gcnirvana
07-17 02:34 PM
IV is a public forum and recently its under the radar from various different organizations. So please do not use profanity in your language. You never know how it might come back and bite us. Please...please...please...
Murthy is a she...and I would but I'm not single. ;)
Murthy is a she...and I would but I'm not single. ;)
wallpaper Selena Gomez Punched by One of
xela
06-18 07:55 AM
I never saw a change from the April 30th LUD and got the CPO yesterday.
So dont get too concerend if after the receipt notice LUDs you do not see any movement, seems like it goes straight from that to CPO!
Good luck for everyone who is still waiting! :)
So dont get too concerend if after the receipt notice LUDs you do not see any movement, seems like it goes straight from that to CPO!
Good luck for everyone who is still waiting! :)
gsc999
01-18 02:09 PM
waiting, just sent you a pm with details.
Guys, couple of things:
- If you are trying to join the Nor. Cal. Yahoo group, please include your phone number in your request.
- I have added a poll to get a better idea on the number of people
- Feel free to bring your spouse/kids/friends to this event
Cheers!
Guys, couple of things:
- If you are trying to join the Nor. Cal. Yahoo group, please include your phone number in your request.
- I have added a poll to get a better idea on the number of people
- Feel free to bring your spouse/kids/friends to this event
Cheers!
2011 selena gomez punched in the
gclongwaytogo
10-18 03:47 PM
Just thought of starting this thread as i couldn't see any.
July 3rd Filer.
Reciept notice received on October 11th.
Waiting for EAD.
FP Not Done
July 3rd Filer.
Reciept notice received on October 11th.
Waiting for EAD.
FP Not Done
more...
go_guy123
01-11 09:47 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This is still riddled with amnesty....more punitive versions will surely come which the democratic party will oppose for sure.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This is still riddled with amnesty....more punitive versions will surely come which the democratic party will oppose for sure.
Lisap
08-03 12:30 PM
Libra-
I apologize for upsetting you- I am not a pro at this just joined yesterday- can you give me a break? Next time I will send you a note to see where you think I should post....
I apologize for upsetting you- I am not a pro at this just joined yesterday- can you give me a break? Next time I will send you a note to see where you think I should post....
more...
Better_Days
11-20 07:00 PM
Come one folks. Since posting this, I had another beautiful addition to my family and then a minor surgery. Any insights or opinion will be highly appreciarted.
The quoted post above describes my situation. I140 and I485 were pending. I140 got denied and ended up with AAO. Second I140 got approved and I485 is linked with this 2nd approved I140 even though the priority date was not current.
Called USCIS twice to get the receipt number of the 140 underlying my 485 and got the receipt number for the second, approved 140 everytime.
The company has received an RFE from the AAO and they simply are in no mood to respond to it. They are going to withdraw the first 140. The lawyer retained by my company is absolutely clueless about how and why the second,approved 140 got linked with the pending 485 without the priority date being current. He is trying to play it safe by covering his own behind by saying statements like "USCIS made a mistake and if they every discovered this mistake in future, I will be regarded as being out of status from the day I used any EAD based on this pending 485", He is suggesting that we file a new 485 when the dates being current ( I am EB3/ROW).
Now I know that there are a lot of people who have had their 485s linked to their second, approved 140 automatically. Did this happen to any of you without the PD being current? Please do respond if you are in this boat.
Also, is there a policy or memo that explicitly refers to it? Can anyone please provide me a reference?
If the first 140 is withdrawn? Will it have ANY impact on the second 140 or the pending 485? The reason I ask this question is that after the AAO issed an RFE, the status on both my 140's changed to "Post Decisioon Activity". This is what worries me the most.
Any comment on any of the above questions will be highly appreciated.
Thanks for you time.
The quoted post above describes my situation. I140 and I485 were pending. I140 got denied and ended up with AAO. Second I140 got approved and I485 is linked with this 2nd approved I140 even though the priority date was not current.
Called USCIS twice to get the receipt number of the 140 underlying my 485 and got the receipt number for the second, approved 140 everytime.
The company has received an RFE from the AAO and they simply are in no mood to respond to it. They are going to withdraw the first 140. The lawyer retained by my company is absolutely clueless about how and why the second,approved 140 got linked with the pending 485 without the priority date being current. He is trying to play it safe by covering his own behind by saying statements like "USCIS made a mistake and if they every discovered this mistake in future, I will be regarded as being out of status from the day I used any EAD based on this pending 485", He is suggesting that we file a new 485 when the dates being current ( I am EB3/ROW).
Now I know that there are a lot of people who have had their 485s linked to their second, approved 140 automatically. Did this happen to any of you without the PD being current? Please do respond if you are in this boat.
Also, is there a policy or memo that explicitly refers to it? Can anyone please provide me a reference?
If the first 140 is withdrawn? Will it have ANY impact on the second 140 or the pending 485? The reason I ask this question is that after the AAO issed an RFE, the status on both my 140's changed to "Post Decisioon Activity". This is what worries me the most.
Any comment on any of the above questions will be highly appreciated.
Thanks for you time.
2010 fan of mine or whomEVER#39;S,
.jpg "selena gomez punched by justin")
tnite
06-19 09:41 AM
Part 2 application type
I use EB3 , which one should I check? a ?
my wife file with me, which one should she check? b?
part 3 processing information
were you inspected by a US immigration officer? yes or no
what does the "inspected" mean?
You shld check a , if you're the primary applicant
you wife shld check b
yes, everyone who gets a stamp and comes through port of entry and gets stamped , questioned is inspected by a US immigration officer
I use EB3 , which one should I check? a ?
my wife file with me, which one should she check? b?
part 3 processing information
were you inspected by a US immigration officer? yes or no
what does the "inspected" mean?
You shld check a , if you're the primary applicant
you wife shld check b
yes, everyone who gets a stamp and comes through port of entry and gets stamped , questioned is inspected by a US immigration officer
more...
GCVictim
05-07 11:57 AM
Me and my wife got soft LUD on 485 files. the date was 03/19/2009. we are Jul 07 filers. PD was May 07
hair fan punching Selena Gomez
maverick_iv
12-05 09:35 PM
Don't think there is any need to take your kid along. Other than avoiding the postal delay, applying in person has no other advantages. The person sitting in the counter would double check your docs and accept the application and would give the standard response that it would take 45 days. If you had done your homework, you don't have to worry about another person checking your docs.
Other tips for folks going to the DC embassy:
- None of the phone numbers would be answered.
- At the counter there would three phone numbers listed for PIO/OCI queries(no mention of those in the website) - but you won't be able to get anyone on those lines either.
- What is really helpful is that everyday between 12.30 and 1pm, you could get into the main building of the embassy for PIO/OCI queries.
- The person approving the PIOs is Mr. Natesan - a very helpful and patient chap.
- Once you get into the office, you'll have a story to tell on how PIOs are processed. You would notice a number of USPS tubs full of PIO applns in the corridor with folks trying to look and pull their applns out.
- Regardless, if you have a pending appln, you could explain the situation and request for the PIO to be issued the same day. The folks in the PIO section are very cooperative - there were about 12-13 people on the day that I went in - Almost all of them got it on the same day regardless of when they applied.
Harikris - My suggestion to you is to mail your application right away and take a trip to the DC embassy a week or two later. If you want to, you could apply in person and try your luck the same day.
Hi,
Thanks for your response.
AFAIK, there is no tatkal or emergency type of service for PIO card - atleast not at Washington DC which is our jurisdiction.
My company surprised all it's employees with a 2 week of paid X-Mas holidays. Hence the need for PIO card asap. Hence the reasoning for going and applying in person. So, do i absolutely need to take the kid? I don't see any reason why i should. But better to check with ppl that have first hand experience in submitting the application in person at the Embassy counter.
Thanks for the idea on the thumb impressions. That helps.
Other tips for folks going to the DC embassy:
- None of the phone numbers would be answered.
- At the counter there would three phone numbers listed for PIO/OCI queries(no mention of those in the website) - but you won't be able to get anyone on those lines either.
- What is really helpful is that everyday between 12.30 and 1pm, you could get into the main building of the embassy for PIO/OCI queries.
- The person approving the PIOs is Mr. Natesan - a very helpful and patient chap.
- Once you get into the office, you'll have a story to tell on how PIOs are processed. You would notice a number of USPS tubs full of PIO applns in the corridor with folks trying to look and pull their applns out.
- Regardless, if you have a pending appln, you could explain the situation and request for the PIO to be issued the same day. The folks in the PIO section are very cooperative - there were about 12-13 people on the day that I went in - Almost all of them got it on the same day regardless of when they applied.
Harikris - My suggestion to you is to mail your application right away and take a trip to the DC embassy a week or two later. If you want to, you could apply in person and try your luck the same day.
Hi,
Thanks for your response.
AFAIK, there is no tatkal or emergency type of service for PIO card - atleast not at Washington DC which is our jurisdiction.
My company surprised all it's employees with a 2 week of paid X-Mas holidays. Hence the need for PIO card asap. Hence the reasoning for going and applying in person. So, do i absolutely need to take the kid? I don't see any reason why i should. But better to check with ppl that have first hand experience in submitting the application in person at the Embassy counter.
Thanks for the idea on the thumb impressions. That helps.
more...
pezz77
05-24 10:02 AM
Please go ahead with the filing especially when your employer is bearing the expenses.
Everything is in flux right now and even the bill is approved, It takes some time for the new system to get in place and you can preserve the Priority Date of the LC applied under the old system, if you need to reapply as per the new merit based point system.
Thanks for answering the question Sravani... that's all I was looking for: opinion on wether or not it was best to wait or not. Have a good one.
Everything is in flux right now and even the bill is approved, It takes some time for the new system to get in place and you can preserve the Priority Date of the LC applied under the old system, if you need to reapply as per the new merit based point system.
Thanks for answering the question Sravani... that's all I was looking for: opinion on wether or not it was best to wait or not. Have a good one.
hot Selena Gomez
apahilaj
03-28 02:56 PM
I got this from different website(not sure if I can quote here).
Before going /planning for a perticular consualte, you can email the consulate with a i797 copy asking them to check if it exists in their system. If it doesn't then they will request concerned athorities to make it available in system so that you won't get stuck with PIMS delay. So far I have heard mexico/canada consualte responding to emails positively.
I will be mailing(canada consulate) them soon. Will keep you updated if i hear anything from them. if it works..its indeed a good options for us.:D
Many thanks for this useful post .
I am not sure about consulates in India though. Any one, any idea?
Before going /planning for a perticular consualte, you can email the consulate with a i797 copy asking them to check if it exists in their system. If it doesn't then they will request concerned athorities to make it available in system so that you won't get stuck with PIMS delay. So far I have heard mexico/canada consualte responding to emails positively.
I will be mailing(canada consulate) them soon. Will keep you updated if i hear anything from them. if it works..its indeed a good options for us.:D
Many thanks for this useful post .
I am not sure about consulates in India though. Any one, any idea?
more...
house Selena Gomez: talk to the hand
clear485
03-27 01:07 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/245(k)_14Jul08.pdf
The adjudicator must only examine the period from the date of the alien�s last lawful admission to the United States and must not count violations that occurred before the alien�s last lawful admission.
http://smithgarg.com/article-overcoming-violations.aspx
Fortunately, the ameliorative provisions of INA � 245(k), discussed above, also apply to cases of unauthorized employment and violations of nonimmigrant visa terms. Thus, for many foreign workers seeking a green card, unauthorized employment or visa violations occurring for less than 180 days since the last lawful entry will not act as a disqualification for adjustment of status.
Above documents are good....but have one concern here....let us assume....
Since last entry this person maintains status and filed I-485 at some point....But he might submitted experiance letter that includes these 4 months to support his experiance....right...
Will it be a problem ?
The adjudicator must only examine the period from the date of the alien�s last lawful admission to the United States and must not count violations that occurred before the alien�s last lawful admission.
http://smithgarg.com/article-overcoming-violations.aspx
Fortunately, the ameliorative provisions of INA � 245(k), discussed above, also apply to cases of unauthorized employment and violations of nonimmigrant visa terms. Thus, for many foreign workers seeking a green card, unauthorized employment or visa violations occurring for less than 180 days since the last lawful entry will not act as a disqualification for adjustment of status.
Above documents are good....but have one concern here....let us assume....
Since last entry this person maintains status and filed I-485 at some point....But he might submitted experiance letter that includes these 4 months to support his experiance....right...
Will it be a problem ?
tattoo selena gomez punched by justin
mps
08-15 05:00 PM
:p You just killed spirit of "AC21"
:D Now you may want to add that - USCIS should request proof of employement each year from anyone who gets GC in EB category right !
I noticed a flaw in GC process with respect to �Ability to pay� and �AC21�
Here are the definitions
Ability to pay - Suppose a company files for I-140, it has to prove its ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary.
AC21 states that an employee can change jobs to a similar position if I-485 is pending for more than 180 days. This could happen when I-485 is pending for more than 180 days or after its approval.
Let�s consider the following scenario
1) Company A files for I-140 and I-485 concurrently and proves its ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary at I-140 stage.
2) I-140 gets approved and I-485 is pending for more than 180 days.
3) The employee quits employer A and remains idle (or) becomes self employed (or) joins employer B in a different position.
4) During the I-485 adjudication he provides an offer letter from employer C with similar roles, responsibilities and wage as the proposed GC position with Company A and says that he intends to work with employer C after I-485 approval.
5) I-485 gets approved.
Here is the flaw. USCIS doesn�t check if employer C has the ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary. All it asks for is an offer letter with wage, duties and annual salary.
What if company C is running in loss and not in a position to pay the proffered wage.
Why should USCIS make a big deal out of ability to pay when it�s not checked across all employers where the beneficiary intends to work?
:D Now you may want to add that - USCIS should request proof of employement each year from anyone who gets GC in EB category right !
I noticed a flaw in GC process with respect to �Ability to pay� and �AC21�
Here are the definitions
Ability to pay - Suppose a company files for I-140, it has to prove its ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary.
AC21 states that an employee can change jobs to a similar position if I-485 is pending for more than 180 days. This could happen when I-485 is pending for more than 180 days or after its approval.
Let�s consider the following scenario
1) Company A files for I-140 and I-485 concurrently and proves its ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary at I-140 stage.
2) I-140 gets approved and I-485 is pending for more than 180 days.
3) The employee quits employer A and remains idle (or) becomes self employed (or) joins employer B in a different position.
4) During the I-485 adjudication he provides an offer letter from employer C with similar roles, responsibilities and wage as the proposed GC position with Company A and says that he intends to work with employer C after I-485 approval.
5) I-485 gets approved.
Here is the flaw. USCIS doesn�t check if employer C has the ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary. All it asks for is an offer letter with wage, duties and annual salary.
What if company C is running in loss and not in a position to pay the proffered wage.
Why should USCIS make a big deal out of ability to pay when it�s not checked across all employers where the beneficiary intends to work?
more...
pictures selena gomez got punched in
Thiru
09-22 08:53 PM
I applied for my AP on Aug 24th. I haven't seen any update on the case. May I know when you guys applied for it?
I applied on 8th of July and got approval notice through mail on 4th sep at TSC
I applied on 8th of July and got approval notice through mail on 4th sep at TSC
dresses selena gomez punched in the
H1Girl
08-16 04:37 PM
I wonder in what way this post is relevant to immigration issue etc.
It's all once's personal probelm as far as I understand...
It's all once's personal probelm as far as I understand...
more...
makeup selena gomez punched in the
backtoschool
12-28 08:10 AM
All the gurus on this forum,
I have this questions and I have feeling some of you are considering doijng this;;;;
My I-140 and 485 was concurrently filed in Dec2002. I-140 got approved. 485 is pending.
As i decided that this GC process should not hold me captive i went ahead made plans for my MBA education. Now I have an admission from europe for classes starting 2007.
IF my employer gives me Pesonal Leave of Abscene for one year....without pay
can I take off for studies without impacting the GCprocess?
Since I will be moving out of my residenec should I inform the INS of a new address friends) so that they can send EAD/AP etc..
I would love to connect to anyone who is similar situation......
PLEASE respond
:(
I have this questions and I have feeling some of you are considering doijng this;;;;
My I-140 and 485 was concurrently filed in Dec2002. I-140 got approved. 485 is pending.
As i decided that this GC process should not hold me captive i went ahead made plans for my MBA education. Now I have an admission from europe for classes starting 2007.
IF my employer gives me Pesonal Leave of Abscene for one year....without pay
can I take off for studies without impacting the GCprocess?
Since I will be moving out of my residenec should I inform the INS of a new address friends) so that they can send EAD/AP etc..
I would love to connect to anyone who is similar situation......
PLEASE respond
:(
girlfriend selena gomez punched in the
cbd80
08-27 02:26 PM
Hi,
My company filed for I-140 around Dec-2007. During first week of Sep-2008 USCIS case status page was showing "I-140 is approved". After that since third week of Sep-2008 case status page is showing "Documents mailed to applicant".
But neighter my lawyer not my employer had received the approval notice in mail.
How to obtain the duplicate or copy of this approved I-140? What form need to be submitted? where? and how much time it takes?
Thanks,
My company filed for I-140 around Dec-2007. During first week of Sep-2008 USCIS case status page was showing "I-140 is approved". After that since third week of Sep-2008 case status page is showing "Documents mailed to applicant".
But neighter my lawyer not my employer had received the approval notice in mail.
How to obtain the duplicate or copy of this approved I-140? What form need to be submitted? where? and how much time it takes?
Thanks,
hairstyles tattoo Selena Gomez Punched,
.jpeg "selena gomez punched in the")
monicasgupta
12-31 10:32 AM
Dear friends,
My h1 is valid till Dec 2009. H1 stamping is expired in passport in Oct 2007.
My AP is approved. I am planning to travel in Jan 2008. Can I us AP to reenter in Feb 2008 and continue working on H1 or do I have to use EAD to work?
Thanks
MOnica
My h1 is valid till Dec 2009. H1 stamping is expired in passport in Oct 2007.
My AP is approved. I am planning to travel in Jan 2008. Can I us AP to reenter in Feb 2008 and continue working on H1 or do I have to use EAD to work?
Thanks
MOnica
antihero
12-01 12:06 PM
It's not your airline but your transit stop. If your flight is through London, you'll probably need a transit visa, but check with someone.
the flights that I have booked fly via doha, qatar.
i have heard that even in the case of london, transit visa is not required if the passenger has a valid document to enter his/her destination. which means that an indian citizen must have an indian passport while going to india, and must have a valid visa for usa if going to usa. i have heard that many people unnecessarily obtain transit visa for britain where none is required. one can check british govt websites to confirm this.
the flights that I have booked fly via doha, qatar.
i have heard that even in the case of london, transit visa is not required if the passenger has a valid document to enter his/her destination. which means that an indian citizen must have an indian passport while going to india, and must have a valid visa for usa if going to usa. i have heard that many people unnecessarily obtain transit visa for britain where none is required. one can check british govt websites to confirm this.
chanduv23
10-23 07:50 PM
walking_dude, cagedcactus and bestin
you guys are a terrific trio
you guys are a terrific trio
No comments:
Post a Comment