casinoroyale
03-18 10:49 AM
http://www.irs.gov/app/espc/
wallpaper 54.000 1999 Bentley Brooklands
gctoget
07-19 12:58 PM
Hi eagerr2i,
Just saw the message. Will send you a PM on this. FYI to other members, I know someone has prepared a list of So. Cal members which is very comprehensive. I will try to send a PM to get their details. If you have any other questions, please feel free to send me a PM or an email at twinbrothers@gmail.com
Here is a list of 53 members so far registered in SoCal chapter:
Jimi_Hendrix
GCSOON-Ihope
eagerr2i
days_go_by
485Mbe4001
yogkc
tcsonly
willgetgc2005
MY_GC_DREAMS
payal_nag
genius
Not2Happy
thirumalkn
meetdebasish
GC Process
baleraosreedhar
caydee
rkotamurthy
hourglass
murali77
satishku_2000
acruix
imv116
santb1975
amaruns
IN2US
twinbrothers
kumhyd2
xstal
mashu
zoooom
tcsonly
drona
DCQC
jasmin45
gctoget
rsamudrala
satishbsk
SDdesi
Progressive
abhisam
smuthu2000
hmehta
rfarkiya
eb3stuck
imv116
northstar1
manishs7
navkap
mangelschots
Pia
kkcal2002
GC_Applicant
Just saw the message. Will send you a PM on this. FYI to other members, I know someone has prepared a list of So. Cal members which is very comprehensive. I will try to send a PM to get their details. If you have any other questions, please feel free to send me a PM or an email at twinbrothers@gmail.com
Here is a list of 53 members so far registered in SoCal chapter:
Jimi_Hendrix
GCSOON-Ihope
eagerr2i
days_go_by
485Mbe4001
yogkc
tcsonly
willgetgc2005
MY_GC_DREAMS
payal_nag
genius
Not2Happy
thirumalkn
meetdebasish
GC Process
baleraosreedhar
caydee
rkotamurthy
hourglass
murali77
satishku_2000
acruix
imv116
santb1975
amaruns
IN2US
twinbrothers
kumhyd2
xstal
mashu
zoooom
tcsonly
drona
DCQC
jasmin45
gctoget
rsamudrala
satishbsk
SDdesi
Progressive
abhisam
smuthu2000
hmehta
rfarkiya
eb3stuck
imv116
northstar1
manishs7
navkap
mangelschots
Pia
kkcal2002
GC_Applicant
spicy_guy
11-08 05:17 PM
If my Wife's employer starts GC for her on EB2, can my case be ported / interfile to her's? She is dependent on my GC application. :eek:
I have exact same Q. Any inputs?
I have exact same Q. Any inputs?
2011 The Bentley Brooklands
eb3_nepa
07-14 01:29 PM
Do you know how to pay online from my bank account? I checked the contributions page, but it discusses about paying through Paypal (and for $100+).
Simply send the check of $5 to Immigration Voice at the address listed in the first post as if you were paying a utility bill. That way your bank will send IV a check of $5.00 (or whatever amount you want it to) and IV gets the WHOLE $5 and no fees are deducted.
Simply send the check of $5 to Immigration Voice at the address listed in the first post as if you were paying a utility bill. That way your bank will send IV a check of $5.00 (or whatever amount you want it to) and IV gets the WHOLE $5 and no fees are deducted.
more...
susie
07-28 02:44 PM
update on case
As you know they should have answered law suit at end of May 07, then requested a further 30 days till end of Jun
Just before end of june their attorney called my attorney and said they want a resolution to case, they had little to no paperwork so requested our file which I hand delivered to Tampa on 6th July 07, so asked for another 30 days to end July
Well they have replied and agreed with 90% of our case. they say case is moot because my husband died, but my attorney says no, because they errored whilst husband was alive so irrelevant. They are also saying we cannot sue them, my attorney says there wrong
Anyway I will not bore you with all the details as I now have to do a lot of work, indexing, getting proof my son was issued an L2 visa (they are denying this), getting proof my son took steps to immigrate, which we have as he had INS medical well before his 21st
My attorney says if we win this will help so many others cases from aging out and to be strong, very hard to do at the moment.
Oh and they do not believe I am depressed, but I have the tablets and pescription to prove
And they do not believe my son is his fathers natural son, what b---tards, just cos I did not submit his birth certificate
As you know they should have answered law suit at end of May 07, then requested a further 30 days till end of Jun
Just before end of june their attorney called my attorney and said they want a resolution to case, they had little to no paperwork so requested our file which I hand delivered to Tampa on 6th July 07, so asked for another 30 days to end July
Well they have replied and agreed with 90% of our case. they say case is moot because my husband died, but my attorney says no, because they errored whilst husband was alive so irrelevant. They are also saying we cannot sue them, my attorney says there wrong
Anyway I will not bore you with all the details as I now have to do a lot of work, indexing, getting proof my son was issued an L2 visa (they are denying this), getting proof my son took steps to immigrate, which we have as he had INS medical well before his 21st
My attorney says if we win this will help so many others cases from aging out and to be strong, very hard to do at the moment.
Oh and they do not believe I am depressed, but I have the tablets and pescription to prove
And they do not believe my son is his fathers natural son, what b---tards, just cos I did not submit his birth certificate
vkannan
03-06 05:33 PM
Few observations based on thread postings
1) Last year around this same time not many RFE/LUD were seen.
2) Most of these cases with RFE/LUD are either EB2 around 2005-2006 or EB3 2003-2004
3) My Lawyer based out of IL confirming RFEs are in high volume and majority of these are Employment verification with Birth verification and Health letter verification as close second.
Now given the gov attitude and the current scenario it does not seem that they would be interested in pre-adjudication. There is something else that is going on. On the same note I am also seeing that people with dates which could possibly be current anytime this year are not seeing any LUD/RFE. If pre-adjudicating is the objective than these cases should have received the RFEs first.
Just my observation. Any input is appreciated.
To keep the HOPE high;) One more point to consider , remember a month back there was a information going around on the # of Cards ordered by USCIS? Man, all these crazy things going around with
a) LUDs
b) Name Check 180 days rule
c) # of Cards ordered etc etc., etc., is making ppl. more anxious.....
1) Last year around this same time not many RFE/LUD were seen.
2) Most of these cases with RFE/LUD are either EB2 around 2005-2006 or EB3 2003-2004
3) My Lawyer based out of IL confirming RFEs are in high volume and majority of these are Employment verification with Birth verification and Health letter verification as close second.
Now given the gov attitude and the current scenario it does not seem that they would be interested in pre-adjudication. There is something else that is going on. On the same note I am also seeing that people with dates which could possibly be current anytime this year are not seeing any LUD/RFE. If pre-adjudicating is the objective than these cases should have received the RFEs first.
Just my observation. Any input is appreciated.
To keep the HOPE high;) One more point to consider , remember a month back there was a information going around on the # of Cards ordered by USCIS? Man, all these crazy things going around with
a) LUDs
b) Name Check 180 days rule
c) # of Cards ordered etc etc., etc., is making ppl. more anxious.....
more...
willwin
07-11 09:06 AM
dude..dont rain on our parade...everyone knows the harsh realities.. i myself said earlier that only half the battle is won...but the least we deserve is one day of hope.
Congrats EB2-I !!
I guess the intention of DOS was to enable Consular posts to approve as many EB2 cases as possible inorder to minimize VISA wastage. And also continue to enable USCIS to pick the low hanging fruits.
Otherwise, I dont think USCIS has cleared all pending cases with PD earlier than April 2004.
Yes, EB2 definitely deserves this moment and at the same time EB3 I does not deserve this 'coma' stage in their PD movement.
Congrats EB2-I !!
I guess the intention of DOS was to enable Consular posts to approve as many EB2 cases as possible inorder to minimize VISA wastage. And also continue to enable USCIS to pick the low hanging fruits.
Otherwise, I dont think USCIS has cleared all pending cases with PD earlier than April 2004.
Yes, EB2 definitely deserves this moment and at the same time EB3 I does not deserve this 'coma' stage in their PD movement.
2010 Bentley. Model. Brooklands
ashismaity
03-10 02:28 PM
http://www.wamu.org/programs/dr/
March 10 11:00The Immigration Debate
Some activists believe the U.S. needs a fence along the entire U.S.-Mexico border. Diane talks with her guests about this idea and other proposals from Congress in the latest round of the immigration debate.
Guests
Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies
Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum
Colin Hanna, president of Let Freedom Ring. Let Freedom Ring is the parent organization for www.WeNeedAFence.com
March 10 11:00The Immigration Debate
Some activists believe the U.S. needs a fence along the entire U.S.-Mexico border. Diane talks with her guests about this idea and other proposals from Congress in the latest round of the immigration debate.
Guests
Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies
Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum
Colin Hanna, president of Let Freedom Ring. Let Freedom Ring is the parent organization for www.WeNeedAFence.com
more...
pappu
09-13 08:05 PM
Dear All
The website
http://capwiz.com/aila2/dbq/media/ contains email/ address of 6479 media address
depends on javascript to force you to send only 5 messages at a time.
here is small shortcut:So switch off javascript
on IE go
Tools>Internet Options>Security>Internet>Custom level>Scripting
Close the browser and open it for again for your state.
also the format is like this if you want to send numerically
http://capwiz.com/aila2/mail/compose/?type=ME&alertid=&mediaid=1&mediaid=2&mediaid=3
the "&mediaid=1" seems to be the repeating unit except for the number
my IE only takes 179 address at a time As i mentioned there are 6479 address so if maybe some smart techie knows to increase the address bar size
drak70
Thanks for the tip
The website
http://capwiz.com/aila2/dbq/media/ contains email/ address of 6479 media address
depends on javascript to force you to send only 5 messages at a time.
here is small shortcut:So switch off javascript
on IE go
Tools>Internet Options>Security>Internet>Custom level>Scripting
Close the browser and open it for again for your state.
also the format is like this if you want to send numerically
http://capwiz.com/aila2/mail/compose/?type=ME&alertid=&mediaid=1&mediaid=2&mediaid=3
the "&mediaid=1" seems to be the repeating unit except for the number
my IE only takes 179 address at a time As i mentioned there are 6479 address so if maybe some smart techie knows to increase the address bar size
drak70
Thanks for the tip
hair Bentley Brooklands
perm
07-20 04:05 PM
top 20 states to MOVE IN in USA for legal immigrants
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
more...
matreen
10-17 01:58 AM
Guys,
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
hot Bentley Brooklands 2009.
micofrost
07-18 06:57 PM
Does PD exist just to be able to file I-485? Or as some members say, does it also play a role after filing I-485 for adjudication? Does CIS go by PD or RD when the visas are limited?
Let's say A has PD(Priority date) Dec 2004 and RD(Receipt Date) Jul 25 2007, and B has PD Mar 2007 and RD Jul 2 2007. Who would be adjudicated first?
If visa numbers are current for both of them, then its a matter of luck, whose application gets processed quickly and which guy's application reaches to the approval officer first. That time both have equal chance.
Ofcourse PD is considered for VISA numbers, not the RD. RD is good for portability issues like AC21/180 days rule. So B can switch jobs 23 days before A. Again that (180 days rule)also as per some lawyers isnt a hard n fast rule. Hope it helps.
Let's say A has PD(Priority date) Dec 2004 and RD(Receipt Date) Jul 25 2007, and B has PD Mar 2007 and RD Jul 2 2007. Who would be adjudicated first?
If visa numbers are current for both of them, then its a matter of luck, whose application gets processed quickly and which guy's application reaches to the approval officer first. That time both have equal chance.
Ofcourse PD is considered for VISA numbers, not the RD. RD is good for portability issues like AC21/180 days rule. So B can switch jobs 23 days before A. Again that (180 days rule)also as per some lawyers isnt a hard n fast rule. Hope it helps.
more...
house entley-rookland-side smaller
claudia255
04-30 10:42 PM
I emailed the partial recording to all those who PMed me for it ...
Enjoy the Comedy Central channel....
Would it possible to have the link for the video please?
Thanks.
Enjoy the Comedy Central channel....
Would it possible to have the link for the video please?
Thanks.
tattoo 1997 - Bentley Brooklands
learning01
04-25 02:06 PM
offline means talk in private emails, private messages and send conclusions to IV core team for including in thier next goals, once most of present goals are achieved. Thanks. Let's concentrate on the main work here.
I did'nt start this thread. I just expressed my opinion supporting it, when I saw others' express their views..
I don't understand what you mean by saying "take this offline". Anyway, if you are the admin, you can delete this thread and put it where you want...
I did'nt start this thread. I just expressed my opinion supporting it, when I saw others' express their views..
I don't understand what you mean by saying "take this offline". Anyway, if you are the admin, you can delete this thread and put it where you want...
more...
pictures 2008 Bentley Brooklands
coopheal
12-24 04:01 PM
Lets revive the campaign to remove country limits.
It is hurting EB immigrants from India and China and still people are unwilling to make this an important issue. We have not seen any employer take this up as an issue. However if you see country cap being added to the amnesty bill, the entire lobby of these people will make noise and will not let this happen. So let us stop giving arguments like diversity etc to ourselves because that really is not an argument across the board. So if country cap is an important issue for Indians and Chinese, they need to lobby hard against it. This has not really happened. Instead we get caught up in action items for small things that the community really wants. Imagine if the country caps are removed, the dates will move much faster. There needs to be strong support from the community if country caps were to be removed in CIR next year.
It is hurting EB immigrants from India and China and still people are unwilling to make this an important issue. We have not seen any employer take this up as an issue. However if you see country cap being added to the amnesty bill, the entire lobby of these people will make noise and will not let this happen. So let us stop giving arguments like diversity etc to ourselves because that really is not an argument across the board. So if country cap is an important issue for Indians and Chinese, they need to lobby hard against it. This has not really happened. Instead we get caught up in action items for small things that the community really wants. Imagine if the country caps are removed, the dates will move much faster. There needs to be strong support from the community if country caps were to be removed in CIR next year.
dresses Bentley Brooklands coupe
ndbhatt
09-09 12:43 PM
My 2 cents.
From what I have read and learned from my experience, the dwelling (house/condo/apt, etc) prices are sensible and affordable (read payable) if it is between 2-3 times household annual income. I think this applies universaly with few exceptions.
Average household (family) income in India metro cities is around 6-7 INR lacs. For folks working in IT, it would be 'X' % more depending on his/her work. Let's take liberal amount of 12 lacs p.a.
This means that buying a property for price over INR 36 lacs would carry significant risk of defaulting. I have heard many of my friends give me argument that our income will grow significantly over years and should be able to manage higher loan amounts.
I am really aghast at the rate at which NRI's are investing in India. I can speak to Mumbai, where there are thousands of NRI bought properties that are vacant for years and there is no justifiable ROI. Having realised that there is no ROI due to resale or renting, sooner or later they will start pulling out their hard earned money. I wouldn't be surprised to see many foreclosures, in years to come, and RBI may have to bail out ICICI, IDBI, etc - a scenario similar to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
I have thumb rule for myself - Don't buy property which is 3 times more than current annual income.
P.S. This isn't applicable for folks who have inherited a fortune. :D
From what I have read and learned from my experience, the dwelling (house/condo/apt, etc) prices are sensible and affordable (read payable) if it is between 2-3 times household annual income. I think this applies universaly with few exceptions.
Average household (family) income in India metro cities is around 6-7 INR lacs. For folks working in IT, it would be 'X' % more depending on his/her work. Let's take liberal amount of 12 lacs p.a.
This means that buying a property for price over INR 36 lacs would carry significant risk of defaulting. I have heard many of my friends give me argument that our income will grow significantly over years and should be able to manage higher loan amounts.
I am really aghast at the rate at which NRI's are investing in India. I can speak to Mumbai, where there are thousands of NRI bought properties that are vacant for years and there is no justifiable ROI. Having realised that there is no ROI due to resale or renting, sooner or later they will start pulling out their hard earned money. I wouldn't be surprised to see many foreclosures, in years to come, and RBI may have to bail out ICICI, IDBI, etc - a scenario similar to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
I have thumb rule for myself - Don't buy property which is 3 times more than current annual income.
P.S. This isn't applicable for folks who have inherited a fortune. :D
more...
makeup BENTLEY BROOKLANDS reviews
gimme_GC2006
03-09 12:00 PM
For Eb2 india and china dates will be like this in April 2009 bulletin.
Eb2 India : Feb 2005
China : Feb 2006
May 2009 bulletin
Eb2 India : May 2005
China : May 2006
June 2009 bulletin
Eb2 India : Sep 2005
China : Sep 2006
July 2009 bulletin
Eb2 India : Feb 2006
China : Feb 2007
August 2009 bulletin
Eb2 India : May 2007
China : May 2008
What is the basis for this prediction or just a lotto guess :)
Eb2 India : Feb 2005
China : Feb 2006
May 2009 bulletin
Eb2 India : May 2005
China : May 2006
June 2009 bulletin
Eb2 India : Sep 2005
China : Sep 2006
July 2009 bulletin
Eb2 India : Feb 2006
China : Feb 2007
August 2009 bulletin
Eb2 India : May 2007
China : May 2008
What is the basis for this prediction or just a lotto guess :)
girlfriend Bentley Brooklands Car Picture
ragz4u
03-16 08:37 AM
any update?
I just spoke with a CapitolHearings rep and she said she is going to get the technical team in charge of this to look into it
Hopefully it should start soon
I just spoke with a CapitolHearings rep and she said she is going to get the technical team in charge of this to look into it
Hopefully it should start soon
hairstyles 2009 Bentley Brooklands
iqube00
09-10 01:49 PM
I contributed $100 by Paypal and sent out an eamil to about 15 of my friends who are in the same boat as I am. My email mentioned everything IV is trying to achieve and encouraged them to contribute too. I hope atleast a few of them will come forward.
If all of us contributing can email our friends and encourage them to do the same - that might help contributions pour in faster.
Great job IV!
If all of us contributing can email our friends and encourage them to do the same - that might help contributions pour in faster.
Great job IV!
chanduv23
07-11 12:01 PM
I am not sure if I should be happy or sad with this news. I was laidoff recently and had applied for I-485 on July 17,2007 i.e. current processing date for TSC. Also with this bulletin I will be current (EB2 2006). I have not found a new job yet and my company has told me that they will be revoking my I-140 after 30 days. My company lawyers are not advising me much citing conflict of interest.
What options do I have? Will sending a new G-28 form at this time raise any issues that I do not have job with original employer as my PD is current and it is quite possible that my case maybe adjudicated. In the meantime if I do not sent new G-28 form I am not sure how much my company attorney will co-operate
Saileshdude - relax. Get a job ASAP. PM me your phone number and I will call you
What options do I have? Will sending a new G-28 form at this time raise any issues that I do not have job with original employer as my PD is current and it is quite possible that my case maybe adjudicated. In the meantime if I do not sent new G-28 form I am not sure how much my company attorney will co-operate
Saileshdude - relax. Get a job ASAP. PM me your phone number and I will call you
natrajs
07-18 09:23 PM
Contributed $ 100 Yesterday , and Will do Again
Thank Q You All
Thank Q You All
No comments:
Post a Comment