gc_on_demand
05-13 11:01 AM
Dear members
Please dont keep hope that there will be a CIR in a year. Why ? Mr President is not confident that he will bring it or not otherwise he would have sound plan and announcement. He is asking Mccain to take a lead on this and remember that news Mccain was angry on mexican delegation who went to him to argue to bring CIR.
This year they will not bring it with unemployment and other reason. Next year it will be election year.
If time is good they will attempt in 2011 so it will help in election 2012...again nothing can be done in 2012 too..
Please dont keep hope that there will be a CIR in a year. Why ? Mr President is not confident that he will bring it or not otherwise he would have sound plan and announcement. He is asking Mccain to take a lead on this and remember that news Mccain was angry on mexican delegation who went to him to argue to bring CIR.
This year they will not bring it with unemployment and other reason. Next year it will be election year.
If time is good they will attempt in 2011 so it will help in election 2012...again nothing can be done in 2012 too..
wallpaper nose piercing care. about nose
alterego
12-12 07:09 PM
How there could be demand for visa numbers for EB2 India between the years 2000 & 2002. The possible sources of such visa number demand would be from BEC or LC substitution. Both require filing a new I-140 recently, which most likely would not have been approved yet. Are visa numbers alloted even before I-140 is approved??
Unless there were some real unlucky ones with PD earlier than 2002 that got through 'namecheck' just recently.
You forget that BECs were clearing up since some time now, and that 140PP was available until late July. Which person in his/her right mind having endured the BEC nightmare would not have done the 140PP, and if they did that and filed concurrently, then if all goes well 485 could easily get wrapped up in 4-6 months. I know of a person from EB2 ROW who got his green card start(PERM) to finish(485 approval) in 8mths flat. Similar examples, if a little slower abound at . To him this can seem an efficient system!
Unless there were some real unlucky ones with PD earlier than 2002 that got through 'namecheck' just recently.
You forget that BECs were clearing up since some time now, and that 140PP was available until late July. Which person in his/her right mind having endured the BEC nightmare would not have done the 140PP, and if they did that and filed concurrently, then if all goes well 485 could easily get wrapped up in 4-6 months. I know of a person from EB2 ROW who got his green card start(PERM) to finish(485 approval) in 8mths flat. Similar examples, if a little slower abound at . To him this can seem an efficient system!
fromnaija
09-22 05:55 PM
Is it possible to include "allow filing 485" if labor has been pending for 2+ years?
Its not just people who have labor approved and are waiting for PD to be current. In fact there are a lot of ppl who are waiting for labor for 4+ years.
I think its perfectly doable. If its ok to ask for ability to file 485 without PD being current, I think its ok to ask for ability to file 485 while labor is pending.
But I guess we have gone thru this a dozen times and it doesn't appear that the plight of ppl stuck in PBEC is on IV agenda.
I don't think that would be okay as you would then be jumping the hoop of I-140. I think we should just stay with the modest request of "filing 485" without visa number availability.
Its not just people who have labor approved and are waiting for PD to be current. In fact there are a lot of ppl who are waiting for labor for 4+ years.
I think its perfectly doable. If its ok to ask for ability to file 485 without PD being current, I think its ok to ask for ability to file 485 while labor is pending.
But I guess we have gone thru this a dozen times and it doesn't appear that the plight of ppl stuck in PBEC is on IV agenda.
I don't think that would be okay as you would then be jumping the hoop of I-140. I think we should just stay with the modest request of "filing 485" without visa number availability.
2011 lg neon blue.
dan19
03-09 02:50 PM
Based on Murthy.com, It's likely that EB3 World will move but India and China will remain stagnant:confused:
As most EB3 numbers go to IT software and as there are so many issues, until DOS and USCIS fix these issues they wont move these forward
As most EB3 numbers go to IT software and as there are so many issues, until DOS and USCIS fix these issues they wont move these forward
more...
GotFreedom?
03-12 10:33 AM
Congratulations and Enjoy.
gc28262
03-26 07:10 PM
I was on bench for 4 months in 2001. I have 2 times H1 transfer after that and visited India couple of times. I have regular pay stubs from 2002 onwards.
Can this create an issue while IO is working on my 485 application?
Have you gone out of the country and came back to USA on H1B visa after that ?
If so, you are safe. Status is checked from the last lawful entry into US ( entry using AP does not help).
Can this create an issue while IO is working on my 485 application?
Have you gone out of the country and came back to USA on H1B visa after that ?
If so, you are safe. Status is checked from the last lawful entry into US ( entry using AP does not help).
more...
haritha
02-19 08:54 PM
Cataphract
Thanks for the update. This surely will inspire many more. You guys form a Brilliant Team. Good luck.
Haritha.
Thanks for the update. This surely will inspire many more. You guys form a Brilliant Team. Good luck.
Haritha.
2010 elle macpherson style_09. honda cbr600rr. honda cbr600rr.
gc_75
07-17 04:45 PM
Here is the link:
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3269.html
Please refer to following para about July bulletin:
D. JULY EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISA AVAILABILITY
After consulting with Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Visa Office advises readers that Visa Bulletin #107 (dated June 12) should be relied upon as the current July Visa Bulletin for purposes of determining Employment visa number availability, and that Visa Bulletin #108 (dated July 2) is hereby withdrawn.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3269.html
Please refer to following para about July bulletin:
D. JULY EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISA AVAILABILITY
After consulting with Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Visa Office advises readers that Visa Bulletin #107 (dated June 12) should be relied upon as the current July Visa Bulletin for purposes of determining Employment visa number availability, and that Visa Bulletin #108 (dated July 2) is hereby withdrawn.
more...
snowshoe
01-01 09:00 AM
I just returned from my 4 days cruise with a stop at Calica, Mexico. Here is my experience with the Customs and Border Patrol officer at the Port of Miami:
I told him that we had applied for green card and handed him the original AP approval notices. He went through our passports to look at our visa stamps. He pointed out that the Visa stamps in our passports had expired, he asked me if I still work with the same company, I answered "Yes" and handed him our new H1 extension approval notices. He looked at the documents (guess looked at name and validity dates) and then took all the documents to another officer.
After returning to his desk he justed entered some data into their system (I think our passport numbers) and told us we were good to go. He did not take our AP notices and did not issue new I-94.
(while embarkation the Carnival staff had looked at our AP notices and hence had not asked for our old I-94s).
I wish all of us a very happy new year.
I told him that we had applied for green card and handed him the original AP approval notices. He went through our passports to look at our visa stamps. He pointed out that the Visa stamps in our passports had expired, he asked me if I still work with the same company, I answered "Yes" and handed him our new H1 extension approval notices. He looked at the documents (guess looked at name and validity dates) and then took all the documents to another officer.
After returning to his desk he justed entered some data into their system (I think our passport numbers) and told us we were good to go. He did not take our AP notices and did not issue new I-94.
(while embarkation the Carnival staff had looked at our AP notices and hence had not asked for our old I-94s).
I wish all of us a very happy new year.
hair elle macpherson style_09. party dresses juniors 2011.
eilsoe
10-03 01:41 PM
Yes... someone should start a SPAM thread...
to let off some agressions that is...
ahh what the h*ll.. we answered his question in the beginning...
to let off some agressions that is...
ahh what the h*ll.. we answered his question in the beginning...
more...
binadh
07-09 01:44 PM
I have made several attempts to get my money back from my previous lawyer without any success. After complaining about his services, he has sent me an email saying the he will return half of the money because he was not prompt on processing my case and I was not happy with his services. I received that email about 6 weeks ago and haven't seen a dime from him yet. And I do not think I will get my money back from this guy. This was paid for creating my job profile and filing the labor - what this bastard calls an initial retention.
Is there any specific website/forum where I can post my experience with this guy so that others will not take their business to this scammer. Please let us know if there is anything that we can do about this type of guys?
Is there any specific website/forum where I can post my experience with this guy so that others will not take their business to this scammer. Please let us know if there is anything that we can do about this type of guys?
hot elle macpherson style_09. houses on fire pictures. houses on fire pictures.
go_guy123
01-11 09:47 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This is still riddled with amnesty....more punitive versions will surely come which the democratic party will oppose for sure.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This is still riddled with amnesty....more punitive versions will surely come which the democratic party will oppose for sure.
more...
house elle macpherson style_09. blake lively thinspo; blake lively thinspo
lecter
January 4th, 2005, 11:34 PM
nice work. the technique works well. I like to make these moodier.....
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/data//501/7236bw-HL2C9754-med.jpg
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/data//501/7236BW-HL2C9756-med.jpg
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/data//501/7236bw-HL2C9754-med.jpg
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/data//501/7236BW-HL2C9756-med.jpg
tattoo elle macpherson style_09. dodge journey rt.
andhrawala
11-18 01:49 PM
Hi GCInLimbo,
I also did the same thing what you did. I applied for my h1 extension and as it was pending for the last 6 months I joined a different employer by filing a new H1B (Approved after premium processing). So, I was without any approved H1 for 6 months (basically maintained legal status on pending H1).
Now, my old employer reverted the pending H1B as I left the company.
I also applied for my I-485 with my old employer in 2007, but I have not received NOID so far. Looking at your case I may also get a NOID.
Please update me of how are you proceeding with your case.
Thanks,
I also did the same thing what you did. I applied for my h1 extension and as it was pending for the last 6 months I joined a different employer by filing a new H1B (Approved after premium processing). So, I was without any approved H1 for 6 months (basically maintained legal status on pending H1).
Now, my old employer reverted the pending H1B as I left the company.
I also applied for my I-485 with my old employer in 2007, but I have not received NOID so far. Looking at your case I may also get a NOID.
Please update me of how are you proceeding with your case.
Thanks,
more...
pictures elle macpherson style_09. in laden hat bin laden gay.
Sandeep
05-22 07:30 PM
US Congress warned on green card backlog
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12919954/
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12919954/
dresses elle macpherson style_09.
jungalee43
12-23 12:29 PM
I must travel to India due to family emergency. My AP is valid for next five months. But just 1 week ago we changed our residence and now I have a family emergency. So my current address is different than that on the AP. I have updated my address online AR-11and have a confirmation document with both the addresses. I will clear immigration at JFK. Would this addres change create any problem? Has anyone gone through similar situation? The new adress is in the same state, just 4 miles from previous address, but city and zip is changed. No employer change.
more...
makeup elle macpherson style_09. modern hairstyles with bangs.
kaisersose
04-16 03:11 PM
Thanks for the quick response gurus. Would like to know if anyone else is in the same boat. Also because of this issue, my spouse is resigning her job and going out of US for a H4 stamp. Is there any way we can avoid it as it is a oversight issue?
Thanks
This is jut my opinion, but I would do exactly this. She should not be quitting her job. If you file an MTR quickly, then she is not really breaking any rules.
Even if you get a 485 rejection notice, it is still OK as long as you file an MTR in a timely manner. The case status will change to "under process" and then you will be fine again as long as your lawyer takes care to extensively document your case so that an IO cannot make a mistake about your EB category again.
In short, just keep your jobs and file an MTR ASAP with correct documentation.
Thanks
This is jut my opinion, but I would do exactly this. She should not be quitting her job. If you file an MTR quickly, then she is not really breaking any rules.
Even if you get a 485 rejection notice, it is still OK as long as you file an MTR in a timely manner. The case status will change to "under process" and then you will be fine again as long as your lawyer takes care to extensively document your case so that an IO cannot make a mistake about your EB category again.
In short, just keep your jobs and file an MTR ASAP with correct documentation.
girlfriend elle macpherson style_09. plant and animal cell; plant and animal cell
waitforevergc
09-04 02:05 PM
People:
Please pray that EB2I becomes 2008 :)
I desperately want to file for i-485 and get EAD since my job is in shaky ground.
Please pray for me folks.
Please pray that EB2I becomes 2008 :)
I desperately want to file for i-485 and get EAD since my job is in shaky ground.
Please pray for me folks.
hairstyles elle macpherson style_09. more
Loruoo26
02-14 12:47 PM
Everyone is entitled to have an opinion. When it comes to opinions, though, there's a difference between the majority wow gold (http://www.wowpl.de), of people and celebrities like actors, athletes, and rock stars. If you're an average person, only your family and friends care about your opinion. If you’re famous, the whole world listens, or so it seems sometimes. Is this the way if should be? I don't think so. We shouldn't pay attention to famous people's opinions just because of who they are. Being a famous basketball player doesn't make someone an expert on environmental issues. However, that basketball player has a better opportunity to be heard than most wow gold (http://www.wowleveln.de), people do. If that player feels very strongly about an issue, he can use his fame to draw attention to it and get other people involved. That way they can saw attention and needed dollars to that issue. People who are rich put their money behind a cause. In the same way, famous people are using their most valuable asset. In their case, it's not money. It's their name recognition. Should people pay attention to what they think just because of who maple story powerleveling (http://www.maplestorymesosshop.com/maple-story-power-leveling.asp), they are? I don’t think so. I also don't think we should discount what they think just because of who they are. They have a right to their opinion. If their name draws people to that cause, all the better for the cause. I think too often we categories people and try to keep them in their place. maple story powerleveling (http://www.maplestorymesosstore.com/maple-story-power-leveling.asp), Celebrities have brains and should be allowed to use them. When they're advocating a cause, their opinion should be just one of many factors we use to evaluate that cause.Everyone is entitled to have an opinion. When maple story powerleveling (http://www.mesosoon.com/maple-story-power-leveling.asp),it comes to opinions, though, there's a difference between the majority of people and celebrities like actors, athletes, and rock stars. If you're an average person, only your family and friends care about your opinion. If you’re famous, the whole world listens, or so it seems sometimes. Is this the way if should be? I don't think so. We shouldn't pay attention to famous people's opinions just because of who they are. Being a famous basketball player doesn't make someone an expert on environmental issues. However, that basketball player has a better opportunity to be heard than most people do. If that player feels very strongly about an issue, he can use his fame to draw attention to it and get other people involved. That way they can saw attention and needed dollars to that issue. People who are rich put their money behind a cause. In the same way, famous people are using their most valuable asset. In their case, it's not money. It's their name recognition. Should people pay attention to what they think just because of who they are? I don’t think so. I also don't think we should discount what they think just because of who they are. They have a right to their opinion. If their name draws people to that cause, all the better for the cause. I think too often we categories people and try to keep them in their place. Celebrities have brains and should be allowed to use them. When they're advocating a cause, their opinion should be just one of many factors we use to evaluate that cause.
logiclife
10-26 04:35 PM
For people familiar with how databases work:
You have to realize that each page load means a query has to run to a table of 14,000 records (for 14,000 threads) in MySQL database on our limited capacity server and since you have to sort the rows on basis of most recent updates, you have to get all 14,000 rows of result set and then let database sort them in descending order.
The reason for messed up sort order is that the "recent forums posts" has been pointed to a separete table that has recent threads and that seperate table is populated every 1 or 2 minutes from entire table of threads. That's sometimes you update a thread and it takes a while for it to become most recent thread.
For some reason, and we dont know yet, our site has been over loaded. This used to happen during July bulletin and we did the same work around by pointing "recent forum posts" to a smaller table populated thru a stored procedure running every few minutes. Also, during the July bulletin, we upgraded the server processing capacity and doubled the memory. It may be time to upgrade again, or maybe its time for some tune-up with regards to creating an index on the table for threads.
For people not familiar with Databases:
The messed up sort order on "recent forum posts" is by intention an its a work around to avoid site crashes that we have been having due to reasons we dont know yet.
You have to realize that each page load means a query has to run to a table of 14,000 records (for 14,000 threads) in MySQL database on our limited capacity server and since you have to sort the rows on basis of most recent updates, you have to get all 14,000 rows of result set and then let database sort them in descending order.
The reason for messed up sort order is that the "recent forums posts" has been pointed to a separete table that has recent threads and that seperate table is populated every 1 or 2 minutes from entire table of threads. That's sometimes you update a thread and it takes a while for it to become most recent thread.
For some reason, and we dont know yet, our site has been over loaded. This used to happen during July bulletin and we did the same work around by pointing "recent forum posts" to a smaller table populated thru a stored procedure running every few minutes. Also, during the July bulletin, we upgraded the server processing capacity and doubled the memory. It may be time to upgrade again, or maybe its time for some tune-up with regards to creating an index on the table for threads.
For people not familiar with Databases:
The messed up sort order on "recent forum posts" is by intention an its a work around to avoid site crashes that we have been having due to reasons we dont know yet.
tertip
03-11 02:39 PM
Hi All,
EB3-ROW PD: June 6, 2005
AOS application sent: July 1, 2007
I switched employent on December 2007. I didn't transfer H1-B so I am using my EAD to work for the new company. I didn't file for AC21 because I was worried about RFE or other type of complications.
My H1-b visa and I94 expired on May 2008. I am planning to visit my homecountry and come back on AP. As I understand all I need normally is AP+ passport+ I485 receipt. However, I also read some forum members recommending that we carry recent pay stubs and an employment letter from our company. I also read some that folks were asked if they were still working for the same company. My honest answer would be "no". I left my GC sponsoring firm (A) and joined company (B). So I wouln't have letters or pay stubs from company A. Would that be a problem at the POE? If I run into an IO that prefers to scrutinize, I might get into trouble. This really worries me. Again I switched jobs and never filed for AC21. Would I be at fault for not reporting the job change?
Thanks a lot for all your support!!
EB3-ROW PD: June 6, 2005
AOS application sent: July 1, 2007
I switched employent on December 2007. I didn't transfer H1-B so I am using my EAD to work for the new company. I didn't file for AC21 because I was worried about RFE or other type of complications.
My H1-b visa and I94 expired on May 2008. I am planning to visit my homecountry and come back on AP. As I understand all I need normally is AP+ passport+ I485 receipt. However, I also read some forum members recommending that we carry recent pay stubs and an employment letter from our company. I also read some that folks were asked if they were still working for the same company. My honest answer would be "no". I left my GC sponsoring firm (A) and joined company (B). So I wouln't have letters or pay stubs from company A. Would that be a problem at the POE? If I run into an IO that prefers to scrutinize, I might get into trouble. This really worries me. Again I switched jobs and never filed for AC21. Would I be at fault for not reporting the job change?
Thanks a lot for all your support!!
No comments:
Post a Comment