desi3933
06-18 04:30 PM
Under Part 3.
What should one put for
1. Nonimmigrant Visa number
2. Date Visa Issued
3. Consulate Where Visa was Issued.
I'm currently on a valid H1 extension with a valid I-94. The visa on passport has expired and I had got an extension within US. Anybody any ideas????
Mr. EndlessWait -
You extended your status, not visa. Please get your basics correct.
1. Nonimmigrant Visa number
Visa Number for the last issued visa (does not matter if is expired)
2. Date Visa Issued
Date of Issue for Visa in #1
3. Consulate Where Visa was Issued.
Place of Issue for Visa in #1
Good Luck
Please check and verify details with your attorney/lawyer. This is NOT a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
What should one put for
1. Nonimmigrant Visa number
2. Date Visa Issued
3. Consulate Where Visa was Issued.
I'm currently on a valid H1 extension with a valid I-94. The visa on passport has expired and I had got an extension within US. Anybody any ideas????
Mr. EndlessWait -
You extended your status, not visa. Please get your basics correct.
1. Nonimmigrant Visa number
Visa Number for the last issued visa (does not matter if is expired)
2. Date Visa Issued
Date of Issue for Visa in #1
3. Consulate Where Visa was Issued.
Place of Issue for Visa in #1
Good Luck
Please check and verify details with your attorney/lawyer. This is NOT a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
wallpaper dresses Wood Desktop wallpaper
raj3078
04-27 11:08 AM
This looks like a hoax to me. Could you quote a credible news story or a link on a enforcement site where there is any advisory?
Pappu,
This is the hoax and seems like an attempt to discredit India Law system. Please close the thread. We should not be party to such attempts. I get tons of emails like that including the one which talks about getting 10 million of lottery prize money. If I start believeing them then god save me....Please close this immediately.:mad:
Pappu,
This is the hoax and seems like an attempt to discredit India Law system. Please close the thread. We should not be party to such attempts. I get tons of emails like that including the one which talks about getting 10 million of lottery prize money. If I start believeing them then god save me....Please close this immediately.:mad:
jonty_11
07-16 07:09 PM
It would help if you guys provide ur PDs to get an idea what PD folks are getting CP interview calls?
2011 Desktop Waterfall Snow
kumar07
09-13 11:10 AM
Somebody please give me suggestions?
more...
neha_garg123
01-07 09:04 PM
I did my MBA in one of the premium university in USA.
My OPT was ending in May 2008, However since I was in cap-gap, I got a new I-20 from my school till 30-Sep-2008 and I continued working on my I-20 with my previous employer.
I applied for H1-B in FY 2008 under master quota from a small consulting company B.
My case went into RFE so I left USA on 30-Sep-2008.
I got a approved petition on 23-Nov 2008 . I went to New Delhi consulate for H1-B stamping. However I got a Blue 221 G slip. I never submitted any document as the consultant who applied for my visa , needs lots of time to process the documents. In the mean time I got another offer from one of the fortune 500 companies in USA. I am just exploring the possibility of H1-B transfer in this case. Ofcourse they will file a new H1-B application but would I be cap-exempt in this case?
Thanks,
Neha
My OPT was ending in May 2008, However since I was in cap-gap, I got a new I-20 from my school till 30-Sep-2008 and I continued working on my I-20 with my previous employer.
I applied for H1-B in FY 2008 under master quota from a small consulting company B.
My case went into RFE so I left USA on 30-Sep-2008.
I got a approved petition on 23-Nov 2008 . I went to New Delhi consulate for H1-B stamping. However I got a Blue 221 G slip. I never submitted any document as the consultant who applied for my visa , needs lots of time to process the documents. In the mean time I got another offer from one of the fortune 500 companies in USA. I am just exploring the possibility of H1-B transfer in this case. Ofcourse they will file a new H1-B application but would I be cap-exempt in this case?
Thanks,
Neha
gc_75
07-17 07:45 PM
I think if they did not get the interview already, they will need to wait until the dates become current again. If they have interview scheduled in July, they can go a head and attend the interview and get the GC.
While today's development is great news for folks in the 485/AOS cue, what happens with people in CP? With the opening of the floodgates, I am unsure when visas will be available to CP cases who were scheduled for interviews in Aug and beyond. I am a great supporter of today's victory, but I am unsure where CP cases stand now? Another 4 year wait?
While today's development is great news for folks in the 485/AOS cue, what happens with people in CP? With the opening of the floodgates, I am unsure when visas will be available to CP cases who were scheduled for interviews in Aug and beyond. I am a great supporter of today's victory, but I am unsure where CP cases stand now? Another 4 year wait?
more...
gc4arun
06-23 08:35 AM
Could you please provide your input on this . Thank You.
Port 2003 PD at the time of filing 2nd I-140, keep copies of old labor + 140 and new approved labor and a cover letter should specify that the beneficiary for both is the same ie YOU and you are not doing labor subsititution. I have been successful porting my pd from 03- the only difference was that my job classification was the same and salary for 2nd job was more
A
Port 2003 PD at the time of filing 2nd I-140, keep copies of old labor + 140 and new approved labor and a cover letter should specify that the beneficiary for both is the same ie YOU and you are not doing labor subsititution. I have been successful porting my pd from 03- the only difference was that my job classification was the same and salary for 2nd job was more
A
2010 2010 funny wallpaper desktop.
NikNikon
June 17th, 2005, 03:44 AM
Maybe my monitor is set a bit dark since I have yet to see my version as being too bright. Do pictures in my gallery seem to bright as well? If so I may have to do some adjustments.
more...
tempgc
09-24 01:27 PM
The green side of the story is, USCIS will try to attract new applications. For this DOS need to move the dates further.
OR
Introduce a new process of filing 485 for administrative processing (which is in talks) even before your PD is current as per visa bulletin as soon as 140 approval.
I see this good for people waiting to file for 485.
OR
Introduce a new process of filing 485 for administrative processing (which is in talks) even before your PD is current as per visa bulletin as soon as 140 approval.
I see this good for people waiting to file for 485.
hair Desktop Wallpaper
%252Bdesktop%252Bwallpapers%252B.jpg "Desktop Wallpapers")
ram_ram
10-01 09:43 AM
The backlogs at DOLS's found a solution..PERM. Similarly premium processing was introduced for I-140's. I think now it's time to move the Departments and courts to find a more efficient Security/Name check process. If not USCIS will continue to loose tons of visa numbers every year. Though USCIS has 26 k cases that has the visa number available,
many of them are struck with FBI. Any movements or actions?
Successfully Challenging USCIS Delays in Federal Court
On September 10, the Los Angeles Times featured an article about how FBI name checks have been slowing down the process of gaining immigration benefits for hundreds of thousands of applicants.
The article revealed that "nearly 320,000 people were waiting for their name checks to be completed as of August 7, including more than 152,000 who had been waiting for more than six months, according to the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. More than 61,000 had been waiting for more than two years."
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed a lawsuit in federal court regarding this issue. The Times article quotes an ACLU attorney who stated that "there is nothing in immigration law that says that a citizenship application should take two, three, four years. That's absurd. People who have not been any sort of threat ... have been caught up in this dragnet."
Applicants for adjustment of status, citizenship, extensions of stay and many other immigration benefits have taken days off work to visit USCIS offices only to be told that the USCIS can do nothing since the name check process is in the hands of the FBI.
Nor do letters and meetings with Senators and Members of Congress yield results. They receive polite letters from the USCIS' Congressional Liaison Unit to the effect that "Sorry, but this is FBI's problem, not ours."
DHS Secretary Chertoff announced that his Department is meeting with the FBI (which is part of the Department of Justice) to work out a more efficient system of processing these name checks, but so far, the number of people waiting for results from the FBI continues to grow and grow.
The problem exists for applicants from a wide variety of countries and affects Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, etc.
Our solution is to sue both the USCIS and the FBI in Federal Court. Most Federal Judges are not reluctant to order the FBI and the USCIS to complete their name checks and application processing by a date certain.
Many applicants have turned to litigation as the one and only method of solving the name check problem. The numbers of such lawsuits have increased from just 680 in 2005 to 2,650 in 2006 to over 4,100 this year. Although there is no guarantee of success, our law firm has yet to lose one of these cases in Federal Court.
The Times article concludes with a quote from me:
"There is only one thing that works, and that is suing them in federal court."
We link to the Times article, "Caught in a Bureaucratic Black Hole" from
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091107P.shtml
We also link to AILF's new practice advisory entitled "Mandamus Jurisdiction over Delayed Applications: Responding to the Government's Motion to Dismiss" from
http://shusterman.com/toc-dpt.html#A1
many of them are struck with FBI. Any movements or actions?
Successfully Challenging USCIS Delays in Federal Court
On September 10, the Los Angeles Times featured an article about how FBI name checks have been slowing down the process of gaining immigration benefits for hundreds of thousands of applicants.
The article revealed that "nearly 320,000 people were waiting for their name checks to be completed as of August 7, including more than 152,000 who had been waiting for more than six months, according to the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. More than 61,000 had been waiting for more than two years."
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed a lawsuit in federal court regarding this issue. The Times article quotes an ACLU attorney who stated that "there is nothing in immigration law that says that a citizenship application should take two, three, four years. That's absurd. People who have not been any sort of threat ... have been caught up in this dragnet."
Applicants for adjustment of status, citizenship, extensions of stay and many other immigration benefits have taken days off work to visit USCIS offices only to be told that the USCIS can do nothing since the name check process is in the hands of the FBI.
Nor do letters and meetings with Senators and Members of Congress yield results. They receive polite letters from the USCIS' Congressional Liaison Unit to the effect that "Sorry, but this is FBI's problem, not ours."
DHS Secretary Chertoff announced that his Department is meeting with the FBI (which is part of the Department of Justice) to work out a more efficient system of processing these name checks, but so far, the number of people waiting for results from the FBI continues to grow and grow.
The problem exists for applicants from a wide variety of countries and affects Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, etc.
Our solution is to sue both the USCIS and the FBI in Federal Court. Most Federal Judges are not reluctant to order the FBI and the USCIS to complete their name checks and application processing by a date certain.
Many applicants have turned to litigation as the one and only method of solving the name check problem. The numbers of such lawsuits have increased from just 680 in 2005 to 2,650 in 2006 to over 4,100 this year. Although there is no guarantee of success, our law firm has yet to lose one of these cases in Federal Court.
The Times article concludes with a quote from me:
"There is only one thing that works, and that is suing them in federal court."
We link to the Times article, "Caught in a Bureaucratic Black Hole" from
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091107P.shtml
We also link to AILF's new practice advisory entitled "Mandamus Jurisdiction over Delayed Applications: Responding to the Government's Motion to Dismiss" from
http://shusterman.com/toc-dpt.html#A1
more...
kishdam
02-06 03:28 PM
Hi,
What is legally considered as "Permanent Residency approval date" - is it the approval of I485/getting greencard or is it the approval of I140. Sometimes the I140 referred to as an immigrant petition. As we know the process is once this immigrant petition (I14) is approved we apply for adjustment of status as a permanent resident thru II485 - so legally - can we consider that until I485 is not approved, our permanent residence applicaiton is pending?
This is to interpret a reimburse agreement I signed (bad thing to do - but I was naive then and signed a very vague repayment statement). But somewhat good thing is the agreement talks about staying for 2 years "after" the permanent residence is approved. If things get bad - I am hoping that this language might save me. Any thoughts?
- kd
What is legally considered as "Permanent Residency approval date" - is it the approval of I485/getting greencard or is it the approval of I140. Sometimes the I140 referred to as an immigrant petition. As we know the process is once this immigrant petition (I14) is approved we apply for adjustment of status as a permanent resident thru II485 - so legally - can we consider that until I485 is not approved, our permanent residence applicaiton is pending?
This is to interpret a reimburse agreement I signed (bad thing to do - but I was naive then and signed a very vague repayment statement). But somewhat good thing is the agreement talks about staying for 2 years "after" the permanent residence is approved. If things get bad - I am hoping that this language might save me. Any thoughts?
- kd
hot Day Desktop Wallpapers
vallabhu
08-15 01:18 PM
My application was sent to NSC on July 2nd signed by J.Barret at 10.25 AM but have I140 pending in TSC , My checks are not cashed yet.
Probably they forwarded my application to TSC.
Any one else in the same boat.
Probably they forwarded my application to TSC.
Any one else in the same boat.
more...
house Nature 3d desktop wallpaper
iq5203
01-20 07:10 PM
In COBRA, you would have to pay the *entire* insurance cost from your pocket. It may comes out $500-$1000 to be a month per person depending on the state and coverage. Unless you have a known condition that makes you very risky, it is usually too expensive to carry forth.
Note by the way, the catch of some individual insurances (not COBRA). Other than being costlier, many of them consider each period as a "new" enrollment (even if you are getting the same insurance from the same company), and therefore, they will declare anything that was found in the previous period as "pre-existing" in the new period and deny coverage.
Read fine prints very carefully.
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.
Note by the way, the catch of some individual insurances (not COBRA). Other than being costlier, many of them consider each period as a "new" enrollment (even if you are getting the same insurance from the same company), and therefore, they will declare anything that was found in the previous period as "pre-existing" in the new period and deny coverage.
Read fine prints very carefully.
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.
tattoo 2011 3d wallpaper desktop
Roger Binny
08-11 06:48 AM
Answers in bold...
Gurus,
A very close friend of mine has filed EB3-I 485 with Sep 2003 PD. The job, at present, requires EB2 level qualifications, however, the employer is not too keen on sponsoring a change to EB2.
So, what options do we have ?
a) when is EB3-I Sep 2003 PD likely to be come current? 12m? 18m from now?
- As usual no one knows
b) can AC21 approach be used to port this to a EB2 category ?
- Can you be more elaborate on this
c) can his spouse separately file for EB2-I PERM, I140 and file for 485?
(I am assuming that EB2-I will be current approximately around this time next year).
- If he/she is working and qualifies for EB2-I, certainly one can apply during the I-485 stage i guess one can go for a cross charge-ability (not sure of the word) but yes i have seen posts where one can use the spouse's 485 priority dates.
Thanks.
Gurus,
A very close friend of mine has filed EB3-I 485 with Sep 2003 PD. The job, at present, requires EB2 level qualifications, however, the employer is not too keen on sponsoring a change to EB2.
So, what options do we have ?
a) when is EB3-I Sep 2003 PD likely to be come current? 12m? 18m from now?
- As usual no one knows
b) can AC21 approach be used to port this to a EB2 category ?
- Can you be more elaborate on this
c) can his spouse separately file for EB2-I PERM, I140 and file for 485?
(I am assuming that EB2-I will be current approximately around this time next year).
- If he/she is working and qualifies for EB2-I, certainly one can apply during the I-485 stage i guess one can go for a cross charge-ability (not sure of the word) but yes i have seen posts where one can use the spouse's 485 priority dates.
Thanks.
more...
pictures Desktop Wallpapers for
ngopalak
07-05 12:59 PM
i think you are right. 100 M is a LOT of money to forsake for an agency like USCIS.
That I think is the reason they had to stop people from applyng before Julyy27th
If you like to beleive that the USCIS employees care USCIS revenue, you might like this answer.
200K apps (potential applicants in July) times $500 increase.
100,000,000
That I think is the reason they had to stop people from applyng before Julyy27th
If you like to beleive that the USCIS employees care USCIS revenue, you might like this answer.
200K apps (potential applicants in July) times $500 increase.
100,000,000
dresses computer desktop wallpaper
yabadaba
08-20 03:43 PM
I am glad they have started enforcing this. This will let them work on the cases rather than answer the calls.
once and for all.. the adjudicators dont answer calls. its just cust service people...who are contractors. so if u dont call them.. all they will be doing is sitting around doing nothing.
once and for all.. the adjudicators dont answer calls. its just cust service people...who are contractors. so if u dont call them.. all they will be doing is sitting around doing nothing.
more...
makeup desktop wallpaper
capriol
07-06 02:16 AM
Dear Folks:
I will be returning from India soon by KLM (via the Delhi-Amsterdam-U.S route), with an AP, 485 pending receipt, an H1B status BUT with an expired H1B visa on your passport? Given that I have these documents, I have decided not to get my H1B visa re-stamped in India. But now, I am getting a little panicked as the time is nearing for the following reasons (and these related questions). Will you please answer them for me:
(1) If I have the AP documents, the 485 pending receipt, and my HIB paperwork with me (but not the H1B visa stamped in my passport), will I be able to re-enter the U.S? Will there be any problems at the port of entry?
(2) At Delhi and at Amsterdam, will the immigraiton folks give me trouble if they see an expired HIB visa on my passport? Can they refuse to let me board the plane? Have any of you traveling via Delhi and Amstredam experienced any problems from the immigration folks?
Please share your experiences. Thanks a lot.
I will be returning from India soon by KLM (via the Delhi-Amsterdam-U.S route), with an AP, 485 pending receipt, an H1B status BUT with an expired H1B visa on your passport? Given that I have these documents, I have decided not to get my H1B visa re-stamped in India. But now, I am getting a little panicked as the time is nearing for the following reasons (and these related questions). Will you please answer them for me:
(1) If I have the AP documents, the 485 pending receipt, and my HIB paperwork with me (but not the H1B visa stamped in my passport), will I be able to re-enter the U.S? Will there be any problems at the port of entry?
(2) At Delhi and at Amsterdam, will the immigraiton folks give me trouble if they see an expired HIB visa on my passport? Can they refuse to let me board the plane? Have any of you traveling via Delhi and Amstredam experienced any problems from the immigration folks?
Please share your experiences. Thanks a lot.
girlfriend wallpaper desktop flowers.
greencardfever
12-11 01:37 PM
Is it 6 months for both, EAD and AP or just EAD? If it's just EAD, then how soon can I renew my AP?
hairstyles desktop wallpaper for guys.
Blog Feeds
12-18 09:50 AM
Silicon Valley Immigration Lawyer Blog Has Just Posted the Following:
Yesterday I was taken aback when I turned to the editorial page of the San Jose Mercury News, the primary newspaper of Silicon Valley, and found an Op-Ed by Patrick J. Buchanan calling for a moratorium on ALL LEGAL immigration. (http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_13952824?nclick_check=1) He argues that the LEGAL immigrants are taking jobs from U.S. workers, and that by barring all U.S. immigration the economy can recover faster.
Legal immigration is not the same as "illegal" immigration. He is not talking about doing something about the high number of undocumented people living in the U.S. By calling for a halt to legal immigration, he would stop the husbands and wives of U.S. citizens from immigrating to the U.S. He would prevent the children and step-children of U.S. citizens from coming to the U.S. He would stop the parents of U.S. citizens from immigrating. He would stop U.S. citizens from adopting children from abroad. He would prevent those who came as refugees from obtaining permanent residence. He would turn away the brilliant minds who qualify to immigrate by being awarded the equivalent of a Nobel Prize.
More... (http://www.siliconvalleyimmigrationlawyer.com/2009/12/san-jose-mercury-news-publishe.html)
Yesterday I was taken aback when I turned to the editorial page of the San Jose Mercury News, the primary newspaper of Silicon Valley, and found an Op-Ed by Patrick J. Buchanan calling for a moratorium on ALL LEGAL immigration. (http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_13952824?nclick_check=1) He argues that the LEGAL immigrants are taking jobs from U.S. workers, and that by barring all U.S. immigration the economy can recover faster.
Legal immigration is not the same as "illegal" immigration. He is not talking about doing something about the high number of undocumented people living in the U.S. By calling for a halt to legal immigration, he would stop the husbands and wives of U.S. citizens from immigrating to the U.S. He would prevent the children and step-children of U.S. citizens from coming to the U.S. He would stop the parents of U.S. citizens from immigrating. He would stop U.S. citizens from adopting children from abroad. He would prevent those who came as refugees from obtaining permanent residence. He would turn away the brilliant minds who qualify to immigrate by being awarded the equivalent of a Nobel Prize.
More... (http://www.siliconvalleyimmigrationlawyer.com/2009/12/san-jose-mercury-news-publishe.html)
what_now
06-14 03:08 PM
CPO mail today......
she81
11-09 07:40 PM
Listen to this. A week after our company filed our 485 (after my conventional labor got approved first week of August) and quite a few of my colleagues were in the same boat, they mysteriously changed our lawyers - apparently none of us had even receipts by then. The old lawyers were not ready to talk to us as they transferred our files to the new firm, and none of us had an idea what to do. On top of that, our HR rep did not provide us with any contact info of the new Law Firm and insisted every communication go through her (and when she forwards their replies to us after taking her own sweet time, very meticulously she removes all contact info from the emails).
They're never short of ways to annoy us immigrants.
They're never short of ways to annoy us immigrants.