nivasch
03-09 05:07 PM
From Visa bulletin for Schedule A Workers (Q..)
===============================
Schedule A Workers: Employment First, Second, and Third preference Schedule A applicants are entitled to up to 50,000 �recaptured� numbers.
=======================
So from now on words those 50k can be use for us?:confused:
-----------------------
EB3_NEPA, I'm pretty sure that's how it works. They first use the regular EB3 numbers available.
===============================
Schedule A Workers: Employment First, Second, and Third preference Schedule A applicants are entitled to up to 50,000 �recaptured� numbers.
=======================
So from now on words those 50k can be use for us?:confused:
-----------------------
EB3_NEPA, I'm pretty sure that's how it works. They first use the regular EB3 numbers available.
wallpaper Interested in inventions?
kevinkris
06-06 03:03 PM
Goto Top. Guys, can we make this thread STICKY ?
paskal
07-22 07:44 PM
I am glad to see sked A here. I have been following this forum for a long time now and there is nothing for healthcare prof though the discussions were very helpful. As I can see it, the july VB put benefits on those going through AOS but as a result those whom I know who are scheduled for interview in their home countries in AUg. was cancelled.
august was always going to be unavailable, come what may...
The AOS reversal did not change availability of visa numbers.
this whole thing needs a more permanent solution
august was always going to be unavailable, come what may...
The AOS reversal did not change availability of visa numbers.
this whole thing needs a more permanent solution
2011 newton, isaac newton,
apahilaj
04-30 06:54 PM
So, where is the bill going next? Sorry guys, haven't heard the recording but just going by the thread it seems like this hearing didn't go as expected...
Is the bill going to die prematurely or is it going any where?
Is the bill going to die prematurely or is it going any where?
more...
gc_maine2
07-19 02:06 PM
Contributed $100 today, earlier contribution $50.
Order Details - Jul 19, 2007 2:28 PM EDT
Google Order #464374160968946
Order Details - Jul 19, 2007 2:28 PM EDT
Google Order #464374160968946
GeetaRam
11-30 03:28 PM
Hi,
I was following this thread and it has good information.
I have EB3 labor and I-140 approved with priority date March 2005. I couldn't file my I-485 in 2007.
Recently thru same employer I filed EB2 labor which got approved in Sept 2010. I have filed my I-140 under regular processing. I asked my attorney and he said as I already have one I-140 approved I should file this one under regular processing. USCIS might reject premium processing. Any advice.
My 6th year of H1-B is getting completed on Sept 2011.
Please suggest should I file my I-140 under premium processing? Should I try to convert it???
9 years and VayuMahesh any inputs... congratulations to u both for successful I-140 approval and porting....
Thanks in advance...
I was following this thread and it has good information.
I have EB3 labor and I-140 approved with priority date March 2005. I couldn't file my I-485 in 2007.
Recently thru same employer I filed EB2 labor which got approved in Sept 2010. I have filed my I-140 under regular processing. I asked my attorney and he said as I already have one I-140 approved I should file this one under regular processing. USCIS might reject premium processing. Any advice.
My 6th year of H1-B is getting completed on Sept 2011.
Please suggest should I file my I-140 under premium processing? Should I try to convert it???
9 years and VayuMahesh any inputs... congratulations to u both for successful I-140 approval and porting....
Thanks in advance...
more...
audelinom
02-25 03:10 PM
For all the replies to my post. I understand that there are many others in the same situation I am in, who can understand and feel the injustices of this process.
I understand that we made personal choices and we have to take responsibility for our actions, if something is clear is that h1-B is a NON-EMIGRANT visa. I just wish there was more transparency from the USA government when it comes to apply for PR through employment. The backlogs and collapse of the system, only reflect the lack of interest in solving the problem which in my opinion it's also a reflection of the lack of interest in having any more skilled professionals coming to the US.
Most of the participants in this forum are from India. I appreciate your insights and wisdom, you are well known for being spiritual people who work hard through hardships in life. Many of you have left here important advices and I am grateful for that.
Personally I have done my best to live a life outside this green card ordeal. I have moved on trying to live a normal life without being obsessed with this problem, but as most of you know, reality hits quite often and we are reminded of the limitations that our legal position imposes, more often than not.
I am only regret the rude comment of somebody who replied saying " Give up something you don't have? Live a life". It's true I don't have anything to give up and that is the sad part of all this process. I have invested thousands of dollars from my own pocket, gone under distress and suffered the unfairness of the system in exchange of nothing. Yet.
Thanks for your feedback, and good luck to all you. I hope that someday in the future people from my country, or any country for that matter, wont be forced to leave their families and friends behind because of unbearable live conditions we face.
I understand that we made personal choices and we have to take responsibility for our actions, if something is clear is that h1-B is a NON-EMIGRANT visa. I just wish there was more transparency from the USA government when it comes to apply for PR through employment. The backlogs and collapse of the system, only reflect the lack of interest in solving the problem which in my opinion it's also a reflection of the lack of interest in having any more skilled professionals coming to the US.
Most of the participants in this forum are from India. I appreciate your insights and wisdom, you are well known for being spiritual people who work hard through hardships in life. Many of you have left here important advices and I am grateful for that.
Personally I have done my best to live a life outside this green card ordeal. I have moved on trying to live a normal life without being obsessed with this problem, but as most of you know, reality hits quite often and we are reminded of the limitations that our legal position imposes, more often than not.
I am only regret the rude comment of somebody who replied saying " Give up something you don't have? Live a life". It's true I don't have anything to give up and that is the sad part of all this process. I have invested thousands of dollars from my own pocket, gone under distress and suffered the unfairness of the system in exchange of nothing. Yet.
Thanks for your feedback, and good luck to all you. I hope that someday in the future people from my country, or any country for that matter, wont be forced to leave their families and friends behind because of unbearable live conditions we face.
2010 of scientific discoveries
desi485
11-14 06:09 PM
One of IV members 'lazycis' (he is a knowledgable & senior member) also mentioned this, which exactly matches with what RG said:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=301999&postcount=16
so I am sure there are some provisionsI hope 'lazycis' will provide some more info if he sees this post.
Edit: Chandu - please click this link to read on RG's forums. (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6461)
Chandu, also see this link about cancellation of employment authorisation.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=a3791be48df2a5191102c84123773141&rgn=div8&view=text&node=8:1.0.1.2.54.2.1.3&idno=8
� 274a.14 Termination of employment authorization.
(a) Automatic termination of employment authorization. (1) Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter shall automatically terminate upon the occurrence of one of the following events:
(i) The expiration date specified by the Service on the employment authorization document is reached;
(ii) Exclusion or deportation proceedings are instituted (however, this shall not preclude the authorization of employment pursuant to �274a.12(c) of this part where appropriate); or
(iii) The alien is granted voluntary departure.
(2) Termination of employment authorization pursuant to this paragraph does not require the service of a notice of intent to revoke; employment authorization terminates upon the occurrence of any event enumerated in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
However, automatic revocation under this section does not preclude reapplication for employment authorization under �274.12(c) of this part.
(b) Revocation of employment authorization —(1) Basis for revocation of employment authorization. Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter may be revoked by the district director:
(i) Prior to the expiration date, when it appears that any condition upon which it was granted has not been met or no longer exists, or for good cause shown; or
(ii) Upon a showing that the information contained in the application is not true and correct.
(2) Notice of intent to revoke employment authorization. When a district director determines that employment authorization should be revoked prior to the expiration date specified by the Service, he or she shall serve written notice of intent to revoke the employment authorization. The notice will cite the reasons indicating that revocation is warranted. The alien will be granted a period of fifteen days from the date of service of the notice within which to submit countervailing evidence. The decision by the district director shall be final and no appeal shall lie from the decision to revoke the authorization.
(c) Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987. (1) Temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987, pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(c) (�109.1(b) contained in the 8 CFR edition revised as of January 1, 1987), shall automatically terminate on the date specified by the Service on the document issued to the alien, or on December 31, 1996, whichever is earlier. Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization does not preclude a subsequent application for temporary employment authorization.
(2) A document issued by the Service prior to June 1, 1987, that authorized temporary employment authorization for any period beyond December 31, 1996, is null and void pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of this section. The alien shall be issued a new employment authorization document upon application to the Service if the alien is eligible for temporary employment authorization pursuant to 274A.12(c).
(3) No notice of intent to revoke is necessary for the automatic termination of temporary employment authorization pursuant to this part.
[52 FR 16221, May 1, 1987, as amended at 53 FR 8614, Mar. 16, 1988; 53 FR 20087, June 1, 1988; 61 FR 46537, Sept. 4, 1996]
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=301999&postcount=16
so I am sure there are some provisionsI hope 'lazycis' will provide some more info if he sees this post.
Edit: Chandu - please click this link to read on RG's forums. (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6461)
Chandu, also see this link about cancellation of employment authorisation.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=a3791be48df2a5191102c84123773141&rgn=div8&view=text&node=8:1.0.1.2.54.2.1.3&idno=8
� 274a.14 Termination of employment authorization.
(a) Automatic termination of employment authorization. (1) Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter shall automatically terminate upon the occurrence of one of the following events:
(i) The expiration date specified by the Service on the employment authorization document is reached;
(ii) Exclusion or deportation proceedings are instituted (however, this shall not preclude the authorization of employment pursuant to �274a.12(c) of this part where appropriate); or
(iii) The alien is granted voluntary departure.
(2) Termination of employment authorization pursuant to this paragraph does not require the service of a notice of intent to revoke; employment authorization terminates upon the occurrence of any event enumerated in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
However, automatic revocation under this section does not preclude reapplication for employment authorization under �274.12(c) of this part.
(b) Revocation of employment authorization —(1) Basis for revocation of employment authorization. Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter may be revoked by the district director:
(i) Prior to the expiration date, when it appears that any condition upon which it was granted has not been met or no longer exists, or for good cause shown; or
(ii) Upon a showing that the information contained in the application is not true and correct.
(2) Notice of intent to revoke employment authorization. When a district director determines that employment authorization should be revoked prior to the expiration date specified by the Service, he or she shall serve written notice of intent to revoke the employment authorization. The notice will cite the reasons indicating that revocation is warranted. The alien will be granted a period of fifteen days from the date of service of the notice within which to submit countervailing evidence. The decision by the district director shall be final and no appeal shall lie from the decision to revoke the authorization.
(c) Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987. (1) Temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987, pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(c) (�109.1(b) contained in the 8 CFR edition revised as of January 1, 1987), shall automatically terminate on the date specified by the Service on the document issued to the alien, or on December 31, 1996, whichever is earlier. Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization does not preclude a subsequent application for temporary employment authorization.
(2) A document issued by the Service prior to June 1, 1987, that authorized temporary employment authorization for any period beyond December 31, 1996, is null and void pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of this section. The alien shall be issued a new employment authorization document upon application to the Service if the alien is eligible for temporary employment authorization pursuant to 274A.12(c).
(3) No notice of intent to revoke is necessary for the automatic termination of temporary employment authorization pursuant to this part.
[52 FR 16221, May 1, 1987, as amended at 53 FR 8614, Mar. 16, 1988; 53 FR 20087, June 1, 1988; 61 FR 46537, Sept. 4, 1996]
more...
gcsim
06-10 07:02 AM
yeah just checked....EB3 'U' and EB2 1 April 2004 :-( more waiting ......nothing like last July.God help us.
hair Albert Einstein Sir Isaac
greyhair
05-10 01:37 PM
I finished calling all Senators for the 2nd time. It feels good talking with them about my green card. I also called my Senators in CA. The person on the phone said they support CIR and green cards.
more...
superbabu
09-10 09:58 PM
how short are we from 30k?.
hot isaac_newton.jpg. Newton was
gc_on_demand
04-30 03:00 PM
We dont need EAD And AP if they process 485 in 6 months or less
more...
house photo: Sir Isaac Newton in a
.jpg/140px-Sir_Isaac_Newton_(1643-1727).jpg "Sir Isaac Newton is one of the")
gctoget
07-31 10:27 AM
There will be a conference call for SoCal IV members on August 7th,2007 at 8:00 P.M.
Please join SoCal IV yahoogroup for more info.
Send blank e-mail to
SC_Immigration_Voice-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Please join SoCal IV yahoogroup for more info.
Send blank e-mail to
SC_Immigration_Voice-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
tattoo Isaac Newton
sagis99
08-08 10:33 AM
FYI:
Here is a quote from an email i received from the Ombudsman's office:
"Our office is in fact at this time actively probing the I-140 situation you describe generally."
This was in response to an e-mail i sent them, describing the situation (my wife's I-140 from April 2008 got approved before mine, which was submitted, you guessed it, on July 2007)
So maybe there's some hope here, who knows.
Here is a quote from an email i received from the Ombudsman's office:
"Our office is in fact at this time actively probing the I-140 situation you describe generally."
This was in response to an e-mail i sent them, describing the situation (my wife's I-140 from April 2008 got approved before mine, which was submitted, you guessed it, on July 2007)
So maybe there's some hope here, who knows.
more...
pictures Newton, Sir Isaac (1642-1727)
ChalapathiChitturi
12-27 03:27 AM
My case is not yet approved, I Filed on Aug 01 st, Vermont Service Center.
Can you really go for H1 stamping when you are coming back on AP.
As far as I know, you should not use H1 at port of entry while coming back, if you do that your green card will be aboundend. Gurus please currect.
If you are not coming back on H1, then why are you going for stamping?
Can you really go for H1 stamping when you are coming back on AP.
As far as I know, you should not use H1 at port of entry while coming back, if you do that your green card will be aboundend. Gurus please currect.
If you are not coming back on H1, then why are you going for stamping?
dresses of Isaac Newton lifting so
tikka
07-18 02:06 PM
50$ each month.
for your contribution... :)
for your contribution... :)
more...
makeup Isaac Newton#39;s sketches for a
gchope07
07-18 03:36 PM
Immm,
Please update us on this thread when you receive the physical notice and let us know if the receipt date was Jun15th or something else. That will give us some vital information abt what the defintion of receipt date is.
Thanks...
My application was sent on June, 14th and delivered on June 15th (I have the FedEx tracking info and signature page confirming 6/15).
The case status online based on receipt number (obtained by calling them a few times until I got lucky) says:
"On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case."
Not sure if the online status is referring to the receipt date or the notice date when it says "On July 11, 2007, we received" when, in fact, they received it on June 15th!!
.
Please update us on this thread when you receive the physical notice and let us know if the receipt date was Jun15th or something else. That will give us some vital information abt what the defintion of receipt date is.
Thanks...
My application was sent on June, 14th and delivered on June 15th (I have the FedEx tracking info and signature page confirming 6/15).
The case status online based on receipt number (obtained by calling them a few times until I got lucky) says:
"On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case."
Not sure if the online status is referring to the receipt date or the notice date when it says "On July 11, 2007, we received" when, in fact, they received it on June 15th!!
.
girlfriend But now to Sir Isaac Newton
bluekayal
08-23 04:54 PM
Rest easy folks:
Mayorkas said he was determined to “get it right and get it fast.” “The community deserves consistency,” he said. “These are our customers, and we are committed to improving customer service.”
The latest example of the changes wrought by Director Mayorkas is an opportunity to allow the public to comment on interim guidance memorandums before they becomes effective in final form. This type of pre-effective-date chance to comment never happened before with the old INS or the pre-Mayorkas USCIS. The early-peek opportunity for comment allows the agency to withdraw with dignity intact from a position that stakeholders may show is contrary to law or legitimate business practices. For example, USCIS is now accepting comments on a guidance memo with a dry title but a topic of great significance to many prospective green-card applicants with high levels of accomplishment: “Evaluation of Evidentiary Criteria in Certain Form I-140 Petitions.”
This particular guidance memo arises from a debunking the agency received from the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115, C.A.9 (Cal.), March 04, 2010 (NO. 07-56774). The Court in Kazarian held that USCIS (in this case the Administrative Appeals Office) may not “unilaterally impose novel substantive or evidentiary requirements” without support in the Immigration and Nationality Act or agency regulations.
While Kazarian dealt with EB-1 (extraordinary ability or achievement) green-card eligibility criteria, the interim agency guidance cited extends this also to the EB-2 immigrant visa category for exceptional ability aliens. In my view, USCIS should have issued a guidance memorandum more broadly. Stakeholder feedback should have been issued on a guidance memorandum (which I’d be happy to craft upon request) entitled “Illegality of Unilaterally Imposing Novel Substantive or Evidentiary Requirements.”
Nation of immigrators - A public policy blog on our dysfunctional immigration system � The Dark Sides of Immigration Fame and Anonymity (http://www.nationofimmigrators.com/?p=349)
Mayorkas said he was determined to “get it right and get it fast.” “The community deserves consistency,” he said. “These are our customers, and we are committed to improving customer service.”
The latest example of the changes wrought by Director Mayorkas is an opportunity to allow the public to comment on interim guidance memorandums before they becomes effective in final form. This type of pre-effective-date chance to comment never happened before with the old INS or the pre-Mayorkas USCIS. The early-peek opportunity for comment allows the agency to withdraw with dignity intact from a position that stakeholders may show is contrary to law or legitimate business practices. For example, USCIS is now accepting comments on a guidance memo with a dry title but a topic of great significance to many prospective green-card applicants with high levels of accomplishment: “Evaluation of Evidentiary Criteria in Certain Form I-140 Petitions.”
This particular guidance memo arises from a debunking the agency received from the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115, C.A.9 (Cal.), March 04, 2010 (NO. 07-56774). The Court in Kazarian held that USCIS (in this case the Administrative Appeals Office) may not “unilaterally impose novel substantive or evidentiary requirements” without support in the Immigration and Nationality Act or agency regulations.
While Kazarian dealt with EB-1 (extraordinary ability or achievement) green-card eligibility criteria, the interim agency guidance cited extends this also to the EB-2 immigrant visa category for exceptional ability aliens. In my view, USCIS should have issued a guidance memorandum more broadly. Stakeholder feedback should have been issued on a guidance memorandum (which I’d be happy to craft upon request) entitled “Illegality of Unilaterally Imposing Novel Substantive or Evidentiary Requirements.”
Nation of immigrators - A public policy blog on our dysfunctional immigration system � The Dark Sides of Immigration Fame and Anonymity (http://www.nationofimmigrators.com/?p=349)
hairstyles Isaac Newton (1665), Gottfried
Milind123
09-17 08:44 AM
Folks, we just need 5 more people. My shot is guaranteed. Do you want to fire the next shot to encourage the last four people?
willwin
06-11 12:33 PM
How would I-140 approvals impact the availability of visa numbers and isnt spill over already happening,ie, removal of country caps, as we have seen last year,last quarter as well in July VB?
More I140 approvals (of those who have already filed their 485) means more 485 eligible to be adjudicated. Longer the queue and more efficient the USCIS is - slower the PD movement.
More I140 approvals (of those who have already filed their 485) means more 485 eligible to be adjudicated. Longer the queue and more efficient the USCIS is - slower the PD movement.
ychousa
07-19 12:58 AM
The following post
dont worry, the above scenario would happen only if pd remaines current.This is highly unlikely. In the next few months PD would retrogress to for instance 2004 , then you'll get your GC first :) Cheer up buddy:)
And this post
So the work of reviewing files goes roughly in FIFO order (that is based on RD) all round the year whether the bulletin says C, U, A, B or JAN01STONEAGE!
say the opposite.
The process in the second post sounds unfair, but it seems it is true, escpecially if you check this page: https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
dont worry, the above scenario would happen only if pd remaines current.This is highly unlikely. In the next few months PD would retrogress to for instance 2004 , then you'll get your GC first :) Cheer up buddy:)
And this post
So the work of reviewing files goes roughly in FIFO order (that is based on RD) all round the year whether the bulletin says C, U, A, B or JAN01STONEAGE!
say the opposite.
The process in the second post sounds unfair, but it seems it is true, escpecially if you check this page: https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
No comments:
Post a Comment