aguy
08-23 01:17 AM
Hi,
My first NIW/I140 was concurrent filed with I485 for both my wife and me. When they denied I140, the USCIS also denied I485s for both of us. I have a pending MTR for that I140.
While the MTR was pending, I filed another NIW/I140, which was approved. I noticed that the approval notice has the A# that was on the I485 of the first petition.
So, should I assume that my the USCIS has interfiled my I485 automatically and my old PD is active?
Thanks.
My first NIW/I140 was concurrent filed with I485 for both my wife and me. When they denied I140, the USCIS also denied I485s for both of us. I have a pending MTR for that I140.
While the MTR was pending, I filed another NIW/I140, which was approved. I noticed that the approval notice has the A# that was on the I485 of the first petition.
So, should I assume that my the USCIS has interfiled my I485 automatically and my old PD is active?
Thanks.
wallpaper ieber fans injured01 jpg
lecter
January 6th, 2005, 09:05 PM
I see what your getting at...... yep... I do like that too.... still have a lot to learn :D
It was a quick and dirty, you can select a colour and then mask and feather it so there's no halo's around the edges, blah blah...
there's heaps of excellent PS books around....
indulge yourself...
Scott Kelby is a good start....
Rob
It was a quick and dirty, you can select a colour and then mask and feather it so there's no halo's around the edges, blah blah...
there's heaps of excellent PS books around....
indulge yourself...
Scott Kelby is a good start....
Rob
mrsr
02-19 09:55 PM
I am looking for some help on interfiling, want to replace my old eb2 140 with the new I140 Eb3(jul10,2001) so that my AOS will be transfered to new I140
Thanks..
I am looking for some help on interfiling, want to replace my old eb2 140 with the new I140 Eb3(jul10,2001) so that my AOS will be transfered to new I140
Thanks..
any idea
please guys
is anybody there
is any body there
Thanks..
I am looking for some help on interfiling, want to replace my old eb2 140 with the new I140 Eb3(jul10,2001) so that my AOS will be transfered to new I140
Thanks..
any idea
please guys
is anybody there
is any body there
2011 Funny Justin Bieber Fan Art
raysaikat
06-20 08:59 PM
[snip...]
As long as you have the I-797 approval petition you are good.
S/he has to have a valid I-94 to stay in the country legally. I-797 usually comes with an I-94. However, what the original poster said is that his/her I-94 is going to expire. I am interpreting the statement to mean that among the I-94's (one or more) s/he holds, the one with farthest validity is going to expire. If it does, s/he has to go out and get a new I-94 while re-entering. If s/he applies for some other status, and relevant I-797 comes with another I-94, then that's different. The bottom-line is, s/he has to have a valid I-94. It is irrelevant if the I-94 is given by the IO at the entry post or attached to an I-797.
As long as you have the I-797 approval petition you are good.
S/he has to have a valid I-94 to stay in the country legally. I-797 usually comes with an I-94. However, what the original poster said is that his/her I-94 is going to expire. I am interpreting the statement to mean that among the I-94's (one or more) s/he holds, the one with farthest validity is going to expire. If it does, s/he has to go out and get a new I-94 while re-entering. If s/he applies for some other status, and relevant I-797 comes with another I-94, then that's different. The bottom-line is, s/he has to have a valid I-94. It is irrelevant if the I-94 is given by the IO at the entry post or attached to an I-797.
more...
Ramba
03-26 11:42 AM
There is a little chance to overcome this issue. Because of promotion in same occupation classification, one can not upgrade the education requirement to Master degree, if the same occupation required Bachelors degree in junior level. If your employer requested more experience (rather than education), probabaly they may approve the second LC, as it is geneune for asking more experience for senor level.
Now DOL and USCIS is tightening the requirement as everyone is shooting for higher requirement to apply in EB2.
Now DOL and USCIS is tightening the requirement as everyone is shooting for higher requirement to apply in EB2.
pak
07-20 10:29 AM
Go to maxico but getting visa of Mexico from US is difficult on B1/B2. Canadian visa for her on B1/B2 visa is impossible. Check and call other near by countries visa consulate as well as US consular visa officer for the availibility of dates of H4 visa interview.
Hope you will find the solution.
Hope you will find the solution.
more...
snowshoe
12-17 07:35 PM
I am planning to visit Mexico (not for H1 stamping - plan to use AP), I had called up their consulate in Philly and was told that they are not issuing visas at that location until Jan first week. The person I spoke to suggested that I go to the consulate in New York. I tried calling the consulate in NY, however, I could not get to speak with anyone there. They had an automated message that lists the things required for the stamping, the visa fee ($36), etc.,
However, no info if I have to schedule an appointment, how long they require to process the application.
Does anyone here have an experience with the Mexican tourist visa stamping?
Thanks in advance.
However, no info if I have to schedule an appointment, how long they require to process the application.
Does anyone here have an experience with the Mexican tourist visa stamping?
Thanks in advance.
2010 Justin Bieber fans IMG_7365.
Asian
12-07 09:26 AM
Hi,
I am EB-3 ROW, PD in Nov.03, I-140 approved. I am planning on changing my current employer (non profit) to for-profit company.
I am in my H-1 B fifth year. I renewed once on my third year. By the time I change my job to the new employer, I will have about one year left in my current H-1B.
If I change the employer, will I be subject to H-1 B visa quota restriction?
I have stayed with my current employer (University) for five years just for the hope of green card. But I think this is time to move on. Staying in my current job is so detrimental to my career.
However, if the new company that may hire me, cannot find any H-1 B visa quota left for me, I will be in trouble if it is the case.
I would appreciate your advice very much.
Thank you always.
I am EB-3 ROW, PD in Nov.03, I-140 approved. I am planning on changing my current employer (non profit) to for-profit company.
I am in my H-1 B fifth year. I renewed once on my third year. By the time I change my job to the new employer, I will have about one year left in my current H-1B.
If I change the employer, will I be subject to H-1 B visa quota restriction?
I have stayed with my current employer (University) for five years just for the hope of green card. But I think this is time to move on. Staying in my current job is so detrimental to my career.
However, if the new company that may hire me, cannot find any H-1 B visa quota left for me, I will be in trouble if it is the case.
I would appreciate your advice very much.
Thank you always.
more...
soneC
06-15 01:10 PM
Dear Ms. Martin:
Hello. Thank you for your timely and to-the-point reply. I will file for I-485 petition (family-based) as soon as my PD becomes current. A couple of questions:
1. I know for family-based I-485, my sponsor (my father) needs to show financial support through I-864 (Affidavit of Support). What should I do in unlikely case that my father lost his engineer position in his company? My parents actually own their house (no loan, about 250K house) and have decent amount of money for retirement. Is this enough to convince USCIS?
2. National Visa Center sent my father a notice when USCIS transferred the approved I-130 application to NVC. The notice stated case number was assigned and asked us not to make travel arrangements. Obviously, NVC still believes I am aboard because in the I-130 form, my father stated that I was aboard. Should I inform NVC that I am in the country and would like to do AoS instead of CP?
3. I assume that I can apply for EAD/AP along with the family-based I-485. Am I right?
4. Do you have an estimate family-based I-485 processing time? I was told about six month. Is it true?
5. Please give me a fee quote for I-485/EAD/AP?
Thank you so much. I am looking forward to your reply.
Sincerely
Hello. Thank you for your timely and to-the-point reply. I will file for I-485 petition (family-based) as soon as my PD becomes current. A couple of questions:
1. I know for family-based I-485, my sponsor (my father) needs to show financial support through I-864 (Affidavit of Support). What should I do in unlikely case that my father lost his engineer position in his company? My parents actually own their house (no loan, about 250K house) and have decent amount of money for retirement. Is this enough to convince USCIS?
2. National Visa Center sent my father a notice when USCIS transferred the approved I-130 application to NVC. The notice stated case number was assigned and asked us not to make travel arrangements. Obviously, NVC still believes I am aboard because in the I-130 form, my father stated that I was aboard. Should I inform NVC that I am in the country and would like to do AoS instead of CP?
3. I assume that I can apply for EAD/AP along with the family-based I-485. Am I right?
4. Do you have an estimate family-based I-485 processing time? I was told about six month. Is it true?
5. Please give me a fee quote for I-485/EAD/AP?
Thank you so much. I am looking forward to your reply.
Sincerely
hair Sweetheart Bieber Fans!
Student with no hopes
12-10 09:55 AM
/
more...
Anders �stberg
June 16th, 2005, 11:07 AM
Thanks for your comments! I'll see what I can do to lighten the second one up a little bit more. Please feel free to experiment if you like.
EDIT: OK, I've lightened the mid tones a bit, hopefully there's some detail visible in the feathers now. I don't want to make it too light though. Black feathers are difficult...
EDIT: OK, I've lightened the mid tones a bit, hopefully there's some detail visible in the feathers now. I don't want to make it too light though. Black feathers are difficult...
hot Bieber fans everywhere.
shahsahil
04-17 12:31 AM
Hi
I am new to this group. I have a question regarding my PERM case.
MY PERM case is pending in DOL from last 10 months. I find this very
unusual.
Anybody heard about such a long pending case?
Are there any suggestion for following up on my PERM case?
Any advise will be useful.
Thanks
-Sahil.
I am new to this group. I have a question regarding my PERM case.
MY PERM case is pending in DOL from last 10 months. I find this very
unusual.
Anybody heard about such a long pending case?
Are there any suggestion for following up on my PERM case?
Any advise will be useful.
Thanks
-Sahil.
more...
house JUSTIN BIEBER FANS ANGRY WITH
jettu77
10-05 03:57 PM
^^^
tattoo Justin Bieber fans are
21stIcon
12-21 06:33 AM
What I am saying his employer process pay roll for $5800, he gets in hand after tax deduction.
You guys should understand one thing if your base salary is $1000/k, company should process $8333/pm on a pay roll then pay roll will decide about tax withholdings. There is no way company can show gimmicks and run pay roll for less. I have been working for the past 8 years, all the time companies divided annual salary by biweekly and deposited rest will be taken care by pay roll processing.
Bottom line pay slip should show 8333 not even single penny less for 100k it means you are employer is cheating you.
You guys should understand one thing if your base salary is $1000/k, company should process $8333/pm on a pay roll then pay roll will decide about tax withholdings. There is no way company can show gimmicks and run pay roll for less. I have been working for the past 8 years, all the time companies divided annual salary by biweekly and deposited rest will be taken care by pay roll processing.
Bottom line pay slip should show 8333 not even single penny less for 100k it means you are employer is cheating you.
more...
pictures ATTENTION JUSTIN BIEBER FANS!
acecupid
09-06 08:33 PM
Read something interesting on TOI..
NRIs treated as Not Required Indians! - India - NEWS - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/NRIs-treated-as-Not-Required-Indians/articleshow/4979439.cms)
Indubhai Amin, a non-resident Indian (NRI) settled in the UK earns interest income of Rs 3 lakh on his non-resident ordinary account bank deposit in
India in the current FY 2009-10. Enjoying his personal exemption limit of Rs 1.60 lakh and the eligible deduction of Rs 1 lakh u/s 80C, Amin is comfortable paying income tax of Rs 4,000 in the first slab of 10 per cent on his effective taxable income of Rs 40,000.
Flat tax of 20% and 30%
A huge shock awaits Amin and millions of NRIs, in regard to taxation of their interest and investment income and capital gains earned in India, proposed to be treated under the draft Direct Tax Code as "income from special sources."
In 2011-12, on the same interest income of Rs 3 lakh, Amin will be required to pay a hefty tax of Rs 60,000 at the flat rate of 20 per cent, without being eligible to claim any basic exemption or other deduction, as provided under rule three of the First Schedule to the Code.
Moreover, all capital gains earned by a non-resident will attract a flat tax of 30 per cent, irrespective of the amount of capital gains. While a resident Indian will be required to pay tax of Rs 3.84 lakh on his taxable income of Rs 25 lakh, an NRI earning equivalent capital gains will be called upon to pay almost double tax of Rs 7.5 lakh.
Hair-raising drafting
New section 13 (2) provides that such �special income� shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of the Ninth Schedule, the drafting of which is literally hair-raising. It provides that the amount of accrual or receipt shall be computed as the taxable income, and no loss, allowance or deduction shall be allowed, as the same shall be presumed to have been granted. The only exception in this regard, in respect of capital gains arising from the transfer of equity shares or units of equity oriented mutual fund chargeable to STT, is quite amusing, as it stands redundant in view of the proposal to abolish STT (a classic instance of incoherent drafting).
The draftsman does not seem to have realized the harsh implications. It means that if an NRI sells a capital asset purchased for Rs 10 lakh at Rs 30 lakh, he will be required to pay tax of Rs 9 lakh at 30 per cent on the gross sale consideration of Rs 30 lakh without any deduction even for the cost of acquisition of Rs 10 lakh (not to mention any benefit of indexation on the same).
Determination of residential status
The residential status of an individual under the Code is proposed to be determined as per the current norms. However, the status of "not ordinarily resident" (NOR) is proposed to be eliminated. Despite the above, Clause 24 of the Sixth Schedule has still provided for exemption in respect of interest earned on foreign currency deposits in the case of NOR. Poor drafting indeed!
The Code has proposed to retain the current exemptions availed by a non-resident in case of interest earned on NRE and FCNR deposits with banks.
Special exemption for returning NRIs
A useful exemption has been provided in case of income earned outside India, if it is not derived from a business controlled from India, in the financial year in which the returning NRI becomes an Indian resident and the immediately succeeding financial year. However, the benefit of the said exemption would be available, only if such individual was a non-resident for nine years immediately preceding the financial year in which he becomes a resident.
Wealth-tax liability for NRIs
Proposed Section 102 of the Code provides for wealth tax liability in the case of the value of all global assets of an individual or HUF. However, an exemption has been provided in case of the value of assets located outside India in case of an individual who is not a citizen of India or an individual or HUF not resident in India. Hence, while returning NRIs who are non-citizens will enjoy wealth-tax exemption for their overseas assets, NRIs with Indian citizenship becoming residents will attract wealth-tax liability on such assets held abroad.
Illogical exemption under wealth-tax
Talking about wealth tax, the Code prescribes an exemption in respect of any house or plot of land belonging to an individual or HUF, if it is acquired before April 1, 2000. It is difficult to understand the logic as to why this exemption has been denied in all cases where such immovable property is acquired after March 31, 2000!
Proposals That Will Hurt the Global Indian Sentiment
Flat Rate of Tax
20% flat tax on interest & other investment income
30% flat tax on all capital gains
Apart from 20% & 30% TDS on above, TDS at a baffling rate of 35% prescribed on all residual income
No Personal Exemption
No personal exemption or deduction allowed in computing the above income treated as �income from special sources�.
Weird Interpretation
Poor drafting leads to such a weird interpretation that transfer of a capital asset may attract 30% tax on gross sale consideration.
What Discrimination!
Ironical but true! Non-Indian sportspersons, say Ricky Ponting or Shoaib Akhtar, required to pay a concessional tax of 10% on their game, advertisement and column earnings in India, thus enjoying a more privileged tax status than our own sons of the soil living abroad.
NRIs treated as Not Required Indians! - India - NEWS - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/NRIs-treated-as-Not-Required-Indians/articleshow/4979439.cms)
Indubhai Amin, a non-resident Indian (NRI) settled in the UK earns interest income of Rs 3 lakh on his non-resident ordinary account bank deposit in
India in the current FY 2009-10. Enjoying his personal exemption limit of Rs 1.60 lakh and the eligible deduction of Rs 1 lakh u/s 80C, Amin is comfortable paying income tax of Rs 4,000 in the first slab of 10 per cent on his effective taxable income of Rs 40,000.
Flat tax of 20% and 30%
A huge shock awaits Amin and millions of NRIs, in regard to taxation of their interest and investment income and capital gains earned in India, proposed to be treated under the draft Direct Tax Code as "income from special sources."
In 2011-12, on the same interest income of Rs 3 lakh, Amin will be required to pay a hefty tax of Rs 60,000 at the flat rate of 20 per cent, without being eligible to claim any basic exemption or other deduction, as provided under rule three of the First Schedule to the Code.
Moreover, all capital gains earned by a non-resident will attract a flat tax of 30 per cent, irrespective of the amount of capital gains. While a resident Indian will be required to pay tax of Rs 3.84 lakh on his taxable income of Rs 25 lakh, an NRI earning equivalent capital gains will be called upon to pay almost double tax of Rs 7.5 lakh.
Hair-raising drafting
New section 13 (2) provides that such �special income� shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of the Ninth Schedule, the drafting of which is literally hair-raising. It provides that the amount of accrual or receipt shall be computed as the taxable income, and no loss, allowance or deduction shall be allowed, as the same shall be presumed to have been granted. The only exception in this regard, in respect of capital gains arising from the transfer of equity shares or units of equity oriented mutual fund chargeable to STT, is quite amusing, as it stands redundant in view of the proposal to abolish STT (a classic instance of incoherent drafting).
The draftsman does not seem to have realized the harsh implications. It means that if an NRI sells a capital asset purchased for Rs 10 lakh at Rs 30 lakh, he will be required to pay tax of Rs 9 lakh at 30 per cent on the gross sale consideration of Rs 30 lakh without any deduction even for the cost of acquisition of Rs 10 lakh (not to mention any benefit of indexation on the same).
Determination of residential status
The residential status of an individual under the Code is proposed to be determined as per the current norms. However, the status of "not ordinarily resident" (NOR) is proposed to be eliminated. Despite the above, Clause 24 of the Sixth Schedule has still provided for exemption in respect of interest earned on foreign currency deposits in the case of NOR. Poor drafting indeed!
The Code has proposed to retain the current exemptions availed by a non-resident in case of interest earned on NRE and FCNR deposits with banks.
Special exemption for returning NRIs
A useful exemption has been provided in case of income earned outside India, if it is not derived from a business controlled from India, in the financial year in which the returning NRI becomes an Indian resident and the immediately succeeding financial year. However, the benefit of the said exemption would be available, only if such individual was a non-resident for nine years immediately preceding the financial year in which he becomes a resident.
Wealth-tax liability for NRIs
Proposed Section 102 of the Code provides for wealth tax liability in the case of the value of all global assets of an individual or HUF. However, an exemption has been provided in case of the value of assets located outside India in case of an individual who is not a citizen of India or an individual or HUF not resident in India. Hence, while returning NRIs who are non-citizens will enjoy wealth-tax exemption for their overseas assets, NRIs with Indian citizenship becoming residents will attract wealth-tax liability on such assets held abroad.
Illogical exemption under wealth-tax
Talking about wealth tax, the Code prescribes an exemption in respect of any house or plot of land belonging to an individual or HUF, if it is acquired before April 1, 2000. It is difficult to understand the logic as to why this exemption has been denied in all cases where such immovable property is acquired after March 31, 2000!
Proposals That Will Hurt the Global Indian Sentiment
Flat Rate of Tax
20% flat tax on interest & other investment income
30% flat tax on all capital gains
Apart from 20% & 30% TDS on above, TDS at a baffling rate of 35% prescribed on all residual income
No Personal Exemption
No personal exemption or deduction allowed in computing the above income treated as �income from special sources�.
Weird Interpretation
Poor drafting leads to such a weird interpretation that transfer of a capital asset may attract 30% tax on gross sale consideration.
What Discrimination!
Ironical but true! Non-Indian sportspersons, say Ricky Ponting or Shoaib Akhtar, required to pay a concessional tax of 10% on their game, advertisement and column earnings in India, thus enjoying a more privileged tax status than our own sons of the soil living abroad.
dresses Justin Bieber fans became
perm2gc
01-08 04:39 PM
Hi,
Do the h4's in this year applying for an H1 need to start sooner than normal h1 applications?
Filing immediately after they open in April is good option.If new H1 increase bill is not passed then the current numbers won't long enough.
Do the h4's in this year applying for an H1 need to start sooner than normal h1 applications?
Filing immediately after they open in April is good option.If new H1 increase bill is not passed then the current numbers won't long enough.
more...
makeup Photo: Justin Bieber Fans
Steve Mitchell
February 15th, 2004, 06:56 PM
Just added the Sony 717 to the list of cameras that the DOF calculator should give an accurate DOF reading. It is my understanding the the COC varies with varies digital cameras. I gathered this information from here (http://dfleming.ameranet.com/digital_coc.html). This is the guy who created the equations for one of Nikon's websites. That is the variable that changes and alters the DOF if I interpurt this correctly. This is the variable that is changed when determing the DOF in the DOF calculator (http://www.dphoto.us/forum/index.php?section=depthoffield) on Dphoto.us.
Your experiencing an effect called Depth of Field(DOF). This is commen and usally you want to minimize it for effect but not in your case.
You will need to learn to use a DOF calculator, there is one on this site but it does not include the 2/3" sensor sive you camera has. A better one for you right now may be this calculator here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp5700/page2.asp
Using this you can determine the distance you need, focal length and distance to subject to obtain the desired DOF. Currently on the wide end of your camera, you'll need to move about a 1.5 feet from the focus point with f8 to get the DOF you desire. If you get the WA adaptor you'll be able to move closer to about .9 feet from the focus point and still obtain the DOF you desire.
You'll never be able to be within 5 inches from the object and obtain the DOF you desire, it simply is not possible with you camera. As to which WA adaptor to get? I don't know. I've never used anything of the sort so I can not answer that question for you.
Scott
Your experiencing an effect called Depth of Field(DOF). This is commen and usally you want to minimize it for effect but not in your case.
You will need to learn to use a DOF calculator, there is one on this site but it does not include the 2/3" sensor sive you camera has. A better one for you right now may be this calculator here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp5700/page2.asp
Using this you can determine the distance you need, focal length and distance to subject to obtain the desired DOF. Currently on the wide end of your camera, you'll need to move about a 1.5 feet from the focus point with f8 to get the DOF you desire. If you get the WA adaptor you'll be able to move closer to about .9 feet from the focus point and still obtain the DOF you desire.
You'll never be able to be within 5 inches from the object and obtain the DOF you desire, it simply is not possible with you camera. As to which WA adaptor to get? I don't know. I've never used anything of the sort so I can not answer that question for you.
Scott
girlfriend Bieber fans in line for the
saveimmigration
12-06 02:22 PM
After seeing so much activism on Dream Act in the news, I think Dream Act deserves to be passed. Recapture does not. We are responsible for it for not doing anything if Dream Act passes. Just Google Dream Act and you will see so much work done on this. Compare it to Recapture bill. Reporters will also write about issues where they see lot of activity. We are simply not doing enough.
DREAM act is a political issue if passed will get Democrats millions and millions of hispanic votes and possibly help them in 2012 election. Republicans will also want those votes. So there is a possibility that DREAM will pass some day. It is unfortunate illegal aliens get path to citizenship and legal immigrants like us have to wait on an untimed line with a hope to get green card. It is all politics my friends. Bottom line is they are illegal when they came here. If they are students they should get F1 visas if they are working should get work permits. Giving them citizenship is ridiculous. No one supports our cause, not even the Hispanic community. Dude we should oppose illegal immigration that has kept legal immigration at hostage. Jai Hind!1
DREAM act is a political issue if passed will get Democrats millions and millions of hispanic votes and possibly help them in 2012 election. Republicans will also want those votes. So there is a possibility that DREAM will pass some day. It is unfortunate illegal aliens get path to citizenship and legal immigrants like us have to wait on an untimed line with a hope to get green card. It is all politics my friends. Bottom line is they are illegal when they came here. If they are students they should get F1 visas if they are working should get work permits. Giving them citizenship is ridiculous. No one supports our cause, not even the Hispanic community. Dude we should oppose illegal immigration that has kept legal immigration at hostage. Jai Hind!1
hairstyles Extreme Justin Bieber Fan
tonyHK12
01-11 09:28 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
gc2
02-19 11:22 AM
you may find this helpful. it provides info on I-130 and I-485 and the documents you need to file. if he is clean (no criminal background, issues with legal status etc) then you should not have any problems. Good luck and congrats on your marriage.
Almond
08-14 12:10 PM
^^^^ sounds like good news, I'm happy for you:)
0 comments:
Post a Comment