laksmi
12-12 06:23 PM
You are not supposed to work on EAD until unless it�s renewed that is sure, you can work on H1B for your H1B employer if H1B is not revoked.
I suggest a attorneys advice on H1B once.
I suggest a attorneys advice on H1B once.
wallpaper Return to Gold Rush Images
Blog Feeds
04-06 10:50 AM
Immigration Visa Attorney Blog Has Just Posted the Following:
The Barack Obama Administration recently announced that border guards at United States Ports of Entry (POE) will begin screening aliens arriving from certain countries based on specific information about threats to the USA. The immigration attorneys at Los Angeles' Fong & Chun immigration law firm are advocates for national security balanced against sensible protections for civil rights. We hope this change will reduce the number of unwarranted, unreasonable, and (usually) unfriendly challenges to certain arriving visitors.
Since the New York terrorist attack in September 2001, the USA has maintained a list of approximately fourteen countries (the so-called "group of fourteen") which are considered to encourage state-sponsored terrorism, or which are believed to provide assistance to terrorists. The US would not even officially name the specific countries, or confirm the exact number of countries, on the list. All citizens of one of these countries -- of any gender, any age, any social class, any educational level, for any reason -- would be subjected to additional interrogation by US Border Guards.
The newly-announced change sets up a system which uses intelligence information and threat assessment -- about specific persons, specific targets, and specific descriptions, to identify passengers who might have a link to terrorism. Quite properly, those persons would be subjected to additional scrutiny. Others who do not meet the more reasoned threat profiles would be allowed to enter the USA in the way of other visitors.
For example: most people in the know would say that the Islamic Republic of Iran was part of the group of fourteen. All citizens from Iran -- absolutely all -- would be pulled aside and interrogated at POEs. Under the new system, if the US has specific information about a 26-year old male Iranian student, or an Iranian woman with a certain name, or even someone with a partial passport number, then persons meeting those descriptions will be pulled aside. This allows border guards to focus their efforts on persons about whom the USA has specific threat-related information. --jcf
More... (http://www.immigrationvisaattorneyblog.com/2010/04/border-guards-will-finally-use.html)
The Barack Obama Administration recently announced that border guards at United States Ports of Entry (POE) will begin screening aliens arriving from certain countries based on specific information about threats to the USA. The immigration attorneys at Los Angeles' Fong & Chun immigration law firm are advocates for national security balanced against sensible protections for civil rights. We hope this change will reduce the number of unwarranted, unreasonable, and (usually) unfriendly challenges to certain arriving visitors.
Since the New York terrorist attack in September 2001, the USA has maintained a list of approximately fourteen countries (the so-called "group of fourteen") which are considered to encourage state-sponsored terrorism, or which are believed to provide assistance to terrorists. The US would not even officially name the specific countries, or confirm the exact number of countries, on the list. All citizens of one of these countries -- of any gender, any age, any social class, any educational level, for any reason -- would be subjected to additional interrogation by US Border Guards.
The newly-announced change sets up a system which uses intelligence information and threat assessment -- about specific persons, specific targets, and specific descriptions, to identify passengers who might have a link to terrorism. Quite properly, those persons would be subjected to additional scrutiny. Others who do not meet the more reasoned threat profiles would be allowed to enter the USA in the way of other visitors.
For example: most people in the know would say that the Islamic Republic of Iran was part of the group of fourteen. All citizens from Iran -- absolutely all -- would be pulled aside and interrogated at POEs. Under the new system, if the US has specific information about a 26-year old male Iranian student, or an Iranian woman with a certain name, or even someone with a partial passport number, then persons meeting those descriptions will be pulled aside. This allows border guards to focus their efforts on persons about whom the USA has specific threat-related information. --jcf
More... (http://www.immigrationvisaattorneyblog.com/2010/04/border-guards-will-finally-use.html)
unluckydude
06-01 10:00 AM
My online 485 status shows "card/document production" for a long time now and I did not get the card yet. I had contacted USCIS several times thru lawyer and never got any reply. My lawyer said that could have been a mistake.
I finally called hte USCIS directly and got the reply from the Phone rep that my 485 is approved and will open a ticket to find out why my card has not arrived. After a week or so I got a letter from USCIS quoting my earlier call and said my PD is Jan'04 and currently the availablity is only for Apr '02 and I have to wait till the PD is current for case.
There was never an explanation about why my online status shows the card/document in production.
In this case, what are my options ? Please help.
Can't explain the kind of emotional and psychological trauma we go thru ever since we saw online status and subsequent messages from USCIS.
-Unlucky Dude
I finally called hte USCIS directly and got the reply from the Phone rep that my 485 is approved and will open a ticket to find out why my card has not arrived. After a week or so I got a letter from USCIS quoting my earlier call and said my PD is Jan'04 and currently the availablity is only for Apr '02 and I have to wait till the PD is current for case.
There was never an explanation about why my online status shows the card/document in production.
In this case, what are my options ? Please help.
Can't explain the kind of emotional and psychological trauma we go thru ever since we saw online status and subsequent messages from USCIS.
-Unlucky Dude
2011 Oh, those glorious Gold Rush
jaya_chh
09-19 11:35 AM
Hello All,
I got my H1B in 2006 and started working in Nov 2006. My employer while filing my H1 petition- on my LCA mentioned that I would work in OH.
From Jan this year, I started working in NJ but my employer did not file a LCA for NJ.
Now I have to get my H1 stamped from Mumbai consulate and the lawyer tells me that this could be a problem.
As of now, he filed LCA for NJ, but says that he doesn't have a answer to why it was not done in Jan and that my stamping at Mumbai.
Has anyone faced such a issue.
Please share your experiences and views.
Thanks.
I got my H1B in 2006 and started working in Nov 2006. My employer while filing my H1 petition- on my LCA mentioned that I would work in OH.
From Jan this year, I started working in NJ but my employer did not file a LCA for NJ.
Now I have to get my H1 stamped from Mumbai consulate and the lawyer tells me that this could be a problem.
As of now, he filed LCA for NJ, but says that he doesn't have a answer to why it was not done in Jan and that my stamping at Mumbai.
Has anyone faced such a issue.
Please share your experiences and views.
Thanks.
more...
watzgc
11-05 07:47 PM
friends, any reply? thnks
GC444
08-11 10:24 PM
all my games, Gamesboys, GameCubes, my bike, tennis rackets and all. Since I am addicted to IV so much I don't have time to play.
My wife is so jealous that if she sees IV site on my PC she asks me to change goo(shit in English) filled dipers of our baby...:eek:
I would rather do that millions of time (diaper thing) then wait for the stupid GC , i would do anything for the baby !!!!!! Your wife is right !!!!
My wife is so jealous that if she sees IV site on my PC she asks me to change goo(shit in English) filled dipers of our baby...:eek:
I would rather do that millions of time (diaper thing) then wait for the stupid GC , i would do anything for the baby !!!!!! Your wife is right !!!!
more...
sarosi
04-16 09:41 PM
I have the following status working with the original H1B employer who filed for my green card petition:
1) PD Jan, 2007, EB3-I
2) I-140 approved and pending AOS
3) 2 yrs. EAD available, expiring Sep. 2011
4) H1B will be expiring within 3 months (1 year left from 6 years limit)
My questions,
1) Can I use EAD instead of extending H1B? I want to stay with the same employer as a
full time employee.
2) If yes, is it required to inform INS? How and when?
3) In that case, how me, my son (middle school student, H4 & pending AOS) and wife's (EAD & pending AOS) stay in US will be justified with no valid I-94 (assuming I am not extending H1B anymore) ?
Answers to my above questions will be highly appreciated.:confused:
1) PD Jan, 2007, EB3-I
2) I-140 approved and pending AOS
3) 2 yrs. EAD available, expiring Sep. 2011
4) H1B will be expiring within 3 months (1 year left from 6 years limit)
My questions,
1) Can I use EAD instead of extending H1B? I want to stay with the same employer as a
full time employee.
2) If yes, is it required to inform INS? How and when?
3) In that case, how me, my son (middle school student, H4 & pending AOS) and wife's (EAD & pending AOS) stay in US will be justified with no valid I-94 (assuming I am not extending H1B anymore) ?
Answers to my above questions will be highly appreciated.:confused:
2010 miners
same_old_guy
10-23 05:31 PM
Who told you that ? I am sure it wasn't any lawyer !!
more...
Blog Feeds
06-03 03:40 PM
VIA AILA
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Wednesday, June 3, 2009CONTACT:
George Tzamaras
202-507-7649
<a href="mailto:" gtzamaras@aila.org"="" style="color: rgb(51, 102, 153); ">gtzamaras@aila.org
ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER RESTORES DUE PROCESS FOR IMMIGRANTS INJURED BY INEFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION:
AILA praises decision by Attorney General to withdraw Matter of Compean.
WASHINGTON, DC*� The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) welcomes the restoration of due process in the Immigration Court system. Attorney General Eric Holder today withdrew the decision issued by former Attorney General Mukasey on the last day of the Bush Administration, which had eviscerated the right to effective representation in Immigration Court proceedings. Attorney General Holder had stated during his confirmation process that he would review the Mukasey decision and that he disagreed with its reasoning. AILA is grateful for this restoration of a basic constitutional process�Due Process, in the immigration court system.
AILA commends Attorney General Holder for living up to his word, and for his clarity of understanding of not only the constitutional principle of due process, but also for the boldness with which he acted today. �The restoration of the prior standard for claiming ineffective representation in immigration court proceedings is a welcome sign that the Obama administration understands that the rights that apply to the least of us, apply to all of us,� said Charles H. Kuck, president of AILA. �By ensuring that immigrants seeking relief from the harsh consequences of deportation are assured that they will not be punished by the ineffective actions of their counsel, Attorney General Holder has reset the standard that the Constitution ensures. Today�s action, along with the other positive signs from the Administration signal that a restoration of our most sacred principles of justice has begun.�
###The American Immigration Lawyers Association is the national association of immigration lawyers established to promote justice, advocate for fair and reasonable immigration law and policy, advance the quality of immigration and nationality law and practice, and enhance the professional development of its members.
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/06/03/aila-praises-decision-by-attorney-general-to-withdraw-matter-of-compean.aspx?ref=rss)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Wednesday, June 3, 2009CONTACT:
George Tzamaras
202-507-7649
<a href="mailto:" gtzamaras@aila.org"="" style="color: rgb(51, 102, 153); ">gtzamaras@aila.org
ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER RESTORES DUE PROCESS FOR IMMIGRANTS INJURED BY INEFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION:
AILA praises decision by Attorney General to withdraw Matter of Compean.
WASHINGTON, DC*� The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) welcomes the restoration of due process in the Immigration Court system. Attorney General Eric Holder today withdrew the decision issued by former Attorney General Mukasey on the last day of the Bush Administration, which had eviscerated the right to effective representation in Immigration Court proceedings. Attorney General Holder had stated during his confirmation process that he would review the Mukasey decision and that he disagreed with its reasoning. AILA is grateful for this restoration of a basic constitutional process�Due Process, in the immigration court system.
AILA commends Attorney General Holder for living up to his word, and for his clarity of understanding of not only the constitutional principle of due process, but also for the boldness with which he acted today. �The restoration of the prior standard for claiming ineffective representation in immigration court proceedings is a welcome sign that the Obama administration understands that the rights that apply to the least of us, apply to all of us,� said Charles H. Kuck, president of AILA. �By ensuring that immigrants seeking relief from the harsh consequences of deportation are assured that they will not be punished by the ineffective actions of their counsel, Attorney General Holder has reset the standard that the Constitution ensures. Today�s action, along with the other positive signs from the Administration signal that a restoration of our most sacred principles of justice has begun.�
###The American Immigration Lawyers Association is the national association of immigration lawyers established to promote justice, advocate for fair and reasonable immigration law and policy, advance the quality of immigration and nationality law and practice, and enhance the professional development of its members.
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/06/03/aila-praises-decision-by-attorney-general-to-withdraw-matter-of-compean.aspx?ref=rss)
hair The Klondike Gold Rush (1896)
Saralayar
07-10 05:45 PM
IMO there is a good chance you will qualify for EB2. When doing educational evaluation, you should base your claim on your masters degree. That way you would qualify.
The worst part is in justifying an EB2 case. As the job market is very bad and many US citizens with the required qualification for the position are available, it will be very difficult for the company to justify that no one in this country is available except you for this position. Lot of big companies are afraid as there is a strict AUDIT that will be enforeced by USCIS in case they have a doubt about the non availability of a citizen for that position.
The worst part is in justifying an EB2 case. As the job market is very bad and many US citizens with the required qualification for the position are available, it will be very difficult for the company to justify that no one in this country is available except you for this position. Lot of big companies are afraid as there is a strict AUDIT that will be enforeced by USCIS in case they have a doubt about the non availability of a citizen for that position.
more...
calgirl
08-07 03:27 PM
I have maybe a similar scenario..
MY 485 and old EAD have SRC hence at Texas. But I noticed that my new EAD has been applied for and has LIN.
Any ideas why would my lawyer do this?
MY 485 and old EAD have SRC hence at Texas. But I noticed that my new EAD has been applied for and has LIN.
Any ideas why would my lawyer do this?
hot California Gold Rush Miners in
mrajatish
04-26 11:41 PM
That is just so wrong - you need BS and MS, it does not matter how long your MS takes.
more...
house Gold Rush - OpenContent
gg_ny
10-18 10:46 AM
Hi,
I anticipate an inevitable situation arising out regarding my parents' health, that would require us to move back to India sometime in 2007. My EB2 NIW PD is Dec 2004. Does somebody out there with knowledge about issues and procedures connected with transferring from AOS application to Consular processing in India?
Thanks.
-gg_ny
I anticipate an inevitable situation arising out regarding my parents' health, that would require us to move back to India sometime in 2007. My EB2 NIW PD is Dec 2004. Does somebody out there with knowledge about issues and procedures connected with transferring from AOS application to Consular processing in India?
Thanks.
-gg_ny
tattoo www.
salvador marley
04-24 05:47 PM
sorry here
more...
pictures of gold miners,
GCDreaming
10-25 10:56 PM
All,
I am currently unemployed and my spouse needs to travel to Mumbai urgently. Our AP is valid through November 30, 2009. Will there be any issues for my wife when she comes back - possibly because of my current status. Wife is employed (with a different company)& the EAD/AP was filed by my last employer. Responses will be appreciated. Thanks!
I am currently unemployed and my spouse needs to travel to Mumbai urgently. Our AP is valid through November 30, 2009. Will there be any issues for my wife when she comes back - possibly because of my current status. Wife is employed (with a different company)& the EAD/AP was filed by my last employer. Responses will be appreciated. Thanks!
dresses Chinese Miners: Gam Saam Meets
MYGCBY2010
07-23 03:12 PM
Me and my spouse both work on H1B and I am applying for I-485 along with EAD/AP for both me and my spouse. My question is since my spouse is already in H1B with certain job title which was mentioned in one of the documents that was filled with i-485, when spouse uses EAD does she need to be looking for similiar jobs only?. Please clarify. Thanks in advance.
more...
makeup California Gold Rush Miners in
aaren253
02-19 02:50 AM
I am 15 years old travelling alone on American Airlines from Toronto YYZ, Canada to Delhi, India via Chicago ORD. Will there be any problems for a 15 year old travelling alone.
girlfriend mini rush when he later
rajenk
11-18 05:38 PM
What I have heard was they ask for a copy of I-140 approval. No Original needed. Also I don't think you'll get the original I-140 approval, that is a petitioner's document to own. You should be able to get a copy of I-140 from your employer/attorney.
Make sure to get the original approval copy. Not the courtesy copy. The courtesy copy will clearly state that you cannot get any benefit/proof based on that copy. When you get a copy make an extra copy of it. It will help you for future needs.
Yes for 6+3 year extensions they ask for copy of approved I-140s.
Hope that helps.
Make sure to get the original approval copy. Not the courtesy copy. The courtesy copy will clearly state that you cannot get any benefit/proof based on that copy. When you get a copy make an extra copy of it. It will help you for future needs.
Yes for 6+3 year extensions they ask for copy of approved I-140s.
Hope that helps.
hairstyles klondike gold rush miners
chna
06-30 11:46 AM
Hi Friends,
I am a green card holder, becoming eligible for citizenship in April 2009. My fianc�e has been in the US for the past 2 plus years on F1. She completes her MS in December this year .We plan to visit our home country in August this year and get married. I thought this was a relatively uncomplicated case till I read in some forum recently that marriage to a permanent resident can be a barrier to being admitted to the U.S. in F-1 status. This is because such a marriage obliterates the "non-immigrant" intent required for F-1 entrants. This could very easily jeopardize her plan to re-enter in F-1 status.
Any thoughts or advice on this? Appreciate all the help.
Thanks a lot.
I am a green card holder, becoming eligible for citizenship in April 2009. My fianc�e has been in the US for the past 2 plus years on F1. She completes her MS in December this year .We plan to visit our home country in August this year and get married. I thought this was a relatively uncomplicated case till I read in some forum recently that marriage to a permanent resident can be a barrier to being admitted to the U.S. in F-1 status. This is because such a marriage obliterates the "non-immigrant" intent required for F-1 entrants. This could very easily jeopardize her plan to re-enter in F-1 status.
Any thoughts or advice on this? Appreciate all the help.
Thanks a lot.
chintu25
08-16 02:36 PM
hI wALKING dUDE tHANKS FOR jOINING IN .....yOU CAN HELP BY POSTING BANNERS AND POSTERS IN groceries and temples and other places such as gyms etc to propagate our cause . You can find the slogan/banners in thread posted on mainpage or i can email u some all the best
f1vlad
05-10 09:26 PM
Hi, I have strange situation, when I check status of my I-485, this is what I see:
http://i.imgur.com/8beDR.png
According to their site I've already should have received either approval or denial of Applicatio to Adjust Status (I-485).
So my attorney called customer support # and claims that service representative told her that it refers to something mailed other than approval or denial having being mailed.
Well, since my attorney couldn't figure it out, I decided to call myself today. In my case, customer service rep told me that she isn't allowed to tell me whether it was approval or denial, but she said that it must be either one of the two. She offered to send me a copy of what was sent on Sep 2007 as per this screenshot above. So now I have to wait up to 45 days to see what it is.
I am wondering if anyone else has seen similar thing happen.
By the way, my priority dates aren't current. I am still in backlog, hence I am not so optimistic this could be approval or denial. I am actually more afraid whether or not my paperwork got stalled or something and it'll now never get resolved because of according to their system the matter has been resolved.
Anyway, if anyone has any advice or ideas that'd be appreciated,
Thanks,
Vlad
http://i.imgur.com/8beDR.png
According to their site I've already should have received either approval or denial of Applicatio to Adjust Status (I-485).
So my attorney called customer support # and claims that service representative told her that it refers to something mailed other than approval or denial having being mailed.
Well, since my attorney couldn't figure it out, I decided to call myself today. In my case, customer service rep told me that she isn't allowed to tell me whether it was approval or denial, but she said that it must be either one of the two. She offered to send me a copy of what was sent on Sep 2007 as per this screenshot above. So now I have to wait up to 45 days to see what it is.
I am wondering if anyone else has seen similar thing happen.
By the way, my priority dates aren't current. I am still in backlog, hence I am not so optimistic this could be approval or denial. I am actually more afraid whether or not my paperwork got stalled or something and it'll now never get resolved because of according to their system the matter has been resolved.
Anyway, if anyone has any advice or ideas that'd be appreciated,
Thanks,
Vlad
