p.guptapost
11-06 05:54 PM
2 K number comes from I485 inventory report from USCIS. It shows 2K visas filed overall in 2009 till Aug.
mrdelhiite
08-07 10:57 AM
Though its not mentioned it is good file I-134. You are not eligible for I-864.
Yes u are right about I-864. Any employement based green card like ours ( EB2/EB3) should not file it. Here is the text from the I864 form -->
Employment-based preference immigrants in cases onlywhen a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident relativefiled the immigrant visa petition or such relative has asignificant ownership interest (five percent or more) in theentity that filed the petition.
Thanks a ton for your help guys. :-)
-M
Yes u are right about I-864. Any employement based green card like ours ( EB2/EB3) should not file it. Here is the text from the I864 form -->
Employment-based preference immigrants in cases onlywhen a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident relativefiled the immigrant visa petition or such relative has asignificant ownership interest (five percent or more) in theentity that filed the petition.
Thanks a ton for your help guys. :-)
-M
vejella
08-01 01:40 PM
I have seen many cases where the GC is given to primary applicant and none of his /her benificiaries got GC and otherwise , even though their name checks are cleared.
My Guess is for x number of GCs processed during last week of june, most of the 2008 quota is consumed by their benificiaries just to clean up the mess.
For the retrogressed countries /categories with thighter quota restrictions , i would not be too much hopefull for atleast couple of years.
Just MY 2Cents
My Guess is for x number of GCs processed during last week of june, most of the 2008 quota is consumed by their benificiaries just to clean up the mess.
For the retrogressed countries /categories with thighter quota restrictions , i would not be too much hopefull for atleast couple of years.
Just MY 2Cents
kaisersose
08-01 01:29 PM
But dont you guys expect improvement after all this fiasco ?
Do you not agree that INS will learn some lessons from this ?
They certainly have. We will not see dates becoming C ever again.
They may also come up with a new system where the DOS bulletin is only for USCIS use and we will file 485s based on another bulletin released by USCIS, which will be a more accurate reflection of what is happening inside USCIS.
Do you not agree that INS will learn some lessons from this ?
They certainly have. We will not see dates becoming C ever again.
They may also come up with a new system where the DOS bulletin is only for USCIS use and we will file 485s based on another bulletin released by USCIS, which will be a more accurate reflection of what is happening inside USCIS.
more...
Scythe
11-25 07:08 PM
All the buttons should be put into one jpeg, so we can see them all side by side. 2 rows with 5 buttons each.
Leo07
09-16 05:52 PM
done done done...
more...
puskeygadha
05-22 11:33 AM
My question was
how long after the comment period the rule will be implemented from
past experience
how long after the comment period the rule will be implemented from
past experience
Roger Binny
04-06 01:14 AM
If your case is I-140 + I- 485 applied at the same time, then word on the street is they will process both at the same time rather than processing I140 first then wait for visa dates and process I485, hope you are already aware of this rumor/speculation or truth.
more...
dingudi
06-08 07:59 PM
I don't live in the tri-state...
I have my W-2's from 99 and 00 so no need to call the University.
What I dont have is the actual return (1040nr) which I "mailed" at that time.
Who in the world makes copies of a tax form that was actually mailed. Oh, and kept it for 9 years!!!
You mention that you had graduate assistantship in 1999-2000 on F1. This means that you were paid for this assistantship , in terms of bi-weekly or monthly paycheck, correct? And you did file returns for that year as well as obviously you have W2.
So you may even have another effort to convince the IO that the W2 that you are providing is in fact because you worked as graduate assistant on-campus which is allowed being on F1 for the first 9 months of F1 and that you did not take any illegal work authorization. This should be obvious from employer name on W2 which is most likely the university. But make sure whoever is your attorney is , they make this point clear.
I have my W-2's from 99 and 00 so no need to call the University.
What I dont have is the actual return (1040nr) which I "mailed" at that time.
Who in the world makes copies of a tax form that was actually mailed. Oh, and kept it for 9 years!!!
You mention that you had graduate assistantship in 1999-2000 on F1. This means that you were paid for this assistantship , in terms of bi-weekly or monthly paycheck, correct? And you did file returns for that year as well as obviously you have W2.
So you may even have another effort to convince the IO that the W2 that you are providing is in fact because you worked as graduate assistant on-campus which is allowed being on F1 for the first 9 months of F1 and that you did not take any illegal work authorization. This should be obvious from employer name on W2 which is most likely the university. But make sure whoever is your attorney is , they make this point clear.
coopheal
12-04 05:15 PM
I cannot make it to the rally but will contribute 100$ towards the efforts.
Thanks
Thanks
more...
rajuram
11-08 11:54 PM
According to the following document from USCIS they issued receipts for approx 150K applications for AOS in sept. So my estimate of the total back log is
June filers 75k
July - 25k
August 200k
Sept 150k
Oct 50K
Total = 500k
http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/APPLICATIONS%20FOR%20IMMIGRATION%20BENEFITS_Septem ber07.pdf
June filers 75k
July - 25k
August 200k
Sept 150k
Oct 50K
Total = 500k
http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/APPLICATIONS%20FOR%20IMMIGRATION%20BENEFITS_Septem ber07.pdf
cbpds
06-08 02:52 PM
Appreciate your response kondur, we have submitted the original I94, hence we shd be fine.
In my opinion, you do not really have to. here are a few points (to the best of my knowledge):
1. Surrendering I 94 establishes the day/date when you left US.
2. If you have more than one I 94 (from the same entry), the "white one" will be attached to your passport and others (that came with extension or change of status) will be attached to your approval notices. THEY ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SAME NUMBER. So, technically you have to surrender them all when you leave the country, but if you surrender any one of them, it still establishes the same thing and you do not need to do anything about the rest.
3. If you forgot to return I 94 altogether, keep a record of your leaving US on specific date (copy of boarding passes, passport stamp of entry in another country etc) and you can use that as an evidence of leaving in time (if asked about it in future). OR you can return your I 94 at a laterdate with these copies attached to USCIS.
I have not heard of anyone getting in trouble because of not returning I 94 (please correct me on this if any of you have heard of it) - as long as they did not overstay.
In my opinion, you do not really have to. here are a few points (to the best of my knowledge):
1. Surrendering I 94 establishes the day/date when you left US.
2. If you have more than one I 94 (from the same entry), the "white one" will be attached to your passport and others (that came with extension or change of status) will be attached to your approval notices. THEY ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SAME NUMBER. So, technically you have to surrender them all when you leave the country, but if you surrender any one of them, it still establishes the same thing and you do not need to do anything about the rest.
3. If you forgot to return I 94 altogether, keep a record of your leaving US on specific date (copy of boarding passes, passport stamp of entry in another country etc) and you can use that as an evidence of leaving in time (if asked about it in future). OR you can return your I 94 at a laterdate with these copies attached to USCIS.
I have not heard of anyone getting in trouble because of not returning I 94 (please correct me on this if any of you have heard of it) - as long as they did not overstay.
more...
eb3retro
05-29 10:30 PM
I have an emergency to go to India to take care of my sickly mom and I need to return back to work on July first. I am also trying to get emergency appointment. I couldnt. Could you please suggest the way I can get emergency appointment in any of the consulate.
sent u a pm pls respond. thanks
sent u a pm pls respond. thanks
chantu
06-04 10:13 AM
I had a account in Bank of America, and they sent me a letter when i asked them to send a "Account verification letter for Immigration purposes" They charged me $10 for that and took around a week. See if you can open a account at a local bank and try transfering the money to that account, Before you decide on opening a account , confirm if they issue such a letter.
I advise not to do like this guy is saying. My suggesstion is if it is really not possible for you to get the letter, just send last 6 months of bank statements. And let your parent tell VO that your bank gives letter in person & you live far away from that bank. Majority cases, they will not even ask for any bank letters or statements. My suggesstion is to send both Indiana bank and HSBC bank statements for last 6 months. That will be good.
I advise not to do like this guy is saying. My suggesstion is if it is really not possible for you to get the letter, just send last 6 months of bank statements. And let your parent tell VO that your bank gives letter in person & you live far away from that bank. Majority cases, they will not even ask for any bank letters or statements. My suggesstion is to send both Indiana bank and HSBC bank statements for last 6 months. That will be good.
more...
indyanguy
10-19 02:10 PM
Interesting thread. For all those who've gotten their hands dirty in the stock market, can you recommend any message boards that conducts healthy discussions for taking advantage of the volatility in the short term. I have looked at yahoo, aol, msn and google and most of them are non sensible discussions without much factual info.
Thanks!
Thanks!
ram_ram
06-08 02:16 PM
Not possible. You can carry your PD once the 140(based on the labor that has the PD) is approved. Not the other way..
more...
ca_immigrant
07-25 07:49 PM
Folks,
What is the best and most cost effective way to send some money home ?
Till last year I was using the service from icici and was under the belief that the exchange rate was pretty decent. the service I believe was never free as they make up for service fee though the exchange rate.
Today for example when I check on icici it says they will give a rate of 47.63 per $ which I believe means around half a rupee less per $ ?
so for $1000 they are essentially charging Rs 500 (aound $10)
I beleive previously they were giving around 25 paise less per $ and now it looks like it is 50 paise less per dollor ?
Western union charges $15 and also gives a lower exchange rate than icici.
So would that mean ICICI isthe best cost effective one ?
Ideas ?
Thanks,
What is the best and most cost effective way to send some money home ?
Till last year I was using the service from icici and was under the belief that the exchange rate was pretty decent. the service I believe was never free as they make up for service fee though the exchange rate.
Today for example when I check on icici it says they will give a rate of 47.63 per $ which I believe means around half a rupee less per $ ?
so for $1000 they are essentially charging Rs 500 (aound $10)
I beleive previously they were giving around 25 paise less per $ and now it looks like it is 50 paise less per dollor ?
Western union charges $15 and also gives a lower exchange rate than icici.
So would that mean ICICI isthe best cost effective one ?
Ideas ?
Thanks,
dontcareaboutGC
03-19 11:24 AM
Ignore this if this is a repost!
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
chanduv23
07-27 09:50 PM
The good indication of anyone 485 is pre-adjudicated, if LUD changes continously for 3 or 4 days on their online account with uscis. To notice thist, one has to moniter every day. If they receive RFE, it is the good indication of the application will be pre-adjudicated based on the aswer to the RFE. If they recive answer to RFE, the LUD will normalyy change with in 10 days continously. Pre-adjudicatred does not mean that it is 100% pre-approved. They may ask a question at the time of approval, if the 485 is pending for pro-lonnged time after it is pre-adjudicated.
Need not necessarily be the case. Soft LUDs are not reliable and sometimes the online system never reflects LUDs, but offocurse when there are soft LUDs it is obvious that the file is being processed and status getting updated.
There could be cases that are preadjudicated but we never really see any continuous soft LUDs and there could be cases that arenot preadjudicated but we see tons of LUDs hitting.
I spoke to a person who recently received his GC - no LUDs nothing, no status change after responding to RFE and no approval email - the GCs were lying in the mailbox one fine day.
Need not necessarily be the case. Soft LUDs are not reliable and sometimes the online system never reflects LUDs, but offocurse when there are soft LUDs it is obvious that the file is being processed and status getting updated.
There could be cases that are preadjudicated but we never really see any continuous soft LUDs and there could be cases that arenot preadjudicated but we see tons of LUDs hitting.
I spoke to a person who recently received his GC - no LUDs nothing, no status change after responding to RFE and no approval email - the GCs were lying in the mailbox one fine day.
anindya1234
07-17 10:34 PM
You are OK. This is taken from the 485 instructions.
File all employment-based AOS applications at the following address:
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
P.O. Box 87485
Lincoln, NE 68501-7485
This includes an employment-based Form I-485 filed concurrently with a Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, and an employment-based Form I-485 filed based on a pending or an approved Form I-140. To facilitate acceptance and processing of Form I-485 when Form I-140 has already been approved, submit a copy of the I-140 approval notice.
Actually my I-140 was approved from TSC; 485 was sent to TSC..but the employment letter in the package was addressed to NSC....will that be a problem?
File all employment-based AOS applications at the following address:
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
P.O. Box 87485
Lincoln, NE 68501-7485
This includes an employment-based Form I-485 filed concurrently with a Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, and an employment-based Form I-485 filed based on a pending or an approved Form I-140. To facilitate acceptance and processing of Form I-485 when Form I-140 has already been approved, submit a copy of the I-140 approval notice.
Actually my I-140 was approved from TSC; 485 was sent to TSC..but the employment letter in the package was addressed to NSC....will that be a problem?
WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC
06-24 03:19 PM
Rupert Murdoch, Mayor Bloomberg Lobby For Immigration Reform, Path To 'Legal Status' For Illegal Immigrants (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/24/rupert-murdoch-mayor-bloo_n_623805.html)
Excellent.
Let them lobby.
Agriculture sector and Tech firms, Construction, Latinos have been lobbying for years now but nothing happened.
Immigration will be taken up during the next year. The Top Agenda is energy bill for this year. No Matter who lobbyies nothing gonna matter.
Next year if Reps gain majority in the Senate then It will be tough battle.
Amnesty will not come easy.
If the fight between reps and dems become too intense. No CIR next year either.
Adjobs,dream act,some EB relief, tough border, Fine employers may pass piece meal
which will calm down most of the Immigration lobbyist next year.
If God forbid the market does not pickup next year, jobs, housings, finance .. CIR will be nearly impossible.
Bernanke
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2010-06-08-bernanke_N.htm
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6523SN20100609
Excellent.
Let them lobby.
Agriculture sector and Tech firms, Construction, Latinos have been lobbying for years now but nothing happened.
Immigration will be taken up during the next year. The Top Agenda is energy bill for this year. No Matter who lobbyies nothing gonna matter.
Next year if Reps gain majority in the Senate then It will be tough battle.
Amnesty will not come easy.
If the fight between reps and dems become too intense. No CIR next year either.
Adjobs,dream act,some EB relief, tough border, Fine employers may pass piece meal
which will calm down most of the Immigration lobbyist next year.
If God forbid the market does not pickup next year, jobs, housings, finance .. CIR will be nearly impossible.
Bernanke
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2010-06-08-bernanke_N.htm
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6523SN20100609
