nixstor
10-15 11:53 PM
ok what receipt # are you guys talking about? i think iam little confused..
ok if I send the letter with my name and notarize it would it suffice? plkease advise? waht is that receipt # that u guysa re talking about
Yes, just notarize and send by mail or fax. The receipt number is for tracking your FOIA request and NOT for your immigration related cases.
From USCIS FOIA home page
Making a FOIA or PA request:
1. To Request USCIS Records: Unless otherwise noted below, mail or fax all requests for USCIS records, including alien files and procurement information, to the National Records Center at the address listed above. Please note: ALL FOIA REQUESTS MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING. Form G-639 (available from this website under Immigration Forms) may be used for this purpose, but is not required. Please see “How to make a FOIA or PA request” for detailed information necessary to process your request. Unfortunately, we are unable to accept FOIA or PA requests by e-mail at this time.
ok if I send the letter with my name and notarize it would it suffice? plkease advise? waht is that receipt # that u guysa re talking about
Yes, just notarize and send by mail or fax. The receipt number is for tracking your FOIA request and NOT for your immigration related cases.
From USCIS FOIA home page
Making a FOIA or PA request:
1. To Request USCIS Records: Unless otherwise noted below, mail or fax all requests for USCIS records, including alien files and procurement information, to the National Records Center at the address listed above. Please note: ALL FOIA REQUESTS MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING. Form G-639 (available from this website under Immigration Forms) may be used for this purpose, but is not required. Please see “How to make a FOIA or PA request” for detailed information necessary to process your request. Unfortunately, we are unable to accept FOIA or PA requests by e-mail at this time.
wallpaper Fiesta I Wish I Wish - Remix
BlueSunD
02-16 05:56 PM
count me in too! :) Just started today, but i'll see if I post some wip screens.
immigrant2007
03-12 10:29 AM
Sorry to break your heart. People use a the words like "ass" and "dick" all the time, nobody really mind reading these words. Why would the same words in Hindi be so offensive ???
Think about that.
You called me Dick Head, would it be fair if I call you Lund Ka Topa. Its the same thing, just translated.
Apologize if I offended someone else, I was trying to be funny.
Haribhai
Tranlsation of dickhead is not correct (there might be some interpretation on your part)
Think about that.
You called me Dick Head, would it be fair if I call you Lund Ka Topa. Its the same thing, just translated.
Apologize if I offended someone else, I was trying to be funny.
Haribhai
Tranlsation of dickhead is not correct (there might be some interpretation on your part)
2011 Gold-Remix Special Vol. 1
immigrant2007
09-10 12:42 PM
I thinkThis year will be good for EB3.
With 700 per queter going to EB2I and EB2C, this means that EB2I will go only upto few months by Jul-2011 before the spill kicks IN.
Once the spill over kicks in EB2 will move by atmost Jul-2007 (as there are won't be any 485 filed for India / China post 2007. Even if they are it is unlikely that they will be processed in 1 or 2 months). So I expect EB3 to use most of the spill over this year.
CATCH: IF USCIS allows filing of 485 for POST 2007 FIASCO then the above doesn't hold true.
With 700 per queter going to EB2I and EB2C, this means that EB2I will go only upto few months by Jul-2011 before the spill kicks IN.
Once the spill over kicks in EB2 will move by atmost Jul-2007 (as there are won't be any 485 filed for India / China post 2007. Even if they are it is unlikely that they will be processed in 1 or 2 months). So I expect EB3 to use most of the spill over this year.
CATCH: IF USCIS allows filing of 485 for POST 2007 FIASCO then the above doesn't hold true.
more...
cshen
06-12 06:28 AM
We are not out of the CIR woods yet.
Link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070612/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_immigration
Link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070612/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_immigration
pcs
04-20 03:20 PM
Pl. send me the contact tel nos & names
more...
Jaime
09-10 03:41 PM
You always have to justify your existence - Like when you go through U.S. immigration after every trip abroad and the immigration officer grills you like you are a criminal on whether you are still working for your H1-B employer, what you do, etc and just plain old gives you a hard time, when your only sin was to briefly leave the U.S. on a business or pleasure trip.
2010 Watch: R. Kelly Plays Classics
needhelp!
10-22 11:05 AM
I sent mine yesterday. Do we get an acknowledgement and a number after this?.
Yes, you should get a receipt number in 2-3 weeks. Please post it here for IV to make a list.
Yes, you should get a receipt number in 2-3 weeks. Please post it here for IV to make a list.
more...
meera_godse
01-31 05:23 PM
Well excuse me, but people having queries other than the reason why this thread was started, please create a new thread.
Sorry to say so, but my query for travel has been sidelined because of other issues.
thanks in advance for your cooperation.
Sorry to say so, but my query for travel has been sidelined because of other issues.
thanks in advance for your cooperation.
hair R. Kelly wants to write you a
saravanaraj.sathya
03-10 03:02 PM
There is nothing to worry. You should be fine. IT does not really depend on your specific skills. If you move to another position as systems analyst with diferent technical skills it should not matter. So long as you are in the same/similar occupation as defined in ONET job code.
Ve fun
Guru's
I have a small doubt on AC -21 especially the same / similar interpretation. in Perm Application there are two places where there is job description. One is Section H field 11 ( Job Opportunity/ job duties) and other one is Section F field 2 ( Prevailing Wage/ SOC code) now both define what the job is the Section H is company specific and Section F is list of USCIS codes under which this particular job falls as subset.
The question is will USCIS judge using section F or Section H for same/ similar interpretation because Section F is pretty Generic and as long as you are in same field it works example in IT if you were say DBA and now data modeler or Systems Analyst or coder they are pretty much same. Here is an example of one such code
15-1051 Computer Systems Analysts
Analyze science, engineering, business, and all other data processing problems for application to electronic data processing systems. Analyze user requirements, procedures, and problems to automate or improve existing systems and review computer system capabilities, workflow, and scheduling limitations. May analyze or recommend commercially available software. Exclude persons working primarily as "Engineers" (17-2011 through 17-2199), "Mathematicians" (15-2021), or "Scientists" (19-1011 through 19-3099). May supervise computer programmers.
But in case they try to interpret Section H is it very complex and has specific tools that can get outdated or obselete with time. So it will be difficult to do an Ac -21 with that Example if they mention SQL Server or Ab-Initio in section H and now you take a full time in company using Oracle or Informatica will that cause an issue?
Ve fun
Guru's
I have a small doubt on AC -21 especially the same / similar interpretation. in Perm Application there are two places where there is job description. One is Section H field 11 ( Job Opportunity/ job duties) and other one is Section F field 2 ( Prevailing Wage/ SOC code) now both define what the job is the Section H is company specific and Section F is list of USCIS codes under which this particular job falls as subset.
The question is will USCIS judge using section F or Section H for same/ similar interpretation because Section F is pretty Generic and as long as you are in same field it works example in IT if you were say DBA and now data modeler or Systems Analyst or coder they are pretty much same. Here is an example of one such code
15-1051 Computer Systems Analysts
Analyze science, engineering, business, and all other data processing problems for application to electronic data processing systems. Analyze user requirements, procedures, and problems to automate or improve existing systems and review computer system capabilities, workflow, and scheduling limitations. May analyze or recommend commercially available software. Exclude persons working primarily as "Engineers" (17-2011 through 17-2199), "Mathematicians" (15-2021), or "Scientists" (19-1011 through 19-3099). May supervise computer programmers.
But in case they try to interpret Section H is it very complex and has specific tools that can get outdated or obselete with time. So it will be difficult to do an Ac -21 with that Example if they mention SQL Server or Ab-Initio in section H and now you take a full time in company using Oracle or Informatica will that cause an issue?
more...
tucker
03-14 07:14 PM
Id be up for a character modeling battle :) Then i can overcome my fear of battles :X
hot BET- Dirty South Volume 1
desi3933
02-12 01:42 PM
....
The things that do make some sense is wastage of visa numbers in 2010. We have some facts to support the "theory" but not enough.
We still have 7 months left for FY2010, so only assertion that there will be EB visa unused is only a "theory" at best.
What doesn't make sense is Ron's assertion that USCIS wasted 13K EB visas in 2009. Facts simply don't support that.
I agree. He has not backed his claim on that thread as well. Someone has posted a question in that thread regarding source of the spillover. The author of the blog responded with legal statute that explains how unused numbers of FB & EB from previous years are used for next year. But no link to justify 13,000 number.
A fact in itself is nothing. It is valuable only for the idea attached to it, or for the proof which it furnishes. - Claude Bernard
I know you lawyers can, with ease, twist words and meanings as you please. - John Gay
_________________
Not a legal advice.
The things that do make some sense is wastage of visa numbers in 2010. We have some facts to support the "theory" but not enough.
We still have 7 months left for FY2010, so only assertion that there will be EB visa unused is only a "theory" at best.
What doesn't make sense is Ron's assertion that USCIS wasted 13K EB visas in 2009. Facts simply don't support that.
I agree. He has not backed his claim on that thread as well. Someone has posted a question in that thread regarding source of the spillover. The author of the blog responded with legal statute that explains how unused numbers of FB & EB from previous years are used for next year. But no link to justify 13,000 number.
A fact in itself is nothing. It is valuable only for the idea attached to it, or for the proof which it furnishes. - Claude Bernard
I know you lawyers can, with ease, twist words and meanings as you please. - John Gay
_________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
house 04 -R. Kelly-U Remind Me
vdlrao
07-19 12:11 AM
We need a realistic estimate of how many applications are pending with PD in 2004. Another thing to bear in mind is the conversion from EB3->EB2. That is also going to hinder the movement of EB2. There are a lot of people trying to use that route.
Yes there would be definetely jumpings from EB3 India to EB2 India. But having allotment of 10 times more of VISA numbers for EB2 India, I presume time is very near by for EB2 India to be current.
Yes there would be definetely jumpings from EB3 India to EB2 India. But having allotment of 10 times more of VISA numbers for EB2 India, I presume time is very near by for EB2 India to be current.
tattoo R._Kelly-Epic-2010-H3X Album
needhelp!
09-18 11:47 PM
I agree,I was a bit annoyed when the congressman started talking about the illegals.. it was totally not related to us.
more...
pictures 1-22 by R. Kelly cover
485Mbe4001
09-10 04:14 PM
i guess they were very happy that they discussed the horse issue and they decided to take a well deserved break...as for 5882 who cares, as one poster mentioned, the horses are US citizens and they support the economy by eating grass. Republicans are happy because legal horses will be eating legal grass as opposed to illegals cutting and shipping grass to the horses. Democrats will be happy because the horses are well looked after.
... i am just venting but i think this is a sign of the times we live in :D .To the folks who say that everything will be ok with the new Prez comes, remember the congress will mostly stay the same.
ya ... at least one issue will be closed by them ... hopefully they discuss our bill today ...
... i am just venting but i think this is a sign of the times we live in :D .To the folks who say that everything will be ok with the new Prez comes, remember the congress will mostly stay the same.
ya ... at least one issue will be closed by them ... hopefully they discuss our bill today ...
dresses R. Kelly, Tyrese, Robin Thicke
nozerd
01-27 10:31 AM
Why are the numbers for 2000 so low. Is it because it is pre AC21.
Also how are we currently accounting for 245I folks in this model. Do we have good numbers on them ?
Also how are we currently accounting for 245I folks in this model. Do we have good numbers on them ?
more...
makeup R. Kelly, Tyrese, Robin Thicke
abd
09-21 04:01 PM
How many days it took you to receive physical RFE after Online status update?
Thanks
I got RFE status change on September 2nd and my attorney recieved it on 7th Tuesday. It was long weekend.
Thanks
I got RFE status change on September 2nd and my attorney recieved it on 7th Tuesday. It was long weekend.
girlfriend R. Kelly - Untitled - 2009
newbee7
07-05 01:56 PM
Total so far approx. $300.
Monthly contrib: $20 for over 7 months.
This purpose of this post in not to boast about my contribution. It is to motivate others who are on the sidelines.
Please contibute to the best of your ability.
Monthly contrib: $20 for over 7 months.
This purpose of this post in not to boast about my contribution. It is to motivate others who are on the sidelines.
Please contibute to the best of your ability.
hairstyles R. Kelly : I Believe I Can
McLuvin
03-12 01:55 PM
finally the bulletin has been posted in the DOS website...
Visa Bulletin for April 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4747.html)
They have given a brief description about "BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS"
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, a significant amount of demand is received each month for applicants who have priority dates which are significantly earlier than the applicable cut-off dates. In addition, fluctuations in demand can cause cut-off date movement to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed. Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however.
Applicability of Section 202(a)(5): INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, removed the per-country limit on Employment-based immigrants in any calendar quarter in which applicant demand for numbers in one or more Employment-based preferences is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5) has allowed countries such as China � mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. Such numbers are provided strictly in priority date order without regard to the foreign state chargeability, and the same cut-off date applies to any country benefiting from this provision.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
Visa Bulletin for April 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4747.html)
They have given a brief description about "BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS"
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, a significant amount of demand is received each month for applicants who have priority dates which are significantly earlier than the applicable cut-off dates. In addition, fluctuations in demand can cause cut-off date movement to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed. Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however.
Applicability of Section 202(a)(5): INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, removed the per-country limit on Employment-based immigrants in any calendar quarter in which applicant demand for numbers in one or more Employment-based preferences is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5) has allowed countries such as China � mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. Such numbers are provided strictly in priority date order without regard to the foreign state chargeability, and the same cut-off date applies to any country benefiting from this provision.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
FinalGC
12-27 08:39 AM
You mean 529? Thanks of telling. I was planning to open an account for my kid's college.
Are you sure they wont let you open an account even if the kid is american citizen by birth?
GUYS THIS SEEMS INCORRECT, I HAVE A 529 FOR BOTH MY BOYS......MY FINANCIAL BROKER SET IT UP FOR ME..
Are you sure they wont let you open an account even if the kid is american citizen by birth?
GUYS THIS SEEMS INCORRECT, I HAVE A 529 FOR BOTH MY BOYS......MY FINANCIAL BROKER SET IT UP FOR ME..
qasleuth
05-26 07:49 PM
So I know what you gonna do , next time when you meet the border patrol. Accept the fact that we are middle class , god and immigration fearing creatures, who definitely have a lot of anger and aggression towards these laws and discrimination but cannot do anything about it and Also we like the life style and show off to the relatives in the India, that you are smart and rich NRI, are the reasons, we are not leaving this country despite of all these things.
I sincerely hope you are not talking about me. are you ?
I sincerely hope you are not talking about me. are you ?
No comments:
Post a Comment