gpr
06-07 11:39 AM
I am in the same boat. Sent my application for EAD and AP renewals on 06/01. Received at phoenix lock box on 06/03. No updates yet. My EAD is expiring in the last week of july.
wallpaper Newest fallacy out there: the
jsb
04-16 12:09 PM
Why do you need a new lawyer? You don't need any lawyer now for that matter, but the lawyer who filed your I-485 should not have any problem in continuing to represent you even if your last employer paid your GC processing fees. If you signed G-28, which most likely you did, your lawyer established relationship with you to represent you.
Infact today is my 2nd day at my new job. I have decided not to inform USCIS. And I am in process of hiring a new lawyer , since my previous company paid for my GC , the company lawyer asked me to go with different lawyer for all my future needs.
I will hire a lawyer and plan to file G28 form in this month.
Infact today is my 2nd day at my new job. I have decided not to inform USCIS. And I am in process of hiring a new lawyer , since my previous company paid for my GC , the company lawyer asked me to go with different lawyer for all my future needs.
I will hire a lawyer and plan to file G28 form in this month.
svn
06-25 12:41 PM
But...I'm not comfortable with subject, that is starting with a question.. ( reply to svn's post)
IMO, it might backfire as...'What da xxxx is in it for legal immigrants?'( depending upon ones mood at that time)
I'm more for a lowered tone...request, that is.
Thanks hsingh82! for the post and validating the site.
Leo, that was just a suggestion - as I said, feel free to modify as you deem appropriate! The important thing is to send the faxes so we can draw attention to our plight!
IMO, it might backfire as...'What da xxxx is in it for legal immigrants?'( depending upon ones mood at that time)
I'm more for a lowered tone...request, that is.
Thanks hsingh82! for the post and validating the site.
Leo, that was just a suggestion - as I said, feel free to modify as you deem appropriate! The important thing is to send the faxes so we can draw attention to our plight!
2011 Logical Fallacy :: Examples of
rajmalhotra
10-09 04:18 PM
We entered US in May 2007. My wife's visa stamp was expiring in Nov., but her H4 Visa was expiring in April 2008.
The Customs officer put date valid till Nov. 2007.
I went to US Customs and border protection office and showed them the original Visa. They asked to fill up new I-94 and stamped it with April 2008 Date.
Here's the link: http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/travel/id_visa/i-94_instructions/arrival_departure_record.xml
---------------------------
Q: How do I correct an Arrival-Departure Record reflecting an incorrect admission classification, biographical information or period of admission?
A: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will review and issue the necessary documents to remedy errors recorded on the Arrival-Departure Record at the time of entry to the United States relating to improper non-immigrant classification, inaccurate biographical information or incorrect period of admission, if appropriate.
Any designated deferred inspection location or CBP office located within an international airport should be able to assist you, regardless of where the actual document was issued. In many instances, the location of your final destination where the discrepancy will be resolved may not be the port of your first arrival into the United States. Travelers are encouraged to contact sites not located within an international airport to establish an appointment, if necessary. Mail-in procedures are not available.
Currently, there is not an approved form to request the correction of inaccurate information recorded on the I-94 or I-95 Form at the time of entry into the United States. You will need to bring the questionable I-94 or I-95 Form and documentation to support the claim that the form was not properly annotated. For example, present a passport and visa to justify an incorrect visa classification or an approved petition to support an incorrect admission period. A fee will not be assessed.
The CBP offices within the international airports and deferred inspection locations are only authorized to correct errors that occurred at the time of arrival. Requests to replace the I-94 or I-95 Form that has been lost, stolen or mutilated must be filed with USCIS.
Authorized stays that were limited at the port of first arrival by supervisory authorization as noted on the reverse side of the I-94 Form will not be corrected. Under these circumstances, you will be required to file an I-539 Form with USCIS. .
---------------------
The Customs officer put date valid till Nov. 2007.
I went to US Customs and border protection office and showed them the original Visa. They asked to fill up new I-94 and stamped it with April 2008 Date.
Here's the link: http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/travel/id_visa/i-94_instructions/arrival_departure_record.xml
---------------------------
Q: How do I correct an Arrival-Departure Record reflecting an incorrect admission classification, biographical information or period of admission?
A: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will review and issue the necessary documents to remedy errors recorded on the Arrival-Departure Record at the time of entry to the United States relating to improper non-immigrant classification, inaccurate biographical information or incorrect period of admission, if appropriate.
Any designated deferred inspection location or CBP office located within an international airport should be able to assist you, regardless of where the actual document was issued. In many instances, the location of your final destination where the discrepancy will be resolved may not be the port of your first arrival into the United States. Travelers are encouraged to contact sites not located within an international airport to establish an appointment, if necessary. Mail-in procedures are not available.
Currently, there is not an approved form to request the correction of inaccurate information recorded on the I-94 or I-95 Form at the time of entry into the United States. You will need to bring the questionable I-94 or I-95 Form and documentation to support the claim that the form was not properly annotated. For example, present a passport and visa to justify an incorrect visa classification or an approved petition to support an incorrect admission period. A fee will not be assessed.
The CBP offices within the international airports and deferred inspection locations are only authorized to correct errors that occurred at the time of arrival. Requests to replace the I-94 or I-95 Form that has been lost, stolen or mutilated must be filed with USCIS.
Authorized stays that were limited at the port of first arrival by supervisory authorization as noted on the reverse side of the I-94 Form will not be corrected. Under these circumstances, you will be required to file an I-539 Form with USCIS. .
---------------------
more...
bugsbunny
04-15 03:22 PM
immigration related frequently asked questions
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/FREQUENTLY_ASKED_QUESTIONS)
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/FREQUENTLY_ASKED_QUESTIONS)
hiralal
05-11 07:58 PM
Below is data of PD from last four years for EB2-I - only for Jun, Jul & Aug.
Except July Fiasco , I don't see dates ever moving forward in July VB; but they do move in August VB.
Has anything changed in spillover laws in last 1 year - which will explain this no movement in July but in August?
Jun 06 : 01JAN03 | July 06 : 01JAN03 | August 06 : U ---> No change in July. Aug backward
Jun 07 : 01APR04 | July 07 : C | August 07 : U ---> July Fiasco
Jun 08 : 01APR04 | July 08 : 01APR04 | August 08 : 01JUN06 ---> No change in July. Aug forward
Jun 09 : 01JAN00 | July 09 : 01JAN00 | August 09 : 01OCT03 ---> No change in July. Aug forward
Jun 10 : 01FEB05 | July 10 : ?????? | August 10 : ???? ---> Do your really expect forward movement in July?
yes - There will be some movement - it depends on ROW demand and spillovers - they may even move it ahead just for the heck of it - remember that they are desperate for $$$ - it all depends on how much pressure is there for lawyer lobby (AILA) - USCIS shortfall and I guess doctors who do immigration checkups will also get benefit.
Except July Fiasco , I don't see dates ever moving forward in July VB; but they do move in August VB.
Has anything changed in spillover laws in last 1 year - which will explain this no movement in July but in August?
Jun 06 : 01JAN03 | July 06 : 01JAN03 | August 06 : U ---> No change in July. Aug backward
Jun 07 : 01APR04 | July 07 : C | August 07 : U ---> July Fiasco
Jun 08 : 01APR04 | July 08 : 01APR04 | August 08 : 01JUN06 ---> No change in July. Aug forward
Jun 09 : 01JAN00 | July 09 : 01JAN00 | August 09 : 01OCT03 ---> No change in July. Aug forward
Jun 10 : 01FEB05 | July 10 : ?????? | August 10 : ???? ---> Do your really expect forward movement in July?
yes - There will be some movement - it depends on ROW demand and spillovers - they may even move it ahead just for the heck of it - remember that they are desperate for $$$ - it all depends on how much pressure is there for lawyer lobby (AILA) - USCIS shortfall and I guess doctors who do immigration checkups will also get benefit.
more...
sobers
02-28 02:41 PM
Awesome work, guys!
Btw, besides roll call, another influential Capitol Hill publication is "The Hill".
This story ran in it today. If anything, this (the portion in bold) demonstrates the power of your faxes/emails to lawmakers.
--------
THE HILL
http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/Business/022806_immigration.html
Anti-immigration groups up against unusual coalition
By Patrick O’Connor
The National Restaurant Association usually does not join forces with the National Council of La Raza, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce rarely, if ever, aligns itself with the Conference of Catholic Bishops.
But those organizations and many others have come together in support of a comprehensive immigration-reform bill that would expand guest-worker programs and offer undocumented workers already in this country a path to citizenship. They are up against an aggressive cross-section of single-issue organizations that favor increased enforcement of immigration laws and have condemned any legislation that would allow undocumented workers already here eventually to become citizens.
With the Senate Judiciary Committee expected to mark up its version of the immigration bill Thursday, groups on either side of the issue have geared up for a hard fight, and the vehemence and intractability of either side should make compromise particularly difficult for lawmakers on Capitol Hill.
Staff members of many of the organizations involved in this fight stayed up much of last Thursday night poring over details of draft legislation released by Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) in anticipation of this week’s markup. By Friday afternoon, many of those organizations released statements either heralding or deriding Specter’s draft.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) has said he would like to move a bill to the floor by the end of March, meaning next month is critical in the years-long debate over immigration reform.
A unique coalition of divergent interest groups have rallied in support of a bill introduced by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), with select members of the AFL-CIO teaming up with social-welfare organizations, the Chamber and other business groups that support a temporary-worker program.
“The fact that the Chamber of Commerce needs comprehensive immigration reform is very good,” said Flavia Jimenez, an outreach director for the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic advocacy organization.
Members of the business community also appreciate working with groups such as La Raza because it allows the overarching coalition to communicate with Republicans and Democrats alike on Capitol Hill.
“It’s nice actually to get to work with these guys,” said John Gay, a senior vice president for government affairs with the National Restaurant Association, which co-chairs the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition (EWIC), a group of more than 40 business and trade associations seeking comprehensive reform.
Because the many groups within this broad coalition have slightly different priorities, they must communicate regularly to push common themes. In the end, these organizations are all fighting for what they consider the best interests of their dues-paying members.
“When push comes to shove, we will all become … forceful advocates for our members,” Gay said. “If we’re at an impasse on something, it’s not through misunderstanding. When we differ, it will be for real reasons.”
Despite the breadth of interest groups advocating an expanded guest-worker program, the enforcement-only crowd makes considerably more noise on Capitol Hill, if the flood of mail, e-mail and phone calls to member offices is any indication.
A handful of single-issue groups opposing the guest-worker program have effectively put the other side on the defensive since President Bush first announced his intentions to push comprehensive immigration reform, as evidenced by the administration’s backtracking since Bush first proposed such a program in January 2004.
One of those groups, Numbers USA, has 135,000 registered activists throughout the country and an e-mail list in excess of 1 million subscribers, all of whom have signed up voluntarily, said Caroline Espinosa, a spokeswoman for the group. A link on the Numbers USA website also allows browsers to fax a personal note to members of Congress in support of increased enforcement of illegal immigration.
Numbers USA also does objective and subjective summaries of each bill introduced on the issue and notifies subscribers in advance of any important actions on Capitol Hill, such as this week’s markup. As such, the group was expected to send an alert asking those supporters living in states represented by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to call or fax their members in anticipation of that markup.
Unlike their counterparts on the guest-worker side of the debate, these single-issue groups do not coordinate to the extent of their rivals.
“We’re pretty separate,” Espinosa said. “We don’t even share resources, even though we’re all working toward the same goals.”
Battling with groups like Numbers USA is an uncommon experience for many members of the business community because they do not regularly work on such socially sensitive topics.
“We don’t usually end up on the other side of single-issue groups,” Gay said. “That’s unusual for us.”
McCain was scheduled to appear at a union hall in New York City yesterday with a number of these groups as a demonstration of how the expanded guest-worker program is attracting broad, bipartisan support.
The White House has sent signals to Republicans in both chambers that it favors comprehensive reform, which could include an expanded temporary-worker program. House leaders passed an enforcement-only bill under the assumption that the Senate would take up the more politically difficult guest-worker issue.
The anti-immigration crowd has political momentum at this stage in the fight, with congressional Republicans wary to cast any vote that could turn off their conservative base during this critical election year, but members will also have a hard time ignoring such a broad cross-section of business, labor and social groups with their own self-interested constituents.
“We’re not trying to damage America,” Gay said. “We’re just trying to keep our restaurants open.”
Btw, besides roll call, another influential Capitol Hill publication is "The Hill".
This story ran in it today. If anything, this (the portion in bold) demonstrates the power of your faxes/emails to lawmakers.
--------
THE HILL
http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/Business/022806_immigration.html
Anti-immigration groups up against unusual coalition
By Patrick O’Connor
The National Restaurant Association usually does not join forces with the National Council of La Raza, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce rarely, if ever, aligns itself with the Conference of Catholic Bishops.
But those organizations and many others have come together in support of a comprehensive immigration-reform bill that would expand guest-worker programs and offer undocumented workers already in this country a path to citizenship. They are up against an aggressive cross-section of single-issue organizations that favor increased enforcement of immigration laws and have condemned any legislation that would allow undocumented workers already here eventually to become citizens.
With the Senate Judiciary Committee expected to mark up its version of the immigration bill Thursday, groups on either side of the issue have geared up for a hard fight, and the vehemence and intractability of either side should make compromise particularly difficult for lawmakers on Capitol Hill.
Staff members of many of the organizations involved in this fight stayed up much of last Thursday night poring over details of draft legislation released by Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) in anticipation of this week’s markup. By Friday afternoon, many of those organizations released statements either heralding or deriding Specter’s draft.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) has said he would like to move a bill to the floor by the end of March, meaning next month is critical in the years-long debate over immigration reform.
A unique coalition of divergent interest groups have rallied in support of a bill introduced by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), with select members of the AFL-CIO teaming up with social-welfare organizations, the Chamber and other business groups that support a temporary-worker program.
“The fact that the Chamber of Commerce needs comprehensive immigration reform is very good,” said Flavia Jimenez, an outreach director for the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic advocacy organization.
Members of the business community also appreciate working with groups such as La Raza because it allows the overarching coalition to communicate with Republicans and Democrats alike on Capitol Hill.
“It’s nice actually to get to work with these guys,” said John Gay, a senior vice president for government affairs with the National Restaurant Association, which co-chairs the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition (EWIC), a group of more than 40 business and trade associations seeking comprehensive reform.
Because the many groups within this broad coalition have slightly different priorities, they must communicate regularly to push common themes. In the end, these organizations are all fighting for what they consider the best interests of their dues-paying members.
“When push comes to shove, we will all become … forceful advocates for our members,” Gay said. “If we’re at an impasse on something, it’s not through misunderstanding. When we differ, it will be for real reasons.”
Despite the breadth of interest groups advocating an expanded guest-worker program, the enforcement-only crowd makes considerably more noise on Capitol Hill, if the flood of mail, e-mail and phone calls to member offices is any indication.
A handful of single-issue groups opposing the guest-worker program have effectively put the other side on the defensive since President Bush first announced his intentions to push comprehensive immigration reform, as evidenced by the administration’s backtracking since Bush first proposed such a program in January 2004.
One of those groups, Numbers USA, has 135,000 registered activists throughout the country and an e-mail list in excess of 1 million subscribers, all of whom have signed up voluntarily, said Caroline Espinosa, a spokeswoman for the group. A link on the Numbers USA website also allows browsers to fax a personal note to members of Congress in support of increased enforcement of illegal immigration.
Numbers USA also does objective and subjective summaries of each bill introduced on the issue and notifies subscribers in advance of any important actions on Capitol Hill, such as this week’s markup. As such, the group was expected to send an alert asking those supporters living in states represented by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to call or fax their members in anticipation of that markup.
Unlike their counterparts on the guest-worker side of the debate, these single-issue groups do not coordinate to the extent of their rivals.
“We’re pretty separate,” Espinosa said. “We don’t even share resources, even though we’re all working toward the same goals.”
Battling with groups like Numbers USA is an uncommon experience for many members of the business community because they do not regularly work on such socially sensitive topics.
“We don’t usually end up on the other side of single-issue groups,” Gay said. “That’s unusual for us.”
McCain was scheduled to appear at a union hall in New York City yesterday with a number of these groups as a demonstration of how the expanded guest-worker program is attracting broad, bipartisan support.
The White House has sent signals to Republicans in both chambers that it favors comprehensive reform, which could include an expanded temporary-worker program. House leaders passed an enforcement-only bill under the assumption that the Senate would take up the more politically difficult guest-worker issue.
The anti-immigration crowd has political momentum at this stage in the fight, with congressional Republicans wary to cast any vote that could turn off their conservative base during this critical election year, but members will also have a hard time ignoring such a broad cross-section of business, labor and social groups with their own self-interested constituents.
“We’re not trying to damage America,” Gay said. “We’re just trying to keep our restaurants open.”
2010 hasty generalization fallacy.
sri1309
07-06 06:30 AM
Search immigration.com ("i-140 denied, urgent help please"). I went thru this, attorney was so-so, not experienced in handling cases like this as he is a small firm. So I went to one of the BIG firms and got it MTR'd and cleared in 3 weeks. I spent 3K, but never thought about it before or after.
While you work on backup options, dont just let go the current status that you got in 4-6 yrs.
The new attorney could easily make up for the pay.
Sri.
While you work on backup options, dont just let go the current status that you got in 4-6 yrs.
The new attorney could easily make up for the pay.
Sri.
more...
June05
10-19 11:07 AM
The memo says it has to be current.
hair Logical Fallacies 101 (Part 3
user9
06-06 10:29 AM
That's good for you. As long as you understand the pro's and con's of invoking the H1B as well. The con's mostly depend on whether you have already exhausted your 6 years of permitted H1B.
I spoke with USCIS again this morning and this time got hold of a more helping IO.
I spoke with USCIS again this morning and this time got hold of a more helping IO.
more...
roseball
07-13 11:17 AM
Damn..F5 button on my keyboard needs replacing:D
You can try Ctrl + R.........:D
You can try Ctrl + R.........:D
hot hasty generalization fallacy. Hasty Generalization – 2 hasty generalization
pappu
12-11 12:40 PM
At this time we do not have any one assigned member by IV to lead the chapter. However in the interest of getting things started I request the chapter members to organize a confrence call. If 'williblucky' would like to set it up and send messags to everyone, pls go ahead. If there is anyone else willing to volunteer to set up a call for a weekend pls go ahead. Make sure you send PM's to each member on this thread and inform them about the time for the call. It is important that we have the state chapter active.
more...
house hasty generalization fallacy.
krishnam70
10-02 06:18 PM
Hello Krishnam
Since your GC is for future employment, your current employer might not be able to support you on H1 but you can always get them to support you for future employment and so they can still not revoke your 140 petition process. So if possible be on good terms with them and ask them to keep your 140 process intact
I have a I-485 pending, and there is a chance I may be laid off after 180 days. Would I have to have another similar job offer at hand, or can I still continue looking for a job after 180 days of I-485 till I find one ?
Thank you for your help.
1. What is your current status? H1/EAD? 140 approved/in process
a) If 140 is approved and you filed 485 and its been 180 days and if you meanwhile have an EAD in hand,
a1) then you can move to a new employer using the EAD or
a2) transfer H1 and have no problems with GC process.
If USCIS asks you then you say you are using AC21. At that time since your 140 is approved/contains all required initial evidence USCIS will not ask anything more. If they do however ask then your new company will need to provide all the required information again.
Required initial evidence, as specified under 8 CFR 204.5(g)(2), includes copies of: (1) annual reports, (2) federal tax returns, or (3) audited financial statements. The petitioner must submit a copy of at least one of these required documents
There is big thread on this forum somewhere about Initial evidence. Search should reveal it
b)If 140 is pending and you filed 485 and its been 180 days but you dont have an EAD, if 140 petition is not withdrawn then you can find an employer to support your H1 ( assuming you are on H1. Not sure abt L1 case)
-goodluck
Since your GC is for future employment, your current employer might not be able to support you on H1 but you can always get them to support you for future employment and so they can still not revoke your 140 petition process. So if possible be on good terms with them and ask them to keep your 140 process intact
I have a I-485 pending, and there is a chance I may be laid off after 180 days. Would I have to have another similar job offer at hand, or can I still continue looking for a job after 180 days of I-485 till I find one ?
Thank you for your help.
1. What is your current status? H1/EAD? 140 approved/in process
a) If 140 is approved and you filed 485 and its been 180 days and if you meanwhile have an EAD in hand,
a1) then you can move to a new employer using the EAD or
a2) transfer H1 and have no problems with GC process.
If USCIS asks you then you say you are using AC21. At that time since your 140 is approved/contains all required initial evidence USCIS will not ask anything more. If they do however ask then your new company will need to provide all the required information again.
Required initial evidence, as specified under 8 CFR 204.5(g)(2), includes copies of: (1) annual reports, (2) federal tax returns, or (3) audited financial statements. The petitioner must submit a copy of at least one of these required documents
There is big thread on this forum somewhere about Initial evidence. Search should reveal it
b)If 140 is pending and you filed 485 and its been 180 days but you dont have an EAD, if 140 petition is not withdrawn then you can find an employer to support your H1 ( assuming you are on H1. Not sure abt L1 case)
-goodluck
tattoo The hasty generalization, this
needhelp!
09-22 02:02 PM
paskal back on the forum. That itself is a positive sign :D
there remains a sliver of hope- its called the lame duck session when a lot of such measures are passed. post election, everyone feels "safer".
a marked up bill, ready for the house, could sneak through in the post election season. we have to keep trying!
there remains a sliver of hope- its called the lame duck session when a lot of such measures are passed. post election, everyone feels "safer".
a marked up bill, ready for the house, could sneak through in the post election season. we have to keep trying!
more...
pictures hasty generalization fallacy. Hair Perm Examples - Hasty Conclusion;
CHHAYA
08-19 09:29 AM
1. I am working part time on EAD with my sponsoring company and full time with other company under different position and less requirements than labor certification. I want to leave full time company and want to open a business firm. Is this okay? Along with my own business do I have to work for sponsoring company?
2. My daughter is going to college next year. Is she considered as international student or in state student? Her 485-I is pending under my derivative. She do have EAD and ss.
3. If my daughter turns in 21 years before our green card comes, then will she have any problems in getting GC?
Appreciate for the help.
2. My daughter is going to college next year. Is she considered as international student or in state student? Her 485-I is pending under my derivative. She do have EAD and ss.
3. If my daughter turns in 21 years before our green card comes, then will she have any problems in getting GC?
Appreciate for the help.
dresses #39;fallacy of composition#39;.
pratibha
11-13 11:49 AM
Please make sure you use your credit card wherever you get a receipt with your signature on both sides of the border to prove that you have left the country and the dates on the receipt will verify the same.
Taking your car to Canada is useless as you will end up paying CAD 200 just for processing and then even though your car is good for Canada it will not pass the testing in that country which has to be done within one month of entry. To do the modifications it will cost you hell. I have experienced the same and got fed up and then reexported my car back to US only by sending them a notarized letter saying the car is back in US. I have PR card and went to Canada only temporarily to make my time to re validate my PR, now I am in US
When the officer at the Canadian side will fill up the import form for all your personal goods , you can ask him to stamp your passport which will prove your stay and time in order to obtain the Canadian Citizenship.
Dude nothing is rosy in Canada as there are very little jobs and highly qualified people are driving Cabs and doing laborer's job.
Good luck to you.
Taking your car to Canada is useless as you will end up paying CAD 200 just for processing and then even though your car is good for Canada it will not pass the testing in that country which has to be done within one month of entry. To do the modifications it will cost you hell. I have experienced the same and got fed up and then reexported my car back to US only by sending them a notarized letter saying the car is back in US. I have PR card and went to Canada only temporarily to make my time to re validate my PR, now I am in US
When the officer at the Canadian side will fill up the import form for all your personal goods , you can ask him to stamp your passport which will prove your stay and time in order to obtain the Canadian Citizenship.
Dude nothing is rosy in Canada as there are very little jobs and highly qualified people are driving Cabs and doing laborer's job.
Good luck to you.
more...
makeup hasty generalization fallacy
austingc
07-08 05:13 PM
You definitely need to send it even if you get BIOMETERICS
Hello WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC , Please do not confuse or post anything that you have no idea about.
Its is not true. You don't need to send photos for EAD and the instruction clearley says that. For AP you need to send photos even thnough you went for biometric appointment.
If you apply both EAD and AP together then you will still need to go to fingerprint and also send photos for AP.
Hello WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC , Please do not confuse or post anything that you have no idea about.
Its is not true. You don't need to send photos for EAD and the instruction clearley says that. For AP you need to send photos even thnough you went for biometric appointment.
If you apply both EAD and AP together then you will still need to go to fingerprint and also send photos for AP.
girlfriend hasty generalization fallacy
pappu
08-31 08:43 AM
http://www.c-span.org/watch/cs_cspan_rm.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS
has some program on h1b visas undergoing.
Please call
202 737 0001
202 737 0002
202 628 0205
phone numbers to call in now (until 10 AM EST) to talk about misconceptions and problems faced by them when they apply for green cards.
has some program on h1b visas undergoing.
Please call
202 737 0001
202 737 0002
202 628 0205
phone numbers to call in now (until 10 AM EST) to talk about misconceptions and problems faced by them when they apply for green cards.
hairstyles either or fallacy: only two
ntpatil
11-10 04:15 PM
LostInGCProcess,
The only reason I want to still enter on H4 is that my H4 is stamped until 2010, hence why not use it and save money and hassle on AP entry. As you have said that working on EAD immediately invalidates the H4 status. This is OK for me, but at least I have avoided the AP procedure stuff. Plus the primary applicant is on H1 and hence we both can enter on H1 and H4 respectively rather than one entering on H1 and the other on AP. Let me know if this clears your doubt and if so, can you think this would work out. Also, if you can, please respond to my other questions
Thanks,
The only reason I want to still enter on H4 is that my H4 is stamped until 2010, hence why not use it and save money and hassle on AP entry. As you have said that working on EAD immediately invalidates the H4 status. This is OK for me, but at least I have avoided the AP procedure stuff. Plus the primary applicant is on H1 and hence we both can enter on H1 and H4 respectively rather than one entering on H1 and the other on AP. Let me know if this clears your doubt and if so, can you think this would work out. Also, if you can, please respond to my other questions
Thanks,
beautifulMind
08-20 01:13 PM
I Still think we have a good chance atleast all those with priority date before today.
The economy is not improving and I doubt if it will in next 4-5 years. Even though there is slight improvent the jobless claims went up
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aMhGnVzXaSfM
No way nurses and EB1 would count more than 5-6k per year....
Even out of the 30-40k like I said before about 50% would be from india and china (mostley Eb3) with later priority dates which puts them behind us
Eb2 Filings have drasticaally gone down because of the USCIS rule
Even after giving away all spill over visas to EB2 india and china they will have a lot of visas pending and If USCIS has made the decision that no Visa will go wasted period then we definitely have a great chance
Again my assumption is based on the FACT that USCIS has a policy that all employment Visa numebrs must be used
Lets keep it simple. In the next 4 years there will be 140k * 4 = 560K visas and I would say out of that the only ones with priority before Eb3 india and China are
Eb1 ROW +india & china
EB2 ROW
EB2 India + china (very limited new cases)
and I don't think the above categories would count more than 150k which should leave a lot of pending visas for Eb3
Which would leave a lot of Visa numbers for Eb3 India/china and ROW
The economy is not improving and I doubt if it will in next 4-5 years. Even though there is slight improvent the jobless claims went up
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aMhGnVzXaSfM
No way nurses and EB1 would count more than 5-6k per year....
Even out of the 30-40k like I said before about 50% would be from india and china (mostley Eb3) with later priority dates which puts them behind us
Eb2 Filings have drasticaally gone down because of the USCIS rule
Even after giving away all spill over visas to EB2 india and china they will have a lot of visas pending and If USCIS has made the decision that no Visa will go wasted period then we definitely have a great chance
Again my assumption is based on the FACT that USCIS has a policy that all employment Visa numebrs must be used
Lets keep it simple. In the next 4 years there will be 140k * 4 = 560K visas and I would say out of that the only ones with priority before Eb3 india and China are
Eb1 ROW +india & china
EB2 ROW
EB2 India + china (very limited new cases)
and I don't think the above categories would count more than 150k which should leave a lot of pending visas for Eb3
Which would leave a lot of Visa numbers for Eb3 India/china and ROW
qplearn
10-25 07:56 PM
The bulletin is 2 years old (if that is considered old, given the GC standards). However, no new bulletins have followed to void it. Unless I have been advising with the wrong lawyer and wrong GC applicants (many), there is no such thing as I-485 Approval before the name check is completed. Any third party would like to comment?
Of course, they will not "approve" your 485 before your name check is cleared. You misunderstood me or I was not clear. What I meant is this: if your name check is not cleared but all other work on 485 is finished (which I think I equated to clearing the 485 in my previous post; sorry), they will tell you on phone (if you inquire) that your 485-related stuff is complete, but we are waiting for the name check. (Also, they will wait for your PD to become current).
My main point in the original post was that if it takes them 2 yrs to check your name --- the name-checking process runs concurrently with the 485 process --- then the 485 is bound to be complete by the time your name check is cleared. The processing times of 485 can be gauged from the VSC (or relevant center's) bulletins. Those proc. times do NOT indicate the processing times for the name check. If the name check happens before the 485 process is cleared, great! If not, you wait for the name check; lots (and believe me tens of thousands) of people belong to the second group. Since this forum mostly has people stuck in the process at earlier stages, you are not going to find too many people with that kind of experience here.
So your respected lawyer is technically correct, but what he/she is saying can be very badly misleading!! One gets the impression that clearing the name check happens automatically with completing work on the 485 by USCIS.
Wait a minute; I thought the name check is part of the I485 approval (and for those who file I-140 and I-485 concurrently, part of the I-140 approval).
And the name check is certainly not a part of the 140 approval even if the 140 and 485 are submitted concurrently. If any lawyer is telling you this, please change him/her.
I hope what I said above makes sense :) Took me a long time to compose that ...:)
Of course, they will not "approve" your 485 before your name check is cleared. You misunderstood me or I was not clear. What I meant is this: if your name check is not cleared but all other work on 485 is finished (which I think I equated to clearing the 485 in my previous post; sorry), they will tell you on phone (if you inquire) that your 485-related stuff is complete, but we are waiting for the name check. (Also, they will wait for your PD to become current).
My main point in the original post was that if it takes them 2 yrs to check your name --- the name-checking process runs concurrently with the 485 process --- then the 485 is bound to be complete by the time your name check is cleared. The processing times of 485 can be gauged from the VSC (or relevant center's) bulletins. Those proc. times do NOT indicate the processing times for the name check. If the name check happens before the 485 process is cleared, great! If not, you wait for the name check; lots (and believe me tens of thousands) of people belong to the second group. Since this forum mostly has people stuck in the process at earlier stages, you are not going to find too many people with that kind of experience here.
So your respected lawyer is technically correct, but what he/she is saying can be very badly misleading!! One gets the impression that clearing the name check happens automatically with completing work on the 485 by USCIS.
Wait a minute; I thought the name check is part of the I485 approval (and for those who file I-140 and I-485 concurrently, part of the I-140 approval).
And the name check is certainly not a part of the 140 approval even if the 140 and 485 are submitted concurrently. If any lawyer is telling you this, please change him/her.
I hope what I said above makes sense :) Took me a long time to compose that ...:)