looneytunezez
04-08 04:17 PM
Employment-based: At this time the amount of demand being received in the Employment First preference is extremely low compared with that of recent years. Absent an immediate and dramatic increase in demand, this category will remain “Current” for all countries. It also appears unlikely that a Second preference cut-off date will be imposed for any countries other than China and India, where demand is extremely high. Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off date movement each month during the coming months are as follows:
Employment Second: Demand by applicants who are “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is very high, but the exact amount is not known. Such “upgrades” are in addition to the known demand already reported, and make it very difficult to predict ultimate demand based on forward movement of the China and India cut-off dates. While thousands of “otherwise unused” numbers will be available for potential use without regard to the China and India Employment Second preference per-country annual limits, it is not known how the “upgrades” will ultimately impact the cut-offs for those two countries. (The allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers is discussed below.)
China: none to three weeks expected through July. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
India: One or more weeks, possibly followed by additional movement if demand remains stable. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
Employment Third:
Worldwide: three to six weeks
China: one to three weeks
India: none to two weeks
Mexico: although continued forward movement is expected, no specific projections are possible at this time.
Philippines: three to six weeks
Please be advised that the above ranges are estimates based upon the current demand patterns, and are subject to fluctuations during the coming months. The cut-off dates for upcoming months cannot be guaranteed, and no assumptions should be made until the formal dates are announced.
Allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers in accordance with Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 202(a)(5)
INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand in a calendar quarter will be insufficient to use all available numbers in an Employment preference, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. Based on current levels of demand, there will be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment First and Second preferences. Such numbers may be allocated without regard to per-country limits, once a country has reached its preference annual limit. Since under INA Section 203(e) such numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability, greater number use by one country would indicate greater demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates. Based on amount and priority dates of pending demand and year-to-date number use, a different cut-off date could be applied to each oversubscribed country, for the purpose of assuring that the maximum amount of available numbers will be used. Note that a cut-off date imposed to control the use of “otherwise unused” numbers could be earlier than the cut-off date established to control number use under a quarterly or per-country annual limit. For example, at present the India Employment Second preference cut-off date governs the use of numbers under Section 202(a)(5), India having reached its Employment Second annual limit; the China Employment Second preference cut-off date governs number use under the quarterly limit, since China has not yet reached its Employment Second annual limit.
The rate of number use under Section 202(a)(5) is continually monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for the oversubscribed countries. This helps assure that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while insuring that numbers also remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
As mentioned earlier, the number of applicants who may be “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is unknown. As a result, the cut-off date which governs use of Section 202(a)(5) numbers has been advanced more rapidly than normal, in an attempt to ascertain the amount of “upgrade” demand in the pipeline while at the same time administering use of the available numbers. This action risks a surge in demand that could adversely impact the cut-off date later in the fiscal year. However, it also limits the possibility that potential demand would not materialize and the annual limit would not be reached due to lack of cut-off date movement.
Employment Second: Demand by applicants who are “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is very high, but the exact amount is not known. Such “upgrades” are in addition to the known demand already reported, and make it very difficult to predict ultimate demand based on forward movement of the China and India cut-off dates. While thousands of “otherwise unused” numbers will be available for potential use without regard to the China and India Employment Second preference per-country annual limits, it is not known how the “upgrades” will ultimately impact the cut-offs for those two countries. (The allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers is discussed below.)
China: none to three weeks expected through July. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
India: One or more weeks, possibly followed by additional movement if demand remains stable. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
Employment Third:
Worldwide: three to six weeks
China: one to three weeks
India: none to two weeks
Mexico: although continued forward movement is expected, no specific projections are possible at this time.
Philippines: three to six weeks
Please be advised that the above ranges are estimates based upon the current demand patterns, and are subject to fluctuations during the coming months. The cut-off dates for upcoming months cannot be guaranteed, and no assumptions should be made until the formal dates are announced.
Allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers in accordance with Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 202(a)(5)
INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand in a calendar quarter will be insufficient to use all available numbers in an Employment preference, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. Based on current levels of demand, there will be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment First and Second preferences. Such numbers may be allocated without regard to per-country limits, once a country has reached its preference annual limit. Since under INA Section 203(e) such numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability, greater number use by one country would indicate greater demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates. Based on amount and priority dates of pending demand and year-to-date number use, a different cut-off date could be applied to each oversubscribed country, for the purpose of assuring that the maximum amount of available numbers will be used. Note that a cut-off date imposed to control the use of “otherwise unused” numbers could be earlier than the cut-off date established to control number use under a quarterly or per-country annual limit. For example, at present the India Employment Second preference cut-off date governs the use of numbers under Section 202(a)(5), India having reached its Employment Second annual limit; the China Employment Second preference cut-off date governs number use under the quarterly limit, since China has not yet reached its Employment Second annual limit.
The rate of number use under Section 202(a)(5) is continually monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for the oversubscribed countries. This helps assure that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while insuring that numbers also remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
As mentioned earlier, the number of applicants who may be “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is unknown. As a result, the cut-off date which governs use of Section 202(a)(5) numbers has been advanced more rapidly than normal, in an attempt to ascertain the amount of “upgrade” demand in the pipeline while at the same time administering use of the available numbers. This action risks a surge in demand that could adversely impact the cut-off date later in the fiscal year. However, it also limits the possibility that potential demand would not materialize and the annual limit would not be reached due to lack of cut-off date movement.
wallpaper Napoleon Dynamite
Green_Always
02-01 05:17 PM
Enjoy !!
delax
11-08 01:43 PM
sury,
What that means is "All applications received before August 25, 2006 AND whose PD is current , are being processed"
If your PD is 2003 but you filed your I-485 after Aug'2006 your app will not be adjudicated.
If you filed before Aug'2006 but your PD is after Apr'2004, your app will not be adjudicated.
If your PD is before Apr'2004 and you filed your app before August 25, 2006, your app will be adjudicated..
This is to make sure people don't start expecting approvals and calling them left and right one day after filing if their PD is current. they need some time for every application, so they put in this 'processing date' which works in conjunction with 'priority date' to check if a case is approvable at any given time. They normally won't entertain calls enquiring about a case if the filing date does not fall within this processing date.
I beg to differ - while your general premise is accurate, I know of at least half a dozen people who filed 485 in June 2007 and got appproved over the last two weeks from TX Service Center - I dont think Aug 2006 is a hard date - like many other things with USCIS - they have an irrational passion for NOT applying the FIFO principle and we are expected to digest this irrational passion of theirs with dispassionate rationality.
What that means is "All applications received before August 25, 2006 AND whose PD is current , are being processed"
If your PD is 2003 but you filed your I-485 after Aug'2006 your app will not be adjudicated.
If you filed before Aug'2006 but your PD is after Apr'2004, your app will not be adjudicated.
If your PD is before Apr'2004 and you filed your app before August 25, 2006, your app will be adjudicated..
This is to make sure people don't start expecting approvals and calling them left and right one day after filing if their PD is current. they need some time for every application, so they put in this 'processing date' which works in conjunction with 'priority date' to check if a case is approvable at any given time. They normally won't entertain calls enquiring about a case if the filing date does not fall within this processing date.
I beg to differ - while your general premise is accurate, I know of at least half a dozen people who filed 485 in June 2007 and got appproved over the last two weeks from TX Service Center - I dont think Aug 2006 is a hard date - like many other things with USCIS - they have an irrational passion for NOT applying the FIFO principle and we are expected to digest this irrational passion of theirs with dispassionate rationality.
2011 kip napoleon dynamite gif,
jvs_annapurna
05-07 11:23 PM
sorry guys i was moving to new place. it was with i-94
more...
gcfriend65
12-07 02:47 PM
Its ok to take online classes as long as you are on your h-1.
Yes.
I think you can take classes (online or even regular in-class) as long as you maintian your primary H1B status - i.e. continue to work with the employer on the specified job/number of hours etc.
(note: I am not a lawyer)
Yes.
I think you can take classes (online or even regular in-class) as long as you maintian your primary H1B status - i.e. continue to work with the employer on the specified job/number of hours etc.
(note: I am not a lawyer)
msp1976
02-15 11:33 AM
How about requesting a $1donation when a non-contributing member ask a question, or $5 dollars for ten posts.It is not much but will definitely bring some revenue.
We can have a forum like member only access...where the question can only be posted by payed members or by people who pay a small donation? The idea is that the amount requested is not much ,which anyone can afford, but the number of questions people ask on our forum will definitely generate some revenue.
We can start a volunteer thread as a pilot program to see what kind of response we get...what do Core and rest of the member think of it?
Some of us have a fair study of the immigration laws....Our knowledge is anecdotal.....but still we are not lawyers and we donot want to get into a situation in which we get sued for providing potentially incorrect info....No one wants to mislead anyone but accepting money for service makes us step into an unknown territory....
We want to educate members as much as possible but this is not core business...
All advice we provide is with a caveat that users should check with their lawyesr for feasibility....
We can have a forum like member only access...where the question can only be posted by payed members or by people who pay a small donation? The idea is that the amount requested is not much ,which anyone can afford, but the number of questions people ask on our forum will definitely generate some revenue.
We can start a volunteer thread as a pilot program to see what kind of response we get...what do Core and rest of the member think of it?
Some of us have a fair study of the immigration laws....Our knowledge is anecdotal.....but still we are not lawyers and we donot want to get into a situation in which we get sued for providing potentially incorrect info....No one wants to mislead anyone but accepting money for service makes us step into an unknown territory....
We want to educate members as much as possible but this is not core business...
All advice we provide is with a caveat that users should check with their lawyesr for feasibility....
more...
retropain
09-01 11:08 AM
What's particularly interesting is the number of 'scare words' used in this selected testimony on aspects of the CIR bill. Its a lot like Loo Dobbs "War" on the middle class. Its clear CIS, Nusa, FAIR provide the script to him on immigration matters. I knew Loo wasn't that creative in the first place
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
2010 Dynamite its pretty much my
seba
09-24 01:31 PM
Thanks for the clear answer thepaew. That is what I thought. I currently have the opportunity to start the green card process with my employer under EB3 ROW, but I am also planning to go for an MBA in the US within the next few years. I am just into my 5th year of H1. It seems that I should not start the green card process if I am sure about going for an MBA in the US within the next few years. That would be terrible if you get into a school you like but cannot attend since you cannot switch from H1 to F1.
more...
gc_chahiye
10-29 11:11 PM
Hi,
I got my EAD one day before my H1 expiration. What do I need to do if I want to work on EAD and what form do I need to fill and provide to my employer. As currently my Attorney messed up my H1 status. He sent my H extension to a wrong service center i.e. California and they sent the application back saying they no more process H extensions and we need to apply to a different service center i.e. Vermont. My H expired on 10/11/07 and my Attorney received the H documents back from California Service Center on 10/26/07.
As I asked my Attorney to send the H extension to the right service center with a proof of that he applied on time but was sent to the wrong Service Center. As I don't want to abonden my H status.
My only worries are what if H extension is not approved in that case what will happen to my 485 and EAD i.e. valid from 10/10/2007-10/09/2008. What will be my options then. As I don't want to take any chances specially at this stage. Please advice what to do in this case as my Attorney looks like is not that smart.
Need some advice as to should I just start working on EAD and not wait for the H extension response or should I wait for the response.
Any feedbacks are appreciated.
Thanks
first of all, your EAD and 485 are not impacted by any of these H1 mix-ups from your lawyer. So relax.
You can start working on EAD now and wait for the H1 approval to come through. Whne it does come through, youll need ot leave the US, get a visa stamp and come back in to activate the H1 (if you need H1 status for some reason like you are unmarried and will need to bring spouse on H4).
If you are really paranoid, stop working right now and do the H1 in premium processing. If USCIS grants the extension of status (you get new I-94) continue working on that, you are all set. Otherwise at that point you can start on EAD or leave-get_stamped-return, whatever you want.
To move to EAD you need to file a new I-9 with the employer.
I got my EAD one day before my H1 expiration. What do I need to do if I want to work on EAD and what form do I need to fill and provide to my employer. As currently my Attorney messed up my H1 status. He sent my H extension to a wrong service center i.e. California and they sent the application back saying they no more process H extensions and we need to apply to a different service center i.e. Vermont. My H expired on 10/11/07 and my Attorney received the H documents back from California Service Center on 10/26/07.
As I asked my Attorney to send the H extension to the right service center with a proof of that he applied on time but was sent to the wrong Service Center. As I don't want to abonden my H status.
My only worries are what if H extension is not approved in that case what will happen to my 485 and EAD i.e. valid from 10/10/2007-10/09/2008. What will be my options then. As I don't want to take any chances specially at this stage. Please advice what to do in this case as my Attorney looks like is not that smart.
Need some advice as to should I just start working on EAD and not wait for the H extension response or should I wait for the response.
Any feedbacks are appreciated.
Thanks
first of all, your EAD and 485 are not impacted by any of these H1 mix-ups from your lawyer. So relax.
You can start working on EAD now and wait for the H1 approval to come through. Whne it does come through, youll need ot leave the US, get a visa stamp and come back in to activate the H1 (if you need H1 status for some reason like you are unmarried and will need to bring spouse on H4).
If you are really paranoid, stop working right now and do the H1 in premium processing. If USCIS grants the extension of status (you get new I-94) continue working on that, you are all set. Otherwise at that point you can start on EAD or leave-get_stamped-return, whatever you want.
To move to EAD you need to file a new I-9 with the employer.
hair napoleon dynamite pedro
seahawks
07-19 12:58 AM
I mean i filed without both of those. Theyare required in the 140 phase , not in 485.
But keep them handy - in case they wants mail by next day air
if you are filing for your spouse and if you are sponsoring your spouse, you have to show evidence of income.. There is a form that you fill with it,.
But keep them handy - in case they wants mail by next day air
if you are filing for your spouse and if you are sponsoring your spouse, you have to show evidence of income.. There is a form that you fill with it,.
more...
Rockey
06-22 10:17 AM
Sent the request for correction with my supporting documents.
******************
Request advice...
I know that I will have to stop working on August 11 2010 and I can't earn for as long as I don't have a valid EAD in my hand. I also know that it does not affect my Green Card I-485 app as long as I don't work without and EAD.
So what should I do from here on? Should I wait...I still have 50 days to hope to get my renewed EAD in. Should I call USCIS and request expedited processing of my case...but I haven't even received my receipt notices yet. Should I book and INFOPASS appt...but INFOPASS appointments for I-765 are only issued if it has been more than 90 days since the application was filed?
I will really appreciate any comments/suggestion regarding my case.
***********************
What should one do if he don't receive the nenewal EAD before the current EAD expires, can he continue working ? will the employer come to know ? having the receipt notice is enough ? what is the impact ? Please any one clarify. Thanks.
******************
Request advice...
I know that I will have to stop working on August 11 2010 and I can't earn for as long as I don't have a valid EAD in my hand. I also know that it does not affect my Green Card I-485 app as long as I don't work without and EAD.
So what should I do from here on? Should I wait...I still have 50 days to hope to get my renewed EAD in. Should I call USCIS and request expedited processing of my case...but I haven't even received my receipt notices yet. Should I book and INFOPASS appt...but INFOPASS appointments for I-765 are only issued if it has been more than 90 days since the application was filed?
I will really appreciate any comments/suggestion regarding my case.
***********************
What should one do if he don't receive the nenewal EAD before the current EAD expires, can he continue working ? will the employer come to know ? having the receipt notice is enough ? what is the impact ? Please any one clarify. Thanks.
hot Sniper Napoleon Dynamite
akkakarla
08-16 12:03 PM
While it is good idea to move to UK there are similar protests going in UK due to job loss and lot of Work Permits going in favor of Indians. Recently I read an article which says that 18,000 Visas out of 30,000 Visa(High Tech) are granted to Indians.
UK based companies pulled out their operations from India stating the quality of work from Indian operations is very poor.
Adding fuel to fire Mr Mittal relentless aggression to acquire companies is all creating chaos in UK.
My 2 cents
UK based companies pulled out their operations from India stating the quality of work from Indian operations is very poor.
Adding fuel to fire Mr Mittal relentless aggression to acquire companies is all creating chaos in UK.
My 2 cents
more...
house Camenapoleon dynamite hes
gc_chahiye
09-27 01:42 PM
^^^^^^^ bump
Appreciate any advice...thanks
habils advice is best at this point: try to get a quota-exemp H1 (if you cant extend your F1 and study some more)
Appreciate any advice...thanks
habils advice is best at this point: try to get a quota-exemp H1 (if you cant extend your F1 and study some more)
tattoo Noises fromdownload napoleon
DSLStart
12-15 12:51 PM
jayleno: there is nothing funny about this situation so no need to make jokes on him. He just told him about sending wife to India, because that guys uername says Atul which hail from India and not srilanka or pak or bangladesh.
Buddy,
Are you trying to create a problem or solve one? If I were from Sri Lanka, why would I send my wife to India? If we start following your advice, soon many husbands would be leading a single life for being laid off.
Buddy,
Are you trying to create a problem or solve one? If I were from Sri Lanka, why would I send my wife to India? If we start following your advice, soon many husbands would be leading a single life for being laid off.
more...
pictures Napoleon Dynamite
Macaca
01-21 07:16 PM
most uni's have a indian student association, the contact is usually found on the website, that would the best way to find them, also orkut has alot of desi student in us communities
If you can not locate Indian Student Association (ISA), contact International Student Office; this contact is always available on school web site. Ask them about ISA.
There are truck loads of Chinese and Indians in Engineering + CS. The word can spread very quickly because everyone has friends in other schools also. They may join for the Q/A part.
I doubt they will contribute. Graduate Teaching/Research Assistants make 12K-/year. Others make much less money then the tuition they pay; then there are living expenses. Also, they are not effected by EB retrogression. What is the motivation for such a person to pay when majority of 50K+/year persons (in deep shit) are not paying.
No harm in trying.
If you can not locate Indian Student Association (ISA), contact International Student Office; this contact is always available on school web site. Ask them about ISA.
There are truck loads of Chinese and Indians in Engineering + CS. The word can spread very quickly because everyone has friends in other schools also. They may join for the Q/A part.
I doubt they will contribute. Graduate Teaching/Research Assistants make 12K-/year. Others make much less money then the tuition they pay; then there are living expenses. Also, they are not effected by EB retrogression. What is the motivation for such a person to pay when majority of 50K+/year persons (in deep shit) are not paying.
No harm in trying.
dresses The Chinese Napoleon Dynamite
bsbawa10
08-21 09:46 AM
I broke my politeness today.USCIS inconsistency broke the limits for me.
My case was filed in Nebarska then tranferred to Texas then as soon as the priority date became current, last month, it was transferred to California.
I talked yesterday to customer service and it by chance got transferred to California Service Center where the officer told me that my case was transferred back to Texas Service Center on August 14, 2008. She also told me to call TSC to confirm it.
I called today the National Customer Service Center (NCSC) to confirm it and the lady tells me that the case is still in California and she has no more infomation about it. I told her about my call yesterday.
Lady: How could you have ever called CSC because their phone numbers are not public
Me: I called the same number and for some reason it got transferred to CSC.
Lady: Then you have already been told that your case has been transferred back on Aug 14, what do you need now ?
Me: The website does not show that. Plus the officer yesterday asked me to confirm it which you are not doing, you are just repeating my words about my conversation. There are so many inconsitencies . You told me just now that my case is still in California.
Lady: Can you please hold for a moment.
After hold:
Lady: I just talked to my supervisor, if the website says it is in California then it is California. Is there anything else I can help you with ?
Me: I do not understand "To speed up processing " clause in the reason to transfer it to california. It has been transferred from the center which is processing 485 applications to the center which is not processing applications. So the clause "To speed up processing" is so inconsistent.
Lady: Sir, we cannot tell you the reason why do we transfers
Me: But you have already told me the reason in the written notice as "To speed up processing"
Lady: It is not "To speed up processing " it is "for processing". Is there anything else that I can help you with ?
Me: I hang up the phone.
My case was filed in Nebarska then tranferred to Texas then as soon as the priority date became current, last month, it was transferred to California.
I talked yesterday to customer service and it by chance got transferred to California Service Center where the officer told me that my case was transferred back to Texas Service Center on August 14, 2008. She also told me to call TSC to confirm it.
I called today the National Customer Service Center (NCSC) to confirm it and the lady tells me that the case is still in California and she has no more infomation about it. I told her about my call yesterday.
Lady: How could you have ever called CSC because their phone numbers are not public
Me: I called the same number and for some reason it got transferred to CSC.
Lady: Then you have already been told that your case has been transferred back on Aug 14, what do you need now ?
Me: The website does not show that. Plus the officer yesterday asked me to confirm it which you are not doing, you are just repeating my words about my conversation. There are so many inconsitencies . You told me just now that my case is still in California.
Lady: Can you please hold for a moment.
After hold:
Lady: I just talked to my supervisor, if the website says it is in California then it is California. Is there anything else I can help you with ?
Me: I do not understand "To speed up processing " clause in the reason to transfer it to california. It has been transferred from the center which is processing 485 applications to the center which is not processing applications. So the clause "To speed up processing" is so inconsistent.
Lady: Sir, we cannot tell you the reason why do we transfers
Me: But you have already told me the reason in the written notice as "To speed up processing"
Lady: It is not "To speed up processing " it is "for processing". Is there anything else that I can help you with ?
Me: I hang up the phone.
more...
makeup napoleon dynamite well
snathan
03-28 04:23 PM
As per my tax preparer's advice, I sent both the tax return and W-7 form to IRS ITIN Operation office in Austin, Texas. Is this the correct address?
For any reason if your ITIN application is separated from your Tax return, most likely they would deny the ITIN...the reason would be - You reqested the ITIN for tax filing and there is no tax return papers attached.
I dont have any idea why it happened.
For any reason if your ITIN application is separated from your Tax return, most likely they would deny the ITIN...the reason would be - You reqested the ITIN for tax filing and there is no tax return papers attached.
I dont have any idea why it happened.
girlfriend Sign upthe napoleon dynamite
acecupid
06-25 11:29 AM
You could argue that you don't need to have a job now, just that you need to be in a "same or similar"position when the 485 is approved. if your priority date is very backlogged, you have lots of time to find a job.
Elaine,
Thanks for your response. I am very curious to know if you have been successful in responding to an RFE in the manner you mentioned and USCIS accepted the agrument and continued with AOS for any of your clients. I understand that given the circumstances the OP does not have much of an option since he does not have a job right now. But it would be interesting to know if USCIS has accepted such an argument in the past.
Elaine,
Thanks for your response. I am very curious to know if you have been successful in responding to an RFE in the manner you mentioned and USCIS accepted the agrument and continued with AOS for any of your clients. I understand that given the circumstances the OP does not have much of an option since he does not have a job right now. But it would be interesting to know if USCIS has accepted such an argument in the past.
hairstyles Napoleon Dynamite
Winner
02-18 11:57 AM
Hello IVans,
My employer did not pay for I485 expenses (USCIS fees, Lawyer expenses and Medical exam expenses). I paid all these expenses out of my pocket. Today one of my friends told me that these expenses could qualify as tax-deductible expenses. I have my doubts, but want to get you thoughts.
Thanks.
My employer did not pay for I485 expenses (USCIS fees, Lawyer expenses and Medical exam expenses). I paid all these expenses out of my pocket. Today one of my friends told me that these expenses could qualify as tax-deductible expenses. I have my doubts, but want to get you thoughts.
Thanks.
superdude
07-20 12:29 AM
Congrats to all those who are lucky enough to file their I-485 by August 17. I am kind of on the unlucky side. My mandatory labor recruitment wait period of 30 days end on August 17. Wonder if anyone has any idea about I-485 availability or unavailability by september or october or may even next time this year to use up the available numbers.
I appreciate all your responses.
Thanks
HP
Only those whose labor got approved prior to July can apply for 140/485. August Bulletin says "U" for all categories
It is hard to predict when the numbers will be available again in the future. They may open up for EB1 and for other countires except India, China, Phillipphines and Mexico.
I appreciate all your responses.
Thanks
HP
Only those whose labor got approved prior to July can apply for 140/485. August Bulletin says "U" for all categories
It is hard to predict when the numbers will be available again in the future. They may open up for EB1 and for other countires except India, China, Phillipphines and Mexico.
kirupa
11-26 08:58 PM
Silverlight is a runtime - it really doesn't have a focus :P
This site focuses on the apps used to create content for the runtimes - Flash, Silverlight, WPF. I put Flex Builder and Visual Studio in the developer corner, and I put Expression Blend and Flash CS4 into a more designer corner.
The content on this site revolves around using Flash or Blend to create Flash or SL/WPF content.
This site focuses on the apps used to create content for the runtimes - Flash, Silverlight, WPF. I put Flex Builder and Visual Studio in the developer corner, and I put Expression Blend and Flash CS4 into a more designer corner.
The content on this site revolves around using Flash or Blend to create Flash or SL/WPF content.
No comments:
Post a Comment