yagw
07-11 06:35 PM
Beware...read this:
http://www.usimmigration.net/images/7-8-08_Debarment_of_a_Software_Co_from_PERM_filings_fo r_3_yrs.pdf
Just an FYI, this company is the one that develops SW to help attorneys in filing the PERM. Looks like they used the USCIS website as a testing place for their SW and hence the debarment. Should not be a problem for most of the companies (wonder any?) out there.
From the announcement:
"..
LawLogix submitted more than 100 applications
using the permanent program�s online filing system in the last year, apparently for the
sole purpose of testing the parameters of the department�s electronic processing system.
...
"
http://www.usimmigration.net/images/7-8-08_Debarment_of_a_Software_Co_from_PERM_filings_fo r_3_yrs.pdf
Just an FYI, this company is the one that develops SW to help attorneys in filing the PERM. Looks like they used the USCIS website as a testing place for their SW and hence the debarment. Should not be a problem for most of the companies (wonder any?) out there.
From the announcement:
"..
LawLogix submitted more than 100 applications
using the permanent program�s online filing system in the last year, apparently for the
sole purpose of testing the parameters of the department�s electronic processing system.
...
"
wallpaper Heidi, who raises three
NNReddy
08-26 02:30 PM
My friend's wife got a job. company didn't ask for ead card so far. she filed the employment applicaiton where they asked her if she is a citizen or green card, she filled everything correct, they made an offer and did the background check, she is supposed to start in 2 weeks.
Question, does she need to disclose about EAD now or wait until start give the information while filling I-9 Form. Does employeer right to not hire people on EAD?
Please clarify.
Question, does she need to disclose about EAD now or wait until start give the information while filling I-9 Form. Does employeer right to not hire people on EAD?
Please clarify.
jsb
08-31 03:00 PM
jsb thanks.
Basically what this all tells me is that there is no motivation from USCIS to clear things up. They like things muddied so that they can define the processing date either as Received or Notice or Receipt as per their comfort. :)
No. They believe they are working their best. Think of an assignment received by your company's Headoffice on July 2, 07, but it came to you to work, on Oct 11, 07. If you are to provide periodical progress, what will you call your Receiving Date of assignment? Oct 11, 07.
Processing Centers provide their monthly progress report to be published. They treat the date when they, the centers, (not the USCIS mail room) received, as the receive date, which is close to the Notice Date. Hence the confusion. If you ask them if they use ND sequence, they will confidentally tell you that they use the receiving date for sequencing their work, which to their belief is true.
Logically RD on your receipt should be used. Even if some senior guy at USCIS decides and instructs centers to process cases in that order, can they do it. No, as their sorting of cases is in order they (the centers) physically received them. It will be too tedious to re-sort tens of thousands of cases manually, particularly when mailroom RD is nowhere other than a stamp on the file, and as manually entered info on your receipt. Many follow up documents don't even mention that date, or even PD, as they are not part of the system information. Online info also shows some date close to ND as "your case was received on...".
There is a motivation to use up visas by Sep 30, as bosses question if they don't do that. But if they don't give visas in order of priority (whatever it be), no one questions, as it is difficult to prove someone to be wrong, or to correct even when something is proven wrong.
Bottomline is that the whole process translates to Luck.
Basically what this all tells me is that there is no motivation from USCIS to clear things up. They like things muddied so that they can define the processing date either as Received or Notice or Receipt as per their comfort. :)
No. They believe they are working their best. Think of an assignment received by your company's Headoffice on July 2, 07, but it came to you to work, on Oct 11, 07. If you are to provide periodical progress, what will you call your Receiving Date of assignment? Oct 11, 07.
Processing Centers provide their monthly progress report to be published. They treat the date when they, the centers, (not the USCIS mail room) received, as the receive date, which is close to the Notice Date. Hence the confusion. If you ask them if they use ND sequence, they will confidentally tell you that they use the receiving date for sequencing their work, which to their belief is true.
Logically RD on your receipt should be used. Even if some senior guy at USCIS decides and instructs centers to process cases in that order, can they do it. No, as their sorting of cases is in order they (the centers) physically received them. It will be too tedious to re-sort tens of thousands of cases manually, particularly when mailroom RD is nowhere other than a stamp on the file, and as manually entered info on your receipt. Many follow up documents don't even mention that date, or even PD, as they are not part of the system information. Online info also shows some date close to ND as "your case was received on...".
There is a motivation to use up visas by Sep 30, as bosses question if they don't do that. But if they don't give visas in order of priority (whatever it be), no one questions, as it is difficult to prove someone to be wrong, or to correct even when something is proven wrong.
Bottomline is that the whole process translates to Luck.
2011 Heidi Klum and Seal take kids
sam_hoosier
06-22 04:34 PM
Which is the best place(Kinkos,Sears,Ritz) to take photos for I-485?
If you are just looking for the least expensive option, try CVS. The pics dont come out bad ;)
If you are just looking for the least expensive option, try CVS. The pics dont come out bad ;)
more...
americandesi
10-15 01:51 PM
I have this basic question. How would USCIS know that he had used EAD for the second job? As far as I know, the information submitted in I-9 doesn’t go to USCIS. During the H1 extension if he submits W2’s, Paystubs and all documents from the H1 employer alone, wouldn’t it get approved? Can anyone clarify this?
Lacris
07-18 01:39 AM
They might return urs , simple.
:confused:
Could you answer this? We applied in march for 140/485. I have EAD, AP and FP done.The problem is that I don't remember seing the I-140 application among the papers we had to sign, and nothing just for my husband to sign, which would be normal, since he's the primary applicant. I thought at the time that I-140, being thru the employer doesn't have to be filed personally? Do you think it's possible the I-140 was accepted by mistake without the signature or should I enquire more and maybe my husband signed it at work and doesn't remember?
Thank you
:confused:
Could you answer this? We applied in march for 140/485. I have EAD, AP and FP done.The problem is that I don't remember seing the I-140 application among the papers we had to sign, and nothing just for my husband to sign, which would be normal, since he's the primary applicant. I thought at the time that I-140, being thru the employer doesn't have to be filed personally? Do you think it's possible the I-140 was accepted by mistake without the signature or should I enquire more and maybe my husband signed it at work and doesn't remember?
Thank you
more...
sundeep14
11-14 11:07 AM
Good Replies / Discussions ...
2010 and the recent Heidi Klum
sk2006
08-19 12:45 PM
Is there anybody who got a mail like I got?
more...
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
hair Henry, Heidi Klum#39;s boy,
amitarora74
08-04 11:43 AM
anoopraj2010
you have been waiting for just 1 year. My wife(primary applicant) got her GC exactly 3 years back while i could not be approved due to pending name check. Then the whole thing retrogressed. Have been renewing AP/EAD since then.I know couple of other people in same boat. I think this is more common than you think
you have been waiting for just 1 year. My wife(primary applicant) got her GC exactly 3 years back while i could not be approved due to pending name check. Then the whole thing retrogressed. Have been renewing AP/EAD since then.I know couple of other people in same boat. I think this is more common than you think
more...
vxg
09-10 03:42 PM
Folks,
After more than an hour drive to a shitty town in northern mass Lawrence....no bottles please..cell phones be turned off...
Officer: Purpose
Me: Me approved my wife not
Officer: cases..
Me: Presented cases
Officer: Yes you are approved...your wife is pending
Me: Oh really that is a revelation....
Me: Why so?is she preadjudicated?
Officer: There could be many reasons...no she is not pre-adjudicated...
Me: What can we do to expedite as she is current
Officer: Nuthin ....I was loosing my temper now...
I said how long should one wait...I opened an SR I got a reply that they are doing additional review contact after 6 months..3 days later I get approval email...no one has a clue...the right hand does not know what the left is doing....my wife is kicking me on the foot asking in native language be happy with yours do u want to loose urs too...
Officer: gave a vague Monalisa smile...
Me: Well I guess that's it I didn;t know anything after driving 60 miles that I didn't know before...
On the way back got a mail from my attorney...he checked thru AILA and talked withan IO ...it seems her biometrics need to be redone...it is ordered and she shld get it in 2 weeks she will be current next month too...so keep fingers crossed...well my fingers are crooked and can't be straightened now...
Hope the info helps..
SoP
You do not need Biometrics uploaded for approval. My case was approved without it however they will only send cards after Biometrics are updated.
After more than an hour drive to a shitty town in northern mass Lawrence....no bottles please..cell phones be turned off...
Officer: Purpose
Me: Me approved my wife not
Officer: cases..
Me: Presented cases
Officer: Yes you are approved...your wife is pending
Me: Oh really that is a revelation....
Me: Why so?is she preadjudicated?
Officer: There could be many reasons...no she is not pre-adjudicated...
Me: What can we do to expedite as she is current
Officer: Nuthin ....I was loosing my temper now...
I said how long should one wait...I opened an SR I got a reply that they are doing additional review contact after 6 months..3 days later I get approval email...no one has a clue...the right hand does not know what the left is doing....my wife is kicking me on the foot asking in native language be happy with yours do u want to loose urs too...
Officer: gave a vague Monalisa smile...
Me: Well I guess that's it I didn;t know anything after driving 60 miles that I didn't know before...
On the way back got a mail from my attorney...he checked thru AILA and talked withan IO ...it seems her biometrics need to be redone...it is ordered and she shld get it in 2 weeks she will be current next month too...so keep fingers crossed...well my fingers are crooked and can't be straightened now...
Hope the info helps..
SoP
You do not need Biometrics uploaded for approval. My case was approved without it however they will only send cards after Biometrics are updated.
hot seal and heidi klum children pictures. HEIDI KLUM AND KIDS ON THE RUN
cbpds
04-28 02:51 PM
The Financial regulation bill will go thru for sure, both Dem and Rep parties favor it, however the REP party is trying to resolve certain differences before bringing it to the table.
Both parties cannot afford to be seen as party of Wall street during nov elections.
this is how cir will end..... with a procedural vote -
Financial regulation plan fails first Senate test - U.S. business- msnbc.com (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36770907/ns/business-us_business/)
bet $100?
Both parties cannot afford to be seen as party of Wall street during nov elections.
this is how cir will end..... with a procedural vote -
Financial regulation plan fails first Senate test - U.S. business- msnbc.com (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36770907/ns/business-us_business/)
bet $100?
more...
house 2011 images makeup heidi klum
walking_dude
11-21 11:49 AM
Well, the majority of cubans coming in are families of those US citizens. It's what the antis call disparagingly as "Chain Immigration".
And, if you are missing it, those coming in as refugees are seen as "future vote bank" once they get citizenship. Similar to Bangladeshi immigrants in West Bengal.
And, if you are missing it, those coming in as refugees are seen as "future vote bank" once they get citizenship. Similar to Bangladeshi immigrants in West Bengal.
tattoo Pregnant supermodel Heidi Klum
burgernfries
August 22nd, 2005, 09:49 AM
I read in interesting piece by Bjorn Rorslett on this very subject of stacked polarizers.
Bjorn says it is possible to achieve a sort of false color IR by stacking a Circular and Linear polarizing filters.
As an ND this is really not effective because it is anything but neutral IMO.
Bjorn says it is possible to achieve a sort of false color IR by stacking a Circular and Linear polarizing filters.
As an ND this is really not effective because it is anything but neutral IMO.
more...
pictures hot Klum and singer Seal have been seal and heidi klum children pictures.
surabhi
10-17 03:52 PM
Widely known as payroll tax is actually FICA tax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Insurance_Contributions_Act_tax) 6.2 % of federal and 1.5% of medicare...together coming close to 8%. I'm not aware of any state component above this 8%...
But do consider your desi employer needs to carry a liability insurance of 1 million, otherwise most established vendors and clients won't work with him...He needs to pay premium on that depending on how many consultant are working....
So practically, claim as they may, NO consultancy firm can pay you 90% of your billing and still do business profitably.... They are hiding something behind their numbers...
If you are getting 85% of the billing and your consultancy is paying your payroll taxes and you are paying your medical insurance premium, consider that as a very good deal... I personally could manage 80% of the billing while I was doing consulting...
I agree. 90% of the bill rate never includes the employer taxes portion.
It all adds up. It may not be profitable as one assumes. The relocation costs, medical insurance, unpaid vacation days, unpaid holidays..
But do consider your desi employer needs to carry a liability insurance of 1 million, otherwise most established vendors and clients won't work with him...He needs to pay premium on that depending on how many consultant are working....
So practically, claim as they may, NO consultancy firm can pay you 90% of your billing and still do business profitably.... They are hiding something behind their numbers...
If you are getting 85% of the billing and your consultancy is paying your payroll taxes and you are paying your medical insurance premium, consider that as a very good deal... I personally could manage 80% of the billing while I was doing consulting...
I agree. 90% of the bill rate never includes the employer taxes portion.
It all adds up. It may not be profitable as one assumes. The relocation costs, medical insurance, unpaid vacation days, unpaid holidays..
dresses Heidi Klum and Seal Run Around
Munna Bhai
11-09 08:45 AM
Hello,
My labour is certified but we have to yet to file I-140 and my H1b is getting over my May 2007. Even If I file I-140, it will not be more than 365 days.
Will I get I year extensions?
-Thanks,
M
My labour is certified but we have to yet to file I-140 and my H1b is getting over my May 2007. Even If I file I-140, it will not be more than 365 days.
Will I get I year extensions?
-Thanks,
M
more...
makeup Heidi Klum Lays Down Glaze
zCool
06-08 02:20 AM
While it was indeed a horrible bill and it deserves to die,
it's too early to say it's gone forever.
Moreover, it is nativist and scare-mongering that won the victory today so lets not get carried away..
Moral of the story is.. Anti-immigrant lobbies are very strong and they are organized.
Republican base has found enemy to blame for mis-steps and win 2008 elections.. it is immigration. Buoyed by the success in slowing down 1 piece of legislation that probably had most broad-based support in recent years.. they will try to further the gains by proposing more divisive and mean-spirited bills designed to provoke response and inflame passion (i.e. make life unbearable and very difficult for all immigrants)
On the other hand we will probably have better chance of pushing small reliefs in employement based immigration.
I think if there ever was a time to start new funding drive.. it is NOW!
it's too early to say it's gone forever.
Moreover, it is nativist and scare-mongering that won the victory today so lets not get carried away..
Moral of the story is.. Anti-immigrant lobbies are very strong and they are organized.
Republican base has found enemy to blame for mis-steps and win 2008 elections.. it is immigration. Buoyed by the success in slowing down 1 piece of legislation that probably had most broad-based support in recent years.. they will try to further the gains by proposing more divisive and mean-spirited bills designed to provoke response and inflame passion (i.e. make life unbearable and very difficult for all immigrants)
On the other hand we will probably have better chance of pushing small reliefs in employement based immigration.
I think if there ever was a time to start new funding drive.. it is NOW!
girlfriend Heidi+klum+children+names
prom2
07-22 12:00 AM
New fee is 1010 (I-485 + FP) + $305 (AP) + $340 (EAD) = $1655
First year EAD and AP are Included. Not Life long EAD/AP. Wishful thinking in your part Nothing comes free here.
You guys are wrong.
1) The new fee for I-485 is a package fee (includes EAD and AP)
2) EADs and APs are included as long your adjustement application is pending.
Read the last paragraph here:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/FinalUSCISFeeSchedule052907.pdf
First year EAD and AP are Included. Not Life long EAD/AP. Wishful thinking in your part Nothing comes free here.
You guys are wrong.
1) The new fee for I-485 is a package fee (includes EAD and AP)
2) EADs and APs are included as long your adjustement application is pending.
Read the last paragraph here:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/FinalUSCISFeeSchedule052907.pdf
hairstyles German supermodel Heidi Klum
WaldenPond
02-09 11:03 AM
Hello,
Could anybody please post the latest going on with today's hearing - Committee on Government Reform Hearing: U.S. Competiteveness.
I am not able to find any news/update on this.
Thanks,
Could anybody please post the latest going on with today's hearing - Committee on Government Reform Hearing: U.S. Competiteveness.
I am not able to find any news/update on this.
Thanks,
paskal
11-01 11:42 PM
1. there has been a recapture for nurses once already- 50,000 GC
therefore older PD's are likely to have a GC already, this lot is likely to be for newer applicants
2. last time USCIS did this in a way that did not benefit EB3. instead of starting with recapture numbers right away, they first exhausted the regular quota, so all nurses already coming up for GC got numbers from the annual quota, then they gave recapture numbers to people with more recent applications
of course, either way in the longer run it reduces the number of people in line. but it would be nice if everyone that is waiting could benefit, not just nurses. i'm not writing this to oppose nurses relief or anything, just a factual comment. i do wish they had found a different way- exempt nurses from the quota and allow recapture numbers to be used for everyone...
therefore older PD's are likely to have a GC already, this lot is likely to be for newer applicants
2. last time USCIS did this in a way that did not benefit EB3. instead of starting with recapture numbers right away, they first exhausted the regular quota, so all nurses already coming up for GC got numbers from the annual quota, then they gave recapture numbers to people with more recent applications
of course, either way in the longer run it reduces the number of people in line. but it would be nice if everyone that is waiting could benefit, not just nurses. i'm not writing this to oppose nurses relief or anything, just a factual comment. i do wish they had found a different way- exempt nurses from the quota and allow recapture numbers to be used for everyone...
senthil1
04-30 11:01 PM
I heard that you can get more updates from IV if you become donor. You can try that.
What is the agenda now?
What is the agenda now?
No comments:
Post a Comment