wandmaker
09-15 01:21 AM
When AP is approved, you get 3 copies. I went twice on intl trips and each time they took a copy. I am left with 1 copy of the AP.
Now I need to go on one last intl trip (I have applied for renewal). I just have one copy of AP with me.
How does it work? Will the officer just stamp the AP and make a copy?
Inform POE officer - s/he will make a copy and return the original to you.
Now I need to go on one last intl trip (I have applied for renewal). I just have one copy of AP with me.
How does it work? Will the officer just stamp the AP and make a copy?
Inform POE officer - s/he will make a copy and return the original to you.
wallpaper makeup True Blood Bill and
tiger05
03-01 07:45 PM
Hi Rocky,
Thanks for your reply
Ya I was on unpaid vacation and 2006 was my first year. I will discuss with my attorney also.
Thanks for your reply
Ya I was on unpaid vacation and 2006 was my first year. I will discuss with my attorney also.
gc_aspirant_prasad
06-22 04:38 PM
If you have AAA membership, try them, they do it for free for 1 set typically.
You may have to go in the hours stipulated by them.
You may have to go in the hours stipulated by them.
2011 Sookie and vampire Bill
njdude26
07-12 01:39 PM
My case was closed in Error at the PBEC. My attorney had sent a letter saying this some months ago. Today my attorney informed me that there is some new procedure of re-opening cases that was closed in error using which he says he sent the information by email today.
Just thought will give you guys the info.
Just thought will give you guys the info.
more...
laksmi
02-18 02:33 PM
Is paystub needed When a person is on H1B and is out of project when AOS on 485.
I'm also in similar situation - my current project will also end by Mar 30th and its tough getting a new Project outside since my employer wants to make big money out of me (they keep fat margins) .... My H is valid till Sep 10 but it doesn't matter as soon as the current employer cancels it or asks u to go out of the country.
Do a H transfer immediately with some other company so that u remain in status...
Then file GC with that new company. GC can't be filed on your own - The PERM Labor and I-140 must need a employer and the 3rd stage I-485,EAD,AP you can file on your own.
I'm also in similar situation - my current project will also end by Mar 30th and its tough getting a new Project outside since my employer wants to make big money out of me (they keep fat margins) .... My H is valid till Sep 10 but it doesn't matter as soon as the current employer cancels it or asks u to go out of the country.
Do a H transfer immediately with some other company so that u remain in status...
Then file GC with that new company. GC can't be filed on your own - The PERM Labor and I-140 must need a employer and the 3rd stage I-485,EAD,AP you can file on your own.
rimzhim
05-26 03:15 PM
There is a lot of discussion in various threads about the new. Essentially the questions boil down to the following. Hopefully some knowledgable people can post here.
1. What happens if your labor is still pending in BEC (2001 thru 2005 cases)?
2. What happens if you have an 140 pending filed before May 21, 2007?
3. What happens if you have an approved 140 and about to file 485?
4. What happens if you are yet to file 140?
5. With AC 21 gone will you be able to switch jobs using 485 portability?6. With AC 21 gone will you be able to join new employer based on H1 receipt?
good points. I think AC21 will hold for ppl in the old system though.
1. What happens if your labor is still pending in BEC (2001 thru 2005 cases)?
2. What happens if you have an 140 pending filed before May 21, 2007?
3. What happens if you have an approved 140 and about to file 485?
4. What happens if you are yet to file 140?
5. With AC 21 gone will you be able to switch jobs using 485 portability?6. With AC 21 gone will you be able to join new employer based on H1 receipt?
good points. I think AC21 will hold for ppl in the old system though.
more...
newlife2
09-19 10:18 PM
Guys, I was just laid off and have efiled i539 3 days after the termination date for a status change to F2. Now working on the application letter. Do you think I should mention the layoff in the letter?
If I do mention it:
Con: The layoff might quickly catch the eyes of the immigration officer and if he want to check my status, he could find out the 3 days OOS.
Pro: My previous job was well paid. By mentioning it, I give the reason that why I want to stay at home as F2 instead of keeping the well paid job.
I guess I will mention it in the letter to explain the whole situation and hope everything will be all right. Let me know if anybody disagrees asap, I will mail out the stuff with in next two days.
If I do mention it:
Con: The layoff might quickly catch the eyes of the immigration officer and if he want to check my status, he could find out the 3 days OOS.
Pro: My previous job was well paid. By mentioning it, I give the reason that why I want to stay at home as F2 instead of keeping the well paid job.
I guess I will mention it in the letter to explain the whole situation and hope everything will be all right. Let me know if anybody disagrees asap, I will mail out the stuff with in next two days.
2010 True Blood
saketkapur
07-06 02:46 PM
Yes, as long as you are working for the same employer that had filed your I-140 then you can maintain your H1B status with them. I had confirmed the same with my attorney. You should confirm the same by your attorney too. I beleive there was a thread at a point of time discussing the same on IV too. Maybe some member might be able to point it to you.
I am now with a different employer and using my EAD since May this year.
Hope this helps......
I am now with a different employer and using my EAD since May this year.
Hope this helps......
more...
virald
01-31 09:30 PM
Has anyone analyzed who would be an ideal president from our point of view? Does IV think any candidate is more pro-legal immigrant than the other?
hair Sookie Stackhouse - True Blood
andy garcia
04-08 01:55 PM
US Legal Permanent Residents 2007 (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/LPR_FR_2007.pdf)
162,176 total EB were issued in 2007.
There were 7,148 unused family sponsored preferences in 2006. The 2007 EB limit was 147,148 (140,000 plus 7,148). In 2007, the number of EB immigrants exceeded the above limit. This was due to provisions of the REAL ID Act of 2005 that allowed the recapture of 50,000 unused EB visas (4,743 of these visas were used in 2007) and provisions of the AC21 Act of 2000 that
permitted the recapture.
162,176 total EB were issued in 2007.
There were 7,148 unused family sponsored preferences in 2006. The 2007 EB limit was 147,148 (140,000 plus 7,148). In 2007, the number of EB immigrants exceeded the above limit. This was due to provisions of the REAL ID Act of 2005 that allowed the recapture of 50,000 unused EB visas (4,743 of these visas were used in 2007) and provisions of the AC21 Act of 2000 that
permitted the recapture.
more...
seahawks
09-18 09:23 AM
Why dont we take voting for name change and see what % of members will opt for the change.
not in favour. IV has established an identity with all the hard work from the founders, they are people like you and me who are putting their valuable time. Changing the name now will only add to confusion in the minds of all thousands of people who are involved or talked to from contributions, to news letter articles, appearing on news channels, to talking to law makers and so on. It will take extra efforts to say this " the newly called ... which used to be IV... ". In my opinoin IV is fine, just add a phrase below, as "legal aliens for immigration reform" or something like that.
not in favour. IV has established an identity with all the hard work from the founders, they are people like you and me who are putting their valuable time. Changing the name now will only add to confusion in the minds of all thousands of people who are involved or talked to from contributions, to news letter articles, appearing on news channels, to talking to law makers and so on. It will take extra efforts to say this " the newly called ... which used to be IV... ". In my opinoin IV is fine, just add a phrase below, as "legal aliens for immigration reform" or something like that.
hot TRUEBLOOD » Sookie-Kill-Bill-
gcformeornot
12-31 01:05 PM
bump
more...
house Sookie#39;s Engagement Ring on
txh1b
08-16 05:14 PM
1. Depends on the IO. Most of them take you for the interview together unless the legitamacy of your marriage is in question which will not likely be the case for employment based GC unless the marriage was close to the visa bulletin date or similar.
2. You can take any attorney you want to however it is not needed if your case is straight forward. If you have out of stay period , gap in employment and criminal issue, an attorney can just advise you in case the IO asks something that is against the law or you answering the question might prove to have bad consequences. The attorney cannot answer any of the questions asked. Take all documents and not just the ones mentioned in the interview. It would help you for any out of the way questions.
AN attorney is really not needed for many cases unless you have any criminal convictions or borderline legal points to make you eligible for the 485.
2. You can take any attorney you want to however it is not needed if your case is straight forward. If you have out of stay period , gap in employment and criminal issue, an attorney can just advise you in case the IO asks something that is against the law or you answering the question might prove to have bad consequences. The attorney cannot answer any of the questions asked. Take all documents and not just the ones mentioned in the interview. It would help you for any out of the way questions.
AN attorney is really not needed for many cases unless you have any criminal convictions or borderline legal points to make you eligible for the 485.
tattoo True Blood Dirty Sex:
sands_14
12-05 02:54 PM
i think u need not get a new h1 stamp and can sill come in and out on AP without compromising yr h1 status.
Yes,You should get a multiple-entry AP.If it is one-time entry AP,then you need another AP.Genrally nowadays u get multiple-entry AP.
Yes,You should get a multiple-entry AP.If it is one-time entry AP,then you need another AP.Genrally nowadays u get multiple-entry AP.
more...
pictures Sookie, Bill and Jessica,
vicky007
05-10 12:16 PM
Sorry, the link is not working anymore.
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
dresses True Blood Sims: Bill amp; Sookie
Tshelar
06-15 06:05 PM
There is no law against multiple companies processing H1B for the same candidate at the same time. In past I had 2 Job offeres and both companies were processing my H1-B at the same time. Eventually I joined one of them. I do not see any issue for you to go back to your Home country and get the visa stamped as long as you are working and getting paid as per your approved H1-B petition.
Also if you never landed up working for the company for which your H1B transfered got denied then there is no issue at all, but if you did then I am not sure about the ramifications.
Also if you never landed up working for the company for which your H1B transfered got denied then there is no issue at all, but if you did then I am not sure about the ramifications.
more...
makeup #39;ill-sookie-sexy-1.jpg
rp0lol
08-01 02:57 PM
Guys,
I like the approach however I will request all Iowa residents to call Congressman Kings again and again. Also get your friends and coworkers to call.
Voter calls will always impact politicians...
Lets keep the efforts on...
Thanks
Calling only won't help for our cause.
Some has to go to his office with yesterday's list of amendement and his comments and explin him what's wrong with his stats.
and maybe we should go to our local senator's office with point King was making and right numbers (from DOS or USCIS's published data).
Just my 2 cents.
I like the approach however I will request all Iowa residents to call Congressman Kings again and again. Also get your friends and coworkers to call.
Voter calls will always impact politicians...
Lets keep the efforts on...
Thanks
Calling only won't help for our cause.
Some has to go to his office with yesterday's list of amendement and his comments and explin him what's wrong with his stats.
and maybe we should go to our local senator's office with point King was making and right numbers (from DOS or USCIS's published data).
Just my 2 cents.
girlfriend Sookie and Bill#39;s relationship
ronhira
09-18 09:42 PM
USCIS admits to a backlog of 190K but most are in EB2-I/C and EB3 with a PD earlier than Aug 2007. No one knows how many people are waiting in these categories with approved I-140s from Aug2007-Sep2010. It could be another 150-200K. S0 even if the backlog is not 800K, but its around 400K.
uscis definition of backlog is pending AOS applications that have been processed and have visa dates current...... they do not account for application with non-current dates as backlog..... so that's y they say the backlog is 190K..... but in reality the backlog size is many folder higher than 190K.....
u may want to look for uscis definition of backlog....
uscis definition of backlog is pending AOS applications that have been processed and have visa dates current...... they do not account for application with non-current dates as backlog..... so that's y they say the backlog is 190K..... but in reality the backlog size is many folder higher than 190K.....
u may want to look for uscis definition of backlog....
hairstyles Sookie amp; Bill
LostInGCProcess
06-15 04:25 PM
So the dates are moving ahead but what does this really imply ? With priority dates retrogessed to around 2000 and no visa numbers availble for EB3. Who is getting the GC. Is it only the Eb2 with PD around 2000 or any one else.
Does anyone has more info to better understand what these dates imply ?
It is only the unfortunate souls from India (including me :( ) and China who are not getting the GC's. Rest of the world are getting....that includes Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan etc....I wish I was born there so that I could have fallen on ROW category. :-)
Does anyone has more info to better understand what these dates imply ?
It is only the unfortunate souls from India (including me :( ) and China who are not getting the GC's. Rest of the world are getting....that includes Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan etc....I wish I was born there so that I could have fallen on ROW category. :-)
abhijitp
07-18 07:39 PM
Thanks for the replies !! I have everything ready as I was planning for concurrent filing. But since the decision was changed on July 2nd, my attorney just filed I 140.
sure, I would sign up for the contribution.
I thought you applied under the "Labor Certification" system not PERM. If you did PERM (only then can you file concurrently), nothing stops you from filing for AOS rightaway, so go for it!
sure, I would sign up for the contribution.
I thought you applied under the "Labor Certification" system not PERM. If you did PERM (only then can you file concurrently), nothing stops you from filing for AOS rightaway, so go for it!
vjkypally
01-26 05:01 PM
bump
No comments:
Post a Comment