krishna_brc
05-05 08:54 AM
Yes, we don't need original I-485 receipt notice to travel.
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
wallpaper Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
Springflower
08-30 04:56 PM
Contratulations babu !
--------------------------------------------------------------
Contributed $50. Signed up for $50/month recurring contribution.
PD: March 2004 (EB3 - India)
Labor approved: Jan 2006
I-140 approved: Feb 2006 (NSC)
I-485/EAD/AP applied: July 6th, 2007 (NSC)
Checks cashed: ?
Receipts received: ?
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dear friends
I'm very excited to say that I got my green card approved. Thank you for all of your support.
My status change will not change a bit of my support to IV. I will continue to contribute what I contribute now, until we are sucessful. I'm not successful, until everyone of you is not successful in pursuing your green card. I hope and pray that my stand will motivate non contributing friends to contribute.
Friends and folks, we did not have any organization to support ourselves. So far we had to take anything shoved upon us. But the emergence of IV changed all that. Contribute and support IV. Because IV is our voice!!!
thanks
babu
--------------------------------------------------------------
Contributed $50. Signed up for $50/month recurring contribution.
PD: March 2004 (EB3 - India)
Labor approved: Jan 2006
I-140 approved: Feb 2006 (NSC)
I-485/EAD/AP applied: July 6th, 2007 (NSC)
Checks cashed: ?
Receipts received: ?
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dear friends
I'm very excited to say that I got my green card approved. Thank you for all of your support.
My status change will not change a bit of my support to IV. I will continue to contribute what I contribute now, until we are sucessful. I'm not successful, until everyone of you is not successful in pursuing your green card. I hope and pray that my stand will motivate non contributing friends to contribute.
Friends and folks, we did not have any organization to support ourselves. So far we had to take anything shoved upon us. But the emergence of IV changed all that. Contribute and support IV. Because IV is our voice!!!
thanks
babu
GCNirvana007
10-04 06:08 PM
I've been living in the US for almost 4.5 years now. Last year I was flying from Los Angeles to Las Vegas and the security officer checking the Photo Id./boarding pass at LAX airport asked me the most intelligent question of the century.
"What's the purpose of your visit to Las Vegas?":confused:
I would expect this kind of question at immigration check for international arrivals and not on domestic departures. May be took his job too seriously.
I thought of saying "Gambling, booze and girls" but just answered "Sightseeing" and he let me go :D
I also had a similar experience in Canada where an officer asked the purpose of visit to Canada in spite of showing my Canadian PR card :)
:p:p Thats hilarious
Also a p**** sent me a red for posting this - what a loser
"What's the purpose of your visit to Las Vegas?":confused:
I would expect this kind of question at immigration check for international arrivals and not on domestic departures. May be took his job too seriously.
I thought of saying "Gambling, booze and girls" but just answered "Sightseeing" and he let me go :D
I also had a similar experience in Canada where an officer asked the purpose of visit to Canada in spite of showing my Canadian PR card :)
:p:p Thats hilarious
Also a p**** sent me a red for posting this - what a loser
2011 Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber
willwin
06-09 01:20 PM
Even though your pd is current, It is quite possible that they have not assigned a visa number yet to your case. So they are probably assigning by order of PD's
Example: Sept 2003, before Oct 2003,....So on..so they are assigning earlier PDs Visa numbers first.
Second possibility is that there could be too many eligible before your date or exactly your date and in which case they will go with RD..which in your case is July 2nd, 2007. There could be people with 485 RD's in 2005 when the dates were current.
This is pure guess work and speculation, I really do not know how they do this. But if they really have enough visas for EB2, yours will still be current next month.
-------------------------------------------
India EB3- PD: June 2003
Contributed $480 + Monthly Recurring contributor.
One of my friend with PD Jul 2001 EB3 India is still waiting for his GC. His name check was cleared 4-5 months back and not sure what he was waiting for.....
Example: Sept 2003, before Oct 2003,....So on..so they are assigning earlier PDs Visa numbers first.
Second possibility is that there could be too many eligible before your date or exactly your date and in which case they will go with RD..which in your case is July 2nd, 2007. There could be people with 485 RD's in 2005 when the dates were current.
This is pure guess work and speculation, I really do not know how they do this. But if they really have enough visas for EB2, yours will still be current next month.
-------------------------------------------
India EB3- PD: June 2003
Contributed $480 + Monthly Recurring contributor.
One of my friend with PD Jul 2001 EB3 India is still waiting for his GC. His name check was cleared 4-5 months back and not sure what he was waiting for.....
more...
nihar
11-21 04:08 PM
if i check in the wesite or call the ins they say its approved bt my consultant states that the same had a query which i have also seen was sent to her , the query was sent in aug and we did reply the same instance . rite now im on student visa and abtto complete my mba and eligible for my internship . im veri much in the usa . please guide me as to wat shud i do tackle this situation and whts the next step . i want to wrk asap . i also that want to knw after its approval wat r the next step of docs tat i shud have and wat is it that i need to have to gain a upper hand and be out of this mess
ras
10-13 09:09 PM
All 3 - checks cashed on Oct 11. I got the reciept no.s on the back of the checks. When can I expect to recieve the notices? I am planning travel by the end of this month. Is that OK to travel with just the reciept no's or do I need to have the reciept notices with me. Also I have a valid H1 visa till 2009. Advice greatly appreciated.
more...
BharatPremi
12-08 11:17 PM
And no one can dare to put a price on tension, mental torture through which most are going through. To any one that is the biggest saving and so one should move forward for donating. So please respect the funding request from IV family for respecting yourself.
2010 hairstyles wallpaper Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez justin bieber and selena
MA001
10-30 01:31 PM
See this link, give your comments ( I suggest to be brief & to the point).
http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2006/10/immigration_is_.html
http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2006/10/immigration_is_.html
more...
GCwaitforever
05-31 02:45 PM
Thanks for sharing your experiences. I am also sponsoring my mother-in-law to come here. I will have to see how this goes.
hair Justin Bieber amp; Selena Gomez
johnamit
07-12 01:43 PM
My company has filed more than 200 in early July, I checked with attorney yesterday and he said so far not even a single check has been cashed and none returned.
more...
gc28262
02-24 12:15 PM
People may end up populating junk data, if we force them to enter profile details.
For statistical purposes, no-data is preferable over junk data.
For statistical purposes, no-data is preferable over junk data.
hot house Selena Gomez Justin Bieber justin bieber and selena gomez hawaii
arihant
05-06 04:10 PM
Additional Resources to Eliminate Backlog by Sep 2007
The DOL reports that they are "scaling up" resources dedicated to the elimination of backlog cases. Their stated deadline for eliminating the backlog is September 30, 2007. Based on what we at the Murthy Law Firm are experiencing, they are going to have to really increase their efforts, particularly in Pennsylvania, to meet this goal. They note that the work at the BPCs cannot be compared to the PERM case processing, since backlog cases receive full review, whereas the PERM cases are based upon attestations and primarily are technology-driven.
The DOL reports that they are "scaling up" resources dedicated to the elimination of backlog cases. Their stated deadline for eliminating the backlog is September 30, 2007. Based on what we at the Murthy Law Firm are experiencing, they are going to have to really increase their efforts, particularly in Pennsylvania, to meet this goal. They note that the work at the BPCs cannot be compared to the PERM case processing, since backlog cases receive full review, whereas the PERM cases are based upon attestations and primarily are technology-driven.
more...
house Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
amslonewolf
08-21 11:03 AM
Is calling them and paying by the minute any better at getting an appointment..
tattoo makeup Justin Bieber And Selena Gomez justin bieber and selena gomez kissing
VenuK
07-10 07:35 PM
Hi SDDesi,
That's a good point. i will talk to my attorney and senior attorney from other resources.
Thanks,
Hi raysaikat,
I talked to my attorney about the security clearance and he said my security clearance is done successfully. basically, FBI will do all that behind the scenes thats what my attorney said, they back check in bio-data since i came into US,
then
only i have received approved I-797 with company Y on Jun 5, 2008.
addition to it, i have a letter (from my attorney) from an expert opinion who is the Professor from University of Maryland on my Education and Work Experience. correct me if this is wrong.
coming to second point
i dont think my current client will give me that kinda luxury working from remote place,
what is TAL?
what information is provided there.
what do i need to look for in there.
do u have any link where i can look into it, if so pls email me at
kvenu135 at hotmail dot com
please email me anyone who reads this thread/post with your advices.
I would be more than happy to appreciate it
With Thanks,
Venu
That's a good point. i will talk to my attorney and senior attorney from other resources.
Thanks,
Hi raysaikat,
I talked to my attorney about the security clearance and he said my security clearance is done successfully. basically, FBI will do all that behind the scenes thats what my attorney said, they back check in bio-data since i came into US,
then
only i have received approved I-797 with company Y on Jun 5, 2008.
addition to it, i have a letter (from my attorney) from an expert opinion who is the Professor from University of Maryland on my Education and Work Experience. correct me if this is wrong.
coming to second point
i dont think my current client will give me that kinda luxury working from remote place,
what is TAL?
what information is provided there.
what do i need to look for in there.
do u have any link where i can look into it, if so pls email me at
kvenu135 at hotmail dot com
please email me anyone who reads this thread/post with your advices.
I would be more than happy to appreciate it
With Thanks,
Venu
more...
pictures 2010 Justin Bieber amp; Selena
singhsa3
09-05 11:47 AM
Please visit this site http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html . You will see that STRIVE bill is about to be introduced in both houses. Also notice that this bill is a bipartisan bill with Democrats in the lead. This increase chances of its success.
Note that though it is a comprehensive immigration reform bill but it does have some positive provisions, which greatly affect us. For example: The effective yearly green cards will be increased from 140K per year to 290K *2.5 = 725K, where 2.5 is the multiplier for spouse and children as they will be exempted from the quota.
In simple terms, priority dates will become current as soon as the bill passes.
Unfortunately, the bill needs to be passed by certain majority and there are three categories of people who will vote on this a) In favor b) Not in favor c) Haven’t decided yet. Category “C” are the ones that need to be convinced to vote in favor of the bill.
One of the goals of the Sep 18th rally is to meet with the category “c” lawmakers and try bringing then on our side. But if our number is not large enough they will most likely be voting Nay and hence defeating the bill.
So think and act….
Note that though it is a comprehensive immigration reform bill but it does have some positive provisions, which greatly affect us. For example: The effective yearly green cards will be increased from 140K per year to 290K *2.5 = 725K, where 2.5 is the multiplier for spouse and children as they will be exempted from the quota.
In simple terms, priority dates will become current as soon as the bill passes.
Unfortunately, the bill needs to be passed by certain majority and there are three categories of people who will vote on this a) In favor b) Not in favor c) Haven’t decided yet. Category “C” are the ones that need to be convinced to vote in favor of the bill.
One of the goals of the Sep 18th rally is to meet with the category “c” lawmakers and try bringing then on our side. But if our number is not large enough they will most likely be voting Nay and hence defeating the bill.
So think and act….
dresses Selena Gomez Justin Bieber
Canadianindian
11-14 09:16 PM
The December bulletin is extremely frustrating.
Does anyone suggest another DC rally or another media campaign could bring some attention to our plight? I am up for either/both.
Hello all IV members,
I was wondering, the 7% green card allotment for each country, can than be considered as racial discrimination? I mean a law suit against USCIS for discriminating against skilled workers.
A question for all you, what do you think is going to happen? will EB2 move fast in next few months, I don't understand how can U.S govt play will all our lives? We all have some personal decisions on hold,
Lastly i feel, we should contact some high profile politicians in India, so they can put a question or make some time of arrangement for Indians who are stuck over here, we all know unites states is interested in nuclear deal, if some type of provision is put in there to help Indians in this country
how about holding another DC rally?
We have to do some big about all this crap!
Does anyone suggest another DC rally or another media campaign could bring some attention to our plight? I am up for either/both.
Hello all IV members,
I was wondering, the 7% green card allotment for each country, can than be considered as racial discrimination? I mean a law suit against USCIS for discriminating against skilled workers.
A question for all you, what do you think is going to happen? will EB2 move fast in next few months, I don't understand how can U.S govt play will all our lives? We all have some personal decisions on hold,
Lastly i feel, we should contact some high profile politicians in India, so they can put a question or make some time of arrangement for Indians who are stuck over here, we all know unites states is interested in nuclear deal, if some type of provision is put in there to help Indians in this country
how about holding another DC rally?
We have to do some big about all this crap!
more...
makeup Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
NKR
06-02 10:35 AM
NKR, thanks . I am considering that option.
Can you please tell if I do the L1 Extension, will it NEGATE the approved H1 ?
I am sorry, I cannot help you there since I am not aware of the consequences. Please consult an attorney
Can you please tell if I do the L1 Extension, will it NEGATE the approved H1 ?
I am sorry, I cannot help you there since I am not aware of the consequences. Please consult an attorney
girlfriend Are the Justin Bieber and
GEEVER
January 31st, 2008, 02:36 PM
well thanks i'm thinking now that it's a good idea that buying an old one thing...i think i'll do it
hairstyles Selena Gomez amp; Justin Bieber:
sandy_anand
04-07 09:25 AM
I have seen few posts on , here is one of them http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/677347613/got-email-from-nvcattorney-state-gov-to-pay-794-spam
There two other cases on who have received similar notices from NVC to pay invoice fees.. Their priority dates are July 2007 and Nov 2007
Kate, do you personally know the two cases? Just curious. Thanks!
There two other cases on who have received similar notices from NVC to pay invoice fees.. Their priority dates are July 2007 and Nov 2007
Kate, do you personally know the two cases? Just curious. Thanks!
cendra
04-30 11:15 AM
EB3-PD Jul 02
LC Approved Jan 07
I-140 Pending since March 07
LC Approved Jan 07
I-140 Pending since March 07
Dakshini R. Sen
06-25 11:12 PM
My H1 filed & approved thorugh company A from October 2004.
H1 then transferred to company B & approved from Nov 2005.
My GC process (EB3 Category) started & labor filed through company C for future job in Feb 2006. Labor approved & I-140 filed in June 2006. RFE received in April 2007 & documents received by INS in May 2007. SINCE THEN I-140 is pending... I-485 & EAD filed in July fiasco. EAD approved and renewed once. Valid until september 2010.
My H1 extension through company B denied in Jan 2009 (H1 expired in september 2008). MTR filed in Feb 2009, still pending. This made my EAD active as I have continued working for company B.
Another H1 filed through company C (GC sponsoring company) in April 2009 and RFE notice dated 23rd June, 2009 yet to be received.
In the process of filing 2nd labor through Comapny C ( same company), but this time under EB2 category.
At this point, my questions are:
1) Since my new H1 is through my GC sponsoring company, will RFE for H1 impact old GC process & new GC process?
2) Is my old pending I-140 eligible for premium processing since it is stuck for almost 3 years now? If yes, is it worth doing it?
The reason I want to get my old I-140 to be approved so that I can retain my old priority date.
Experts please share some knwoledge and suggest the steps best for my situation....Am really stressed out...
Thank You in advance...
The RFE on the H1 will not have a negative effect on the GC as long as the employer and the job offer are legitimate. Yes, you can premium process your I-140. Effective June 29, 2009, USCIS will resume Premium Processing Service for I-140 forms.
Dakshini R. Sen,
Attorney at Law
212-242-1677
713-278-1677
H1 then transferred to company B & approved from Nov 2005.
My GC process (EB3 Category) started & labor filed through company C for future job in Feb 2006. Labor approved & I-140 filed in June 2006. RFE received in April 2007 & documents received by INS in May 2007. SINCE THEN I-140 is pending... I-485 & EAD filed in July fiasco. EAD approved and renewed once. Valid until september 2010.
My H1 extension through company B denied in Jan 2009 (H1 expired in september 2008). MTR filed in Feb 2009, still pending. This made my EAD active as I have continued working for company B.
Another H1 filed through company C (GC sponsoring company) in April 2009 and RFE notice dated 23rd June, 2009 yet to be received.
In the process of filing 2nd labor through Comapny C ( same company), but this time under EB2 category.
At this point, my questions are:
1) Since my new H1 is through my GC sponsoring company, will RFE for H1 impact old GC process & new GC process?
2) Is my old pending I-140 eligible for premium processing since it is stuck for almost 3 years now? If yes, is it worth doing it?
The reason I want to get my old I-140 to be approved so that I can retain my old priority date.
Experts please share some knwoledge and suggest the steps best for my situation....Am really stressed out...
Thank You in advance...
The RFE on the H1 will not have a negative effect on the GC as long as the employer and the job offer are legitimate. Yes, you can premium process your I-140. Effective June 29, 2009, USCIS will resume Premium Processing Service for I-140 forms.
Dakshini R. Sen,
Attorney at Law
212-242-1677
713-278-1677