antihero
12-01 12:06 PM
It's not your airline but your transit stop. If your flight is through London, you'll probably need a transit visa, but check with someone.
the flights that I have booked fly via doha, qatar.
i have heard that even in the case of london, transit visa is not required if the passenger has a valid document to enter his/her destination. which means that an indian citizen must have an indian passport while going to india, and must have a valid visa for usa if going to usa. i have heard that many people unnecessarily obtain transit visa for britain where none is required. one can check british govt websites to confirm this.
the flights that I have booked fly via doha, qatar.
i have heard that even in the case of london, transit visa is not required if the passenger has a valid document to enter his/her destination. which means that an indian citizen must have an indian passport while going to india, and must have a valid visa for usa if going to usa. i have heard that many people unnecessarily obtain transit visa for britain where none is required. one can check british govt websites to confirm this.
wallpaper 2012 Mitsubishi Colt First
vxb2004
07-26 07:18 PM
You can get EAD even if your I-140 is pending.Correct me if I am wrong.
Processing of your EAD and AP is independent of your 140 status.
Processing of your EAD and AP is independent of your 140 status.
petersebastian
04-02 01:09 PM
Get married to your partner.. its legal in states like CT, MA. Not sure if USCIS will consider it legal.
No, they will not. In fact, if I get married to him, they will deport me immediately.
Well guys thanks for your help...
And you're not the only one to tell me to stay here to get my gc. I was also advised to marry a woman just for the gc. The point is that I don't want to do anything illegal.
But I considered all those options. All I want to do right now is to stay with my partner just a little bit longer, I can't imagine putting an ocean between us again. I understand that I'm already in a difficult situation, and I will have a lot of explaining to do in the future when applying for a visa (since as I understand my current one is no longer valid), but I just want to get a ban. That's the only thing I'm afraid of.
No, they will not. In fact, if I get married to him, they will deport me immediately.
Well guys thanks for your help...
And you're not the only one to tell me to stay here to get my gc. I was also advised to marry a woman just for the gc. The point is that I don't want to do anything illegal.
But I considered all those options. All I want to do right now is to stay with my partner just a little bit longer, I can't imagine putting an ocean between us again. I understand that I'm already in a difficult situation, and I will have a lot of explaining to do in the future when applying for a visa (since as I understand my current one is no longer valid), but I just want to get a ban. That's the only thing I'm afraid of.
2011 Called the Mitsubishi CS,
Munna Bhai
07-12 09:08 AM
hello, any inputs
more...
sirinme
03-16 02:21 PM
I got this letter from USCIS last week, but wasn't aware of this action item. I hope it's not too late.
Blog Feeds
07-09 12:30 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
more...
black_logs
05-25 10:26 PM
Guys,
So finally we're out of Senate with a thundorous victory. We have almost all our provisions in place. I want to thank QGA , The Senators & Staffers of several Senators who helped us sailing thru this 'like a charm'.
Thanks
So finally we're out of Senate with a thundorous victory. We have almost all our provisions in place. I want to thank QGA , The Senators & Staffers of several Senators who helped us sailing thru this 'like a charm'.
Thanks
2010 The new Mitsubishi Colt
srkamath
07-21 11:23 AM
FYI:
I don't know if this is old news but thought of sharing it anyway.
I was in the same boat as many others here i.e, no FP notice even 1yr after filing for 485. With my PD becoming current in Aug 2008, I called my attorney to see if he can do anything to help me out. He told me that due to several complaints from people like us and a law suit threat (or an actual lawsuit, not sure) from AILA, the Texas center has sent has set up an exclusive fax line for such requests. This system came into existence only about 2-3 weeks ago.
He sent a fax on my behalf to that number last Tuesday 7/15/08. My wife and I both received FP notices on Sat 7/19/08! So looks like for a change, something that�s set up for our own good is actually working. Frankly, I hadn�t pinned any hopes on the fax having a positive impact but I was pleasantly surprised. Our appointments are for next week.
Hope this little tip will help others in the same boat if their attorneys are either not aware and/or haven�t told their clients about it.
The fax number is not made available to the general public. Only attorneys have access to it.
BTW: As a result of all this, I haven't seen any LUD changes (soft or hard) on my case status online....I thought that was strange.
What is the fax number?
I don't know if this is old news but thought of sharing it anyway.
I was in the same boat as many others here i.e, no FP notice even 1yr after filing for 485. With my PD becoming current in Aug 2008, I called my attorney to see if he can do anything to help me out. He told me that due to several complaints from people like us and a law suit threat (or an actual lawsuit, not sure) from AILA, the Texas center has sent has set up an exclusive fax line for such requests. This system came into existence only about 2-3 weeks ago.
He sent a fax on my behalf to that number last Tuesday 7/15/08. My wife and I both received FP notices on Sat 7/19/08! So looks like for a change, something that�s set up for our own good is actually working. Frankly, I hadn�t pinned any hopes on the fax having a positive impact but I was pleasantly surprised. Our appointments are for next week.
Hope this little tip will help others in the same boat if their attorneys are either not aware and/or haven�t told their clients about it.
The fax number is not made available to the general public. Only attorneys have access to it.
BTW: As a result of all this, I haven't seen any LUD changes (soft or hard) on my case status online....I thought that was strange.
What is the fax number?
more...
arunmohan
04-06 12:44 PM
Friends ,
Count me in,I live in Tucson.
Count me in,I live in Tucson.
hair mitsubishi colt 2011
cleopatra
02-17 10:41 AM
You are right. We need to get this to everyone who is waiting for GC.
But Instead of focussing on getting this to everyone, can you focus on getting just two people to participate in this event?
Even if only a few of us do this, this will spread like wildfire by itself. We can make this event a grand success and get what we want.
Spread the word. Participate.
But Instead of focussing on getting this to everyone, can you focus on getting just two people to participate in this event?
Even if only a few of us do this, this will spread like wildfire by itself. We can make this event a grand success and get what we want.
Spread the word. Participate.
more...
gcseeker28
07-28 03:54 PM
So, I was talking to one of the attorneys and he mentioned that one should contest the denial within 30 days and as long as it is approved, we don't have any problem. But, if the MTR is rejected, then all the days that have been accumulated after the denial will be in illegal status.
What is the probability of cases of MTR getting approved after the relevant documents have been published?
For the client letter denial reason, did anybody furnish further documents?
Appreciate your inputs
What is the probability of cases of MTR getting approved after the relevant documents have been published?
For the client letter denial reason, did anybody furnish further documents?
Appreciate your inputs
hot New 2009 Mitsubishi Colt Driving Promo
rkat
12-13 08:15 PM
Dyekek12 - my friend....We all are here only wishing the best for each other.! There has to be a reason why majority of folks who responded to to ur post in fact agree with what i had to say...This country is full of opportunity - no doubt about that.! But boy - one has to heavy, heavy price for that.!! A price that a lot of folks on this forum have to come to see - one that is not worth it.!. Yes - i am talking about the GC. Something that promises you all the freedom, flexibility, mobility that each one of is entiltled too.! But the road to get the GC is a road better not taken.! The only reason most of the folks here think alike - because we're already on this extremely bumpy road...invested time, $$, energy into all this.! And we all have been bought to a stage where we are standing outside the temple but are not allowed inside to seek blessings.! We don't know when we will be allowed inside..?? This is the anxiety that ends up eating u inside.!! Extremely uncomfortable, uneasy and anxiety filled scenario.!!
Yeah dude...make a wise decision..No matter what! We can only advice.! Good luck!
Yeah dude...make a wise decision..No matter what! We can only advice.! Good luck!
more...
house Image video of Mitsubishi New Colt Jet-Fighter Grille.
EndlessWait
01-10 04:45 PM
So, this would mean anyone stuck in name check should never receive FP--correct? I don't think that's the case...i know of a lot of people who get FP notices every 15 (or is it 18?) months or so and are stuck in name checks forever.
The two processes Name check & FP are parallel, not sequential.
I have myself not rcvd FP - July 2nd filer NSC-CSC-NSC transfer victim :-). My way of looking at things is that CSC transferred I-485 to NSC in late September. So my I-485 is queued after an August 17th filer. August 17th filers have rcvd their FPs recently (Bay Area, CA), so it should not be that far away. (BTW, I am not dying to get FP done, i just want to shorten my stay-alert-for-FP window and get it over with it)
USCIS works in strange ways...i may be using logic that's beyond their IQ :)
Take it easy...
just exactly what ur case status says ...mine hasn't changed ever since it transferred to nebraska..it still says "the case has been transferred to NSC becoz they've jurisdiction over it etc. etc '
thanks
The two processes Name check & FP are parallel, not sequential.
I have myself not rcvd FP - July 2nd filer NSC-CSC-NSC transfer victim :-). My way of looking at things is that CSC transferred I-485 to NSC in late September. So my I-485 is queued after an August 17th filer. August 17th filers have rcvd their FPs recently (Bay Area, CA), so it should not be that far away. (BTW, I am not dying to get FP done, i just want to shorten my stay-alert-for-FP window and get it over with it)
USCIS works in strange ways...i may be using logic that's beyond their IQ :)
Take it easy...
just exactly what ur case status says ...mine hasn't changed ever since it transferred to nebraska..it still says "the case has been transferred to NSC becoz they've jurisdiction over it etc. etc '
thanks
tattoo 2009 Mitsubishi Colt
Rb_newsletter
04-15 05:20 PM
The person I know who got GC before the PD was current, debated for sometime asked his lawyer etc... but it was whoever's mistake, they have got to honor it... he decided to keep the GC act dumb and njoy life.:D.. by the way even if you get a GC when PD is current they reserve the right to revoke... check with lawyer and decide for yourself !!!
Does anyone know which law states that GC should not be approved when PD is not current? I guess the whole 'PD' concept was invented by administration people.
Does anyone know which law states that GC should not be approved when PD is not current? I guess the whole 'PD' concept was invented by administration people.
more...
pictures New Mitsubishi Colt is a new
greencardfever
12-11 01:37 PM
Is it 6 months for both, EAD and AP or just EAD? If it's just EAD, then how soon can I renew my AP?
dresses of the new Mitsubishi Colt
krishmunn
05-05 10:03 PM
Just a follow up question:
Now that i have my I-140 approved for over an year now and never filed for 485, does the similar/same job/field apply in case of a job change or can i have a new job responsibility with a new employer and then port my PD based upon the approved 1-140 from previous employer?
You do not need similar job. You can even move from EB3 to EB2. But you will need to start over the whole 9 yards .. have a new PERM from new employer for the new job position, apply a new 140 . during applying 140, you request CIS to allocate you the old PD.
Now that i have my I-140 approved for over an year now and never filed for 485, does the similar/same job/field apply in case of a job change or can i have a new job responsibility with a new employer and then port my PD based upon the approved 1-140 from previous employer?
You do not need similar job. You can even move from EB3 to EB2. But you will need to start over the whole 9 yards .. have a new PERM from new employer for the new job position, apply a new 140 . during applying 140, you request CIS to allocate you the old PD.
more...
makeup 2010 Mitsubishi Colt Ralliart
mrajatish
09-17 12:02 PM
Explain your comments more clearly - do you mean EB1 unused is not getting used by EB2 India/China? If so, this is a matter of grave concern, and yes, we need to find out more information on this. We have to wait till DOS publishes Visa number usage this year. All EB1 and EB2 numbers should be used by over-subscribed countries in those categories and by no means by EB3.
Find out/research as much as you can on this - we need to understand what is going on.
Find out/research as much as you can on this - we need to understand what is going on.
girlfriend Mitsubishi Colt
laborfd
07-27 09:47 AM
Guys,
I just created a search engine (http://immisearch.blogspot.com/) to help all people looking for a better way to search topics around immigration related activites. The search engine came as a result of my countless hours that I spent searching to answers around the web.
Try searching for any information with h1b, h4, Green Card, I-485, I140, citizenship etc, and the engine should give you a better result.
Leave a comment at the blog and let me know what else could be improved.
http://immisearch.blogspot.com/
-Vikram
Cool, good job, very useful :)
I just created a search engine (http://immisearch.blogspot.com/) to help all people looking for a better way to search topics around immigration related activites. The search engine came as a result of my countless hours that I spent searching to answers around the web.
Try searching for any information with h1b, h4, Green Card, I-485, I140, citizenship etc, and the engine should give you a better result.
Leave a comment at the blog and let me know what else could be improved.
http://immisearch.blogspot.com/
-Vikram
Cool, good job, very useful :)
hairstyles Mitsubishi colt glx p
aspirant_1
07-22 09:34 PM
5 start rating
pak
07-27 03:01 PM
If I-485 is rejected, can you switch back to H4 from EAD without going out of USA?
neema
11-29 02:22 PM
I am currently in US on H4. I had applied for my H1B while in India , through a consultant based in US and have the approval with me now.
The problem is that I might have to go back to India next year for good, due to which I wont be able to utilize my H1b for working in the US.
My question is:
1) Since I wont be coming back to US as of now, what if I do not get my H1 visa stamped. Can I use my approval(I-797)in the present consulting firm's name, for getting H1b stamped through any other company in future.
2) I understand that stamping is needed only for reentering US. What if i just get the stamping done and still do not come back. In that case, can I still transfer my stamped H1B to any other company without working at all for the consulting firm whose stamp I have on my passport.
Any help is greatly appreciated, I need to decide fast. Thanks a lot.
The problem is that I might have to go back to India next year for good, due to which I wont be able to utilize my H1b for working in the US.
My question is:
1) Since I wont be coming back to US as of now, what if I do not get my H1 visa stamped. Can I use my approval(I-797)in the present consulting firm's name, for getting H1b stamped through any other company in future.
2) I understand that stamping is needed only for reentering US. What if i just get the stamping done and still do not come back. In that case, can I still transfer my stamped H1B to any other company without working at all for the consulting firm whose stamp I have on my passport.
Any help is greatly appreciated, I need to decide fast. Thanks a lot.
