CCC2006
09-26 01:21 PM
Hi All,
My visa will expire (6 yrs completion) in the month of October 2007. What can I do next. Will I get an years extension based on the Green card filing. What is the standard procedure ?
CCC2006
My visa will expire (6 yrs completion) in the month of October 2007. What can I do next. Will I get an years extension based on the Green card filing. What is the standard procedure ?
CCC2006
wallpaper selena gomez wallpaper for. jaxstate. Jul 27, 11:27 AM. MacPro. Leopard
tijuanense
11-23 04:09 PM
The Real Tijuana (http://realtijuana.blogspot.com/) is a blog that began this month in order to describe Baja California from the inside. People who actually live in Tijuana address issues of local culture, medicine, cuisine, and history with the goal of making tourism less intimidating and more rewarding.
Thanks to you, Prem, we will start running items on transportation this week.
Tijuana is surprisingly peaceable in spite of the bad press.
Thanks to you, Prem, we will start running items on transportation this week.
Tijuana is surprisingly peaceable in spite of the bad press.
somegchuh
06-10 06:45 PM
I was wondering if anyone here who had a canadian PR (i.e. did a landing), got GC later has travelled again to Canada again?
We got canadian PR in 2005 and did a landing while we were waiting for our GC. We got a our GC last year and are planning to visit canada using our GC. Are there going to be any issue in entering canada?
Also, we travelled to India last year and received new I-94 when we got back into US using AP. Very soon (days) we received our GC's. I am not sure what do with these I-94's when we leave US. Do we still need to surrender these as in the past?
We got canadian PR in 2005 and did a landing while we were waiting for our GC. We got a our GC last year and are planning to visit canada using our GC. Are there going to be any issue in entering canada?
Also, we travelled to India last year and received new I-94 when we got back into US using AP. Very soon (days) we received our GC's. I am not sure what do with these I-94's when we leave US. Do we still need to surrender these as in the past?
2011 selena gomez wallpapers hot hd
immi2006
05-24 09:14 AM
If you want to make decisions do it based on career progress not on GC.
I seriously doubt if you can get your GC IMHO, reason being with 7 % of 90000 being a small number for any country. Particularly India / China, DO you know something - there are thousands in line from 2002 onwards waiting to file 485.
Even after 10 years of wait the number will still not be enough to fill the 485 backlog. I do not want to sound as someone not wishing you well. I am touching on ground realities.
I seriously doubt if you can get your GC IMHO, reason being with 7 % of 90000 being a small number for any country. Particularly India / China, DO you know something - there are thousands in line from 2002 onwards waiting to file 485.
Even after 10 years of wait the number will still not be enough to fill the 485 backlog. I do not want to sound as someone not wishing you well. I am touching on ground realities.
more...
Humhongekamyab
01-29 10:23 AM
this rumour sounds like its straight out of timesofindia :p;)
:d
:d
Robert Kumar
03-22 09:03 AM
It's no brainer. Have the baby in US and then leave for india. You get US citizenship for your baby free of cost and without any hassles. Your baby can get indian citizenship anytime if that's your goal.
And u can get your GC by him sponsoring for you as parents in just 15-16 years from now.
That will be faster than this EB2 and EB3 backlogs.
You help him now, and he will help you.
And u can get your GC by him sponsoring for you as parents in just 15-16 years from now.
That will be faster than this EB2 and EB3 backlogs.
You help him now, and he will help you.
more...
sixburgh
08-13 06:05 PM
I saw some information somewhere, but don't have the link right away to post here.
But here is the crux of it.
Basically the guy said that : assuming that the wife is working on EAD, and the moment she gets an H4 extension approval, she automatically comes on H4 status, but the very next day if she goes back to work on EAD, the H4 status gets invalidated and person comes on AOS status instantly.
Now should she force the company to update the I-9 on that date, is the question.
The bottom line I think is : there is nothing called as a STATUS field in any USCIS or DOS computer system. Its what you do that determines your status. I believe USCIS allows dual intent.
Does anyone think that I am wrong?
But here is the crux of it.
Basically the guy said that : assuming that the wife is working on EAD, and the moment she gets an H4 extension approval, she automatically comes on H4 status, but the very next day if she goes back to work on EAD, the H4 status gets invalidated and person comes on AOS status instantly.
Now should she force the company to update the I-9 on that date, is the question.
The bottom line I think is : there is nothing called as a STATUS field in any USCIS or DOS computer system. Its what you do that determines your status. I believe USCIS allows dual intent.
Does anyone think that I am wrong?
2010 selena gomez wallpaper for laptop 2011. selena gomez wallpaper for
srgadi
07-20 08:02 PM
Hi All,
Is having paystubs absolutely essential or will w2's suffice ?
As far as I know paystubs are not part of the required documents for AOS, tax returns are.
Is having paystubs absolutely essential or will w2's suffice ?
As far as I know paystubs are not part of the required documents for AOS, tax returns are.
more...
Siboo
07-27 12:52 PM
If NSC had put all applications from July 2nd to July 17th on hold.
Did they open and timestamp it ? for received date ??????
If they did not , then I may be lucky.
Because my package had signatures and all other dates of June 29th . The day when we were planning to ship the package, but for july fiasco.
Do you guys think ? they might see this and enter it as received date ?
I did not think of this. Otherwise I would have written the date in all the forms as 01/01/1995 to make the visa number available to me...:D
You may write any day, month and year in the forms. USCIS will have the time stamp when a package was actually received.
Did they open and timestamp it ? for received date ??????
If they did not , then I may be lucky.
Because my package had signatures and all other dates of June 29th . The day when we were planning to ship the package, but for july fiasco.
Do you guys think ? they might see this and enter it as received date ?
I did not think of this. Otherwise I would have written the date in all the forms as 01/01/1995 to make the visa number available to me...:D
You may write any day, month and year in the forms. USCIS will have the time stamp when a package was actually received.
hair selena gomez wallpaper for
monkeyman
10-17 01:14 PM
No, you are expected to fill up all the forms and only once you confirm the appointment (I do not know how much time) - but you will be able to go back in later and print out all the forms. Or if you provide the e-mail id, the system automatically sends you the appointment confirmation along with DS-156 and DS-157.
more...
suriajay12
05-13 07:11 AM
We're all impacted by retrogression and each person comes up with different reasons such as labor substitution or porting from EB3 to EB2 etc. I think that the unemployment rate is a key factor that might be influencing the movement of visa dates. With a double digit unemployment rate for US workers, why will the government want to give green cards to foreign workers.
Even if you get the green card, you could lose your job and apply for unemployment benefits. The US government does not want increase in the numbers of those claiming unemployment benefits or welfare programs. These benefits are not available to workers on temporary visas.Social security and medicare are also going to be tapped out within the next 10-20 years. These factors could have made them influence the USCIS/DOS to roll the dates back and make it U for all EB3 and to past 2000 for EB2 India. EB2 is current for other countries due to low demand.
Until the unemployment rate falls to reasonably low (in their view) levels, they have no inclination to act on immigration reform.
Notwithstanding the DOS explanation for the retrogression, there might be political factors in the background that are not made public.How do we know that this wasn't happening behind the scenes?
Its not unemployment, but swine flu thats responsible for this retrogression mess. They could imagine this flu will strike in 2009 and hence wanted to discourage people to come to US or to adjust status here. They know immigrants travel more than citizens out of country and to Mexico and hence more chance to get that virus to US.
Even if you get the green card, you could lose your job and apply for unemployment benefits. The US government does not want increase in the numbers of those claiming unemployment benefits or welfare programs. These benefits are not available to workers on temporary visas.Social security and medicare are also going to be tapped out within the next 10-20 years. These factors could have made them influence the USCIS/DOS to roll the dates back and make it U for all EB3 and to past 2000 for EB2 India. EB2 is current for other countries due to low demand.
Until the unemployment rate falls to reasonably low (in their view) levels, they have no inclination to act on immigration reform.
Notwithstanding the DOS explanation for the retrogression, there might be political factors in the background that are not made public.How do we know that this wasn't happening behind the scenes?
Its not unemployment, but swine flu thats responsible for this retrogression mess. They could imagine this flu will strike in 2009 and hence wanted to discourage people to come to US or to adjust status here. They know immigrants travel more than citizens out of country and to Mexico and hence more chance to get that virus to US.
hot selena gomez wallpaper for laptop. Selena+gomez+wallpapers+
bkn96
02-18 01:33 PM
Hello bkn96! congratulations!
so, i am interested to know more about your self-employment status. so you saying that you actually worked for your own company when the 485 was adjudicated? so, they did not ask you any questions about that? no rfe? no raised eyebrows? that is cool! how was it? please share!
That is possible. It is like working with any other company. This not exactly self-employment, we (myself +my wife) have created own corporation with my wife has president and me as employee (Both of us have EAD). So then start working for that company. No need to inform USCIS, it is like working with any other company. Again i am still working in same or simlar job description per Labor/I140. It is verymuch legal and we are paying taxes too!!! .
so, i am interested to know more about your self-employment status. so you saying that you actually worked for your own company when the 485 was adjudicated? so, they did not ask you any questions about that? no rfe? no raised eyebrows? that is cool! how was it? please share!
That is possible. It is like working with any other company. This not exactly self-employment, we (myself +my wife) have created own corporation with my wife has president and me as employee (Both of us have EAD). So then start working for that company. No need to inform USCIS, it is like working with any other company. Again i am still working in same or simlar job description per Labor/I140. It is verymuch legal and we are paying taxes too!!! .
more...
house selena gomez wallpaper for laptop. selena gomez wallpaper 2009.
learning01
05-22 12:48 PM
It is their level of competence and their best.
Who are you (or we) to label them otherwise. LOL.
No mention on incompetence on part of DOL?
Who are you (or we) to label them otherwise. LOL.
No mention on incompetence on part of DOL?
tattoo selena gomez wallpaper for
willigetagc
08-17 02:32 PM
just remember to carefully preserve all payslips, email communications, and all other docs from this period. If and when you file for GC, you MAY need these docs.
But, otherwise, your case is straightforward. As long as you send the H1 transfer to CIS before you are terminated/resign from B, you status will continue uninterrupted... So you are ok.
But, otherwise, your case is straightforward. As long as you send the H1 transfer to CIS before you are terminated/resign from B, you status will continue uninterrupted... So you are ok.
more...
pictures gomez+wallpaper+for+laptop
loveiv
07-01 09:42 PM
We do see such threads on the forum occasionally. There are several instances where members have posted negative comments about consulting companies and how employees are unhappy working for them.
I want to understand the reasons why people are not filing lawsuits against such companies yet? Why are we not reporting them to DOL and USCIS? Especially after filing I485 and expiry of 6 months, people are in a better position to file lawsuits against such employers.
IV can help only if people are willing to be helped and ready to take action.
If this system needs to be cleansed, then why aren't we doing it?
I'm with you. Matter of fact, I'm preparing a lawsuit against my old employer.
Lets see.
I want to understand the reasons why people are not filing lawsuits against such companies yet? Why are we not reporting them to DOL and USCIS? Especially after filing I485 and expiry of 6 months, people are in a better position to file lawsuits against such employers.
IV can help only if people are willing to be helped and ready to take action.
If this system needs to be cleansed, then why aren't we doing it?
I'm with you. Matter of fact, I'm preparing a lawsuit against my old employer.
Lets see.
dresses selena gomez wallpaper for
cris
08-30 10:00 AM
for gg_ny
this is extension of H1B based of aproved I140 .
if i understood correctly the application for H1 extension will became null and void if i travel outside of US .
this is very interesting. I was not aware about this .
Anyway, thank you for your valuable input
this is extension of H1B based of aproved I140 .
if i understood correctly the application for H1 extension will became null and void if i travel outside of US .
this is very interesting. I was not aware about this .
Anyway, thank you for your valuable input
more...
makeup selena gomez wallpaper for laptop. selena gomez wallpaper 2011
vedicman
01-04 08:34 AM
Ten years ago, George W. Bush came to Washington as the first new president in a generation or more who had deep personal convictions about immigration policy and some plans for where he wanted to go with it. He wasn't alone. Lots of people in lots of places were ready to work on the issue: Republicans, Democrats, Hispanic advocates, business leaders, even the Mexican government.
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
girlfriend selena gomez wallpaper for
dealsnet
08-05 11:56 AM
You will receive the paper welcome letter within one week.
Physical card will receive within 10 days. I did receive the physical card after the day I have received the email 'approval notice send'.
About ADIT:
ADIT=Alien Documentation Identification & Telecommunication Systems.
Could mean biometrics not up to date or just stamp in passport.
Either way they will tell you what they want.
ADIT (I-551) stamping
•
Applicant appears at local USCIS for ADIT processing, as outlined in AOS approval letter. Applicant will not be scheduled for an ADIT appointment, ADIT processing is done by "walk-in" basis ONLY.
•
Once the applicant adjusts his/her status by completing ADIT processing, s/he is given the I-551 permanent resident stamp in his/her passport.
Don't worry. Minor things.
Thanks Dealsnet;
Do you have any clue on "ADIT Processing'. Do we have to do anything ?
Any probable expectation that, Actual Plastic Cards, would be received within XX days of Welcome notices ?
Just curious to know, if you have any info.. :)
thanks,:)
Physical card will receive within 10 days. I did receive the physical card after the day I have received the email 'approval notice send'.
About ADIT:
ADIT=Alien Documentation Identification & Telecommunication Systems.
Could mean biometrics not up to date or just stamp in passport.
Either way they will tell you what they want.
ADIT (I-551) stamping
•
Applicant appears at local USCIS for ADIT processing, as outlined in AOS approval letter. Applicant will not be scheduled for an ADIT appointment, ADIT processing is done by "walk-in" basis ONLY.
•
Once the applicant adjusts his/her status by completing ADIT processing, s/he is given the I-551 permanent resident stamp in his/her passport.
Don't worry. Minor things.
Thanks Dealsnet;
Do you have any clue on "ADIT Processing'. Do we have to do anything ?
Any probable expectation that, Actual Plastic Cards, would be received within XX days of Welcome notices ?
Just curious to know, if you have any info.. :)
thanks,:)
hairstyles selena gomez wallpaper for laptop. selena gomez wallpaper who
JunRN
08-11 05:19 PM
That is not a flaw in the system and in the USCIS manual, they know it. Since the previous I-140 is already approved and you've stayed more than 6 months in that I-140, then there's no need for the ability to pay. USCIS is treating your case as if you already have a GC, it is just that it is pending.
If one has a GC, he can transfer to another employer. It is your risk if your new employer has not the ability to pay you. The same is true with portability, USCIS doesn't care anymore if you transfer to an employer with no ability to pay you because the first I-140 is already approved and you worked for it already. They are concerned now about your I-485 (AOS) and your qualifications under it.
If one has a GC, he can transfer to another employer. It is your risk if your new employer has not the ability to pay you. The same is true with portability, USCIS doesn't care anymore if you transfer to an employer with no ability to pay you because the first I-140 is already approved and you worked for it already. They are concerned now about your I-485 (AOS) and your qualifications under it.
dreamworld
11-30 03:08 PM
Hi All,
I and My wife were applied 485 in July 2007. We have received receipt numbers, EAD's and Advance Paroles. In online my wife 485 status showing as approved, but we did not receive any letters from USCIS. When we called USCIS about this, some of the IO officers are saying they don't know why the Card production ordered was not happened and they will send a request to supervisor. But some of the IO officers are saying instead of approving 131,they approved 485 and it is a mistake. Even though if they are saying mistake, they are not changing the online message or when we call them getting different messages from USCIS until today...Gurus please advise what we need to do.
Thanks.
What is the birth country of your wife????. If she is not born in India then her PD is current...
I and My wife were applied 485 in July 2007. We have received receipt numbers, EAD's and Advance Paroles. In online my wife 485 status showing as approved, but we did not receive any letters from USCIS. When we called USCIS about this, some of the IO officers are saying they don't know why the Card production ordered was not happened and they will send a request to supervisor. But some of the IO officers are saying instead of approving 131,they approved 485 and it is a mistake. Even though if they are saying mistake, they are not changing the online message or when we call them getting different messages from USCIS until today...Gurus please advise what we need to do.
Thanks.
What is the birth country of your wife????. If she is not born in India then her PD is current...
webm
10-05 02:07 PM
Folks,
Who receives the AP approval? lawyer or the beneficiary?
Generally Lawyer receives it.Check with your lawyer constantly.
Who receives the AP approval? lawyer or the beneficiary?
Generally Lawyer receives it.Check with your lawyer constantly.
No comments:
Post a Comment