gsc999
05-25 12:00 AM
Its so eazy to send.
wallpaper shakira y pique en lanes. la luz que Piqué y Shakira
Norristown
10-18 06:33 AM
My wife recived FP notice without EAD. Even though online status shows Approved and sent, on Sept 27 we haven;t got receipt or approved card.
desi3933
06-19 10:00 AM
I have an approved I-140 (EB3 PD Oct 2004) and a pending I-140 (EB2 PD Jun 2006). Both from the same employer/company, for different job requirements.
If on July 01 I file my I-485 using the approved I-140 (EB3 PD Oct 2004), when the dates for EB3 retrogress in the coming months, and after the currently pending EB2 I-140 is approved, will I be able to request USCIS to substitute my EB2 I-140 with the EB3 I-140 for the same I-485?
???
Yes. Applicant can use the earliest PD for any approved I-140s and with the highest category for any I-140. In your case, after your second I-140 is approved, you can claim PD of eB2 Oct 2004.
Again, you can claim PD of eb2 Oct 2004 after second I-140 is approved.
Please check and verify details with your attorney/lawyer. This is NOT a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
If on July 01 I file my I-485 using the approved I-140 (EB3 PD Oct 2004), when the dates for EB3 retrogress in the coming months, and after the currently pending EB2 I-140 is approved, will I be able to request USCIS to substitute my EB2 I-140 with the EB3 I-140 for the same I-485?
???
Yes. Applicant can use the earliest PD for any approved I-140s and with the highest category for any I-140. In your case, after your second I-140 is approved, you can claim PD of eB2 Oct 2004.
Again, you can claim PD of eb2 Oct 2004 after second I-140 is approved.
Please check and verify details with your attorney/lawyer. This is NOT a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
2011 Shakira y Piqué se dan besos
dagabaaj
10-01 02:51 PM
Does the H4 get invalidated after application for SSN using EAD card.
more...
WeShallOvercome
05-21 03:34 PM
Congratulations Mark!
I remember your wonderfully funny speech in front of the US Capitol on the DC rally day. I hope you continue lifting the tired spirits with your humor and energy :)
I remember your wonderfully funny speech in front of the US Capitol on the DC rally day. I hope you continue lifting the tired spirits with your humor and energy :)
locomotive36
02-03 05:52 PM
Thanks for you simple explanation of the facts logiclife..
Can you tell me about closing costs? What is it exactly and how do they arrive at the costs.
Thanks!
Can you tell me about closing costs? What is it exactly and how do they arrive at the costs.
Thanks!
more...
sammyb
10-19 04:38 PM
Hi Guys,
I joined a fortune 500 company in April 2006 and my offer letter states that
"After one year of satisfactory or above performance, [Comapany Name] will make a determination about sponsorship for permanent residency".
The company made a technology change from Microsoft to Java and I am being told that since I do not have the skills for the new environment they will not sponsor my residency.
Is the company legally bound to sponsor my residency or am I better off looking for new opportunities.
Thanks a lot for your help.
nop ... none of the companies are legally bound to file your GC ... they do it to keep you on their payroll and exploit you over a longer period of time ... for big companies they always does the same .. either they will do it late or will never do it .... so better keep your resume fine tuned and put it on job sites ...
I joined a fortune 500 company in April 2006 and my offer letter states that
"After one year of satisfactory or above performance, [Comapany Name] will make a determination about sponsorship for permanent residency".
The company made a technology change from Microsoft to Java and I am being told that since I do not have the skills for the new environment they will not sponsor my residency.
Is the company legally bound to sponsor my residency or am I better off looking for new opportunities.
Thanks a lot for your help.
nop ... none of the companies are legally bound to file your GC ... they do it to keep you on their payroll and exploit you over a longer period of time ... for big companies they always does the same .. either they will do it late or will never do it .... so better keep your resume fine tuned and put it on job sites ...
2010 es que Shakira y Piqué son
Humhongekamyab
03-05 12:29 PM
It appears Hyderabad consulate is looking for client letters and many more documents for H1B visa. Please refer the official link below:
http://hyderabad.usconsulate.gov/handl.html
I remember Murthy clarified to Chennai consulate earlier that getting client letters is not possible for H1B consultants, as most of the clients are not ready to take the burden of immigration procedures. However Hyderabad consulate starts with more requirements from its begining of service.
Thanks
I don't think Murthy's clarifying to the consulate will have any bearing on their requirements. In light of all the bad news about layoffs and H-1B fraud I don't blame the consulate for making sure that the job is bona fide.
http://hyderabad.usconsulate.gov/handl.html
I remember Murthy clarified to Chennai consulate earlier that getting client letters is not possible for H1B consultants, as most of the clients are not ready to take the burden of immigration procedures. However Hyderabad consulate starts with more requirements from its begining of service.
Thanks
I don't think Murthy's clarifying to the consulate will have any bearing on their requirements. In light of all the bad news about layoffs and H-1B fraud I don't blame the consulate for making sure that the job is bona fide.
more...
perm2gc
12-02 04:14 PM
I am very happy to report from the Indian American Forum event in Cambridge, MA. The core members might send a report about the event, but let me tell you that we have excellent people as leaders of IV.
I am very impressed with our fearless leader WaldenPond. I can say IV is well connected and know the right strings to play to get the music. From now for me it is a question of how soon.
Folks, I request you to take this as an attestation from someone who has seen the leaders in action at the event. Please believe in this group and provide the supported needed in cash or kind.
I am going to send my second contribution now.
Thank You..waiting to hear more ...
I am very impressed with our fearless leader WaldenPond. I can say IV is well connected and know the right strings to play to get the music. From now for me it is a question of how soon.
Folks, I request you to take this as an attestation from someone who has seen the leaders in action at the event. Please believe in this group and provide the supported needed in cash or kind.
I am going to send my second contribution now.
Thank You..waiting to hear more ...
hair Ese verano lo pasé en Blanes
immm
07-03 03:56 PM
http://lofgren.house.gov/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1808
Press Release
Rep. Lofgren Issues Statement on Updated Visa Bulletin
July 3, 2007
Washington, D.C. � Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose) today issued the following statement in response to the State Department�s update of the July Visa Bulletin and the subsequent rejection of applications for adjustment of status by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).
I�m deeply concerned by today�s updating of the July Visa Bulletin by the Departments of State and Homeland Security. By taking this unprecedented mid-month update, the Departments of State and Homeland Security have seriously undermined the stability and predictability of U.S. immigration law. Thousands of individuals and businesses rely on the monthly bulletins to prepare and plan for the submission of applications. In addition, thousands of dollars in legal fees and other application related expenses are incurred in preparation for filing applications based on the these monthly bulletins.
This update sets a terrible precedent, and undermines our nation�s efforts to foster legal and orderly immigration.
Rep. Lofgren recently sent Secretaries Rice and Chertoff letters asking them to reconsider any mid-month updates of the July Visa Bulletin.
The complete text of both letters is below:
----------
The Honorable Michael Chertoff
Secretary
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528
Dear Secretary Chertoff:
I am writing with regard to a time sensitive matter. It has been brought to my attention that you are considering the rejection of adjustment of status applications for several employment-based immigration preference categories, despite the fact that the published July Visa Bulletin shows that visas for these categories are available. I am concerned that such action may violate the law and could threaten the integrity of our immigration system. In addition, such an act may cause the Department of Homeland Security to incur substantial litigation costs.
As you know, pursuant to your own regulations, �[i]f the applicant [for adjustment of status] is a preference alien, the current Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Bulletin will be consulted to determine whether an immigrant visa is immediately available.� 8 CFR 245.1(g). Thus, when the Visa Bulletin shows that visas for most preference categories are available for applicants with priority dates on or before the listed priority date, your Department must accept those adjustment of status applications for adjudication.
I understand that you are considering the return of applications for adjustment of status as early as today despite the fact that the published July Visa Bulletin would allow for their acceptance. As you may know, thousands of businesses have acted in reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin and 8 CFR 245.1(g), just as they have done in previous months for several years now. I have been told that many U.S. businesses have taken the necessary steps to prepare and file applications for adjustment of status, including thousands of dollars of expenses to engage counsel, flights for employees to quickly obtain necessary documents and medical exams for the applications, cancellation of business and holiday travel, changes in family plans to ensure families are in the proper location, etc. Moreover, some have already submitted such applications for receipt today, July 2, 2007, in reliance upon the law and precedent. Changing course now could result in the loss of thousands of dollars already expended by businesses and individuals, and more importantly, threaten the integrity and predictability of our immigration system.
Moreover, I am very concerned that you may choose to reject adjustment of status applications while the Visa Bulletin shows that immigrant visas are available. Such an action may spawn litigation that I understand many are considering and preparing to undertake.
As you know, I have raised concern over the recent decision to raise immigration application fees by, on average, over 80%. One of the justifications provided for such a large increase was litigation costs.
While some costs of litigation are certainly justified in defense of the Government, I would have serious concern over litigation to defend the Department of Homeland Security from a decision to reject applications of adjustment of status in light of the existing regulations and the July Visa Bulletin showing most employment-based visas as available.
Before you take any action to reject adjustment of status applications, I would greatly appreciate a timely response to this letter and a meeting to discuss the matter. In your response, I would like an explanation of the reasons you are considering for taking action contrary to 8 CFR 245.1(g), years of precedent, and the potential for litigation which could cost the Department a substantial amount it cannot spare for litigation at this time.
Thank you for your timely consideration of this very important matter.
Sincerely,
Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, & International Law
The Honorable Condoleezza Rice
Secretary
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20451
Dear Secretary Rice:
I am writing with regard to a time sensitive matter. It has been brought to my attention that the Department of State may revise its July Visa Bulletin published on June 13, 2007, to reflect a retrogression or unavailability of immigrant visas in several employment-based immigration categories. I am concerned about the effect such unprecedented action will have on the predictability and reliability of our legal immigration system and on those who rely upon it.
As you know, pursuant to your authority to control the numerical limitations of visas as described in 22 CFR 42.51, each month your Department issues a Visa Bulletin that is consulted by hundreds of thousands of U.S. businesses seeking immigrant visas to determine whether an immigrant visa is immediately available for their employees.
On June 13, your Department announced in its Visa Bulletin for July 2007 that all employment-based categories (except for the �Other Workers� category) for immigrant visas will be �current,� meaning that U.S. businesses going through the lengthy and backlogged immigrant visa or "green card" process can, throughout July, file adjustment of status applications. Your regulations at 22 CFR 42.51 allow them to rely on and use such information. Historically, they have relied on such information knowing that when they prepare and file such applications, they will be accepted and adjudicated.
I have been told, however, that your Department is seriously considering a revision of the July Bulletin as early as today or tomorrow that would retrogress the visas available in various employment categories. This unprecedented action would result in the termination of thousands of applications by U.S. businesses who have prepared and are ready to file applications on behalf of their employees pursuant to the June 13th publication of your Department�s July Visa Bulletin.
It is my understanding that such a revision, coming in the same month in which the bulletin is issued, would be contrary to years of practice in which revisions or adjustments to the availability of immigrant visa numbers are made in the following month of before the beginning of the month, not in the same month individuals and businesses have begun preparing and submitting applications for adjustment of status. I am concerned that the extraordinary action of revising a bulletin mid-month may be taken without serious consideration of the effect on precedence, stability in immigration law, and predictability for those who rely upon the Visa Bulletin.
Furthermore, it is my understanding that thousands of businesses have acted in reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin, just as they have done with previous Bulletins. I have been told that, based upon the July Visa Bulletin, many businesses have taken the necessary steps to prepare for the submission of applications for adjustment of status, including thousands of dollars of legal expenses, flights for employees to quickly obtain necessary documents and medical exams for the applications, cancellation of business and holiday travel, changes in family plans to ensure families are in the proper location, etc.
Before any decision is made to revise the July Visa Bulletin, I would greatly appreciate a timely response to this letter and a meeting to discuss the matter. In your response, I would like an explanation of the reason you chose to issue a visa bulletin listing most employment-based immigrant visas as current, when just a few weeks later�after thousands of employers and employees have acted in reliance upon the bulletin, but before applications could be submitted based upon the bulletin�you are now considering a change of course. I would also appreciate an explanation of whether and in what ways you have considered the serious ramifications of such action upon the integrity, stability, and predictability of our immigration law.
Thank you for your timely consideration of this very important matter.
Sincerely,
Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, & International Law
Press Release
Rep. Lofgren Issues Statement on Updated Visa Bulletin
July 3, 2007
Washington, D.C. � Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose) today issued the following statement in response to the State Department�s update of the July Visa Bulletin and the subsequent rejection of applications for adjustment of status by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).
I�m deeply concerned by today�s updating of the July Visa Bulletin by the Departments of State and Homeland Security. By taking this unprecedented mid-month update, the Departments of State and Homeland Security have seriously undermined the stability and predictability of U.S. immigration law. Thousands of individuals and businesses rely on the monthly bulletins to prepare and plan for the submission of applications. In addition, thousands of dollars in legal fees and other application related expenses are incurred in preparation for filing applications based on the these monthly bulletins.
This update sets a terrible precedent, and undermines our nation�s efforts to foster legal and orderly immigration.
Rep. Lofgren recently sent Secretaries Rice and Chertoff letters asking them to reconsider any mid-month updates of the July Visa Bulletin.
The complete text of both letters is below:
----------
The Honorable Michael Chertoff
Secretary
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528
Dear Secretary Chertoff:
I am writing with regard to a time sensitive matter. It has been brought to my attention that you are considering the rejection of adjustment of status applications for several employment-based immigration preference categories, despite the fact that the published July Visa Bulletin shows that visas for these categories are available. I am concerned that such action may violate the law and could threaten the integrity of our immigration system. In addition, such an act may cause the Department of Homeland Security to incur substantial litigation costs.
As you know, pursuant to your own regulations, �[i]f the applicant [for adjustment of status] is a preference alien, the current Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Bulletin will be consulted to determine whether an immigrant visa is immediately available.� 8 CFR 245.1(g). Thus, when the Visa Bulletin shows that visas for most preference categories are available for applicants with priority dates on or before the listed priority date, your Department must accept those adjustment of status applications for adjudication.
I understand that you are considering the return of applications for adjustment of status as early as today despite the fact that the published July Visa Bulletin would allow for their acceptance. As you may know, thousands of businesses have acted in reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin and 8 CFR 245.1(g), just as they have done in previous months for several years now. I have been told that many U.S. businesses have taken the necessary steps to prepare and file applications for adjustment of status, including thousands of dollars of expenses to engage counsel, flights for employees to quickly obtain necessary documents and medical exams for the applications, cancellation of business and holiday travel, changes in family plans to ensure families are in the proper location, etc. Moreover, some have already submitted such applications for receipt today, July 2, 2007, in reliance upon the law and precedent. Changing course now could result in the loss of thousands of dollars already expended by businesses and individuals, and more importantly, threaten the integrity and predictability of our immigration system.
Moreover, I am very concerned that you may choose to reject adjustment of status applications while the Visa Bulletin shows that immigrant visas are available. Such an action may spawn litigation that I understand many are considering and preparing to undertake.
As you know, I have raised concern over the recent decision to raise immigration application fees by, on average, over 80%. One of the justifications provided for such a large increase was litigation costs.
While some costs of litigation are certainly justified in defense of the Government, I would have serious concern over litigation to defend the Department of Homeland Security from a decision to reject applications of adjustment of status in light of the existing regulations and the July Visa Bulletin showing most employment-based visas as available.
Before you take any action to reject adjustment of status applications, I would greatly appreciate a timely response to this letter and a meeting to discuss the matter. In your response, I would like an explanation of the reasons you are considering for taking action contrary to 8 CFR 245.1(g), years of precedent, and the potential for litigation which could cost the Department a substantial amount it cannot spare for litigation at this time.
Thank you for your timely consideration of this very important matter.
Sincerely,
Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, & International Law
The Honorable Condoleezza Rice
Secretary
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20451
Dear Secretary Rice:
I am writing with regard to a time sensitive matter. It has been brought to my attention that the Department of State may revise its July Visa Bulletin published on June 13, 2007, to reflect a retrogression or unavailability of immigrant visas in several employment-based immigration categories. I am concerned about the effect such unprecedented action will have on the predictability and reliability of our legal immigration system and on those who rely upon it.
As you know, pursuant to your authority to control the numerical limitations of visas as described in 22 CFR 42.51, each month your Department issues a Visa Bulletin that is consulted by hundreds of thousands of U.S. businesses seeking immigrant visas to determine whether an immigrant visa is immediately available for their employees.
On June 13, your Department announced in its Visa Bulletin for July 2007 that all employment-based categories (except for the �Other Workers� category) for immigrant visas will be �current,� meaning that U.S. businesses going through the lengthy and backlogged immigrant visa or "green card" process can, throughout July, file adjustment of status applications. Your regulations at 22 CFR 42.51 allow them to rely on and use such information. Historically, they have relied on such information knowing that when they prepare and file such applications, they will be accepted and adjudicated.
I have been told, however, that your Department is seriously considering a revision of the July Bulletin as early as today or tomorrow that would retrogress the visas available in various employment categories. This unprecedented action would result in the termination of thousands of applications by U.S. businesses who have prepared and are ready to file applications on behalf of their employees pursuant to the June 13th publication of your Department�s July Visa Bulletin.
It is my understanding that such a revision, coming in the same month in which the bulletin is issued, would be contrary to years of practice in which revisions or adjustments to the availability of immigrant visa numbers are made in the following month of before the beginning of the month, not in the same month individuals and businesses have begun preparing and submitting applications for adjustment of status. I am concerned that the extraordinary action of revising a bulletin mid-month may be taken without serious consideration of the effect on precedence, stability in immigration law, and predictability for those who rely upon the Visa Bulletin.
Furthermore, it is my understanding that thousands of businesses have acted in reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin, just as they have done with previous Bulletins. I have been told that, based upon the July Visa Bulletin, many businesses have taken the necessary steps to prepare for the submission of applications for adjustment of status, including thousands of dollars of legal expenses, flights for employees to quickly obtain necessary documents and medical exams for the applications, cancellation of business and holiday travel, changes in family plans to ensure families are in the proper location, etc.
Before any decision is made to revise the July Visa Bulletin, I would greatly appreciate a timely response to this letter and a meeting to discuss the matter. In your response, I would like an explanation of the reason you chose to issue a visa bulletin listing most employment-based immigrant visas as current, when just a few weeks later�after thousands of employers and employees have acted in reliance upon the bulletin, but before applications could be submitted based upon the bulletin�you are now considering a change of course. I would also appreciate an explanation of whether and in what ways you have considered the serious ramifications of such action upon the integrity, stability, and predictability of our immigration law.
Thank you for your timely consideration of this very important matter.
Sincerely,
Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, & International Law
more...
Munna Bhai
11-26 10:00 AM
Dear members,
Anyone started using EAD?? If yes, how is everything going?? Are you having any issues which other members should take care off.
Thanks-inadvance for your suggestion.
-M
Anyone started using EAD?? If yes, how is everything going?? Are you having any issues which other members should take care off.
Thanks-inadvance for your suggestion.
-M
hot Long romance: Shakira and
insbaby
03-19 03:45 PM
Can we push for treating first entry in USA on H1B status as Priority date subject to maintaining continuous H1B status all the time with casual absence (vacation)?
Will this be a legislative change or administrative?
Thoughts? Ideas? May be some red dots? :D
Not a bad idea.
I would love to have "birth date" as priority date. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Then we follow real seniority in processing.
Will this be a legislative change or administrative?
Thoughts? Ideas? May be some red dots? :D
Not a bad idea.
I would love to have "birth date" as priority date. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Then we follow real seniority in processing.
more...
house shakira y pique en lanes.
techbuyer77
07-16 03:01 PM
You will need an employment offer letter clearly stating your role and responsibilities as similar to the petition role and wage >= petitioned wage. Preferably the letter needs to be notarized.
My lawyer never mentioned anything about notarizing the EVL. I sent one with i-140 and one with i-485. Both without notary. You think it will be a problem?
My lawyer never mentioned anything about notarizing the EVL. I sent one with i-140 and one with i-485. Both without notary. You think it will be a problem?
tattoo aseguran que Shakira lleva
payur
01-12 12:26 PM
I believe IV core team is our Dr. King. If anyone, they will be the one who will bring relief to legal immigrants. They, however, will need all the support members can give and let's hope that all members are in fact doing just that.
I have been reading this portal for sometime now, I think it is time for me to act now. How do I support IV team? I have seen so many friends in this portal saying support the team, but the question is how does IV team need our support. Please suggest.
PAYUR.
I have been reading this portal for sometime now, I think it is time for me to act now. How do I support IV team? I have seen so many friends in this portal saying support the team, but the question is how does IV team need our support. Please suggest.
PAYUR.
more...
pictures shakira y pique en lanes.
va_il
04-14 03:06 PM
I still don't understand how this is going to solve the problem. Our problem is with limited visa numbers and quota. How can premium process would make 485 fast?
dresses shakira y pique en lanes.
lifestrikes
02-18 09:55 AM
To file ITIN Number you need to submit W7 form. No wastes your money going to Tax consultant.
Send supporting documents (as per W7 Instructions)
How to Apply - Second Bullet says the following.
Your original, completed tax return(s) for which the ITIN is needed. Attach Form W-7 to the front of your tax return. If you are applying for more than one ITIN for the same tax return (such as for a spouse or dependent(s)), attach all Forms W-7 to contain an expiration date, they are considered current at all the same tax return. After your Form W-7 has been processed, times. The IRS will assign an ITIN to the return and process the return
Link to W7 Instructions (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/iw7.pdf)
Link to W7 Form (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/iw7.pdf)
Mail both W7, supporting documents and your Married Filed Jointly tax returns to Austin, Texas address (this is different from regular tax mailing address).
It took us about 6 weeks to get the ITIN + Tax Refund.
State Tax Return (if required)
Till you receive the ITIN, you will not be able to file state tax. So, if you apply for ITIN no in Feb, if you get ITIN before April 18, then file your state tax, if not, apply for State Tax extension.
Send supporting documents (as per W7 Instructions)
How to Apply - Second Bullet says the following.
Your original, completed tax return(s) for which the ITIN is needed. Attach Form W-7 to the front of your tax return. If you are applying for more than one ITIN for the same tax return (such as for a spouse or dependent(s)), attach all Forms W-7 to contain an expiration date, they are considered current at all the same tax return. After your Form W-7 has been processed, times. The IRS will assign an ITIN to the return and process the return
Link to W7 Instructions (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/iw7.pdf)
Link to W7 Form (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/iw7.pdf)
Mail both W7, supporting documents and your Married Filed Jointly tax returns to Austin, Texas address (this is different from regular tax mailing address).
It took us about 6 weeks to get the ITIN + Tax Refund.
State Tax Return (if required)
Till you receive the ITIN, you will not be able to file state tax. So, if you apply for ITIN no in Feb, if you get ITIN before April 18, then file your state tax, if not, apply for State Tax extension.
more...
makeup shakira y pique en lanes.
ns33
09-05 11:13 AM
We finally got our FP notices and had some questions about process itself.
- Do we have to fill out any forms etc after reaching ASC? Or just the FP notice along with supporting documentation is enough?
- How long does the biometrics capture process itself takes?
- I am in situation where we may end up taking our little kids with us to ASC (they are not part of AOS). My wife and I have appointments one hour apart (0900 and 1000) and was wondering if kids may be permitted inside the bldg or we could take turns with them in parking lot while the other one is inside for appointments. knowing the process times may help us decide how do we handle this.
I am worried that say my wife's inside for her 0900 appointment and I'm waiting with kids and if she's not back by say 0945 - I am considered late for 1000 appointment or something like that.
Any help appreciated.
Thanks,
NS
- Do we have to fill out any forms etc after reaching ASC? Or just the FP notice along with supporting documentation is enough?
- How long does the biometrics capture process itself takes?
- I am in situation where we may end up taking our little kids with us to ASC (they are not part of AOS). My wife and I have appointments one hour apart (0900 and 1000) and was wondering if kids may be permitted inside the bldg or we could take turns with them in parking lot while the other one is inside for appointments. knowing the process times may help us decide how do we handle this.
I am worried that say my wife's inside for her 0900 appointment and I'm waiting with kids and if she's not back by say 0945 - I am considered late for 1000 appointment or something like that.
Any help appreciated.
Thanks,
NS
girlfriend shakira y pique en lanes.
joydiptac
09-28 07:57 PM
Thanks for the good work.
(*based on data from USCIS)
Your position is 3686 in the Green Card Queue based on your Country of Chargeability "India", Priority Date "Feb-04" and Category "EB3" .
Your Expected Date of Adjudication is Jan, 2011.
(*based on data from USCIS website September 2009)
Result for patiently_waiting:
Your position is 24486 in the Green Card Queue based on your Country of Chargeability "India", Priority Date "Feb-04" and Category "EB3" .
Your Expected Date of Adjudication is Jun, 2018.
*******************************************
I can understand how the tracker gave 24486 based on pdf provided by USCIS recently.
How the tracker provides 3686 based on my prioority date ?
Can someone please explain ?
Thanks a lot.
FOIA response is b4 mass preadjudication USCIS update is more current therefore after the ongoing pre-adjudication. remember they had no clue of the numbers till they actually preadjudicated right? I know its sad but that is the only explanation.
1) Also don't be surprised if the number increases in the coming months as more get pre adj.
2) Another thing to mention here is there are people who are of older PDs but because of misc reasons did not file their I485.
3) Also my guess is this does not contain the number of people in Consular processing.
So even this calculation is not foolproof.
(*based on data from USCIS)
Your position is 3686 in the Green Card Queue based on your Country of Chargeability "India", Priority Date "Feb-04" and Category "EB3" .
Your Expected Date of Adjudication is Jan, 2011.
(*based on data from USCIS website September 2009)
Result for patiently_waiting:
Your position is 24486 in the Green Card Queue based on your Country of Chargeability "India", Priority Date "Feb-04" and Category "EB3" .
Your Expected Date of Adjudication is Jun, 2018.
*******************************************
I can understand how the tracker gave 24486 based on pdf provided by USCIS recently.
How the tracker provides 3686 based on my prioority date ?
Can someone please explain ?
Thanks a lot.
FOIA response is b4 mass preadjudication USCIS update is more current therefore after the ongoing pre-adjudication. remember they had no clue of the numbers till they actually preadjudicated right? I know its sad but that is the only explanation.
1) Also don't be surprised if the number increases in the coming months as more get pre adj.
2) Another thing to mention here is there are people who are of older PDs but because of misc reasons did not file their I485.
3) Also my guess is this does not contain the number of people in Consular processing.
So even this calculation is not foolproof.
hairstyles shakira y pique en lanes.
neo_ny
10-26 09:39 AM
Hello All - I am thinking of getting my H1-B stamped in India sometime in December (first time .. got COS F1 to H1B). I was wondering if it possible to add my parents as dependents to my application when I head down for my stamping under the same appointment? It is even possible .. has anyone had any experience with it? Oh btw, I was thinking of doing it in Chennai.
Any inputs would be greatly appreciated.
Neo
Any inputs would be greatly appreciated.
Neo
bkarnik
03-12 07:10 PM
Not all of them in h1b are applying gc. Top 5 H1B Indian companies TCS,CTS Wipro,Satyam and Infosys are not processing GC. So less than 40% of people only apply gc. In that some of them are not serious. So if 650k people comes on H1b Only 200 to 300k people should have applied Gc. 70% of H1b persons are Eb3. So EB3 is in very bad shape. Also no adjustment was done for H1B increase from 2001 to 2004 to 195K. If some temporary relief is done by giving one time increase of 100k to 200k gc will make PD picture much brighter
My estimate only includes students and H1B from India and China ONLY. Please read the assumptions. It does not include Philipines, ROW, Mexico EB3s at all. Neither does it include spouse/dependent data from H1Bs. It also does not include EB applications made by applicants on other visas such as L1, etc. It also does not include all those applicants who have been in the US prior to the cutoff dates but have been unable to start their GC process sooner than the cut off dates. Finally, it does not include any data from October 2005-present because the information is not yet available. Considering all the numbers that are left out....I feel that it should easilty cover the applicants who have gone back, students who have converted to H1Bs, etc. In fact, I am almost sure that the number is probably higher than what I have estimated.
While I agree that any increase is better than nothing, for the problem to go away quickly we need something like the Title V of S2611 which incidentally had the figure of EBS limited to 650,000 (pure coincidence).
My estimate only includes students and H1B from India and China ONLY. Please read the assumptions. It does not include Philipines, ROW, Mexico EB3s at all. Neither does it include spouse/dependent data from H1Bs. It also does not include EB applications made by applicants on other visas such as L1, etc. It also does not include all those applicants who have been in the US prior to the cutoff dates but have been unable to start their GC process sooner than the cut off dates. Finally, it does not include any data from October 2005-present because the information is not yet available. Considering all the numbers that are left out....I feel that it should easilty cover the applicants who have gone back, students who have converted to H1Bs, etc. In fact, I am almost sure that the number is probably higher than what I have estimated.
While I agree that any increase is better than nothing, for the problem to go away quickly we need something like the Title V of S2611 which incidentally had the figure of EBS limited to 650,000 (pure coincidence).
vasa
10-20 09:34 PM
Count us in..
No comments:
Post a Comment