aillarramendi
10-01 12:22 PM
Is the PD for AOS same than Consular Processing??
I'm asking because is supposed that they assign visas per country or not assign but is a limit of maximum 7% (I believe) of the visas per country.
So, if a person in EB3 with PD of July 2005 ROW (Rest of the World) applied for AOS in June 2007 and the USCIS approved the Green Card, why is that?
The PD is not current for EB3 ROW so, why the approved?
Is because the unused visas of the country was not completely used for consular processing and then the USCIS is using those visas for the same country but for AOS?
I don't understand why applications that are not current are getting GC approvals?
Thanks.
I'm asking because is supposed that they assign visas per country or not assign but is a limit of maximum 7% (I believe) of the visas per country.
So, if a person in EB3 with PD of July 2005 ROW (Rest of the World) applied for AOS in June 2007 and the USCIS approved the Green Card, why is that?
The PD is not current for EB3 ROW so, why the approved?
Is because the unused visas of the country was not completely used for consular processing and then the USCIS is using those visas for the same country but for AOS?
I don't understand why applications that are not current are getting GC approvals?
Thanks.
wallpaper Korean Drama. Genres
jayleno
10-13 05:19 PM
While I feel your pain, I still have a question:
How can you expect them to reach new goals when they are not even reaching their existing golas?
For example,
Honoring the priority date,
Processing in sequence,
Approving in the expected 90 days,
....
...
..
bottom less list.
Well you are correct I am trying to draw attention because as a saying "you will only know the pain when you walk the line". My company attorneys delayed the filings. I am not blaming anyone but myself. However, the fact of the matter is to find out a way to address this issue which is going to help everyone else. I do not knonw how long my particular case might take but since I am in the process I understood the issue.
First, when you apply in advance, yeah the possibility of approval before existing application expiration is very high. But you will end up loosing the EAD period from the date of approval to the date of last expiration. This is a loss for us.
Second, a renewal should only take less time as it takes for Drivers license. It is not AP where they have to validate your last entry etc etc.
EAD renewal adjudication should be separate from rest of all application processing and should shrink the timline.
Imagine my case. My wife was searching for jobs since her first EAD and now she got one but lack of EAD is going to cause her to loose it.....
How can you expect them to reach new goals when they are not even reaching their existing golas?
For example,
Honoring the priority date,
Processing in sequence,
Approving in the expected 90 days,
....
...
..
bottom less list.
Well you are correct I am trying to draw attention because as a saying "you will only know the pain when you walk the line". My company attorneys delayed the filings. I am not blaming anyone but myself. However, the fact of the matter is to find out a way to address this issue which is going to help everyone else. I do not knonw how long my particular case might take but since I am in the process I understood the issue.
First, when you apply in advance, yeah the possibility of approval before existing application expiration is very high. But you will end up loosing the EAD period from the date of approval to the date of last expiration. This is a loss for us.
Second, a renewal should only take less time as it takes for Drivers license. It is not AP where they have to validate your last entry etc etc.
EAD renewal adjudication should be separate from rest of all application processing and should shrink the timline.
Imagine my case. My wife was searching for jobs since her first EAD and now she got one but lack of EAD is going to cause her to loose it.....
AirWaterandGC
05-12 10:09 AM
Thank you for taking action on AILA's Contact Congress website. If you'd like to get more involved in our advocacy efforts, please contact AILA's Manager of Grassroots Advocacy, Jenny Levy.
Your message was sent to:
Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL)
Senator Barack Obama (D-IL)
Representative J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL 14th)
This is a suggestion for members using AILA tool. While we appreciate AILA for creating these useful tools, IV is not part of this AILA campaign.
If you want to use the AILA tool. Use your own letter and not AILA letter. Make sure not to use words like 'H1B' and 'illegal/undocumented' in the letter. Lawmaker offices will look at it and will not even care to read it fully. They will assume it is for H1B increase or about illegal immigration. Sometimes you will get an automated reply that has nothing to do with your issues you raised in your letter.
There are some good letter templates in http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3999
and some of them do not use H1B word at all. They are totally focussed on 'Green card'. You can choose to use any one of them. As we see the progress on CIR IV will have its own webfax and call the lawmakers campaign.
Your message was sent to:
Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL)
Senator Barack Obama (D-IL)
Representative J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL 14th)
This is a suggestion for members using AILA tool. While we appreciate AILA for creating these useful tools, IV is not part of this AILA campaign.
If you want to use the AILA tool. Use your own letter and not AILA letter. Make sure not to use words like 'H1B' and 'illegal/undocumented' in the letter. Lawmaker offices will look at it and will not even care to read it fully. They will assume it is for H1B increase or about illegal immigration. Sometimes you will get an automated reply that has nothing to do with your issues you raised in your letter.
There are some good letter templates in http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3999
and some of them do not use H1B word at all. They are totally focussed on 'Green card'. You can choose to use any one of them. As we see the progress on CIR IV will have its own webfax and call the lawmakers campaign.
2011 Korean Drama DVD For Sale
IN2US
03-17 11:21 AM
Your flow of logic is correct but you ar ebuilding this palace on soft land...:). Your "numbers" base is way way small... There are thousands of EB2 switch over occured and there are thousands and thousands of applications are waiting in EB2. If you add up thosands and thousands then you can reach million speedly.. right? Only July 2007 filing was around 500000. You just apply crude maths: 500000/3 (Categories) = So EB2 numbers are = 1,66,667.
Now divide 1,66,667/5 ( IN,CHina,MX, Philipines,ROW) = 33333. That is just for July 2007. Now to scare you more let me tell you that there was number around during July 2007 in all immigration boards that around 500000 applications are stuck in the process including Name Check (No claim on accuracy of that number but pretty much bignames were talking about that number so generally you would trust that number.) So now start applying your logic andyou would realize the seriousness of the problem.
no offense but the above doesn't make any sense what so ever, so does majority of your posts.
and stop pretending to be a guru on immigration issues and leave the analysis part to the real experts.
Peace :)
Now divide 1,66,667/5 ( IN,CHina,MX, Philipines,ROW) = 33333. That is just for July 2007. Now to scare you more let me tell you that there was number around during July 2007 in all immigration boards that around 500000 applications are stuck in the process including Name Check (No claim on accuracy of that number but pretty much bignames were talking about that number so generally you would trust that number.) So now start applying your logic andyou would realize the seriousness of the problem.
no offense but the above doesn't make any sense what so ever, so does majority of your posts.
and stop pretending to be a guru on immigration issues and leave the analysis part to the real experts.
Peace :)
more...
jasmin45
02-26 10:53 AM
Hi one question,,,if I go home to my country to study using H4 while my GC is pending,then suddenly the GC was sent to my sister here in US,can my sister just mail my GC to me in my country so that if i go back here in the US,i can present my GC to the US immigration???uh!im confussed!thanks!
First of all you have an "If" in your question. So I belive this is for future plan.
Now, when you say "suddenly GC was sent to your sister here in US" I am comfused as to whether your sister has already got the GC in mail and you are outside US?
I would request you to provide some more information on your status and info such as Whether you have had/will have approved "AP" etc before you left/plan to leave this country for studies.
First of all you have an "If" in your question. So I belive this is for future plan.
Now, when you say "suddenly GC was sent to your sister here in US" I am comfused as to whether your sister has already got the GC in mail and you are outside US?
I would request you to provide some more information on your status and info such as Whether you have had/will have approved "AP" etc before you left/plan to leave this country for studies.
rahul2699
05-19 11:46 AM
The Indian compnies absued the B1 visa...they are getting B1 visa but brought in people, put them at client location for work. The USCIS/US consulates found this and this is the right reason for your B1 visa rejection. So you wouldnt be able to get the B1 even if you apply again.
I agree with you...B-1 visa abuse by indian MNC's putting pressure on the legit applicants. Looks like its all coming together to haunt. I think you'll have little luck in getting it done considering that you've already spent 3 years on H-1B. They might look at it as you are resorting to B-1 visa to immigrate. Sorry to say this but that's most likely is what they are thinking.
I agree with you...B-1 visa abuse by indian MNC's putting pressure on the legit applicants. Looks like its all coming together to haunt. I think you'll have little luck in getting it done considering that you've already spent 3 years on H-1B. They might look at it as you are resorting to B-1 visa to immigrate. Sorry to say this but that's most likely is what they are thinking.
more...
rockstart
12-07 11:07 AM
Yes they can qualify in certain cases but the application as well as candidate have to be exceptionally strong. The company should be able to prove that the job needs a guy with EB1 skills and candidate should have proven academic record with publications and patents that support the job description. I had heard of a guy from Texas Instruments who got his GC through EB1
2010 Soul Mate (Korean Drama - 2006
GreenMe
07-21 11:51 AM
This idea was floated a few years back, but then we did not have the win of a flower campaign behind us.
We now have a senator to focus our energies on - Dick Durbin.
How about everybody with a US degree send a copy of the diploma in a packet to Sen Durbin with a message - Dont hold us hostage because of a few bad apples..something to that nature?
Alternatively we can send it to Sen Obama asking him to please let the senior senator from illinois, sen Durbin, know we are high skilled immigrants - dont hold us hostage because of a few bad apples.
maybe we can send an apple too :D
sending to sen obama will make sure the issue is played in media because of the presidential coverage.
Liked the idea of sending copy of diploma ... but whats the message ???
We now have a senator to focus our energies on - Dick Durbin.
How about everybody with a US degree send a copy of the diploma in a packet to Sen Durbin with a message - Dont hold us hostage because of a few bad apples..something to that nature?
Alternatively we can send it to Sen Obama asking him to please let the senior senator from illinois, sen Durbin, know we are high skilled immigrants - dont hold us hostage because of a few bad apples.
maybe we can send an apple too :D
sending to sen obama will make sure the issue is played in media because of the presidential coverage.
Liked the idea of sending copy of diploma ... but whats the message ???
more...
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
hair Soul Mate (Korean Drama - 2006
rb_248
09-10 03:26 PM
Got the cards in the mail. My online case status says the application is still pending.
Folks (those whose PDs are current this month),
Check with your attorney, in your mail boxes along with the online USCIS case status. You may get the good news in your mail box or from your attorney's office before your status is updated online.
This is what my attorney had to say:
The USCIS online status system is maintained by contract workers and is often inaccurate.
My Online status got updated today. Snail mail is faster than email - happens only with USCIS. Anyways, my journey is over. Good luck to others.
Folks (those whose PDs are current this month),
Check with your attorney, in your mail boxes along with the online USCIS case status. You may get the good news in your mail box or from your attorney's office before your status is updated online.
This is what my attorney had to say:
The USCIS online status system is maintained by contract workers and is often inaccurate.
My Online status got updated today. Snail mail is faster than email - happens only with USCIS. Anyways, my journey is over. Good luck to others.
more...
mantagon
07-23 11:02 AM
is in RED.
Thank you for all the responses.
One question remains though that what does it mean when the I-94 says paroled till 3rd March 2009?
Not much, really!
How does one prove the legal status in the country?
Since your wife entered the US by showing AP, her legal status is "Pending AOS" and the proof is the USCIS receipt notice of I-485 that you filed for her!
Thank you for all the responses.
One question remains though that what does it mean when the I-94 says paroled till 3rd March 2009?
Not much, really!
How does one prove the legal status in the country?
Since your wife entered the US by showing AP, her legal status is "Pending AOS" and the proof is the USCIS receipt notice of I-485 that you filed for her!
hot korean drama mix music video
smisachu
12-08 12:08 PM
If you are making 200K+/yr, just bite your lip and stay put. There are very very few careers which give you such a good pay scale.
I don't think you can do a MS in CompSci with out a BS with same specialization as far as understanding subject matter goes, but you could possibly do an MS in Information systems or similar.
But it all depends on your GRE score. If you have a high GRE score with good percentile in quantitative section then you could get into a good program.
I came to canada in 2000.I have been in USA Since 2003.
I started the GC process in Ohio, moved to bay area in 2006,stated the process again, recaptured old PD( EB2 all the way). Was hoping to get GC in Aug 2008 when my PD was current for 2 months. Hope will get it this year.
After moving to bay area I saw lots of engineer,mostly software, seemed happy with jobs. Started doing some search and found that this is one of the least stressful jobs in US with great salary and growth potential. There is no more growth in my field and it is very stressful and draining.
Thanks for the views guys, would like to know if can do MS with a bachelors in non engineering field.
I don't think you can do a MS in CompSci with out a BS with same specialization as far as understanding subject matter goes, but you could possibly do an MS in Information systems or similar.
But it all depends on your GRE score. If you have a high GRE score with good percentile in quantitative section then you could get into a good program.
I came to canada in 2000.I have been in USA Since 2003.
I started the GC process in Ohio, moved to bay area in 2006,stated the process again, recaptured old PD( EB2 all the way). Was hoping to get GC in Aug 2008 when my PD was current for 2 months. Hope will get it this year.
After moving to bay area I saw lots of engineer,mostly software, seemed happy with jobs. Started doing some search and found that this is one of the least stressful jobs in US with great salary and growth potential. There is no more growth in my field and it is very stressful and draining.
Thanks for the views guys, would like to know if can do MS with a bachelors in non engineering field.
more...
house is korean drama#39;s modern
HRPRO
04-13 01:47 PM
I have got an H1B reject because LCA did not include the client location. So most of you who say its ok to work elsewhere without an LCA change, you have been lucky!
As I understand, LCAs will absolutely have to have the client location else it is a violation of the law. Small companies more often than not do not file an amendment and cut corners. If they are caught, it could lead to dire consequences.
As I understand, LCAs will absolutely have to have the client location else it is a violation of the law. Small companies more often than not do not file an amendment and cut corners. If they are caught, it could lead to dire consequences.
tattoo The Complete Korean Drama DVD
for_gc
04-27 04:28 PM
Thanks a lot everybody. This is so helpful.
You all made my weekend !!!
You all made my weekend !!!
more...
pictures and a Korean film house,
makemygc
07-18 12:08 PM
There's no need for you to be negative.
Obviously you have benefitted already from what's happened. Think about people who are stuck (just as you were up until recently) and want to 'try' to make things work for them too....
wish people were more understanding of others also. Why is it people forget what it was like for them when they were in same boat?
That's exactly what I'm saying. Flowers campaign has run its course and it's not going to benefit anymore. We need to come up with fresh ideas.
Obviously you have benefitted already from what's happened. Think about people who are stuck (just as you were up until recently) and want to 'try' to make things work for them too....
wish people were more understanding of others also. Why is it people forget what it was like for them when they were in same boat?
That's exactly what I'm saying. Flowers campaign has run its course and it's not going to benefit anymore. We need to come up with fresh ideas.
dresses Korean drama, Soulmate,
surabhi
04-08 05:24 AM
This is serious and could affect quite a few.
Summary: you could be affected if ALL of the folllowing is true
1)you have a PD before July 16, 2007 ( likely case is EB3 I/C 2002/2003 PD)
2) you have left your original employer ( whether you stayed for 180 days after I-485 application to comply with AC-21 rule doesnt matter)
3) your original employer has used your labor to subsititute some on else ( before July 16,2007)
Remember you are affected even though you are the original beneficiary.
How did this case happen?
This happend because USCIS not following LIFO processing
1. The original applicat applied labor in April 2001
2. Labor approved in Jan 2002
3. Original applicant applied I-140 in April 2002
4. i-140 approved in July 2002
5. Original applicant applies for I-485 in Dec 2002
In Jan 2004, after more than year ( > 180 days and Ac-21 was enacted), original applicant leaves the employer, presuming that she is safe and covered under Ac-21
Employer promptly writes to USCIS asking to revoke I-140. The employer goes ahead and uses the labor for another person and files I-140
The USCIS apprves I-140 and subsequently I-485 for the subsituted beneficiary.
So how could USCIS approve a I-485 that was filed at least 18 months later than the original applicant. ( May be the subsituted applicant was from different chargeability country and hence could ge approved??)
Now the original applicant is screwed because USCIS cannnot approve 2 I-485 petitions based on same labor.
I feel for the original applicant. She played by rules all along, but got screwed anyway
Now you can see the chances of your case being caught in similar circumstrances
1. You are EB3, India/China with PD around 2002/2003
2. You filed I-485 sometime before July 2007 ( if you filed during July 2007 and you were with original employer at that time, this doesnt apply)
3. You left your original employer before July 2007
4. Unbeknownst to you, your original employer has subsituted your labor for another person.(before July 16, 2007)
5. that other person also filed for I-1485
6. Now its a timebomb waiting to explode
Summary: you could be affected if ALL of the folllowing is true
1)you have a PD before July 16, 2007 ( likely case is EB3 I/C 2002/2003 PD)
2) you have left your original employer ( whether you stayed for 180 days after I-485 application to comply with AC-21 rule doesnt matter)
3) your original employer has used your labor to subsititute some on else ( before July 16,2007)
Remember you are affected even though you are the original beneficiary.
How did this case happen?
This happend because USCIS not following LIFO processing
1. The original applicat applied labor in April 2001
2. Labor approved in Jan 2002
3. Original applicant applied I-140 in April 2002
4. i-140 approved in July 2002
5. Original applicant applies for I-485 in Dec 2002
In Jan 2004, after more than year ( > 180 days and Ac-21 was enacted), original applicant leaves the employer, presuming that she is safe and covered under Ac-21
Employer promptly writes to USCIS asking to revoke I-140. The employer goes ahead and uses the labor for another person and files I-140
The USCIS apprves I-140 and subsequently I-485 for the subsituted beneficiary.
So how could USCIS approve a I-485 that was filed at least 18 months later than the original applicant. ( May be the subsituted applicant was from different chargeability country and hence could ge approved??)
Now the original applicant is screwed because USCIS cannnot approve 2 I-485 petitions based on same labor.
I feel for the original applicant. She played by rules all along, but got screwed anyway
Now you can see the chances of your case being caught in similar circumstrances
1. You are EB3, India/China with PD around 2002/2003
2. You filed I-485 sometime before July 2007 ( if you filed during July 2007 and you were with original employer at that time, this doesnt apply)
3. You left your original employer before July 2007
4. Unbeknownst to you, your original employer has subsituted your labor for another person.(before July 16, 2007)
5. that other person also filed for I-1485
6. Now its a timebomb waiting to explode
more...
makeup quot;I#39;m looking for a soul mate
vivekm1309
07-12 12:17 AM
Our lawyer Company has decided to file the AOS application in July
I work for a big 5 Software company & our lawyer Littler Global had taken a stand on July that they will not file our AOS application after the June VB was revoked/amended on July 2nd.
Surprisingly , today we have received a mail from them that that keeping in view our best interest they have decided to file our AOS case in July regardless of CIS receipting them.
Wanted to share this information as it may be helpful for you folks too ...
Vivek
I work for a big 5 Software company & our lawyer Littler Global had taken a stand on July that they will not file our AOS application after the June VB was revoked/amended on July 2nd.
Surprisingly , today we have received a mail from them that that keeping in view our best interest they have decided to file our AOS case in July regardless of CIS receipting them.
Wanted to share this information as it may be helpful for you folks too ...
Vivek
girlfriend Soulmate MV - Shin Dong Wook amp; Lee Soo Kyung soulmate korean drama
USDream2Dust
07-21 07:37 AM
Thanks for the responses. I think I will call USCIS and inquire and just to be on the safe side will send in a G325A separately with a letter. Ofcourse, will try getting a response from my attorney's office too. Thanks again.
Also please the let us know what you find out after calling USCIS.
Also please the let us know what you find out after calling USCIS.
hairstyles Throughout the drama, Lee
sabr
09-19 03:17 PM
Quick Q:
Lets say my H1b renewal is pending..while its pending I used EAD for a diff company than my sponsoring company( I will be with my Sponsoring company but in bench). Then my H1b gets approved. Can I still work with a diff company till I choose to go out to stamp for H1b and once am in US i can start working for my sponsoring company again?
Lets say my H1b renewal is pending..while its pending I used EAD for a diff company than my sponsoring company( I will be with my Sponsoring company but in bench). Then my H1b gets approved. Can I still work with a diff company till I choose to go out to stamp for H1b and once am in US i can start working for my sponsoring company again?
veni001
02-03 03:53 PM
thank you veni, that is very informative and solid reference.
looks like under 'advanced degree' category, just having a US Masters or foreign equivalent (4+2) is enough. lot of people are under the impression, its MS+3yrs. but the description in USCIS link states just an advanced degree (higher than baccalaureate) is enough. am i reading this right?
BS+5years is equivalent to having an Advanced degree.
But, I think its BS+5yrs, not BS Equivalent + 5 yrs.
That's correct.
Good luck!
looks like under 'advanced degree' category, just having a US Masters or foreign equivalent (4+2) is enough. lot of people are under the impression, its MS+3yrs. but the description in USCIS link states just an advanced degree (higher than baccalaureate) is enough. am i reading this right?
BS+5years is equivalent to having an Advanced degree.
But, I think its BS+5yrs, not BS Equivalent + 5 yrs.
That's correct.
Good luck!
smileyslimey
11-30 01:42 PM
Thanks to everyone who responded.
Appreciate your advice.
regards.
Appreciate your advice.
regards.
No comments:
Post a Comment