nousername
11-20 09:05 PM
Sorry to hear about your situation.. Your husbands b***s should be chopped for physically abusing you..
I'm not sure where you are based or which country you originally belong to but like in SF Bay Area (California) there is Indian Community Center which on Sunday's offer free legal advice. Here is the link Free Legal Clinic | Indiacc Home (http://www.indiacc.org/legal_clinic)
You might have something like this around you live..
Good luck.
Help!
I divorced my husband after 14 months of marriage. I have a green card with conditional residency (the I-751 90 day 'window' to remove conditions starts Sept 2010). My husband was abusive mentally and physically, I have no contact with him.
I cannot prove the abuse definitively as I covered it up at the time (no photos or police reports, only my testimony and perhaps that of the counselors we saw together). The advice I have received on how to proceed has been conflicting; some say wait and apply during the 90 day window to remove the conditions and it MIGHT be ok; some say I need to file now and prove the abuse.
I have no money for a lawyer as my husband also stole most of my money and I just got laid off as well. Any ideas?!? Does anyone know if it is riskier to try and prove the abuse or how hard that is and if I'm more likely to lose my green card that way? Is there any way at all do to this without thousands to spend on a lawyer?
Many thanks in advance for all help and advice.
P.S. I've tried the local bar association, legal aid and a thousand other options, all of which have either been dead-ends or given me yet more conflicting info.
I'm not sure where you are based or which country you originally belong to but like in SF Bay Area (California) there is Indian Community Center which on Sunday's offer free legal advice. Here is the link Free Legal Clinic | Indiacc Home (http://www.indiacc.org/legal_clinic)
You might have something like this around you live..
Good luck.
Help!
I divorced my husband after 14 months of marriage. I have a green card with conditional residency (the I-751 90 day 'window' to remove conditions starts Sept 2010). My husband was abusive mentally and physically, I have no contact with him.
I cannot prove the abuse definitively as I covered it up at the time (no photos or police reports, only my testimony and perhaps that of the counselors we saw together). The advice I have received on how to proceed has been conflicting; some say wait and apply during the 90 day window to remove the conditions and it MIGHT be ok; some say I need to file now and prove the abuse.
I have no money for a lawyer as my husband also stole most of my money and I just got laid off as well. Any ideas?!? Does anyone know if it is riskier to try and prove the abuse or how hard that is and if I'm more likely to lose my green card that way? Is there any way at all do to this without thousands to spend on a lawyer?
Many thanks in advance for all help and advice.
P.S. I've tried the local bar association, legal aid and a thousand other options, all of which have either been dead-ends or given me yet more conflicting info.
wallpaper Poems , lyrics , songs , love
lord_labaku
09-16 10:59 PM
Infopass would not hurt.....so just take Infopass to ease ur mind. Explain to the IO ur exact situation & ask them to confirm if ur 485 is ok. u will have the answer from the horse's mouth/
jediknight
10-23 12:57 PM
I am surprised that this was not the law before but considering the current Immigration laws, I should not have been :-(
2011 i love poems love poems
dupedinjuly
07-15 02:07 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/us/politics/15immig.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin
A Little-Known Group Claims a Victory on Immigration
July 15, 2007
A Little-Known Group Claims a Victory on Immigration
By ROBERT PEAR
WASHINGTON, July 14 � When a comprehensive immigration bill collapsed last month on the Senate floor, it was a victory for a small group that had been lobbying Congress for a decade to reduce the number of immigrants � legal and illegal � in the United States.
The group, Numbers USA, tracked every twist and turn of the bill. Its members flooded the Senate with more than a million faxes, sent through the organization�s Web site. It supplied arguments and information to senators opposing the bill.
�It was a David-and-Goliath struggle,� said Roy H. Beck, the president of Numbers USA, who had been preparing for this moment since 1996, when he wrote a book titled �The Case Against Immigration.�
Supporters of the bill included President Bush, the United States Chamber of Commerce, the high-tech industry, the Roman Catholic Church, many Hispanic organizations, farmers, restaurants, hotels and the construction industry.
�The bill had support from the opinion elite in this country,� Mr. Beck said. �But we built a grass-roots army, consumed with passion for a cause, and used the power of the Internet to go around the elites and defeat a disastrous amnesty bill.�
The measure, which died on June 28, would have offered legal status and a path to citizenship to millions of illegal immigrants and created a new temporary worker program while increasing border security.
�Numbers USA initiated and turbocharged the populist revolt against the immigration reform package,� said Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, a pro-immigrant advocacy group. �Roy Beck takes people who are upset about illegal immigration for different reasons, including hostility to Latino immigrants, and disciplines them so their message is based on policy rather than race-based arguments or xenophobia.�
Representative Brian P. Bilbray, Republican of California and chairman of the Immigration Reform Caucus, said, �We�re involved in weekly discussions with Numbers USA and other immigration-control groups as part of a team effort.�
Numbers USA had fewer than 50,000 members at the end of 2004, but now counts more than 447,000, with an increase of 83 percent since January alone.
Turning to the next phase of the debate, those members will push for enforcement of existing laws and new measures to curb the employment of illegal immigrants.
�Our No. 1 legislative goal is to begin a system of mandatory workplace verification, to confirm that every employee is a United States citizen or an alien authorized to work in this country,� said Rosemary E. Jenks, director of government relations at Numbers USA.
The organization wants to reduce immigration � as Mr. Beck says in the subtitle of his book � for �moral, economic, social and environmental reasons.�
He contends that immigrants and their children are driving population growth, which he says is gobbling up open space, causing urban sprawl and creating more traffic congestion.
Moreover, Mr. Beck asserts that immigrants and temporary workers, by increasing the supply of labor, have depressed wages in industries from meatpacking to information technology. Numbers USA has worked most closely with conservative Republicans, but in recent weeks has built alliances with Democrats who share the concern.
Numbers USA keeps a scorecard showing every vote by every member of Congress on immigration-related issues since 1989. The group assigns a letter grade to each member.
Lawmakers who received an A-plus were all Republicans and included Representatives J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois and Tom Tancredo of Colorado, a presidential candidate. The lowest grades � F-minuses � went to Democrats, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Representative Joe Baca of California, chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.
Numbers USA objects to proposals that increase the number of legal or illegal immigrants. It steers clear of debates over the allocation of visas.
�It does not matter to us whether a visa goes to a high-tech worker, a farm worker or the sibling of a U.S. citizen,� Mr. Beck said.
Numbers USA is one of many organizations fostered by John H. Tanton, an ophthalmologist from Michigan who has also championed efforts to protect the environment, limit population growth and promote English as an official language.
Critics like the Southern Poverty Law Center and Representative Chris Cannon, Republican of Utah, have described Dr. Tanton as a father of the anti-immigration movement. Mark A. Potok, a senior researcher at the law center, called Numbers USA the �kinder, gentler side of that movement.�
Mr. Beck said Numbers USA had been independent of Dr. Tanton since 2002. On the group�s Web site, Mr. Beck cautions against �immigrant bashing� and says, �Even illegal aliens deserve humane treatment as they are detected, detained and deported.�
In the fight over the Senate bill, Numbers USA had daily conference calls with conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation and the Eagle Forum.
For tax purposes, Numbers USA has two arms, an educational foundation and an advocacy group that lobbies Congress. Together, Mr. Beck said, they have a budget of $3 million this year, but will probably raise and spend $4.5 million.
Mr. Beck said that in the past the group received about two-thirds of its money from foundations like the Colcom Foundation of Pittsburgh and the Weeden Foundation in New York. Many of these foundations have an interest in conservation.
Numbers USA has raised the rest of its money from individual contributors over the Internet. The group collects detailed information on its members � their ethnic background, politics, religious affiliations, occupations and concerns � so it can choose the most effective advocates on any particular issue.
In a survey question on religion, the group said the information would be useful because many lawmakers were likely to respond better to people with �a very similar religious worldview.�
�This is our citizen army,� Mr. Beck said, pointing to a map that showed members of his group in every Congressional district.
Home
World U.S. N.Y. / Region Business Technology Science Health Sports Opinion Arts Style Travel Jobs Real Estate Automobiles Back to Top
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
A Little-Known Group Claims a Victory on Immigration
July 15, 2007
A Little-Known Group Claims a Victory on Immigration
By ROBERT PEAR
WASHINGTON, July 14 � When a comprehensive immigration bill collapsed last month on the Senate floor, it was a victory for a small group that had been lobbying Congress for a decade to reduce the number of immigrants � legal and illegal � in the United States.
The group, Numbers USA, tracked every twist and turn of the bill. Its members flooded the Senate with more than a million faxes, sent through the organization�s Web site. It supplied arguments and information to senators opposing the bill.
�It was a David-and-Goliath struggle,� said Roy H. Beck, the president of Numbers USA, who had been preparing for this moment since 1996, when he wrote a book titled �The Case Against Immigration.�
Supporters of the bill included President Bush, the United States Chamber of Commerce, the high-tech industry, the Roman Catholic Church, many Hispanic organizations, farmers, restaurants, hotels and the construction industry.
�The bill had support from the opinion elite in this country,� Mr. Beck said. �But we built a grass-roots army, consumed with passion for a cause, and used the power of the Internet to go around the elites and defeat a disastrous amnesty bill.�
The measure, which died on June 28, would have offered legal status and a path to citizenship to millions of illegal immigrants and created a new temporary worker program while increasing border security.
�Numbers USA initiated and turbocharged the populist revolt against the immigration reform package,� said Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, a pro-immigrant advocacy group. �Roy Beck takes people who are upset about illegal immigration for different reasons, including hostility to Latino immigrants, and disciplines them so their message is based on policy rather than race-based arguments or xenophobia.�
Representative Brian P. Bilbray, Republican of California and chairman of the Immigration Reform Caucus, said, �We�re involved in weekly discussions with Numbers USA and other immigration-control groups as part of a team effort.�
Numbers USA had fewer than 50,000 members at the end of 2004, but now counts more than 447,000, with an increase of 83 percent since January alone.
Turning to the next phase of the debate, those members will push for enforcement of existing laws and new measures to curb the employment of illegal immigrants.
�Our No. 1 legislative goal is to begin a system of mandatory workplace verification, to confirm that every employee is a United States citizen or an alien authorized to work in this country,� said Rosemary E. Jenks, director of government relations at Numbers USA.
The organization wants to reduce immigration � as Mr. Beck says in the subtitle of his book � for �moral, economic, social and environmental reasons.�
He contends that immigrants and their children are driving population growth, which he says is gobbling up open space, causing urban sprawl and creating more traffic congestion.
Moreover, Mr. Beck asserts that immigrants and temporary workers, by increasing the supply of labor, have depressed wages in industries from meatpacking to information technology. Numbers USA has worked most closely with conservative Republicans, but in recent weeks has built alliances with Democrats who share the concern.
Numbers USA keeps a scorecard showing every vote by every member of Congress on immigration-related issues since 1989. The group assigns a letter grade to each member.
Lawmakers who received an A-plus were all Republicans and included Representatives J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois and Tom Tancredo of Colorado, a presidential candidate. The lowest grades � F-minuses � went to Democrats, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Representative Joe Baca of California, chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.
Numbers USA objects to proposals that increase the number of legal or illegal immigrants. It steers clear of debates over the allocation of visas.
�It does not matter to us whether a visa goes to a high-tech worker, a farm worker or the sibling of a U.S. citizen,� Mr. Beck said.
Numbers USA is one of many organizations fostered by John H. Tanton, an ophthalmologist from Michigan who has also championed efforts to protect the environment, limit population growth and promote English as an official language.
Critics like the Southern Poverty Law Center and Representative Chris Cannon, Republican of Utah, have described Dr. Tanton as a father of the anti-immigration movement. Mark A. Potok, a senior researcher at the law center, called Numbers USA the �kinder, gentler side of that movement.�
Mr. Beck said Numbers USA had been independent of Dr. Tanton since 2002. On the group�s Web site, Mr. Beck cautions against �immigrant bashing� and says, �Even illegal aliens deserve humane treatment as they are detected, detained and deported.�
In the fight over the Senate bill, Numbers USA had daily conference calls with conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation and the Eagle Forum.
For tax purposes, Numbers USA has two arms, an educational foundation and an advocacy group that lobbies Congress. Together, Mr. Beck said, they have a budget of $3 million this year, but will probably raise and spend $4.5 million.
Mr. Beck said that in the past the group received about two-thirds of its money from foundations like the Colcom Foundation of Pittsburgh and the Weeden Foundation in New York. Many of these foundations have an interest in conservation.
Numbers USA has raised the rest of its money from individual contributors over the Internet. The group collects detailed information on its members � their ethnic background, politics, religious affiliations, occupations and concerns � so it can choose the most effective advocates on any particular issue.
In a survey question on religion, the group said the information would be useful because many lawmakers were likely to respond better to people with �a very similar religious worldview.�
�This is our citizen army,� Mr. Beck said, pointing to a map that showed members of his group in every Congressional district.
Home
World U.S. N.Y. / Region Business Technology Science Health Sports Opinion Arts Style Travel Jobs Real Estate Automobiles Back to Top
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
more...
gsc999
07-11 02:54 PM
People who want to volunteer:
Please PM Franklin or/and me your e-mail address and phone number so that we can share the phone list. There are 380 numbers to call. So if e'one takes 50
we need seven members.
Please PM Franklin or/and me your e-mail address and phone number so that we can share the phone list. There are 380 numbers to call. So if e'one takes 50
we need seven members.
LongJourny
01-20 06:10 PM
Hi,
I was working for a company A and filed for h1 transfer through company b. I was able to transfer successfully. However, Company A realised that some how and fired me immediately. because of this I had to leave this company A before even I start working for Company B. As an Example, Company A termininated by job on august 23 rd and I started workin for the company B from August 31. I have filed, h1 transfer, while working for Company A and got approved.
I have been working for company for over a period of 3 years, got stamped once after wards, and also renewed my H1. Now I needs to get it stamped. I need to mention my previous employment history with dates along with employment letters in DS-156 form. Now I am afraid if they might reject my visa. Can you please help me understand my situation and offer any suggestion. thanks in advance
I was working for a company A and filed for h1 transfer through company b. I was able to transfer successfully. However, Company A realised that some how and fired me immediately. because of this I had to leave this company A before even I start working for Company B. As an Example, Company A termininated by job on august 23 rd and I started workin for the company B from August 31. I have filed, h1 transfer, while working for Company A and got approved.
I have been working for company for over a period of 3 years, got stamped once after wards, and also renewed my H1. Now I needs to get it stamped. I need to mention my previous employment history with dates along with employment letters in DS-156 form. Now I am afraid if they might reject my visa. Can you please help me understand my situation and offer any suggestion. thanks in advance
more...
freeskier89
01-02 02:17 AM
Is there a good way to post swfs? We can zip them, but its nice to be able to see the entries quickly. Is there any place to post them externally so the security of the forum isn't compromised? I might be able to set up an uploader in the next week for the contest on my server if it would help.
2010 love poems wallpapers
memyselfandus
11-19 07:03 PM
Seewa helps people who have undergone similar experiences as you did. Call them for advice and help. If they can't directly help you atleast they can refer to a proper organization that would.
SEWAA - Service and Education for Women Against Abuse (http://www.sewaa.net)
All the best.
SEWAA - Service and Education for Women Against Abuse (http://www.sewaa.net)
All the best.
more...
kk_kk
04-23 01:27 PM
I have chnaged my address twice in last 2 months with USCIS. One change is from zip code xxxxx to yyyyy and other with in the same zip code. Both the time, there was an soft LUD on my I-485. knock on wood, no RFE's as of yet.
hair love poems wallpapers
walking_dude
11-21 11:33 AM
You are probably refering to Cubans in Cuba and their leader Castro.
I'm refering to Cubans in Florida who are a solid 'vote bank' for Republican Party. They have even become Senators and Congressman, without sacrificing their Cuban heritage.
No they are NOT if you are talking about immigration!They are highly passionate and vocal in support for their own country and its leader (well are we???).
I'm refering to Cubans in Florida who are a solid 'vote bank' for Republican Party. They have even become Senators and Congressman, without sacrificing their Cuban heritage.
No they are NOT if you are talking about immigration!They are highly passionate and vocal in support for their own country and its leader (well are we???).
more...
delax
07-16 08:55 AM
USCIS decided a date Jun 1, 2006 to be current for EB2, so that Visa Numbers are not lost this year. This they decided on the basis of numbers of applications they were able to process by Jul 8, 2008. We all know that I485 Processing Date for NSC was Jul 28, 2007 and TSC was July 17, 2007. These dates were posted on Jun 15 and by July 8, might have moved by a day or two.
Last year USCIS announced (I remember it was last quarter) that for processing all the files received will take around 18 months. We have just 6-9 months gone.
Jul - Sep, the Priority date should not change, because USCIS has to approve all the processed application, they think approvable.
In Oct, also it may remain same, but after that, it will not be able to sustain demand and face retrogression. Nov 2008 to Jun 2009 there may be seesaw of Priority Date +/-1 years of 2005.
Jul-Aug 2009 USCIS may come across similar situation as this year - but in this case all applications of July 2007 processed - I think that time PD will be some date in 2005.
Right now Processing date might be frozen of 2-3 months, because USCIS may put entire energy in approving EB2 processed cases.
You may be correct about the PD see-saw but I am not convinced about the RD logic. I know of at least a dozen friends (EB2-I) with PD in mid 2003 who filed in June 2007 and were approved by Oct 2007. The RD during that time was in 2006.
Last year USCIS announced (I remember it was last quarter) that for processing all the files received will take around 18 months. We have just 6-9 months gone.
Jul - Sep, the Priority date should not change, because USCIS has to approve all the processed application, they think approvable.
In Oct, also it may remain same, but after that, it will not be able to sustain demand and face retrogression. Nov 2008 to Jun 2009 there may be seesaw of Priority Date +/-1 years of 2005.
Jul-Aug 2009 USCIS may come across similar situation as this year - but in this case all applications of July 2007 processed - I think that time PD will be some date in 2005.
Right now Processing date might be frozen of 2-3 months, because USCIS may put entire energy in approving EB2 processed cases.
You may be correct about the PD see-saw but I am not convinced about the RD logic. I know of at least a dozen friends (EB2-I) with PD in mid 2003 who filed in June 2007 and were approved by Oct 2007. The RD during that time was in 2006.
hot anime love poems
parablergh
09-02 04:13 PM
The officer is incorrect. The H-1B visa stamp only allows for reentry into the U.S. from abroad, it does not control your status. You can either go back and explain that the I-94 card attached to the approval notice isn't the most recent, and therefore isn't your current expiration or follow one of the other options presented above.
more...
house lyrics. love poems anime;
canmt
11-07 07:20 AM
If you do not inform USCIS there is considerable risk you will be taking if your I-140 gets revoked and subsequent RFE do not get into your hands in time.
You will have to write a simple letter stating your intent to change employer and support it with your offer letter and pending I-485 receipt. Usually, the offer letters from employers don't go into details of job duties in such cases you'll get a RFE to obtain a letter from your current employer stating your job duties. You can respond to that RFE and be rest assured that it will go into USCIS system and forget worrying about I-140 revocation for rest of your life or for that matter changing employers.
If you think your lawyer can play foul with your green card prospects. This is the right time to submit AC21 with a new G-28 so the new lawyer will get all future correspondence from USCIS otherwise you'll have to go through whole lot of trouble to get a copy of the RFE and respond to it on time.
I hope this helps and good luck on your green card pursuit...
You will have to write a simple letter stating your intent to change employer and support it with your offer letter and pending I-485 receipt. Usually, the offer letters from employers don't go into details of job duties in such cases you'll get a RFE to obtain a letter from your current employer stating your job duties. You can respond to that RFE and be rest assured that it will go into USCIS system and forget worrying about I-140 revocation for rest of your life or for that matter changing employers.
If you think your lawyer can play foul with your green card prospects. This is the right time to submit AC21 with a new G-28 so the new lawyer will get all future correspondence from USCIS otherwise you'll have to go through whole lot of trouble to get a copy of the RFE and respond to it on time.
I hope this helps and good luck on your green card pursuit...
tattoo love poems wallpapers
sandy_anand
12-08 05:50 PM
"On December 4, 2009, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you."
My PD was Dec 4, 2004. EB2. Exactly 5 years from PD and over 10 years from first entry to US. Getting stuck in the BEC backlog and my wife getting stuck in India with 221(g) were among my most painful experiences through the journey. And not being able to take a fabulous offer at double my salary in 2007 hurt too.
Thanks for all the support. And congratulations again to the leaders of IV for creating a platform for Employment based GC applicants.
Feel free to contact me if you are starting high-growth businesses and need someone to bounce ideas off. And of course I am happy to help with IV initiatives to clear EB backlog.
Bpositive.
Congratulations!
My PD was Dec 4, 2004. EB2. Exactly 5 years from PD and over 10 years from first entry to US. Getting stuck in the BEC backlog and my wife getting stuck in India with 221(g) were among my most painful experiences through the journey. And not being able to take a fabulous offer at double my salary in 2007 hurt too.
Thanks for all the support. And congratulations again to the leaders of IV for creating a platform for Employment based GC applicants.
Feel free to contact me if you are starting high-growth businesses and need someone to bounce ideas off. And of course I am happy to help with IV initiatives to clear EB backlog.
Bpositive.
Congratulations!
more...
pictures Poem/Lyrics Poster by pammys
chem2
08-29 10:14 PM
PAR: parolee
dresses Best Love Poems Our Hearts The
transpass
08-14 01:18 PM
But i noticed, All approved cases are clear, means no RFE in any stage.
I don't know about that...Cases can be approved after RFE...Some cases might have been that way...Who knows? But I have not seen postings with approvals after RFE though over the past few days...
I don't know about that...Cases can be approved after RFE...Some cases might have been that way...Who knows? But I have not seen postings with approvals after RFE though over the past few days...
more...
makeup Images for love poems images
mohitb272
12-10 07:17 PM
in my view software engineer and business analyst are NOT similar. One deals with generating lines of code and the other is taking requirements...in my view both are different...talk to your attorney...it is just my view only...and u know i am neither expert nor an attorney...
Well, In a small company as mine, people have to take a lot of other responsibilities besides development, including customer support and at times taking requirements. My role gradually changed but now I am a BA. Anyway, thanks for the advice.
Well, In a small company as mine, people have to take a lot of other responsibilities besides development, including customer support and at times taking requirements. My role gradually changed but now I am a BA. Anyway, thanks for the advice.
girlfriend nice love poem
milind70
08-04 01:42 PM
Hi,
My employer is filing my I-140 and I-485/131/765 concurrently. My lawyer/representative send a list which says G-28 signed by lawyer and my employer. I understand for I-140, G-28 is signed by lawyer and employer(petitioner). When filed concurrently is one G-28 is enough for whole forms?
I read we need to have G-28 form for each form and for 485/131/765 forms G-28 should be signed by the actual applicant and the lawyer instead of the petitioner(my employer). Right now in my case there is only G-28 form they were sending that was signed by my employer(petitioner) and the lawyer...is one G-28 is fine for whole application packet when filed concurrently...
USCIS website clearly says without G-28 form they will reject the application right away...but it didn't mentioned for each form though...but all my colleagues says they signed three G-28 forms one each 485/765/131...i am little confused and concerend..please suggest..
thanks in advance..
For 140 G 28 needs to signed by employer and lawyer.
For 485 related g 28 neeeds to signed by applicants and lawyer.
My lawyer asked for 4 copies of G 28
My employer is filing my I-140 and I-485/131/765 concurrently. My lawyer/representative send a list which says G-28 signed by lawyer and my employer. I understand for I-140, G-28 is signed by lawyer and employer(petitioner). When filed concurrently is one G-28 is enough for whole forms?
I read we need to have G-28 form for each form and for 485/131/765 forms G-28 should be signed by the actual applicant and the lawyer instead of the petitioner(my employer). Right now in my case there is only G-28 form they were sending that was signed by my employer(petitioner) and the lawyer...is one G-28 is fine for whole application packet when filed concurrently...
USCIS website clearly says without G-28 form they will reject the application right away...but it didn't mentioned for each form though...but all my colleagues says they signed three G-28 forms one each 485/765/131...i am little confused and concerend..please suggest..
thanks in advance..
For 140 G 28 needs to signed by employer and lawyer.
For 485 related g 28 neeeds to signed by applicants and lawyer.
My lawyer asked for 4 copies of G 28
hairstyles Love Poems Lyrics »
ilikekilo
06-07 05:45 PM
I am surprised with this thread. There is no Deadline for employemnt based GC (this was mentioned by Sen. Robert (Bob) Men�ndez,NJ when requesting to move the FB deadline which is clearly mentioned in the bill as May 01, 2005) . Please read the summary and text carefully.
Summary:
First five years
Total number of merit-based green cards includes sum of:
a.) First five fiscal years have same number of green cards as made available to EB category in 2005. This number is 246,878.
b.) Any visa number not used by family based category.
How the total number will be divided between Current system and new merit-based system and Y visa holders --
- 10,000 (or more) reserved for exceptional aliens under �Y� visa category.
- 90,000 (exactly 90,000 � not more not less) for backlogged (pending or approved I-140 applications). Currently, this number is 140,000.
- Remaining possibly goes to new merits system. Until the merits system is ready for accepting petitions, the Y visa holders probably get a shot at this since the clause says �No more than 10,000� � leaving room to let it go up from 10,000 to whatever is left.
and the TEXT of the Bill
�(A) for the first five fiscal years shall be equal to the
33 number of immigrant visas made available to aliens
34 seeking immigrant visas under section 203(b) of this
35 Act for fiscal year 2005, plus any immigrant visas
36 not required for the class specified in (c), of which:
37 (i) at least 10,000 will be for exceptional aliens
38 in nonimmigrant status under section
39 101(a)(15)(Y); and
40 (ii) 90,000 will be for aliens who were the
41 beneficiaries of an application that was pending
42 or approved at the time of the effective date of
43 this section, per Section 502(d) of the [Insert
44 title of Act] ( Act not the bill)
(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.�The amendments made by this section shall take
11 effect on the first day of the fiscal year subsequent to the fiscal year of
12 enactment.
So a bill becomes law only after signed by the president, and the effective date could be Oct 01, 2007 if not Oct 01, 2008.
So all the I-140 filed on of before Effective date are considered as pending!!
I don't know why even lawyers are getting confused here!:confused:
ok veni..stop geeting surprised and pl contribute for your sake
Summary:
First five years
Total number of merit-based green cards includes sum of:
a.) First five fiscal years have same number of green cards as made available to EB category in 2005. This number is 246,878.
b.) Any visa number not used by family based category.
How the total number will be divided between Current system and new merit-based system and Y visa holders --
- 10,000 (or more) reserved for exceptional aliens under �Y� visa category.
- 90,000 (exactly 90,000 � not more not less) for backlogged (pending or approved I-140 applications). Currently, this number is 140,000.
- Remaining possibly goes to new merits system. Until the merits system is ready for accepting petitions, the Y visa holders probably get a shot at this since the clause says �No more than 10,000� � leaving room to let it go up from 10,000 to whatever is left.
and the TEXT of the Bill
�(A) for the first five fiscal years shall be equal to the
33 number of immigrant visas made available to aliens
34 seeking immigrant visas under section 203(b) of this
35 Act for fiscal year 2005, plus any immigrant visas
36 not required for the class specified in (c), of which:
37 (i) at least 10,000 will be for exceptional aliens
38 in nonimmigrant status under section
39 101(a)(15)(Y); and
40 (ii) 90,000 will be for aliens who were the
41 beneficiaries of an application that was pending
42 or approved at the time of the effective date of
43 this section, per Section 502(d) of the [Insert
44 title of Act] ( Act not the bill)
(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.�The amendments made by this section shall take
11 effect on the first day of the fiscal year subsequent to the fiscal year of
12 enactment.
So a bill becomes law only after signed by the president, and the effective date could be Oct 01, 2007 if not Oct 01, 2008.
So all the I-140 filed on of before Effective date are considered as pending!!
I don't know why even lawyers are getting confused here!:confused:
ok veni..stop geeting surprised and pl contribute for your sake
GC Khichdi
10-24 03:44 PM
Once H-1B extension is received, one gets all the luxuries like any other H-1B. You can change jobs any day you want. Having that said, there are few things you have to re-do. Get the H-1B stamped if you change jobs. You have to re-start the GC process from scratch, yet you get to keep the PD and at the same time can switch to any EB catagory.
Before LC PERM process started, people didn't change jobs as LC could take any where from 2 to 4 years and re-starting the GC process was just no brainer. Now, as it takes 45days or less (theoraticaly) people easily change jobs and get H-1 transferred as well as get new GC process started and get LC in 45 days and then I-140 approved (with premium processing) in another 2 weeks.
So you once you change jobs you can get to the same stage where you are in two months if you start GC process right-away.
For tips to the other readers.
Some employers has company policy where they support the H-1 transfer (financially also) and then one has to wait for 1 or 2 years before they initiate GC process. The mostly the excuse is "Budget is fixed for a year".
One can propose a solution to this. Ask them, "What if I pay for the charges incurred for GC process if they agree to initiate right away and when s/he finishes one year of employment, reimburse the charges"
This has worked in many cases as doing such bothe employer and employee gets best of both worlds.
Before LC PERM process started, people didn't change jobs as LC could take any where from 2 to 4 years and re-starting the GC process was just no brainer. Now, as it takes 45days or less (theoraticaly) people easily change jobs and get H-1 transferred as well as get new GC process started and get LC in 45 days and then I-140 approved (with premium processing) in another 2 weeks.
So you once you change jobs you can get to the same stage where you are in two months if you start GC process right-away.
For tips to the other readers.
Some employers has company policy where they support the H-1 transfer (financially also) and then one has to wait for 1 or 2 years before they initiate GC process. The mostly the excuse is "Budget is fixed for a year".
One can propose a solution to this. Ask them, "What if I pay for the charges incurred for GC process if they agree to initiate right away and when s/he finishes one year of employment, reimburse the charges"
This has worked in many cases as doing such bothe employer and employee gets best of both worlds.
Chiwere
01-14 11:15 AM
Initially I had sent:
a. 1 letter from Company A
States my title, skills dates
b. 2 letters from Company B.
1 generic letter from HR stating dates, no skills
1 letter from colleague stating title, skills, dates
I think the problem is with the Letter provided by the colleague. USCIS might be looking for a letter from Company B on the lines of that from A.
Just Resending the letters as-is might not work- my 2paise.
a. 1 letter from Company A
States my title, skills dates
b. 2 letters from Company B.
1 generic letter from HR stating dates, no skills
1 letter from colleague stating title, skills, dates
I think the problem is with the Letter provided by the colleague. USCIS might be looking for a letter from Company B on the lines of that from A.
Just Resending the letters as-is might not work- my 2paise.
No comments:
Post a Comment