vin13
01-14 12:37 PM
`Sec. 245B. (a) In General- The Secretary of Homeland Security may adjust the status of an alien to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if the alien--
`(1) was physically present in the United States for a continuous period of not less than 5 years immediately preceding the date on which this provision was enacted and has maintained continuous physical presence since then.
This if i am reading and understanding right may not be too bad. Let me kow if i am missing anything......
`(1) was physically present in the United States for a continuous period of not less than 5 years immediately preceding the date on which this provision was enacted and has maintained continuous physical presence since then.
This if i am reading and understanding right may not be too bad. Let me kow if i am missing anything......
wallpaper Selena Gomez, Cassie Scerbo,
hiralal
08-03 11:15 PM
Although officially so far, USCIS has not branded an I-485 status as "pre-adjudicated", if you haven't received any RFE and/or any other negative status about your 485, and if your case is outside the processing dates of the Service Center, then obviously dude your case is pre-adjudicated. I don't understand why most of the people are ignoring this simple fact. I think we need to stop consider USCIS a mystery box, and start treating it like an organization that processes the applications in a structured way.
I tend to believe that the offical status of being "pre-adjudicated" is coming soon. A few months back I read that USCIS is considering publishing another set of date known as "Qualifying Date" in their monthly visa bulletin. That date will define if you are "qualified" to file I-485. They will determine this date based on their workload. The idea behind is to avoid another July 2007 fiasco. They intend to process the 485's early rather than have you wait for your PD to become current. That way they will manage their workload efficiently and avoid visa wastage. They did indicate these applications to be pre-adjudicated then. I am guessing the official status of "pre-adjudicated" on your 485 application is coming soon.
well my view is that it is not that obvious !! say someone is in EB3-I with a priority date of 2004 or EB2-I with a PD of 2006 / 2007 - what would USCIS do ?
these are not the low hanging cases (as opposed to EB2 with PD of 2004 or EB3 with PD of 2001) ..or in other words - there is less chance that they will become current soon ..in that case, does USCIS close the case and put the file away or will they still pre-adjudicate ??
(I am not as informed -- since I have not read the article in detail ..and hence my post is more of a question ...)
I tend to believe that the offical status of being "pre-adjudicated" is coming soon. A few months back I read that USCIS is considering publishing another set of date known as "Qualifying Date" in their monthly visa bulletin. That date will define if you are "qualified" to file I-485. They will determine this date based on their workload. The idea behind is to avoid another July 2007 fiasco. They intend to process the 485's early rather than have you wait for your PD to become current. That way they will manage their workload efficiently and avoid visa wastage. They did indicate these applications to be pre-adjudicated then. I am guessing the official status of "pre-adjudicated" on your 485 application is coming soon.
well my view is that it is not that obvious !! say someone is in EB3-I with a priority date of 2004 or EB2-I with a PD of 2006 / 2007 - what would USCIS do ?
these are not the low hanging cases (as opposed to EB2 with PD of 2004 or EB3 with PD of 2001) ..or in other words - there is less chance that they will become current soon ..in that case, does USCIS close the case and put the file away or will they still pre-adjudicate ??
(I am not as informed -- since I have not read the article in detail ..and hence my post is more of a question ...)
whattodo21
05-11 12:02 PM
Pappu,
Please let me know your thoughts..
I-140 is approved. I-485 was filed in July 2007. I have an opportunity to move to another company for a similar job profile. But the new company wants me to work as a contractor (hourly) on W2.
Is that a problem when filing AC-21?
Please advise.
You may be able to find answers in the IV wikki - have you tried it?
AC21 FAQ - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/AC21_FAQ)
Please let me know your thoughts..
I-140 is approved. I-485 was filed in July 2007. I have an opportunity to move to another company for a similar job profile. But the new company wants me to work as a contractor (hourly) on W2.
Is that a problem when filing AC-21?
Please advise.
You may be able to find answers in the IV wikki - have you tried it?
AC21 FAQ - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/AC21_FAQ)
2011 Selena Gomez Selena Gomez at
aadimanav
07-14 04:39 PM
In addition to email, send regular mail, and fax too.
more...
ganip
03-18 04:01 PM
Did anyone of you use AP to come back and the name is not correct, i have a situation where my
middle name is missing one alphabet and i am worried if that would be an issue while coming back from India.
middle name is missing one alphabet and i am worried if that would be an issue while coming back from India.
logiclife
02-01 06:05 PM
HAs anyone seen this.
How is this going to effect our efforts for lobbying
Check this out
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060201/ap_on_go_co/lobbying_ethics
---
Sunil
The rule passed applies mainly to former members of congress who now work as lobbyist. The rule says that those lobbyists, who used to be members of congress(senate or house) cannot go to house floor or the house Gym.
This does not affect our efforts due to many reasons:
1. House floor and house Gym is not the exclusive place for lobbying. Lobbying can be done at a lot of places in Washington DC besides the house floor or the Gym of the house. This rule is only lip-service really. It serves one purpose: after the abramoff scandal, you will not see lobbyist of the ex-congressman variety physically present in the house floor or the house gym lifting weights with the congressmen.
2. Lobbying - the legwork and logistics - happens mostly at the staff level. The top guys only establish initial working relationship. The rest of the work happens between the staff of the lobbyist and the staff of the congress member.
3. None of the firms we are talking to are tainted by the Abramoff scandal. The ones that were tainted are already closed anyways.
4. This rule or that rule is not going to slow down the business of lobbying significantly. Its is nature of Washington DC. Its not going anywhere. These rules will only prevent congress members from accepting gifts and freebies from lobbyist. And actually that's a good thing.
How is this going to effect our efforts for lobbying
Check this out
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060201/ap_on_go_co/lobbying_ethics
---
Sunil
The rule passed applies mainly to former members of congress who now work as lobbyist. The rule says that those lobbyists, who used to be members of congress(senate or house) cannot go to house floor or the house Gym.
This does not affect our efforts due to many reasons:
1. House floor and house Gym is not the exclusive place for lobbying. Lobbying can be done at a lot of places in Washington DC besides the house floor or the Gym of the house. This rule is only lip-service really. It serves one purpose: after the abramoff scandal, you will not see lobbyist of the ex-congressman variety physically present in the house floor or the house gym lifting weights with the congressmen.
2. Lobbying - the legwork and logistics - happens mostly at the staff level. The top guys only establish initial working relationship. The rest of the work happens between the staff of the lobbyist and the staff of the congress member.
3. None of the firms we are talking to are tainted by the Abramoff scandal. The ones that were tainted are already closed anyways.
4. This rule or that rule is not going to slow down the business of lobbying significantly. Its is nature of Washington DC. Its not going anywhere. These rules will only prevent congress members from accepting gifts and freebies from lobbyist. And actually that's a good thing.
more...
vinicola76
05-21 01:02 PM
Wow!!..i 140 for EB3 has not even moved by a day according to the May 08' processing times.......
2010 Selena Gomez Selena Gomez at
chanduv23
10-02 03:20 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^
more...
485Mbe4001
04-09 05:15 PM
i tend agree with you, most of our forum topics start sensibly and then meander on...
The very reason why we join this forum so that we can, as whole, say something that may influence the law makers of this country to change the existing laws so that our problem with GC will be resolve.
Alot of times the comments in this forum are completely irrelevant and very insulting to the Americans. And here, we are asking them to please change your laws so we could live happily in their county. And if they say no, that's their right.
I am as frustrated as anyone here and I know people from other countries including Australia, Philippines, UK and China who have been waiting for years as well.
If we could please make our comments "not country-centric", I am sure more people will join this forum.
I know several people are not participating in this forum anymore because they are turned off by these country-centric comments.
It hurts, but that's the truth.
The very reason why we join this forum so that we can, as whole, say something that may influence the law makers of this country to change the existing laws so that our problem with GC will be resolve.
Alot of times the comments in this forum are completely irrelevant and very insulting to the Americans. And here, we are asking them to please change your laws so we could live happily in their county. And if they say no, that's their right.
I am as frustrated as anyone here and I know people from other countries including Australia, Philippines, UK and China who have been waiting for years as well.
If we could please make our comments "not country-centric", I am sure more people will join this forum.
I know several people are not participating in this forum anymore because they are turned off by these country-centric comments.
It hurts, but that's the truth.
hair Selena Gomez Selena Gomez at
beppenyc
05-11 07:42 PM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Amy Call (Frist) 202-224-1865
May 11, 2006 Beth Tiehen (Hagel) 202-224-3474
Ken Lundberg (Martinez) 202-228-5957
Andrew Wilder (Kyl) 202-224-4521
Andrea Jones (McCain) 202-224-7130
Wes Hickman (Graham) 202-224-5972
Don Stewart (Cornyn) 202-224-0704
FRIST, HAGEL, MARTINEZ, KYL, McCAIN, GRAHAM, CORNYN
COMMENT ON UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT
WASHINGTON, D.C. � U.S. Senators Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), Mel Martinez (R-Fla.), Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and John Cornyn (R-Texas) today released the following joint statement regarding the unanimous consent agreement to bring comprehensive immigration reform legislation back to the Senate floor Monday:
�Under the unanimous consent agreement reached today, the Senate will resume the immigration debate next week. Senate Republicans are united in their commitment to an open and full debate on multiple amendments -- just as we have done on other bills of this magnitude like bankruptcy and class action reform. �We are willing to put differences aside so we can get on with the important work to be done securing our borders and grappling with the 12 million illegal immigrants currently living in our country. We are also in agreement that efforts to curtail the debate prematurely will only derail this process. We call on Senate Democrats to allow an open debate and votes on this complex and challenging issue.�
http://www.rnha.org/ImmigrationReformNow/Senate%20Statement%20on%20Immigraiton%20Agreement. htm
May 11, 2006 Beth Tiehen (Hagel) 202-224-3474
Ken Lundberg (Martinez) 202-228-5957
Andrew Wilder (Kyl) 202-224-4521
Andrea Jones (McCain) 202-224-7130
Wes Hickman (Graham) 202-224-5972
Don Stewart (Cornyn) 202-224-0704
FRIST, HAGEL, MARTINEZ, KYL, McCAIN, GRAHAM, CORNYN
COMMENT ON UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT
WASHINGTON, D.C. � U.S. Senators Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), Mel Martinez (R-Fla.), Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and John Cornyn (R-Texas) today released the following joint statement regarding the unanimous consent agreement to bring comprehensive immigration reform legislation back to the Senate floor Monday:
�Under the unanimous consent agreement reached today, the Senate will resume the immigration debate next week. Senate Republicans are united in their commitment to an open and full debate on multiple amendments -- just as we have done on other bills of this magnitude like bankruptcy and class action reform. �We are willing to put differences aside so we can get on with the important work to be done securing our borders and grappling with the 12 million illegal immigrants currently living in our country. We are also in agreement that efforts to curtail the debate prematurely will only derail this process. We call on Senate Democrats to allow an open debate and votes on this complex and challenging issue.�
http://www.rnha.org/ImmigrationReformNow/Senate%20Statement%20on%20Immigraiton%20Agreement. htm
more...
dudes2006
02-10 06:54 PM
Project_A - Were you ablle to file Eb2 and got approval after doing online MS ? How does USCIS treat online MS compared to full time MS for approving under eb2 ?
I also have 3 year degree + 1 year PG+ 20 years progressive experience. How can I file under eb2 ? I heard that USCIS looks for 4 year degree for approval under eb2.
I also have 3 year degree + 1 year PG+ 20 years progressive experience. How can I file under eb2 ? I heard that USCIS looks for 4 year degree for approval under eb2.
hot quot;See photos of Selena Gomez at
Junky
09-22 03:09 PM
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
Call Baby Call!!!!
more...
house Justin Bieber may have been
gimme_GC2006
05-06 08:48 PM
Guys!!!
No point in showing frustration. Its not our birth right. We all were well educated before we came in here. Situation changes. And system makes an adjustment. Dont blame your country( I am also from India), for no one asked us to move out. There are so many nice positions available to work for. More than 80% of us found here a better oppurtunity, because there were no competition at all in getting jobs. 1st come 1st serve.
So do not complain. They do not have any urgency to hand us over the GCs. We can only request them to do the needful on the basis of our sorry state of affairs. Again, we are still at their mecrcy.
So stop complaining. Either wait and support IV or boot out.
Very well said..I have many desi ppl at my work place who gag about H1b slavery blah-blah..Not giving GC early..
People need to understand. (Offcourse its frustrating to wait for..but no one forced us to stay here..or come here)
No point in showing frustration. Its not our birth right. We all were well educated before we came in here. Situation changes. And system makes an adjustment. Dont blame your country( I am also from India), for no one asked us to move out. There are so many nice positions available to work for. More than 80% of us found here a better oppurtunity, because there were no competition at all in getting jobs. 1st come 1st serve.
So do not complain. They do not have any urgency to hand us over the GCs. We can only request them to do the needful on the basis of our sorry state of affairs. Again, we are still at their mecrcy.
So stop complaining. Either wait and support IV or boot out.
Very well said..I have many desi ppl at my work place who gag about H1b slavery blah-blah..Not giving GC early..
People need to understand. (Offcourse its frustrating to wait for..but no one forced us to stay here..or come here)
tattoo Selena Gomez / Photo Credit:
waitforgc1
06-12 11:57 AM
Ron Gotcher said something similar... they may be trying not take any more
applications from 2000-2009 until they finish the backlog. That may be one of the
reasons why they may have retrogressed to 2000. Just my 2 cents.
applications from 2000-2009 until they finish the backlog. That may be one of the
reasons why they may have retrogressed to 2000. Just my 2 cents.
more...
pictures Selena Gomez
seekerofpeace
08-24 03:39 PM
Are there any transfered cases which got approved? I am yet to see one. My service center is TSC but my case starts with WAC as it was sent to Calif for data uploading ...my bad luck...I will be current next month but i doubt any transfered cases will get approved...
just fell thru the cracks....anyway good luck for those who are straight forward cases (if there are any)
SoP
just fell thru the cracks....anyway good luck for those who are straight forward cases (if there are any)
SoP
dresses Actress Selena Gomez poses at
chris
09-29 10:48 PM
Thanks a1b2ce..
Eb2 India, PD Mar 03.
Not contacted Omdusman, but contacted Congresman and Senetor.
I came to know that my file is in Adjudications Area. I never heared this word.
Any one know what is " Adjudications Area " means ?
Can you share some info? What category and PD? You should file Ombudsman report. you done that already?
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb_dhsform7001.pdf
check out this thread (hope they can clear backlogs):
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21782
Eb2 India, PD Mar 03.
Not contacted Omdusman, but contacted Congresman and Senetor.
I came to know that my file is in Adjudications Area. I never heared this word.
Any one know what is " Adjudications Area " means ?
Can you share some info? What category and PD? You should file Ombudsman report. you done that already?
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb_dhsform7001.pdf
check out this thread (hope they can clear backlogs):
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21782
more...
makeup Justin Bieber: Never Say
ras
12-16 10:51 PM
Yes you said it right. See if IV can come up with some provision to encourage those who have expressed to shell out only few dollars. It doesn't look good critisizing those who have expressed their geniune feelings.
The question here is not asking the Poster to donate more but rather tell him the provisions to contribute less as well.
No two individuals are at the same thinking level. so his thoughts are that he can contribute less frequently if allowed. So let him know how he can do that. There may be many in the same boat like him.
For the sake of generating more funds, let IV act like collection agency and look at the member as a customer/defaulter(those fence sitters). Collection Agencies make all sorts of efforts and provisions to collect money from these people. Finally they end up some how getting the money paid. There could be a payment installments based on the capability, lesser or higher amount, reminders etc. I am not sure if this anology is good for IV or not. The ultimate goal is to generate funds with the willingness from the members...
You gave perfect examples here. Let's take a close look.
If you think the atterney fee worth $10, you wouln't hire an atterney asking for $6k. Samething with the restraunt check. Samething with IV contribution. If you think $100 is too high, you don't pay it. But if you think it worth $10 you simply ask for it, like everybody will do. Imagine a car saleman responds to his potential buyer's request to a lower price of a car with insulting remarks, he'll loose this customer and many more.
And IV ALLOWED everyone ...? You went too far, pal.
The question here is not asking the Poster to donate more but rather tell him the provisions to contribute less as well.
No two individuals are at the same thinking level. so his thoughts are that he can contribute less frequently if allowed. So let him know how he can do that. There may be many in the same boat like him.
For the sake of generating more funds, let IV act like collection agency and look at the member as a customer/defaulter(those fence sitters). Collection Agencies make all sorts of efforts and provisions to collect money from these people. Finally they end up some how getting the money paid. There could be a payment installments based on the capability, lesser or higher amount, reminders etc. I am not sure if this anology is good for IV or not. The ultimate goal is to generate funds with the willingness from the members...
You gave perfect examples here. Let's take a close look.
If you think the atterney fee worth $10, you wouln't hire an atterney asking for $6k. Samething with the restraunt check. Samething with IV contribution. If you think $100 is too high, you don't pay it. But if you think it worth $10 you simply ask for it, like everybody will do. Imagine a car saleman responds to his potential buyer's request to a lower price of a car with insulting remarks, he'll loose this customer and many more.
And IV ALLOWED everyone ...? You went too far, pal.
girlfriend Tags: Justin Bieber: Never Say
lazycis
12-06 12:18 PM
I was at USCIS this morning, followed every thing you suggested. My IO officer was actually a desi guy.
1) They completely refused to look at the received date, I had my EAD (765) receipt, but the IO said he only cares about the receipt date. I even has the print out from USCIS.gov in which they have mentioned that they will honor the date on which applications were received in the mail room but he did not budge. His argument was " That update is in the over all scheme of things, but for EAD they have specific instruction to follow only the date they entered the data in the system"
2) I was not allowed to see a supervisor, the IO did talk to the supervisor but did not let me see her.
So they refused to acknowledge that it is pending more than 90 days?
They are technically right, the regulations say "within 90 days from the date of receipt of the application".
Talk about broken promises. Write to the USCIS ombudsman.
1) They completely refused to look at the received date, I had my EAD (765) receipt, but the IO said he only cares about the receipt date. I even has the print out from USCIS.gov in which they have mentioned that they will honor the date on which applications were received in the mail room but he did not budge. His argument was " That update is in the over all scheme of things, but for EAD they have specific instruction to follow only the date they entered the data in the system"
2) I was not allowed to see a supervisor, the IO did talk to the supervisor but did not let me see her.
So they refused to acknowledge that it is pending more than 90 days?
They are technically right, the regulations say "within 90 days from the date of receipt of the application".
Talk about broken promises. Write to the USCIS ombudsman.
hairstyles Premiere selena gomez dressed
forever
06-12 08:31 PM
I agree with the analysis given by willwin. In fact, I was thinking on similar lines. If no visas are wasted and total number of pending employment based visas is around 200,000 as given by Mr. Op.. himself, I do not see any reason why dates do not move. My estimation is both EB-2 and EB-3 dates for China and India will hover in the range of 2005 ~ 2006. This estimation is based on number of applications filed during Pre-PERM and Post-PERM era with two recessions taking the toll on number of applications received by USCIS.
Only assumptions in the above analysis are
1. Figures given by Mr. Op.. is somewhat correct. (Seems to be correct based on monthly statistics released by USCIS since 2008)
2. USCIS does not intend to waste visas.(This also can be safely assumed as they are following the policy of not wasting for the last two years)
3.No country limit. (This seems correct if point 2 is correct)
Now guys, do not disturb my dream.:)
Only assumptions in the above analysis are
1. Figures given by Mr. Op.. is somewhat correct. (Seems to be correct based on monthly statistics released by USCIS since 2008)
2. USCIS does not intend to waste visas.(This also can be safely assumed as they are following the policy of not wasting for the last two years)
3.No country limit. (This seems correct if point 2 is correct)
Now guys, do not disturb my dream.:)
makemygc
07-06 10:56 AM
It doesn't seem to be fair to people filing after July 2nd. It's causing backfire...
You are not reading it correctly. Lawsuit is not limited to July 2nd filers. That is the reason why attorney's are encouraging to file even now.
On your backfire note, you gotta read Pappu and logiclife postings about some people being happy about the July bulletin fiasco. Read it over the weekend. Those are great postings.
You are not reading it correctly. Lawsuit is not limited to July 2nd filers. That is the reason why attorney's are encouraging to file even now.
On your backfire note, you gotta read Pappu and logiclife postings about some people being happy about the July bulletin fiasco. Read it over the weekend. Those are great postings.
test101
06-28 03:23 PM
Assuming that I got my EAD, and then my I-140 got denied for whatever reason.
What happen next? Will i be out of status? do i have to leave the country? if i'm F-1 student will i be back on F-1?
thanks
What happen next? Will i be out of status? do i have to leave the country? if i'm F-1 student will i be back on F-1?
thanks
