fcres
07-24 04:48 PM
Well according to this FAQ dated 07/23 they will accept application without medical report (Qn# 13) which is also an initial evidence. So i hope EVL is also ok.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
My lawyer agreed to send the EVL separate eventhough he said he does not foresee a rejection on the case on this ground. He said its not advised to send another 485, just sent a cover letter and the EVL.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
My lawyer agreed to send the EVL separate eventhough he said he does not foresee a rejection on the case on this ground. He said its not advised to send another 485, just sent a cover letter and the EVL.
wallpaper Valentine#39;s Day Wedding
battineni
08-12 09:47 AM
How come a person with EB2 category applied GC in 2006 doing the same thing that a EB3 person does who applied GC in 2002 gets their Green Cards approved?? Again not against any category...What in the world of kinda rationale is this is??
not even 2002, it's just 01Jan2002, means only 2001.
EB2 person who applied for greencard in 2006 getting the GC wth the person who applied in EB2 - 2006.
This gap between EB2 and EB3 is keep on increasing....
EB2 move is in Months....EB3 move not even in Days...
I'm not against EB2... but just comparing.:(
not even 2002, it's just 01Jan2002, means only 2001.
EB2 person who applied for greencard in 2006 getting the GC wth the person who applied in EB2 - 2006.
This gap between EB2 and EB3 is keep on increasing....
EB2 move is in Months....EB3 move not even in Days...
I'm not against EB2... but just comparing.:(
insbaby
07-18 05:02 AM
USCIS did not say that they will return the application and they should be refilled.
With their announcement on July 17th, they have about 16 more days in this month left. It is a heavy workload for them to reject all the petitions (minimum 200K packages) which is unnecessary work and cost enourmous amount of money.
Also they will not invite another problem if the do not give sufficient time to the clients to file, what if someone receives the package Auguest 15. That will be another mess up.
It looks like SCs have rejected some applications on the same day (July 2nd), those applicants should have already received them(on July 3rd or 4th). They have to refile. Rejections after July 17th may not be true.
My lawer says:
Your application has reached INS on July 2nd and upon the statement from USIC on July 17th, it will be accepted.
With their announcement on July 17th, they have about 16 more days in this month left. It is a heavy workload for them to reject all the petitions (minimum 200K packages) which is unnecessary work and cost enourmous amount of money.
Also they will not invite another problem if the do not give sufficient time to the clients to file, what if someone receives the package Auguest 15. That will be another mess up.
It looks like SCs have rejected some applications on the same day (July 2nd), those applicants should have already received them(on July 3rd or 4th). They have to refile. Rejections after July 17th may not be true.
My lawer says:
Your application has reached INS on July 2nd and upon the statement from USIC on July 17th, it will be accepted.
2011 Wedding Bouquet
ilikekilo
01-18 07:54 PM
traffiic cop....i am not sure about that....you always have the right to remain silent ans ask whether u r free to go...period...
more...
pappu
01-10 12:48 PM
Some people are already doing our job.
http://www.zazona.com/NewsArchive/2006-12-26%20Renewed%20Push%20for%20H-1B%20Increase.txt
This shows that we have anti immigrant members and visitors amongst us looking for IV updates and our actionplans. sometimes such people pose as annonymous users and contact IV asking for updates without revealing who they are and doing anything constructive for IV. We try to be cautious in such cases. Its good that they quoted us as it shows that we are a force to recon with.
http://www.zazona.com/NewsArchive/2006-12-26%20Renewed%20Push%20for%20H-1B%20Increase.txt
This shows that we have anti immigrant members and visitors amongst us looking for IV updates and our actionplans. sometimes such people pose as annonymous users and contact IV asking for updates without revealing who they are and doing anything constructive for IV. We try to be cautious in such cases. Its good that they quoted us as it shows that we are a force to recon with.
bayarea07
08-06 07:46 PM
Read Post above yours and you will have the answer.
Hello Gurus.
My wife's and my I-485 status changed to 'Card Production' . PD Jan 2006.
My wife is in India and scheduled to return on 25th of August on Valid AP. My question is if my can still use to AP to enter USA ?
Appreciate your inputs.
Thanks
Mo
Hello Gurus.
My wife's and my I-485 status changed to 'Card Production' . PD Jan 2006.
My wife is in India and scheduled to return on 25th of August on Valid AP. My question is if my can still use to AP to enter USA ?
Appreciate your inputs.
Thanks
Mo
more...
sbabunle
01-05 01:35 AM
An idea!!
Lets just put our post on codeguru.com , expertsexchange.com etc etc....
I'm pretty sure lot of techies visit there from all kind of nationalities.....
Lets just put our post on codeguru.com , expertsexchange.com etc etc....
I'm pretty sure lot of techies visit there from all kind of nationalities.....
2010 wedding flowers picture
shivaz90
07-13 11:44 AM
Reading through this thread I find this intense debate about the value and intentions of Murthy's letter.
Let's first deal with the value part: This letter could be from any one of us or anybody else from Timbuktu. Why does this letter have any special significance except that the DHS secretary may read it because Murthy and the secretary are alumni of the same institution (see how carefully this part is added to the letter for our consumption). Now this feeds into the intention part. Even if Murthy wrote a letter to the DHS Secretary why did she have to publicize it on her website (except for the gullible among us to take notice). Generally publicized letters have value if they are from some influential policy maker or lawmaker. In this case Murthy is neither and so her letter does not add or subtract any value to this debate. So we are left with the question of who gains by publicizing this letter. Your guess is as good as mine.
Ultimately I am left wondering why this thread was started in the first place except to garner cheap publicity. Do we really have so much time on our hands?
"Why does Murthy publicize such a letter?" - well it means that she has a client base who needs to know what she is doing in her capacity as thier attorney. Second - there are thousands of Murthy.com members who are neither her client nor her well wishers - but who go to her site to find what is going on latest in the world of Immigration. Not to discredit anyone's effort in this issue - ask any immigrant or potential immigrant into this country about immigration related question, I can guarantee you that they have gained almost all thier knowledge about the process from Murthy.com site. Intended or unintended - the message to DHS is welcome, particularly at this time, be it from whoever.
Anyone who has been a regular murthy.com visitor knows that her site consists of all her interactions with all the Agency people and government officials regarding immigration. Its called the "Internet". People post stuff - period! If it is meant to garner attention, yes, people will post messages. Its far better than a bunch of goof balls posting in youtube about thier experience with coke and spearmint. Please come out of the caves - people.
Let's first deal with the value part: This letter could be from any one of us or anybody else from Timbuktu. Why does this letter have any special significance except that the DHS secretary may read it because Murthy and the secretary are alumni of the same institution (see how carefully this part is added to the letter for our consumption). Now this feeds into the intention part. Even if Murthy wrote a letter to the DHS Secretary why did she have to publicize it on her website (except for the gullible among us to take notice). Generally publicized letters have value if they are from some influential policy maker or lawmaker. In this case Murthy is neither and so her letter does not add or subtract any value to this debate. So we are left with the question of who gains by publicizing this letter. Your guess is as good as mine.
Ultimately I am left wondering why this thread was started in the first place except to garner cheap publicity. Do we really have so much time on our hands?
"Why does Murthy publicize such a letter?" - well it means that she has a client base who needs to know what she is doing in her capacity as thier attorney. Second - there are thousands of Murthy.com members who are neither her client nor her well wishers - but who go to her site to find what is going on latest in the world of Immigration. Not to discredit anyone's effort in this issue - ask any immigrant or potential immigrant into this country about immigration related question, I can guarantee you that they have gained almost all thier knowledge about the process from Murthy.com site. Intended or unintended - the message to DHS is welcome, particularly at this time, be it from whoever.
Anyone who has been a regular murthy.com visitor knows that her site consists of all her interactions with all the Agency people and government officials regarding immigration. Its called the "Internet". People post stuff - period! If it is meant to garner attention, yes, people will post messages. Its far better than a bunch of goof balls posting in youtube about thier experience with coke and spearmint. Please come out of the caves - people.
more...
Nikith77
03-12 08:57 AM
Why is this info no in the USCIS web site.
hair Antique red rose wedding
vkannan
11-12 10:59 PM
WRONG.
YOU are an EB2 India guy for sure and your PD is close.
If spillover happens, all visas will get used up by EB2 India only. EB3 India gets nothing. There are way too many Indians in the system. Even if something is left from EB2 India, EB3 ROW will get breadcrums.
EB3 India gets nothing. So stop giving wrong logic. I will oppose IV helping EB2 guys with close priority dates and not caring about everyone else.
Well, No wonder why we still could not pass any bill in our favour, Keep fighting Dude, EB1 vs EB2 v EB3 v horozontal spill vs vertical spill vs etc etc etc., Keep fighting....you are a good samaritan......
YOU are an EB2 India guy for sure and your PD is close.
If spillover happens, all visas will get used up by EB2 India only. EB3 India gets nothing. There are way too many Indians in the system. Even if something is left from EB2 India, EB3 ROW will get breadcrums.
EB3 India gets nothing. So stop giving wrong logic. I will oppose IV helping EB2 guys with close priority dates and not caring about everyone else.
Well, No wonder why we still could not pass any bill in our favour, Keep fighting Dude, EB1 vs EB2 v EB3 v horozontal spill vs vertical spill vs etc etc etc., Keep fighting....you are a good samaritan......
more...
gc_on_demand
11-12 03:24 PM
Under the regulation No reference to Calendar year. It mentions explicitly calendar quarter.
Immigration and Nationality Act: Section ACT 202 - Numerical Limitation to any single foreign state under Sec. 202. [8 U.S.C. 1152]
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
(B) LIMITING FALL ACROSS FOR CERTAIN COUNTRIES SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (e)- In the case of a foreign state or dependent area to which subsection (e) applies, if the total number of visas issued under section 203(b) exceeds the maximum number of visas that may be made available to immigrants of the state or area under section 203(b)consistent with subsection (e) (determined without regard to this paragraph),in applying subsection (e) all visas shall be deemed to have been required for the classes of aliens specified in section 203(b).
Isn't there a limit of 27% of visas per quarter per country per calendar year ? If that limit is there then who will take precedence ? Quarterly Spill over or that limit ?
To me I think DOS is doing 27% quota limit for first 3 quarters then they are doing spill over so there is no quarterly spill. What if they will show us that there is a limit per quarter in law and they have to follow it. Is it something like deadlock. that trying to follow one law breaks another one.
What if we end up getting response that there is some action needed from Lawmakers to correct law..
just random thoughts.
Immigration and Nationality Act: Section ACT 202 - Numerical Limitation to any single foreign state under Sec. 202. [8 U.S.C. 1152]
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
(B) LIMITING FALL ACROSS FOR CERTAIN COUNTRIES SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (e)- In the case of a foreign state or dependent area to which subsection (e) applies, if the total number of visas issued under section 203(b) exceeds the maximum number of visas that may be made available to immigrants of the state or area under section 203(b)consistent with subsection (e) (determined without regard to this paragraph),in applying subsection (e) all visas shall be deemed to have been required for the classes of aliens specified in section 203(b).
Isn't there a limit of 27% of visas per quarter per country per calendar year ? If that limit is there then who will take precedence ? Quarterly Spill over or that limit ?
To me I think DOS is doing 27% quota limit for first 3 quarters then they are doing spill over so there is no quarterly spill. What if they will show us that there is a limit per quarter in law and they have to follow it. Is it something like deadlock. that trying to follow one law breaks another one.
What if we end up getting response that there is some action needed from Lawmakers to correct law..
just random thoughts.
hot Red Rose Wedding Bouquet
nojoke
03-01 03:57 AM
What a lovely change. Every time Obama and his press Secy opens their mouth, markets dive into red. In this country Main Street and Wall Street are in bed with each other :-)
Obama with his sense-less economic policies, trying to separate Main Street from Wall street. Government needs to seriously lure the investors to the market , cut capital gains and taxes, take off protectionist hats and recover the economy. Then Obama can go with his socialist/populist agenda but certainly this is not the right time.:D
Stop watching faux news.
Bush has done tax cuts to the investor class and look where it has taken this country.
Obama with his sense-less economic policies, trying to separate Main Street from Wall street. Government needs to seriously lure the investors to the market , cut capital gains and taxes, take off protectionist hats and recover the economy. Then Obama can go with his socialist/populist agenda but certainly this is not the right time.:D
Stop watching faux news.
Bush has done tax cuts to the investor class and look where it has taken this country.
more...
house and red wedding flowers
desi485
03-15 11:11 PM
I agree with you completely ! I wish and pray Interfilers and labor substitution applicants rot in hell.
You are a frustrated fool.
I have a friend who despite eligible for eb2, his employer filed in eb3 without his knowledge. He only came to know about this after 3 years after his labor got approved and got I-140 approved. The employer didn't provide him any papers for labor cert but somehow he got hold of his I-140 notice approval. He changed his job now and filed eb2 with new employer. I see no reason why he should not do interfile.
You are frustrated because of retrogression. Why don't you curse others, not those little less fortunate, from so called retrogressed countries? I have seen people in my organization coming from ROW countries and getting complete GC in less than 15 months. You should really get frustrated with country quota, not with your fellow sufferers.
think before you act like a fool. Say honestly that you never tried any legally available shortcut in your life.
You are a frustrated fool.
I have a friend who despite eligible for eb2, his employer filed in eb3 without his knowledge. He only came to know about this after 3 years after his labor got approved and got I-140 approved. The employer didn't provide him any papers for labor cert but somehow he got hold of his I-140 notice approval. He changed his job now and filed eb2 with new employer. I see no reason why he should not do interfile.
You are frustrated because of retrogression. Why don't you curse others, not those little less fortunate, from so called retrogressed countries? I have seen people in my organization coming from ROW countries and getting complete GC in less than 15 months. You should really get frustrated with country quota, not with your fellow sufferers.
think before you act like a fool. Say honestly that you never tried any legally available shortcut in your life.
tattoo Red Reality Rose Bouquet
gc_lover
07-24 01:46 PM
Can anyone confirm if the files are actually being transferred from Nebraska to Texas? Why is the compliance date for Texas 10/26 and for Nebraska it's 8/1.
Why would files be transferred from NSC to TSC. Didn't USCIS issue instructions to file everything at NSC. Life is getting more complicated each day.
Why would files be transferred from NSC to TSC. Didn't USCIS issue instructions to file everything at NSC. Life is getting more complicated each day.
more...
pictures Wedding Flowers Rose
HOPE_GC_SOON
08-02 03:13 PM
Folks,
This is a good beginning for a cause which gives us some relief in these retrogressed life.
We can atleast propose to USCIS, to accept 485 (if not approval), for those case, where I140 is approved, and the approval can be given in the normal PD schema.
This would lessen the burden on USCIS and facilitate the GC applicant to avail of AC21 PROVISION.
Also, we can highlight here that EAD renewal could be a great source of revenue for USCIS.
Please start this movement.
best wishes and thanks for all the great Volunteers.
No doubt if, IV wish, it can achieve... No Wonders
thanks
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
This is a good beginning for a cause which gives us some relief in these retrogressed life.
We can atleast propose to USCIS, to accept 485 (if not approval), for those case, where I140 is approved, and the approval can be given in the normal PD schema.
This would lessen the burden on USCIS and facilitate the GC applicant to avail of AC21 PROVISION.
Also, we can highlight here that EAD renewal could be a great source of revenue for USCIS.
Please start this movement.
best wishes and thanks for all the great Volunteers.
No doubt if, IV wish, it can achieve... No Wonders
thanks
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
dresses red wedding cake
gc_on_demand
11-14 10:31 AM
Why do u limit urself to just sending letters. Whhy can't you approach Zoe's office, why can't you take the lead?
Dont take me wrong on this one... but If I am not wrong rajuram wants some one from her dis. to call her. Here is my experience in this week.
I called Zoe's Office recently but lady over phone told me to call my local lawmaker. She didnot give any detail on HR 5882. She told she is not aware of it right now. I went online to send email but I got this message when I put my zip code.
'Access to the requested form is denied, the zip code which you entered does not provide access to this form.'
We need some one from her district to call her office and find out.
We need support from california members on this one.
Dont take me wrong on this one... but If I am not wrong rajuram wants some one from her dis. to call her. Here is my experience in this week.
I called Zoe's Office recently but lady over phone told me to call my local lawmaker. She didnot give any detail on HR 5882. She told she is not aware of it right now. I went online to send email but I got this message when I put my zip code.
'Access to the requested form is denied, the zip code which you entered does not provide access to this form.'
We need some one from her district to call her office and find out.
We need support from california members on this one.
more...
makeup Red Roses Bridal Bouquet
thecipher5
10-12 03:22 PM
Hello!
I don't know if anyone is in or has been in a similar situation. But would appreciate sound advise on the next steps...
My wife and mine PD have been current since September 1st (PD: Apr 2006). We'd received a RFE in 2009 and we'd responded to it in June 2009. The status on USCIS states "Response Review" for both of us and that we should hear back within 60 days of receiving the RFE response which dates back to June 2009.
I've opened a SR, contacted a congressman and still no update or specific feedback since 1st week of September.
What should I do in such a situation?? Can I take an Infopass appointment even though 45 days haven't elapsed since opening SR?
What other avenues can I pursue to obtain concrete feedback on our applications?
all the help appreciated!
thecipher5
I don't know if anyone is in or has been in a similar situation. But would appreciate sound advise on the next steps...
My wife and mine PD have been current since September 1st (PD: Apr 2006). We'd received a RFE in 2009 and we'd responded to it in June 2009. The status on USCIS states "Response Review" for both of us and that we should hear back within 60 days of receiving the RFE response which dates back to June 2009.
I've opened a SR, contacted a congressman and still no update or specific feedback since 1st week of September.
What should I do in such a situation?? Can I take an Infopass appointment even though 45 days haven't elapsed since opening SR?
What other avenues can I pursue to obtain concrete feedback on our applications?
all the help appreciated!
thecipher5
girlfriend A wedding with a particular
nirenjoshi
10-29 12:02 PM
Posted last week..
hairstyles Hand tied Bridal Bouquet with
saimrathi
08-15 04:02 PM
This is already on another thread..!!!
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12391
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12391
ncrtpMay2004
09-09 02:13 PM
You know it takes serious $$$ to get anything moving.
Please consider $50/month level.
Please consider $50/month level.
nixstor
10-15 05:03 PM
And my question is: will sending multiple copies of this make any difference ?? How many copies are really required to get their attention??
Yes, copies of this request from different individuals is going to make a difference. we need to show that the information being requested is needed by a lot of people out there. Just in case if you are wondering, Your application and your FOIA request have got nothing to do with each other.
Yes, copies of this request from different individuals is going to make a difference. we need to show that the information being requested is needed by a lot of people out there. Just in case if you are wondering, Your application and your FOIA request have got nothing to do with each other.
0 comments:
Post a Comment