty occupation sought.
If the beneficiary will work on an in-house project, submit evidence describing the in-house project, the length of time the beneficiary is expected to work on the project, team members assigned to the project, their titles and duties, and invoices showing the sale of the product to your customers. Explain the qualification necessary for the project and how the beneficiary is qualified for the project. Provide copies of client contracts with details that specify the in-house project name, location, definite starting and ending dates. All contracts should be current and include signatures and contact information from representatives of both companies.
This kind of H1 RFE is common this year. Employer needs to send the end-client letter for RFE.
Surya
I received an RFE on my H1-B application this year with the following questions. My H1-B sponsorer is currently discussing with the attorneys to better handle this situation. I would appreciate if someone can respond me how to handle this scenario properly.
Following are the context from the RFE document.
---------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is in receipt of your Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I-129). Additional evidence is required in order to process your application:
Y ur company provides IT Consulting services. The record does not establish where, when, or for whom the beneficiary will work. USCIS regulations at 8 CFR part 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) provide that an H petition which requires services to be performed in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services to be provided.
Submit an itinerary of the work sites the beneficiary is assigned to, to include specific dates, locations, and the name of each work site where the beneficiary�s services will be delivered.
Submit a letter from each work site that identifies the name of the project and beneficiary is assigned to, the name of the vendor through whom the beneficiary�s services are provided, and whether the work site has the ability to assign the beneficiary to a different employer. Each letter must provide the address and telephone number where a contact can be reached.
For each of the beneficiary�s work assignments, identify the succession of consulting or staffing businesses involved in the assignment of the beneficiary to each ultimate work location. Include the related succession of contracts and work orders. The contracts and work orders must provide the address and telephone number where a contact can be reached. All contracts must be signed.
For each of the beneficiary�s work assignments, submit a letter from the business with ultimate control and authority over the beneficiary�s work. The letter must address the title and duties of the beneficiary�s position, the minimum education requirement for the contracted position, and the name and title of the person who primarily supervises or will supervise the beneficiary at the work site. This information is necessary to determine whether the actual duties to be performed under contract for an end client are duties associated with the specialty occupation sought.
If the beneficiary will work on an in-house project, submit evidence describing the in-house project, the length of time the beneficiary is expected to work on the project, team members assigned to the project, their titles and duties, and invoices showing the sale of the product to your customers. Explain the qualification necessary for the project and how the beneficiary is qualified for the project. Provide copies of client contracts with details that specify the in-house project name, location, definite starting and ending dates. All contracts should be current and include signatures and contact information from representatives of both companies.
This kind of H1 RFE is common this year. Employer needs to send the end-client letter for RFE.
Surya
more...
yabadaba
02-28 01:39 PM
Thanks Y,
I was thinking more along the lines of transfering from US Public education school system to either ICSE, CBSE or Maharashtra Sate Board.
Upto what standard would it be relatively eay for a child to adapt and integrate into the Indian system ?
nozerd,
honestly i dont know. when I changed schools and in the process boards, the most difficult transition for me was from the UK board to the ICSE system. but this was almost 18 years back (man..cant believe it) ...the indian system was still learning by rote...heavily focused on tests and exams. from what i have heard recently there have been major changes specially at the elementary school level. there is less emphasis on homework and tests and more of a focus on projects and learning by doing.
As a parent of a 13 month old, if I ever decide to go back, I would probably go back before my kid is in the 4th grade. This would be because they really start establishing their identities by the time they are 8-9 years old. They can still adapt fast enough but the major focus has to be on us as parents to smooth out the transition and give them the support system they need.
If you want a seamless transition, I would agree that 1st grade is probably the best bet. By that time their accents and all can easily be adapted, without a major crisis.
I was thinking more along the lines of transfering from US Public education school system to either ICSE, CBSE or Maharashtra Sate Board.
Upto what standard would it be relatively eay for a child to adapt and integrate into the Indian system ?
nozerd,
honestly i dont know. when I changed schools and in the process boards, the most difficult transition for me was from the UK board to the ICSE system. but this was almost 18 years back (man..cant believe it) ...the indian system was still learning by rote...heavily focused on tests and exams. from what i have heard recently there have been major changes specially at the elementary school level. there is less emphasis on homework and tests and more of a focus on projects and learning by doing.
As a parent of a 13 month old, if I ever decide to go back, I would probably go back before my kid is in the 4th grade. This would be because they really start establishing their identities by the time they are 8-9 years old. They can still adapt fast enough but the major focus has to be on us as parents to smooth out the transition and give them the support system they need.
If you want a seamless transition, I would agree that 1st grade is probably the best bet. By that time their accents and all can easily be adapted, without a major crisis.
jsquare
08-14 12:24 PM
Thanks for sharing the expericence?
My question is why they need Biometrics again for renewing EAD?
My question is why they need Biometrics again for renewing EAD?
more...
ganguteli
06-02 11:31 AM
Recently, I made my own PP photos using http://www.epassportphoto.com/
This is a great service - It creates a jpeg file from a picture that you upload, and you can choose the "free" option in which you can save the jpeg file with 4-6 pictures in one frame (A 4" x 6" photo can yield 6 pp photos of 2" x 2"), and take it to Walgreens/Costco/Kinkos for a printout for $0.25 each. Otherwise you pay about $8-$12 for 2 photos at the same stores!!
For a family of 4, this equates to savings of ~ $40!!!
The site has all the tools for meeting various types of visa/pp/etc photo requirements for various countries.
Wow that is so Great!!!!!! You saved $40.
Now how about contributing it to IV?
This is a great service - It creates a jpeg file from a picture that you upload, and you can choose the "free" option in which you can save the jpeg file with 4-6 pictures in one frame (A 4" x 6" photo can yield 6 pp photos of 2" x 2"), and take it to Walgreens/Costco/Kinkos for a printout for $0.25 each. Otherwise you pay about $8-$12 for 2 photos at the same stores!!
For a family of 4, this equates to savings of ~ $40!!!
The site has all the tools for meeting various types of visa/pp/etc photo requirements for various countries.
Wow that is so Great!!!!!! You saved $40.
Now how about contributing it to IV?
gc28262
04-07 06:23 PM
I'm in my 9th year of H1B which is going to expire in about six months. My employer is suggesting to extend H1B and not use or extend EAD. Based on your experience and knowledge please post your advise. If a post like this already exists, please point me to that. I could not find one easily. Thanks a lot.
Irrespective of whether EAD is used, one should always extend EAD as a backup. ( Especially in this economy)
Irrespective of whether EAD is used, one should always extend EAD as a backup. ( Especially in this economy)
more...
ameryki
01-08 10:14 PM
People who filed I-485 after the July fiasco (starting with the August 2007 bulletin) paid a higher initial fee ($1010) - but they don't have to pay any EAD & AP fee - either the first time or for any renewals.
Look at the "Special instructions" sections of the following URL:
http://www.uscis.gov/i-485
so those that didn't pay the new fees when they filed 485 but paid the new fees for renewal of EAD and AP what happens to them? do they also get free renewals?
Look at the "Special instructions" sections of the following URL:
http://www.uscis.gov/i-485
so those that didn't pay the new fees when they filed 485 but paid the new fees for renewal of EAD and AP what happens to them? do they also get free renewals?
Nikith77
01-20 02:50 PM
LOOKs Goooood
satishku_2000
08-15 03:30 PM
My 485 was filed on july 2nd, have'nt recieved the RN,Now i want to file for EAD/AP without RN (cos need it badly for my wife) but the lawyer is advicing against it. He says...
My concern in filing the EAD/AP applications without the I-485 Receipt Notice is that it will take USCIS a long time to marry the files together, and that much longer to adjudicate, versus filing the EAD/AP applications with the I-485 Receipt Notice. In the latter case, the application can stand on its own, in that USCIS does not have to "search" for any other file; in this instance, we suspect USCIS will adjudicate these applications faster.
Anyone in the same boat..
I want to file for EAD and TD and dont have receipts yet and have been sending emails to attorney office everyday about RNs. Looks like they are busy with Aug 17th deadline and they have not got back to me yet. My lawyer dint say anything about RNs but I thought it would be nice to file for EAD and TD with 485 receipt notice so that the case would be str8forward .
My concern in filing the EAD/AP applications without the I-485 Receipt Notice is that it will take USCIS a long time to marry the files together, and that much longer to adjudicate, versus filing the EAD/AP applications with the I-485 Receipt Notice. In the latter case, the application can stand on its own, in that USCIS does not have to "search" for any other file; in this instance, we suspect USCIS will adjudicate these applications faster.
Anyone in the same boat..
I want to file for EAD and TD and dont have receipts yet and have been sending emails to attorney office everyday about RNs. Looks like they are busy with Aug 17th deadline and they have not got back to me yet. My lawyer dint say anything about RNs but I thought it would be nice to file for EAD and TD with 485 receipt notice so that the case would be str8forward .
Nagireddi
03-16 12:09 PM
You can try Mr.James Eiss. I am very happy with him. His web address is www.usvisahelp.com Good luck.
neerajvir
07-17 05:52 PM
Just made a contribution of $100 to IV. Please take time to renew the faith and keep the pressure on..
No comments:
Post a Comment