widad2020
01-16 04:37 PM
Good one man. I can see myself while reading your story.
wallpaper University of Phoenix Stadium
karanp25
07-14 06:28 PM
Sorry for asking too many questions. One more thing is when did you get this RFE? I am in similar situation---used AC-21 and applied for EAD back in first week of May 2008, but nothing yet from NSC. I was with my GC sponsoring employer for more than 6 months though and I-140 was approved back in 2005.
I filed EAD renewal on May 28 2008.
Service Center: Nebraska
I filed EAD renewal on May 28 2008.
Service Center: Nebraska
NKR
03-17 10:50 AM
Before retrogression started in "October 2005 Bulletin, Nov 2005 effective", there are quite a few people who applied for I-485 and had PD upto sept 2004. Those cases are approved. I know couple of cases myself.
I think I was current then and I missed out on that date since I was stuck in backlog elimination centre. you could be right.
I think I was current then and I missed out on that date since I was stuck in backlog elimination centre. you could be right.
2011 Only the University of Phoenix
GCwaitforever
02-22 11:41 AM
EB-2 India went to unavailable because USCIS stamped 2003/2004 petitions left and right to consume VISA numbers. Then they realized there were bunch of 2001/2002 petitions gathering dust. After no VISA numbers left, they had no option but to move the priority date backwards to make very few petitions current.
I am betting that they will move the dates forward to 2003 in August or September and process few more EB-2 India petitions. For any forward movement to happen to India EB-2/EB-3, ROW EB-2/EB-3 must become current again. If not, we have to wait till October 2008 for new quota to become effective.
I am betting that they will move the dates forward to 2003 in August or September and process few more EB-2 India petitions. For any forward movement to happen to India EB-2/EB-3, ROW EB-2/EB-3 must become current again. If not, we have to wait till October 2008 for new quota to become effective.
more...
va_dude
08-21 10:08 AM
Uscis has done nothing wrong.
This person who posted the new thread seems to have come in to the country without even a passport. How is that legal?
How in the world can we expect Uscis to overlook all that? Don't criticize uscis for doing their job right (for once) :)
This person who posted the new thread seems to have come in to the country without even a passport. How is that legal?
How in the world can we expect Uscis to overlook all that? Don't criticize uscis for doing their job right (for once) :)
cestmoi
01-11 11:46 PM
Am I blind or is part 2 missing one more option?
None of the options apply to me below as I will be applying for employment based Green Card as I have a L1A visa (unless I'm not supposed to be filling out i-485?)
a. An immigrant petition giving me an immediately available immigrant visa number has been approved (attach a copy of the approval notice, or a relative, special immigrant juvenile, or special immigrant military visa petition filed...
b. My spouse or parent applied for adjustment of status or was granted lawful permanent residence in an immigrant visa category that allows derivative status for spouses and children
c. I entered as a K-1 fiance(e) of a US citizen whom I married within 90 days of entry...
d. I was granted asylum or derivative asylum status as the spouse or child of a person granted asylum and am eligible for adjustment.
e. I am a native or citizen of Cuba admitted or paroled into the US after Jan 1, 1959...
f. I am the husband, wife or minor unmarried child of a Cuban described above in (e)....
g. I have continously resided in the US since before Jan 1, 1972
h. Other basis of eligibility. Explain (for example, I was admitted as a refugee, my status has not been terminated, and I have been physically present in the US for 1 year...
None of the options apply to me below as I will be applying for employment based Green Card as I have a L1A visa (unless I'm not supposed to be filling out i-485?)
a. An immigrant petition giving me an immediately available immigrant visa number has been approved (attach a copy of the approval notice, or a relative, special immigrant juvenile, or special immigrant military visa petition filed...
b. My spouse or parent applied for adjustment of status or was granted lawful permanent residence in an immigrant visa category that allows derivative status for spouses and children
c. I entered as a K-1 fiance(e) of a US citizen whom I married within 90 days of entry...
d. I was granted asylum or derivative asylum status as the spouse or child of a person granted asylum and am eligible for adjustment.
e. I am a native or citizen of Cuba admitted or paroled into the US after Jan 1, 1959...
f. I am the husband, wife or minor unmarried child of a Cuban described above in (e)....
g. I have continously resided in the US since before Jan 1, 1972
h. Other basis of eligibility. Explain (for example, I was admitted as a refugee, my status has not been terminated, and I have been physically present in the US for 1 year...
more...
sprajulu
07-01 04:09 PM
We all should request politely to end the specific reservations.
2010 University of Phoenix Stadium
minimalist
09-10 12:29 PM
girijas, your comment is both funny and sad... we are behind horses.. :(
The picture is not pretty.
The picture is not pretty.
more...
newuser
10-15 08:19 PM
Will mail the doc asap
hair University of Phoenix-Houston
nc14
01-17 03:48 PM
Just signed up for $20 monthly Recurring. Thanks a lot guys for doing what you have done so far and plan to do in the future. GOD Bless IV and its efforts.
more...
alex99
10-31 07:46 AM
Bump
hot University of Phoenix: Dominion Atlantic Railway
NKR
10-16 03:24 PM
So to put extensive blame on USCIS for the "reaction" (I assume you are talking about the backlogs) is not right.
Read your above sentence, then read your below sentence. If I try to find a relation between these two sentences I do not know what you are talking.
Firstly: If USCIS was reacting, they would not have approved the so called "newer" applications.
Second: When you say "approving" newer applications, are you saying approving older applications by PD or older applications by RD/ND (with older being 3-4 year older RD/PD)?? USCIS has never had to process applications by PD, only factor they have is RD/ND. PD just tells when someone can be approved (or apply), it doesn't get you any priority in the processing queue. I am sure you dont want the situation where you have your later PD, earlier RD, but someone who chose to delay his app to come with an ancient PD, but a fresh RD to get processed ahead of you (when both of you are current) do you?
Again I am not sure what you are saying but MY PD is in early 2004 and RD was in Aug, they moved my application to another centre and my new RD is Oct. then I saw 2006 and 2007 cases getting approved. This is not right, why are they going by RD and not on PD?.
I am bit out of touch, but isn't PERM/BEC a DoL operation not USCIS. Then again, those were the factors you have no control. Even when it was just the Labor Cert process, there had been disparities between various processing centers. Some people made use of provisions (sometimes fraudulently) to get their LCs through these "fast" process centers. I too have been affected by the Perm/LC situation, but I don't think USCIS is to take blame on that.
Exactly dude, there should be some synchronization between DOL and USCIS. Just saying that USCIS is not responsible for DOL�s actions does not solve the problem, they can conveniently blame each other and take till eternity to process applications and you will keep saying the same thing that USCIS is not to be blamed.
Am I defending USCIS: No, I am just saying if people want a Flower campaign, they should go ahead with it. No point putting FUD to stop people from doing what they want.
No, you did not say that, all you said was USCIS is not doing anything wrong.
Read your above sentence, then read your below sentence. If I try to find a relation between these two sentences I do not know what you are talking.
Firstly: If USCIS was reacting, they would not have approved the so called "newer" applications.
Second: When you say "approving" newer applications, are you saying approving older applications by PD or older applications by RD/ND (with older being 3-4 year older RD/PD)?? USCIS has never had to process applications by PD, only factor they have is RD/ND. PD just tells when someone can be approved (or apply), it doesn't get you any priority in the processing queue. I am sure you dont want the situation where you have your later PD, earlier RD, but someone who chose to delay his app to come with an ancient PD, but a fresh RD to get processed ahead of you (when both of you are current) do you?
Again I am not sure what you are saying but MY PD is in early 2004 and RD was in Aug, they moved my application to another centre and my new RD is Oct. then I saw 2006 and 2007 cases getting approved. This is not right, why are they going by RD and not on PD?.
I am bit out of touch, but isn't PERM/BEC a DoL operation not USCIS. Then again, those were the factors you have no control. Even when it was just the Labor Cert process, there had been disparities between various processing centers. Some people made use of provisions (sometimes fraudulently) to get their LCs through these "fast" process centers. I too have been affected by the Perm/LC situation, but I don't think USCIS is to take blame on that.
Exactly dude, there should be some synchronization between DOL and USCIS. Just saying that USCIS is not responsible for DOL�s actions does not solve the problem, they can conveniently blame each other and take till eternity to process applications and you will keep saying the same thing that USCIS is not to be blamed.
Am I defending USCIS: No, I am just saying if people want a Flower campaign, they should go ahead with it. No point putting FUD to stop people from doing what they want.
No, you did not say that, all you said was USCIS is not doing anything wrong.
more...
house University of Phoenix Stadium,
greyhair
02-12 01:06 PM
pbuckeye, , You are still more concerned about what immigration body shop has to say than the facts and numbers on the ground. I am confused :confused:
tattoo University of Phoeni
chanduv23
11-22 02:14 PM
There are ofcourse lot of ways to stay afloat on your GC process. But its all risky. Even expreienced Lawyers will say its possible and might go ahead as well. But something happens latter then the lawyer is not at loss. Its you who will bear the brunt.
If you are saying that I am following the book to get my GC so be it. On my recent trip to Cleavland, Ohio I was in cab driven by a Indian and he was telling me that he made sure he always had a "American" girlfriend as in case of "troubled waters" he can play the safe and easy card by marrying the girlfriend. Smart, only if you are single :D
So the gist of my message is there are many ways to keep afloat but its better to choose the correct one and risk free one unless you are already on the loosing side and this is the best you can do and the last leaf of your luck.
Always follow the right route. But if you are in troubled waters, try provisions and workarounds make make sure u do it legally :) Play by the rules. In cases where company is laying off, bad managers, selfish employers, mergers etc... bad work, I think one must see if he has provisions and workarounds. You never marry a company for thee sake of Green Card, if you do so, then get ready for an unconditional divorce. Remember, company are commercial entities, and they dont care a shit about u or ur family or green card, they care about themselves, I have seen so many people being artificially loyal to their companies so that they would not face layoffs or issues. As such nothing is straight forward. No system is 100% perfect and though the American system may not be 100% perfect system, this is the only system that can be the best in the world. There is provision for almost anything. One may not feel right about certain things but at the end of the day everyone gets what they deserve. Try to be a "survivor" :)
If you are saying that I am following the book to get my GC so be it. On my recent trip to Cleavland, Ohio I was in cab driven by a Indian and he was telling me that he made sure he always had a "American" girlfriend as in case of "troubled waters" he can play the safe and easy card by marrying the girlfriend. Smart, only if you are single :D
So the gist of my message is there are many ways to keep afloat but its better to choose the correct one and risk free one unless you are already on the loosing side and this is the best you can do and the last leaf of your luck.
Always follow the right route. But if you are in troubled waters, try provisions and workarounds make make sure u do it legally :) Play by the rules. In cases where company is laying off, bad managers, selfish employers, mergers etc... bad work, I think one must see if he has provisions and workarounds. You never marry a company for thee sake of Green Card, if you do so, then get ready for an unconditional divorce. Remember, company are commercial entities, and they dont care a shit about u or ur family or green card, they care about themselves, I have seen so many people being artificially loyal to their companies so that they would not face layoffs or issues. As such nothing is straight forward. No system is 100% perfect and though the American system may not be 100% perfect system, this is the only system that can be the best in the world. There is provision for almost anything. One may not feel right about certain things but at the end of the day everyone gets what they deserve. Try to be a "survivor" :)
more...
pictures of University of Phoenix
Almond
07-05 01:57 PM
Its not about individualistic ideas, but a collection of all good ideas.
Make ALL advanced features such as PMing, emailing members on the forums, accessible to paid members. We are not asking for much JUST $10. If a guy cant pay $10 and that too to basically ask questions, then maybe we dont WANT them on the site, hogging bandwidth.
MOnthly or yearly?
Make ALL advanced features such as PMing, emailing members on the forums, accessible to paid members. We are not asking for much JUST $10. If a guy cant pay $10 and that too to basically ask questions, then maybe we dont WANT them on the site, hogging bandwidth.
MOnthly or yearly?
dresses University of Phoenix Stadium,
ashkam
01-30 02:54 PM
So, basically anyone laid off on I485 pending without a job is accumulating "out of status" days.That's your opinion?
If you are I-485 pending, you are not out of status regardless of whether you have a job or not.
If you are I-485 pending, you are not out of status regardless of whether you have a job or not.
more...
makeup University of Phoenix Stadium
nixstor
07-05 11:19 AM
Yes, there are other ways that in an emergency you can keep in touch with IV. Total waste of valuable money, for the couple of occasions it has happened
I dont really care about the website outages. Thats not the main issue. Two or three core/senior volunteers are always running a contribution drive. Imagine thse people doing some thing more productive than running funding/media drives. When shyt hits the roof, we have a boat load of people asking when the hell shyt is gonna be all over us or how to wipe off the shyt. IV's strength lies in its members and all the time IV members have not responded to enroll in a monthly payment. People want GC's, but they dont want to pay for the fight. People want GC's but they want accountability for 20USD. People have point specific issues about themselves and their imigration issues and are happy to leverage the knowledge of the IV community, but do not care a damn about IV community. Those who pay, pay twice, pay thrice and even more. Why should any one do it? Why should others just simply browse and get answers for persoanl point specific issues? Those who do not know the value of green and what it can do in America, should stop worrying about GC. We have become a laughing stock for people on anti forums like alipac who have arrived at the conclusion that they dont need to fight us because we fight among us big time. Enough of my rant.
I dont really care about the website outages. Thats not the main issue. Two or three core/senior volunteers are always running a contribution drive. Imagine thse people doing some thing more productive than running funding/media drives. When shyt hits the roof, we have a boat load of people asking when the hell shyt is gonna be all over us or how to wipe off the shyt. IV's strength lies in its members and all the time IV members have not responded to enroll in a monthly payment. People want GC's, but they dont want to pay for the fight. People want GC's but they want accountability for 20USD. People have point specific issues about themselves and their imigration issues and are happy to leverage the knowledge of the IV community, but do not care a damn about IV community. Those who pay, pay twice, pay thrice and even more. Why should any one do it? Why should others just simply browse and get answers for persoanl point specific issues? Those who do not know the value of green and what it can do in America, should stop worrying about GC. We have become a laughing stock for people on anti forums like alipac who have arrived at the conclusion that they dont need to fight us because we fight among us big time. Enough of my rant.
girlfriend University of Phoenix Stadium
chanduv23
09-28 03:48 PM
Those Asian Americans who are against new Asian immigrants, which include some of my relatives, sadly to tell you, are just helping White Americans in this fight. It is their wish and their passion. But if White Americans don't want it, they will have no chance of getting their voice heard. Not all White Americans are against immigration. But there is a big percentage of White Americans who are either fiercely against it or do not want it. I can hardly find any White American who says they want more immigrants. And a small percentage of White Americans are fiercely against immigrations. They would curse at anyone who they think is a new immigrant at any opportunity they have.
Well, unfortunately they all vote and their votes are important to all the candidates. Even Senators like Obama, Hillary etc... are playing the same vote bank politics. They seem to be loving immigrants of different ethnicities, but not skilled immigrants waiting for green card - VERY SIMPLE EQUATION - NO VOTING POWER NO SUPPORT - and people like Durbin and Grassley go a step ahead and damage the entire industry and attack tech companies. They do all these just for the sake of votes.
Our only mistake is that we are in the queue, followed all rules, contribute to economy and we do not vote. They do not see anything else but votes. They are not controlling brain drain, not recognizing skills, tried to break their own rules during the July bulletin fiasco - why so much hatred towards us? Just because we are competitive?
Well, unfortunately they all vote and their votes are important to all the candidates. Even Senators like Obama, Hillary etc... are playing the same vote bank politics. They seem to be loving immigrants of different ethnicities, but not skilled immigrants waiting for green card - VERY SIMPLE EQUATION - NO VOTING POWER NO SUPPORT - and people like Durbin and Grassley go a step ahead and damage the entire industry and attack tech companies. They do all these just for the sake of votes.
Our only mistake is that we are in the queue, followed all rules, contribute to economy and we do not vote. They do not see anything else but votes. They are not controlling brain drain, not recognizing skills, tried to break their own rules during the July bulletin fiasco - why so much hatred towards us? Just because we are competitive?
hairstyles University of Phoenix-Jersey
mordaut
02-27 08:38 PM
wow these are good...but im just wondering...what are they modelled after? ive never seen any subways like those...
green_card
07-05 12:56 AM
if there is enough of a stink made over this, the law could be changed to get back the 'lost' numbers.... laws are there to cater to needs of the situation at hand anc can be changed. IV, AILA and the ombudsman are doing a great job in helping bring about a change in the law. even if congress decides to allow reclaiming of the numbers lost since 1992, there could be an end to this problem for the forseeable future until SKIL or another version of "the grand bargain" comes to the table.
I applied for 140/485 concurrently in August 2004 before IV existed. I can tell you first hand that IV has made a HUGE difference. Our voice is being heard above the din of mostly bigoted and ignorant comments by right wing radicals and liberals that only care about illegals/unskilled workers.
I am sick of the narrow minded comments of a lot of people that post here that only care about their particular scenario and dont take the bigger picture into account. We are all in this together and we will succeed only as a combined front and not as bickering individuals.
All the IV core members, thanks for everything
I applied for 140/485 concurrently in August 2004 before IV existed. I can tell you first hand that IV has made a HUGE difference. Our voice is being heard above the din of mostly bigoted and ignorant comments by right wing radicals and liberals that only care about illegals/unskilled workers.
I am sick of the narrow minded comments of a lot of people that post here that only care about their particular scenario and dont take the bigger picture into account. We are all in this together and we will succeed only as a combined front and not as bickering individuals.
All the IV core members, thanks for everything
sammas
07-12 04:01 PM
F. DETERMINATION OF THE NUMERICAL LIMITS ON IMMIGRANTS REQUIRED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT (INA)
The State Department is required to make a determination of the worldwide numerical limitations, as outlined in Section 201(c) and (d) of the INA, on an annual basis. These calculations are based in part on data provided by U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services (CIS) regarding the number of immediate relative adjustments in the preceding year and the number of aliens paroled into the United States under Section 212(d)(5) in the second preceding year. Without this information, it is impossible to make an official determination of the annual limits. To avoid delays in processing while waiting for the CIS data, the Visa Office (VO) bases allocations on the minimum annual limits outlined in Section 201 of the INA. On July 7th, CIS provided the required data to VO.
The Department of State has determined the Family and Employment preference numerical limits for FY-2010 in accordance with the terms of Section 201 of the INA. These numerical limitations for FY-2010 are as follows:
Worldwide Family-Sponsored preference limit: 226,000
Worldwide Employment-Based preference limit: 150,667
Under INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2010 the per-country limit is 26,367. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,533.
The State Department is required to make a determination of the worldwide numerical limitations, as outlined in Section 201(c) and (d) of the INA, on an annual basis. These calculations are based in part on data provided by U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services (CIS) regarding the number of immediate relative adjustments in the preceding year and the number of aliens paroled into the United States under Section 212(d)(5) in the second preceding year. Without this information, it is impossible to make an official determination of the annual limits. To avoid delays in processing while waiting for the CIS data, the Visa Office (VO) bases allocations on the minimum annual limits outlined in Section 201 of the INA. On July 7th, CIS provided the required data to VO.
The Department of State has determined the Family and Employment preference numerical limits for FY-2010 in accordance with the terms of Section 201 of the INA. These numerical limitations for FY-2010 are as follows:
Worldwide Family-Sponsored preference limit: 226,000
Worldwide Employment-Based preference limit: 150,667
Under INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2010 the per-country limit is 26,367. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,533.
No comments:
Post a Comment