immihelp1
07-17 06:22 PM
India76,
U have till Aug 17th to file AOS. U can go to india and come back before AUG 17 to file
U have till Aug 17th to file AOS. U can go to india and come back before AUG 17 to file
wallpaper 2009 Pontiac G6 GXP Coupe
BimmerFAn
06-13 01:45 PM
No there is no premium processing process for waiver applications. There seems to be no apparent order in the order they are adjudicated. Once the Department of State recommends you for a waiver you may apply for H1B change of status with the recommendation alone. If ur H1B application is filed for premium processing then the USCIS might adjudicate the waiver within 15 days as part of the h1b processing.
jkays94
05-04 02:17 PM
Here are the relevant parts of the transcript (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0605/03/acd.01.html) :
COOPER: Rising gas prices aren't the only thing causing heartburn this election year. Immigration reform is close behind. The battle at the border has spread into the heartland and across the country. Some politicians already paying the price. Ahead, we'll get a reality check from the best political team around.
Plus, a brazen break in the border. They've actually poured concrete here and they've formed steps which makes it easier for whoever was bringing drugs into the United States, actually climb up through the tunnel.
Tunnel built by drug runners. We showed it to you back in January. Now there's a new development in the story. What's going to happen to the tunnel? We'll bring you the latest next on 360.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: Those pictures, of course, from Monday's massive immigration demonstrations. Hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants and their supporters in the streets. They wanted to show their economic power. They hoped that would translate into political power. But now some critics are saying it's actually had the opposite effect, creating a backlash. And in at least one city so far the issue has already cost a Mayor his job. Here's CNN's Candy Crowley.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CANDY CROWLEY, SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: This is where day laborers, mostly immigrants, legal and not, hang out looking for work in Herndon, Virginia. It may not look like an election issue, but last night, voters threw out their mayor and two city council members who pushed for the day labor center. This is the new mayor.
STEVE DEBENEDITTIS, HERNDON VIRGINIA MAYOR-ELECT: Welcome immigrants, but they have concerns, valid concerns, about illegal immigration.
CROWLEY: Fewer than 3,000 people voted in Herndon. Just about 24 hours after the nation watched hundreds of thousands of immigrants, legal and not, demonstrate across the country.
FRANK SHARRY, EXEC. DIR., NATIONAL IMMIGRATION FORUM: I've never known a politician who wasn't attracted to a large crowd. And these have been some pretty large crowds.
CROWLEY: True enough, it was evidence that the immigrant community can galvanize itself. The question is, to what end? Congress is reading the tea leaves.
SEN. HARRY REID, (D) MINORITY LEADER: I personally believe very, very fervently that they have helped, helped picture this issue in the minds of the American people in a positive fashion.
CROWLEY: Tea leaf reading is not an exact science, particularly in an election year where frankly democrats would be better off if the republican-led congress did nothing.
SHARRY: I think the congress is going to have a lot of explaining to do if they don't end this session with a good comprehensive bill.
CROWLEY: Republicans desperate for something to tout as accomplishment, anxious not to alienate core conservative voters, are afraid the demonstrations harden conservative opposition to anything that smacks of a break for illegals. SEN. MEL MARTINEZ, (R) FLORIDA: I believe at the end of the day we'll see that it really had a negative effect and it backfired on those of us who are trying to move forward something that is comprehensive but yet in middle course.
CROWLEY: Senator Mel Martinez of Florida says since Monday's demonstrations calls to his office have run 10 to 1 against his bill providing tougher border security and a pathway to citizenship after hurdles are jumped.
JOHN FUNU, WALL STREET JOURNAL: The boycott has so heated up the measure that we're not going to have any bill this year. It's simply poisoned the well.
CROWLEY: As Washington lawmakers struggle with the political weight of all those demonstrations --
SEN. JOHN CORNYN, (R) TEXAS: It wasn't clear exactly what the message was. And I think in some ways it tended to polarize people.
CROWLEY: Herndon, Virginia, is already discussing changes to ensure the day labor center cannot be used by illegals. The problem with tea leaves is, you never know which ones to read. Candy Crowley, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: Well, earlier I spoke with Candy Crowley along with John Roberts and John King, part of the best political team on television.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: John Roberts, what are the prospects for getting immigration reform this year?
JOHN ROBERTS, SR. NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That would depend on who you talk to. Some republicans who want to put a good spin on this say that it's possible that they can get it done. It might even be possible that they could get it done by the August recess. Other people including the White House are much more pessimistic about it saying they don't expect anything to happen until after the November election.
COOPER: Candy, I mean could these demonstrations really have backfired and derailed a compromised deal, even among those who support some sort of reform?
CROWLEY: Absolutely. I mean, the problem really is, first of all, the politics are that the democrats would rather have the issue at this point because it's an election year than a bill. The republicans would like a bill because it will be an accomplishment, but they have problems with their conservative core. And the people we talked to said listen, the demonstrations backfired. It left -- people looked and said well they're not working, and they're out demonstrating. You know, fair or not, the conservative core sort of toughened up. It seemed to have hardened both sides of this debate. COOPER: John King, a lot of talk, too about all the Mexican flags out in the street. Obviously there were a lot of American flags where organizers really tried to get American flags out there. But that certainly angers a lot of people. What are you hearing from the people you talked to in Washington?
JOHN KING, CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, that tactic, as Candy just noted, there is a backfiring from these demonstrations. And that tactic in particular has emboldened conservatives. Remember the key question here is, if they can get a bill through the senate, can they then get the house to embrace a more liberal immigration policy? The house members, most are from safe conservative districts. And back home in their districts they didn't feel all that much pressure to begin with. And what they are saying now is that this sends an anti-American signal.
If these people want legal status in the United States, they should be holding American flags, they should be demonstrating for rights in the United States not celebrating Mexico or El Salvador. So to that degree, while the masses in the streets certainly showed the emerging political power and potential political power of the Latino vote, that symbol has helped the opponents of this measure especially in the house. It has simply stiffened the resolve of conservatives who say no to any new broad immigration reform.
COOPER: Rising gas prices aren't the only thing causing heartburn this election year. Immigration reform is close behind. The battle at the border has spread into the heartland and across the country. Some politicians already paying the price. Ahead, we'll get a reality check from the best political team around.
Plus, a brazen break in the border. They've actually poured concrete here and they've formed steps which makes it easier for whoever was bringing drugs into the United States, actually climb up through the tunnel.
Tunnel built by drug runners. We showed it to you back in January. Now there's a new development in the story. What's going to happen to the tunnel? We'll bring you the latest next on 360.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: Those pictures, of course, from Monday's massive immigration demonstrations. Hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants and their supporters in the streets. They wanted to show their economic power. They hoped that would translate into political power. But now some critics are saying it's actually had the opposite effect, creating a backlash. And in at least one city so far the issue has already cost a Mayor his job. Here's CNN's Candy Crowley.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CANDY CROWLEY, SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: This is where day laborers, mostly immigrants, legal and not, hang out looking for work in Herndon, Virginia. It may not look like an election issue, but last night, voters threw out their mayor and two city council members who pushed for the day labor center. This is the new mayor.
STEVE DEBENEDITTIS, HERNDON VIRGINIA MAYOR-ELECT: Welcome immigrants, but they have concerns, valid concerns, about illegal immigration.
CROWLEY: Fewer than 3,000 people voted in Herndon. Just about 24 hours after the nation watched hundreds of thousands of immigrants, legal and not, demonstrate across the country.
FRANK SHARRY, EXEC. DIR., NATIONAL IMMIGRATION FORUM: I've never known a politician who wasn't attracted to a large crowd. And these have been some pretty large crowds.
CROWLEY: True enough, it was evidence that the immigrant community can galvanize itself. The question is, to what end? Congress is reading the tea leaves.
SEN. HARRY REID, (D) MINORITY LEADER: I personally believe very, very fervently that they have helped, helped picture this issue in the minds of the American people in a positive fashion.
CROWLEY: Tea leaf reading is not an exact science, particularly in an election year where frankly democrats would be better off if the republican-led congress did nothing.
SHARRY: I think the congress is going to have a lot of explaining to do if they don't end this session with a good comprehensive bill.
CROWLEY: Republicans desperate for something to tout as accomplishment, anxious not to alienate core conservative voters, are afraid the demonstrations harden conservative opposition to anything that smacks of a break for illegals. SEN. MEL MARTINEZ, (R) FLORIDA: I believe at the end of the day we'll see that it really had a negative effect and it backfired on those of us who are trying to move forward something that is comprehensive but yet in middle course.
CROWLEY: Senator Mel Martinez of Florida says since Monday's demonstrations calls to his office have run 10 to 1 against his bill providing tougher border security and a pathway to citizenship after hurdles are jumped.
JOHN FUNU, WALL STREET JOURNAL: The boycott has so heated up the measure that we're not going to have any bill this year. It's simply poisoned the well.
CROWLEY: As Washington lawmakers struggle with the political weight of all those demonstrations --
SEN. JOHN CORNYN, (R) TEXAS: It wasn't clear exactly what the message was. And I think in some ways it tended to polarize people.
CROWLEY: Herndon, Virginia, is already discussing changes to ensure the day labor center cannot be used by illegals. The problem with tea leaves is, you never know which ones to read. Candy Crowley, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: Well, earlier I spoke with Candy Crowley along with John Roberts and John King, part of the best political team on television.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: John Roberts, what are the prospects for getting immigration reform this year?
JOHN ROBERTS, SR. NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That would depend on who you talk to. Some republicans who want to put a good spin on this say that it's possible that they can get it done. It might even be possible that they could get it done by the August recess. Other people including the White House are much more pessimistic about it saying they don't expect anything to happen until after the November election.
COOPER: Candy, I mean could these demonstrations really have backfired and derailed a compromised deal, even among those who support some sort of reform?
CROWLEY: Absolutely. I mean, the problem really is, first of all, the politics are that the democrats would rather have the issue at this point because it's an election year than a bill. The republicans would like a bill because it will be an accomplishment, but they have problems with their conservative core. And the people we talked to said listen, the demonstrations backfired. It left -- people looked and said well they're not working, and they're out demonstrating. You know, fair or not, the conservative core sort of toughened up. It seemed to have hardened both sides of this debate. COOPER: John King, a lot of talk, too about all the Mexican flags out in the street. Obviously there were a lot of American flags where organizers really tried to get American flags out there. But that certainly angers a lot of people. What are you hearing from the people you talked to in Washington?
JOHN KING, CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, that tactic, as Candy just noted, there is a backfiring from these demonstrations. And that tactic in particular has emboldened conservatives. Remember the key question here is, if they can get a bill through the senate, can they then get the house to embrace a more liberal immigration policy? The house members, most are from safe conservative districts. And back home in their districts they didn't feel all that much pressure to begin with. And what they are saying now is that this sends an anti-American signal.
If these people want legal status in the United States, they should be holding American flags, they should be demonstrating for rights in the United States not celebrating Mexico or El Salvador. So to that degree, while the masses in the streets certainly showed the emerging political power and potential political power of the Latino vote, that symbol has helped the opponents of this measure especially in the house. It has simply stiffened the resolve of conservatives who say no to any new broad immigration reform.
2011 2008 Pontiac G6 GXP picture,
my2cents
08-05 11:36 AM
Time and again - there are confilicting opinion from attorneys.
My attorney ( and i trust her) said that if you are maintaining H1/H4 status (not necessairly VISA stamped) . your I-485/I-131 doesn't get considered cancelled and only requirements that you must be in US while filing. Being on purely non immigrant VISA like F1/F2/B1 you must be in US on day of approval.
People normally refer to friend's example but i have 2 collegues whose spouses has done same thing. Spouse's H4 visa stamping is long expired but they were gone to India after filing AP and they have comeback without any issue.
If you have not extended ur H1-B/H4 (dual immigrant) and have take advantage on AC-21 then I believe that you are not maintaining any non-immigrant status and you are just paroled in.
Thanks
My attorney ( and i trust her) said that if you are maintaining H1/H4 status (not necessairly VISA stamped) . your I-485/I-131 doesn't get considered cancelled and only requirements that you must be in US while filing. Being on purely non immigrant VISA like F1/F2/B1 you must be in US on day of approval.
People normally refer to friend's example but i have 2 collegues whose spouses has done same thing. Spouse's H4 visa stamping is long expired but they were gone to India after filing AP and they have comeback without any issue.
If you have not extended ur H1-B/H4 (dual immigrant) and have take advantage on AC-21 then I believe that you are not maintaining any non-immigrant status and you are just paroled in.
Thanks
more...
sunny26
02-23 11:31 AM
I already finished 14month 8days and still pending in NSC
2 friggin days... man they got to be kidding... :eek::eek::eek: at this rate it will take me 15 months to get my 140 approved... mine was filed on july 27th.....
2 friggin days... man they got to be kidding... :eek::eek::eek: at this rate it will take me 15 months to get my 140 approved... mine was filed on july 27th.....
gc_check
09-08 08:14 PM
No, Did not port to EB3, He is EB3, Filed for 485 in July '07 fiasco. He is consulting his attorney to see, what to do about the unusual approval. Also did not receive the FP, after filing for 485 in July '07 until last month, when they did the first FP mid-august. Pretty sure about that, from what I heard from my friend.
more...
gvenkat
02-23 12:00 AM
2 friggin days... man they got to be kidding... :eek::eek::eek: at this rate it will take me 15 months to get my 140 approved... mine was filed on july 27th.....
2010 BlackGXP: 08 Pontiac G6 GXP
sroyc
08-03 12:21 PM
I have the notice of action for my I-140 approval. It doesn't mention an A# anywhere. Are you sure about this?
Guys,
From what i gathered, It seems these 2 things could effect your processing apart from PD....
Both can be done, if you take a infopass at your local office....
1) I-485 fingerprints
2) A# Mismatch on i-485 receipt, i- 140 approval notice
For me, i didnt get FP notice from USCIS, i had to go to local office and get that done in feb. 2008.
A# also didntnt match, So, i called POJ and they said, they open a ticket to consolidate. If i dont see an LUD in a week, i will have to go to a local office and try again...
In July 2007, when they received 1000's of apps, for most 485 cases, they generated a new A# instead of attaching A# from your I-140 receipt/approval. Your lawyer will say 2 A#'s not a problem. But, this is definitely a problem ACCORDING TO
Others RD, ND, namecheck which we have no control of even though you did everything right.
Guys,
From what i gathered, It seems these 2 things could effect your processing apart from PD....
Both can be done, if you take a infopass at your local office....
1) I-485 fingerprints
2) A# Mismatch on i-485 receipt, i- 140 approval notice
For me, i didnt get FP notice from USCIS, i had to go to local office and get that done in feb. 2008.
A# also didntnt match, So, i called POJ and they said, they open a ticket to consolidate. If i dont see an LUD in a week, i will have to go to a local office and try again...
In July 2007, when they received 1000's of apps, for most 485 cases, they generated a new A# instead of attaching A# from your I-140 receipt/approval. Your lawyer will say 2 A#'s not a problem. But, this is definitely a problem ACCORDING TO
Others RD, ND, namecheck which we have no control of even though you did everything right.
more...
palnati
07-20 01:48 PM
It doesn't matter. You can file G-325 or G-325A.
hair 2009 Pontiac G6 GXP Sedan
ImmiLosers
09-26 08:53 PM
Even if your employer revokes I-140 the PD is locked - Make sure you have a Copy of 140 approval Receipt Notice and a copy of the Labor PD. When you file new GC or 485 application just ask your company's lawyer to slip in the old 140 instead of new 140.
This is a real cool feature but make sure you have to maintain H status all the time - i'm here for 9 yrs and whenever i think about these maverick cool steps i stop at the point of H transfer , extension and fear of getting H denied.
Just to correct you - if you request USCIS to port your old PD during 2nd 140 approval you are good; if you request during I-485 , you got to attach both I140s, which is another recipe for confusion.
In my case I ported but did not get the benefit yet ;
Do it when you have desperate situation? Not sure whether USCIS scrutinize
such applications more than others.
This is a real cool feature but make sure you have to maintain H status all the time - i'm here for 9 yrs and whenever i think about these maverick cool steps i stop at the point of H transfer , extension and fear of getting H denied.
Just to correct you - if you request USCIS to port your old PD during 2nd 140 approval you are good; if you request during I-485 , you got to attach both I140s, which is another recipe for confusion.
In my case I ported but did not get the benefit yet ;
Do it when you have desperate situation? Not sure whether USCIS scrutinize
such applications more than others.
more...
swarnapuri
06-26 12:48 PM
There is a news in news article thread that Senators Cantwell & Kyl have proposed a amendment which will open up a parallel employer sponsored GC path. Anyone has information regarding this amendment?
hot 2008 Pontiac G6 GXP sedan
fasterthanlight�
06-06 03:50 PM
The Guidlines one and the Family Guy monkey are my favorites cause they make me laugh.
Yes!!!!!
Yes!!!!!
more...
house 2009 Pontiac G6 GXP STREET
snathan
08-18 03:16 PM
Thanks for the replies guys....
TXH1B,
The RFE as per my employer is about Vendor/Client Details and a latest paystub from the current job. Since I started working already and was getting paid, my employer generated a paystub and supplied the same.
I think you are in trouble. The USCIS asked for your previous employer's pay stub but you supplied the pay stub from current employer. There is a strong possibility for denial. Then your employment became unauthorized. So hope for the best and prepare for the worst.
TXH1B,
The RFE as per my employer is about Vendor/Client Details and a latest paystub from the current job. Since I started working already and was getting paid, my employer generated a paystub and supplied the same.
I think you are in trouble. The USCIS asked for your previous employer's pay stub but you supplied the pay stub from current employer. There is a strong possibility for denial. Then your employment became unauthorized. So hope for the best and prepare for the worst.
tattoo 2009 Pontiac G6 GXP Parma, OH
MerciesOfInjustices
02-22 09:59 PM
Pardon my ignorance, but what is PBEC exactly and what are the issues regarding it? Something to do with Labor backlogs?
more...
pictures 2009 Pontiac G6 Gxp Coupe 2d
dehradoon
11-13 06:08 PM
ok. let's say I-140 approved and pass 180 days. the person is working using ac21 and ead with a new company. the person is travelling using AP , the old company withdraw I-140, will he be able to come back in the us ?
once the person is working for the new company can he send the offer letter to avoid problem with 485. kinda of preemption - proactive approach or does the person needs to wait until ins request?
Dude, you really need to use the search feature on this forum. after I140 is approved and 485 pending for 180 days, the I140 stays in effect even if the company tried to revoke it.
Once you invoke AC21, it is not required (although suggested) to send papers to USCIS. I have read that you should not do anything until you get an RFE which I think is the best way, This makes sure that your case is being properly handled if you are unlucky enough to get an RFE. Y would anyone what to raise a flag by sending in paperwork to USCIS indicating the use of AC21, I personally know atleast 15 friends who have done this with out telling USCIS and have received their GC's
So, The bottom line is if -
I140 approved and 485 pending for more than 180.
START LIVING YOUR DREAM, DO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. CHANGE YOUR JOB, GET A RAISE, OPEN A COMPANY, BUY A HOUSE .... WHATEVER, DON'T GET MARRIED - SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT WHILE YOU WERE ON H1
THE AC21 IS A LAW - USE IT, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TELL ANYONE ABOUT USING A LAW UNLESS YOU HAVE TO JUSTIFY YOUR SITUATION IN FRONT OF AN AGENCY THAT REQUIRES YOU BY LAW TO PROVE IT.
OH! AND AS FAR AS TRAVEL IS CONCERNED, JUST HAVE THE DOCS IN HAND AND NOTHING ELSE MATTERS (don't commit a crime though, or be drunk in front of the immigration officer). LOL
once the person is working for the new company can he send the offer letter to avoid problem with 485. kinda of preemption - proactive approach or does the person needs to wait until ins request?
Dude, you really need to use the search feature on this forum. after I140 is approved and 485 pending for 180 days, the I140 stays in effect even if the company tried to revoke it.
Once you invoke AC21, it is not required (although suggested) to send papers to USCIS. I have read that you should not do anything until you get an RFE which I think is the best way, This makes sure that your case is being properly handled if you are unlucky enough to get an RFE. Y would anyone what to raise a flag by sending in paperwork to USCIS indicating the use of AC21, I personally know atleast 15 friends who have done this with out telling USCIS and have received their GC's
So, The bottom line is if -
I140 approved and 485 pending for more than 180.
START LIVING YOUR DREAM, DO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. CHANGE YOUR JOB, GET A RAISE, OPEN A COMPANY, BUY A HOUSE .... WHATEVER, DON'T GET MARRIED - SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT WHILE YOU WERE ON H1
THE AC21 IS A LAW - USE IT, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TELL ANYONE ABOUT USING A LAW UNLESS YOU HAVE TO JUSTIFY YOUR SITUATION IN FRONT OF AN AGENCY THAT REQUIRES YOU BY LAW TO PROVE IT.
OH! AND AS FAR AS TRAVEL IS CONCERNED, JUST HAVE THE DOCS IN HAND AND NOTHING ELSE MATTERS (don't commit a crime though, or be drunk in front of the immigration officer). LOL
dresses 2009 Pontiac G6 GXP Coupe
HOPE_GC_SOON
07-12 10:21 PM
Hi,
Just wanted to know about your EAD: Which Center you have applied ? NSC/TSC. What date they have received. My EAD Renewal is pending, and I wish to change job. :confused:
Appreciate your reply. Anyways, You should not be worrying too much on EAD, as your PD is current now, and youshoudlget the Card in coming months. :)
Thanks.
Thanks for the responses. Will call uscis on monday.
Just wanted to know about your EAD: Which Center you have applied ? NSC/TSC. What date they have received. My EAD Renewal is pending, and I wish to change job. :confused:
Appreciate your reply. Anyways, You should not be worrying too much on EAD, as your PD is current now, and youshoudlget the Card in coming months. :)
Thanks.
Thanks for the responses. Will call uscis on monday.
more...
makeup 2009 Pontiac G6 Gxp
atul555
12-15 09:52 PM
Atul555:
Cool down. Nothing to be warried. Since you are married, 485 is not of much help. So you should think of maintaining h1b in order to keep your wife status h4.
1. With cool mind start applying for jobs, increase network. To be on safer side. find a good consultant. Ping me if you need help in finding a good consulatant. Yes when say good consualtant..he is good...!!!!
you still have 4 months time. SO cheer up.
My 2 cents..don't think of using EAD & keeping u r wife on foloow to join blah blah....!!!!
Also if you change your job , your GC journey you had so far will not get wasted. You don't have to file Labour/i-40 again. Make sure the new job is same or similiar. Discuss with your potential employer, they will help you.
Whats your area of work..??Are you into IT...????
Thanks everyone, your input has been very helpful.
I am assuming, my EB3 India PD of Mar 2004 would take about two years to become current and once it does, I can file my spouse as dependent and attain EAD for both of us.
Till then based on your inputs I believe I have two recourse.
1> I transfer my H1 and keep the spouse on H4. AC21 would apply in that case and my GC process would continue unabated.
2> I go on EAD and put my wife on F1 to maitain legal status.
Here are the caveats with each.
With no 1 approach there would be very few jobs for H1-b next year and I would probably have to be at the mercy of some unscrouplous desi consultant.
With no 2 approach, I have more choices in job but I have to get my wife on F1 which would be a drain on finances as well as time consuming for the spouse.
I guess either way I have to tough it out for a couple of years and I was leaning towards no. 1.
BTW, tabletpc, thanks for your suggestion, I am in IT (J2EE websphere) background with considerable experience. I would appreciate any input for a good consultant.
Cool down. Nothing to be warried. Since you are married, 485 is not of much help. So you should think of maintaining h1b in order to keep your wife status h4.
1. With cool mind start applying for jobs, increase network. To be on safer side. find a good consultant. Ping me if you need help in finding a good consulatant. Yes when say good consualtant..he is good...!!!!
you still have 4 months time. SO cheer up.
My 2 cents..don't think of using EAD & keeping u r wife on foloow to join blah blah....!!!!
Also if you change your job , your GC journey you had so far will not get wasted. You don't have to file Labour/i-40 again. Make sure the new job is same or similiar. Discuss with your potential employer, they will help you.
Whats your area of work..??Are you into IT...????
Thanks everyone, your input has been very helpful.
I am assuming, my EB3 India PD of Mar 2004 would take about two years to become current and once it does, I can file my spouse as dependent and attain EAD for both of us.
Till then based on your inputs I believe I have two recourse.
1> I transfer my H1 and keep the spouse on H4. AC21 would apply in that case and my GC process would continue unabated.
2> I go on EAD and put my wife on F1 to maitain legal status.
Here are the caveats with each.
With no 1 approach there would be very few jobs for H1-b next year and I would probably have to be at the mercy of some unscrouplous desi consultant.
With no 2 approach, I have more choices in job but I have to get my wife on F1 which would be a drain on finances as well as time consuming for the spouse.
I guess either way I have to tough it out for a couple of years and I was leaning towards no. 1.
BTW, tabletpc, thanks for your suggestion, I am in IT (J2EE websphere) background with considerable experience. I would appreciate any input for a good consultant.
girlfriend 2009 Pontiac G6 GXP Sedan
pappu
07-14 01:50 PM
This link didn't work for me either.
try
photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7644/2582/1600/chart_alert7.11.2006.gif
try
photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7644/2582/1600/chart_alert7.11.2006.gif
hairstyles 2009 Pontiac G6 GXP Coupe
retropain
09-01 11:08 AM
What's particularly interesting is the number of 'scare words' used in this selected testimony on aspects of the CIR bill. Its a lot like Loo Dobbs "War" on the middle class. Its clear CIS, Nusa, FAIR provide the script to him on immigration matters. I knew Loo wasn't that creative in the first place
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
desi3933
08-04 11:14 AM
Hi, can someone help crack this puzzle?
I have an EB3 application with a PD of Nov 2002 (India). Filed I-485 in June 2007, along with medical forms etc. Of course, that category is 'unavailable' now.
In 2005, we started an EB2 application, within the same company, for a new job, this one requiring a Masters degree.
The EB2 I-140 was just approved, and the notice has the Nov 2002 Priority Date.
The attorney had earlier said they could port the priority dates from the EB3 to EB2 and interfile.
Now, he just called saying he is confused and not sure!
His views:
- There is no formal way to find out if the new I-140 was matched up with the old I-485.
- He says he will ask his peers and will also call USCIS Customer Service.
- He thinks we might need to file a new I-485 to support the new EB2 I-140 to show that there is a pending I-485 - because the underlying EB3 is Unavailable.
Appreciate any inputs!
Cheers!
>> could port the priority dates from the EB3 to EB2 and interfile.
Correct. You should be able to claim EB-2 with PD Nov 2002.
Also, no need to file new I-485. Send a letter with details of both approved I-140 and highlighted PD Recapture in yellow.
_____________________________
Not a legal advice.
US Permanent Resident since 2002
I have an EB3 application with a PD of Nov 2002 (India). Filed I-485 in June 2007, along with medical forms etc. Of course, that category is 'unavailable' now.
In 2005, we started an EB2 application, within the same company, for a new job, this one requiring a Masters degree.
The EB2 I-140 was just approved, and the notice has the Nov 2002 Priority Date.
The attorney had earlier said they could port the priority dates from the EB3 to EB2 and interfile.
Now, he just called saying he is confused and not sure!
His views:
- There is no formal way to find out if the new I-140 was matched up with the old I-485.
- He says he will ask his peers and will also call USCIS Customer Service.
- He thinks we might need to file a new I-485 to support the new EB2 I-140 to show that there is a pending I-485 - because the underlying EB3 is Unavailable.
Appreciate any inputs!
Cheers!
>> could port the priority dates from the EB3 to EB2 and interfile.
Correct. You should be able to claim EB-2 with PD Nov 2002.
Also, no need to file new I-485. Send a letter with details of both approved I-140 and highlighted PD Recapture in yellow.
_____________________________
Not a legal advice.
US Permanent Resident since 2002
kshitijnt
04-23 08:23 AM
The statistics can be skewed in that people switch jobs after perm, people like me have filed 2nd perm application despite having an earlier 2005 application.
