walking_dude
12-21 09:39 AM
First we need to contact the madam @ 10 Janpath. Without her choreography Papa singh won't dance and neither will the daughter.
( Papa Singh isn't helping us much! It would be naive to assume his daughter will help us because of who her Papa is)
I just read at TOI that Dr Manmohan Singh's daughter Amrit Singh is a staff attorney at ACLU.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/PMs_daughter_puts_White_House_in_the_dock/articleshow/2639327.cms
Can she be of any help to IV's Agenda. Has IV core considered contacting her.
( Papa Singh isn't helping us much! It would be naive to assume his daughter will help us because of who her Papa is)
I just read at TOI that Dr Manmohan Singh's daughter Amrit Singh is a staff attorney at ACLU.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/PMs_daughter_puts_White_House_in_the_dock/articleshow/2639327.cms
Can she be of any help to IV's Agenda. Has IV core considered contacting her.
deba
07-18 12:42 PM
You are deemed to have lost Canadian PR if you have not fulfilled the 2 out of 5 years residency requirement. The issue may not affect you immediately, but will come up in case you decide to renew your PR card after 5 years. You will be asked to detail your Canadian residency for the past 5 years in your application. Note that this is only a requirement for the plastic card, not the landing paper: which is the proof of granting of PR. The plastic card is required for any travel back to Canada except for road travel from the US. Once your 5 year validity for the PR card has expired, it is upto the border official on the Canadian side to decide whether to let you in without a valid PR card. However, with a US GC you do not need any visa/permit to visit Canada and can safely let your residency requirement lapse automatically if you have not met the 2/5 Canadian residency requirement.
vivache
09-26 05:14 PM
"Top on IV's goals is 'ability to file for I-485' even when visa number is not available. As you perhaps know this will enable securing an EAD. Hope this answers your question."
Unintelligent question .
What time frame do we expect this to kick in .. if it does?
(I know you can't give a definite date .. but just curious)
Also how optimistic are we (IV lawyers) of getting this one in? (good chance, medium chance ??)
Unintelligent question .
What time frame do we expect this to kick in .. if it does?
(I know you can't give a definite date .. but just curious)
Also how optimistic are we (IV lawyers) of getting this one in? (good chance, medium chance ??)
Dipika
12-03 11:43 AM
I have...
Frist stamp from INDIA (home country),
2 Visa Stamps from Washington DC
Last stamping from Matamoros (Mexico)
Am i ELIGIBLE to get H1 visa stamp from Tijuana next year?
Just for updating everyone, I got my stamping done successfully at Tijuana. They give the passport next day as expected, so just make sure to make the arrangement for the night. It's pretty cool for H-1B people both for full-time plus contractors, albeit for contractors they sometimes will call/e-mail your employer to verify. It will usually happen in a day or two and they'll issue the visa then. Let me know if anyone wants any particular details on Tijuana/H-1B stamping there.
Frist stamp from INDIA (home country),
2 Visa Stamps from Washington DC
Last stamping from Matamoros (Mexico)
Am i ELIGIBLE to get H1 visa stamp from Tijuana next year?
Just for updating everyone, I got my stamping done successfully at Tijuana. They give the passport next day as expected, so just make sure to make the arrangement for the night. It's pretty cool for H-1B people both for full-time plus contractors, albeit for contractors they sometimes will call/e-mail your employer to verify. It will usually happen in a day or two and they'll issue the visa then. Let me know if anyone wants any particular details on Tijuana/H-1B stamping there.
more...
pappu
12-28 02:23 PM
NSC Dec 2007 Processing Times says:
Also, when they are mentioning "April 24, 2007" date , are they ignoring the applicants who are stuck in namecheck process for years? If a person has filed 485 in 2005 or 2006 but stuck in namecheck, how come 485 is completed?
If a person is stuck in namecheck, or has an RFE... his/her case in not counted in II485 backlog at that time.
Also, when they are mentioning "April 24, 2007" date , are they ignoring the applicants who are stuck in namecheck process for years? If a person has filed 485 in 2005 or 2006 but stuck in namecheck, how come 485 is completed?
If a person is stuck in namecheck, or has an RFE... his/her case in not counted in II485 backlog at that time.
jy1021
02-12 10:35 PM
I am holding H-4 visa, last week, I made an appointment in Ottawa consulate so I want to get my H4 before I go.
My wife's H-1 and my H-4 filed together, so I called the lawyer, we paid $1000 premium fee, it was paid on Friday, both H-1 and H-4 got certified on Monday (it only takes 1 day compared with 3 months).
Once you file premium for H-1, H-4 will get premium. but if you file them separately (in different time), then you can not do it this way.
Good luck.
My wife's H-1 and my H-4 filed together, so I called the lawyer, we paid $1000 premium fee, it was paid on Friday, both H-1 and H-4 got certified on Monday (it only takes 1 day compared with 3 months).
Once you file premium for H-1, H-4 will get premium. but if you file them separately (in different time), then you can not do it this way.
Good luck.
more...
aristotle
08-08 01:13 PM
Just had an infopass appointment.
Me: Can you tell us the status of our 485s?
I/O: Name checks are pending for both
Me: Do you know when they were started?
I/O: At the time your application was submitted (duh!)
Me: Would our applications still be processed?
I/O: Yes, they are at TSC(duh!) and they are aware of the 6 month rule
Me: Are they assigned to an officer?
I/O: Right now they are with the officer"s" at Texas, as recently as July 31st, not too long ago.
Me: When do our fingerprints expire?
I/O: blank
I had enough by then.. dont think anything will happen to our apps this month. My wife will get a RFE, because of incomplete medicals (Xray), I was atleast hoping to get that RFE this month.
Me: Can you tell us the status of our 485s?
I/O: Name checks are pending for both
Me: Do you know when they were started?
I/O: At the time your application was submitted (duh!)
Me: Would our applications still be processed?
I/O: Yes, they are at TSC(duh!) and they are aware of the 6 month rule
Me: Are they assigned to an officer?
I/O: Right now they are with the officer"s" at Texas, as recently as July 31st, not too long ago.
Me: When do our fingerprints expire?
I/O: blank
I had enough by then.. dont think anything will happen to our apps this month. My wife will get a RFE, because of incomplete medicals (Xray), I was atleast hoping to get that RFE this month.
Blog Feeds
07-09 12:30 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
more...
navyug
10-13 10:22 PM
Hi,
My first NIW/I140 was concurrent filed with I485 for both my wife and me. When they denied I140, the USCIS also denied I485s for both of us. I have a pending MTR for that I140.
While the MTR was pending, I filed another NIW/I140, which was approved. I noticed that the approval notice has the A# that was on the I485 of the first petition.
So, should I assume that my the USCIS has interfiled my I485 automatically and my old PD is active?
Thanks.
Yes. It happened in my case as well. My I-140 was denied from NSC after having filed I-485. It was refiled (yes refiled in TSC, not MTR and got a different case number). After the I-140 denial my I-485 was also denied. Upon approval on my new I-140 the I-485 was reopened automatically. The online status had not changed from 'Denied". I was surprised when I got my second round of FP notices in August 09. Now the status says "Case has resumed processing". I would however suggest that you ask your attorney to send a letter to USCIS.
My first NIW/I140 was concurrent filed with I485 for both my wife and me. When they denied I140, the USCIS also denied I485s for both of us. I have a pending MTR for that I140.
While the MTR was pending, I filed another NIW/I140, which was approved. I noticed that the approval notice has the A# that was on the I485 of the first petition.
So, should I assume that my the USCIS has interfiled my I485 automatically and my old PD is active?
Thanks.
Yes. It happened in my case as well. My I-140 was denied from NSC after having filed I-485. It was refiled (yes refiled in TSC, not MTR and got a different case number). After the I-140 denial my I-485 was also denied. Upon approval on my new I-140 the I-485 was reopened automatically. The online status had not changed from 'Denied". I was surprised when I got my second round of FP notices in August 09. Now the status says "Case has resumed processing". I would however suggest that you ask your attorney to send a letter to USCIS.
go_guy123
06-22 12:36 AM
CIR 2009 RIP.....health care, economy , perhaps even iran etc are ahead of that
more...
bobzibub
09-25 10:57 AM
I dunno about you, but really I don't think we should pay any fees until we get some sort of product to show for it. I don't pay for a hair cut that might happen in ten years. Why should I pay for a green card that might happen in ten years?
tikka
05-31 12:56 PM
Confirmation Number: 56Y67421A1299244L.
thank you
thank you
more...
eb3_nepa
11-06 12:21 PM
Concurrent H-1Bs are always non-cap.:)
What does that mean?
I guess the reason i am asking is coz my spouse can possibly get a job offer in the near future and i was wondering if there was ANY way in which she can get an H1 and start working without having to wait for Oct 2007 :(
ANY alternative solutions guys? She is on H4 right now and we are both Indian citizens (born in India).
What does that mean?
I guess the reason i am asking is coz my spouse can possibly get a job offer in the near future and i was wondering if there was ANY way in which she can get an H1 and start working without having to wait for Oct 2007 :(
ANY alternative solutions guys? She is on H4 right now and we are both Indian citizens (born in India).
Zee
04-06 06:10 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/06/washington/06immig.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/05/immigration/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/05/immigration/index.html
more...
amsgc
06-15 11:46 PM
WE are in the same situation. Even our company lawyers said the same thing i.e no risk. However, a lot of messages I have seen recommend switching to H4; but then she will have to stop working for some time.
If you read the instructions for I-485, nowhere does it require you to be on a non immigrant visa, with dual intent, to apply for I-485.
I tried to read the instructions from the standpoint of a student, and I did not find anything that says I cannot apply to adjust status. All they want is proof of your status and admission.
Also, we have someone in our company who will go for Eb1, and is on OPT (which is not a status, F1 is). He was told that he can apply for I-140!
If you read the instructions for I-485, nowhere does it require you to be on a non immigrant visa, with dual intent, to apply for I-485.
I tried to read the instructions from the standpoint of a student, and I did not find anything that says I cannot apply to adjust status. All they want is proof of your status and admission.
Also, we have someone in our company who will go for Eb1, and is on OPT (which is not a status, F1 is). He was told that he can apply for I-140!
santb1975
02-14 12:03 AM
These are lengthy but...
Have you heard of the issues faced by Higly skilled Legal Immigrants in US?. Visit Immigration Voice.org
Are you a Highly Skilled Legal Immigrant unable to use your skills and serve United States?
Have you heard of the issues faced by Higly skilled Legal Immigrants in US?. Visit Immigration Voice.org
Are you a Highly Skilled Legal Immigrant unable to use your skills and serve United States?
more...
kaisersose
04-16 04:38 PM
What is an "MTR"?
Motion To Reopen. Basically having the IO re-examine the case by pointing out that the original application + evidence was correct, but the decision was not.
Motion To Reopen. Basically having the IO re-examine the case by pointing out that the original application + evidence was correct, but the decision was not.
WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC
11-11 12:35 PM
Why don't you ask this in the free attorney call
hello
work for decent size company (1500 employees).i am the only non citizen/non gc holder
applied eb3 and stuck since 2003.gained masters in 2006
planning to apply to EB2 with different title .
my employer is requesting to apply eb2 for masters with 7 years of experience as requirement
in general if i look at DOL websites ,most positions requirements says masters plus 2 years like that
does that mean its guaranteed audit like that meaning do they question or is it possible
any experiences who ported are appreciated
thanks
hello
work for decent size company (1500 employees).i am the only non citizen/non gc holder
applied eb3 and stuck since 2003.gained masters in 2006
planning to apply to EB2 with different title .
my employer is requesting to apply eb2 for masters with 7 years of experience as requirement
in general if i look at DOL websites ,most positions requirements says masters plus 2 years like that
does that mean its guaranteed audit like that meaning do they question or is it possible
any experiences who ported are appreciated
thanks
bestofall
07-30 12:19 PM
URGENT UPDATE: HR5882 scheduled for tomorrow - PLEASE CALL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
House Immigration Sub-Committee is planning on mark up Congresswoman Lofgren's recapture bill tomorrow (Thursday) afternoon in her subcommittee. This is an extremely IMPORTANT development. We are hoping that an agreement reached such that there is no party line vote on this effort. As such all members are requested to PLEASE PLEASE call the following members on the subcommittee requesting them to support Lofgren's recapture bill H.R.5882.
Majority Members (Democrats)
Member Name DC Phone
Luis V. Gutierrez (D-IL) 202-225-8203
Howard L. Berman (D-CA) 202-225-4695
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX) 202-225-3816
Maxine Waters (D-CA) 202-225-2201
Bill Delahunt (D-MA) 202-225-3111
Linda T. Sanchez (D-CA) 202-225-6676
Artur Davis (D-AL) 202-225-2665
Keith Ellison (D-MN) 202-225-4755
Anthony Weiner (D-NY) 202-225-6616
Minority Members (Republicans)
Member Name DC Phone
Steve King (R-IA) [Ranking Member]202-225-4426
Elton Gallegly (R-CA) 202-225-5811
Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) 202-225-5431
Dan Lungren (R-CA) 202-225-5716
J. Randy Forbes (R-VA) 202-225-6365
Louie Gohmert (R-TX) 202-225-3035
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
House Immigration Sub-Committee is planning on mark up Congresswoman Lofgren's recapture bill tomorrow (Thursday) afternoon in her subcommittee. This is an extremely IMPORTANT development. We are hoping that an agreement reached such that there is no party line vote on this effort. As such all members are requested to PLEASE PLEASE call the following members on the subcommittee requesting them to support Lofgren's recapture bill H.R.5882.
Majority Members (Democrats)
Member Name DC Phone
Luis V. Gutierrez (D-IL) 202-225-8203
Howard L. Berman (D-CA) 202-225-4695
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX) 202-225-3816
Maxine Waters (D-CA) 202-225-2201
Bill Delahunt (D-MA) 202-225-3111
Linda T. Sanchez (D-CA) 202-225-6676
Artur Davis (D-AL) 202-225-2665
Keith Ellison (D-MN) 202-225-4755
Anthony Weiner (D-NY) 202-225-6616
Minority Members (Republicans)
Member Name DC Phone
Steve King (R-IA) [Ranking Member]202-225-4426
Elton Gallegly (R-CA) 202-225-5811
Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) 202-225-5431
Dan Lungren (R-CA) 202-225-5716
J. Randy Forbes (R-VA) 202-225-6365
Louie Gohmert (R-TX) 202-225-3035
RayP
12-11 02:31 AM
wow !! Good... so you too applied after your EAD had expired... and you continued to work on H1. That gives me a good feeling... thanks. Can you share your situation a little more (or I can give my email seperately). I was also wanting to know if you ae aware whether EAD can be applied from outside the US, just in case I had to do that...
pappu
05-22 04:57 PM
Lets focus on action items.
Thanks
Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment