Aah_GC
07-16 04:01 PM
I agree. These days I freak out when I go to Murthy's website. All that verbose is just a sneeze's worth of what you read in this site. I am almost allergic of murthy.com.
You've got to hand it to these attorneys. They have a way of writing a lot without saying anything.
Sheela Murthy excels in this art. In this situation, should we still file for 485 or not? She will write a whole page on this and finally say you have to make that decision yourself.
Thank you, but I already know that one!
You've got to hand it to these attorneys. They have a way of writing a lot without saying anything.
Sheela Murthy excels in this art. In this situation, should we still file for 485 or not? She will write a whole page on this and finally say you have to make that decision yourself.
Thank you, but I already know that one!
wallpaper lil wayne quotes on haters
babuworld
11-19 03:33 PM
Gurus , I dont know if this question have been addressed before. I am currently on H1B and is valid still july 2009. But i dont have stamping on my passport. I am waiting for AP for my wife and myself. If we user AP to India Trip then
1.Is my H1B still valid?
2. What will be the status? My employer didnt apply for EAD at this movement.
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.
1.Is my H1B still valid?
2. What will be the status? My employer didnt apply for EAD at this movement.
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.
hello
11-29 01:52 PM
Source The OH law firm
The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)
10/14/2010: USCIS Pre-Registration Requirement Rule-Making Agenda in Nonimmigrant and Immigrant Proceedings - How Soon?
The USCIS has been pushing proposals to change procedures of filing of nonimmigrant petitions as well as I-485 applications for sometime. The agency placed these proposals on its agenda this year and surely enough, it has initiated the first part of its agenda in its rule-making vault. The agency drafted and has been seeking the OMB approval for proposed regulation to require pre-registration of the H-1B petitions, apparently as part of its business transformation transition program. It appears that the proposed pre-registration requirement in the H-1B petition process may not bring a drastic impact on the H-1B petitioning employers and the alien beneficiaries. However, its agenda for requiring I-485 applicants to pre-register their intents to file I-485 applications regardless of the visa number availability in the Visa Bulletin will have a significant impact on the immigrants because the proposed rule would discontinue the concurrent filing process for employment-based adjustment of status applicants and would require that an alien seeking to immigrate based upon a classification that is subject to numerical limitations must be the beneficiary of an approved immigrant petition prior to proceeding through a revised adjustment of status process. In plain language, it means that it would terminate the current I-140 and I-485 concurrent filing procedure. The agency justification was to streamline the overall I-485 process and to mitigate visa retrogression through improved estimation of immigrant visa availability. This proposal is still in the vault of the USCIS rule-making agenda with the initial estimation of the proposed rule initiation action in October 2010. We have no information as to whether or not the agency will keep this schedule or will rather turn it over to FY 2011. Whether it initiates sooner or later, it will not have an immediate impact on the foreign workers seeking a green card as the rule-making process will drag into months to come in year 2011. But this is something one has to keep an eye on the development of the USCIS schedules of changes in application procedures. For the reasons, this site will closely monitor the agency's movement from here on. Please stay tuned to this web site for the development of this news.
Any news on this?Will they give EAD?
The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)
10/14/2010: USCIS Pre-Registration Requirement Rule-Making Agenda in Nonimmigrant and Immigrant Proceedings - How Soon?
The USCIS has been pushing proposals to change procedures of filing of nonimmigrant petitions as well as I-485 applications for sometime. The agency placed these proposals on its agenda this year and surely enough, it has initiated the first part of its agenda in its rule-making vault. The agency drafted and has been seeking the OMB approval for proposed regulation to require pre-registration of the H-1B petitions, apparently as part of its business transformation transition program. It appears that the proposed pre-registration requirement in the H-1B petition process may not bring a drastic impact on the H-1B petitioning employers and the alien beneficiaries. However, its agenda for requiring I-485 applicants to pre-register their intents to file I-485 applications regardless of the visa number availability in the Visa Bulletin will have a significant impact on the immigrants because the proposed rule would discontinue the concurrent filing process for employment-based adjustment of status applicants and would require that an alien seeking to immigrate based upon a classification that is subject to numerical limitations must be the beneficiary of an approved immigrant petition prior to proceeding through a revised adjustment of status process. In plain language, it means that it would terminate the current I-140 and I-485 concurrent filing procedure. The agency justification was to streamline the overall I-485 process and to mitigate visa retrogression through improved estimation of immigrant visa availability. This proposal is still in the vault of the USCIS rule-making agenda with the initial estimation of the proposed rule initiation action in October 2010. We have no information as to whether or not the agency will keep this schedule or will rather turn it over to FY 2011. Whether it initiates sooner or later, it will not have an immediate impact on the foreign workers seeking a green card as the rule-making process will drag into months to come in year 2011. But this is something one has to keep an eye on the development of the USCIS schedules of changes in application procedures. For the reasons, this site will closely monitor the agency's movement from here on. Please stay tuned to this web site for the development of this news.
Any news on this?Will they give EAD?
2011 lil wayne quotes about haters.
purgan
10-13 07:23 PM
The US is still the most competitive but the lead is shrinking...its clear that China, India and the emerging Asian economies have the size, the resources and the talent to catch up and probably surpass the US
more...
jgh_res
05-17 10:01 AM
Here is the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
jfredr
06-12 10:24 AM
CIR has got nothing to do with ur visa at this point. this is my idea. better take our seniors advice here at IV
more...
TheCanadian
11-26 04:38 AM
I will? That's surprising!
oh you minx you
oh you minx you
2010 lil wayne quotes on haters
veni001
02-03 07:32 PM
Hey there, I have a three year bachelor's (from Australia) and an American CPA. I believe the two can be evaluated to an Ameircan Master's equivalent. Please, check with your lawyers. It should be possible.
CPA is certification not a degree so i don't think it can be evaluated towards a degree equivalence:confused:
CPA is certification not a degree so i don't think it can be evaluated towards a degree equivalence:confused:
more...
Lucky7
12-04 01:25 AM
I have been waiting since April 2001 for LC EB3 (India) and 4 weeks ago my Attorney calls me up tells me to see him ASAP.So i think Recruitment Instructions finally (LC was filed TR).
Wrong it turns out it is a Analysts Review and they come up with 3 problems:-
1. Job description 2 restrictive and tailored to applicants education and experience.
2. Applicant cannot claim job experience with same employer for job titled offered.
3. Wage is too low,currently making $54.00 an hour,they want $92.00 an hour.
So after addressing the job description and job experience issues and finally get my employer to agree to wage issues and we fax the paper work before the deadline.Have not heard a single thing for close to 5 weeks now.
Are any of you guys having problems with this issue and if so how long after did you get RI.If i dont get LC certified by end of 2007 i think any body with 2003 or earlier PD should file a class action lawsuit against DOL.
Also what happened to DOLs promise to start a date processing guideline,which was supposed to start 1st December 2006,so we would now if it was worthwhile to change from TR to RIR.
Wrong it turns out it is a Analysts Review and they come up with 3 problems:-
1. Job description 2 restrictive and tailored to applicants education and experience.
2. Applicant cannot claim job experience with same employer for job titled offered.
3. Wage is too low,currently making $54.00 an hour,they want $92.00 an hour.
So after addressing the job description and job experience issues and finally get my employer to agree to wage issues and we fax the paper work before the deadline.Have not heard a single thing for close to 5 weeks now.
Are any of you guys having problems with this issue and if so how long after did you get RI.If i dont get LC certified by end of 2007 i think any body with 2003 or earlier PD should file a class action lawsuit against DOL.
Also what happened to DOLs promise to start a date processing guideline,which was supposed to start 1st December 2006,so we would now if it was worthwhile to change from TR to RIR.
hair lil wayne quotes on haters.
glus
10-09 01:12 PM
Sorry to scare you in my previous reply....I did not read your question properly....
Since you are from a Non-Retrogressed Country, you may be eligible to apply for AOS. As you mentioned, you may apply I-140, I-485, I-131, and I-765 all together without any hassle. Make sure your attorney files all your applications with the right fee, since the fee structure has changed recently.
Sorry about my previous post though...
Good Luck!!
Please be careful giving such advises. The person in question was out-of-status because he never worked for company A, so it is not certain if he is in valid status at this point. I would not generalize saying he could file without any hassles. He should speak to a qualified attorney before doing that.
Since you are from a Non-Retrogressed Country, you may be eligible to apply for AOS. As you mentioned, you may apply I-140, I-485, I-131, and I-765 all together without any hassle. Make sure your attorney files all your applications with the right fee, since the fee structure has changed recently.
Sorry about my previous post though...
Good Luck!!
Please be careful giving such advises. The person in question was out-of-status because he never worked for company A, so it is not certain if he is in valid status at this point. I would not generalize saying he could file without any hassles. He should speak to a qualified attorney before doing that.
more...
h1bemployee
02-26 10:43 AM
When was your H1-B amendment denied?
What is your current LCA salary vs. original LCA Salary?
Original LCA salary is like 58k and current one is 40k
What is your current LCA salary vs. original LCA Salary?
Original LCA salary is like 58k and current one is 40k
hot new lil wayne quotes 2011. lil
jambapamba
07-19 07:48 AM
NO
1. W2's/TAX statements are NOT REQUIRED for employment based 485's. Some Attorneys may send them along to play it safe.
2. Affidavits of support for employment based 485's are NOT REQUIRED at all.
1. W2's/TAX statements are NOT REQUIRED for employment based 485's. Some Attorneys may send them along to play it safe.
2. Affidavits of support for employment based 485's are NOT REQUIRED at all.
more...
house lil wayne quotes on haters
snathan
03-29 11:38 AM
Thanks all.
I did send the ITIN application and tax return documents together. I have called IRS multiple times, but they could not confirm anything about the status of ITIN processing. All they say is it is their peak time and I should wait up to 8 weeks to see if I get the ITIN letter :mad:. I have no idea what to do in case I don't get the ITIN letter within that timeframe :confused:.
You dont have anything to worry about. If you dont get the ITIN, just amend your tax return with new ITIN application later.
I did send the ITIN application and tax return documents together. I have called IRS multiple times, but they could not confirm anything about the status of ITIN processing. All they say is it is their peak time and I should wait up to 8 weeks to see if I get the ITIN letter :mad:. I have no idea what to do in case I don't get the ITIN letter within that timeframe :confused:.
You dont have anything to worry about. If you dont get the ITIN, just amend your tax return with new ITIN application later.
tattoo lil wayne quotes on haters.
Munna Bhai
06-11 12:20 PM
Guys,
Every news channel and radio stations is talking abt Bush bringing back teh Immi bill. And I think he will
He will armtwist Congress to pass it like he got the Iraq funding bill passed (w/o plan for withdrawal).....We should have a plan to bring in our ammdts as soon as the bill hits floor again...
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/11/bush.immigration.ap/index.html
Yes, it will be back and it will pass, we all should be well prepared this time.
Every news channel and radio stations is talking abt Bush bringing back teh Immi bill. And I think he will
He will armtwist Congress to pass it like he got the Iraq funding bill passed (w/o plan for withdrawal).....We should have a plan to bring in our ammdts as soon as the bill hits floor again...
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/11/bush.immigration.ap/index.html
Yes, it will be back and it will pass, we all should be well prepared this time.
more...
pictures wallpaper lil wayne quotes
optimystic
03-19 02:44 PM
Well...my PD is current and my RD at Nebraska is also current as per thier processing times. But still no LUDs or any other updates so far :( (its been 19 days since my PD became current)
I already spoke to USCIS IO one week back, and was told its a bit too early, and wait for 45 days and call back if nothing happens until then. They weren't willing to give me the status whether my Namecheck crossed 180 days.
Just going to wait until April 1, and then call them again. Or get an INFOPASS . What do the gurus suggest?
[EB3 - I , PD May 2001, RD July 30 07, Nebraska ]
I already spoke to USCIS IO one week back, and was told its a bit too early, and wait for 45 days and call back if nothing happens until then. They weren't willing to give me the status whether my Namecheck crossed 180 days.
Just going to wait until April 1, and then call them again. Or get an INFOPASS . What do the gurus suggest?
[EB3 - I , PD May 2001, RD July 30 07, Nebraska ]
dresses lil wayne quotes on haters
andy garcia
10-05 10:37 AM
The best way to first start the changes to happen is to file a law suit against USCIS. If we can find a bunch of people would have the same kind of application credentials and different PD were the later PD application was approved we can sue USCIS for losses in personal life and career due to their ineffeciency.
How many of you would be intersted in a law suit like this. If we have even a hunder people to file a law suit we will get more media publicity and our problem will get more recogniction than rallies and lobbying.
This is what the law says:
INA Section 203(e) provides that family-sponsored and employment-based preference visas be issued to eligible immigrants in the order in which a petition in behalf of each has been filed.
What is your argument to sue?
How many of you would be intersted in a law suit like this. If we have even a hunder people to file a law suit we will get more media publicity and our problem will get more recogniction than rallies and lobbying.
This is what the law says:
INA Section 203(e) provides that family-sponsored and employment-based preference visas be issued to eligible immigrants in the order in which a petition in behalf of each has been filed.
What is your argument to sue?
more...
makeup Lil Wayne Quotes And Sayings
Vet04
12-08 12:39 AM
?
girlfriend hot Lil Wayne Quotes: lil
Sath thesmilingstar
02-25 08:10 PM
I understand your mother filed for I-140, but did she also file your I-485 and advance parole? If so, as soon as you get your AP, leave the country and return..as a Parolee. Then apply for FAFSA..
so does this mean that i cannot apply with my is i-140 pending..??
so does this mean that i cannot apply with my is i-140 pending..??
hairstyles haters. lil wayne quotes
Ramba
03-15 11:18 AM
Filing 485 during visa unavailability, should not be the concern in this bill. Why our people are worrying about filing AOS when visa number unavailable? Man, this should not be our concern at all. Our main concern should be reinstating the AC21 provision that allow the oversubscribed countries to use excess visas in each EB category. Specter removed very important provision that eliminate per country limit in EB visas for oversubscribed countries. This is a big blow to India, China. It will stop all the benefits from this bill.
If the current form of specter bill passes, there is no benefit to any of us. If EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3) from count, that drastically increase the visa numbers. The increase is unimaginable, and I feel that it will be about 4 to 5 times than current 140K numbers. If all the listed provisions appears in the final bill, the visa number will always be �current� for all countries for many years, provided AC21 (elimination of per country limit if demand is less than supply) reinstated. If this happens, no one needs to worry about filing AOS when visa number unavailable. That situation never arises.
If current form of Specter bill passes, all the new numbers created thro above listed provisions, will not give any benefit to India/China. DOS simply say per country limit is 10% only no matter what. Remember that, 10% is total of FB+EB numbers. (480000+290000). India and China FB numbers are also heavily backlogged. Therefore our main concern is to reinstate AC21 provision not filing AOS, and keep pressure to keep the listed provisions (EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3)) in the final bill
If the current form of specter bill passes, there is no benefit to any of us. If EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3) from count, that drastically increase the visa numbers. The increase is unimaginable, and I feel that it will be about 4 to 5 times than current 140K numbers. If all the listed provisions appears in the final bill, the visa number will always be �current� for all countries for many years, provided AC21 (elimination of per country limit if demand is less than supply) reinstated. If this happens, no one needs to worry about filing AOS when visa number unavailable. That situation never arises.
If current form of Specter bill passes, all the new numbers created thro above listed provisions, will not give any benefit to India/China. DOS simply say per country limit is 10% only no matter what. Remember that, 10% is total of FB+EB numbers. (480000+290000). India and China FB numbers are also heavily backlogged. Therefore our main concern is to reinstate AC21 provision not filing AOS, and keep pressure to keep the listed provisions (EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3)) in the final bill
pawnrule
01-15 03:05 PM
1) General test.
2) Best thing is not to ask them to send results. Just get an extra copy for yourself and mail it to Buffalo. No specific officer just write on the address
TO
File # B4567890
Immigration section
Consulate General of Canada
Best of luck
Nozerd - Thanks for your help/response.
2) Best thing is not to ask them to send results. Just get an extra copy for yourself and mail it to Buffalo. No specific officer just write on the address
TO
File # B4567890
Immigration section
Consulate General of Canada
Best of luck
Nozerd - Thanks for your help/response.
santb1975
02-15 04:35 PM
^^^
No comments:
Post a Comment