looivy
10-05 12:05 AM
He needs to wake up and look at the plight of legal immigrants.
VIA The New York Times
"Although President Obama has put off an immigration overhaul until next year, the federal agency in charge of approving visas is planning ahead for the possibility of giving legal status to millions of illegal immigrants, the agency’s director said Thursday.
“We are under way to prepare for that,” Alejandro Mayorkas, the director of the agency, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, said in an interview. Mr. Obama has told immigration officials that a legalization program would be part of legislation the White House would propose, said Mr. Mayorkas, who became director in August. The agency’s goal, he said, is to be ready to expand rapidly to handle the gigantic increase in visa applications it would face if the legislation, known as comprehensive immigration reform, passed Congress."
Continue reading (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/us/politics/02immig.html)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/02/president-obama-advises-uscis-to-prepare-for-possible-legalization-legislation-in-2010.aspx?ref=rss)
VIA The New York Times
"Although President Obama has put off an immigration overhaul until next year, the federal agency in charge of approving visas is planning ahead for the possibility of giving legal status to millions of illegal immigrants, the agency’s director said Thursday.
“We are under way to prepare for that,” Alejandro Mayorkas, the director of the agency, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, said in an interview. Mr. Obama has told immigration officials that a legalization program would be part of legislation the White House would propose, said Mr. Mayorkas, who became director in August. The agency’s goal, he said, is to be ready to expand rapidly to handle the gigantic increase in visa applications it would face if the legislation, known as comprehensive immigration reform, passed Congress."
Continue reading (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/us/politics/02immig.html)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/02/president-obama-advises-uscis-to-prepare-for-possible-legalization-legislation-in-2010.aspx?ref=rss)
wallpaper same color family. Rihanna
kopra
08-18 01:57 PM
If she can come back before 1st Oct( i believe her employment will start from Oct 1st) , she should be OK as H1 status will be valid only from Oct 1 2008 onwards.
Hi Everyone,
Have a question
My wife came to USA on H4 (2007), we have applied for H1 this year(2008)and is it approved (we did not received the petition yet). She has to travel back to india for a month from (Sep 08 - Mid Oct08). I am concerned about the issues/status when she enters back in USA. Her H4 is valid till Sep-2009.
1) Can she go back on H4 visa and return back with the same H4 visa. Will she be having any issues at the Immigartion officer at port of entry. If so, what type of questions she has to face?
2)After coming back, will her H1 have any issues ?
What would be the best thing to do .. I am really worried about this status issues.
Can any one of you pls let me know how to face this .
Hi Everyone,
Have a question
My wife came to USA on H4 (2007), we have applied for H1 this year(2008)and is it approved (we did not received the petition yet). She has to travel back to india for a month from (Sep 08 - Mid Oct08). I am concerned about the issues/status when she enters back in USA. Her H4 is valid till Sep-2009.
1) Can she go back on H4 visa and return back with the same H4 visa. Will she be having any issues at the Immigartion officer at port of entry. If so, what type of questions she has to face?
2)After coming back, will her H1 have any issues ?
What would be the best thing to do .. I am really worried about this status issues.
Can any one of you pls let me know how to face this .
shaq
05-14 02:43 PM
I did my three years diploma (polytechnic) and three years engineering degree (B.E.) after that and I had @ eight years of experience while I had applied for GC through EB2 category. I had no problem in getting my I-140 approval; so far I have not received single rfe.
I had same situation as vactorboy but I had US masters. I had no problem with labor or I-140. My I-140 was approved in a month.
I had same situation as vactorboy but I had US masters. I had no problem with labor or I-140. My I-140 was approved in a month.
2011 Rihanna#39;s Family Secret Is Out
addsf345
10-22 01:10 PM
I am trying to figure out the same and after rigorous communication with my lawyer and a few companies, I came to an estimate that it may take anywhere between, atleast 12-18 mnths on a thumb rule. Again, I understand its on a case by case basis.
@KabAyegaMeraGc - question for you: if you were qualified for EB-2, why did you in first place filed for EB-3? Looking at your profile, you may would have been just about to get your GC if you would have been in EB-2 bucket. Just curious. Also, what is your lawyer's take on this whole porting thing?
@KabAyegaMeraGc - question for you: if you were qualified for EB-2, why did you in first place filed for EB-3? Looking at your profile, you may would have been just about to get your GC if you would have been in EB-2 bucket. Just curious. Also, what is your lawyer's take on this whole porting thing?
more...
FredG
January 30th, 2005, 10:23 PM
OK, fine then ... I stink as a photographer and should sell my equipment immediately. But as long as I'm here, I like Solitary Fisherman the best, then Father and Son, but I suggest cropping it to have a bit more space in front of them than behind them.
rChinna
04-01 12:20 PM
Hi All,
My Wife�s I-94 expired on Jan 15, 2010 and I did not know that I had to apply for her H4 extension while applying for my H1B extension under regular processing on March 1, 2010.My employer also forgot to apply for H4 extension. Now that, it�s been more than 2 months with the I-94 expired, Can you please let me know what options I have to resolve this issue?
1.Can I upgrade my H1 Processing to Premium and add the H4 processing to it, so that both H1 and H4 are processed simultaneously?
2.If adding H4 while upgrading H1 to premium is not possible, Should I just upgrade my H1 to Premium so that I can know the results soon and have ample time (before the 180 days grace period) to apply for H4 extension(I-539).Is it true that H1B premium approval is risky compared to regular processing ?
3.Is it safe to go back to India within 180 days (after I-94 expiration) and get H4 stamping in her home country once I get my H1 Extension?
4.Should I just leave my H1B in regular processing and attach the H4 extension (I-539) to it? If attaching H4 is not possible, Can I file H4 separately and get it approved before 180 days expiration?
5.Once her H4 extension is approved, can she get her H4 VISA re-validated in US? Can she apply under �Nunc-pro-tunc� Category?
6.Does she have an option to attend H4 visa interview in Canada or Mexico as her Visa and I-94 are expired? If yes, is this better option than going to India?
Please reply.
Thanks in advance
Chinna
My Wife�s I-94 expired on Jan 15, 2010 and I did not know that I had to apply for her H4 extension while applying for my H1B extension under regular processing on March 1, 2010.My employer also forgot to apply for H4 extension. Now that, it�s been more than 2 months with the I-94 expired, Can you please let me know what options I have to resolve this issue?
1.Can I upgrade my H1 Processing to Premium and add the H4 processing to it, so that both H1 and H4 are processed simultaneously?
2.If adding H4 while upgrading H1 to premium is not possible, Should I just upgrade my H1 to Premium so that I can know the results soon and have ample time (before the 180 days grace period) to apply for H4 extension(I-539).Is it true that H1B premium approval is risky compared to regular processing ?
3.Is it safe to go back to India within 180 days (after I-94 expiration) and get H4 stamping in her home country once I get my H1 Extension?
4.Should I just leave my H1B in regular processing and attach the H4 extension (I-539) to it? If attaching H4 is not possible, Can I file H4 separately and get it approved before 180 days expiration?
5.Once her H4 extension is approved, can she get her H4 VISA re-validated in US? Can she apply under �Nunc-pro-tunc� Category?
6.Does she have an option to attend H4 visa interview in Canada or Mexico as her Visa and I-94 are expired? If yes, is this better option than going to India?
Please reply.
Thanks in advance
Chinna
more...
vishage
09-05 04:41 PM
She checked my file over 20 minutes and also talked to her supervisor. they thought USCIS maybe lost my application somewhere. right now, I am waiting response from NSC for my application. I really do not know what need to do.
wish I am the only bad luck one here and good luck to everyone.
Thanks Divakrr,
Tried this the lady on the second level said she couldnt find anything on the file yet.gues have to keep waitin
wish I am the only bad luck one here and good luck to everyone.
Thanks Divakrr,
Tried this the lady on the second level said she couldnt find anything on the file yet.gues have to keep waitin
2010 Rihanna#39;s Family Secret
desighee
06-19 10:22 AM
if your wife is bugging you to buy a house ...show them this article :D :D ..and it will help
-------------------------------
Female Homeowners Sadder, Fatter Than Renters
John Carney|Jun. 18, 2009, 11:27 AM|comment27
Print
Tags: Economy, Housing, Housing Crisis
Researchers from Wharton have discovered that female homeowners, on average, outweighed renters by 12 pounds.
Female homeowners were also carrying around more aggravation, making less time for leisure, and were less likely to spend time with friends.
"Home ownership can be a much more complex idea than just a straightforward expression of what we call the American dream," says Grace Wong Bucchianeri, an assistant professor of real estate at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. The story was reported on Canada.com
But what about all the good stuff that comes with owning a home? Aren't homeowners benefiting from the security and independence of owning. Not really. The research shows that when you control for things like childbirth and income, the difference in contentment vanishes.
"I don't see any strong evidence that homeowners are any happier than renters," says Bucchianeri, whose 600-woman study is under review for publication in the Journal of Urban Economics. "On the other hand, they consistently report a higher level of pain � or what you might call negative feelings � connected to their home, and that's after controlling for all kinds of demographic characteristics, their financial situation, how many children they have and so on."
wife is a bug that can't be debugged no matter what's the fix
-------------------------------
Female Homeowners Sadder, Fatter Than Renters
John Carney|Jun. 18, 2009, 11:27 AM|comment27
Tags: Economy, Housing, Housing Crisis
Researchers from Wharton have discovered that female homeowners, on average, outweighed renters by 12 pounds.
Female homeowners were also carrying around more aggravation, making less time for leisure, and were less likely to spend time with friends.
"Home ownership can be a much more complex idea than just a straightforward expression of what we call the American dream," says Grace Wong Bucchianeri, an assistant professor of real estate at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. The story was reported on Canada.com
But what about all the good stuff that comes with owning a home? Aren't homeowners benefiting from the security and independence of owning. Not really. The research shows that when you control for things like childbirth and income, the difference in contentment vanishes.
"I don't see any strong evidence that homeowners are any happier than renters," says Bucchianeri, whose 600-woman study is under review for publication in the Journal of Urban Economics. "On the other hand, they consistently report a higher level of pain � or what you might call negative feelings � connected to their home, and that's after controlling for all kinds of demographic characteristics, their financial situation, how many children they have and so on."
wife is a bug that can't be debugged no matter what's the fix
more...
gemini23
08-07 09:56 AM
Just called USCIS to find out the estimated processing time to get gc for indyanguy. you will get it in 265 days and 2 hours.
Just kidding. No one can predict such thing man. relax.
Just kidding. No one can predict such thing man. relax.
hair Rihanna#39;s Family Afraid For
Blog Feeds
10-15 06:30 PM
[Federal Register: October 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 192)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
more...
nfadlalla
03-09 10:20 AM
Receipt Number: WACXXXXXXXXXX
Application Type: I130, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR RELATIVE, FIANCE(E), OR ORPHAN
Current Status: Document OTHER THAN CARD manufactured and mailed.
On February 12, 2007, we mailed the document we manufactured based on our earlier approval of this case, and mailed it to the address on we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
what does this mean?...i havnt recieved anything yet....!!!:confused:
Application Type: I130, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR RELATIVE, FIANCE(E), OR ORPHAN
Current Status: Document OTHER THAN CARD manufactured and mailed.
On February 12, 2007, we mailed the document we manufactured based on our earlier approval of this case, and mailed it to the address on we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
what does this mean?...i havnt recieved anything yet....!!!:confused:
hot As for Rihanna, your family
GKBest
09-29 03:24 PM
Looks like an unique situation...no reply from anybody...
I'm just wondering why would they waive the fee. Are you exempt from paying?
I'm just wondering why would they waive the fee. Are you exempt from paying?
more...
house Rihanna shows off her fine
kondur_007
08-03 02:17 PM
Great idea. edited the signature.
tattoo Rihanna#39;s Family Additions!
eb2dec2005
02-24 06:30 PM
First speak to your employer if they
a) sent a cancellation for H1B
b) If they received any notice from USCIS/request for information or if they have any information about this
c) Though it is not mandatory to file AC21 you can still file AC21 based on a consultation with an attorney.
Most important thing is to know if your employer has informed USCIS about any updates or if the company has received any notification from them
- good luck
kris
I spoke to my employer and he said they cancelled my H1B and not my GC. So i ma assuming my I140 was not revoked.
thanks for your advice.
a) sent a cancellation for H1B
b) If they received any notice from USCIS/request for information or if they have any information about this
c) Though it is not mandatory to file AC21 you can still file AC21 based on a consultation with an attorney.
Most important thing is to know if your employer has informed USCIS about any updates or if the company has received any notification from them
- good luck
kris
I spoke to my employer and he said they cancelled my H1B and not my GC. So i ma assuming my I140 was not revoked.
thanks for your advice.
more...
pictures As one family friend puts it,
pappu
08-02 12:28 PM
Best wishes.
dresses of Rihanna#39;s family are
canmt
11-16 08:46 AM
The term permanent does not mean forever; after you apply AC21 and inform USCIS regarding your intent to change employer you can stop worrying about working for the gc sponsored employer.
But if you stick with your gc sponsored employer till you get your green card; then you cannot use AC21. It is not clear as to how long you need to work for the gc sponsored employer. Most of the lawyers say 1 year is a good time to change employer after getting gc but there is no law binding on such things.
But if you stick with your gc sponsored employer till you get your green card; then you cannot use AC21. It is not clear as to how long you need to work for the gc sponsored employer. Most of the lawyers say 1 year is a good time to change employer after getting gc but there is no law binding on such things.
more...
makeup family member of Rihanna#39;s
ekkatip
11-06 05:59 PM
My Friend has two I-140 one EB3 2002 PD and Other EB2 2008PD.
Last week he got his GC. He never requested to port PD. USCIS ported his PD and approved his case.
My I-140 EB3 PD 2002 approved in 2006
I applied new labor in EB2 category and while applying I-140 my attorney requested to port EB3 PD. USCIS approved EB2 I-140 without porting PD.
Recently My attorney sent another request to port PD , I saw LUD's on I-140 and 485 but no luck so far.
Couple of my friends successfully ported PD and got GC.
Last week he got his GC. He never requested to port PD. USCIS ported his PD and approved his case.
My I-140 EB3 PD 2002 approved in 2006
I applied new labor in EB2 category and while applying I-140 my attorney requested to port EB3 PD. USCIS approved EB2 I-140 without porting PD.
Recently My attorney sent another request to port PD , I saw LUD's on I-140 and 485 but no luck so far.
Couple of my friends successfully ported PD and got GC.
girlfriend about Rihanna#39;s family.
GCBoy786
09-11 01:21 PM
Did any one of you receive receipts matching above criteria. I-140 approved from NSC and 485 sent to NSC.
Also respond if anyone is in the same boat as me waiting for receipts and matching above criteria.
Also respond if anyone is in the same boat as me waiting for receipts and matching above criteria.
hairstyles Rihanna#39;s Family Tree Expands,
EndlessWait
07-05 03:11 PM
Cmon ever since independece we have never been united on any cause. I see threads from Gandhigiri(sending roses)...TO .. "no work on 13th"petition. But cmon look at the responses, e.g. no working day petions had only 75 votes , of which most are scared to put there employer name info. etc.
75 here 120 there..do you guys really think with these numbers will make our voices heard .. On the other end lot of people are happy about the revision of the July bulletin and yes that includes the ones stuck in BEC (hypocrisy check! ) and the desi employers who perhaps were fasting/praying or something for this to happen... :-)
Its a number's game. We will never make our voices heard unless we can join hundred of thousands for a cause. I appreciate what IV has attempted to do, but it's an inherent problem with people like us, every one is out there trying to get ahead of the line. If given the choice most would exploit each other to take advantage. I mentioned "desis" perhaps, the problem we face is quite fitting to people from populous nations. I think we are looking at the problem from a very micro level(green card backlog).. The glut in immigration is nothing new and represents similar issues faced in India or China etc.
I am sounding completely pessimistic, but its the harsh reality. Perhaps we are not tuned to be united, we've been raised, bred to be just competitive and anything else which is a byproduct of competition.
just my 2 cents.
pls before anyone starts shouting at my post. Throw the hypocrisy out of the door and then reply.
75 here 120 there..do you guys really think with these numbers will make our voices heard .. On the other end lot of people are happy about the revision of the July bulletin and yes that includes the ones stuck in BEC (hypocrisy check! ) and the desi employers who perhaps were fasting/praying or something for this to happen... :-)
Its a number's game. We will never make our voices heard unless we can join hundred of thousands for a cause. I appreciate what IV has attempted to do, but it's an inherent problem with people like us, every one is out there trying to get ahead of the line. If given the choice most would exploit each other to take advantage. I mentioned "desis" perhaps, the problem we face is quite fitting to people from populous nations. I think we are looking at the problem from a very micro level(green card backlog).. The glut in immigration is nothing new and represents similar issues faced in India or China etc.
I am sounding completely pessimistic, but its the harsh reality. Perhaps we are not tuned to be united, we've been raised, bred to be just competitive and anything else which is a byproduct of competition.
just my 2 cents.
pls before anyone starts shouting at my post. Throw the hypocrisy out of the door and then reply.
brij523
11-07 12:26 PM
brij523.. Taking time out for IV even though you have your GC
My Pleasure!!
My Pleasure!!
visa_reval
04-29 11:42 AM
My correction letter reached NSC on the 28th. I haven't seen any LUDs so far. sekhar123 and sgurram, please post updates as relevant.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário