fatjoe
09-05 10:28 AM
Thanks Divakar for your prompt response. Could we say that it has been 90 days since we filed, when it is actually only 50 days.
snathan
06-07 01:03 PM
I recently renewed my license in Oklahoma and was surprised to find out that on top of shorter expiration date, now my license has �TEMPORARY� written across it. This is new rule that OK is applying for non-residents and non-citizens. Has any body else gone thru similar experience? I am outraged that now I will be discriminated every where. DL is used on day to day basis and every body will question me, suspect me as to why �TEMPORARY� is written on my DL. Even DL office was not sure when this new rule was implemented, how come police officers, general public will know about it. I feel ashamed to even show my DL now. I�ll get hard time getting loans etc b/c people will think I may move out any time as I am here �Temporarily�
Is it only Oklahoma or other states are doing the same? See the link below from official DPS link for sample of DL.
http://www.dps.state.ok.us/
Why dont you check with attorney and take them to court. Just getting/being angry wont help.
Is it only Oklahoma or other states are doing the same? See the link below from official DPS link for sample of DL.
http://www.dps.state.ok.us/
Why dont you check with attorney and take them to court. Just getting/being angry wont help.
raysaikat
08-22 02:48 AM
Thanks for your suggestions - minimalist,prem_goel,gconmymind.
If she attends for the visa stamping in India,
1) When can she go to consulate - before October 1 or after October 1.
Anytime. In particular, she can go to the consulate before Oct 1. Usually the consulate gives a visa stamp with validity date no earlier than 15 days from the start of the H1-B status (Oct 1 in this case). Since she will return after Oct 1, there will be no problem.
2) Does she needs to carry the H1 documents as new H1 candidate or it is a different list. ( She is in here for almost 1.5 yrs on h4, she will not have paystubs. ) . if different can you pls provide me the link where i can find the same(H4 to H1 visa interview).
She will be a new candidate. Her 6 year clock for H status has already started, though. I.e., she only has 4.5 years left.
3) While leaving the country which I-94 she need to give it back(the one with new h1 petition / the I94 which she received she came in as H4)
Her I-94 for the current status (i.e., the one she got when she entered as H4). The new I-94's validity date should be Oct 1; i.e., it is not in effect. However, when she reenters, she will get a new I-94 reflecting her new status. So the I-94 that is attached with the I-797 form will never be used.
4) Can they ask for more details like client letter,etc - chennai
Yes. The consulate will of course treat her like any other H1-B visa applicant. The consulate should ensure that the employment is legitimate and she has the right skills claimed in the LCA.
If she plans to come back on H4
1) Will she have any issues at port of entry. Can they ask why she is coming on H4 if she has H1.
Thanks in advance.
Not sure I understand the question. If she chooses to come back as H4, then POE officers should not ask anything about H1-B as such. But perhaps she should keep all documentations just in case.
If she attends for the visa stamping in India,
1) When can she go to consulate - before October 1 or after October 1.
Anytime. In particular, she can go to the consulate before Oct 1. Usually the consulate gives a visa stamp with validity date no earlier than 15 days from the start of the H1-B status (Oct 1 in this case). Since she will return after Oct 1, there will be no problem.
2) Does she needs to carry the H1 documents as new H1 candidate or it is a different list. ( She is in here for almost 1.5 yrs on h4, she will not have paystubs. ) . if different can you pls provide me the link where i can find the same(H4 to H1 visa interview).
She will be a new candidate. Her 6 year clock for H status has already started, though. I.e., she only has 4.5 years left.
3) While leaving the country which I-94 she need to give it back(the one with new h1 petition / the I94 which she received she came in as H4)
Her I-94 for the current status (i.e., the one she got when she entered as H4). The new I-94's validity date should be Oct 1; i.e., it is not in effect. However, when she reenters, she will get a new I-94 reflecting her new status. So the I-94 that is attached with the I-797 form will never be used.
4) Can they ask for more details like client letter,etc - chennai
Yes. The consulate will of course treat her like any other H1-B visa applicant. The consulate should ensure that the employment is legitimate and she has the right skills claimed in the LCA.
If she plans to come back on H4
1) Will she have any issues at port of entry. Can they ask why she is coming on H4 if she has H1.
Thanks in advance.
Not sure I understand the question. If she chooses to come back as H4, then POE officers should not ask anything about H1-B as such. But perhaps she should keep all documentations just in case.
Rsamuga
07-16 03:03 PM
Hi All-
I have a tricky scenario here, I need some input/guidance.
I came to USA during Dec 2003 through a California based Indian Consulting firm. I worked for him for 2 years. In between, he
applied the petition for my labor in April 2005 on eB2 Category and my responsibility was to pay for the GREEN CARD expenses.
During Oct 2005, I joined an American company as permanent employee. Even after that, due to the good terms with my previous employer he agreed to apply for my I-140 during 2007 June and I took care of the financial aspect of it. The known understanding was that I will join his company in near future, apply the I-485 and get the GC.
Two months back my I-140 got approved and I was waiting for the priority date to be current. Last week, I came back from my India trip. I got engaged during my trip and my marriage has been fixed in Nov'08. Today when I checked the UCSIS site, the priority date for the eB2 category is current.
My questions are:
1) At this point of time, I do not want to join my old employer.Working with the current American company, can I still proceed and apply for the I-485 through my previous employer ??.
2) If not, Can I use the earlier priority date(April 2005) by applying for a fresh GC(perm labor/ I-140) from my current employer?
3) To use the earlier priority date(April 2005), do I need to take approval letter from my previous employer ? Is there any chance that the old priority date can be revoked by the employer ??
If any of you guys have had/come across the same kind of scenario, please do let me know what would be the best way to proceed.
I really appreciate your response in this regard.
Thanks!!
I have a tricky scenario here, I need some input/guidance.
I came to USA during Dec 2003 through a California based Indian Consulting firm. I worked for him for 2 years. In between, he
applied the petition for my labor in April 2005 on eB2 Category and my responsibility was to pay for the GREEN CARD expenses.
During Oct 2005, I joined an American company as permanent employee. Even after that, due to the good terms with my previous employer he agreed to apply for my I-140 during 2007 June and I took care of the financial aspect of it. The known understanding was that I will join his company in near future, apply the I-485 and get the GC.
Two months back my I-140 got approved and I was waiting for the priority date to be current. Last week, I came back from my India trip. I got engaged during my trip and my marriage has been fixed in Nov'08. Today when I checked the UCSIS site, the priority date for the eB2 category is current.
My questions are:
1) At this point of time, I do not want to join my old employer.Working with the current American company, can I still proceed and apply for the I-485 through my previous employer ??.
2) If not, Can I use the earlier priority date(April 2005) by applying for a fresh GC(perm labor/ I-140) from my current employer?
3) To use the earlier priority date(April 2005), do I need to take approval letter from my previous employer ? Is there any chance that the old priority date can be revoked by the employer ??
If any of you guys have had/come across the same kind of scenario, please do let me know what would be the best way to proceed.
I really appreciate your response in this regard.
Thanks!!
more...
krajani2007
08-15 11:25 AM
I work for company A. I found a project for myself with X through another company B. (The end client is X and the middleman is B. My company A has contract with company B NOT WITH company X (end client)
I have an offer from end client X and my company is in the process of suing me in Virginia as I have a non-compete agreement not to work for client/end client or client's end client.
Has anyone come across such situation. Please help me.
I work on hourly rates and don't get paid if I am on bench. Can this be used nullify the contract as this is not legal on H1.
I have an offer from end client X and my company is in the process of suing me in Virginia as I have a non-compete agreement not to work for client/end client or client's end client.
Has anyone come across such situation. Please help me.
I work on hourly rates and don't get paid if I am on bench. Can this be used nullify the contract as this is not legal on H1.
anilsal
07-11 11:26 PM
this is the next best idea.
In just week, the flower campaign was a success from idea inception.
Guys, make this Arnie campaign a grand success.
Please ask him to "Terminate" Retrogression!
In just week, the flower campaign was a success from idea inception.
Guys, make this Arnie campaign a grand success.
Please ask him to "Terminate" Retrogression!
more...
mohitb272
03-19 03:05 PM
There are several instances when a denial notice was sent, but the website continued to show the status as pending.
So if a denial letter has been received, then the website status means nothing.
Who would get the denial notice? The company or the attorney?
My friend tells me that his company no longer hires that attorney so would it mean that my friend would never actually receive the denial letter.
So if a denial letter has been received, then the website status means nothing.
Who would get the denial notice? The company or the attorney?
My friend tells me that his company no longer hires that attorney so would it mean that my friend would never actually receive the denial letter.
Blog Feeds
02-10 08:50 PM
Most lawyers that are versed in the H1B visa process, are getting busier and busier these days. As we are nearing the April 1, 2010 filing deadline for the H1B visa. Many speculations out there as to when will the Cap be reached this year. The economy is still in recovery mode, and employers are careful before hiring. Yet, many Immigration experts feel the Cap will be met early this year, but when is the big question.
With drastic changes to the Labor Condition Application (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/07/icert_portal_for_lca_filing.html)process (now taking more than 7 days to process), as well as unreasonable denials (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/08/h1b_visa_lawyer_about_icert_wo.html), planning early is the key to a successful H1B case this year. But in this post, I want to go back to the basics, the Cap and the legislative background.
Background
On October 21, 1998 Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the much debated American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277 (hereinafter ACWIA). This legislation was first introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI), the Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, in response to the inadequate numbers of H-1B visas available in any fiscal year. As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, Congress imposed a 65,000 per year cap on these visas. In 1997, the cap was reached prior to the end of the fiscal year. The situation grew to crisis proportions in fiscal year 1998 when all 65,000 visas numbers were taken in May of 1998.
In early March 1998, Senator Abraham introduced a bill entitled, "The American Competitiveness Act." The legislation was introduced on the heels of numerous reports and hearings concerning the high tech worker shortage in the United States. The primary goal of the legislation was to address the looming exhaustion of the H-1B professional or specialty occupation worker visa numbers. (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)
The ACWIA went through many different stages before an agreement could be reached. A complete elimination of the cap had originally been proposed by Senator Abraham. The legislation was then modified to increase the number of H-1B visa numbers available during the government fiscal year; provide additional funds for scholarships in the computer science and mathematics areas; increase enforcement of the Department of Labor component of the H-1B visa process; and provide clarification on the prevailing wage requirements of the process. The legislation also addressed permanent residence by providing for an extension of the H-1B visa should a permanent residence petition be pending, and through restructuring the allocation of the employment-based immigrant visa numbers.
This legislative game between conservative isolationists/liberal protectors of the U.S. workforce and moderate Democrats and Republicans supporting business needs and demands, caused chaos among U.S.-based businesses in need of skilled professional workers. From May 11, 1998 until October 1, 1998 U.S. businesses, research institutions and other organizations were unable to recruit foreign workers as temporary professionals. With the U.S. economy still booming and unemployment rates remaining at an all-time low, businesses, especially in the high tech sector, encountered many problems as a result of the cut-off in H-1B visa availability. These problems included, but were not limited to, taking employees off the U.S. payroll, sending employees back to their home country or to sites outside the U.S. as well as the termination of some critical development projects.
Requirements in the Statute
The ACWIA purportedly balances the need for increased professional visas numbers for foreign workers and the desire to protect the U.S. workforce. The following is a summary of the significant changes made by the legislation.
A. Temporary Increase in the Number of Professional Visas Available
There will be an increase from 65,000 to 115,000 visas for fiscal year 1999 and 2000 (through September 30, 2000). In fiscal year 2001, 107,500 visas will be available. Beginning October 1, 2001 the numbers will revert back to 65,000.
B. Electronic Postings
LCA notices may be posted electronically in situations without a bargaining representative. This provision was effective upon date of enactment.
C. Attestations Required for Employers Dependent Upon Foreign Professionals
U.S. employers of 51 or more employees, whose workforce is comprised of 15% or more foreign nationals in the H-1B category are considered dependent employers and must make certain attestations. Employers will also be considered dependent if they employ 26- 50 full time employees and have more than 12 H-1B employees or if they employ 7 -25 employees and have more than 7 H-1B employees.
The dependent employer must attest that it has not and will not displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before and 90 days after filing the visa application. This attestation carries through to employers who place employees at another worksite. The H-1B dependent employer must also attest that it has taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry wide standards and has offered the position to any U.S. worker who is equally or better qualified for the job the foreign worker is sought.
H-1B employees with a Master�s degree or a salary of $60,000 or higher are not included in the attestation requirements and for the first 6 months following the implementation will not be included in the dependent employer calculation.
D. Increased Enforcement and Penalties for Violations
The Department of Labor may fine employers between $1,000-$35,000 per violation and preclude participation in the H-1B program for up to three years.
E. Back Benching H-1B Employees
Employers must pay H-1B nonimmigrants the wage stated on the H-1B petition even if the beneficiary is in nonproductive status. This does not apply to non-productive time due to non work related factors.
F. Benefits
Employers must offer foreign workers benefits and eligibility for insurance, disability, retirement and savings plans, stock options, etc., on the same basis as offerings made to U.S. workers.
G. Additional Fee for Use of H-1B Program
Beginning December 1, 1998, employers are required to pay an additional fee of $500 for an initial H-1B petition and for the first extension. These fees are to be used to support job training programs and scholarships for U.S. workers.
H. Prevailing Wage Computations
For institutions of higher education, related or affiliated non-profit entities or non profit or governmental research organizations, the prevailing wage shall take into account employees at such institutions in the area of employment.
I. Academic Honoraria
Payments of honoraria may now be made to B-1 and B-2 visitors for usual academic activity lasting 9 days at an academic institution or affiliated non-profit entity or a non-profit governmental research organization. No more than 5 honorarium may be received within a six month period.
Employers based in the U.S. now have a temporary reprieve when hiring foreign professionals. However, it is uncertain whether the 65,000 visas for this fiscal year will be adequate to meet the demand for this year and next. Some government officials estimate that visas will be unavailable as early as the beginning of May 2010. In addition, it is still unclear what is on the legislative horizon, reform or not. Pro Immigrants want to come with a proposal to reform legal immigration. U.S. employers employing foreign nationals in any capacity would be well advised to carefully monitor future legislative and regulatory proposals on the horizon. All I can say is that if you plan on hiring a foreign worker, you better call your lawyer now!!!
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/02/h1b_visa_lawyer_the_filing_sea.html)
With drastic changes to the Labor Condition Application (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/07/icert_portal_for_lca_filing.html)process (now taking more than 7 days to process), as well as unreasonable denials (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/08/h1b_visa_lawyer_about_icert_wo.html), planning early is the key to a successful H1B case this year. But in this post, I want to go back to the basics, the Cap and the legislative background.
Background
On October 21, 1998 Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the much debated American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277 (hereinafter ACWIA). This legislation was first introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI), the Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, in response to the inadequate numbers of H-1B visas available in any fiscal year. As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, Congress imposed a 65,000 per year cap on these visas. In 1997, the cap was reached prior to the end of the fiscal year. The situation grew to crisis proportions in fiscal year 1998 when all 65,000 visas numbers were taken in May of 1998.
In early March 1998, Senator Abraham introduced a bill entitled, "The American Competitiveness Act." The legislation was introduced on the heels of numerous reports and hearings concerning the high tech worker shortage in the United States. The primary goal of the legislation was to address the looming exhaustion of the H-1B professional or specialty occupation worker visa numbers. (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)
The ACWIA went through many different stages before an agreement could be reached. A complete elimination of the cap had originally been proposed by Senator Abraham. The legislation was then modified to increase the number of H-1B visa numbers available during the government fiscal year; provide additional funds for scholarships in the computer science and mathematics areas; increase enforcement of the Department of Labor component of the H-1B visa process; and provide clarification on the prevailing wage requirements of the process. The legislation also addressed permanent residence by providing for an extension of the H-1B visa should a permanent residence petition be pending, and through restructuring the allocation of the employment-based immigrant visa numbers.
This legislative game between conservative isolationists/liberal protectors of the U.S. workforce and moderate Democrats and Republicans supporting business needs and demands, caused chaos among U.S.-based businesses in need of skilled professional workers. From May 11, 1998 until October 1, 1998 U.S. businesses, research institutions and other organizations were unable to recruit foreign workers as temporary professionals. With the U.S. economy still booming and unemployment rates remaining at an all-time low, businesses, especially in the high tech sector, encountered many problems as a result of the cut-off in H-1B visa availability. These problems included, but were not limited to, taking employees off the U.S. payroll, sending employees back to their home country or to sites outside the U.S. as well as the termination of some critical development projects.
Requirements in the Statute
The ACWIA purportedly balances the need for increased professional visas numbers for foreign workers and the desire to protect the U.S. workforce. The following is a summary of the significant changes made by the legislation.
A. Temporary Increase in the Number of Professional Visas Available
There will be an increase from 65,000 to 115,000 visas for fiscal year 1999 and 2000 (through September 30, 2000). In fiscal year 2001, 107,500 visas will be available. Beginning October 1, 2001 the numbers will revert back to 65,000.
B. Electronic Postings
LCA notices may be posted electronically in situations without a bargaining representative. This provision was effective upon date of enactment.
C. Attestations Required for Employers Dependent Upon Foreign Professionals
U.S. employers of 51 or more employees, whose workforce is comprised of 15% or more foreign nationals in the H-1B category are considered dependent employers and must make certain attestations. Employers will also be considered dependent if they employ 26- 50 full time employees and have more than 12 H-1B employees or if they employ 7 -25 employees and have more than 7 H-1B employees.
The dependent employer must attest that it has not and will not displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before and 90 days after filing the visa application. This attestation carries through to employers who place employees at another worksite. The H-1B dependent employer must also attest that it has taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry wide standards and has offered the position to any U.S. worker who is equally or better qualified for the job the foreign worker is sought.
H-1B employees with a Master�s degree or a salary of $60,000 or higher are not included in the attestation requirements and for the first 6 months following the implementation will not be included in the dependent employer calculation.
D. Increased Enforcement and Penalties for Violations
The Department of Labor may fine employers between $1,000-$35,000 per violation and preclude participation in the H-1B program for up to three years.
E. Back Benching H-1B Employees
Employers must pay H-1B nonimmigrants the wage stated on the H-1B petition even if the beneficiary is in nonproductive status. This does not apply to non-productive time due to non work related factors.
F. Benefits
Employers must offer foreign workers benefits and eligibility for insurance, disability, retirement and savings plans, stock options, etc., on the same basis as offerings made to U.S. workers.
G. Additional Fee for Use of H-1B Program
Beginning December 1, 1998, employers are required to pay an additional fee of $500 for an initial H-1B petition and for the first extension. These fees are to be used to support job training programs and scholarships for U.S. workers.
H. Prevailing Wage Computations
For institutions of higher education, related or affiliated non-profit entities or non profit or governmental research organizations, the prevailing wage shall take into account employees at such institutions in the area of employment.
I. Academic Honoraria
Payments of honoraria may now be made to B-1 and B-2 visitors for usual academic activity lasting 9 days at an academic institution or affiliated non-profit entity or a non-profit governmental research organization. No more than 5 honorarium may be received within a six month period.
Employers based in the U.S. now have a temporary reprieve when hiring foreign professionals. However, it is uncertain whether the 65,000 visas for this fiscal year will be adequate to meet the demand for this year and next. Some government officials estimate that visas will be unavailable as early as the beginning of May 2010. In addition, it is still unclear what is on the legislative horizon, reform or not. Pro Immigrants want to come with a proposal to reform legal immigration. U.S. employers employing foreign nationals in any capacity would be well advised to carefully monitor future legislative and regulatory proposals on the horizon. All I can say is that if you plan on hiring a foreign worker, you better call your lawyer now!!!
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/02/h1b_visa_lawyer_the_filing_sea.html)
more...
OlgaJ
May 25th, 2005, 06:01 AM
I think the starkness of the Cherry Creek Reservoir area makes it difficult to capture its charm. (I lived 1-2 miles away from there for 24 years.) If I still lived there, I would be concentrating more on the cloud formations (which you don't see in too many places) when using the 17-85 lens. I would also take a couple of shots of the same scene, one metered for the sky and another for the shadow areas and blend them in PS.
Olga
Olga
new_horizon
08-03 11:22 PM
Great idea. But make sure the replies you send are appropriate to the questions. I think those who add that to their signature should be more careful in avoiding jokes or vain words so that others don't take it (signature) lightly.
more...
Jelena
07-14 07:16 AM
Regardless of the nature of the outcome from USCIS, I think we should all take 5-10 minutes out of our busy lives and all the "predicting" and dash off a quick note of thanks to Congresswoman Lofgren
Couldn't agree more. I will be sending her a personal Thank You card today. Flowers might not be quite appropriate, especially so shortly after the recent "flower campaign". :)
Couldn't agree more. I will be sending her a personal Thank You card today. Flowers might not be quite appropriate, especially so shortly after the recent "flower campaign". :)
desi3933
06-22 09:50 AM
[QUOTE=desi3933][COLOR="Blue"]1. No, unless she goes out of country and re-enters US on H1 visa on or after Oct 1st
As her I-94 is attached and COS if approved with H1B, Can she work on I-485-EAD/H4 from Aug 1 - Sept 30 and then work on H1B from Oct 1 - next 3 years from the same company?
Please advise.
I have answered this question in my last post (#1 in post). Here we go again --
By working on EAD she will be on AOS Pending status. In order to change to H4 back again, she needs to go out of country and re-enter US on H1 visa on or after Oct 1st.
Not a legal advice.
-----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
As her I-94 is attached and COS if approved with H1B, Can she work on I-485-EAD/H4 from Aug 1 - Sept 30 and then work on H1B from Oct 1 - next 3 years from the same company?
Please advise.
I have answered this question in my last post (#1 in post). Here we go again --
By working on EAD she will be on AOS Pending status. In order to change to H4 back again, she needs to go out of country and re-enter US on H1 visa on or after Oct 1st.
Not a legal advice.
-----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
more...
gc_on_demand
03-17 10:40 AM
Even I have received the RFEs as well on pending I-485 cases for me and my wife. My PD is Mar 2005. I am also wondering about the RFEs. I'll share mine as soon as I get those.
update profile first and help community..
update profile first and help community..
mhtanim
02-11 06:00 PM
Count me in. No FP Notice yet.
more...
shantak
02-29 04:57 PM
Same here, not received FP. Raised an SR but no use.
Hope it will not cause any issues during EAD and AP renewal
My case is at TSC and July 2007 filer
Hope it will not cause any issues during EAD and AP renewal
My case is at TSC and July 2007 filer
Asian
05-30 02:07 PM
As many of you have experienced, the pace of things here in general is slower than that of our home countries. Working in the project management, I often realize how hard it is to make the other party move faster when it is not involving the interest of the other side.
That is what makes me feel skeptical how much they would move, when we demand faster processing of our green card. Probably, the voice of our employer will be more effective. But is our employer losing anything from this slow process?
Even if our demand for more visa numbers is met and the retrogression problem is resolved, there is a big trap ahead waiting for us. Nobody really knows how much time it will take in the 3rd stage after all of us jump in and process our 485. It will be disastrous if it will be the same thing all over again.
It will do no good finger pointing for the lost time of ours in the past years. It does only good when we unite our voice and demand specific things to make up for the past.
Why is the green card so valuable to you? For me, it is the freedom of chaning jobs without making the new employer feel embarrassed.
If only they can allow us to submit I-485 regardless even though they can not process it until Visa number becomes current and if only they can remove the restrictions (same or similar rule) on AC-21 portability, these will save so many lives from being trapped.
These two legal changes which may be easier for the Congress, will actually make up for the lost time in our life waiting in line.
Maybe, it is time to be practical, realistic, and specific. Maybe, it is time to get smarter.
That is what makes me feel skeptical how much they would move, when we demand faster processing of our green card. Probably, the voice of our employer will be more effective. But is our employer losing anything from this slow process?
Even if our demand for more visa numbers is met and the retrogression problem is resolved, there is a big trap ahead waiting for us. Nobody really knows how much time it will take in the 3rd stage after all of us jump in and process our 485. It will be disastrous if it will be the same thing all over again.
It will do no good finger pointing for the lost time of ours in the past years. It does only good when we unite our voice and demand specific things to make up for the past.
Why is the green card so valuable to you? For me, it is the freedom of chaning jobs without making the new employer feel embarrassed.
If only they can allow us to submit I-485 regardless even though they can not process it until Visa number becomes current and if only they can remove the restrictions (same or similar rule) on AC-21 portability, these will save so many lives from being trapped.
These two legal changes which may be easier for the Congress, will actually make up for the lost time in our life waiting in line.
Maybe, it is time to be practical, realistic, and specific. Maybe, it is time to get smarter.
more...
gbof
10-15 03:54 PM
I have had situations where CIS has issued more than one RFE, but only about twice in 12 years of immigration practice.
Thank you so much. I appreciate a word from your experience
Thank you so much. I appreciate a word from your experience
va_labor2002
09-25 12:00 PM
I did not google rajiv chandrasekaran for the first time. I saw his article on the main page of Washington Post on Sep 17 Sunday. I thought he will listen to our issues and write something about us ! I already sent an email to him.
You can submit your message to Rajiv under the following link;
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/rajiv+chandrasekaran/
I encourage everybody to send message to Rajiv,so that he will write an article on legal immigration. Good luck.
Thank you.
You can submit your message to Rajiv under the following link;
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/rajiv+chandrasekaran/
I encourage everybody to send message to Rajiv,so that he will write an article on legal immigration. Good luck.
Thank you.
chehuan
01-25 02:53 PM
BS + 5 years experience or Master +2 years
sandyn16
11-01 12:30 AM
I faced the same situation last year when my I94 expired because my passport expired in April 2007. I got my passport renewed but missed the I94 expiry date.
I consulted my attorney and he advised leaving the country asap and coming back. I went to Canada (since I had a Canadian visitor visa) via Buffalo and came back, but the immigration officer told me am fine as long as my I797 is valid.
I heeded my lawyers advise finally and visited India for a few weeks and came back and got new I94.
Based on the information I gathered at that time, there is some time period , I think 40 days after the I94 expiry date by which you can file for new I94 within this country else you have to go out of the country and come back.
I consulted my attorney and he advised leaving the country asap and coming back. I went to Canada (since I had a Canadian visitor visa) via Buffalo and came back, but the immigration officer told me am fine as long as my I797 is valid.
I heeded my lawyers advise finally and visited India for a few weeks and came back and got new I94.
Based on the information I gathered at that time, there is some time period , I think 40 days after the I94 expiry date by which you can file for new I94 within this country else you have to go out of the country and come back.
Shams
10-24 03:06 PM
BTW my case was received by NSC on 8/15, and so was my wife's. Her EAD card status still says "Case received and Pending".
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий