needhelp!
11-06 07:41 PM
What about the 60 000 who are expected to attend diwali mela in dfw.. I am guessing a chunk of them are green card applicants
wallpaper Is Nicole Richie finally
quizzer
07-05 09:52 PM
Anything is possible with USCIS!!!
gcnotfiledyet
03-16 11:16 PM
Option 1 - Take Travel Insurance for 15 days. For young folks that is not pricey and covers emergencies.
Option 2 - Just ignore....It is a matter of 15 days. Insurance is good, desirable, and highly recommended......but it is not something that deserves too much worry for 15 days for any healthy person.
I would highly recommend against option#2. I had accident on first day of driving after coming back from India. I had been driving for 5yrs before it. Luckily nothing happened but you never know and that is why you have insurance. For this scenario check health coverage on your auto policy. But how many scenarios are you going to cover? Best to get some kind of coverage. It is not advisable to live in this country without health insurance. It can make you go back to your home country/file bankruptcy etc. Americans are not stupid to have such costly insurance policies.
Option 2 - Just ignore....It is a matter of 15 days. Insurance is good, desirable, and highly recommended......but it is not something that deserves too much worry for 15 days for any healthy person.
I would highly recommend against option#2. I had accident on first day of driving after coming back from India. I had been driving for 5yrs before it. Luckily nothing happened but you never know and that is why you have insurance. For this scenario check health coverage on your auto policy. But how many scenarios are you going to cover? Best to get some kind of coverage. It is not advisable to live in this country without health insurance. It can make you go back to your home country/file bankruptcy etc. Americans are not stupid to have such costly insurance policies.
2011 a pregnant Nicole Richie,
rrkany
10-20 10:40 AM
Thanks a lot for all your quick responses. I will try to get this done soon. When you say be prepared for lot of questions, do you mean questions like "Why did you come here for visa stamp instead of going back to home country"
more...
LC2002
04-14 11:06 AM
Congratulations..
Thank You!
Thank You!
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."
more...
eb2_immigrant
10-22 08:17 PM
I think this is what is happening in your cases,
If you efile for your AP and If your last fingerprinting was done 18 months before Then you will get Fingerprinting notice and you got to go n give new finger prints.
If you paper file, Whether or not your FP expired (18 months) you will never get finger printing notice. (unless your PD is current and they are adjudicating your case and sending a RFE).
Always better to paper file.
So to confirm if what you are thinking is true or not I called USCIS,
The guy in TSC said it is a mistake and they will clarify it. I wasn't very convinced with his response, I called back after sometime, this time since there was no response to TSC it was route to other service center
As earlier even this time the representative in this center was not able to answer as to why it says "interview reschedules” but she did transferred me to an officer.
After several identification questions, Officer said this is not related to finger prints and she was not sure if it is related to I-485 interview either as they put reschedule interview note on my I-131 application.
Finally she gave me a WTC-XXXXXXXX-TSC number, asked for my cell # and asked me to call back after 10 days if I don’t hear anything from the USCIS.
I really don’t know what is happening; I don’t have much choice either other than waiting for something “GOOD “ to happen
Any thoughts ......??????
If you efile for your AP and If your last fingerprinting was done 18 months before Then you will get Fingerprinting notice and you got to go n give new finger prints.
If you paper file, Whether or not your FP expired (18 months) you will never get finger printing notice. (unless your PD is current and they are adjudicating your case and sending a RFE).
Always better to paper file.
So to confirm if what you are thinking is true or not I called USCIS,
The guy in TSC said it is a mistake and they will clarify it. I wasn't very convinced with his response, I called back after sometime, this time since there was no response to TSC it was route to other service center
As earlier even this time the representative in this center was not able to answer as to why it says "interview reschedules” but she did transferred me to an officer.
After several identification questions, Officer said this is not related to finger prints and she was not sure if it is related to I-485 interview either as they put reschedule interview note on my I-131 application.
Finally she gave me a WTC-XXXXXXXX-TSC number, asked for my cell # and asked me to call back after 10 days if I don’t hear anything from the USCIS.
I really don’t know what is happening; I don’t have much choice either other than waiting for something “GOOD “ to happen
Any thoughts ......??????
2010 nicolerichie pregnant Nicole
gcformeornot
09-25 03:53 PM
When 140 is revoked USCIS generally send NOID and ask from a offer letter from intended(new) employer. If you can not provide a letter from new employer... they will deny 485.... sorry.
Your EAD is valid, but it is useful only if you have a new job.
Your EAD is valid, but it is useful only if you have a new job.
more...
jamsumfarray
11-17 06:34 PM
i just got a letter from teh backlog center stating that i need to send advertisement from my company?
any one has any idea about this non rir case how does it move etc any information is really needful ..
thanks
hence i cant change from non rir to rir .
any one has any idea about this non rir case how does it move etc any information is really needful ..
thanks
hence i cant change from non rir to rir .
hair Pregnancy The Nicole Richie
mdross2
11-16 01:19 PM
Hi All
I have a query, Maybe some of the experts here can help me out.
1. I came to the US in 2003 on a L-1 via company A.(I have the original petition)
2. I switched to H-1 via company B in 2005 .(I have the copy of I-797A)
3. In 2006 I switched to company C. (I have the original for I-797A)
All this while I was here(U.S) only . I am going for a vacation (much needed :-) to India next month. I need to get a VISA stamped to come back.
Question 1. - The I-94 I have stapled in my passport is when I entered US. There have been 2 I-94's after that (from I-797A from company B and company C) ... Which one of those I need to submit when I go to India ? If its from A,B and C ...Does it have to be from the original since I don't have the original I-797A from company B ?)
Question 2. - As far as docs required for VISA stamping interview are concerned I have read various websites and posts and most of them say that I need the original I-797A only for the current (company C) H-1 petition.The copies of I-797A from the old employers will suffice too. Is that correct ?
Thanks.
I have a query, Maybe some of the experts here can help me out.
1. I came to the US in 2003 on a L-1 via company A.(I have the original petition)
2. I switched to H-1 via company B in 2005 .(I have the copy of I-797A)
3. In 2006 I switched to company C. (I have the original for I-797A)
All this while I was here(U.S) only . I am going for a vacation (much needed :-) to India next month. I need to get a VISA stamped to come back.
Question 1. - The I-94 I have stapled in my passport is when I entered US. There have been 2 I-94's after that (from I-797A from company B and company C) ... Which one of those I need to submit when I go to India ? If its from A,B and C ...Does it have to be from the original since I don't have the original I-797A from company B ?)
Question 2. - As far as docs required for VISA stamping interview are concerned I have read various websites and posts and most of them say that I need the original I-797A only for the current (company C) H-1 petition.The copies of I-797A from the old employers will suffice too. Is that correct ?
Thanks.
more...
hibworker
11-04 11:02 AM
You will not know until I-140 is filed as the preference category is requested on I-140 and not on the PERM.
Hi,
My labor was approved recently but i am not sure wheather it is approved under eb2 or eb3.Attorney is trying to keep me in dark and saying every time you have to contact to your employer only we will not provide the details.My employer is saying your is eb2 in oral only,but when i am trying to ask him in email he is calling to me and saying your's category is eb2 only.Can you guys help me out how to find it out my category is eb2 or eb3,and he send me a pdf document,it is saying
the department of labor has made a determination on your application for permanent employment certification(ETA form 9089) pursuant 20 CFR �656.24 and as required by the immigration and nationality act,as amended.
Form ETA 9089 has been certified and is enslosed.This certification must be attached to the I-140 petition and filed with the appropriate office of the united states citizenship and immigration services(USCIS).
Can some one please help me to find my case is wheather it is EB2 or EB3?
Thanks in Advance.
Hi,
My labor was approved recently but i am not sure wheather it is approved under eb2 or eb3.Attorney is trying to keep me in dark and saying every time you have to contact to your employer only we will not provide the details.My employer is saying your is eb2 in oral only,but when i am trying to ask him in email he is calling to me and saying your's category is eb2 only.Can you guys help me out how to find it out my category is eb2 or eb3,and he send me a pdf document,it is saying
the department of labor has made a determination on your application for permanent employment certification(ETA form 9089) pursuant 20 CFR �656.24 and as required by the immigration and nationality act,as amended.
Form ETA 9089 has been certified and is enslosed.This certification must be attached to the I-140 petition and filed with the appropriate office of the united states citizenship and immigration services(USCIS).
Can some one please help me to find my case is wheather it is EB2 or EB3?
Thanks in Advance.
hot Skinny minney Nicole Richie IS
gcpadmavyuh
07-27 12:28 AM
What was the date of I485 approval? And when did the wife's 485 reach USCIS?
My friend has a unique situation. Please help out with your advise.
He had earlier applied for 485 in 2005(before October retrogression) and didnt get a chance to add his wife until the July bulletin(as he got married only after filing 485 and his PD was not current until the July 17th). His wife's application is now filed with the NSC center on 7/19th(didnt recieve the receipt notice yet) as a add-on and as a dependent for his original 485 application(he submitted I-134 affidavit of support along with his wife's application).
Today he got an email update from USCIS confirming that his 485 is approved. Since he doesnt know his wife's 485 status yet, he is not even sure if his wife's application is receipted or acknowledged as a dependent to his application. From Fedex, he can confirm that it reached the Nebraska CIS office on July 19th.
Considering his wife's application did go to the NSC center(7/19) before his 485 is approved(9/26), does this mean his wife is in-status or out-of-status(wife is on H-4 dependent visa). Their were not prepared for this news so soon and hence would appreciate any alternatives they can pursue.
My friend has a unique situation. Please help out with your advise.
He had earlier applied for 485 in 2005(before October retrogression) and didnt get a chance to add his wife until the July bulletin(as he got married only after filing 485 and his PD was not current until the July 17th). His wife's application is now filed with the NSC center on 7/19th(didnt recieve the receipt notice yet) as a add-on and as a dependent for his original 485 application(he submitted I-134 affidavit of support along with his wife's application).
Today he got an email update from USCIS confirming that his 485 is approved. Since he doesnt know his wife's 485 status yet, he is not even sure if his wife's application is receipted or acknowledged as a dependent to his application. From Fedex, he can confirm that it reached the Nebraska CIS office on July 19th.
Considering his wife's application did go to the NSC center(7/19) before his 485 is approved(9/26), does this mean his wife is in-status or out-of-status(wife is on H-4 dependent visa). Their were not prepared for this news so soon and hence would appreciate any alternatives they can pursue.
more...
house Tags : celebrity pregnancy
geve
02-28 02:07 PM
Check this feedback. Very detailed and from one who gone through these steps.
http://www.zrox.net/Personal/moving.html
http://www.zrox.net/Personal/moving.html
tattoo nicole richie jet blog Nicole
gchandu
12-08 05:09 PM
Hi Raj
You waited this long and is really required to wait for another 4 + months. It is upto your best judgement but if i were you I will pass on these 4 months....
Thanks
You waited this long and is really required to wait for another 4 + months. It is upto your best judgement but if i were you I will pass on these 4 months....
Thanks
more...
pictures Pregnant reality TV star
h1techSlave
07-19 01:22 PM
one of my friend got his Initail EAD after 90 days by walking into local office but that was long back in 2002 . Not sure if laws changed ..
In the immigration world, 5 years is like 5 centuries.:)
In the immigration world, 5 years is like 5 centuries.:)
dresses Nichole Richie is known for
hiralal
08-08 03:03 PM
good post ..actually H1 program has become like a witchhunt (for better or not) ..I heard similar stories for those in cognizant (I thought it was a good company but I remember reading some postings which were contrary to my thought ) . one of my friend is having trouble with h1 extension ..it keeps getting denied.
more...
makeup nicole-richie-300
maristella61
04-20 09:22 AM
He is talking about the original first letter of approval , not an extension
Does any one have any input or suggestion?
Does any one have any input or suggestion?
girlfriend nicolerichie.jpg
ashwin_27
05-10 07:45 PM
Very Interesting set of links. We need to respond to each of these journalists thanking for any positive coverage but also highlighting the specific issues that is causign the backlog (7% per country limit and lack of visa recapture). We need to request that attention be paid to this aspect and how removal of per-country limit is neccessary to eliminate the greencard backlogs (and that visa recapture will at least provide limited relief). Most of such articles praise high-skilled immigrants but do not get to the root of the issue and the possible solutions. We need some folks to help with this IV media outreach. Please PM me if you are interested.
hairstyles Humps of Nicole Richie
maristella61
04-20 12:42 PM
Why don`t you ask your Attorney about it since you are paying him and that`s his job to tell what documents he needs. ASK HIM.
I did and he says we will submit a copy of the Visa and just hope they do not request the approval letter.
I was just wondering how important an approval letter was if you have the visa stamped on the passport. That should be proof enough of legal status.
I did and he says we will submit a copy of the Visa and just hope they do not request the approval letter.
I was just wondering how important an approval letter was if you have the visa stamped on the passport. That should be proof enough of legal status.
baleraosreedhar
11-09 05:20 PM
Hi all,
Thanks a lot for ur responses
I got the courtesy copy ,i will contact my wifes employer again to send me the copy of i797 the attorney received.
Thanks a lot for ur responses
I got the courtesy copy ,i will contact my wifes employer again to send me the copy of i797 the attorney received.
desi3933
03-19 01:21 PM
.... once your 6 years cap is over and AOS is denied you cannot get extensions. ...
Correct.
Correct.
No comments:
Post a Comment