permfiling
07-28 05:25 PM
I am self filing out the AOS forms , since some of the fields do not take more then the specificed strings, I wanted to see if I can mix handwriting as well as keyboard input data in the same form?
Any opinions?
Any opinions?
wallpaper pictures hair girls generation jessica girls generation jessica.
delax
07-13 10:48 AM
everybody ..I think 70% of green card filers know that Murthy is money maker and does not help our community much at all...
she is just making up to show to world that she is doing some help for us..
we still have to appreciate her efforts tahts all.
MONEY MAKER - who isnt a money maker. Welcome to the world of Capitalism. I dont think any of us are in a position to comment on whether she helps our community or not. Here is a fact - On her call last week she mentioned that the Murthy Law Firm is one of the biggest financial contributor to AILF - who by the way are ready to file the class action lawsuit. If the lawsuit is successfull and given AILF's funding source - will you exclude yourself from the potential benefit because Murthy's funds were used to support the litigation - who's piggybacking now :)
Again - Its not one against the other - Please bear in mind the DUE PROCESS of LAW has been violated by USCIS resulting in a curtailment of your substantive rights (EAD, Parole, AC21 etc). I would not care who fights on my behalf so long as the outcome is to correct the earlier mistake.
she is just making up to show to world that she is doing some help for us..
we still have to appreciate her efforts tahts all.
MONEY MAKER - who isnt a money maker. Welcome to the world of Capitalism. I dont think any of us are in a position to comment on whether she helps our community or not. Here is a fact - On her call last week she mentioned that the Murthy Law Firm is one of the biggest financial contributor to AILF - who by the way are ready to file the class action lawsuit. If the lawsuit is successfull and given AILF's funding source - will you exclude yourself from the potential benefit because Murthy's funds were used to support the litigation - who's piggybacking now :)
Again - Its not one against the other - Please bear in mind the DUE PROCESS of LAW has been violated by USCIS resulting in a curtailment of your substantive rights (EAD, Parole, AC21 etc). I would not care who fights on my behalf so long as the outcome is to correct the earlier mistake.
greyhair
02-08 06:01 PM
Frankly I think that this lawyer is just posting provocative material to make himself popular. He has made many predictions and number of "useful" analysis in the past, most of which were found to be untrue. I used to read his posts until recently I figured out that the analysis was unreliable. This is just my opinion.
2011 Filed Under: Girls#39; Generation
desi3933
02-02 02:32 PM
Thanks for your inputs Desi.
.....
one must be employed at all times on EAD
......
Not Correct. One must have a LC job offer and it must be available at all times since PD to the date of I-485 approval.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
.....
one must be employed at all times on EAD
......
Not Correct. One must have a LC job offer and it must be available at all times since PD to the date of I-485 approval.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
more...
chanduv23
09-28 02:33 PM
Hi Chandu,
Not all GC holders are against the aspiring GC seekers. In fact, I am promoting IV actively to many older GC holders and exposing how bad the system is now when compared to their days. [Say from 10 years ago]. I am trying my best to help many, who are in line with what ever little knowledge I gained during this process. I will be happier one and only if this broken system is fixed and the process is made transparent. I only wish that this will happen during my life time :p
Thanks
PS: I did not had IV during the time when I started my GC process :mad:
Sorry about the generalization. I was refering to Senthil1 kind of folks, not folks like you. Thanks for all the support. My friend got a green card as recently as a month back, he struggled for a long time before he got one, I asked him if he wants to come for the rally and he told me "MRRRRRRRR I GOT MY GREEN CARD, YOU ARE ASKING THE WRONG PERSON FOR THE RALLY" and the same person told me "SOMETHING MUST HAPPEN TO THESE ROTTEN CONSULTING COMPANIES, THEY ARE RUINING THE SYSTEM" he got his GC from a small consulting company and after getting his GC he says these companies must not exist - he wants to shut thee door behind him
Not all GC holders are against the aspiring GC seekers. In fact, I am promoting IV actively to many older GC holders and exposing how bad the system is now when compared to their days. [Say from 10 years ago]. I am trying my best to help many, who are in line with what ever little knowledge I gained during this process. I will be happier one and only if this broken system is fixed and the process is made transparent. I only wish that this will happen during my life time :p
Thanks
PS: I did not had IV during the time when I started my GC process :mad:
Sorry about the generalization. I was refering to Senthil1 kind of folks, not folks like you. Thanks for all the support. My friend got a green card as recently as a month back, he struggled for a long time before he got one, I asked him if he wants to come for the rally and he told me "MRRRRRRRR I GOT MY GREEN CARD, YOU ARE ASKING THE WRONG PERSON FOR THE RALLY" and the same person told me "SOMETHING MUST HAPPEN TO THESE ROTTEN CONSULTING COMPANIES, THEY ARE RUINING THE SYSTEM" he got his GC from a small consulting company and after getting his GC he says these companies must not exist - he wants to shut thee door behind him
rajuram
03-10 09:04 PM
I agree, when will the right time to recapture visa numbers???
We did not do it in the last government,
we did not do it when the economy was good,
did not do it when they were wanting ways for new people to buy houses,
did not do it in july 2007,
THERE WILL NEVER BE A RIGHT TIME, NEVER
Of all 4 the proposals made by vbkris77,
I would just stick with one and only one:
RE-CAPTURING VISA NUMBERS.
If we add any other item like re validating H1B inside US,accountability for USCIS etc, the message would bound to get lost. It will get bogged down by the details of implementing the other proposals. The devil is always in the details.
I think we need to stick to single target of visa re-capturing (with no mention of the word H1B in the legislation). There should be no crap about H1B workers stealing jobs nor granting pardon for illegals. Visa re-capture is for educated foreign-born professionals currently employed in US.
Many ask if this is the right time. When will be the right time?. Are we asking anything that has not been already granted by the law?. These past visa numbers have been already approved by the law but not used by the USCIS.
The time is RIGHT NOW.
It is interesting why IV team is not taking up this one item and start fund raising.
May be the team has some valid reasons for not doing so. I could only guess.
But waiting for the right time to take up this agenda of re-capturing visa numbers is not a valid reason. That is totally hopeless.
We did not do it in the last government,
we did not do it when the economy was good,
did not do it when they were wanting ways for new people to buy houses,
did not do it in july 2007,
THERE WILL NEVER BE A RIGHT TIME, NEVER
Of all 4 the proposals made by vbkris77,
I would just stick with one and only one:
RE-CAPTURING VISA NUMBERS.
If we add any other item like re validating H1B inside US,accountability for USCIS etc, the message would bound to get lost. It will get bogged down by the details of implementing the other proposals. The devil is always in the details.
I think we need to stick to single target of visa re-capturing (with no mention of the word H1B in the legislation). There should be no crap about H1B workers stealing jobs nor granting pardon for illegals. Visa re-capture is for educated foreign-born professionals currently employed in US.
Many ask if this is the right time. When will be the right time?. Are we asking anything that has not been already granted by the law?. These past visa numbers have been already approved by the law but not used by the USCIS.
The time is RIGHT NOW.
It is interesting why IV team is not taking up this one item and start fund raising.
May be the team has some valid reasons for not doing so. I could only guess.
But waiting for the right time to take up this agenda of re-capturing visa numbers is not a valid reason. That is totally hopeless.
more...
sgorla
01-16 01:39 PM
Hello folks,
I just signed up for $ 20 a month contribution to IV. I hope this helps to fight for our cause. I did talk to few people that I know who are in the same boat as we are, and hope they join IV and contribute.
I just signed up for $ 20 a month contribution to IV. I hope this helps to fight for our cause. I did talk to few people that I know who are in the same boat as we are, and hope they join IV and contribute.
2010 Group Girls#39; Generation#39;s
cessua
08-17 05:29 PM
I don't get it.
How can:
VB-April07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
VB-MAy07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-03
VB-June07 EB3-ROW PD be June-05
..and then:
VB-Sept-07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
Are you telling me they haven't processed any EB3-ROW 485 during all those months? Why does it go all the way back to Aug-02???
Sometimes i consider seriously giving up:(
Need someone to give me the motivation to keep waiting... something logical i can understand.
How can:
VB-April07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
VB-MAy07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-03
VB-June07 EB3-ROW PD be June-05
..and then:
VB-Sept-07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
Are you telling me they haven't processed any EB3-ROW 485 during all those months? Why does it go all the way back to Aug-02???
Sometimes i consider seriously giving up:(
Need someone to give me the motivation to keep waiting... something logical i can understand.
more...
nomi
12-11 03:12 PM
First someone from IV core has to confirm that this rule change does not need congress action. I am sure the core has explored this option before.
Until then, there is no point in having any discussion on this.
Can someone from IV core team confirm this "this rule change does not need congress action." ???
If we don`t talk about here then how does core team know aobut it ??
Anyway i will wait from core team about it. I don`t know either this rule come under USCIS OR Department of State ??
thx.
Until then, there is no point in having any discussion on this.
Can someone from IV core team confirm this "this rule change does not need congress action." ???
If we don`t talk about here then how does core team know aobut it ??
Anyway i will wait from core team about it. I don`t know either this rule come under USCIS OR Department of State ??
thx.
hair snsd gee
jonty_11
12-13 01:04 PM
Pappu has doused the fire..:(
more...
gconmymind
07-14 06:36 PM
Is it possible they are trying to adjudicate my 485. I am EB2 India PD: JAN 2006.
The reason there is an RFE and not a NOID means USCIS is trying to adjudicate your application. Depends what action they take on your response..my 2 cents
The reason there is an RFE and not a NOID means USCIS is trying to adjudicate your application. Depends what action they take on your response..my 2 cents
hot hot girls generation jessica
shreekhand
08-16 02:53 PM
There is no injustice in the VB...just a higher demand from EB3.
If there is any injustice then it is with the present per country limits without regard to the demand and skills that emanate from a country.
It Is Too Bad For Eb 3 , Why This Injustice With Eb 3 ?
If there is any injustice then it is with the present per country limits without regard to the demand and skills that emanate from a country.
It Is Too Bad For Eb 3 , Why This Injustice With Eb 3 ?
more...
house Girls Generation#39;s Jessica
pd052009
03-15 08:18 AM
^^^^^
tattoo Girls#39; Generation, one of
wIeRdLiFe
02-18 07:03 PM
Hello,
Is it true if you are in US for more than 5 years you get GC? It is too good to be true.
Any way which part of this bill says so? I am sorry for my ignorance.
Is it valid even if you came on F1 and started working ....
thanks in advance for answers.
Is it true if you are in US for more than 5 years you get GC? It is too good to be true.
Any way which part of this bill says so? I am sorry for my ignorance.
Is it valid even if you came on F1 and started working ....
thanks in advance for answers.
more...
pictures girls generation jessica gee.
GCBy3000
07-12 11:32 PM
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
dresses Girls#39; Generation (Korean:
alterego
07-14 09:37 PM
The fundamental rule (for getting GC) is the longterm intent of having permanent employment relationship between employer and employee at the time of filing 140 and 485 (see the Q&A). The intet has to be "at the time of filing" only. The employee has worked 3 years in H1B for thr sponser. It clearly establishes the both party's intent at the time of filing. So, even if the employer revokes his approved 140, he is 100% safe.
I do not think what you are saying is correct. Ac21 does not allow you to leave before 180 days of your 485 filing.
The RFE is trying to determine whether your former employer holds a bonafide future job open for you or not. If he/she does not then your application is not valid in your circumstances from what I know.
If you get a letter from him/her then that should be adequate, however you will also need to start work with that employer for a reasonable time afterward to be within the law.
If as the poster above said the intent has to be there at the time of filing, then it would be easy for everyone to intend whatever the needed at the time of filing and then change their minds. It does not work that way.
The revocation of the 140 would not have been a problem if it happened after the 180 days, but would be an issue now.
I can see you are in a difficult spot. I would definitely suggest you stay honest, since they have all of your filing records etc. and if you fudge it, your petition can be denied for fraud, which could harm future applications.
Rather than relying on the advise here, you should seek out a good attorney experienced in AC21.
I do not think what you are saying is correct. Ac21 does not allow you to leave before 180 days of your 485 filing.
The RFE is trying to determine whether your former employer holds a bonafide future job open for you or not. If he/she does not then your application is not valid in your circumstances from what I know.
If you get a letter from him/her then that should be adequate, however you will also need to start work with that employer for a reasonable time afterward to be within the law.
If as the poster above said the intent has to be there at the time of filing, then it would be easy for everyone to intend whatever the needed at the time of filing and then change their minds. It does not work that way.
The revocation of the 140 would not have been a problem if it happened after the 180 days, but would be an issue now.
I can see you are in a difficult spot. I would definitely suggest you stay honest, since they have all of your filing records etc. and if you fudge it, your petition can be denied for fraud, which could harm future applications.
Rather than relying on the advise here, you should seek out a good attorney experienced in AC21.
more...
makeup wallpaper girls generation
drirshad
07-04 09:35 PM
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
girlfriend girls generation jessica.
IMGPAT
05-05 08:33 PM
Follow the url and refer Q.31, clearly answers your question.
http://www.immigration.com/faq/lvisa.html#77.
http://www.immigration.com/faq/lvisa.html#77.
hairstyles Jessica at Pattaya
map_boiler
07-18 08:43 AM
Our packet was delivered to NSC on July 2nd at 7:55 am...
gc03
07-24 03:36 PM
Mr. Gonz�lez,
I have a question on retrogression in Employment Based (EB) Visas. I am in the USA LEGALLY for the past 7 + years and am still waiting for my Green Card (Permanent Residency) in the employment based category. How long do I have to wait? With current retrogression of the dates, I cannot apply for adjustment of status for another 5 or more year. My green card process is going on and on for the past 4 + years. The situation is very disappointing one and all. My spouse is having Research Doctorate and waiting for my Permanent Residency to contribute to the economy and society.
My Question:
Is it possible to you allowing filing of I-485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The Adjust Status of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available.
Regards,
I have a question on retrogression in Employment Based (EB) Visas. I am in the USA LEGALLY for the past 7 + years and am still waiting for my Green Card (Permanent Residency) in the employment based category. How long do I have to wait? With current retrogression of the dates, I cannot apply for adjustment of status for another 5 or more year. My green card process is going on and on for the past 4 + years. The situation is very disappointing one and all. My spouse is having Research Doctorate and waiting for my Permanent Residency to contribute to the economy and society.
My Question:
Is it possible to you allowing filing of I-485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The Adjust Status of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available.
Regards,
kartikiran
08-21 09:48 AM
welcome to the world of dealing with USCIS
I am outraged that after not hearing ONE thing from them in over 2 years, that all of a sudden I am supposed to come up with all this stuff, hand over money I don't have and still not be assured my green card.
.
.
.
I am really ticked with USCIS and their utter lack of correspondence and then expecting me to bleed money from a stone for them. They are not in any hurry to process my application so why do I need to be? I've been here this long, what's another few years?
Has anyone else dealt with this or can you direct me to someone who knows what needs to be done and how?
I am outraged that after not hearing ONE thing from them in over 2 years, that all of a sudden I am supposed to come up with all this stuff, hand over money I don't have and still not be assured my green card.
.
.
.
I am really ticked with USCIS and their utter lack of correspondence and then expecting me to bleed money from a stone for them. They are not in any hurry to process my application so why do I need to be? I've been here this long, what's another few years?
Has anyone else dealt with this or can you direct me to someone who knows what needs to be done and how?
