kriskris
07-28 02:49 PM
We are planning to go to India in the last week of September. My current AP expires by Oct 10. Hence applying for a new one. How long are AP approvals taking now a days at TSC.
Thanks in advance
-Krishna
Thanks in advance
-Krishna
wallpaper a different perspective to
SSSarkar
06-23 10:47 AM
I wanted to tell that only last year's tax return was needed. Nothing else.
USCIS can ask for previous tax return any time. you maynot have tofile now but better to clean that. refile 1040X and pay the taxes and interst. you will be fine. IRS is good if you accept your mistake instead of catching you later.
USCIS can ask for previous tax return any time. you maynot have tofile now but better to clean that. refile 1040X and pay the taxes and interst. you will be fine. IRS is good if you accept your mistake instead of catching you later.
aperregatturv
05-06 02:32 PM
Congrats..
Hey guys I got the mail today! I'm sooo happy!
Thanks everybody that replied!
Hey guys I got the mail today! I'm sooo happy!
Thanks everybody that replied!
2011 Anna Paquin, Stephen Moyer
sircaustic
07-20 12:43 AM
good to hear that it worked out ok in your case!
One Q: how long did it take for USCIS to get back to you with a confirmation that the MTR was accepted? [from the day you requested it]
Well.I did not have to request for confirmation. My attorney received the letter the next day after I received the automated email. The online status for my case still shows as "Denial Notice Sent".:(
One Q: how long did it take for USCIS to get back to you with a confirmation that the MTR was accepted? [from the day you requested it]
Well.I did not have to request for confirmation. My attorney received the letter the next day after I received the automated email. The online status for my case still shows as "Denial Notice Sent".:(
more...
pointlesswait
03-31 11:30 PM
Dude,
I think one of the reasons why you got and RFE is because u filed for a transfer without sufficient paystubs. You need atleast 3-4 (bi weekly) paystubs to not raise any eyebrows.
So basically the IO officer was doing his thing and requesting all the basic documentation.
best scenarios would have been : If you had gone back to company A after a gap of few months, and filed for an extension and then transferred to Company B, this RFE would not have risen at all ...as you would have have continuous employment and pay stubs to show.
In this economy everyone has got hit pretty hard..so just hope for the best.
Thanks a lot for your comments. They are really helpful.
In case I do what you mention, what normally comes with a rejection? would the USCIS go further (beyond the simple denial), and rule that I was out status penalizing/prohibiting me to enter the country?
Should it be better if I just leave the country and wait for the approval outside the US? I guess Im prepared for a denial, what concerns me the most is jeopardizing B1-B2 Visa or as you said to be prohibited to enter the country.
Do you know the "standard" wording for USCIS decision in cases like mine?
Thanks a lot again, I really appreciate your comments.
I think one of the reasons why you got and RFE is because u filed for a transfer without sufficient paystubs. You need atleast 3-4 (bi weekly) paystubs to not raise any eyebrows.
So basically the IO officer was doing his thing and requesting all the basic documentation.
best scenarios would have been : If you had gone back to company A after a gap of few months, and filed for an extension and then transferred to Company B, this RFE would not have risen at all ...as you would have have continuous employment and pay stubs to show.
In this economy everyone has got hit pretty hard..so just hope for the best.
Thanks a lot for your comments. They are really helpful.
In case I do what you mention, what normally comes with a rejection? would the USCIS go further (beyond the simple denial), and rule that I was out status penalizing/prohibiting me to enter the country?
Should it be better if I just leave the country and wait for the approval outside the US? I guess Im prepared for a denial, what concerns me the most is jeopardizing B1-B2 Visa or as you said to be prohibited to enter the country.
Do you know the "standard" wording for USCIS decision in cases like mine?
Thanks a lot again, I really appreciate your comments.
lskreddy
08-14 12:05 PM
all the best to you! If you are serious about this, then you may want to go easy on visiting iv and start checking out: http://www.r2iclubforums.com/forums/
I spend a few good hours a week on that site. :-)
Some of the writings are pretty motivating...
I spend a few good hours a week on that site. :-)
Some of the writings are pretty motivating...
more...
HRPRO
02-23 10:26 AM
Depends Jax
If you are still on a H or L and have a valid visa, you can enter using that as well but if you working on an EAD, all yopu will need is the parole document.
If you are still on a H or L and have a valid visa, you can enter using that as well but if you working on an EAD, all yopu will need is the parole document.
2010 Stephen Moyer, Anna Paquin and
sankap
10-28 12:01 PM
Skilled immigration: Green-card blues | The Economist (http://www.economist.com/node/17366155)
Skilled immigration
Green-card blues
A backlash against foreign workers dims business hopes for immigration reform
The Economist: October 30, 2010
Oct 28th 2010 | Washington, dc
BAD as relations are between business and the Democrats, immigration was supposed to be an exception. On that topic the two have long had a marriage of convenience, with business backing comprehensive reform in order to obtain more skilled foreign workers.
That, at least, was what was meant to happen. In March Chuck Schumer, a Democratic senator, and Lindsey Graham, a Republican, proposed a multi-faceted reform that would toughen border controls and create a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants while granting two longstanding goals of business: automatic green cards (that is, permanent residence) for students who earned advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or maths in America, and an elimination of country quotas on green cards. The quotas bear no relationship to demand, leaving backlogs of eight to ten years for applicants from China and India. Barack Obama immediately announced his support.
But the proposal never became a bill, much less law. Mr Graham developed cold feet and withdrew his support; he was concerned that the Democrats were moving too quickly, as the economic misery that has turned Americans against foreign trade spread to dislike of foreign workers. Last year Congress made it harder for banks that had received money from the Troubled Asset Relief Programme to hire workers on H-1B visas, the most popular type for skilled foreign workers. In January the Citizenship and Immigration Service barred the use of H-1Bs for workers based on a client�s premises instead of their own company�s, a move aimed at outsourcing companies, many of them based in India.
In August even Mr Schumer, needing to look tough on outsourcing, pushed through a bill sharply raising H-1B fees on firms that depend heavily on the visas. Perhaps the most naked election-year hostility to foreigners appeared during the debate in September over a Democratic bill in the Senate that would have rewarded companies for firing foreign-based workers and replacing them with Americans. Charles Grassley, a Republican senator, responded with a proposal to prohibit any company that had laid off Americans from hiring visa workers at all. The bill did not win enough votes to break a filibuster.
Tightened restrictions, political aggravation and economic conditions seem to be having an effect. In 2009 the number of employment-based green cards and H-1B visas was the lowest in years (see chart). It took an unusually long time for the quota of H-1Bs for the fiscal year that ended on September 30th to be used up. Several Indian outsourcing companies have made a point of boosting local hiring at American facilities.
This is partly the result of the recession, which has hurt demand for all types of workers. But in a recent report the Hamilton Project, a moderately liberal research group, notes that the number of foreign workers in America has been declining for some time. This might reflect America�s diminished appeal to the world�s most sought-after workers, as well as brightening prospects in their own countries. A survey for the pro-immigration Kauffman Foundation in 2007 found that only a tiny proportion of foreign students planned to stay in the United States. This almost certainly extracts an economic toll, since immigrants are more likely than others to start businesses or file patents.
America�s immigration policies have long put a higher priority on family reunification than on employment. Legal immigrants to the country are more likely to have failed to finish high school than either native-born Americans or immigrants to other English-speaking countries. Immigrants to Canada are far more likely to have a college degree.
Legislators from both parties have at various times advanced proposals that would smooth the way for skilled migrants, but they have usually foundered on the more intractable problem of dealing with illegal immigration. �These two issues can and should be separate,� says Michael Greenstone of the Hamilton Project. �We are giving up economic growth by putting the two issues together.�
Democratic Hispanic legislators oppose separating them for fear of losing business support for comprehensive reform. In principle, then, a Republican takeover of the House might increase the likelihood of a stand-alone bill on skilled immigration. That, however, is not the Republicans� priority. Lamar Smith, the Republican who would probably become chairman of the House judiciary committee, is more focused on deporting illegal immigrants and strengthening the border.
Still, it would be premature to write off the odds of immigration reform. If Mr Obama is to accomplish anything in the next Congress, he needs to find common ground with Republicans on something. Business-friendly immigration reform might just qualify.
Skilled immigration
Green-card blues
A backlash against foreign workers dims business hopes for immigration reform
The Economist: October 30, 2010
Oct 28th 2010 | Washington, dc
BAD as relations are between business and the Democrats, immigration was supposed to be an exception. On that topic the two have long had a marriage of convenience, with business backing comprehensive reform in order to obtain more skilled foreign workers.
That, at least, was what was meant to happen. In March Chuck Schumer, a Democratic senator, and Lindsey Graham, a Republican, proposed a multi-faceted reform that would toughen border controls and create a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants while granting two longstanding goals of business: automatic green cards (that is, permanent residence) for students who earned advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or maths in America, and an elimination of country quotas on green cards. The quotas bear no relationship to demand, leaving backlogs of eight to ten years for applicants from China and India. Barack Obama immediately announced his support.
But the proposal never became a bill, much less law. Mr Graham developed cold feet and withdrew his support; he was concerned that the Democrats were moving too quickly, as the economic misery that has turned Americans against foreign trade spread to dislike of foreign workers. Last year Congress made it harder for banks that had received money from the Troubled Asset Relief Programme to hire workers on H-1B visas, the most popular type for skilled foreign workers. In January the Citizenship and Immigration Service barred the use of H-1Bs for workers based on a client�s premises instead of their own company�s, a move aimed at outsourcing companies, many of them based in India.
In August even Mr Schumer, needing to look tough on outsourcing, pushed through a bill sharply raising H-1B fees on firms that depend heavily on the visas. Perhaps the most naked election-year hostility to foreigners appeared during the debate in September over a Democratic bill in the Senate that would have rewarded companies for firing foreign-based workers and replacing them with Americans. Charles Grassley, a Republican senator, responded with a proposal to prohibit any company that had laid off Americans from hiring visa workers at all. The bill did not win enough votes to break a filibuster.
Tightened restrictions, political aggravation and economic conditions seem to be having an effect. In 2009 the number of employment-based green cards and H-1B visas was the lowest in years (see chart). It took an unusually long time for the quota of H-1Bs for the fiscal year that ended on September 30th to be used up. Several Indian outsourcing companies have made a point of boosting local hiring at American facilities.
This is partly the result of the recession, which has hurt demand for all types of workers. But in a recent report the Hamilton Project, a moderately liberal research group, notes that the number of foreign workers in America has been declining for some time. This might reflect America�s diminished appeal to the world�s most sought-after workers, as well as brightening prospects in their own countries. A survey for the pro-immigration Kauffman Foundation in 2007 found that only a tiny proportion of foreign students planned to stay in the United States. This almost certainly extracts an economic toll, since immigrants are more likely than others to start businesses or file patents.
America�s immigration policies have long put a higher priority on family reunification than on employment. Legal immigrants to the country are more likely to have failed to finish high school than either native-born Americans or immigrants to other English-speaking countries. Immigrants to Canada are far more likely to have a college degree.
Legislators from both parties have at various times advanced proposals that would smooth the way for skilled migrants, but they have usually foundered on the more intractable problem of dealing with illegal immigration. �These two issues can and should be separate,� says Michael Greenstone of the Hamilton Project. �We are giving up economic growth by putting the two issues together.�
Democratic Hispanic legislators oppose separating them for fear of losing business support for comprehensive reform. In principle, then, a Republican takeover of the House might increase the likelihood of a stand-alone bill on skilled immigration. That, however, is not the Republicans� priority. Lamar Smith, the Republican who would probably become chairman of the House judiciary committee, is more focused on deporting illegal immigrants and strengthening the border.
Still, it would be premature to write off the odds of immigration reform. If Mr Obama is to accomplish anything in the next Congress, he needs to find common ground with Republicans on something. Business-friendly immigration reform might just qualify.
more...
sc3
09-25 02:10 PM
Usually when a lawyer gets blacklisted, there's lots of chaos. The lawyer's new reputation spreads like wildfire and there's a lot of staff changed. A lot of clients fall out.
In my case, I kept good relationships with other clients of my lawyer. I also became good friends with my lawyer's secretary due to being a customer for over 5 years. Yes, that's unfortunately how long I've waited.
All of them told me the same story. Too many miracles, case got investigated, blacklisted.
Ontopic: any other opinions please? A simple what is involved in the process would be greatly appreciated.
Did they not drop all the charges for now (even though the charges were true)? So why is your lawyer still docked? Maybe he no longer is, unless his "miracles" were different from Fragomen.
In my case, I kept good relationships with other clients of my lawyer. I also became good friends with my lawyer's secretary due to being a customer for over 5 years. Yes, that's unfortunately how long I've waited.
All of them told me the same story. Too many miracles, case got investigated, blacklisted.
Ontopic: any other opinions please? A simple what is involved in the process would be greatly appreciated.
Did they not drop all the charges for now (even though the charges were true)? So why is your lawyer still docked? Maybe he no longer is, unless his "miracles" were different from Fragomen.
hair Stephen Moyer and Anna Paquin
xtronics
06-11 03:13 PM
This is my 6th yr (will enter 7th yr in Dec). I have approval until Dec'09. Does that mean I can apply for premium I-140 within 60 days of the end of 6th yr?
This is confusing. Any help appreciated. Thanks
This is confusing. Any help appreciated. Thanks
more...
TO BE OR NO TO BE
10-21 04:19 PM
I am thinking of switching the company and look for new job. I am not sure how this will work when I am on EAD and not expecting my GC to come soon as my priority date (EB3) is March 2005.
Possibly the new job will not be 100% aligned with the job desc that was put during the LC.
Do any one can help me guide what are my options?
I am not a Lawyer, just advising based on my knowledge / experience:
You can certainly change job (Since you have EAD, I am assuming here that you have approved I-140 and filed for I-485 for more than 180 days). AC-21 (its a law) allows you to port your job when you have approved I-140 and I-485 is filed for more than 180 days.
The job has to be "same or similar" need not be same. The word "same or similar" is not defined in the law, but you can use O*Net classification. The O*Net classification is the code under which your labor petition was filed. Then use O*net website to see the proposed job you are looking at is similar to the O*Net classification your labor was filed for. Its little bit confusing how to use O*Net but if you Google AC-21 you will find enough literature / articles posted by lawyers. Better yet, one of the IV member have wrote whole blog on that (you would have to find that, as I don't remember).
The new job don't need to be restricted within geographic area where your original labor was filed for (you can work anywhere in the USA).
The new employer is not required to prove ability to pay.
There is no upword salary restriction, but if the pay difference is significant then USCIS may take a look at it in detail just to verify that the new job falls within "same or similar" category.
You will have to find a good lawyer (you can do yourself as well) to write AC-21 letter to USCIS. I have seen people suggesting that you don't have to do that, USCIS may never get that into your file. If they you don't send AC-21 letter or it never gets to your file, they will send you RFE to prove that you still have "same or similar" job offer. They may also send you NOID or deny your case, but you can file motion to reopen (obviously using a qualified attorney) and they will most probably approve your case.
And finally, your existing employer can't revoke your approved I-140 (if its over 180 days).
Hopefully this is helpful!
Possibly the new job will not be 100% aligned with the job desc that was put during the LC.
Do any one can help me guide what are my options?
I am not a Lawyer, just advising based on my knowledge / experience:
You can certainly change job (Since you have EAD, I am assuming here that you have approved I-140 and filed for I-485 for more than 180 days). AC-21 (its a law) allows you to port your job when you have approved I-140 and I-485 is filed for more than 180 days.
The job has to be "same or similar" need not be same. The word "same or similar" is not defined in the law, but you can use O*Net classification. The O*Net classification is the code under which your labor petition was filed. Then use O*net website to see the proposed job you are looking at is similar to the O*Net classification your labor was filed for. Its little bit confusing how to use O*Net but if you Google AC-21 you will find enough literature / articles posted by lawyers. Better yet, one of the IV member have wrote whole blog on that (you would have to find that, as I don't remember).
The new job don't need to be restricted within geographic area where your original labor was filed for (you can work anywhere in the USA).
The new employer is not required to prove ability to pay.
There is no upword salary restriction, but if the pay difference is significant then USCIS may take a look at it in detail just to verify that the new job falls within "same or similar" category.
You will have to find a good lawyer (you can do yourself as well) to write AC-21 letter to USCIS. I have seen people suggesting that you don't have to do that, USCIS may never get that into your file. If they you don't send AC-21 letter or it never gets to your file, they will send you RFE to prove that you still have "same or similar" job offer. They may also send you NOID or deny your case, but you can file motion to reopen (obviously using a qualified attorney) and they will most probably approve your case.
And finally, your existing employer can't revoke your approved I-140 (if its over 180 days).
Hopefully this is helpful!
hot domingo 22 de agosto de 2010
glores1970
09-22 08:25 AM
Hello,
Anybody has information to offer for such a case ?
Thanks.
Anybody has information to offer for such a case ?
Thanks.
more...
house Anna Paquin And Stephen Moyer
gc_in_30_yrs
01-22 06:59 PM
"thank you" looks a small word but it is the only word i have to convey my thanks.
fighters wont stop fighting until they win.
we are fighters.
fighters wont stop fighting until they win.
we are fighters.
tattoo Anna Paquin and Stephen Moyer
indianabacklog
01-28 01:58 PM
I am sorry to hear you are still wading through the labor cert stuff. Mike Delph has little or no knowledge of how the immigration system works. My family and I found this out over six years ago when he worked for Dan Burton.
Wishing you all the best.
Wishing you all the best.
more...
pictures See more photos of Anna Paquin
EndRetro
04-19 01:49 PM
Has anyone had an experience with h1 restamping at Mumbai when they were not resident of Mumbai Embassy district.
I have an apptmt in Mumbai for May 12th for an H-1 staming and I am WORKING in USA and the address in the passport is in KERALA (Chennai consulate).
This is the response to a MAIL that I had sent to the MUMBAI consulate!!
************************************************** ********
MUMBAI, N IV to me
Apr 18 (1 day ago)
"Returning workers can apply in any of the four U.S. consulates in India."
It is advisable to apply in your own district. That is the last place in India where you resided for at least 6 months before going to the U.S.
It may be harder to qualify for the visa if you are not applying in your
own district.
The visa officers at the U. S. Embassy or Consulate at an applicant's designated consulate are generally more familiar with his or her circumstances and documents than the officers somewhere else would be.You should also be aware that even if this post allows you to apply, it is still possible that the interviewing officer will refuse to adjudicate your case and will refer you to your own district anyway.
Application fees in this case will NOT be refunded.
Best regards,
Non Immigrant Visa Section/wds
U.S. Consulate General Mumbai
************************************************** ********
I have an apptmt in Mumbai for May 12th for an H-1 staming and I am WORKING in USA and the address in the passport is in KERALA (Chennai consulate).
This is the response to a MAIL that I had sent to the MUMBAI consulate!!
************************************************** ********
MUMBAI, N IV to me
Apr 18 (1 day ago)
"Returning workers can apply in any of the four U.S. consulates in India."
It is advisable to apply in your own district. That is the last place in India where you resided for at least 6 months before going to the U.S.
It may be harder to qualify for the visa if you are not applying in your
own district.
The visa officers at the U. S. Embassy or Consulate at an applicant's designated consulate are generally more familiar with his or her circumstances and documents than the officers somewhere else would be.You should also be aware that even if this post allows you to apply, it is still possible that the interviewing officer will refuse to adjudicate your case and will refer you to your own district anyway.
Application fees in this case will NOT be refunded.
Best regards,
Non Immigrant Visa Section/wds
U.S. Consulate General Mumbai
************************************************** ********
dresses Anna Paquin, Stephen Moyer
lccleared
04-15 10:14 AM
We had the same situation and ones got rejected.
By some reason, the software carried my last year's AGI into my wife's last year AGI box. I corrected it and got accepted on second time efile. I used turbo tax software.
Hope this helps out.
Thanks.
By some reason, the software carried my last year's AGI into my wife's last year AGI box. I corrected it and got accepted on second time efile. I used turbo tax software.
Hope this helps out.
Thanks.
more...
makeup Stephen Moyer and Anna Paquin
NKR
06-13 10:48 AM
It has not passed April 04 since Sept 05 (when it was current) and during July Fiasco.
I was just a couple of months away when PD reached APR 04, it remained there for sometime, got retrogressed and now it is again back to square one at the same date. Wonder what the bottleneck on APR 04 is�.
I was just a couple of months away when PD reached APR 04, it remained there for sometime, got retrogressed and now it is again back to square one at the same date. Wonder what the bottleneck on APR 04 is�.
girlfriend Anna Paquin and Stephen Moyer
manfrmind
04-01 02:11 PM
Do you know which attorneys sent this E-mail? Can you please post those E-mails after removing personal details?
"===============================================
It is advised to all the employees not to travel out of the country for visa stamping nor vacations, if it can be avoided. Right now, there are reports of many visa denials at the consulates abroad and even the US Port of Entry. Unless it is absolutely inevitable, travel should not be undertaken.
If travel is a must, it is advised to the employees to carry the following supporting documents:
1. Employer provided copies of recruitment activity stating that they attempted to hire US citizens but failed - THIS WILL BE HARD TO ESTABLISH
2. The usual check list for H stamping and employment verification at the US port of entry
The general advise is even for AP holders (Advance Parole) to refrain from traveling outside the US, if you can.
"===============================================
"===============================================
It is advised to all the employees not to travel out of the country for visa stamping nor vacations, if it can be avoided. Right now, there are reports of many visa denials at the consulates abroad and even the US Port of Entry. Unless it is absolutely inevitable, travel should not be undertaken.
If travel is a must, it is advised to the employees to carry the following supporting documents:
1. Employer provided copies of recruitment activity stating that they attempted to hire US citizens but failed - THIS WILL BE HARD TO ESTABLISH
2. The usual check list for H stamping and employment verification at the US port of entry
The general advise is even for AP holders (Advance Parole) to refrain from traveling outside the US, if you can.
"===============================================
hairstyles anna paquin stephen moyer
coopheal
12-30 11:14 AM
I think all Gravitation was saying is PD needs to be after 1st May 2001.
This is an interesting theory about EB3 ppl moving to EB2 and jamming EB2 as well. Good for EB3 ppl having PB in 2003 at least.
Although it does scare me that even if 20% people moved to EB2, and EB2 is now stagnant, so how many more are left in EB3 before June 2003.
This is an interesting theory about EB3 ppl moving to EB2 and jamming EB2 as well. Good for EB3 ppl having PB in 2003 at least.
Although it does scare me that even if 20% people moved to EB2, and EB2 is now stagnant, so how many more are left in EB3 before June 2003.
needlotsofluck
08-13 09:30 PM
Hi,
I just read the FAQ#3 and A33 says that I-485 �7/30/07 Y� should be used but my attorney used "07/24/06 Y" to file my I-485. Very worried now... any comments... what are chances that my apllication would be rejected?
Q33: When filing an EB I-485 using the old fee, what version of the I-485 form do we use?
A33: The current I-485 form version dated �7/30/07 Y� should be used.
Thanks
Ron
It says on FAQ3:
Q33: When filing an EB I-485 using the old fee, what version of the I-485 form do we use?
A33: The current I-485 form version dated �7/30/07 Y� should be used. I-485 Version 07/24/06 is also acceptable. The form can be found at www.uscis.gov.
Please read the whole answer.
I just read the FAQ#3 and A33 says that I-485 �7/30/07 Y� should be used but my attorney used "07/24/06 Y" to file my I-485. Very worried now... any comments... what are chances that my apllication would be rejected?
Q33: When filing an EB I-485 using the old fee, what version of the I-485 form do we use?
A33: The current I-485 form version dated �7/30/07 Y� should be used.
Thanks
Ron
It says on FAQ3:
Q33: When filing an EB I-485 using the old fee, what version of the I-485 form do we use?
A33: The current I-485 form version dated �7/30/07 Y� should be used. I-485 Version 07/24/06 is also acceptable. The form can be found at www.uscis.gov.
Please read the whole answer.
kittu1991
07-17 07:18 PM
We travelled last year from Kochi to SFO with no issue. Yes you have to go secondary room. Based on the number of people ahead of you, your wait can vary. But once its your turn it should take only less than 5 mins.
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar