pappu
07-21 10:16 AM
You can consult any lawyer. To the best of my knowledge you dont need employer sponsorship if ur a PhD although i could be wrong.
Yes. Just having a Ph.D does not ensure a greencard. Employer based EB greencards are straightforward in process since employer only has to prove that no american citizen is available to do the job and the employer is willing to pay the salary as per market rates. This is established via labor certification process. The other routes of bypassing this are by showing that one is so expectional that US Government should allow them to stay permanently in this country. The various routes for this are if you can show if you have several publications, articles, patents awards at international level. Extraordinary ability people in Sciences, sports and arts can apply for it. The other avenue is the investor category. if you invest money and give employment to US citizens. You should go through USCIS website to get more details on various GC routes.
Yes. Just having a Ph.D does not ensure a greencard. Employer based EB greencards are straightforward in process since employer only has to prove that no american citizen is available to do the job and the employer is willing to pay the salary as per market rates. This is established via labor certification process. The other routes of bypassing this are by showing that one is so expectional that US Government should allow them to stay permanently in this country. The various routes for this are if you can show if you have several publications, articles, patents awards at international level. Extraordinary ability people in Sciences, sports and arts can apply for it. The other avenue is the investor category. if you invest money and give employment to US citizens. You should go through USCIS website to get more details on various GC routes.
wallpaper 25 Fruits Wallpapers
sheela
08-06 12:35 PM
Received an email from CRIS stating that Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident. Those who are tracking approval, check out IV profile/tracker.
Congrats!!!
Quick question: What is the best time to check for update on USCIS site. Does it happen all the time/real time/ morning/evening. It will prevent/help people visiting case status every now-and-then.
Congrats!!!
Quick question: What is the best time to check for update on USCIS site. Does it happen all the time/real time/ morning/evening. It will prevent/help people visiting case status every now-and-then.
vikramy
09-02 10:48 AM
When i called last time when my wife EAD got approved, they told me the address on the application. So they should know.
Did you get Soft LUD after you filed change of address? If yes, then it's probably updated.
Folks,
I had filed my I-485 in Oct 2008 (EB2-I, PD of May 2006) and moved in March 2009. I changed my address online and have a confirmation number for it. However, I don't think I have received a confirmation in the mail from USCIS.
I am trying to find out how to confirm if USCIS has my current address correctly on file. I tried to call in today and was told there is no way for them to confirm that on phone. The lady I spoke with took the updated address again -- saying she will refile for change of address and gave me a service ID that I could apparently use to get an infopass appointment 45 days from now.
Is there anything else I should/could do? Appreciate any input.
Thanks.
Did you get Soft LUD after you filed change of address? If yes, then it's probably updated.
Folks,
I had filed my I-485 in Oct 2008 (EB2-I, PD of May 2006) and moved in March 2009. I changed my address online and have a confirmation number for it. However, I don't think I have received a confirmation in the mail from USCIS.
I am trying to find out how to confirm if USCIS has my current address correctly on file. I tried to call in today and was told there is no way for them to confirm that on phone. The lady I spoke with took the updated address again -- saying she will refile for change of address and gave me a service ID that I could apparently use to get an infopass appointment 45 days from now.
Is there anything else I should/could do? Appreciate any input.
Thanks.
2011 Beautiful wild fruits in
breddy2000
06-25 10:06 AM
Bumping up.
Atleast , you are sure that you can leave your employer after 2 yrs.
But if you do not file now and the date retrogesses again,. you may not be able to file any time sooner...with this CIR and stuff like that, which are not favourable to us. I would say just go ahead and do it.
See if there is any breakage clause. if they have, then if you like quit them and pay the Penalty or what ever.
I say all these are made up by the Employers to scare the employees.
As of now, just accept in what ever they say....and later on see if it is legal/illegal etc...
Atleast , you are sure that you can leave your employer after 2 yrs.
But if you do not file now and the date retrogesses again,. you may not be able to file any time sooner...with this CIR and stuff like that, which are not favourable to us. I would say just go ahead and do it.
See if there is any breakage clause. if they have, then if you like quit them and pay the Penalty or what ever.
I say all these are made up by the Employers to scare the employees.
As of now, just accept in what ever they say....and later on see if it is legal/illegal etc...
more...
skd
07-08 10:51 PM
nice job
Nice
Nice
nixstor
09-21 09:43 PM
Exactly! disable free preview of forums to guests. That will propel the number of members. Even anti immigration folks will count towards the number as it will become inevitable for them to register.
more...
hebron
06-14 03:09 PM
Refer this:
Case Study: Upgrade from EB3 to EB2 (http://www.imminfo.com/News/Newsletter/2010-06/case_study_upgrade_from_eb3_to_eb2.html)
Thank you gc28262 for sharing that link. Very informative. I have a question though about that case study: This paragraph is confusing - "Raj learned that the CIS will not allow him to substitute his new I-140 into his pending EB3 adjustment of status (AOS) application. Instead, they require a new AOS filing. Knowing the the CIS can take years to process an AOS application, even when the applicant's priority date is current at all times, he decided to opt for overseas consular processing."
Does this infer that If my current employer decides to file EB2 PERM application and I-140, I will have to wait till the priority date (Priority date for the new EB2 PERM) becomes current? Can I not use my September 2004 priority date and file I-485?
Case Study: Upgrade from EB3 to EB2 (http://www.imminfo.com/News/Newsletter/2010-06/case_study_upgrade_from_eb3_to_eb2.html)
Thank you gc28262 for sharing that link. Very informative. I have a question though about that case study: This paragraph is confusing - "Raj learned that the CIS will not allow him to substitute his new I-140 into his pending EB3 adjustment of status (AOS) application. Instead, they require a new AOS filing. Knowing the the CIS can take years to process an AOS application, even when the applicant's priority date is current at all times, he decided to opt for overseas consular processing."
Does this infer that If my current employer decides to file EB2 PERM application and I-140, I will have to wait till the priority date (Priority date for the new EB2 PERM) becomes current? Can I not use my September 2004 priority date and file I-485?
2010 Fruits Wallpapers For Desktop
cagedcactus
05-03 06:59 PM
"senator_levin@levin.senate.gov" to me
show details Apr 30 (3 days ago)
Dear Mr. Amin:
Thank you for contacting me regarding immigration and border security. I appreciate receiving your views on these important issues.
Our immigration system is broken and needs reform. I believe an effective immigration policy must include comprehensive border security and comprehensive immigration reform. We must secure our borders against real threats from terrorism and protect U.S. workers, while preserving the freedoms and principles on which our nation was founded. We must address reforms realistically, stem the tide of illegal immigrants entering the country and be fair to those who are here legally.
I support comprehensive border security reform. I voted in favor of an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2007 Defense Appropriations Act (P.L.109-289) that appropriated $1.83 billion to construct 370 miles of triple-layered fencing and 461 miles of vehicle barriers along the southwest border of our country. I also supported an amendment to the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief (P.L.109-13) that provided $390 million to hire an additional 650 border patrol agents, 250 immigration investigators, and 168 immigration enforcement agents and deportation officers, as well as to fund an additional 2,000 detention beds for immigration enforcement purposes.
I believe any reform must protect U.S. workers. For this reason, I voted in favor of an amendment to the Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R.2) that would bar employers who violate immigration laws by hiring undocumented workers from receiving federal government contracts for up to 10 years. The Fair Minimum Wage Act passed the Senate on February 1, 2007, and must now be considered by a House-Senate conference committee to reconcile the differences between the Senate and House versions of the bill. I believe it is important to ensure that employers hire only those legally eligible to work and that employees are treated fairly. I support a broad-based Electronic Employment Verification (EEV) system, which builds upon the existing voluntary pilot program, to increase the reliability of employment authorization checks. In the 109th Congress, I supported a number of worker protection amendments to the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (S.2611). I voted in favor of an amendment that would have established a true prevailing wage for all occupations to ensure that U.S. workers� wages are not lowered as a result of the guest worker program, and I supported an amendment that would have required employers to make good faith efforts to recruit U.S. workers first. S.2611 passed the Senate by a bipartisan vote of 62-36. Unfortunately, S.2611 was blocked by the House because of opposition to the immigration provisions in the Senate bill. The bill was not passed before the end of the 109th Congress.
Comprehensive immigration reform must remove the �magnet� that has attracted millions of people to cross the border illegally. We should not provide amnesty, but instead permit currently undocumented workers to earn the right to obtain legal status over a long period of time, under restrictive conditions, including being required to pay fees and back taxes. These individuals would be required to apply through the same immigration process as everyone else and take their place in line behind all those whose applications are pending. I will continue to work with my colleagues in the Senate toward effective solutions that address our nation�s real immigration problems. Without a comprehensive approach to immigration reform, our current problems with illegal immigration will likely continue.
Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Carl Levin
CC to senator_levin
show details 7:36 pm (1 minute ago)
Respected Sir,
I wanted to bring to your attention the woes of immigrants who are legally here in U.S. Specifically, the high-skilled workers who are experiencing decade-long waits to get Green Cards (the employment based Green Cards). There are approximately half a million such people in U.S. today whose lives are in limbo as they wait to get their Green Cards. I encourage you to visit http://immigrationvoice.org, an organization comprising of such people who are lobbying the Congress to help get some relief urgently.
The focus of immigration reform has solely been on illegal immigration. What is not so well understood is that the fate of legal immigrants has been tied with that of the illegal immigrants (because there is just one bill that the Congress will debate - CIR/STRIVE). It is ironic that if this bill does not pass, legal immigrants would be left hanging in the dark again, even when there is bi-partisan support for their cause!
The waiting times for getting an employment-based (EB) Green Card (GC) are increasing each day for nationals of all countries. But especially hard-hit are people from India and China, whose waiting times are expected to increase to 10-15 years, if the current trend continues. The demand for EB-GC keeps increasing because over the last decade an average of about 100,000 skilled workers have joined the U.S. work-force each year (using H-1B visa, and graduating foreign students), but only 50,000 new employment-based Green Cards are issued. U.S. issues 140,000 EB GC but even family members are counted-off from this quota, which thus effectively reduces to about one-third. Therefore, each year about 50,000 skilled workers join the queue for a Green Card.
Once the wait for a Green Card starts, all major life-decisions are influenced by the Green Card application process. Decisions about traveling abroad, marrying, investing, kids' education, and changing cities are then based on the stage in which one's GC application is. The biggest impact of the wait is on the person's professional career. Once the process starts, changing jobs usually means re-filing for a GC, implying that the person starts from the end of the line again. Even promotions within the same company are not without risks, as any change in job descriptions necessitates refilling the application. So a person waiting for a GC is expected to remain in the same job with the same company and without any substantial increase (or decrease) in pay! The skilled worker therefore lives life in constant limbo.
The psychological impact of being stuck and being treated as less than equal, even while paying all taxes (including SS and Medicare, to which they are not even entitled to without becoming permanent residents) is immense.
Your help is very much needed to eliminate this unfair backlog and reform the system, so that no innocent and law abiding person should suffer anymore. Your kind reply is very valuable to me.
I appreciate your time and help.
Regards,
CC
Above is the email conversation beween me and Senetor Levine. He seems to be in support for Legal immigration, but is against Amnesty.
My reply here is basically a nice written post by a fellow member here (Eternal_hope).
So credit for writing goes to him.
A similar reply was sent to senetor Debbie Stabenow (Michigan too)
Please comment......
show details Apr 30 (3 days ago)
Dear Mr. Amin:
Thank you for contacting me regarding immigration and border security. I appreciate receiving your views on these important issues.
Our immigration system is broken and needs reform. I believe an effective immigration policy must include comprehensive border security and comprehensive immigration reform. We must secure our borders against real threats from terrorism and protect U.S. workers, while preserving the freedoms and principles on which our nation was founded. We must address reforms realistically, stem the tide of illegal immigrants entering the country and be fair to those who are here legally.
I support comprehensive border security reform. I voted in favor of an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2007 Defense Appropriations Act (P.L.109-289) that appropriated $1.83 billion to construct 370 miles of triple-layered fencing and 461 miles of vehicle barriers along the southwest border of our country. I also supported an amendment to the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief (P.L.109-13) that provided $390 million to hire an additional 650 border patrol agents, 250 immigration investigators, and 168 immigration enforcement agents and deportation officers, as well as to fund an additional 2,000 detention beds for immigration enforcement purposes.
I believe any reform must protect U.S. workers. For this reason, I voted in favor of an amendment to the Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R.2) that would bar employers who violate immigration laws by hiring undocumented workers from receiving federal government contracts for up to 10 years. The Fair Minimum Wage Act passed the Senate on February 1, 2007, and must now be considered by a House-Senate conference committee to reconcile the differences between the Senate and House versions of the bill. I believe it is important to ensure that employers hire only those legally eligible to work and that employees are treated fairly. I support a broad-based Electronic Employment Verification (EEV) system, which builds upon the existing voluntary pilot program, to increase the reliability of employment authorization checks. In the 109th Congress, I supported a number of worker protection amendments to the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (S.2611). I voted in favor of an amendment that would have established a true prevailing wage for all occupations to ensure that U.S. workers� wages are not lowered as a result of the guest worker program, and I supported an amendment that would have required employers to make good faith efforts to recruit U.S. workers first. S.2611 passed the Senate by a bipartisan vote of 62-36. Unfortunately, S.2611 was blocked by the House because of opposition to the immigration provisions in the Senate bill. The bill was not passed before the end of the 109th Congress.
Comprehensive immigration reform must remove the �magnet� that has attracted millions of people to cross the border illegally. We should not provide amnesty, but instead permit currently undocumented workers to earn the right to obtain legal status over a long period of time, under restrictive conditions, including being required to pay fees and back taxes. These individuals would be required to apply through the same immigration process as everyone else and take their place in line behind all those whose applications are pending. I will continue to work with my colleagues in the Senate toward effective solutions that address our nation�s real immigration problems. Without a comprehensive approach to immigration reform, our current problems with illegal immigration will likely continue.
Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Carl Levin
CC to senator_levin
show details 7:36 pm (1 minute ago)
Respected Sir,
I wanted to bring to your attention the woes of immigrants who are legally here in U.S. Specifically, the high-skilled workers who are experiencing decade-long waits to get Green Cards (the employment based Green Cards). There are approximately half a million such people in U.S. today whose lives are in limbo as they wait to get their Green Cards. I encourage you to visit http://immigrationvoice.org, an organization comprising of such people who are lobbying the Congress to help get some relief urgently.
The focus of immigration reform has solely been on illegal immigration. What is not so well understood is that the fate of legal immigrants has been tied with that of the illegal immigrants (because there is just one bill that the Congress will debate - CIR/STRIVE). It is ironic that if this bill does not pass, legal immigrants would be left hanging in the dark again, even when there is bi-partisan support for their cause!
The waiting times for getting an employment-based (EB) Green Card (GC) are increasing each day for nationals of all countries. But especially hard-hit are people from India and China, whose waiting times are expected to increase to 10-15 years, if the current trend continues. The demand for EB-GC keeps increasing because over the last decade an average of about 100,000 skilled workers have joined the U.S. work-force each year (using H-1B visa, and graduating foreign students), but only 50,000 new employment-based Green Cards are issued. U.S. issues 140,000 EB GC but even family members are counted-off from this quota, which thus effectively reduces to about one-third. Therefore, each year about 50,000 skilled workers join the queue for a Green Card.
Once the wait for a Green Card starts, all major life-decisions are influenced by the Green Card application process. Decisions about traveling abroad, marrying, investing, kids' education, and changing cities are then based on the stage in which one's GC application is. The biggest impact of the wait is on the person's professional career. Once the process starts, changing jobs usually means re-filing for a GC, implying that the person starts from the end of the line again. Even promotions within the same company are not without risks, as any change in job descriptions necessitates refilling the application. So a person waiting for a GC is expected to remain in the same job with the same company and without any substantial increase (or decrease) in pay! The skilled worker therefore lives life in constant limbo.
The psychological impact of being stuck and being treated as less than equal, even while paying all taxes (including SS and Medicare, to which they are not even entitled to without becoming permanent residents) is immense.
Your help is very much needed to eliminate this unfair backlog and reform the system, so that no innocent and law abiding person should suffer anymore. Your kind reply is very valuable to me.
I appreciate your time and help.
Regards,
CC
Above is the email conversation beween me and Senetor Levine. He seems to be in support for Legal immigration, but is against Amnesty.
My reply here is basically a nice written post by a fellow member here (Eternal_hope).
So credit for writing goes to him.
A similar reply was sent to senetor Debbie Stabenow (Michigan too)
Please comment......
more...
sansas
01-21 07:28 AM
hi dionysus
i got this from some requirement agencies
i got this from some requirement agencies
hair Free Dunk Fruits Wallpapers
santa123
06-11 12:25 AM
I have an approved labor and curious to know if PP is only for H1 extensions and not open to all. Thanks!
more...
InTheMoment
02-27 01:16 PM
UnitedNations,
While what you say is technically true the visa rejection thing is not always true. We had a I-130 done for our family by our realtive yearrrs back (20 or so). I mentioned it on my visa application very clearly, so did my brother when we came here on an F-1 a few years back in, no questions asked the visa stamped and given at the consulate in 2 hours.
It's another thing that none of us used that I-130 ever.
Leslie535,
Just as others have suggested the issue ostensibly commands a lot of expert attention so go the attorney way and give your mind some peace.
While what you say is technically true the visa rejection thing is not always true. We had a I-130 done for our family by our realtive yearrrs back (20 or so). I mentioned it on my visa application very clearly, so did my brother when we came here on an F-1 a few years back in, no questions asked the visa stamped and given at the consulate in 2 hours.
It's another thing that none of us used that I-130 ever.
Leslie535,
Just as others have suggested the issue ostensibly commands a lot of expert attention so go the attorney way and give your mind some peace.
hot Strawberry Wallpaper - Fruit
logiclife
02-08 11:48 AM
You want to keep your 140 intact for 2 reasons:
1. To port the priority date for future use in a subsequent Greencard petition.
2. To get more H1 extensions based on this 140, until you have another labor and 140 going on with new employer.
First, about 1:
There is a lot of information on this thread about priority date transfers (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=912)from old approved 140 to a new 140. Read that thread and you will learn all you want to learn and all the information out there in the immigration world about PD transfer from one 140 to another 140.
In a nutshell:
Its a grey area of the law. If your 140 is never revoked, you would be fine and able to port your priority date. If it is revoked for fraud and willful misrepresentation, then you cannot port that PD under any circumstances. If 140 is revoked by employer then it falls into grey area. USCIS adjudicator's field manual says that you can still port your PD. The code of federal regulations says that you cannot. Currently USCIS is porting priority dates even if employer has revoked that 140, and they are following the AFM(adjudicator's field manual). However that can change in future. Legislation trumps regulation and regulation trumps the adjudicator's field manual. For now, things are great as AFM is being followed.
About 2:
If you have an H1 approved for 3 years after 140 approval, and you transfer jobs to a new employer and get another H1. You should be fine. If your previous employer cancels your I-140 after you leave and go to another employer, then USCIS will not go back and cancel your H1 because it was based on an approved 140 that is now revoked. This is what is happening as of now. At the time of H1 transfer to your new employer, your 140 should be in good status and you should have a photocopy of your approved 140. Once your H1 transfer is done (probably will have same end-date as the current 3-year H1 from your current employer), if the 140 is revoked AFTER that, then you should be fine. I am saying this based on advice from a very good lawyer.
Now, in far future, USCIS may decide to go and look for H1s that were approved based on approved 140 and then if that 140 is revoked, then they would go and cancel that H1 also. Its very very unlikely that they would do that even in future. They dont have that kind of resources to keep track of H1s based on 140 approvals and then go back and cancel them whenever some disappointed employer revokes 140.
About preventing 140 from being revoked:
I do not think that by changing lawyers, you can stop the previous 140 from being revoked. Your previous employer, for any reason, can get that 140 revoked with any lawyer they choose, regardless of who your current lawyer is. Lawyers are tied to clients, not petitions and cases. However, if someone knows more about this, please post here.
1. To port the priority date for future use in a subsequent Greencard petition.
2. To get more H1 extensions based on this 140, until you have another labor and 140 going on with new employer.
First, about 1:
There is a lot of information on this thread about priority date transfers (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=912)from old approved 140 to a new 140. Read that thread and you will learn all you want to learn and all the information out there in the immigration world about PD transfer from one 140 to another 140.
In a nutshell:
Its a grey area of the law. If your 140 is never revoked, you would be fine and able to port your priority date. If it is revoked for fraud and willful misrepresentation, then you cannot port that PD under any circumstances. If 140 is revoked by employer then it falls into grey area. USCIS adjudicator's field manual says that you can still port your PD. The code of federal regulations says that you cannot. Currently USCIS is porting priority dates even if employer has revoked that 140, and they are following the AFM(adjudicator's field manual). However that can change in future. Legislation trumps regulation and regulation trumps the adjudicator's field manual. For now, things are great as AFM is being followed.
About 2:
If you have an H1 approved for 3 years after 140 approval, and you transfer jobs to a new employer and get another H1. You should be fine. If your previous employer cancels your I-140 after you leave and go to another employer, then USCIS will not go back and cancel your H1 because it was based on an approved 140 that is now revoked. This is what is happening as of now. At the time of H1 transfer to your new employer, your 140 should be in good status and you should have a photocopy of your approved 140. Once your H1 transfer is done (probably will have same end-date as the current 3-year H1 from your current employer), if the 140 is revoked AFTER that, then you should be fine. I am saying this based on advice from a very good lawyer.
Now, in far future, USCIS may decide to go and look for H1s that were approved based on approved 140 and then if that 140 is revoked, then they would go and cancel that H1 also. Its very very unlikely that they would do that even in future. They dont have that kind of resources to keep track of H1s based on 140 approvals and then go back and cancel them whenever some disappointed employer revokes 140.
About preventing 140 from being revoked:
I do not think that by changing lawyers, you can stop the previous 140 from being revoked. Your previous employer, for any reason, can get that 140 revoked with any lawyer they choose, regardless of who your current lawyer is. Lawyers are tied to clients, not petitions and cases. However, if someone knows more about this, please post here.
more...
house Free Dunk Fruits Wallpapers
gc_on_demand
09-10 03:11 PM
If person is working for same company after MS then he/she cannot use experience for GC for same company. One of my friend got GC who was working for same company since he graduated and got GC under EB2. He had 4 years of exp after MS when he applied but could not show
tattoo 3D Fruits Wallpaper
pappu
11-25 10:15 PM
We should not wait for CIR.
If it happens its great, but if it does not, then we should have plans ready now. There needs to be effort with the new administration for administrative relief and also to continue the dialog with USCIS and DOL that we have now. We also need to meet lawmakers again in the new congress and see any opportunities for us. All background work needs to happen long before there is even a mention of CIR timeline by lawmakers.
If it happens its great, but if it does not, then we should have plans ready now. There needs to be effort with the new administration for administrative relief and also to continue the dialog with USCIS and DOL that we have now. We also need to meet lawmakers again in the new congress and see any opportunities for us. All background work needs to happen long before there is even a mention of CIR timeline by lawmakers.
more...
pictures Free Mixed Fruits Wallpapers
wangwei417
05-18 12:22 PM
Great works, guys. :o
dresses Fruit Wallpapers,
small2006
07-21 10:21 AM
FYI:
I don't know if this is old news but thought of sharing it anyway.
I was in the same boat as many others here i.e, no FP notice even 1yr after filing for 485. With my PD becoming current in Aug 2008, I called my attorney to see if he can do anything to help me out. He told me that due to several complaints from people like us and a law suit threat (or an actual lawsuit, not sure) from AILA, the Texas center has sent has set up an exclusive fax line for such requests. This system came into existence only about 2-3 weeks ago.
He sent a fax on my behalf to that number last Tuesday 7/15/08. My wife and I both received FP notices on Sat 7/19/08! So looks like for a change, something that’s set up for our own good is actually working. Frankly, I hadn’t pinned any hopes on the fax having a positive impact but I was pleasantly surprised. Our appointments are for next week.
Hope this little tip will help others in the same boat if their attorneys are either not aware and/or haven’t told their clients about it.
The fax number is not made available to the general public. Only attorneys have access to it.
BTW: As a result of all this, I haven't seen any LUD changes (soft or hard) on my case status online....I thought that was strange.
I don't know if this is old news but thought of sharing it anyway.
I was in the same boat as many others here i.e, no FP notice even 1yr after filing for 485. With my PD becoming current in Aug 2008, I called my attorney to see if he can do anything to help me out. He told me that due to several complaints from people like us and a law suit threat (or an actual lawsuit, not sure) from AILA, the Texas center has sent has set up an exclusive fax line for such requests. This system came into existence only about 2-3 weeks ago.
He sent a fax on my behalf to that number last Tuesday 7/15/08. My wife and I both received FP notices on Sat 7/19/08! So looks like for a change, something that’s set up for our own good is actually working. Frankly, I hadn’t pinned any hopes on the fax having a positive impact but I was pleasantly surprised. Our appointments are for next week.
Hope this little tip will help others in the same boat if their attorneys are either not aware and/or haven’t told their clients about it.
The fax number is not made available to the general public. Only attorneys have access to it.
BTW: As a result of all this, I haven't seen any LUD changes (soft or hard) on my case status online....I thought that was strange.
more...
makeup Tropical Fruit Wallpaper
eb3_nepa
02-21 03:43 PM
I had mailed and faxed sen Specter's office asking for an appointment. Spoke to Mr Kenneth Altman, the immigration incharge. He said there was no point in an appointment, since their office is WELL AWARE of the Retrogression problem all over the country. He DID however say, i could mail him the Powerpoint presentation and he would take a look at it. I will Do that this week.
girlfriend Multi Fruits wallpaper for
Abhishika
12-18 07:24 AM
Hi All,
I am also in similar situation. My labor says title as "Programmer Analyst"
and I have an offer as a Database Administrator.
If I look for onetcenter I am not seeing a direct code for "Programmer Analyst" but I see
a) 15-1051.00 Computer Systems Analysts
Sample of reported job titles: Systems Analyst, Programmer Analyst, Computer Systems Consultant, Business Systems Analyst, Systems Engineer, Computer Specialist, Computer Systems Analyst, Data Processing Systems Analyst, Information Technology Consultant (IT Consultant), Information Technology Specialist
b) 15-1021.00 Computer Programmers
Sample of reported job titles: Programmer Analyst, Programmer, Computer Programmer, Software Developer, Internet Programmer, Web Programmer
And when I search for the database administrator, it gives
15-1061.00 Database Administrators
Sample of reported job titles: Database Administrator (DBA), Database Analyst, Database Coordinator, Database Programmer, Programmer Analyst, Systems Manager
So should we look at the sample of reported job titles? If thats the case all the above mentions programmer Analyst.
Appreciate ur inputs
Abhi
I am also in similar situation. My labor says title as "Programmer Analyst"
and I have an offer as a Database Administrator.
If I look for onetcenter I am not seeing a direct code for "Programmer Analyst" but I see
a) 15-1051.00 Computer Systems Analysts
Sample of reported job titles: Systems Analyst, Programmer Analyst, Computer Systems Consultant, Business Systems Analyst, Systems Engineer, Computer Specialist, Computer Systems Analyst, Data Processing Systems Analyst, Information Technology Consultant (IT Consultant), Information Technology Specialist
b) 15-1021.00 Computer Programmers
Sample of reported job titles: Programmer Analyst, Programmer, Computer Programmer, Software Developer, Internet Programmer, Web Programmer
And when I search for the database administrator, it gives
15-1061.00 Database Administrators
Sample of reported job titles: Database Administrator (DBA), Database Analyst, Database Coordinator, Database Programmer, Programmer Analyst, Systems Manager
So should we look at the sample of reported job titles? If thats the case all the above mentions programmer Analyst.
Appreciate ur inputs
Abhi
hairstyles Fresh Fruits in a Glass
GCKabhayega
01-09 03:04 PM
Every time why does feel like that I have been in this dilemma before. I think we will gain almost nada frm this bulletin either.
My guess
EB2 : 1000 BC
EB3 : January 1962
My guess
EB2 : 1000 BC
EB3 : January 1962
simple1
09-16 04:19 PM
If you are genuine: Don’t do it. It will affect your GC.
If you are losers guild member using Indian name to post: Leave this forum immediately. I am tired of fake posts. I personally believe Riakapoor and ar7165 are fake.
you can apply for UI - Unemployment insurance, NOT Unemployment benefit. The first is an insurance, the second a benefit that will impact your GC application.
Hello All,
I am on a dependent EAD. I lost my job (laid off) few days back. Can I enroll for unemplyment benefits as i am reading the threads that dependents can enroll into UB. But just want to make sure before going forward. We are on I-485 pending status.
Please suggest.
Thanks in Advance!
My gc is in process, both I-140 and I-485 is approved over 180 days back. I have a valid EAD. Recently I lost my job (laid off). Can I apply for unemployment benefit?
If you are losers guild member using Indian name to post: Leave this forum immediately. I am tired of fake posts. I personally believe Riakapoor and ar7165 are fake.
you can apply for UI - Unemployment insurance, NOT Unemployment benefit. The first is an insurance, the second a benefit that will impact your GC application.
Hello All,
I am on a dependent EAD. I lost my job (laid off) few days back. Can I enroll for unemplyment benefits as i am reading the threads that dependents can enroll into UB. But just want to make sure before going forward. We are on I-485 pending status.
Please suggest.
Thanks in Advance!
My gc is in process, both I-140 and I-485 is approved over 180 days back. I have a valid EAD. Recently I lost my job (laid off). Can I apply for unemployment benefit?
bkarnik
05-18 09:24 PM
Alabaman,
We have repeatedly stressed the fact that our members are from all over the place. That we represent not only our members but the over 500,000 EB applicants from all over the world who are stuck in the process. On the other hand we cannot always control the spin that individual news organizations choose -- this CNN-IBN covers Indian issues and chose to characterize us that way.
There were Chinese members who attended our DC event, but this reporter didn't film them! Sucks.
See what I said earlier many times, including here:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=9897&postcount=55
BEE: If I am not mistaken, there is a brief clip showing the chinese members.
We have repeatedly stressed the fact that our members are from all over the place. That we represent not only our members but the over 500,000 EB applicants from all over the world who are stuck in the process. On the other hand we cannot always control the spin that individual news organizations choose -- this CNN-IBN covers Indian issues and chose to characterize us that way.
There were Chinese members who attended our DC event, but this reporter didn't film them! Sucks.
See what I said earlier many times, including here:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=9897&postcount=55
BEE: If I am not mistaken, there is a brief clip showing the chinese members.
No comments:
Post a Comment