krishjack
03-25 12:56 PM
Well How do you know that all the members who are registered with IV is aware of this Webfax? Did you guys notify them in anyway? Do you expect/mandate all the IV members should be checking the website/forums all the time? No Hard feeling.... Just my 2 cents
wallpaper The dress quite similar to
akred
04-17 12:07 AM
It does not matter when no bill is passed and also we are not even close to it. This is giving just false hope .Hope for best and prepare for worst
True. Best possible window of action may be immediately after a Democratic victory in 08. Probably will take another Clinton to undo what the first Clinton wrought with 245(i).
True. Best possible window of action may be immediately after a Democratic victory in 08. Probably will take another Clinton to undo what the first Clinton wrought with 245(i).
gimme Green!!
07-24 12:17 PM
Attach the screen shot of labor approval and indicate that you are waiting to receive the actual approval.
Can I file concurrently I-140 and I-485 if the labor is approved but haven't received the hard copy? What do I need to attach to these applications to substitute for the hard copy?
Can I file concurrently I-140 and I-485 if the labor is approved but haven't received the hard copy? What do I need to attach to these applications to substitute for the hard copy?
2011 anne hathaway dresses like kid. Anne Hathaway#39;s 7 Oscars
Raj Iyer
09-13 04:52 PM
Due to the denial of your H-1B extension, you did not have any underlying non-immigrant status at the time of filing the H-1B transfer. IF your petition gets approved, normally USCIS will only approve it with consular processing. Assuming your H-1B extension was successful, they will approve a transfer.
8 months is a long time for a pending H-1B. You should immediately follow up. Since it is a premium processing, you should be able to send an email to the premium processing division. I would be very worried if the case is taking so long.
8 months is a long time for a pending H-1B. You should immediately follow up. Since it is a premium processing, you should be able to send an email to the premium processing division. I would be very worried if the case is taking so long.
more...
abracadabra
07-06 11:27 AM
Hope others also ask some questions
Gravitation
04-09 05:00 AM
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1607940,00.html
President Bush returns to the Mexico border at Yuma, Arizona,� Monday to reprise last year's role as buggy-riding border sheriff. And as with every piece of White House theater, this one has a very specific audience in mind: the anti-immigration right wing of the Republican party. It is this deeply skeptical crowd Bush must win over if he is to get the last potential domestic policy achievement of his presidency: "comprehensive immigration reform." And, with Congress' summer recess and the 2008 presidential primaries approaching, time is running out.
Bush will spend most of his time in Yuma talking about his achievements in combatting illegal immigration: nearly doubling the number of border guards, funding hundreds of miles of border fence, a significant uptick in border arrests and so on. He'll also talk about progress in cracking down on illegal hiring of undocumented workers by restaurants, hotels, construction and food processing plants, among other employers. Burnishing his credentials as a law-and-order border guard is key to the effort.
But the President's "comprehensive" reform includes more than border security, and that's where conservative skepticism comes in. His proposals, unveiled to Democrats for the first time two weeks ago, aim to create not just tougher border security and tighter domestic enforcement at work sites, but also a new guest worker program and a solution for the 11-12 million illegal immigrants in the country. Though these goals� are associated with a softer line on immigration, under his new plan, Bush has played to the hardline consensus among Republicans on these issues too.
Although the plan does create a guest worker program, Democrats and Republicans familiar with it say it would not offer new guest workers a faster track to citizenship than any other foreigner trying to become an American. And while the plan does offer a path to citizenship for the millions of illegal immigrants already in the country, it sets high hurdles: They would be sent to the end of the line of those applying for citizenship, would have to pay heavy fines for the years they have been in the country, would have to show that they have held a job while here, pay full back-taxes on their earnings and pass an English exam. And in a major departure from U.S. immigration policy as it has existed since 1965, the plan would do away with citizenship for their family members.
Even as Bush struts and frets on the GOP stage, Senator Edward Kennedy is doing the same for his audience, the pro-immigration left, which is calling for full amnesty for the illegal immigrants, a liberal guest worker program and broad new thresholds for immigration in coming years. Kennedy's staff says Bush will have to make concessions before Kennedy will sign up for the President's plan, and they insist the Massachusetts Senator won't back down on such core principles as reunification for immediate family members.
Yet, for all the appearance of conflict between the two men, each is well aware that he needs to the other to get an immigration reform bill passed � that's why they've been in deep discussions on the issue since the start this year. The positions each is taking now are less oriented towards coercing the other side than towards securing maximum support from within their own party. By giving the appearance of a deep Democrat-Republican divide, they increase the chances of winning their skeptics over to a compromise. Bush and Kennedy will have more leeway to make small concessions on fines or family reunification if each has the extremes of his own party on board.�
It's a smart strategy, but it faces tough challenges, as both men are finding it harder to rally even centrist support than it was a year ago. Thanks to the 2008 elections, two key Republican� backers of last year's effort at immigration reform, John McCain and Sam Brownback, have disappeared down the campaign trail. McCain had previously united with Kennedy to form a central Senate bloc for a compromise, while Brownback played a key role representing the compassionate right. Mel Martinez, a key Hispanic Republican voice in the debate, has also gone quiet since taking over the Republican National Committee.
For his part, Kennedy must deliver Democrats who in strictly political terms have no reason to back reform. The new Congress, under Democratic control, has had a very effective three-month run blocking Bush on everything from domestic proposals to foreign affairs and the war in Iraq. Handing the president a win on a major issue like immigration reform in the run up to the 2008 elections might be good policy, but it would be bad politics.
At some point between now and the end of May, when Senate majority leader Harry Reid has said the Senate will vote on immigration reform, the theater will end and real negotiating will begin. But with thin centrist backing, skeptical party extremes, and very little time to negotiate it will take more than compelling theater to get the deal done.
President Bush returns to the Mexico border at Yuma, Arizona,� Monday to reprise last year's role as buggy-riding border sheriff. And as with every piece of White House theater, this one has a very specific audience in mind: the anti-immigration right wing of the Republican party. It is this deeply skeptical crowd Bush must win over if he is to get the last potential domestic policy achievement of his presidency: "comprehensive immigration reform." And, with Congress' summer recess and the 2008 presidential primaries approaching, time is running out.
Bush will spend most of his time in Yuma talking about his achievements in combatting illegal immigration: nearly doubling the number of border guards, funding hundreds of miles of border fence, a significant uptick in border arrests and so on. He'll also talk about progress in cracking down on illegal hiring of undocumented workers by restaurants, hotels, construction and food processing plants, among other employers. Burnishing his credentials as a law-and-order border guard is key to the effort.
But the President's "comprehensive" reform includes more than border security, and that's where conservative skepticism comes in. His proposals, unveiled to Democrats for the first time two weeks ago, aim to create not just tougher border security and tighter domestic enforcement at work sites, but also a new guest worker program and a solution for the 11-12 million illegal immigrants in the country. Though these goals� are associated with a softer line on immigration, under his new plan, Bush has played to the hardline consensus among Republicans on these issues too.
Although the plan does create a guest worker program, Democrats and Republicans familiar with it say it would not offer new guest workers a faster track to citizenship than any other foreigner trying to become an American. And while the plan does offer a path to citizenship for the millions of illegal immigrants already in the country, it sets high hurdles: They would be sent to the end of the line of those applying for citizenship, would have to pay heavy fines for the years they have been in the country, would have to show that they have held a job while here, pay full back-taxes on their earnings and pass an English exam. And in a major departure from U.S. immigration policy as it has existed since 1965, the plan would do away with citizenship for their family members.
Even as Bush struts and frets on the GOP stage, Senator Edward Kennedy is doing the same for his audience, the pro-immigration left, which is calling for full amnesty for the illegal immigrants, a liberal guest worker program and broad new thresholds for immigration in coming years. Kennedy's staff says Bush will have to make concessions before Kennedy will sign up for the President's plan, and they insist the Massachusetts Senator won't back down on such core principles as reunification for immediate family members.
Yet, for all the appearance of conflict between the two men, each is well aware that he needs to the other to get an immigration reform bill passed � that's why they've been in deep discussions on the issue since the start this year. The positions each is taking now are less oriented towards coercing the other side than towards securing maximum support from within their own party. By giving the appearance of a deep Democrat-Republican divide, they increase the chances of winning their skeptics over to a compromise. Bush and Kennedy will have more leeway to make small concessions on fines or family reunification if each has the extremes of his own party on board.�
It's a smart strategy, but it faces tough challenges, as both men are finding it harder to rally even centrist support than it was a year ago. Thanks to the 2008 elections, two key Republican� backers of last year's effort at immigration reform, John McCain and Sam Brownback, have disappeared down the campaign trail. McCain had previously united with Kennedy to form a central Senate bloc for a compromise, while Brownback played a key role representing the compassionate right. Mel Martinez, a key Hispanic Republican voice in the debate, has also gone quiet since taking over the Republican National Committee.
For his part, Kennedy must deliver Democrats who in strictly political terms have no reason to back reform. The new Congress, under Democratic control, has had a very effective three-month run blocking Bush on everything from domestic proposals to foreign affairs and the war in Iraq. Handing the president a win on a major issue like immigration reform in the run up to the 2008 elections might be good policy, but it would be bad politics.
At some point between now and the end of May, when Senate majority leader Harry Reid has said the Senate will vote on immigration reform, the theater will end and real negotiating will begin. But with thin centrist backing, skeptical party extremes, and very little time to negotiate it will take more than compelling theater to get the deal done.
more...
maddipati1
02-04 04:30 PM
has anyone requested USCIS to send AP via Fedex/UPS?
I am thinking of sending USCIS a Fedex return envelope so that they can use that instead of regular USPS mail.
has anyone done this successfully?
would help me a lot
thanks
I am thinking of sending USCIS a Fedex return envelope so that they can use that instead of regular USPS mail.
has anyone done this successfully?
would help me a lot
thanks
2010 celebs like Anne Hathaway
willIWill
06-16 12:54 PM
Vinzak, You have to take into consideration the recaptured visas of the 90's applied in the period 00-06. If I remember correctly the earlier recapture was signed in 2000 by Pres. Clinton . If we exclude those recaptured numbers the actuals are much lesser. Hope this helps.
more...
sriniks
12-06 08:48 PM
My wife's EAD expires later this month. She doesn't intend to work; so does she need to renew her EAD? She doesn't have another status like h1 or h4. Will she be out of status when the EAD expires?
The bigger question is that I got my GC a few months ago; but she hasn't got hers. We had an interview at the local office; the officer said he's recommended approval of the 485 and we should get it soon. This happened 2 months ago and still we don't see the 485 approval. The officer also mentioned we could go to the local office any time and get a GC stamp in the passport. Is this true? Can we just take an infopass and get the stamp right away? Do they do that? I called the call center but they just say it's pending and they won't give me any information.
really appreciate your advice...
srini
The bigger question is that I got my GC a few months ago; but she hasn't got hers. We had an interview at the local office; the officer said he's recommended approval of the 485 and we should get it soon. This happened 2 months ago and still we don't see the 485 approval. The officer also mentioned we could go to the local office any time and get a GC stamp in the passport. Is this true? Can we just take an infopass and get the stamp right away? Do they do that? I called the call center but they just say it's pending and they won't give me any information.
really appreciate your advice...
srini
hair anne hathaway dresses like kid
beppenyc
03-20 08:15 PM
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-20-2006/0004323801&EDATE=
Q Okay. My question is, since 9/11, one of the key things that we need
is immigration reform, including comprehensive immigration reform that is
right now in front of Senator Specter's committee in the Judiciary. There are
two principles I'm hoping that you would support: One, the good people, the
engineers, the PhDs, the doctors, the nurses, the people in the system who
have followed the rules, will go to the head of the line in any form of
immigration reform. That's Title IVz of the bill.
Secondly, the illegals who have not followed the rules -- I understand the
debate, I appreciate your statements about immigration reform, but isn't it
better that we know who they are, have them finger-printed and photographed,
and allow some form of 245I to come back so --
THE PRESIDENT: Tell people what that is. Tell people what 245I is.
Q Okay -- 245I is a partial amnesty program that expired back in 2001,
in fact, was going to be voted on on 9/11, unfortunately. But those -- it was
a small segment of the illegal population where they would pay the $1,000 fine
and, for example, coming in illegally, then marrying an American citizen,
could somehow legalize their status.
THE PRESIDENT: Okay. Let me give you some broad principles on
immigration reform as I see them. First of all, we do need to know who's
coming into our country and whether they're coming in illegally, or not
legally -- legally or not legally -- and whether they're coming in or going
out. And part of reforms after September the 11th was a better system of
finding out who's coming here.
Secondly, we have a big border between Texas and Mexico that's really hard
to enforce. We got to do everything we can to enforce the border,
particularly in the south. I mean, it's the place where people are pouring
across in order to find work. We have a situation in our own neighborhood
where there are way -- disparities are huge, and there are jobs in America
that people won't do. That's just a fact. I met an onion grower today at the
airport when I arrived, and he said, you got to help me find people that will
grow onions -- pluck them, or whatever you do with them, you know.
(Laughter.) There are jobs that just simply aren't getting done because
Americans won't do them. And yet, if you're making 50 cents an hour in
Mexico, and you can make a lot more in America, and you got mouths to feed,
you're going to come and try to find the work. It's a big border, of which --
across which people are coming to provide a living for their families.
Step one of any immigration policy is to enforce our border in practical
ways. We are spending additional resources to be able to use different
detection devices, unmanned UAVs, to help -- and expand Border Patrol, by the
way, expand the number of agents on the border, to make sure we're getting
them the tools necessary to stop people from coming across in the first place.
Secondly, part of the issue we've had in the past is we've had -- for lack
of a better word -- catch and release; the Border Patrol would find people
sneaking in; they would then hold them for a period of time; they'd say, come
back and check in with us 45 days later, and then they wouldn't check in 45
days later. And they would disappear in society to do the work that some
Americans will not do.
And so we're changing catch and release. We're particularly focusing on
those from Central America who are coming across Mexico's southern border,
ending up in our own -- it's a long answer, but it's an important question:
How do we protect our borders, and at the same time, be a humane society?
Anyway, step one, focus on enforcing border; when we find people, send
them home, so that the work of our Border Patrol is productive work.
Secondly, it seems like to me that part of having a border security
program is to say to people who are hiring people here illegally, we're going
to hold you to account. The problem is our employers don't know whether
they're hiring people illegally because there's a whole forgery industry
around people being smuggled into the United States. There's a smuggling
industry and a forgery industry. And it's hard to ask our employers, the
onion guy out there, whether or not he's got -- whether or not the documents
that he's being shown that look real are real.
And so here's a better proposal than what we're doing today, which is to
say, if you're going to come to do a job an American won't do, you ought to be
given a foolproof card that says you can come for a limited period of time and
do work in a job an American won't do. That's border security because it
means that people will be willing to come in legally with a card to do work on
a limited basis, and then go home. And so the agents won't be chasing people
being smuggled in 18-wheelers or across the Arizona desert. They'll be able
to focus on drugs and terrorists and guns.
The fundamental question that he is referring to is, what do we do about -
- there's two questions -- one, should we have amnesty? And the answer, in my
judgment, is, no, we shouldn't have amnesty. In my judgment, granting
amnesty, automatic citizenship -- that's what amnesty means -- would cause
another 11 million people, or however many are here, to come in the hopes of
becoming a United States citizen. We shouldn't have amnesty. We ought to
have a program that says, you get in line like everybody else gets in line;
and that if the Congress feels like there needs to be higher quotas on certain
nationalities, raise the quotas. But don't let people get in front of the
line for somebody who has been playing by the rules. (Applause.)
And so, anyway, that's my ideas on good immigration policy. Obviously,
there's going to be some questions we have to answer: What about the person
who's been here since 1987 -- '86 was the last attempt at coming up with
immigration reform -- been here for a long period of time. They've raised a
family here. And my only advice for the Congress and for people in the debate
is understand what made America. We're a land of immigrants. This guy is
from Hungary, you know. (Applause.) And we got to treat people fairly.
We've got to have a system of law that is respectful for people.
I mean, the idea of having a program that causes people to get stuck in
the back of 18-wheelers, to risk their lives to sneak into America to do work
that some people won't do is just not American, in my judgment. And so I
would hope the debate would be civil and uphold the honor of this country.
And remember, we've been through these periods before, where the immigration
debate can get harsh. And it should not be harsh. And I hope -- my call for
people is to be rational about the debate and thoughtful about what words can
mean during this debate.
Final question, sir. You're paying me a lot of money and I got to go back
to work. (Laughter.)
PS I did not know about the story of I-245 on 9/11....
Q Okay. My question is, since 9/11, one of the key things that we need
is immigration reform, including comprehensive immigration reform that is
right now in front of Senator Specter's committee in the Judiciary. There are
two principles I'm hoping that you would support: One, the good people, the
engineers, the PhDs, the doctors, the nurses, the people in the system who
have followed the rules, will go to the head of the line in any form of
immigration reform. That's Title IVz of the bill.
Secondly, the illegals who have not followed the rules -- I understand the
debate, I appreciate your statements about immigration reform, but isn't it
better that we know who they are, have them finger-printed and photographed,
and allow some form of 245I to come back so --
THE PRESIDENT: Tell people what that is. Tell people what 245I is.
Q Okay -- 245I is a partial amnesty program that expired back in 2001,
in fact, was going to be voted on on 9/11, unfortunately. But those -- it was
a small segment of the illegal population where they would pay the $1,000 fine
and, for example, coming in illegally, then marrying an American citizen,
could somehow legalize their status.
THE PRESIDENT: Okay. Let me give you some broad principles on
immigration reform as I see them. First of all, we do need to know who's
coming into our country and whether they're coming in illegally, or not
legally -- legally or not legally -- and whether they're coming in or going
out. And part of reforms after September the 11th was a better system of
finding out who's coming here.
Secondly, we have a big border between Texas and Mexico that's really hard
to enforce. We got to do everything we can to enforce the border,
particularly in the south. I mean, it's the place where people are pouring
across in order to find work. We have a situation in our own neighborhood
where there are way -- disparities are huge, and there are jobs in America
that people won't do. That's just a fact. I met an onion grower today at the
airport when I arrived, and he said, you got to help me find people that will
grow onions -- pluck them, or whatever you do with them, you know.
(Laughter.) There are jobs that just simply aren't getting done because
Americans won't do them. And yet, if you're making 50 cents an hour in
Mexico, and you can make a lot more in America, and you got mouths to feed,
you're going to come and try to find the work. It's a big border, of which --
across which people are coming to provide a living for their families.
Step one of any immigration policy is to enforce our border in practical
ways. We are spending additional resources to be able to use different
detection devices, unmanned UAVs, to help -- and expand Border Patrol, by the
way, expand the number of agents on the border, to make sure we're getting
them the tools necessary to stop people from coming across in the first place.
Secondly, part of the issue we've had in the past is we've had -- for lack
of a better word -- catch and release; the Border Patrol would find people
sneaking in; they would then hold them for a period of time; they'd say, come
back and check in with us 45 days later, and then they wouldn't check in 45
days later. And they would disappear in society to do the work that some
Americans will not do.
And so we're changing catch and release. We're particularly focusing on
those from Central America who are coming across Mexico's southern border,
ending up in our own -- it's a long answer, but it's an important question:
How do we protect our borders, and at the same time, be a humane society?
Anyway, step one, focus on enforcing border; when we find people, send
them home, so that the work of our Border Patrol is productive work.
Secondly, it seems like to me that part of having a border security
program is to say to people who are hiring people here illegally, we're going
to hold you to account. The problem is our employers don't know whether
they're hiring people illegally because there's a whole forgery industry
around people being smuggled into the United States. There's a smuggling
industry and a forgery industry. And it's hard to ask our employers, the
onion guy out there, whether or not he's got -- whether or not the documents
that he's being shown that look real are real.
And so here's a better proposal than what we're doing today, which is to
say, if you're going to come to do a job an American won't do, you ought to be
given a foolproof card that says you can come for a limited period of time and
do work in a job an American won't do. That's border security because it
means that people will be willing to come in legally with a card to do work on
a limited basis, and then go home. And so the agents won't be chasing people
being smuggled in 18-wheelers or across the Arizona desert. They'll be able
to focus on drugs and terrorists and guns.
The fundamental question that he is referring to is, what do we do about -
- there's two questions -- one, should we have amnesty? And the answer, in my
judgment, is, no, we shouldn't have amnesty. In my judgment, granting
amnesty, automatic citizenship -- that's what amnesty means -- would cause
another 11 million people, or however many are here, to come in the hopes of
becoming a United States citizen. We shouldn't have amnesty. We ought to
have a program that says, you get in line like everybody else gets in line;
and that if the Congress feels like there needs to be higher quotas on certain
nationalities, raise the quotas. But don't let people get in front of the
line for somebody who has been playing by the rules. (Applause.)
And so, anyway, that's my ideas on good immigration policy. Obviously,
there's going to be some questions we have to answer: What about the person
who's been here since 1987 -- '86 was the last attempt at coming up with
immigration reform -- been here for a long period of time. They've raised a
family here. And my only advice for the Congress and for people in the debate
is understand what made America. We're a land of immigrants. This guy is
from Hungary, you know. (Applause.) And we got to treat people fairly.
We've got to have a system of law that is respectful for people.
I mean, the idea of having a program that causes people to get stuck in
the back of 18-wheelers, to risk their lives to sneak into America to do work
that some people won't do is just not American, in my judgment. And so I
would hope the debate would be civil and uphold the honor of this country.
And remember, we've been through these periods before, where the immigration
debate can get harsh. And it should not be harsh. And I hope -- my call for
people is to be rational about the debate and thoughtful about what words can
mean during this debate.
Final question, sir. You're paying me a lot of money and I got to go back
to work. (Laughter.)
PS I did not know about the story of I-245 on 9/11....
more...
Administrator2
01-06 11:39 AM
Sen. Menendez is trying to get the dialogue started. He doesn't seem to be getting a response from Sen. Graham's office, which is not a good sign. As a next step, he is making public statements in the press with the expectation to provoke a response from Sen. Graham.
Sen. Menendez and Sen. Graham are both willing to take the lead on immigration bill. Its just that the larger politics has taken over the debate for last couple of years.
Sen. Menendez and Sen. Graham are both willing to take the lead on immigration bill. Its just that the larger politics has taken over the debate for last couple of years.
hot anne hathaway dresses like kid
la_guy
07-28 05:01 PM
i too got LUD on the AP on 7/27. should be system upgrade. hope this helps.
more...
house anne hathaway dresses like kid. anne hathaway vivienne
fcres
08-08 10:11 AM
What i have heard is that the RFE for I140 are mostly for ability to pay and for educational qualifications.
tattoo a red Calvin Klein dress.
we_can
01-02 04:30 PM
After the renewal, I got a passport with a new passport number (the old passport is still there stapled with the new one).
My labor and H1B all have the old #. Is there a need to do anything with the new passport number wrt to my existing H1 and labor and such?
My labor and H1B all have the old #. Is there a need to do anything with the new passport number wrt to my existing H1 and labor and such?
more...
pictures This dress is perfect,
zCool
04-02 11:15 AM
But for 140, ability to pay type of RFE can and will be answered by company financials etc. It's just that if you are already employed and are getting more than LC proffered wage and can prove that via W2+paystubs.. it makes it simpler even when company doesn't have enough assets or profits.
But it's not completely a must have,
More to the point though
You can count on getting some type of RFE somewhere in the process that will ask you to prove the status.
Normally W2 and Paystubs are basic stuff that maybe asked even at the time of 485 decision.
and moreover if he's paying you, why work?!!
But it's not completely a must have,
More to the point though
You can count on getting some type of RFE somewhere in the process that will ask you to prove the status.
Normally W2 and Paystubs are basic stuff that maybe asked even at the time of 485 decision.
and moreover if he's paying you, why work?!!
dresses anne hathaway dresses like kid. Anne Hathaway looked stunning
thomachan72
10-19 12:27 PM
Very informative replies. Thanks!!
more...
makeup Which one do you like best?
lskreddy
03-12 07:19 PM
Thanks.
What would one need to capture time outside? Luckily in my case, all I need to show is probably about a week's worth of time outside US to apply. Isn't that correct?
I have a sub-case going with someone else and have EAD but my primary employer's labor is going to be just 361 days when my H1 expires. If my I140 get s cleared for the sub-case, of course all of this is moot.
Thanks again for your reply,.
What would one need to capture time outside? Luckily in my case, all I need to show is probably about a week's worth of time outside US to apply. Isn't that correct?
I have a sub-case going with someone else and have EAD but my primary employer's labor is going to be just 361 days when my H1 expires. If my I140 get s cleared for the sub-case, of course all of this is moot.
Thanks again for your reply,.
girlfriend Anne-Hathaway-vogue-us-spots
Adam
08-19 11:01 PM
I agree about the mouth thing...It's hard to not make it look like a stupid smirk or snowman nose :lol:
hairstyles Anne Hathaway wore Oscar de la
snathan
02-15 12:18 PM
I know but when there is a chance, we must make sure. Who told u that always works.
They advertise in the company's message board and recently I have seen they did not mention anything about qualifications for one EB2 GC of my friend.
Hence I got a doubt.
Again,
Is it a must that education like MS or equivalent experience is needed for EB2. Please let me know.
Yes you need Masters or Bachlor + 5 years progressive experience.
They advertise in the company's message board and recently I have seen they did not mention anything about qualifications for one EB2 GC of my friend.
Hence I got a doubt.
Again,
Is it a must that education like MS or equivalent experience is needed for EB2. Please let me know.
Yes you need Masters or Bachlor + 5 years progressive experience.
Dhundhun
10-19 09:27 PM
#1. When AP is applied, you need to mention duration. I doubt any one mentions duration as six months or one year. Usually people mention time is weeks or a month.
#2. When AP is applied, you need to mention reason. No primary I1485 applicant says to be "When I'll be out of job".
Whenever IOs feels that there is no voilation of duration/reason and intent of AP being used for emergency (family) and business purpose, they don't harass.
Refer to http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-131instr.pdf, page 3. Even if AP is applied for "Employment Based AOS Pending", clearly it mentions that "You may apply if you have an adjustment-of-status application pending and you seek to travel abroad for emergent personal or bona fide business reasons".
So USCIS has clearly mandated the use of AOS pending AP, it simple. We interpret as per out convenience and IOs interpret as per guidelines they have.
We can always say going to home country in case of loss of job to cut down expenses is an "emergent personal reason". How many IOs agree with that? But we have examples of dependants going for studies for several months and still return on AP was not an issue.
#2. When AP is applied, you need to mention reason. No primary I1485 applicant says to be "When I'll be out of job".
Whenever IOs feels that there is no voilation of duration/reason and intent of AP being used for emergency (family) and business purpose, they don't harass.
Refer to http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-131instr.pdf, page 3. Even if AP is applied for "Employment Based AOS Pending", clearly it mentions that "You may apply if you have an adjustment-of-status application pending and you seek to travel abroad for emergent personal or bona fide business reasons".
So USCIS has clearly mandated the use of AOS pending AP, it simple. We interpret as per out convenience and IOs interpret as per guidelines they have.
We can always say going to home country in case of loss of job to cut down expenses is an "emergent personal reason". How many IOs agree with that? But we have examples of dependants going for studies for several months and still return on AP was not an issue.
chapsi29
04-02 11:10 AM
Hi all,
I had applied for my I-140/I-485 (concurrent) in Summer 07 and am awaiting a decision. My company has not been paying on time and is lagging behind on pay checks for about a few months now... I would like to know how this would affect my I-140 - Does the USCIS normally issue an RFE for this type of a problem or would they deny the I-140 ? If it is an RFE, what kind of proof does the company have to provide ?
Is it required for the company to completely catch up on the backlog and have all the pending pay checks paid before my I-140 gets processed ?
Thanks in advance.
I had applied for my I-140/I-485 (concurrent) in Summer 07 and am awaiting a decision. My company has not been paying on time and is lagging behind on pay checks for about a few months now... I would like to know how this would affect my I-140 - Does the USCIS normally issue an RFE for this type of a problem or would they deny the I-140 ? If it is an RFE, what kind of proof does the company have to provide ?
Is it required for the company to completely catch up on the backlog and have all the pending pay checks paid before my I-140 gets processed ?
Thanks in advance.
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu