Texascitypaul
02-23 06:15 PM
No necessarily protected. Anyone who overstays their I-94 is removable (deportable). However, some people can contest that in removal proceedings. One basis to contest a removal order is because the foreign national is married to a US citizen and/or has an Adjustment of Status pending.
The problem with VWP entrants is that they sign away their rights to contest a removal order, even if married to a US citizen (unless they claim asylum). Worse - they can be removed without a hearing in immigration court, simply by an order of the local District Director. In theory, a VWP entrant who overstayed could file for permanent residence and be issued a removal order and put in detention when s/he turned up for the marriage interview at the District Office.
I don't mean to terrify you, and most district offices do approve cases filed by VWP entrants, but please check with a local attorney before filing anything.
__________________
Thank you very much for clarifying that for me,ok so first thing is to find a reputable immigration attorney close to me in Texas City.
Thank you for your time it is very much appreciated,
Paul
The problem with VWP entrants is that they sign away their rights to contest a removal order, even if married to a US citizen (unless they claim asylum). Worse - they can be removed without a hearing in immigration court, simply by an order of the local District Director. In theory, a VWP entrant who overstayed could file for permanent residence and be issued a removal order and put in detention when s/he turned up for the marriage interview at the District Office.
I don't mean to terrify you, and most district offices do approve cases filed by VWP entrants, but please check with a local attorney before filing anything.
__________________
Thank you very much for clarifying that for me,ok so first thing is to find a reputable immigration attorney close to me in Texas City.
Thank you for your time it is very much appreciated,
Paul
wallpaper Cascada - Another You
Pagal
05-29 01:05 PM
Hello,
Good points, but all are already on IV agenda in one form or another... please visit the IV agenda thread to read what all IV is doing...
Good points, but all are already on IV agenda in one form or another... please visit the IV agenda thread to read what all IV is doing...
santb1975
03-09 11:06 PM
I talked to attorney Murthy about this issue a few weeks ago. My 140 was approved July 2007. The salary I currently make 485 is 10K less than the salary mentioned on my Labor. I work for a speciality Pharma company with steady revenues. They are a public company as well. Two years ago my company Attorney(Fragomen) and my HR said that should not be a problem since GC is for a future position etc. When I checked with Attorney Murthy she said that is true but if you get a strict immigration officer he can say that the prevailing wage determination for your job was done two years ago and you are still not making that money. She said it is better to make the $$ mentioned on my labor now. I am going to ask my company attorney the same question and see what he says. I have a lot of respect for my company's attorney
2011 girlfriend cascada wallpapers
a_yaja
07-12 03:39 PM
Are you exempted from cap if you were on H1B in last 6 years or your received your H1 B in past 6 years?
I was on H1B from feb 2001 to Aug 2004 and then moved to F2 and then H4 Will I still be exempted from cap though my initial H1 has been more than 6 years old.
Thanks for help
You may ne able to get H1B for additional 2 1/2 yrs.
I was on H1B from feb 2001 to Aug 2004 and then moved to F2 and then H4 Will I still be exempted from cap though my initial H1 has been more than 6 years old.
Thanks for help
You may ne able to get H1B for additional 2 1/2 yrs.
more...
psaxena
11-05 06:09 PM
Mine is exactly the same case as yours. I applied under EB3 for that reason.
You do not qualify for EB2 this way, give up that I-140 and apply a new one under EB3.
Guys,
I want to know what are the chances of getting I-140 approve if we file a new petition and current I-140 appeal process is pending with USCIS. My I-140 was denied on education basis. In denial notice USCIS wrote that we did not prove that my 3+3 (Diploma + Engg degree from India) degree is not equivalent to B.S in Computer science from Labor certification.
Guys please share your experience with me since its important for me to get I-140 approve for future growth.
Thanks
You do not qualify for EB2 this way, give up that I-140 and apply a new one under EB3.
Guys,
I want to know what are the chances of getting I-140 approve if we file a new petition and current I-140 appeal process is pending with USCIS. My I-140 was denied on education basis. In denial notice USCIS wrote that we did not prove that my 3+3 (Diploma + Engg degree from India) degree is not equivalent to B.S in Computer science from Labor certification.
Guys please share your experience with me since its important for me to get I-140 approve for future growth.
Thanks
ushkand
09-15 10:27 PM
For the main applicant (me) under
Section: Adjustment as direct beneficiary of immigrnt petition
For spouse
Section: Derivtive Adjustment
Maybe you need to call an attorney and eventuallu USCIS to get this corrected.
Section: Adjustment as direct beneficiary of immigrnt petition
For spouse
Section: Derivtive Adjustment
Maybe you need to call an attorney and eventuallu USCIS to get this corrected.
more...
gcseeker2002
02-12 05:17 PM
Folks,
employer's attorney claims that there is no such thing as H4 premium processing.
Can anyone point me to the correct memo where Premium filing was made available for I-539 applications?
I searched all Mathew-Oh updates dated one year ago and can't locate it.
I need to get that h4 under premium ASAP so that I can transfer to H1 in April.
Can anyone please help?
My company cries about the costs for regular process, forget premium process , so i dont know.
employer's attorney claims that there is no such thing as H4 premium processing.
Can anyone point me to the correct memo where Premium filing was made available for I-539 applications?
I searched all Mathew-Oh updates dated one year ago and can't locate it.
I need to get that h4 under premium ASAP so that I can transfer to H1 in April.
Can anyone please help?
My company cries about the costs for regular process, forget premium process , so i dont know.
2010 wallpaper Evacuate the
sanbaj
02-20 10:12 AM
Your lawyer or any competent lawyer should be able to interfile your application. The lawyer has to write a letter to USCIS along with the original approval notice of the newly approved but older PD I140. As per today's EB2/EB3 PD scenario, interfile is the best option for you. Earlier PD transfers ruled when EB2 PD used to be ahead of EB3 PD. Now, EB2 PD is Unavailable. Again, get a competent lawyer who has extensive experience in this particular issue.
The following thread has most of the information and knowledge you would need: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=912&highlight=transfer.
Best of luck !!
The following thread has most of the information and knowledge you would need: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=912&highlight=transfer.
Best of luck !!
more...
bijualex29
05-05 03:33 PM
I would like to know, can I get my H-1B at 6.0 year of my H-4 with my spouse�s approved I-140 (affected by EB-3 retrogression)?
hair wallpaper Evacuate the
rjgleason
June 18th, 2005, 03:11 PM
No.1 is my favorite.....I like that (so it seems to me) that the emphasis is on the sky, which has suberb coloring........Wish I was into photography when I was living in SFO......I'd still be there, borrowing your 600mm. (and having a good friend!)
more...
desi3933
06-25 10:41 AM
I though such contracts are illegal in US?....It is employment at will.....that means they can kick you out anytime or you can leave anytime....maybe someone can clarify
This is one of the biggest myths amongst H1 workers in USA.
All depends the terms and wordings of the "Employment agreement". For example, if one is sent for 2 weeks training in, say, .Net 2.0 Technology and its cost is $8000, then agreement could have clause for paying back $8000 to employer if left employment within one year.
There are, of course, other things involved and it is a complex subject. In short, Employment Agreement given enough ammunitions for employer to file at least a civil suit against employee.
Please consult a good lawyer before signing any such contract.
Not a legal advice
-----------------------
desi3933 at gmail.com
This is one of the biggest myths amongst H1 workers in USA.
All depends the terms and wordings of the "Employment agreement". For example, if one is sent for 2 weeks training in, say, .Net 2.0 Technology and its cost is $8000, then agreement could have clause for paying back $8000 to employer if left employment within one year.
There are, of course, other things involved and it is a complex subject. In short, Employment Agreement given enough ammunitions for employer to file at least a civil suit against employee.
Please consult a good lawyer before signing any such contract.
Not a legal advice
-----------------------
desi3933 at gmail.com
hot makeup Artist: Cascada I Title
.JPG "hair cascada wallpapers fondos")
hojo
09-04 06:03 PM
very nice picture, dan is the man =)
more...
house Cascada circular
jettu77
03-13 01:14 PM
Congratulations!
tattoo fondos de pantalla, wallpapers
solaris27
03-20 10:04 AM
no diffrence in selling a house on H1b or EAD
more...
pictures Cascada - Yaprak Forum
snowcatcher
05-22 08:12 AM
This is the actual study that was referred to in this article. It seems like they just posted it? It's timing is perfect. Looks like we are going to be lucky. Let's hope so.
http://www.nfap.com/researchactivities/studies/NFAPStudyLegalImmigrantsWaitingForever052206.pdf
http://www.nfap.com/researchactivities/studies/NFAPStudyLegalImmigrantsWaitingForever052206.pdf
dresses hair cascada wallpapers fondos
humdesi
03-13 01:23 AM
There is a add on Sulekha ...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/add
transitive verb
1: to join or unite so as to bring about an increase or improvement <adds 60 acres to his land> <wine adds a creative touch to cooking>
2: to say further : append
3: to combine (numbers) into an equivalent simple quantity or number
4: to include as a member of a group <don't forget to add me in>
intransitive verb
1 a: to perform addition b: to come together or unite by addition
2 a: to serve as an addition <the movie will add to his fame> b: to make an addition <added to her savings>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/AD
Main Entry: 1ad
Pronunciation: \ˈad\
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Date: 1841
1 : advertisement 2
2 : advertising
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/add
transitive verb
1: to join or unite so as to bring about an increase or improvement <adds 60 acres to his land> <wine adds a creative touch to cooking>
2: to say further : append
3: to combine (numbers) into an equivalent simple quantity or number
4: to include as a member of a group <don't forget to add me in>
intransitive verb
1 a: to perform addition b: to come together or unite by addition
2 a: to serve as an addition <the movie will add to his fame> b: to make an addition <added to her savings>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/AD
Main Entry: 1ad
Pronunciation: \ˈad\
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Date: 1841
1 : advertisement 2
2 : advertising
more...
makeup /images/wallpapers/
ssnd03
03-04 02:57 PM
Finally some sanity on FBI Namecheck from the DHS head honcho Michael Chertoff. He is now saying things which everybody has been screaming for the last three four years. I have highlighted those. But it does take that long for wheels to turn even in the most liberal democracy.
Question: Mr. Secretary, you had, at the very beginning, laid out some great progress that's been made in terms of preventing bad people from getting in. And part of the Homeland Security mission, which is a challenging one, is that while you are responsible for protecting against bad things, you're also responsible for facilitating good things. And be that the flow of people, in this case, USCIS is responsible for that for the department. They've begun a $3.5 billion transformation. And I'm hoping you could speak to that in two ways. What's your concept of success in that, in terms of the national security part of it, the operational excellence part of it, and customer service part of it?
Secretary Chertoff: Three -- two main things. One is, we have to move from a paper-based system to a totally electronically-based system. We still have too much paper, and it's hard to track, it's hard to manage, and it takes a lot of time.
The second piece is, I want to rebuild -- re-engineer the system in a couple of ways. One is, and the most urgent, is to deal with the background check problem. It just takes way too long for the Bureau to complete background checks for a small but a significant number of people. The majority of people -- you know, if the name doesn't pop up on anything in the -- it's pretty quick. But for a small number -- but still significant, and certainly to the individual, significant -- if their name crops up and it's an older case, and it's in a file somewhere, someone has got to hunt it down. And to be perfectly honest, that is not a top priority job for an agent, is to go through an old paper record sitting in a warehouse.
Looking forward as we go electronically, and as the Bureau goes electronically, that problem will diminish. But looking backwards we have to re-engineer the system to be a little tougher. And one of the things we did, for example, with the green cards was we said, for background checks that took longer than six months, we would give you a green card, and then if it turned out the background check later revealed a problem, we would take the green card away.
Now why did we do that -- because I got criticized, �Oh, you're sacrificing national security.� Here's why. First of all, if you haven't been -- if it's going to take longer than six months, it's clear that you're not on a Terrorist Watch List, you haven't been convicted of a crime, you haven't been indicted for a crime. In other words, most of the major things you would worry about -- it's a very easy thing to determine whether you've had a problem or not. What you're not going to get in that six months is the guy whose name came up in a file somewhere. And the vast majority of those are benign mentions.
Secondly, you're here. If you're going to do something bad, you're still here legally. The green card -- it's not like we're bringing you in from overseas. So if you think about it logically, the risk of giving you the green card with the understanding that it can be pulled away if something turns up, it's a minimal risk. It's a minimal, marginal risk. Whereas the customer service value of giving someone the green card is high. That's an example of trying to be more cost-benefit in the system.
See
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=24818
Question: Mr. Secretary, you had, at the very beginning, laid out some great progress that's been made in terms of preventing bad people from getting in. And part of the Homeland Security mission, which is a challenging one, is that while you are responsible for protecting against bad things, you're also responsible for facilitating good things. And be that the flow of people, in this case, USCIS is responsible for that for the department. They've begun a $3.5 billion transformation. And I'm hoping you could speak to that in two ways. What's your concept of success in that, in terms of the national security part of it, the operational excellence part of it, and customer service part of it?
Secretary Chertoff: Three -- two main things. One is, we have to move from a paper-based system to a totally electronically-based system. We still have too much paper, and it's hard to track, it's hard to manage, and it takes a lot of time.
The second piece is, I want to rebuild -- re-engineer the system in a couple of ways. One is, and the most urgent, is to deal with the background check problem. It just takes way too long for the Bureau to complete background checks for a small but a significant number of people. The majority of people -- you know, if the name doesn't pop up on anything in the -- it's pretty quick. But for a small number -- but still significant, and certainly to the individual, significant -- if their name crops up and it's an older case, and it's in a file somewhere, someone has got to hunt it down. And to be perfectly honest, that is not a top priority job for an agent, is to go through an old paper record sitting in a warehouse.
Looking forward as we go electronically, and as the Bureau goes electronically, that problem will diminish. But looking backwards we have to re-engineer the system to be a little tougher. And one of the things we did, for example, with the green cards was we said, for background checks that took longer than six months, we would give you a green card, and then if it turned out the background check later revealed a problem, we would take the green card away.
Now why did we do that -- because I got criticized, �Oh, you're sacrificing national security.� Here's why. First of all, if you haven't been -- if it's going to take longer than six months, it's clear that you're not on a Terrorist Watch List, you haven't been convicted of a crime, you haven't been indicted for a crime. In other words, most of the major things you would worry about -- it's a very easy thing to determine whether you've had a problem or not. What you're not going to get in that six months is the guy whose name came up in a file somewhere. And the vast majority of those are benign mentions.
Secondly, you're here. If you're going to do something bad, you're still here legally. The green card -- it's not like we're bringing you in from overseas. So if you think about it logically, the risk of giving you the green card with the understanding that it can be pulled away if something turns up, it's a minimal risk. It's a minimal, marginal risk. Whereas the customer service value of giving someone the green card is high. That's an example of trying to be more cost-benefit in the system.
See
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=24818
girlfriend To download wallpapers Cascada
alterego
12-12 07:03 PM
My guess is they retrogressed to basically stem demand completely as they felt they had used too many visas too soon, and that is where they decided they need to put the date to extinguish demand. Last month they tried Jan. 2002, but quite clearly that did not have the desired impact. Hence the further move backward.
This is not too hard to see once you realize you are speaking about 2800 visas for EB2 India, and that means 700 per quarter or about 250-300 primary beneficiaries. When they kept PD at Apr 2004 for the first 3 months, why is it hard to envision that they went through say about 500 primary applicants with such dates, between genuinely old petitions, substitute labor petitions and EB3 to EB2 jumpers, backlog center applicants etc? I mean the truth hurts but this is where it is at. My guess is they have almost certainly used up over 1/2 of the annual allotment for EB2 India, hence they mentioned last month they used up 38% and now they are warning about the possibility of unavailability in coming months preparing us for the inevitable.
EB3 won't be too far behind in my guesstimate since if they move dates by just a few months this will drive up demand and the fate of that PD will be the same as EB2. 2800 visas inclusive of family members for EB2 and EB3 India is like feeding a hungry lion a chicken wing.:)
The one possibility that might help us is if once again around the may-june-july time period they accelerate demand by moving EB India to use up visa numbers. If my memory serves me right they did end up using about 15K visas for EB2 India last year. There is no guarantee they will do that again this year however after last years VB fiasco for which they took a lot of heat, they may just let the visas go.
I see visa recapture as our only hope for temporary relief. Failing which we desperately need administrative fixes like 3yr EADs etc to ease our pain while we wait out the presidential elections next year. Lets hope for the best with the omnibus legislation.
This is not too hard to see once you realize you are speaking about 2800 visas for EB2 India, and that means 700 per quarter or about 250-300 primary beneficiaries. When they kept PD at Apr 2004 for the first 3 months, why is it hard to envision that they went through say about 500 primary applicants with such dates, between genuinely old petitions, substitute labor petitions and EB3 to EB2 jumpers, backlog center applicants etc? I mean the truth hurts but this is where it is at. My guess is they have almost certainly used up over 1/2 of the annual allotment for EB2 India, hence they mentioned last month they used up 38% and now they are warning about the possibility of unavailability in coming months preparing us for the inevitable.
EB3 won't be too far behind in my guesstimate since if they move dates by just a few months this will drive up demand and the fate of that PD will be the same as EB2. 2800 visas inclusive of family members for EB2 and EB3 India is like feeding a hungry lion a chicken wing.:)
The one possibility that might help us is if once again around the may-june-july time period they accelerate demand by moving EB India to use up visa numbers. If my memory serves me right they did end up using about 15K visas for EB2 India last year. There is no guarantee they will do that again this year however after last years VB fiasco for which they took a lot of heat, they may just let the visas go.
I see visa recapture as our only hope for temporary relief. Failing which we desperately need administrative fixes like 3yr EADs etc to ease our pain while we wait out the presidential elections next year. Lets hope for the best with the omnibus legislation.
hairstyles tattoo Cascada - Evacuate The
GCNirvana007
03-30 08:18 AM
Thank you guys for helping me.
Could you tell me please if it's ok to write where it's written "purpose of trip"........that I want to travel to visit my parents......is it ok with Uscis if I write that? Or what else should I write.
Thanks again!
Make sure its some sort of emergency given today's scenario.
Could you tell me please if it's ok to write where it's written "purpose of trip"........that I want to travel to visit my parents......is it ok with Uscis if I write that? Or what else should I write.
Thanks again!
Make sure its some sort of emergency given today's scenario.
chanduv23
02-24 09:27 AM
Thank you theshiningsun and chanduv23.
Chanduv23 - You are right. I'm working for a consulting company and the contract is ending.
I want to clarify little more.
1. Will I receive NOID, if my employer revokes I140? Can I avoid it by filing AC21 before my existing employer cancels the I140?
2. Can I travel out of the country without the job? Will it cause any issue at the Port of Entry, if I use AP to enter US (but currently doesn't have the job in hand)?
Here is the whole meat - I have written about this probably 200 times.
You may receive NOID - yes - thats how it works. An employer sends a letter to the service center stating that the candidate has moved to a different job so does not want to hold this position and decided to eliminate the position. The officer then processes the request - usually this whole thing happens in 4 to 6 weeks after your employer sends the letter.
If you already sent a new employment letter from your new or prospective employer - chances are that it may end up in your file or not - we don't know how USCIS works internally. Even if your letter reaches your file, the officer processing your 140 revocation may not physically check your document folder, rather may rely on their online system which may not have any reference to AC21 change in job because AC21 is not a formal process.
Now, if you sent AC21 letter and it reaches the officer processing your 140 revocation, chances are that the officer may accept it or may want more information in form of an RFE so that the process looks standard, RFE or NOID is almost similar and in case of 140 revocations, they usually send NOID - which means you cannot withdraw your 485 and you have one shot at your 485 by responding to NOID.
In some cases the officer may send a denial on 485 - the denial will not have any reference to AC21 but clearly states that your 140 was revoked and therefore your 485 got denied. In such cases you have to file for a motion to reopen - this has happened a lot and continue to happen (though we do not see lately because lot of cases have been preadjudicated and not many 485s being filed or not many 140 revocations. Motions take anywhere from weeks to few months and you may need help from Ombudsman's office at times if it is getting delayed. Now when it comes to travel - if you travel when 485 is denied, you cannot come back and file for MTR - it gets complicated.
AC21 works just fine in most cases and people have navigated smoothly and usually the same or similar job has never been an issue as long as you are doing similar job. technically you don't need copy of labor as long as you know what you are doing. The job duties need not be a photo copy of earlier job but just be similar. Say if you are a .net programmer, you are fine if you are doing Java.
Good luck and don't panic. Do talk to a lawyer if you want and look for a good job. Fulltime jobs are taking a long time to get because employers are picky in this market with more supply than demand. Don't let your employer know you are looking for fulltime jobs - he may take instant revenge. It is not only consulting companies that we talk about and trash, but any employer looks for their interests - corporate world is greedy and selfish - one must know how to play.
Also remember, not all lawyers are ethical because it is a business to them and they will do what is in best interest of their business. You need to be smart and tricky. It is painful at times to deal with all the legal stuff when you want to progress, burt work your ways smartly.
If you want to travel without a job in hand, it is your choice, most times it is smooth, as long as your documents are intact, I think you will be fine, but there is always a risk. I would recommend to find a job and then travel.
Chanduv23 - You are right. I'm working for a consulting company and the contract is ending.
I want to clarify little more.
1. Will I receive NOID, if my employer revokes I140? Can I avoid it by filing AC21 before my existing employer cancels the I140?
2. Can I travel out of the country without the job? Will it cause any issue at the Port of Entry, if I use AP to enter US (but currently doesn't have the job in hand)?
Here is the whole meat - I have written about this probably 200 times.
You may receive NOID - yes - thats how it works. An employer sends a letter to the service center stating that the candidate has moved to a different job so does not want to hold this position and decided to eliminate the position. The officer then processes the request - usually this whole thing happens in 4 to 6 weeks after your employer sends the letter.
If you already sent a new employment letter from your new or prospective employer - chances are that it may end up in your file or not - we don't know how USCIS works internally. Even if your letter reaches your file, the officer processing your 140 revocation may not physically check your document folder, rather may rely on their online system which may not have any reference to AC21 change in job because AC21 is not a formal process.
Now, if you sent AC21 letter and it reaches the officer processing your 140 revocation, chances are that the officer may accept it or may want more information in form of an RFE so that the process looks standard, RFE or NOID is almost similar and in case of 140 revocations, they usually send NOID - which means you cannot withdraw your 485 and you have one shot at your 485 by responding to NOID.
In some cases the officer may send a denial on 485 - the denial will not have any reference to AC21 but clearly states that your 140 was revoked and therefore your 485 got denied. In such cases you have to file for a motion to reopen - this has happened a lot and continue to happen (though we do not see lately because lot of cases have been preadjudicated and not many 485s being filed or not many 140 revocations. Motions take anywhere from weeks to few months and you may need help from Ombudsman's office at times if it is getting delayed. Now when it comes to travel - if you travel when 485 is denied, you cannot come back and file for MTR - it gets complicated.
AC21 works just fine in most cases and people have navigated smoothly and usually the same or similar job has never been an issue as long as you are doing similar job. technically you don't need copy of labor as long as you know what you are doing. The job duties need not be a photo copy of earlier job but just be similar. Say if you are a .net programmer, you are fine if you are doing Java.
Good luck and don't panic. Do talk to a lawyer if you want and look for a good job. Fulltime jobs are taking a long time to get because employers are picky in this market with more supply than demand. Don't let your employer know you are looking for fulltime jobs - he may take instant revenge. It is not only consulting companies that we talk about and trash, but any employer looks for their interests - corporate world is greedy and selfish - one must know how to play.
Also remember, not all lawyers are ethical because it is a business to them and they will do what is in best interest of their business. You need to be smart and tricky. It is painful at times to deal with all the legal stuff when you want to progress, burt work your ways smartly.
If you want to travel without a job in hand, it is your choice, most times it is smooth, as long as your documents are intact, I think you will be fine, but there is always a risk. I would recommend to find a job and then travel.
raysaikat
01-20 07:47 PM
According to federal law, if you've had coverage for 6 months prior to changing your coverage to the new insurance, they can't refuse to cover pre existing conditions. They may try, I just had to fight this out with CIGNA. They lost. However if you let your coverage lapse, you can get hit with this.
If you are talking about HIPAA, then that generally applies to group plans (offered by your employer), not individual plans that we are talking about in this thread.
If you are talking about HIPAA, then that generally applies to group plans (offered by your employer), not individual plans that we are talking about in this thread.