ItIsNotFunny
11-21 05:08 PM
You are correct Chandu. I confirmed with attorney based on some discussion going on in other thread that made me concerned. H1B and GC are complete independent for status.
I think you are wrong ( I just think)
H1b and AOS are two differnt things and are not coupled. A yearly h1b extension beyond 6 years is given if you have a Labor pending for more than an year or pending 140 more than one year and a 3 year h1b extension is granted if you have an approved 140.
So the basis of getting a h1b extension or transfer is 140 and not AOS. One may not have even applied for AOS but can get h1 extensions as long as the above conditions are satisfied.
This is based on what I know. Thats why Attorneys prefer h1b compared to EAd because h1b essentially gives time for you to change jobs/apply for new GC petition in case existing petition has tons of issues etc...
I think you are wrong ( I just think)
H1b and AOS are two differnt things and are not coupled. A yearly h1b extension beyond 6 years is given if you have a Labor pending for more than an year or pending 140 more than one year and a 3 year h1b extension is granted if you have an approved 140.
So the basis of getting a h1b extension or transfer is 140 and not AOS. One may not have even applied for AOS but can get h1 extensions as long as the above conditions are satisfied.
This is based on what I know. Thats why Attorneys prefer h1b compared to EAd because h1b essentially gives time for you to change jobs/apply for new GC petition in case existing petition has tons of issues etc...
wallpaper I used BM Hawthorne Yellow,
ragz4u
03-09 11:57 AM
is it over now? All I get is buzzzzz
Yes it is, the hearing is now scheduled for next Wed
Yes it is, the hearing is now scheduled for next Wed
belmontboy
05-13 11:05 PM
� I-140 filed 05/04/2007
� I-140 approved 09/04/2007.� I-485 filed on 07/02/2007.
� Changed jobs on 07/14//2008 (after 1 year of pending I-485)
� Soft LUD on I-140 02/03/2009 (possible revocation of I-140 from my previous employer)
� got I-485 denial notice on 02/18/2009
� filed MTR on 02/27/2009
� MTR dismissed on 03/26/2009 (on the grounds that I-140 was denied on 09/04/2009)
� filed second MTR on 04/23/2009
� soft LUDs on the second MTR on 04/27/2009 and 04/28/2009
was ur first MTR denied in error?
as per you, your I-140 was never denied.
� I-140 approved 09/04/2007.� I-485 filed on 07/02/2007.
� Changed jobs on 07/14//2008 (after 1 year of pending I-485)
� Soft LUD on I-140 02/03/2009 (possible revocation of I-140 from my previous employer)
� got I-485 denial notice on 02/18/2009
� filed MTR on 02/27/2009
� MTR dismissed on 03/26/2009 (on the grounds that I-140 was denied on 09/04/2009)
� filed second MTR on 04/23/2009
� soft LUDs on the second MTR on 04/27/2009 and 04/28/2009
was ur first MTR denied in error?
as per you, your I-140 was never denied.
2011 not have yellow somewhere.
InTheMoment
07-18 02:07 PM
Adjudication means the process of an adjudicator going thro' your file to see whether you are eligible for adjustment!
Here pre-adjudication means irrespective whether the PD is current or not or availabilty of visa numbers the adjudication process continues.
In other words even though visa numbers are "U" till October they would not simply warm their seats but do something !
See http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cissop.html
Here pre-adjudication means irrespective whether the PD is current or not or availabilty of visa numbers the adjudication process continues.
In other words even though visa numbers are "U" till October they would not simply warm their seats but do something !
See http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cissop.html
more...
Bodran
06-01 04:05 PM
That means your son is also able to file 485, right? In that case he will not age out once an AOS is submitted for him. I am assuming your 140 will be approved before he turns 21.
Thank you for your response......
Yes I believe paperwork will be filed for all my dependants concurrently. Does it even matter when the I140 is approved?
It seems that under the new law his cutoff date is Jun 1 since that is when my priority date will be current so as long as he applies for a green card within one year he is ok.
So if we apply concurrently when is his green card application deemed to have been applied for? When we file concurrently or only when and if the 140is approved.
What do you think?
Thank you for your response......
Yes I believe paperwork will be filed for all my dependants concurrently. Does it even matter when the I140 is approved?
It seems that under the new law his cutoff date is Jun 1 since that is when my priority date will be current so as long as he applies for a green card within one year he is ok.
So if we apply concurrently when is his green card application deemed to have been applied for? When we file concurrently or only when and if the 140is approved.
What do you think?
santb1975
06-20 12:53 AM
Are we not reaching 20K even??
more...
lonedesi
08-08 09:05 AM
Since we are trying to address I-140 delays in general at TSC and NSC, can we just send a general letter to Ombudsman's office without specifying our case and DHS Form 7001 ?
This way it will turn out to be a letter campaign.
What do you think ?
My understanding is if you send a general letter, you will get a general response (standard template) from the Ombudsman's office. For that matter, you don't even have to send the general letter, because I will provide you with the response you can expect to receive from Ombudsman's office without the DHS Form 7001.
----------------------------------------------------------------
"
Thank you for your recent correspondence to the Office of the
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman (CIS Ombudsman). I
appreciate your comments regarding I-140 processing at the Service
Centers. We are well aware of the processing delays at all of the
Service Centers. Currently the TSC is processing I-140 applications
received in July 2007. USCIS has taken steps to address the processing
delays, but their efforts have not come about swiftly. We are
continuing to review and address this issue.
Under the authority of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the CIS
Ombudsman assists individuals and employers who experience specific
problems during the USCIS benefits seeking process, largely to identify
problems and to formulate recommendations to improve the USCIS service.
Please see our website for more information about the CIS Ombudsman
(www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman/).
I believe that first hand information from individuals like you is the
best source for identifying systemic problems in the immigration
benefits process. My office will consider the information you provided
as we develop recommendations to improve USCIS' practices and
procedures.
Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact my office, and for
giving me the opportunity to serve you. I look forward to the day when I
can report that the work of this office has been accomplished because
our vision of a world-class immigration benefits system has been
achieved. Your contribution takes us a step closer to reaching this
goal.
Office of the Ombudsman
-------------------------------------------------------
Please don't get me wrong. All I am trying to emphasize is the DHS Form 7001 is absolutely necessary if you want them to investigate the problem and see for themselves if what we are complaining about is indeed true. You stand a chance that they may take steps to address this problem. If not, it is just waste of time and effort. There is nothing to fear by providing the case details to Ombudsman's office. There are people who have sued USCIS due to the delays and have won their cases....so why fear when all you are doing is requesting USCIS to process our cases in orderly manner.
So please take the time to mail the letter & the completed DHS Form 7001 to the ombudsman's office.
This way it will turn out to be a letter campaign.
What do you think ?
My understanding is if you send a general letter, you will get a general response (standard template) from the Ombudsman's office. For that matter, you don't even have to send the general letter, because I will provide you with the response you can expect to receive from Ombudsman's office without the DHS Form 7001.
----------------------------------------------------------------
"
Thank you for your recent correspondence to the Office of the
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman (CIS Ombudsman). I
appreciate your comments regarding I-140 processing at the Service
Centers. We are well aware of the processing delays at all of the
Service Centers. Currently the TSC is processing I-140 applications
received in July 2007. USCIS has taken steps to address the processing
delays, but their efforts have not come about swiftly. We are
continuing to review and address this issue.
Under the authority of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the CIS
Ombudsman assists individuals and employers who experience specific
problems during the USCIS benefits seeking process, largely to identify
problems and to formulate recommendations to improve the USCIS service.
Please see our website for more information about the CIS Ombudsman
(www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman/).
I believe that first hand information from individuals like you is the
best source for identifying systemic problems in the immigration
benefits process. My office will consider the information you provided
as we develop recommendations to improve USCIS' practices and
procedures.
Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact my office, and for
giving me the opportunity to serve you. I look forward to the day when I
can report that the work of this office has been accomplished because
our vision of a world-class immigration benefits system has been
achieved. Your contribution takes us a step closer to reaching this
goal.
Office of the Ombudsman
-------------------------------------------------------
Please don't get me wrong. All I am trying to emphasize is the DHS Form 7001 is absolutely necessary if you want them to investigate the problem and see for themselves if what we are complaining about is indeed true. You stand a chance that they may take steps to address this problem. If not, it is just waste of time and effort. There is nothing to fear by providing the case details to Ombudsman's office. There are people who have sued USCIS due to the delays and have won their cases....so why fear when all you are doing is requesting USCIS to process our cases in orderly manner.
So please take the time to mail the letter & the completed DHS Form 7001 to the ombudsman's office.
2010 Moore Hawthorne Yellow
wandmaker
06-04 09:22 AM
I got my GC couple of weeks ago and IV has been like a true supportive friend throughout my long wait for this day.
As a way to 'celebrate' my GC, made a Contribution of $500.00 via PayPal.
"This email confirms that you have paid Immigration Voice (donations@immigrationvoice.org) $500.00 USD using PayPal."
Zappy, thank you for your generosity and support for IV.
Wakeup Folks
As a way to 'celebrate' my GC, made a Contribution of $500.00 via PayPal.
"This email confirms that you have paid Immigration Voice (donations@immigrationvoice.org) $500.00 USD using PayPal."
Zappy, thank you for your generosity and support for IV.
Wakeup Folks
more...
gctest
09-15 05:23 PM
Here is the form you can fill out to express support:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?key=pfq9i31UpaJcQdUK-1PaKcg&hl=en
View the read only document here:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pfq9i31UpaJcQdUK-1PaKcg&hl=en
http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?key=pfq9i31UpaJcQdUK-1PaKcg&hl=en
View the read only document here:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pfq9i31UpaJcQdUK-1PaKcg&hl=en
hair 山楂黄(#HC-4): 挺适合光照不足
gcisadawg
02-08 07:15 PM
Absolutely wrong. If husband and wife are filing a joint tax return, it is wrong on her part to send money to her parents without informing her husband. Leave the taxes, it was simply wrong on a wife's/husband's part to do ANY major money transaction without letting your other partner know. Its equivalent of cheating (just financial cheating). Do you think it is ok for a man to send money to his parents?
I do agree with your point that information about transactions should be known to both parties. To answer your question, yes, in my opinion, it is perfectly OK for a man to send money to his parents since the man is earning. If the girl earns, she earns that right.
Say, when the couple goes to India for a vacation, I totally support the girl buying gifts similar to what the man has bought for his family/relatives. I also support assistance based on humanitarian needs for girl's parents. ONLY when it is comes to demands of sending monthly allowance or occasional lump sum, a line needs to be drawn.
I do agree with your point that information about transactions should be known to both parties. To answer your question, yes, in my opinion, it is perfectly OK for a man to send money to his parents since the man is earning. If the girl earns, she earns that right.
Say, when the couple goes to India for a vacation, I totally support the girl buying gifts similar to what the man has bought for his family/relatives. I also support assistance based on humanitarian needs for girl's parents. ONLY when it is comes to demands of sending monthly allowance or occasional lump sum, a line needs to be drawn.
more...
Green.Tech
06-11 10:46 AM
Let's see who the first HERO will be to break the pattern of 2 days of zero contributions...
hot Yellow- Benjamin Moore
xyzgc
02-09 09:49 PM
My stand is based on the premise that a man is financially responsible for his wife and his kids and not to wife's parents! The point I was making is about a completely non working spouse. It is not about a wife that leaves workforce for medical reason temporarily.
Let us not confuse the responsibility towards a man's wife and kids with that of in-laws!
Using the same token, a man shouldn't expect/demand any property/cash from in-laws!
I'm perfectly OK with humanitarian and need based help. What crosses the line, according to me, is that 'taking for granted' attitude!
If the brother in OP's story is taking care of his parents, then this situation wouldn't have occurred. Look at it other way. If the man's parents are in need of money, it is better to ask the man instead of their son-in-law!
A man taking a stand and be done with it has a better chance of saving a marriage than a man caving to the demand and building resentment. Hey, if a man is willing to please his in-laws in all possible ways, then who are we to stop him! Let him enjoy!!
I think, gcisadawg, the problem is the structure of the indian society. This is true with westerners too but as much true.
An Indian/asian guy has to earn because he is perceived to be a bread winner. Unless he is properly settled he is not eligible for marriage.
On the other hand, if a girl is not career-oriented she can still get good husbands depending on her personality and so on.
And such girls invariably forfeit the right to send money to their parents. In such cases, one should not expect girl's parents to give her a share in their property. Its all clean.
You have Indian house wives (many of them) but you have fewer house husbands. Even if your wife works, it is supplementary income and not the main.
This is a complex equation and husbands and wives must understand the social structure we live in and adjust with each other.
Let us not confuse the responsibility towards a man's wife and kids with that of in-laws!
Using the same token, a man shouldn't expect/demand any property/cash from in-laws!
I'm perfectly OK with humanitarian and need based help. What crosses the line, according to me, is that 'taking for granted' attitude!
If the brother in OP's story is taking care of his parents, then this situation wouldn't have occurred. Look at it other way. If the man's parents are in need of money, it is better to ask the man instead of their son-in-law!
A man taking a stand and be done with it has a better chance of saving a marriage than a man caving to the demand and building resentment. Hey, if a man is willing to please his in-laws in all possible ways, then who are we to stop him! Let him enjoy!!
I think, gcisadawg, the problem is the structure of the indian society. This is true with westerners too but as much true.
An Indian/asian guy has to earn because he is perceived to be a bread winner. Unless he is properly settled he is not eligible for marriage.
On the other hand, if a girl is not career-oriented she can still get good husbands depending on her personality and so on.
And such girls invariably forfeit the right to send money to their parents. In such cases, one should not expect girl's parents to give her a share in their property. Its all clean.
You have Indian house wives (many of them) but you have fewer house husbands. Even if your wife works, it is supplementary income and not the main.
This is a complex equation and husbands and wives must understand the social structure we live in and adjust with each other.
more...
house Hawthorne yellow HC-4
ramkigr@hotmail.com
04-17 09:58 AM
HSBC denied my refinance application because of EAD status. They said EAD is not one of the statuses they accept. They needed either H1B or GC status. I lost my $325 rate locking fee, not sure what else my real estate attorney is going to charge me because of this denial. I am in the process of talking to other banks.
Hope this helps someone not to loose money.
Hope this helps someone not to loose money.
tattoo Hawthorne Yellow HC-4
Green.Tech
06-03 05:09 PM
Bump!
more...
pictures hawthorne yellow HC-4.
immi_seeker
10-01 03:04 PM
My impression was that USCIS calculated the possible number of cases that would be ready to be assigned a visa (means all the name check and other formalities finished) , before a month and the first PD that will not get a VISA will be the cutoff date for the bulletin for that month.
If the USCSI didnt have enough applications to be assigned the VISA , then why are they so conservative in making the cutoff dates move ahead. What is the harm in pro-actively moving the cutiff dates, to amek sure no visa gets wasted. I think focussing on avoiding visa wastage itself will reduce this retrogression mess to a big extent
If the USCSI didnt have enough applications to be assigned the VISA , then why are they so conservative in making the cutoff dates move ahead. What is the harm in pro-actively moving the cutiff dates, to amek sure no visa gets wasted. I think focussing on avoiding visa wastage itself will reduce this retrogression mess to a big extent
dresses The Tavern at The Hawthorne
jbr
06-11 12:59 PM
I have a dumb question: when the above post refers to 25,000 EB2 and EB3 applications does it refer to 25,000 primary applicants or total (applicant and dependent) applications. Does anyone know? -- Thanks.
more...
makeup best friends are playing
Libra
09-28 09:52 PM
I can work on weekend for free, where to apply? atleast i can push some of them out of line. i mean i am very good in approving cases.
girlfriend Hawthorne Yellow HC-4
lazycis
11-20 06:25 PM
Yep, Ron G. precisely described risks of focusing on maintaining H1 and forgetting about maintaining EAD.
hairstyles Chili Pepper, Hawthorne Yellow
bpratap
05-18 06:28 PM
My Loan is not Jumbo loan, its under 400K
I don't have 20% down. But I was speaking to the Loan officer, he was telling, it doesn't matter if you put more down or not, 3yr forward continuous visa is req. I never heard this earlier.
Jumbo loans are not getting approved for EAD status. Banks are rejecting Jumbo loans (> 417K) if your immigration status is EAD or AOS. I don't have any idea about normal loans (< 417K). But banks are giving Jumbo loans if the status is H-1B.
But noone is rejecting loan, if your down payment is 20% of the value of the home.
I don't have 20% down. But I was speaking to the Loan officer, he was telling, it doesn't matter if you put more down or not, 3yr forward continuous visa is req. I never heard this earlier.
Jumbo loans are not getting approved for EAD status. Banks are rejecting Jumbo loans (> 417K) if your immigration status is EAD or AOS. I don't have any idea about normal loans (< 417K). But banks are giving Jumbo loans if the status is H-1B.
But noone is rejecting loan, if your down payment is 20% of the value of the home.
eb3_nepa
04-25 11:47 AM
Guys what about the type of visa? I mean shud the start date be ur H1B start date or ur F1 entry date? Coz if some people start on an H1 a lot of us also started on an F1. In that case doesnt it make more sense to root for the clause that says the immigrant can apply for his own GC that is employer independant? If i am not mistaken, is that not already a part of the PACE act?
Besides a lot of people are not sure for a while, if they even want to apply for their GCs or not initially. I personally know of atleast 3 such people. By putting the responsibility of application of the GC into the immigrant's hands, and empowering the applicant to apply for himself/herself, the process becomes a lot more transparent and fair. That way the day the immigrant decides to apply and applies is their PD. That way if someone does not start it as soon as he/she can, it is now up to them. Since the applicant Can apply for himself instead of being sponsored for a GC by an employer, it is no longer employer based, so no one can fault the employer saying that, "They didnt file for me for a year".
In my opinion, just pushing ur PD to the date u entered will not really help a lot. Coz say ur current PD is Feb 2002 EB3 but u had entered in 1998. DOL/UCSIS will say, ok lets do that, and the next day they will say, Now the Retrogression goes back to the year 1996. Is that not possible? Currently what we need is the immigrant to be in total control of his/her GC process. That way the GC can take even 10 years, so long as the applicant and dependants can avail of EADs and Travel permits which are longer than just 1 year increments. If we are thinking long term, then shudnt we be looking at this aspect? The GC itself represents nothing more than total freedom in ur career and it's choices. If we can achieve the same thing without the actual GC, isint that our goal?
Besides a lot of people are not sure for a while, if they even want to apply for their GCs or not initially. I personally know of atleast 3 such people. By putting the responsibility of application of the GC into the immigrant's hands, and empowering the applicant to apply for himself/herself, the process becomes a lot more transparent and fair. That way the day the immigrant decides to apply and applies is their PD. That way if someone does not start it as soon as he/she can, it is now up to them. Since the applicant Can apply for himself instead of being sponsored for a GC by an employer, it is no longer employer based, so no one can fault the employer saying that, "They didnt file for me for a year".
In my opinion, just pushing ur PD to the date u entered will not really help a lot. Coz say ur current PD is Feb 2002 EB3 but u had entered in 1998. DOL/UCSIS will say, ok lets do that, and the next day they will say, Now the Retrogression goes back to the year 1996. Is that not possible? Currently what we need is the immigrant to be in total control of his/her GC process. That way the GC can take even 10 years, so long as the applicant and dependants can avail of EADs and Travel permits which are longer than just 1 year increments. If we are thinking long term, then shudnt we be looking at this aspect? The GC itself represents nothing more than total freedom in ur career and it's choices. If we can achieve the same thing without the actual GC, isint that our goal?
bkn96
12-01 09:50 AM
Hmmm....I am still wondering...
1> How much money an applicant will spend on MTR? on self, on dependents?
2> How much money an applicant will bleed to move to US District Court?
3> If an applicant is working on EAD during all this farce, would he be able to continue working (atleast seeing paycheck) or will seat at home and bleed more?
4> if he looses EAD job, will CIS again punish him for not having a job?
5> Even after doing all these above, what if he accumulates 180 days of unlawful(?) presence? will he be deported for following the laws?
6> Last question: Are those undocumented workers are better positioned to get legal citizenship in long run than those legal skilled immigrants from retrogressed countries?
(sorry for my language, but I can't understand the logic behind such a serious painful punishment to an innocent lawful AC-21 user without any fault of his own? is there justice? what do I not understand here? I am sure I am missing something. Please guide!!!)
1. MTR -USCIS fee$585, Lawyer fee vary between $750 to $3500. Dependents another $500 extra in lawyer fee
2. US court no idea - but RG website says they take cases free of charges if case is strong as they can get attorney fee from USCIS..
1> How much money an applicant will spend on MTR? on self, on dependents?
2> How much money an applicant will bleed to move to US District Court?
3> If an applicant is working on EAD during all this farce, would he be able to continue working (atleast seeing paycheck) or will seat at home and bleed more?
4> if he looses EAD job, will CIS again punish him for not having a job?
5> Even after doing all these above, what if he accumulates 180 days of unlawful(?) presence? will he be deported for following the laws?
6> Last question: Are those undocumented workers are better positioned to get legal citizenship in long run than those legal skilled immigrants from retrogressed countries?
(sorry for my language, but I can't understand the logic behind such a serious painful punishment to an innocent lawful AC-21 user without any fault of his own? is there justice? what do I not understand here? I am sure I am missing something. Please guide!!!)
1. MTR -USCIS fee$585, Lawyer fee vary between $750 to $3500. Dependents another $500 extra in lawyer fee
2. US court no idea - but RG website says they take cases free of charges if case is strong as they can get attorney fee from USCIS..
No comments:
Post a Comment