feedfront
09-16 02:51 PM
Done
uma001
07-26 02:30 PM
Go for GC , not career. You can get good career whenever you want, but you cant get GC whenever you want. Once you get GC you can apply for 150k job wherever you want, any company you want. With h1 you cant do that.
gvenkat
02-23 12:00 AM
2 friggin days... man they got to be kidding... :eek::eek::eek: at this rate it will take me 15 months to get my 140 approved... mine was filed on july 27th.....
abhijitp
07-08 01:53 PM
07/08/2007: Massive Flower Send-In Campaign by Indian Community in Spirit of Mahatma Gandhi's Nonviolent Protest Against the Injustice Involving Visa Bulletin Fiasco
The East Indian community has been engaging in an interesting campaign sending a massive bouque of flowers with a message of protest to the leaders of the USCIS and the State Deparment, including Mr. Emilio Gonzalez, Director of USCIS and Dr. Rice, Secretary of Department of State relating to the ongoing Visa Bulletin commotion. Indians are the primary sources of foreign high-tech workers and the country's much needed sources of brains for the businesses and the employers, and it turns out that the current Visa Bulletin fiasco has hit most them and their U.S. employers. Considering the fact that the Congress sidelined foreign legal workers and brains as a backburner issue in the ill-fated CIR, the current Visa Bulletin fiasco appears to add the heat of outrage to the Congress' unfair and unjust treatment of the legal immigrants by leaders in this country. OUCH!
Thanks a lot for posting!
Please post the URL, always, if I may add.
The East Indian community has been engaging in an interesting campaign sending a massive bouque of flowers with a message of protest to the leaders of the USCIS and the State Deparment, including Mr. Emilio Gonzalez, Director of USCIS and Dr. Rice, Secretary of Department of State relating to the ongoing Visa Bulletin commotion. Indians are the primary sources of foreign high-tech workers and the country's much needed sources of brains for the businesses and the employers, and it turns out that the current Visa Bulletin fiasco has hit most them and their U.S. employers. Considering the fact that the Congress sidelined foreign legal workers and brains as a backburner issue in the ill-fated CIR, the current Visa Bulletin fiasco appears to add the heat of outrage to the Congress' unfair and unjust treatment of the legal immigrants by leaders in this country. OUCH!
Thanks a lot for posting!
Please post the URL, always, if I may add.
more...
neoklaus
11-14 03:33 PM
Does it have anything to do with how recently you travelled out of the country? or How recently you came into this country? My wife came to US only 6 months back and I am not sure if this has got to do anything with the whole biometrics thing?
It is probably just this IO who has a different intepretation of the rules.
I came to US in June,07, my husband & daughter -Aug.14,07...probably just interpretation matters
It is probably just this IO who has a different intepretation of the rules.
I came to US in June,07, my husband & daughter -Aug.14,07...probably just interpretation matters
hemanth22
07-21 09:24 AM
What you should do immediately.
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
This is a very unfortunate happening.
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Among the senators with presidential ambitions only McCain voted in favor of the bill
I am for , contacting the local sentators who have voted nay for this bill
Are there any established methods of doing so
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
This is a very unfortunate happening.
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Among the senators with presidential ambitions only McCain voted in favor of the bill
I am for , contacting the local sentators who have voted nay for this bill
Are there any established methods of doing so
more...
jvs
03-02 06:36 PM
Regarding "New Scenario - Seeking second opinion"
Couple of things to consider...
1) You need to be present in US at time of applying for the extension and when its approved. In your case I think with travel coming up in June, you probably need to go premium so you have approval in hand my April end. Regular processing takes about 2-3 months I think.
2) You can only go 90 days in advance of your new/extended approval as far as I know. So you need to see if that matches when you plan to go for stamping.
If in similar situation I would probably do what you are planning. It adds some anxiety with both wedding and consulate visit at same time, but once past that it will make life little easier.
Couple of things to consider...
1) You need to be present in US at time of applying for the extension and when its approved. In your case I think with travel coming up in June, you probably need to go premium so you have approval in hand my April end. Regular processing takes about 2-3 months I think.
2) You can only go 90 days in advance of your new/extended approval as far as I know. So you need to see if that matches when you plan to go for stamping.
If in similar situation I would probably do what you are planning. It adds some anxiety with both wedding and consulate visit at same time, but once past that it will make life little easier.
uumapathi
09-29 01:31 PM
I was wondering what one would see in the online case status if an RFE/NOID is issued. Anyone has any text that would appear on the Case status application?
more...
brain_implosion
12-13 10:05 PM
HAs anyone used CC after primary 485 filed? I got married this year, spouse from non retrogressed country, but 485 filed in July 07. Does any one have exp with this?
GCDream
02-20 08:12 PM
Here is what I have after analyzing the FLC Data Center MDB files
>2001 May 8 = 504 Certified Labors
2002 = 79784 Certified Labors
2003 = 62912 Certified Labors
2004 = 43582 Certified Labors
Total: 186782 Certified Labors
The above data is for world
Let's say India is 25% of world and 75% of India is in EB3
This gives 186782 * 0.25 * 0.75 = 35022 for India from 2001 to 2004
Since the country of the alien is available for Perm, let's use it for 2005 and 2006
2005 India = 1350
2006 India = 22298
Total for India in 2005 and 2006 = 23648
Pending in BEC: 111000
Applying the same formula for India EB3: 111000 * 0.25 * 0.75 = 20812
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 = 35022 + 23648 + 20812 = 79482
Let's say 20% labors are duplicate or deserted. This gives 79482 * 0.80 = 63586
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 with Dependents = 63586 * 2.2 = 139889
Total EB3 visas for India in a year: 140000 * 0.07 * 0.286 = 2802
Without any Law:
139889/2802 = 50 Years
Assuming CIR passes with
1. Dependents not counted
2. EB visas increased from 140,000 to 650,000
3. Per country quota raised to 10%
4. Exempts advanced degree holders
Total EB3 India visas per year = 650,000 * 0.1 * 0.286 = 18590
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 without dependents: 63586
Assuming 20% have advanced degree holders = 63586 * 0.2 = 12717
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 without dependents and advanced degree holders
= 63586 - 12717 = 50869
For India EB3 Priority date to reach Dec 2006 = 50869/18590 = 2.7 Years
Conclusion
Without Law: 50 Years :confused:
With Law: 2.7 Years :D
>2001 May 8 = 504 Certified Labors
2002 = 79784 Certified Labors
2003 = 62912 Certified Labors
2004 = 43582 Certified Labors
Total: 186782 Certified Labors
The above data is for world
Let's say India is 25% of world and 75% of India is in EB3
This gives 186782 * 0.25 * 0.75 = 35022 for India from 2001 to 2004
Since the country of the alien is available for Perm, let's use it for 2005 and 2006
2005 India = 1350
2006 India = 22298
Total for India in 2005 and 2006 = 23648
Pending in BEC: 111000
Applying the same formula for India EB3: 111000 * 0.25 * 0.75 = 20812
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 = 35022 + 23648 + 20812 = 79482
Let's say 20% labors are duplicate or deserted. This gives 79482 * 0.80 = 63586
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 with Dependents = 63586 * 2.2 = 139889
Total EB3 visas for India in a year: 140000 * 0.07 * 0.286 = 2802
Without any Law:
139889/2802 = 50 Years
Assuming CIR passes with
1. Dependents not counted
2. EB visas increased from 140,000 to 650,000
3. Per country quota raised to 10%
4. Exempts advanced degree holders
Total EB3 India visas per year = 650,000 * 0.1 * 0.286 = 18590
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 without dependents: 63586
Assuming 20% have advanced degree holders = 63586 * 0.2 = 12717
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 without dependents and advanced degree holders
= 63586 - 12717 = 50869
For India EB3 Priority date to reach Dec 2006 = 50869/18590 = 2.7 Years
Conclusion
Without Law: 50 Years :confused:
With Law: 2.7 Years :D
more...
Green.Tech
09-16 03:37 PM
Will call the rest during my next break :)
Thanks abqguy!
Thanks abqguy!
amitjoey
01-26 11:16 AM
Remember although this bill is only for PHD holders as it states now- It is too early to say if it will see the light of the day- if it will get through the committee and get on the calender and finally get on the floor.
It will go thru many rewrites and if it does have a chance on the floor, we can lobby and put our energy behind to make it better and try to get our provisions in it.
It is too early at this stage to comment on its chances and worse yet talk and fight about its contents.
It will go thru many rewrites and if it does have a chance on the floor, we can lobby and put our energy behind to make it better and try to get our provisions in it.
It is too early at this stage to comment on its chances and worse yet talk and fight about its contents.
more...
panky72
08-13 02:07 AM
oye chappan... ever been to indore?
there is a small shops complex there called chappan dukaan... very famous hangout place for all indorians... just remembered :)
I have been to chappan dukaan in indore. nice place to hangout in college days:)
there is a small shops complex there called chappan dukaan... very famous hangout place for all indorians... just remembered :)
I have been to chappan dukaan in indore. nice place to hangout in college days:)
Sunx_2004
02-11 11:32 AM
What are IVs recommendations ??
Looks like the news is out on this in media.
Immigration Voice has been aware of this and actively working on it for last 3 weeks. This had been also posted on the donor forums. Core members and several key IV volunteers/ donors already have been working on it and analyzing it. We also had been asked for our recommendations and had send our recommendations. We should see this bill introduced soon in a few days.
Looks like the news is out on this in media.
Immigration Voice has been aware of this and actively working on it for last 3 weeks. This had been also posted on the donor forums. Core members and several key IV volunteers/ donors already have been working on it and analyzing it. We also had been asked for our recommendations and had send our recommendations. We should see this bill introduced soon in a few days.
more...
mhtanim
11-19 05:15 PM
My AP was approved for multiple trips. So I can use the 2 stamped AP as many times as I want. The officer told me that when I use the APs for my next trip then they are going stamp the same APs again. And that I will not need to submit anything on my next trip. It would be advisable to keep some photocopies of the AP just in case they ask for a copy.
I guess AP works like I-20s. When I came to the U.S. for the first time, the INS officer took one copy of my I-20 and stamped the other copy and gave it to me. I carried the same stamped I-20 multiple times to get into the U.S. They stamped on the same I-20 every time I got in.
I guess AP works like I-20s. When I came to the U.S. for the first time, the INS officer took one copy of my I-20 and stamped the other copy and gave it to me. I carried the same stamped I-20 multiple times to get into the U.S. They stamped on the same I-20 every time I got in.
abe1
12-27 12:07 AM
Hope some of you might have seen the Wall Street Journal story this weekend on visas/Green Cards for owners of start-up businesses. (Foreign Entrepreneurs Eye StartUp Visa Act - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052748704694004576020001550357580-lMyQjAxMTAwMDIwNTEyNDUyWj.html) )
According to the story there is broad consensus for a program to offer green card to foreign nationals who can bring in as low as $100,000 to start a new business in U.S. While this may not be an option for most of the folks in this forum, the premise of the proposed law has something in common with all of us.
The law is proposed by senators John Kerry (D) and Richard Lugar (R) on the principle that immigrants are more willing to be entrepreneurial and hence offering permanent residency to foreigners who will open a small business will increase the employment opportunities in U.S. Endorsing the entrepreneurial mind of new immigrants WSJ sights that; “Immigrants are nearly 30% more likely to start a business than non-immigrants ” and “about a third of Silicon Valley technology firms were started by Indian or Chinese entrepreneurs” . If the proposed bill is attempting to attract skilled and entrepreneurial minded immigrants into U.S. as a means to increase employment why not U.S. look into the pool of highly skilled and eager folks waiting for a green card for many years? Wouldn’t these folks be highly likely to open a new small business than someone from outside of the U.S. with no U.S. business background? If we are to take cues from the one third of the Silicon Valley entrepreneurs wouldn’t a good number of these people waiting for green card open up the starts up businesses that senators Kerry and Lugar are hoping to .
Would it be worth writing on behalf of Immigration Voice to senators Kerry and Lugar to consider the pool of potential entrepreneurs minded people already in U.S. and have been waiting for an opportunity to realize their entrepreneurial dreams? I don’t have the actual numbers. Aren’t there about 30 or 40,000 people who have been in U.S. with an approved immigration petition but waiting for a green card for many years? Could IV put forward a win-win propositions for everyone?
According to the story there is broad consensus for a program to offer green card to foreign nationals who can bring in as low as $100,000 to start a new business in U.S. While this may not be an option for most of the folks in this forum, the premise of the proposed law has something in common with all of us.
The law is proposed by senators John Kerry (D) and Richard Lugar (R) on the principle that immigrants are more willing to be entrepreneurial and hence offering permanent residency to foreigners who will open a small business will increase the employment opportunities in U.S. Endorsing the entrepreneurial mind of new immigrants WSJ sights that; “Immigrants are nearly 30% more likely to start a business than non-immigrants ” and “about a third of Silicon Valley technology firms were started by Indian or Chinese entrepreneurs” . If the proposed bill is attempting to attract skilled and entrepreneurial minded immigrants into U.S. as a means to increase employment why not U.S. look into the pool of highly skilled and eager folks waiting for a green card for many years? Wouldn’t these folks be highly likely to open a new small business than someone from outside of the U.S. with no U.S. business background? If we are to take cues from the one third of the Silicon Valley entrepreneurs wouldn’t a good number of these people waiting for green card open up the starts up businesses that senators Kerry and Lugar are hoping to .
Would it be worth writing on behalf of Immigration Voice to senators Kerry and Lugar to consider the pool of potential entrepreneurs minded people already in U.S. and have been waiting for an opportunity to realize their entrepreneurial dreams? I don’t have the actual numbers. Aren’t there about 30 or 40,000 people who have been in U.S. with an approved immigration petition but waiting for a green card for many years? Could IV put forward a win-win propositions for everyone?
more...
gxr
10-12 09:50 AM
Naresh/Libra,
What was the LUD on your I-140 before you got the RFE ?
In my case, the RD is 10/06 and LUD is 10/26/2006. But, no updates after that.
gxr
What was the LUD on your I-140 before you got the RFE ?
In my case, the RD is 10/06 and LUD is 10/26/2006. But, no updates after that.
gxr
dj1234
02-12 02:59 PM
Rishikesh:
How much time did NSC take to approve your I-131 after you submitted the RFE?
I am in the similiar situation.
Please reply. Thanks
Luckily I had all but the 1st one when I entered in US. Please see the format letter below [please note that I am copying the format from a word doc & may not display correctly
Dear Sir/Madam,
In response to your letter requesting evidence for FORM I-131. Please find below mentioned details.
a. Copies of all I-94 issued- I do not have copy of I-94 that was issued to me on <>Date (my first arrival in US on H1). The original I-94 was returned to airline official at the time of boarding the flight.
The following entries are in TAB format
Date of Entry mm/DD/yyyy
Date of Exit mm/DD/yyyy
I-94 # NA
Copy Avail? N
Remarks Original I-94 was handed over to airlines staff at the time of boarding [Departed by flight xxx ]. To support my claim, please see attached passport copy that shows arrival record in India on <xxx> [pages 3-4]
b. Approval notices for extensions or change of Status- My original H1 [XXXX] expired on [XXX]. An H1 renewal notice was filed on [XXXX] and was approved on [XXX] [WAC-XXX]. I am attaching copies of both the approval notices.
c. Any other Evidence of your lawful immigrations status: I am attaching a copy of approved I-140 [SRC-XXX] and a copy of I-485 filing receipt [WAC-XXXX]
d. Evidence of relationship: I am attaching the following documents
1. Copy of my birth certificate
2. Copy of my marriage certificate
Thanks & Regards,
<Your Name>
Encl:
1. Passport copy pages displaying the visa issued ,date of entries to US on H1 and displaying the date of arrival in India [6 pages]
2. Copies of H1 approval & extension approval notice [2 pages]
3. Copies of I-94�s issued [5 pages]
4. Copy of I-140 approval [1 pages]
5. Copy of I-485 filing receipt [1 pages]
6. Copy of birth certificate [1 page]
7. Copy of marriage certificate [1 page]
Hope this helps
QUOTE=MYGCBY2010;193771]How did you respond to your RFE?.. Did you have copies of all of your I -94 ?.. Please let me know...[/QUOTE]
How much time did NSC take to approve your I-131 after you submitted the RFE?
I am in the similiar situation.
Please reply. Thanks
Luckily I had all but the 1st one when I entered in US. Please see the format letter below [please note that I am copying the format from a word doc & may not display correctly
Dear Sir/Madam,
In response to your letter requesting evidence for FORM I-131. Please find below mentioned details.
a. Copies of all I-94 issued- I do not have copy of I-94 that was issued to me on <>Date (my first arrival in US on H1). The original I-94 was returned to airline official at the time of boarding the flight.
The following entries are in TAB format
Date of Entry mm/DD/yyyy
Date of Exit mm/DD/yyyy
I-94 # NA
Copy Avail? N
Remarks Original I-94 was handed over to airlines staff at the time of boarding [Departed by flight xxx ]. To support my claim, please see attached passport copy that shows arrival record in India on <xxx> [pages 3-4]
b. Approval notices for extensions or change of Status- My original H1 [XXXX] expired on [XXX]. An H1 renewal notice was filed on [XXXX] and was approved on [XXX] [WAC-XXX]. I am attaching copies of both the approval notices.
c. Any other Evidence of your lawful immigrations status: I am attaching a copy of approved I-140 [SRC-XXX] and a copy of I-485 filing receipt [WAC-XXXX]
d. Evidence of relationship: I am attaching the following documents
1. Copy of my birth certificate
2. Copy of my marriage certificate
Thanks & Regards,
<Your Name>
Encl:
1. Passport copy pages displaying the visa issued ,date of entries to US on H1 and displaying the date of arrival in India [6 pages]
2. Copies of H1 approval & extension approval notice [2 pages]
3. Copies of I-94�s issued [5 pages]
4. Copy of I-140 approval [1 pages]
5. Copy of I-485 filing receipt [1 pages]
6. Copy of birth certificate [1 page]
7. Copy of marriage certificate [1 page]
Hope this helps
QUOTE=MYGCBY2010;193771]How did you respond to your RFE?.. Did you have copies of all of your I -94 ?.. Please let me know...[/QUOTE]
fundo14
02-19 12:36 PM
Hi All,
I wanted to share my experience at the port of entry using AP.
Just to give a quick background me and my wife have been working on H1 for last 8 years, we both were working on our H1’s at the time of leaving for vacation one month back.
Our 485/EAD/AP was filed on July 2nd, 2007; my wife is a Primary Applicant.
We have our 485 receipts/ approved EAD’s and AP’s with us.
Also, our H1 Petition’s are valid till 2010 but the stamping on passport is expired, we did not get stamping in India as we intended to enter using AP
At the Port of entry this is how it went:
Officer: Very rudely asked for our passports & I-94
We gave him our Passports, I-94 forms and Original AP’s
Officer: What’s the purpose of your visit?
Our Answer: To join back at our respective work.
Officer: Work? Who’s the primary applicant?
My answer: My wife
Officer: Then how the hell you will work here, you cannot work here, only your wife can work as the petition is on her name, you are a derivative.
My answer: But I have work Authorization (showed our EAD cards)
Officer: That’s all bullhshit, does not mean anything…you can not work here.
My answer: I politely told him that sir when we left country a month ago we both were working on H1’s, now we are seeking entry on AP.
Officer: yeh but don’t do fraud, you cannot work here (Very rudely)...who told you that you can work here.
My Answer: Again I explained politely- Sir, we filed for 485 which made us eligible to get EAD’s, showed him the EAD card again (which clearly states “Authorized to work in US till validity of this card” Our EAD’s are valid till end of 2008)
Officer: listen don’t teach me law, I have been working here for “x” number of years, and you think you know laws better than me.
After this I and my wife decided to keep quite as that moron was not ready to listen and understand anything.
Officer (rudely): I will set this straight for you…then we were asked to follow him in a separate room. Many people were waiting there I guess most of them using AP
The Officer went to one other custom officer there and pointed towards us and explained him something which we could not hear.
We waited � an hour till our named was called…I was worried that they will now create lot problems for us but to my surprise we were just handed our Passports along with AP’s / I-94 stamped as “AOS” and told you are all set... Absolutely No questions asked.
I am worried if he has entered some nasty remarks on my case…not sure.
Now this entire incident makes me wonder what that officer was talking about, my guess is one of the following:
1. He assumed throughout that my wife is entering on H1 and I on H4
2. Or he did realize his mistake but was too egoistic to accept it.
3. Or he was right and I was wrong about working on EAD (being derivative)...am I missing something here??
One of my suggestion from all this experience is that anybody entering on AP always state the purpose of visit is to “Resume pending AOS”
In last 8 years I have re-entered US like 6 times but never faced such a rude Immigration officer or have been treated like this.
Guru’s please advice if there is a possibility to reinstate our status as H1, we would rather work on H1 then on EAD’s
Thanks!
I wanted to share my experience at the port of entry using AP.
Just to give a quick background me and my wife have been working on H1 for last 8 years, we both were working on our H1’s at the time of leaving for vacation one month back.
Our 485/EAD/AP was filed on July 2nd, 2007; my wife is a Primary Applicant.
We have our 485 receipts/ approved EAD’s and AP’s with us.
Also, our H1 Petition’s are valid till 2010 but the stamping on passport is expired, we did not get stamping in India as we intended to enter using AP
At the Port of entry this is how it went:
Officer: Very rudely asked for our passports & I-94
We gave him our Passports, I-94 forms and Original AP’s
Officer: What’s the purpose of your visit?
Our Answer: To join back at our respective work.
Officer: Work? Who’s the primary applicant?
My answer: My wife
Officer: Then how the hell you will work here, you cannot work here, only your wife can work as the petition is on her name, you are a derivative.
My answer: But I have work Authorization (showed our EAD cards)
Officer: That’s all bullhshit, does not mean anything…you can not work here.
My answer: I politely told him that sir when we left country a month ago we both were working on H1’s, now we are seeking entry on AP.
Officer: yeh but don’t do fraud, you cannot work here (Very rudely)...who told you that you can work here.
My Answer: Again I explained politely- Sir, we filed for 485 which made us eligible to get EAD’s, showed him the EAD card again (which clearly states “Authorized to work in US till validity of this card” Our EAD’s are valid till end of 2008)
Officer: listen don’t teach me law, I have been working here for “x” number of years, and you think you know laws better than me.
After this I and my wife decided to keep quite as that moron was not ready to listen and understand anything.
Officer (rudely): I will set this straight for you…then we were asked to follow him in a separate room. Many people were waiting there I guess most of them using AP
The Officer went to one other custom officer there and pointed towards us and explained him something which we could not hear.
We waited � an hour till our named was called…I was worried that they will now create lot problems for us but to my surprise we were just handed our Passports along with AP’s / I-94 stamped as “AOS” and told you are all set... Absolutely No questions asked.
I am worried if he has entered some nasty remarks on my case…not sure.
Now this entire incident makes me wonder what that officer was talking about, my guess is one of the following:
1. He assumed throughout that my wife is entering on H1 and I on H4
2. Or he did realize his mistake but was too egoistic to accept it.
3. Or he was right and I was wrong about working on EAD (being derivative)...am I missing something here??
One of my suggestion from all this experience is that anybody entering on AP always state the purpose of visit is to “Resume pending AOS”
In last 8 years I have re-entered US like 6 times but never faced such a rude Immigration officer or have been treated like this.
Guru’s please advice if there is a possibility to reinstate our status as H1, we would rather work on H1 then on EAD’s
Thanks!
nav_kri
04-01 08:09 PM
Yes, the info is right
Found this text at http://www.albertacanada.com/immigration/immigrate/srsvisaholder.html
Important note: A new and updated version of the AINP Occupations Under Pressure List for the Strategic Recruitment Stream � U.S. Visa Holder Category will be posted to this site on April 15, 2009. Any applications postmarked before April 15, 2009 will be assessed based on the list currently posted. All applications postmarked on or after April 15, 2009 will be assessed based on the revised list that will be posted on April 15, 2009.
Found this text at http://www.albertacanada.com/immigration/immigrate/srsvisaholder.html
Important note: A new and updated version of the AINP Occupations Under Pressure List for the Strategic Recruitment Stream � U.S. Visa Holder Category will be posted to this site on April 15, 2009. Any applications postmarked before April 15, 2009 will be assessed based on the list currently posted. All applications postmarked on or after April 15, 2009 will be assessed based on the revised list that will be posted on April 15, 2009.
BharatPremi
07-15 11:11 PM
Guys,
Just recently moved from Milwaukee, WI to Plano, TX (DFW) area. Just let me know what need to be done from my side. Awaiting eagerly.
- BharatPremi
Just recently moved from Milwaukee, WI to Plano, TX (DFW) area. Just let me know what need to be done from my side. Awaiting eagerly.
- BharatPremi
No comments:
Post a Comment