Libra
07-06 05:17 PM
All -ve thinking and -ve posts guys one more victim is waiting for your stinking comments go ahead and enjoy by discouraging others
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6156
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6156
wallpaper Philadelphia Phillies manager
villamonte6100
03-31 02:58 PM
Dude, easy, take care of your heart, you might get a heartattack.
They have processed millions of applications and GCs already.
I am as frustrated as you are, but I am sure they have a system and management in place. Call it crappy or not.
Their objective is to provide service to the customers, we are their customers, we are giving them exorbitent amount of money as fees. I don't know of any other Organization/Company who provides as crappy service as they do, what would you call their management then ???
They have processed millions of applications and GCs already.
I am as frustrated as you are, but I am sure they have a system and management in place. Call it crappy or not.
Their objective is to provide service to the customers, we are their customers, we are giving them exorbitent amount of money as fees. I don't know of any other Organization/Company who provides as crappy service as they do, what would you call their management then ???
addsf345
11-20 03:38 PM
Some benefits can be revoked automatically (I-140, I-485), some can be revoked only after determination is made by USCIS and a beneficiary is notified and has an opportunity to respond. EAD is one of the latter.
See e.g., 8 CFR Part 205 titled "Revocation of approval of petitions". It has two sections: 205.1 Automatic revocation and 205.2 Revocation on notice.
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=203798478322+8+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve
EAD is not listed in Sec. 205.1. Moreover, 8 CFR �274a.12(c) specifically lists reasons for automatic revocation. I-485 denial is not listed as such a reason. Therefore, EAD remains valid even after I-485 denial untill it expires or until USCIS director revokes it. I do not see any basis for a different legal interpretation.
See also this court of appeals (8th Cir.) decision where the court says that automatic revocation occurs only if a specific condition specified in the laws and regs is met:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/399/399.F3d.891.04-1132.html
"The district court thought that her adoptive father's petition for immediate relative status was automatically revoked when Taylor reached age 21, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3)(i)(F), but the record does not appear to support that conclusion. The automatic revocation occurs only if the alien reaches age 21 before commencing her journey to the United States (which Taylor did not) or if the alien reaches age 21 before a decision on a pending application for adjustment of status becomes final (and there is no evidence in the record that Taylor ever applied for adjustment of status). See 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3). Thus, it is possible that the petition for immediate relative status was not revoked when Taylor reached age 21, but rather � if the 1984 visa petition was "currently valid" as of her 21st birthday � automatically converted to an approved petition for classification as an unmarried daughter of a citizen of the United States, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 204.2(i)(2). See 8 U.S.C. � 1153(a)(1). In that case, Taylor may have been legally present throughout her time in the United States."
Thank you 'lazycis' for reconfirming this. Just 2 weeks back I used to think that keep working on H1B is lot safer than using EAD :o
See e.g., 8 CFR Part 205 titled "Revocation of approval of petitions". It has two sections: 205.1 Automatic revocation and 205.2 Revocation on notice.
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=203798478322+8+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve
EAD is not listed in Sec. 205.1. Moreover, 8 CFR �274a.12(c) specifically lists reasons for automatic revocation. I-485 denial is not listed as such a reason. Therefore, EAD remains valid even after I-485 denial untill it expires or until USCIS director revokes it. I do not see any basis for a different legal interpretation.
See also this court of appeals (8th Cir.) decision where the court says that automatic revocation occurs only if a specific condition specified in the laws and regs is met:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/399/399.F3d.891.04-1132.html
"The district court thought that her adoptive father's petition for immediate relative status was automatically revoked when Taylor reached age 21, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3)(i)(F), but the record does not appear to support that conclusion. The automatic revocation occurs only if the alien reaches age 21 before commencing her journey to the United States (which Taylor did not) or if the alien reaches age 21 before a decision on a pending application for adjustment of status becomes final (and there is no evidence in the record that Taylor ever applied for adjustment of status). See 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3). Thus, it is possible that the petition for immediate relative status was not revoked when Taylor reached age 21, but rather � if the 1984 visa petition was "currently valid" as of her 21st birthday � automatically converted to an approved petition for classification as an unmarried daughter of a citizen of the United States, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 204.2(i)(2). See 8 U.S.C. � 1153(a)(1). In that case, Taylor may have been legally present throughout her time in the United States."
Thank you 'lazycis' for reconfirming this. Just 2 weeks back I used to think that keep working on H1B is lot safer than using EAD :o
2011 Philadelphia Phillies Baseball
rajuram
05-24 10:42 PM
Thanks for the information. Bills come and go every year, hard to count how many we have seen go up in the air in the last 3 years.
We are talking about HR 5882,5921 and 6039. Very few people are working very hard to take all of us a step ahead with the GC process and we have lots of hope and we also have direction. Please check with your state chapter lead for latest updates.
We are talking about HR 5882,5921 and 6039. Very few people are working very hard to take all of us a step ahead with the GC process and we have lots of hope and we also have direction. Please check with your state chapter lead for latest updates.
more...
ash0210
06-03 12:55 PM
Bodran, pl file your I-140 and your & sons I-485 immediatly..I am sure your I-140 will NOT take 2 years (as you are in EB3 ROW) to approve by which your son will be protected before he turns to be 21.
So, hurry up & file I-140/I485 ASAP and your son will be safe under CSPA (Child Status Protection Act). Also, pl read CSPA rule..I remember it was published on Feb 14, 2003...pl check..
Hope this helps..
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
So, hurry up & file I-140/I485 ASAP and your son will be safe under CSPA (Child Status Protection Act). Also, pl read CSPA rule..I remember it was published on Feb 14, 2003...pl check..
Hope this helps..
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
jay1ram2
08-23 07:12 PM
If implemented, would this cause audits/additional reviews of already approved I-140s? My 140 was approved in January 2007 in EB2 - Exceptional Ability/Advanced Degree. Hope this does not cause any issues for people like me....
I am on the same boat, can anyone please clarify?
I am on the same boat, can anyone please clarify?
more...
desi3933
12-21 11:47 AM
one of my close friend grew from a regular programmer to the position of VP in the span of last 6 years. he is facing lot of issues with GC.
clearly mirage didn't mean growing to the position of exactly VP. he meant a higher and slightly different position, for example an IT Manager. It is not that uncommon, for a IT Progmr who works in the same company for 5-6 years, offered a Manager position.
desi, this is argument is going nowhere, ur intentions in the beginning are good and i welcome ur critique, but leave it when recepeints aren't taking it. it became argument just for the sake of supporting ur argument.
Sure, he will face lot of difficulties, if his employer failed to file for H1 amendment when his job profile/responsibilities changed. There is a procedure in place whenever for cases when job profile changes. My job profile was changed, but my employer filed for both H1 amendment and new I-140 to reflect new job duties.
When new I-140 is filed in such cases, beneficiary retains his/her priority date.
Good Luck with your GC.
______________________________________
Proud Indian-American and Legal Immigrant
clearly mirage didn't mean growing to the position of exactly VP. he meant a higher and slightly different position, for example an IT Manager. It is not that uncommon, for a IT Progmr who works in the same company for 5-6 years, offered a Manager position.
desi, this is argument is going nowhere, ur intentions in the beginning are good and i welcome ur critique, but leave it when recepeints aren't taking it. it became argument just for the sake of supporting ur argument.
Sure, he will face lot of difficulties, if his employer failed to file for H1 amendment when his job profile/responsibilities changed. There is a procedure in place whenever for cases when job profile changes. My job profile was changed, but my employer filed for both H1 amendment and new I-140 to reflect new job duties.
When new I-140 is filed in such cases, beneficiary retains his/her priority date.
Good Luck with your GC.
______________________________________
Proud Indian-American and Legal Immigrant
2010 That#39;s a .700 aseball.
losthope
06-11 08:11 PM
Great Details!! Everything is possible...someone has to sacrifice for people to listen
I would like to bring another point . What is the stand from the immigration attorney on recapturing visa number? Can't they do something on pushing on this? They made allot of money from immigration petition filing
I would like to bring another point . What is the stand from the immigration attorney on recapturing visa number? Can't they do something on pushing on this? They made allot of money from immigration petition filing
more...
ashutrip
06-25 10:21 AM
As far as I know your country of origin doesn't matter under PERM. Correct me if I'm wrong.
No
No
hair Overbay singled in the at-at
spicy_guy
09-01 01:13 PM
Landed in Feb 2000 ....
1. 1st employer cheated me on GC-Labor in 2003 - sold/substituted my labor to some lucky fellow.
2. 2nd employer filed GC-Labor in Mar 05 (really) but silently did it in in EB3 it took 2 yrs for Labor and almost 2 yrs for I-140 in Jan 2009 and by that time recession has hit us.
3. 3rd employer trying a EB2 upgrade by a new PERM Labor in Dec 2010 - the employer seems better than 1 and 2 but don't know until i get it at hand :)
All Desi employers?
1. 1st employer cheated me on GC-Labor in 2003 - sold/substituted my labor to some lucky fellow.
2. 2nd employer filed GC-Labor in Mar 05 (really) but silently did it in in EB3 it took 2 yrs for Labor and almost 2 yrs for I-140 in Jan 2009 and by that time recession has hit us.
3. 3rd employer trying a EB2 upgrade by a new PERM Labor in Dec 2010 - the employer seems better than 1 and 2 but don't know until i get it at hand :)
All Desi employers?
more...
nj_03_2004
07-18 06:21 PM
Defense bill pulled after troop drawdawn measure fails
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/18/us.iraq.ap/index.html
Immigration Amendments on War Bill Fall by Wayside
http://www.numbersusa.com/index
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/18/us.iraq.ap/index.html
Immigration Amendments on War Bill Fall by Wayside
http://www.numbersusa.com/index
hot hoping the Phils bats show
485_se_dukhi
07-20 03:16 PM
Senators who abstained:
1. Obama (D-IL)
2. Brownback (R-KS)
3. Byrd (D-WV)
4. Lott (R-MS)
5. Johnson (D-SD)
Maybe writing to these senators and explaining our part of the story may help them at least see our point of view.
1. Obama (D-IL)
2. Brownback (R-KS)
3. Byrd (D-WV)
4. Lott (R-MS)
5. Johnson (D-SD)
Maybe writing to these senators and explaining our part of the story may help them at least see our point of view.
more...
house The Phillies Big 3,
GCwaitforever
05-02 09:37 AM
The only way to get the stimulus payment is to obtain a Social Security Number for �non-work� purposes. The SSA may issue an SSN to an alien under the following provision:
20 C.F.R. � 422.104(a)(3)
(i) You need a social security number to satisfy a Federal statute or regulation that requires you to have a social security number in order to receive a Federally-funded benefit to which you have otherwise established entitlement and you reside either in or outside the U.S.;
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OP_Home/cfr20/422/422-0104.htm
The Social Security Administration is required by federal law to issue Social Security Numbers to legal aliens who require them to receive federally funded benefits under Section 205(c)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Social Security Act, which states that the Social Security Administration is required to assign an SSN to �any individual who is an applicant for or recipient of a benefit funded in whole or in part with Federal funds.�
Good job Admin2.
Folks with ITINs,
Please file for SSNs quoting this stimulus package and get the refund. If someone tries and SSA refuses, we can take it up with legislators or even pursue litigation.
20 C.F.R. � 422.104(a)(3)
(i) You need a social security number to satisfy a Federal statute or regulation that requires you to have a social security number in order to receive a Federally-funded benefit to which you have otherwise established entitlement and you reside either in or outside the U.S.;
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OP_Home/cfr20/422/422-0104.htm
The Social Security Administration is required by federal law to issue Social Security Numbers to legal aliens who require them to receive federally funded benefits under Section 205(c)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Social Security Act, which states that the Social Security Administration is required to assign an SSN to �any individual who is an applicant for or recipient of a benefit funded in whole or in part with Federal funds.�
Good job Admin2.
Folks with ITINs,
Please file for SSNs quoting this stimulus package and get the refund. If someone tries and SSA refuses, we can take it up with legislators or even pursue litigation.
tattoo The Phillies lead Major League
boom
05-19 08:21 PM
Congrates Ind_game,
You deserved it.Your continued and vigrous effort made the difference.
You deserved it.Your continued and vigrous effort made the difference.
more...
pictures uniform with aseball bat.
gctest
09-13 04:10 PM
People, most of us here are just afraid that they will get red dots, be ridiculed for their beliefs. But the things is; If we don't fight for our rights, who will. We have to defend our place in the queue, which at the moment is at substantial risk.
Here is the form you can fill out to express support:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?key=pfq9i31UpaJcQdUK-1PaKcg&hl=en
View the read only document here:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pfq9i31UpaJcQdUK-1PaKcg&hl=en
I want everybody to get their GCs. but now interfiling/porting is hurting out position in the queue.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
Here is the form you can fill out to express support:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?key=pfq9i31UpaJcQdUK-1PaKcg&hl=en
View the read only document here:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pfq9i31UpaJcQdUK-1PaKcg&hl=en
I want everybody to get their GCs. but now interfiling/porting is hurting out position in the queue.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
dresses He would lose his at again
GCwaitforever
05-01 02:21 PM
We pay tons of fees to USCIS and wait for more than six years for GC and yet some shitty senator who does not know anything about immigration comes and rattles on stage.
The hearing should have started with the Ombudsman reports as a basis. Then the hearing should have asked USCIS for solid data like -
How many applicants from year 2001-2007 are pending? In what year, category, country? (to show the trends of backlogs)
How much percentage of applications were processed on annual basis compared to the limit? What is the inflow and the outflow?
What are the customer satisfaction levels for USCIS?
The hearing should have started with the Ombudsman reports as a basis. Then the hearing should have asked USCIS for solid data like -
How many applicants from year 2001-2007 are pending? In what year, category, country? (to show the trends of backlogs)
How much percentage of applications were processed on annual basis compared to the limit? What is the inflow and the outflow?
What are the customer satisfaction levels for USCIS?
more...
makeup Baseball Keychain middot; Mike
vkannan
08-13 05:12 PM
Agreed. HR 5882 / S 3414 is the only hope.
girlfriend Body Worlds 2: Baseball Player
edgarrecto
12-26 06:25 PM
i filed advance parole maybe august 10,2007, until now status check says pending.
hairstyles Werth walked on the at-at.
ashutrip
06-22 10:40 AM
Any update/news from atalanta....god bad or ugly?
trueguy
08-14 11:40 AM
Mr. Ron Gotcher believes that it means "Mexico F2A and [Mexico] employment third preference cut off dates.� Had they meant Worldwide, they would have said so explicitly".
Relax guys.:)
Mexico EB3 has been Unavailable since last 2 months so why USCIS will make a special comment about that country.
I am sure DOS is referring to entire EB3 Category in their Sep'08 Visa Bulletin. No hopes for EB3-I if PD goes back to Apr'2001 again.
Relax guys.:)
Mexico EB3 has been Unavailable since last 2 months so why USCIS will make a special comment about that country.
I am sure DOS is referring to entire EB3 Category in their Sep'08 Visa Bulletin. No hopes for EB3-I if PD goes back to Apr'2001 again.
JunRN
08-08 06:11 PM
I'm on Schedule A. My attorney filed my I-140/485/EAD on July 30 and it reached USCIS on the 31st. I am now waiting for the Receipt Notice which my lawyer says may take three to four weeks.
I keep on praying that my I-140 will not be returned due to some mistakes in filing. My lawyer filed I-140 using the new fee. Is this correct?
I keep on praying that my I-140 will not be returned due to some mistakes in filing. My lawyer filed I-140 using the new fee. Is this correct?
No comments:
Post a Comment