needhelp!
09-12 07:30 PM
Allen American
Athens Daily Review
Azle News
Corsicana Daily Sun
Dallas / Fort Worth Heritage
Denton Record-Chronicle
Dallas Examiner
Dallas Morning News
Dallas Observer
Dallas Post Tribune
Dallas Voice
El Hispano News
El Sol de Texas
Gainesville Daily Register
Greenville Herald Banner
Hood County News
Paris News
Senior News Source
Stephenville Empire-Tribune
Terrell Tribune
Texas Jewish Post
Wise County Messenger
NetMio.com
D Magazine
KLIF 570 AM
KNES 99.1 FM
DCTV (Ch. 27A, 11B, 13B, 14B, 15B)
Texas Triangle
Plano Star Courier
Fort Worth Star-Telegram
KRLD 1080 AM
WBAP 820 AM
Printed Letters being mailed to:
USA Radio Network
2290 Springlake Rd, Ste 107
Dallas, TX 75234
Salem Radio Network
6400 N Beltline Rd, Ste 210
Irving, TX 75063
KSCS 96.3 FM
2221 E Lamar Blvd, Ste 300
Arlington, TX 76006
KETR 88.0 FM
KNTU 88.1 FM (NPR ) Univ of North Texas
KERA 90.1 FM (NPR)
Athens Daily Review
Azle News
Corsicana Daily Sun
Dallas / Fort Worth Heritage
Denton Record-Chronicle
Dallas Examiner
Dallas Morning News
Dallas Observer
Dallas Post Tribune
Dallas Voice
El Hispano News
El Sol de Texas
Gainesville Daily Register
Greenville Herald Banner
Hood County News
Paris News
Senior News Source
Stephenville Empire-Tribune
Terrell Tribune
Texas Jewish Post
Wise County Messenger
NetMio.com
D Magazine
KLIF 570 AM
KNES 99.1 FM
DCTV (Ch. 27A, 11B, 13B, 14B, 15B)
Texas Triangle
Plano Star Courier
Fort Worth Star-Telegram
KRLD 1080 AM
WBAP 820 AM
Printed Letters being mailed to:
USA Radio Network
2290 Springlake Rd, Ste 107
Dallas, TX 75234
Salem Radio Network
6400 N Beltline Rd, Ste 210
Irving, TX 75063
KSCS 96.3 FM
2221 E Lamar Blvd, Ste 300
Arlington, TX 76006
KETR 88.0 FM
KNTU 88.1 FM (NPR ) Univ of North Texas
KERA 90.1 FM (NPR)
wallpaper arabic wedding hairstyles.
chanduv23
07-11 12:22 PM
employer can withdraw the 140 any time before the approval of 485 - there is no time limit.
That is right. But one MUST NOT worry about it as long as they have a job in hand with same or similar duties. Things to watch out are
(1) AC21 letter
(2) G28 properly filed
(3) NOID
(4) Denial - happened in some cases and reopened through MTR
Now even if your old employer did not revoke 140 you may get an RFE.
That is right. But one MUST NOT worry about it as long as they have a job in hand with same or similar duties. Things to watch out are
(1) AC21 letter
(2) G28 properly filed
(3) NOID
(4) Denial - happened in some cases and reopened through MTR
Now even if your old employer did not revoke 140 you may get an RFE.
govindk
07-14 02:32 PM
Genius...Great work!
Sent....payment Transaction Number is 411666815
------------------------------------------
Contributed so far $200 + $5(today)
Sent....payment Transaction Number is 411666815
------------------------------------------
Contributed so far $200 + $5(today)
2011 beautiful arabic bridal makeup
WeShallOvercome
08-12 02:12 PM
I dont understand how can the senator think it will solve anything as far as giving a job to a US citizen is concerned..
We all know how these H1 dependent companies work.
they will charge this 2K increase to the H1 employee(directly or indirectly)
and do you think someone who wants to make it to the US will mind if he gets 48K instead of 50K per year?
We all know how these H1 dependent companies work.
they will charge this 2K increase to the H1 employee(directly or indirectly)
and do you think someone who wants to make it to the US will mind if he gets 48K instead of 50K per year?
more...
alkg
09-12 08:30 PM
Yes guys we should come forward and and start a compaign like we did in July 2007.
surely............ "Gandhigiri works"
surely............ "Gandhigiri works"
pd_recapturing
11-25 09:37 PM
bkn96, Thanks a lot for this information.
Guys, I was just wondering whether we can talk to Ron Gotcher/Greg Siskind to take up our case with AILA or USCIS. Ron Gotcher seems to be very very unhappy about this wrong doing of USCIS. Any suggestion?
Guys, I was just wondering whether we can talk to Ron Gotcher/Greg Siskind to take up our case with AILA or USCIS. Ron Gotcher seems to be very very unhappy about this wrong doing of USCIS. Any suggestion?
more...
guy03062
03-09 08:33 AM
Please post any important updates here...seems today's session is already started...
2010 Hot Arabic Makeup! Comments
ragz4u
03-08 01:38 PM
She prefers the way the chairman's markup as it is right now
more...
needhelp!
03-12 02:58 PM
reddog, please explain how you have supported IV in the past in non-monetary ways. For lobbying, there is not much you can do other than support monetarily,or make trips to DC yourself.
I am sure IV core will at least consider such non-monetary support on case-by-case basis.
So your definition of support is 'monetary support' only?
I am sure IV core will at least consider such non-monetary support on case-by-case basis.
So your definition of support is 'monetary support' only?
hair 2010 arabic bridal wedding hair arabian bridal makeup. arabian bridal makeup
wandmaker
05-22 12:23 PM
I just sent a check of $100 via online bill payment to IV. I've also set up recurring contribution checks of $25 every month beginning June. I strongly believe in IV's cause and hope that many folks will come forward. This is the time to act to help ourselves, otherwise we'll be left behind. Keep up the good work.
Thank you!
Go IVans Go!
Thank you!
Go IVans Go!
more...
Sachin_Stock
08-23 09:42 AM
So I am guessing that there's no significant change in policy towards EB-2 from what appears in the memo. They are merely reiterating on what exists. Lets not sweat.
hot Arabic bridal makeup and
gcseeker2002
09-13 05:47 PM
What can we do about it ? I knew 3-4 guys who ported from EB3 to EB2 and even got their 485 approved because of this, during August.
more...
house BRIDAL MAKE-UP AND HENNA
bigboy007
06-02 04:30 PM
Any comments on this dual intent option and how it will effect current 485/140 ? As this supposed to effect cases of 140 filed after 15 may 07 ? Or where does it state in bill the same? If thats the case then there is no point of employment based immi at all
tattoo Fresh Makeups | perfect arabic
ArkBird
09-15 04:21 PM
Did you check the grammar of your polling question?
I support this. But might to be able to help with the fee
If this is EB2, I am glad/proud/honor to be EB3
:)
People, most of us here are just afraid that they will get red dots, be ridiculed for their beliefs. But the things is; If we don't fight for our rights, who will. We have to defend our place in the queue, which at the moment is at substantial risk.
I want everybody to get their GCs. but now interfiling/porting is hurting out position in the queue.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
I support this. But might to be able to help with the fee
If this is EB2, I am glad/proud/honor to be EB3
:)
People, most of us here are just afraid that they will get red dots, be ridiculed for their beliefs. But the things is; If we don't fight for our rights, who will. We have to defend our place in the queue, which at the moment is at substantial risk.
I want everybody to get their GCs. but now interfiling/porting is hurting out position in the queue.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
more...
pictures arabian bridal makeup. arabic
Milind123
09-12 05:29 PM
Hi IV members,
Thanks for all the work and effort put into making the life of many simple.
Just made a small contribution from my side
Details
$100 from paypal Receipt ID: 0140-0216-9540-2146
Thanks
-Ska
Way to go first post and a contribution.
Thanks for all the work and effort put into making the life of many simple.
Just made a small contribution from my side
Details
$100 from paypal Receipt ID: 0140-0216-9540-2146
Thanks
-Ska
Way to go first post and a contribution.
dresses makeup Arabic Eye makeup looks
raju123
06-01 04:00 PM
This might be useful to you.
Age-Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "Child Status Protection Act"
The "Child Status Protection Act", effective August 6, 2002, addresses the problems of minor children losing their eligibility for certain immigration benefits as a result of INS (now USCIS) processing delays. Prior to the passage of this law, a child's eligibility in Employment-Based Immigration situations to be part of his or her parent's application as a derivative beneficiary was based on the child's age at the time that the child's I-485 was adjudicated. Because of enormous backlogs and processing delays, many children turned 21 before the their I-485 applications were adjudicated. In such cases, the children "age-out" and are no longer considered to be part of the parent's application and lose their eligibility to obtain green cards as a derivative beneficiary.
Children who otherwise would have aged out may successfully adjust their status through the additional interplay of the new Concurrent Filing rule and the "Child Status Protection Act." According to the "Child Status Protection Act," the eligibility of these aging-out children will be determined by their age at the date a visa becomes available to them minus the number of days that the Employment-Based immigration petition was pending. Furthermore, these children must file for permanent resident status within one year of such availability. For a clearer illustration of this rule, please see the different scenarios below.
Example 1
The Labor Certification application that was submitted on John's behalf on January 1, 2000 was later approved on December 31, 2000. Afterwards, his employer submits an I-140 (EB-2) immigration petition on John's behalf on January 1, 2002. At that time, John's son, Junior, is 20 years and 7 months old. John's I-140 petition was pending for six months and was approved on July 1, 2002, one month after Junior turns 21 years of age. The visa number for EB-2 was available for John on July 1, 2002. Under the old law without the Child Status Protection Act, Junior has aged out because he is now 21 years old. However, under the new law, his age is fixed as of the date that a visa number becomes available minus the number of days that the I-140 was pending. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, these six months must be subtracted from Junior's age at the time the visa number became available on July 1, 2002. Subtracting six months from Junior's age of 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, Junior's age is fixed at 20 years and 7 months. Thus, even though he was already 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, he is still considered a "child" for purposes of accompanying his parents in adjusting his status to permanent residence. However, Junior has to file his I-485 within one year from the date of I-140 approval, that is before July 1, 2003. The length of time that is takes the USCIS to adjudicate Junior's case is no longer important in these cases.
According to "Child Status Protection Act", if through the above calculation, the child's age is fixed at 21 or older, the child would be automatically reclassified to an appropriate category and retains the principal beneficiary's original priority date. Please see the next example below.
Example 2
Same facts as above except that Junior is 21 years and seven months old at the time of John's I-140 approval. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, Junior's age will be fixed at 21 years and one month. Even with the Child Status Protection Act, Junior still ages out and may not adjust his status at this time. However, he will automatically be reclassified to an appropriate category, family-based 2B, and retain his father's original priority date, January 1, 2000, which is the date John's employer filed John's Labor Certification application.
Example 3
Richard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. Richard's son, Simon, is 21 years and one month old. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Richard filed his I-485 because the visa number was currently available for Richard at that time. However, Simon cannot file his I-485 with his father because he aged out.
Example 4
Howard's daughter, Rachel, is 20 years and 10 months old. Howard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Howard and Rachel filed their I-485 since the visa number was available for Howard at that time. Thus, according to the "Child Status Protection Act," no matter how much time Howard's I-140 is pending, Rachel will not age out.
Visa numbers are currently available to all EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. Thus, with the new Concurrent Filing rule, any person who is a beneficiary (or applicant) of an I-140 petition that has already been filed or is filing the I-140 at this time is now eligible to file the I-485 application as well. Family members will be eligible to file the I-485 along with the principal alien. However, since the Concurrent Filing rule became effective, visa numbers may become unavailable in the future because more eligible aliens will be filing their I-485. Thus, eligible aliens with aging-out children should file their I-485 as soon as possible. Please see next example.
Example 5
Jenny filed her I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 10, 2002. Jenny has a son, Benny, who is 20 years and eleven months old. However, due to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, many aliens have filed their I-140 and I-485 together and the visa number for EB-2 has been exhausted. However, the visa number will not be current until December 2002 when Benny will be 21 years and three months old. If Jenny's I-140 is pending for six months and will be approved in February 2003, these six months will be reduced from Benny's age in December 2002 when he is 21 years and three months old. Thus, his age is fixed as 20 years nine months. However, if Jenny's I-140 petition is pending for only two months and will be approved in October 2002, Benny's age will be fixed as 21 years and one month. Thus, Benny ages out in this scenario and must wait until his priority date under family-based 2B immigration becomes current.
Example 6
Jason filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on June 30, 2002. Jason has a son, Ken, who is 20 years and ten months old at that time. According to the visa bulletin, an immigration visa number became available for Jason on July 31, 2002. Ken was 20 years and eleven months on July 31, and he is not in the U.S. but in his home country. Because of the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule Jason filed his I-485 on August 10, 2002. If Jason's I-140 is pending for 6 months until December 31, 2002, one month pending period from June 30 to July 31, 2002 should be subtracted from Ken's age on July 31, 2002. Thus, Ken's age is fixed as 20 years and 10 months. Ken may apply for his immigrant visa through Consular Processing at U.S. Consulate in his home country within one year from July 31, 2002.
For more information about "Age Out", please click the following topics:
What is "Age Out"
Child Status Protection Act
If you are a USC, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
If you are an LPR or will be an LPR, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
Age Out Problems in Employment-Based Immigration
Age Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "CSPA"
Child of Asylee and Refugee
Unmarried Sons or Daughters of Naturalized Citizens
Effective Date of the CSPA
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
Age-Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "Child Status Protection Act"
The "Child Status Protection Act", effective August 6, 2002, addresses the problems of minor children losing their eligibility for certain immigration benefits as a result of INS (now USCIS) processing delays. Prior to the passage of this law, a child's eligibility in Employment-Based Immigration situations to be part of his or her parent's application as a derivative beneficiary was based on the child's age at the time that the child's I-485 was adjudicated. Because of enormous backlogs and processing delays, many children turned 21 before the their I-485 applications were adjudicated. In such cases, the children "age-out" and are no longer considered to be part of the parent's application and lose their eligibility to obtain green cards as a derivative beneficiary.
Children who otherwise would have aged out may successfully adjust their status through the additional interplay of the new Concurrent Filing rule and the "Child Status Protection Act." According to the "Child Status Protection Act," the eligibility of these aging-out children will be determined by their age at the date a visa becomes available to them minus the number of days that the Employment-Based immigration petition was pending. Furthermore, these children must file for permanent resident status within one year of such availability. For a clearer illustration of this rule, please see the different scenarios below.
Example 1
The Labor Certification application that was submitted on John's behalf on January 1, 2000 was later approved on December 31, 2000. Afterwards, his employer submits an I-140 (EB-2) immigration petition on John's behalf on January 1, 2002. At that time, John's son, Junior, is 20 years and 7 months old. John's I-140 petition was pending for six months and was approved on July 1, 2002, one month after Junior turns 21 years of age. The visa number for EB-2 was available for John on July 1, 2002. Under the old law without the Child Status Protection Act, Junior has aged out because he is now 21 years old. However, under the new law, his age is fixed as of the date that a visa number becomes available minus the number of days that the I-140 was pending. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, these six months must be subtracted from Junior's age at the time the visa number became available on July 1, 2002. Subtracting six months from Junior's age of 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, Junior's age is fixed at 20 years and 7 months. Thus, even though he was already 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, he is still considered a "child" for purposes of accompanying his parents in adjusting his status to permanent residence. However, Junior has to file his I-485 within one year from the date of I-140 approval, that is before July 1, 2003. The length of time that is takes the USCIS to adjudicate Junior's case is no longer important in these cases.
According to "Child Status Protection Act", if through the above calculation, the child's age is fixed at 21 or older, the child would be automatically reclassified to an appropriate category and retains the principal beneficiary's original priority date. Please see the next example below.
Example 2
Same facts as above except that Junior is 21 years and seven months old at the time of John's I-140 approval. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, Junior's age will be fixed at 21 years and one month. Even with the Child Status Protection Act, Junior still ages out and may not adjust his status at this time. However, he will automatically be reclassified to an appropriate category, family-based 2B, and retain his father's original priority date, January 1, 2000, which is the date John's employer filed John's Labor Certification application.
Example 3
Richard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. Richard's son, Simon, is 21 years and one month old. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Richard filed his I-485 because the visa number was currently available for Richard at that time. However, Simon cannot file his I-485 with his father because he aged out.
Example 4
Howard's daughter, Rachel, is 20 years and 10 months old. Howard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Howard and Rachel filed their I-485 since the visa number was available for Howard at that time. Thus, according to the "Child Status Protection Act," no matter how much time Howard's I-140 is pending, Rachel will not age out.
Visa numbers are currently available to all EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. Thus, with the new Concurrent Filing rule, any person who is a beneficiary (or applicant) of an I-140 petition that has already been filed or is filing the I-140 at this time is now eligible to file the I-485 application as well. Family members will be eligible to file the I-485 along with the principal alien. However, since the Concurrent Filing rule became effective, visa numbers may become unavailable in the future because more eligible aliens will be filing their I-485. Thus, eligible aliens with aging-out children should file their I-485 as soon as possible. Please see next example.
Example 5
Jenny filed her I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 10, 2002. Jenny has a son, Benny, who is 20 years and eleven months old. However, due to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, many aliens have filed their I-140 and I-485 together and the visa number for EB-2 has been exhausted. However, the visa number will not be current until December 2002 when Benny will be 21 years and three months old. If Jenny's I-140 is pending for six months and will be approved in February 2003, these six months will be reduced from Benny's age in December 2002 when he is 21 years and three months old. Thus, his age is fixed as 20 years nine months. However, if Jenny's I-140 petition is pending for only two months and will be approved in October 2002, Benny's age will be fixed as 21 years and one month. Thus, Benny ages out in this scenario and must wait until his priority date under family-based 2B immigration becomes current.
Example 6
Jason filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on June 30, 2002. Jason has a son, Ken, who is 20 years and ten months old at that time. According to the visa bulletin, an immigration visa number became available for Jason on July 31, 2002. Ken was 20 years and eleven months on July 31, and he is not in the U.S. but in his home country. Because of the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule Jason filed his I-485 on August 10, 2002. If Jason's I-140 is pending for 6 months until December 31, 2002, one month pending period from June 30 to July 31, 2002 should be subtracted from Ken's age on July 31, 2002. Thus, Ken's age is fixed as 20 years and 10 months. Ken may apply for his immigrant visa through Consular Processing at U.S. Consulate in his home country within one year from July 31, 2002.
For more information about "Age Out", please click the following topics:
What is "Age Out"
Child Status Protection Act
If you are a USC, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
If you are an LPR or will be an LPR, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
Age Out Problems in Employment-Based Immigration
Age Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "CSPA"
Child of Asylee and Refugee
Unmarried Sons or Daughters of Naturalized Citizens
Effective Date of the CSPA
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
more...
makeup hairstyles Arabic Brides
mrdelhiite
07-20 10:07 AM
bump^^^^^^^^^^^^^
girlfriend Arabic Bridal look,
nitinboston
06-11 05:40 PM
I am very junior member on IV forums and have listened to all the experts and senior members on IV from time to time. Very solid ideas and very intelligent people! Although, I am not too familiar with the intricacies of what DOS said or what USCIS said; what I know is that there are many thousands of us who are here in a limbo for many many years. I think we have been "super- nice" to USCIS and Congress in the way we have approached them for our problems and rightly so - thats just us!
We have done our best educate them via lobbying efforts etc but wouldnt you agree that its time be a little more "assertive' now. Seriously, we dont know what the bigger picture is here. Year after Year, Month after month nothing moves with USCIS. Same old grim Visa Bulletin. I had written elsewhere that I dont even remember what my dates are anymore! Being in a western country or anywhere else in the world for 10-12 years is a long time. The culture, the enviroment and the system grows on you. Most of us left from India or elsewhere, when we were in our mid 20s . As young adults most of were explorers - soaking information, knowledge, new skills etc as we embarked on our journey to settle down in a foreign country. I think its fair to say that most of us have actually acquired our adult wisdom here. What I am getting to, is that when people talk about packing their bags and going back home - it may only be easier said than done!
I am not an expert at this but I believe we may have to come together again and we will need more visibility - maybe a six month long agressive assertive campaign - letters, flowers, rally and more all together so that we can catch congress' attention. It seems like legislation is the only way out here. Again, please pardon my inability to comprehend issues correctly, if I am wrong in saying so, but if we continue to rely on visa bulletins and USCIS; nothing is going to happen. All I can say is that whatever leaders and intellects at IV decide, I am here in anyway you all need me to help! Please feel free to ask for help at jaisinghaII@gmail.com. Thank you for reading my post.
We can do all we want, but why should any one in congress bother about us. Its same like India, if you cant vote, you have no influence over the legislature. Congress is responsible for the welfare of US citizens, guest workers are not their concern. Blunt but true.
We have done our best educate them via lobbying efforts etc but wouldnt you agree that its time be a little more "assertive' now. Seriously, we dont know what the bigger picture is here. Year after Year, Month after month nothing moves with USCIS. Same old grim Visa Bulletin. I had written elsewhere that I dont even remember what my dates are anymore! Being in a western country or anywhere else in the world for 10-12 years is a long time. The culture, the enviroment and the system grows on you. Most of us left from India or elsewhere, when we were in our mid 20s . As young adults most of were explorers - soaking information, knowledge, new skills etc as we embarked on our journey to settle down in a foreign country. I think its fair to say that most of us have actually acquired our adult wisdom here. What I am getting to, is that when people talk about packing their bags and going back home - it may only be easier said than done!
I am not an expert at this but I believe we may have to come together again and we will need more visibility - maybe a six month long agressive assertive campaign - letters, flowers, rally and more all together so that we can catch congress' attention. It seems like legislation is the only way out here. Again, please pardon my inability to comprehend issues correctly, if I am wrong in saying so, but if we continue to rely on visa bulletins and USCIS; nothing is going to happen. All I can say is that whatever leaders and intellects at IV decide, I am here in anyway you all need me to help! Please feel free to ask for help at jaisinghaII@gmail.com. Thank you for reading my post.
We can do all we want, but why should any one in congress bother about us. Its same like India, if you cant vote, you have no influence over the legislature. Congress is responsible for the welfare of US citizens, guest workers are not their concern. Blunt but true.
hairstyles Wedding Braided Updo
chanduv23
07-11 12:01 PM
I am not sure if I should be happy or sad with this news. I was laidoff recently and had applied for I-485 on July 17,2007 i.e. current processing date for TSC. Also with this bulletin I will be current (EB2 2006). I have not found a new job yet and my company has told me that they will be revoking my I-140 after 30 days. My company lawyers are not advising me much citing conflict of interest.
What options do I have? Will sending a new G-28 form at this time raise any issues that I do not have job with original employer as my PD is current and it is quite possible that my case maybe adjudicated. In the meantime if I do not sent new G-28 form I am not sure how much my company attorney will co-operate
Saileshdude - relax. Get a job ASAP. PM me your phone number and I will call you
What options do I have? Will sending a new G-28 form at this time raise any issues that I do not have job with original employer as my PD is current and it is quite possible that my case maybe adjudicated. In the meantime if I do not sent new G-28 form I am not sure how much my company attorney will co-operate
Saileshdude - relax. Get a job ASAP. PM me your phone number and I will call you
rajenk
12-14 02:35 PM
I need something which removes employer dependency with approved i140 until u file 485.
I hate working at the same employer just becasue my PD is not current. And by the time my PD becomes current, may be employer is not doing good, I am not happy at the job.... and I have to start from PERM again at new employer. Also if employer revokes i140, I loose the PD as well!!
Hi supers789,
You don't loose your PD if I-140 is revoked. All you need is an approved I-140. USCIS does honor the PD from a revoked I-140. That is what I have heard from various immigration attorneys. The PD is yours to keep. I think USCIS is generous enough to not push a person out of the queue once you have started your GC and progressed until I-140 approval.
I agree, I am definitely breathing from the July'07 filing. Otherwise it would be worse for me and my family to be working for my first GC employer. I am on your side for that.
A general advice don't stress yourself too much about it. It is definitely not good for your health. I use to check the status on my case every single day during my I-140 stage and got stressed out a lot and eventually earned some health problems from which I am slowly recovering. This is just a friendly advice.
I hate working at the same employer just becasue my PD is not current. And by the time my PD becomes current, may be employer is not doing good, I am not happy at the job.... and I have to start from PERM again at new employer. Also if employer revokes i140, I loose the PD as well!!
Hi supers789,
You don't loose your PD if I-140 is revoked. All you need is an approved I-140. USCIS does honor the PD from a revoked I-140. That is what I have heard from various immigration attorneys. The PD is yours to keep. I think USCIS is generous enough to not push a person out of the queue once you have started your GC and progressed until I-140 approval.
I agree, I am definitely breathing from the July'07 filing. Otherwise it would be worse for me and my family to be working for my first GC employer. I am on your side for that.
A general advice don't stress yourself too much about it. It is definitely not good for your health. I use to check the status on my case every single day during my I-140 stage and got stressed out a lot and eventually earned some health problems from which I am slowly recovering. This is just a friendly advice.
ronhira
07-06 02:30 AM
U need to change ur handle :-)
now that's not fair, i don't know how to change my handle, just think for a minute that my handle is - let me pick another name out of the blue - how about matloff. would that work?
now that's not fair, i don't know how to change my handle, just think for a minute that my handle is - let me pick another name out of the blue - how about matloff. would that work?
No comments:
Post a Comment