EkAurAaya
07-11 02:15 PM
"Demand for numbers will result in the Employment Third preference Other Worker category reaching the annual FY-2008 numerical limit. As a result, this category will become �unavailable� beginning in August and will remain so for the remainder of FY-2008. Such action will only be temporary, however, and the Employment Third preference Other Worker cut-off date will return to 01JAN03 in October, the first month of the new fiscal year."
Question is how long will it stay 01Jan03?
My PD is feb 03 :mad:
Question is how long will it stay 01Jan03?
My PD is feb 03 :mad:
somegchuh
01-03 03:35 PM
I think this is a really complex issue. We go thru a lot of thoughts now and then.
When I think rationally this is what I am concerned about:
1. Social isolation from family (brother/sisters/extended family) in the long run.
2. Inability to support aging parents.
The second issue weighs down on my soul more because supporting aging parents is a debt we are all supposed to pay back (regardless of ethnicity/class/caste/nationality/...). We are not supposed to run away from it. Some of us are lucky to have sibilings who are supporting the parents back home and that makes it a little easier. I know some of us even have single parents living by themselves.
The long wait makes it hard for you and wife. So you really feel frustrated and want to leave. At the same time waiting for GC your career has been stagnating for years, your wife hasn't had a job in years and that makes going back harder. Its like being stuck between a rock and a hard place. Things seem good with a GC in US and they look good back home but we seem to be getting neither ... *sigh*
When I think rationally this is what I am concerned about:
1. Social isolation from family (brother/sisters/extended family) in the long run.
2. Inability to support aging parents.
The second issue weighs down on my soul more because supporting aging parents is a debt we are all supposed to pay back (regardless of ethnicity/class/caste/nationality/...). We are not supposed to run away from it. Some of us are lucky to have sibilings who are supporting the parents back home and that makes it a little easier. I know some of us even have single parents living by themselves.
The long wait makes it hard for you and wife. So you really feel frustrated and want to leave. At the same time waiting for GC your career has been stagnating for years, your wife hasn't had a job in years and that makes going back harder. Its like being stuck between a rock and a hard place. Things seem good with a GC in US and they look good back home but we seem to be getting neither ... *sigh*
ItIsNotFunny
03-12 03:44 PM
So now I am a traitor and a secret agent and a US citizen, just bcos I dont concur with the DONOR based thread idea?
All, lets not waste energy in negative direction. Not going to help us anyways. Reddog, why don't you contribute for obvious cause of FOIA?
All, lets not waste energy in negative direction. Not going to help us anyways. Reddog, why don't you contribute for obvious cause of FOIA?
ItIsNotFunny
10-24 05:12 PM
ItIsNotFunny:
I have sent out the email and couple of my friends will also do the same. Good intiative, much appreciated.
Thanks wandmaker for appreciation. It helps!
I got quite a few positive responses. On other side I got few negative messages, few pessimitics and few red dots on posts after I started this exercise. Sometimes it still bothers me but I guess I need to get out of this critics and appreciations and want to concentrate 100% on agenda: Fight against injustice in AC21 implementation.
To all,
If you appreciate me, please help me by motivating others to join the movement.
If you don't like me - please be generous and atleast tell me what should be done rather than just criticizing.
I have sent out the email and couple of my friends will also do the same. Good intiative, much appreciated.
Thanks wandmaker for appreciation. It helps!
I got quite a few positive responses. On other side I got few negative messages, few pessimitics and few red dots on posts after I started this exercise. Sometimes it still bothers me but I guess I need to get out of this critics and appreciations and want to concentrate 100% on agenda: Fight against injustice in AC21 implementation.
To all,
If you appreciate me, please help me by motivating others to join the movement.
If you don't like me - please be generous and atleast tell me what should be done rather than just criticizing.
more...
JulyFiler
08-20 07:56 PM
Yes, CA DMV takes quite a while to get clearance from DHS to validate your legal stay before they issue you DL.
GCWhru
03-18 08:57 AM
Here is the link to the page where you can calculate your stimulus amount.
apparently, No SSN (even for one) No Stimulus package...
linkhttp://www.irs.gov/app/espc/
apparently, No SSN (even for one) No Stimulus package...
linkhttp://www.irs.gov/app/espc/
more...
radhay
05-15 05:19 PM
bpratap, faced similar issue since they don't understand. Even if they do they are worried it may cause trouble when they sell the loan to some one else.
I have refinanced with Penfed and they don't have this requirement. It helps to put 20% down payment as some banks waive this 3 year rule with that.
Can you post the name of the bank so others don't waste time and money with those banks.
I have refinanced with Penfed and they don't have this requirement. It helps to put 20% down payment as some banks waive this 3 year rule with that.
Can you post the name of the bank so others don't waste time and money with those banks.
lonedesi
08-11 04:54 PM
Is it Rumors or True?
If it is true then really its very good news and we can see 140 approvals soon.
Never take anything for granted esp with USCIS. Rumors are still rumors up until the time we see the action on part of USCIS to clear the backlogs. So for now, join this campaign and help yourself by putting pressure on USCIS to clear the I-140 backlogs.
If it is true then really its very good news and we can see 140 approvals soon.
Never take anything for granted esp with USCIS. Rumors are still rumors up until the time we see the action on part of USCIS to clear the backlogs. So for now, join this campaign and help yourself by putting pressure on USCIS to clear the I-140 backlogs.
more...
JunRN
09-29 02:20 AM
2015....that was like you're the most unlucky person in the world if you get your GC in 2015....that was like 8 years from now....
pranavgandhi
08-14 03:00 PM
Just a thought.
I think USCIS might be busy with approving I485 cases of EB2-India/China. From October it might be on track. For most of cases, approving I140 immediately is not going to help applicant as he has to wait for I485 as per priority date.
I think USCIS might be busy with approving I485 cases of EB2-India/China. From October it might be on track. For most of cases, approving I140 immediately is not going to help applicant as he has to wait for I485 as per priority date.
more...
josecuervo
07-28 07:37 AM
Hello everyone.
Please share your experiences if you renewed your NJ DL with EAD renewal notice.
My nj dl is due for renewal. I have applied for EAD renewal. I have the receipt notice and am working on EAD.
Thanks
Please share your experiences if you renewed your NJ DL with EAD renewal notice.
My nj dl is due for renewal. I have applied for EAD renewal. I have the receipt notice and am working on EAD.
Thanks
hmehta
07-22 05:12 PM
Yes, me too - joined yahoo groups.
joined the yahoo group.
Others may put a message about their joining here.
joined the yahoo group.
Others may put a message about their joining here.
more...
abhijitp
07-15 01:33 PM
For the long run, we REALLY need "monthly sign-ups"! However every drop counts, so I am going to pitch in with my $5! Good initiative eb3_nepa!
Mohit_Malkani
07-28 09:11 AM
Xela,
What did your employers letter say (I'm a little confused about the "employer letter till feb 1st 2010" part)
What did your employers letter say (I'm a little confused about the "employer letter till feb 1st 2010" part)
more...
Napoleon
03-11 01:25 AM
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
as per this document, you can port to yourself. (Question #8)
But below are the reasons why I am backing off of opening an LLC on spouse name and porting to that.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=8231099851
also google 'UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf"
http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf
"This suggests, fairly clearly, that any communication to the USCIS per the Cronin Memo that the adjustment applicant intends to become self-employed is likely to trigger an RFE to inquire into the legitimacy of this arrangement. Legitimacy in this context is likely to be gauged by the concrete steps the beneficiary has taken in furtherance of the self-employment arrangement, understanding that only full-time and permanent employment will suffice for immigration purposes. Such steps would include the completion of legal and corporate formalities, the securing of financing, the purchase or lease of business premises and equipment,the development of a detailed business plan, the hiring of employees, and any other measures typically taken in the establishment of a business. Vague aspirational statements, however ambitious, about future plans to develop a business are unlikely, in the absence of tangible proof, to be accepted as probative of the requisite legitimacy of the self-employer and job offer."
Also, one relevant footnote in the document -
"At the AILA National Conference in 2003, a USCIS officer indicated that an attempt to invoke �106(c) in a selfemployment context is likely to raise �a big red flag� for an adjudicator, and that self-employment may be viewed as �an easy alternative� for aliens who are unable to find employment to sustain their adjustment-of-status applications. Schorr & Yale-Loehr, supra note 2, at 499. It should also be noted that the Memos view the possibility of an adjustment applicant becoming a public charge (and thus being inadmissible under INA �212(a)(4)) as being �a relevant inquiry� and that an RFE requesting information about a self-employment arrangement is likely to probe whether or not the applicant has sufficient financial resources to avoid becoming such a public charge."
Question #3 and #4 should conclude this discussion.
Also how do you define an established company.
If I stay employed for 2-3 yrs on my spouse's LLC and bring 200K each year, is that established?
as per this document, you can port to yourself. (Question #8)
But below are the reasons why I am backing off of opening an LLC on spouse name and porting to that.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=8231099851
also google 'UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf"
http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf
"This suggests, fairly clearly, that any communication to the USCIS per the Cronin Memo that the adjustment applicant intends to become self-employed is likely to trigger an RFE to inquire into the legitimacy of this arrangement. Legitimacy in this context is likely to be gauged by the concrete steps the beneficiary has taken in furtherance of the self-employment arrangement, understanding that only full-time and permanent employment will suffice for immigration purposes. Such steps would include the completion of legal and corporate formalities, the securing of financing, the purchase or lease of business premises and equipment,the development of a detailed business plan, the hiring of employees, and any other measures typically taken in the establishment of a business. Vague aspirational statements, however ambitious, about future plans to develop a business are unlikely, in the absence of tangible proof, to be accepted as probative of the requisite legitimacy of the self-employer and job offer."
Also, one relevant footnote in the document -
"At the AILA National Conference in 2003, a USCIS officer indicated that an attempt to invoke �106(c) in a selfemployment context is likely to raise �a big red flag� for an adjudicator, and that self-employment may be viewed as �an easy alternative� for aliens who are unable to find employment to sustain their adjustment-of-status applications. Schorr & Yale-Loehr, supra note 2, at 499. It should also be noted that the Memos view the possibility of an adjustment applicant becoming a public charge (and thus being inadmissible under INA �212(a)(4)) as being �a relevant inquiry� and that an RFE requesting information about a self-employment arrangement is likely to probe whether or not the applicant has sufficient financial resources to avoid becoming such a public charge."
Question #3 and #4 should conclude this discussion.
Also how do you define an established company.
If I stay employed for 2-3 yrs on my spouse's LLC and bring 200K each year, is that established?
gccube
07-19 02:29 AM
I personally believe that PD is more significant than the RD but it makes sense to me that RD may take precedence if the PD is current (as suggested by some members of the forum).
But if we think that at all times RD is the order they process them what would happen in this scenario
1. A guy with 2001 PD filed later and was 750,000 th guy in the queue of AOS applications.
2. After accepting all the apps USCIS retrogressed the dates to 2002 Jan. That means that USCIS is asking for AOS apps which satisfy this PD. That means that a visa no is available as of that date for adjudication so the first new application received(after they are retrogressed) will be 750,001 th application.
3. If RD is the only processing order at all times then 750,001th application will not be sent to an officer for review until all other 750,000 th applications with a better RD are processed.
4. Assuming that this takes 3 years (for example) then they are accepting an application today which they are not going to even look at in the next three years and this is not making sense to me.
5. If they are accepting the 750,001 th application because that application qualifies for a visa no then that should be processed before the other applications(barring for special cases FBi name check issues, RFEs etc). This means PD comes into picture when there is retrogression. So then they have to apply the same rule for the I-485 applications which are pending with them. They some how have to order them on the PD and I assume this should not be rocket science for them as that data is part of our AOS applications.
Thanks everyone for your inputs.
But if we think that at all times RD is the order they process them what would happen in this scenario
1. A guy with 2001 PD filed later and was 750,000 th guy in the queue of AOS applications.
2. After accepting all the apps USCIS retrogressed the dates to 2002 Jan. That means that USCIS is asking for AOS apps which satisfy this PD. That means that a visa no is available as of that date for adjudication so the first new application received(after they are retrogressed) will be 750,001 th application.
3. If RD is the only processing order at all times then 750,001th application will not be sent to an officer for review until all other 750,000 th applications with a better RD are processed.
4. Assuming that this takes 3 years (for example) then they are accepting an application today which they are not going to even look at in the next three years and this is not making sense to me.
5. If they are accepting the 750,001 th application because that application qualifies for a visa no then that should be processed before the other applications(barring for special cases FBi name check issues, RFEs etc). This means PD comes into picture when there is retrogression. So then they have to apply the same rule for the I-485 applications which are pending with them. They some how have to order them on the PD and I assume this should not be rocket science for them as that data is part of our AOS applications.
Thanks everyone for your inputs.
more...
Milind123
09-13 10:58 PM
For all those people who are gun shy, let me assure you, it does not harm anybody. On the contrary it is helpful to all of us. Please consider pulling the trigger. The fund drive that is happening today is not the last drive; as long as we are active, their will always be fund drives. Maybe you are thinking of contributing after seeing the effects/results of Sept 18th. In that case, I urge you to contribute now to get the maximum bang for your buck. Think about the Macy�s firework in New York. It will be rather boring to see them light one fire work each night during the month of July, just because funds did not arrive in time or were slow to arrive. Sept 18th is our 4th of July. Please make your contributions esp. if this is your first time. Contribute so IV can pay for all the items in their list and make this firework really bright.
bigboy007
06-03 01:40 AM
I have opened sep thread for the same , i am sorry if this is not acceptable policy of forum and i am reposting as this topic originated here:
================================================== =
I have been following with different threads over articles of Susherman / AILA on abolishing Dual intent for H1B visa and very much , deeply curious about finding the same :
Since i myself new of all these different texts of various immigration laws it took me some time but i think i found out the nerve of it atlast.
Here it goes :
There are two important sections of Student visas.
this bill is carefully drafted against us [h1B and green card] such that this provision is included in student visas section.
================================================== ====
(c) CLARIFYING THE IMMIGRANT INTENT PROVISION.— Subsection (b) of
14 section 214 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(b))
15 is amended—
16
17 (1) by striking the parenthetical phrase “(other than a
18 nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (L) or (V) of section
19 101(a)(15), and other than a nonimmigrant described in any
20 provision of section 101(a)(15)(H)(i) except subclause (b1) of
21 such section) " in the first sentence; and
22
23 (2) by striking “under section 101(a)(15)" and inserting in its
24 place “under the immigration laws.".
25
26 (d) GRANTING DUAL INTENT TO CERTAIN NONIMMIGRANT STUDENTS.—
27 Subsection (h) of section 214 of the Immigration and Nationality Act
28 (8 U.S.C. 1184(h)) is amended—
29
30 (1) by inserting “(F)(iv)," following “(H)(i)(b) or (c),"; and
31
32 (2) by striking “if the alien had obtained a change of status" and
33 inserting in its place “if the alien had been admitted as, provided
34 status as, or obtained a change of status";
================================================== =====
what does (c) in Student visas do :
214(b) of Immigration and Nationality Act : defines whether the applicant has an immigration intent or not and in general avoids , H , L , etc visas out of this category.
As stated in US code of Law this is what it is :
================================================== ======
"Every alien (other than a nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (L) or (V) of section 1101 (a)(15) of this title, and other than a nonimmigrant described in any provision of section 1101 (a)(15)(H)(i) of this title except subclause (b1) of such section) shall be presumed to be an immigrant until he establishes to the satisfaction of the consular officer, at the time of application for a visa, and the immigration officers, at the time of application for admission, that he is entitled to a nonimmigrant status under section 1101 (a)(15) of this title. An alien who is an officer or employee of any foreign government or of any international organization entitled to enjoy privileges, exemptions, and immunities under the International Organizations Immunities Act [22 U.S.C. 288 et seq.], or an alien who is the attendant, servant, employee, or member of the immediate family of any such alien shall not be entitled to apply for or receive an immigrant visa, or to enter the United States as an immigrant unless he executes a written waiver in the same form and substance as is prescribed by section 1257 (b) of this title."
================================================== ======
By doing this (i.e. remove my Underlined and Bold letters) they making H1B prone to 214B clause and any CONSULAR officer can reject visa based on this statute as a H1B categorized as IMMIGRANT intent rather than earlier being non-immigrant.
Now i think this should not effect 485 or 140 or any immigration applications as still H1B holder is still categorized in DUAL Intent.
This is how : when (d) of the above Student visa section is applied this is how it turns :
This is from US code of rules pertaining to 8 U.S.C. 1184(h)
(h) Intention to abandon foreign residence
The fact that an alien is the beneficiary of an application for a preference status filed under section 1154 of this title or has otherwise sought permanent residence in the United States shall not constitute evidence of an intention to abandon a foreign residence for purposes of obtaining a visa as a nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (H)(i)(b) or (c),(F)(iv), (L), or (V) of section 1101 (a)(15) of this title or otherwise obtaining or maintaining the status of a nonimmigrant described in such subparagraph, if the alien had been admitted as, provided status as, or obtained a change of status under section 1258 of this title to a classification as such a nonimmigrant before the alien’s most recent departure from the United States.
================================================== ======
Section 1258 is nothing but Change of nonimmigrant classification which allows for change of status with in Non-immigrant visas.
based on all these , conclusion i see is : h1B visa can now be rejected ( if law passes and i wish , i pray and i am doing all my best it doesnt) under 214B for consular posts.
Still h1B is considered DUAL Intent as per above amendment as it doesnt remove 101 (a)(b) (H) as they are speciality workers that is we.
Please comment , i know i am not an immigration attorney with my knowledge i tried to relate things i am curious about this subject and i request all to comment on this and i feel i made a good judgment based on these resources i have please comment.
----------------------
But logically i also feel this H1B under 214B as doesnt logical for a person whose 140 is approved as in principle his intent of being Immigrant is approved.
================================================== =
I have been following with different threads over articles of Susherman / AILA on abolishing Dual intent for H1B visa and very much , deeply curious about finding the same :
Since i myself new of all these different texts of various immigration laws it took me some time but i think i found out the nerve of it atlast.
Here it goes :
There are two important sections of Student visas.
this bill is carefully drafted against us [h1B and green card] such that this provision is included in student visas section.
================================================== ====
(c) CLARIFYING THE IMMIGRANT INTENT PROVISION.— Subsection (b) of
14 section 214 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(b))
15 is amended—
16
17 (1) by striking the parenthetical phrase “(other than a
18 nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (L) or (V) of section
19 101(a)(15), and other than a nonimmigrant described in any
20 provision of section 101(a)(15)(H)(i) except subclause (b1) of
21 such section) " in the first sentence; and
22
23 (2) by striking “under section 101(a)(15)" and inserting in its
24 place “under the immigration laws.".
25
26 (d) GRANTING DUAL INTENT TO CERTAIN NONIMMIGRANT STUDENTS.—
27 Subsection (h) of section 214 of the Immigration and Nationality Act
28 (8 U.S.C. 1184(h)) is amended—
29
30 (1) by inserting “(F)(iv)," following “(H)(i)(b) or (c),"; and
31
32 (2) by striking “if the alien had obtained a change of status" and
33 inserting in its place “if the alien had been admitted as, provided
34 status as, or obtained a change of status";
================================================== =====
what does (c) in Student visas do :
214(b) of Immigration and Nationality Act : defines whether the applicant has an immigration intent or not and in general avoids , H , L , etc visas out of this category.
As stated in US code of Law this is what it is :
================================================== ======
"Every alien (other than a nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (L) or (V) of section 1101 (a)(15) of this title, and other than a nonimmigrant described in any provision of section 1101 (a)(15)(H)(i) of this title except subclause (b1) of such section) shall be presumed to be an immigrant until he establishes to the satisfaction of the consular officer, at the time of application for a visa, and the immigration officers, at the time of application for admission, that he is entitled to a nonimmigrant status under section 1101 (a)(15) of this title. An alien who is an officer or employee of any foreign government or of any international organization entitled to enjoy privileges, exemptions, and immunities under the International Organizations Immunities Act [22 U.S.C. 288 et seq.], or an alien who is the attendant, servant, employee, or member of the immediate family of any such alien shall not be entitled to apply for or receive an immigrant visa, or to enter the United States as an immigrant unless he executes a written waiver in the same form and substance as is prescribed by section 1257 (b) of this title."
================================================== ======
By doing this (i.e. remove my Underlined and Bold letters) they making H1B prone to 214B clause and any CONSULAR officer can reject visa based on this statute as a H1B categorized as IMMIGRANT intent rather than earlier being non-immigrant.
Now i think this should not effect 485 or 140 or any immigration applications as still H1B holder is still categorized in DUAL Intent.
This is how : when (d) of the above Student visa section is applied this is how it turns :
This is from US code of rules pertaining to 8 U.S.C. 1184(h)
(h) Intention to abandon foreign residence
The fact that an alien is the beneficiary of an application for a preference status filed under section 1154 of this title or has otherwise sought permanent residence in the United States shall not constitute evidence of an intention to abandon a foreign residence for purposes of obtaining a visa as a nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (H)(i)(b) or (c),(F)(iv), (L), or (V) of section 1101 (a)(15) of this title or otherwise obtaining or maintaining the status of a nonimmigrant described in such subparagraph, if the alien had been admitted as, provided status as, or obtained a change of status under section 1258 of this title to a classification as such a nonimmigrant before the alien’s most recent departure from the United States.
================================================== ======
Section 1258 is nothing but Change of nonimmigrant classification which allows for change of status with in Non-immigrant visas.
based on all these , conclusion i see is : h1B visa can now be rejected ( if law passes and i wish , i pray and i am doing all my best it doesnt) under 214B for consular posts.
Still h1B is considered DUAL Intent as per above amendment as it doesnt remove 101 (a)(b) (H) as they are speciality workers that is we.
Please comment , i know i am not an immigration attorney with my knowledge i tried to relate things i am curious about this subject and i request all to comment on this and i feel i made a good judgment based on these resources i have please comment.
----------------------
But logically i also feel this H1B under 214B as doesnt logical for a person whose 140 is approved as in principle his intent of being Immigrant is approved.
Macaca
09-14 08:57 PM
A Little-Known Group Claims a Victory on Immigration (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=113489&postcount=730) By ROBERT PEAR (rpear@nytimes.com) | New York Times, July 15, 2007
How Conservatives Enhanced Online Voice (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=98681&postcount=598) - Talk Radio Blends With Blog Postings To Boost Message By JUNE KRONHOLZ (june.kronholz@wsj.com ) and AMY SCHATZ (Amy.Schatz@wsj.com) | The Wall Street Journal, July 3, 2007
Immigration bill ignites grass-roots fire (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=89612&postcount=461) The conservative group NumbersUSA has seen its numbers skyrocket. Activists pressure wavering senators By Nicole Gaouette (nicole.gaouette@latimes.com) | Times Staff Writer, June 24, 2007
Grass Roots Roared and Immigration Plan Collapsed By JULIA PRESTON (juliapreston@nytimes.com) | New York Times, June 10, 2007: 1 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=80626&postcount=203), 2 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=80627&postcount=204)
How Conservatives Enhanced Online Voice (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=98681&postcount=598) - Talk Radio Blends With Blog Postings To Boost Message By JUNE KRONHOLZ (june.kronholz@wsj.com ) and AMY SCHATZ (Amy.Schatz@wsj.com) | The Wall Street Journal, July 3, 2007
Immigration bill ignites grass-roots fire (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=89612&postcount=461) The conservative group NumbersUSA has seen its numbers skyrocket. Activists pressure wavering senators By Nicole Gaouette (nicole.gaouette@latimes.com) | Times Staff Writer, June 24, 2007
Grass Roots Roared and Immigration Plan Collapsed By JULIA PRESTON (juliapreston@nytimes.com) | New York Times, June 10, 2007: 1 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=80626&postcount=203), 2 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=80627&postcount=204)
desigirl
01-31 09:32 AM
Congratulation to 9years and Vayumahesh. Thank you both for documenting your journey. My EB2 perm was applied from the new company i have joined and it is approved this month. Hopefully i should be applying for I-140 next month.
I have applied my 485 in July 07 but i was not married at that time. I am married now and my my wife is on H1B. When should i add her or amend my I-485.
Thanks
When you become current and before you get your GC approval notice, you should file 485 for your wife.
Disclaimer: Not an attorney.
I have applied my 485 in July 07 but i was not married at that time. I am married now and my my wife is on H1B. When should i add her or amend my I-485.
Thanks
When you become current and before you get your GC approval notice, you should file 485 for your wife.
Disclaimer: Not an attorney.
nlssubbu
07-24 06:05 PM
this is a 2004 EB3 approval! This is the first one I am seeing from 2004. So looks like they have really cleaned the pipes here, and things should be better going forward.
The nicest thing of this whole fiasco is that they seem to have ignored country-limits and approved as many as possible. Last year they did only 9.8K EB Indians (teh final count was 17k, but that was due to ScheduleA). THis year (2007) if they have gotten 20-30K India applications out, the dates should move better in the future.
Eagerly awaiting 2 USCIS stats:
1. per-country per-category EB approvals in 2007
2. number of 485 applications received by August 17th
Per country quota is not applicable based on AC21 rule when it is current for every one. This is what happened due to the July visa bulletin fiasco. As they are honouring that bulletin, they are also forced to approve across all country
The nicest thing of this whole fiasco is that they seem to have ignored country-limits and approved as many as possible. Last year they did only 9.8K EB Indians (teh final count was 17k, but that was due to ScheduleA). THis year (2007) if they have gotten 20-30K India applications out, the dates should move better in the future.
Eagerly awaiting 2 USCIS stats:
1. per-country per-category EB approvals in 2007
2. number of 485 applications received by August 17th
Per country quota is not applicable based on AC21 rule when it is current for every one. This is what happened due to the July visa bulletin fiasco. As they are honouring that bulletin, they are also forced to approve across all country
No comments:
Post a Comment