fromnaija
07-20 04:43 PM
If your friend maintains H status, she could bring her baby back on H4 visa.
Same question. My friend is pregnant and wants to deliver the baby in India. They have filed for AoS now. Howevr they are not sure how to bring ther baby in if they deliver in India.
Same question. My friend is pregnant and wants to deliver the baby in India. They have filed for AoS now. Howevr they are not sure how to bring ther baby in if they deliver in India.
wallpaper funny happy easter clip art.
gc_in_30_yrs
11-21 01:16 PM
I saw the following status on I-131
Application Type: I131, APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
On November 21, 2007 we mailed the document to the address we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
Does it mean that I-131 is approved?
Yes, I guess.
Application Type: I131, APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
On November 21, 2007 we mailed the document to the address we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
Does it mean that I-131 is approved?
Yes, I guess.
.jpg "clip art flowers and hearts.")
yabadaba
06-26 12:22 PM
whats our stance now...do we want it to pass or not? have any of the ammendments that help the EB cause been incorporated?
2011 FUNNY BIRTHDAY CAKE CLIP ART
asharda
07-13 10:47 AM
Its a good idea but make sure you guyz are comfortable. It must be hot out there.
Have every one wear white as the color of peace/silent protest/sadness.
Have every one wear white as the color of peace/silent protest/sadness.
more...
sledge_hammer
05-14 04:21 PM
^_^_^_^_^
snthampi
08-17 12:40 PM
I have all proofs timesheets and bankstatements and email conversations. But, i am worried because he is threatening me saying he will go to court and sue me for working at the same client. Do i have chance to win the case if i fight back.
As your current employer is not the direct client of your former emplyer, they may not have a good case to sue you. They will threaten you to get something out of the situation. So, don't hurry and consult an attorney or get more information from some educated source on this type of matters. By the way, don't tell him what you will do. Just find out what he is trying to do and act accordingly. If you tell him that you will complain to DOL, he will be prepared to face it. Good luck.
As your current employer is not the direct client of your former emplyer, they may not have a good case to sue you. They will threaten you to get something out of the situation. So, don't hurry and consult an attorney or get more information from some educated source on this type of matters. By the way, don't tell him what you will do. Just find out what he is trying to do and act accordingly. If you tell him that you will complain to DOL, he will be prepared to face it. Good luck.
more...
coopheal
11-10 05:13 PM
All,
IV has put in significant effort in creating this survey to map the strength of our community.
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=95&Itemid=36
Answered the the survey.
IV has put in significant effort in creating this survey to map the strength of our community.
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=95&Itemid=36
Answered the the survey.
2010 clip art flowers and hearts.
sanjay02
06-29 08:35 PM
I guess the cases that are pre-adjucated are called for interview.
more...
bheemi
03-15 11:32 AM
hi Super_Moderator,
Why cant we try to add now..instead of waiting for later time..to add this ammendment thru some senator or somebody for filing 485 during retrogression...
just to know whey we need to wait for later to add this...
Why cant we try to add now..instead of waiting for later time..to add this ammendment thru some senator or somebody for filing 485 during retrogression...
just to know whey we need to wait for later to add this...
hair people clip art walking;
ragz4u
03-15 11:05 AM
Ramanujam,
Over the last couple of weeks IV core committee members and QGA have had several meetings with important members of Senate and House. We have tried to educate the relevant folks about our situation.
It is premature to assume/speculate one way or other whether any pro-immigrant provisions will be removed/added. The next few days will provide a good idea of how things might unfold
There are a ton of amendments that are being introduced by various Judiciary Committee members. The committee has only reached Title 3 while Title 4 and 5 are the ones that most affect us
In the same vein, the Judiciary Committee is NOT the only place an amendment can be brought into the bill.
After the Judiciary committee, the bill will be brought to the floor. At that time too amendments can be brought in by Senators. Once the bill passes the senate, the bill will be discussed by the Joint Conference Committee that will negotiate and come to a common bill from both the House Version HR4437 and the senate version of it. Here too, pro-immigrant provisions can be added/removed
So in short, we will try our best to ensure that all our goals mentioned on the home page are achieved (hopefully :) ) and we will keep on working on it until the final bill gets passed by both the house and senate after the joint conference committee!
Over the last couple of weeks IV core committee members and QGA have had several meetings with important members of Senate and House. We have tried to educate the relevant folks about our situation.
It is premature to assume/speculate one way or other whether any pro-immigrant provisions will be removed/added. The next few days will provide a good idea of how things might unfold
There are a ton of amendments that are being introduced by various Judiciary Committee members. The committee has only reached Title 3 while Title 4 and 5 are the ones that most affect us
In the same vein, the Judiciary Committee is NOT the only place an amendment can be brought into the bill.
After the Judiciary committee, the bill will be brought to the floor. At that time too amendments can be brought in by Senators. Once the bill passes the senate, the bill will be discussed by the Joint Conference Committee that will negotiate and come to a common bill from both the House Version HR4437 and the senate version of it. Here too, pro-immigrant provisions can be added/removed
So in short, we will try our best to ensure that all our goals mentioned on the home page are achieved (hopefully :) ) and we will keep on working on it until the final bill gets passed by both the house and senate after the joint conference committee!
more...
peeku
06-20 12:45 PM
EVERYONE , Please take a step BACK
Look and see what lawyers are seeing.
http://immigrationvoice.blogspot.com/
YesGC NoGC you should consult lawyer like the one mentioned in link or Sheela murthy or any good one.
above conference call shows transition to "Project Manager " is one of the most natural ones...
so gather the facts and decide for yourself.
ofcourse i am not debating pros/cons of doing so but defering the judgement to immigration lawyer such as prashanthi ...
Look and see what lawyers are seeing.
http://immigrationvoice.blogspot.com/
YesGC NoGC you should consult lawyer like the one mentioned in link or Sheela murthy or any good one.
above conference call shows transition to "Project Manager " is one of the most natural ones...
so gather the facts and decide for yourself.
ofcourse i am not debating pros/cons of doing so but defering the judgement to immigration lawyer such as prashanthi ...
hot So funny at what people
Marphad
12-03 04:30 PM
My wife is not H4, she is working on EAD and we applied her I-485 last July. She has to travel to India for an emegency. We applied for AP last month, have the receipt but it is not approved. Is it okay if she travels to India without AP approval? I will be here and I can take her approved AP when I go there after two months.
I heard that if she travels without AP, her I-485 is considered abonded. Is this true? Can we apply for her H4 (as I am still on H1). Any advice on how to get her back?
Thanks!
I think you should not take this risk. Once you leave the country without AP, the application is considered as revoked as per my reading somewhere. I am trying to find link.
I heard that if she travels without AP, her I-485 is considered abonded. Is this true? Can we apply for her H4 (as I am still on H1). Any advice on how to get her back?
Thanks!
I think you should not take this risk. Once you leave the country without AP, the application is considered as revoked as per my reading somewhere. I am trying to find link.
more...
house FUNNY VINTAGE PEOPLE GOING
gondalguru
07-08 10:47 PM
i have heard in the past that you can move jobs in the same area, but never gone into the specifics....
my attorney does a lot of this stuff, you can get a free consultation.
pm me if interested.
btw it;s a good question for iv-physicians, are you part of that group? see my signature.
I have requested the membership for iv physician group for quite sometime but it is still not approved. I don't know what the problem might be.
I will pm you regarding NIW thing
my attorney does a lot of this stuff, you can get a free consultation.
pm me if interested.
btw it;s a good question for iv-physicians, are you part of that group? see my signature.
I have requested the membership for iv physician group for quite sometime but it is still not approved. I don't know what the problem might be.
I will pm you regarding NIW thing
tattoo People Clipart clip art
Blog Feeds
01-27 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
more...
pictures lady woman Pages of people
Maverick_2008
02-23 06:43 PM
If we're forced to see the glass half full, delayed 140 processing may actually be good for some people who are about to be laid off and whose 140 is on shaky grounds. It might just buy'em some more time to switch employers and figure out alternatives.
Maverick_2008
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
TSC
485: went from May 24 to April 10, 2007 :(
140: June 23, 2007
NSC
485: July 30, 3007
140: Jan 22, 2007
Maverick_2008
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
TSC
485: went from May 24 to April 10, 2007 :(
140: June 23, 2007
NSC
485: July 30, 3007
140: Jan 22, 2007
dresses FUNNY OLD PEOPLE CARTOON
RamBharose
03-13 06:34 PM
hey kris
i really wanted to know if it was illegla before reporting someone, you can refer to jaylenos reply where he quoted my previous post and you will know my real issue is with people that do fraud.
And i am not that stupid to write in a forum like this accepting that i am doing a fraud ehn i can be tracked.
I wasnt sure and i didnt know how to go about it.
try to follow law in its technicality and spirit. A lot of us may face delay in their app processing for uscis to figure out fraudsters among us. We should keep our program defensible not only in the court of law but also in the court of (american) public opinion.
i really wanted to know if it was illegla before reporting someone, you can refer to jaylenos reply where he quoted my previous post and you will know my real issue is with people that do fraud.
And i am not that stupid to write in a forum like this accepting that i am doing a fraud ehn i can be tracked.
I wasnt sure and i didnt know how to go about it.
try to follow law in its technicality and spirit. A lot of us may face delay in their app processing for uscis to figure out fraudsters among us. We should keep our program defensible not only in the court of law but also in the court of (american) public opinion.
more...
makeup People Clipart DANCING STICK
piyu7444
10-14 06:33 PM
I am in a similar situation...filed for AP in June...mine got approved...wife's AP has not gotten approved yet....planning to travel in early December.
I tried expediting for financial loss and got email saying that is not enough reason....
I am thinking of refiling my wife's I131 and paying the extra $300...now. What do you guys think...is there a chance of approval before end of November or is it a lost cause...
Its late if you want to go in early dec. If money is not a concern I would still try............
I tried expediting for financial loss and got email saying that is not enough reason....
I am thinking of refiling my wife's I131 and paying the extra $300...now. What do you guys think...is there a chance of approval before end of November or is it a lost cause...
Its late if you want to go in early dec. If money is not a concern I would still try............
girlfriend Stick People Clipart
puskeygadha
12-03 10:22 AM
thanks so much guys
my labor is in bpc
I still have 18 months in H1B. but after I get my I140 I will switch
if I feel that I cant file 485 for a while
my labor is in bpc
I still have 18 months in H1B. but after I get my I140 I will switch
if I feel that I cant file 485 for a while
hairstyles smf stick people clip art
shikra1
11-10 03:33 PM
Remember, USCIS only tells us "total" I-485 receipts. They don't break it down to what many of us are interested to know, which is, how many are family based and how many are employment based. There is no way to know how many of the 150K receipts issued in Sept for I-485 were EB.
FB and EB combined annual limit is 366,000 immigrant visas (226K FB + 140K EB)
Again quoting from the monthly visa bulletin:
"Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320."
FB and EB combined annual limit is 366,000 immigrant visas (226K FB + 140K EB)
Again quoting from the monthly visa bulletin:
"Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320."
seahawks
07-19 12:58 AM
I mean i filed without both of those. Theyare required in the 140 phase , not in 485.
But keep them handy - in case they wants mail by next day air
if you are filing for your spouse and if you are sponsoring your spouse, you have to show evidence of income.. There is a form that you fill with it,.
But keep them handy - in case they wants mail by next day air
if you are filing for your spouse and if you are sponsoring your spouse, you have to show evidence of income.. There is a form that you fill with it,.
Chiwere
07-29 08:07 PM
Conchshell raised a valid point, but instead of seeking cooperation we should try to neutralize CHC - oppose any potential relief to illegals. It is about time we paid them back in the same coin.
No comments:
Post a Comment