i99
09-19 12:39 PM
... this means nothing. it might mean "none of the above" in a multiple choice situation and might be put by mistake. might be good to have it corrected though. :rolleyes:
--a person who does not know what happened to own application at all. :)
--a person who does not know what happened to own application at all. :)
wallpaper Community#39;s Alison Brie
looivy
08-14 12:11 PM
That is a relief...
pcs
04-17 12:54 PM
Do it yourself & do not depend on your lawyer. Call them. I filed in Aug'05 & got it in 45 days. I used to call their IT guy in DC office & he was very prompt in fixing issues ( which could be IT related)
2011 alison brie hot pics. alison
Munna Bhai
07-12 09:48 AM
Yes, you can. You can switch to H4 and back to H1 without worrying about the Cap limitation. The only point that is little hazy is how long can you stay on a H4 before you can get back to H1 without the cap limitation kicking in. As the H1 is given in 3 year installments, would you have to get back to your H1 before that 3 year period ends, if in the middle of that period you had switched to H4?
Say, you had obtained your H1 in Jan 2007 and is good until Jan 2010 (3 years allotment), and you switched to H4 in Dec 2007 using up 1 year of your H1. I think that you can switch back to H1 without the cap limitation ONLY until Jan 2010 and your new papers will give you another 3 years of the remaining 5 years of your H1.
Let me know what you find. Good luck.
One person just told me that, I can switch to H4 but I will be subjected to Cap since my spouse is in H1b non-profit.
Currently my H1b extension is based on i-140 approval(3 years), will same rule apply to my case.
Say, you had obtained your H1 in Jan 2007 and is good until Jan 2010 (3 years allotment), and you switched to H4 in Dec 2007 using up 1 year of your H1. I think that you can switch back to H1 without the cap limitation ONLY until Jan 2010 and your new papers will give you another 3 years of the remaining 5 years of your H1.
Let me know what you find. Good luck.
One person just told me that, I can switch to H4 but I will be subjected to Cap since my spouse is in H1b non-profit.
Currently my H1b extension is based on i-140 approval(3 years), will same rule apply to my case.
more...
dummgelauft
05-07 12:11 PM
To all of you who get the adrenalin rush on seeing a LUD...
When you dust a bookcase, you may take the books out, dust them one by one and then put them back in to the bookcase. That does not mean that you READ all or any of the books.
Do you get my drift...
Stop getting excited and opening new threads on LUDS. These mean diddly squat.
None of this means anything, so long as YOU YOURSELF are not holding the ACTUAL GREEN CARD, with YOUR NAME and YOUR PICTURE on it, in YOUR OWN hands.
When you dust a bookcase, you may take the books out, dust them one by one and then put them back in to the bookcase. That does not mean that you READ all or any of the books.
Do you get my drift...
Stop getting excited and opening new threads on LUDS. These mean diddly squat.
None of this means anything, so long as YOU YOURSELF are not holding the ACTUAL GREEN CARD, with YOUR NAME and YOUR PICTURE on it, in YOUR OWN hands.
vasa
07-08 04:43 PM
5 stars and posted comments..good job dude
more...
xela
06-17 08:53 AM
We all saw SLUDs shortly after the day we received notice, as I metioned I got receipt on April 27tha dn last SLUD was April 30th,....sinc ethen nothing
however most people got their EADs already so they might just enjoy sitting on mine who knows sigh...
good luck and dont expect any LUDs until they actually send you something :-)
however most people got their EADs already so they might just enjoy sitting on mine who knows sigh...
good luck and dont expect any LUDs until they actually send you something :-)
2010 Hot or Not: Alison Brie @ 2009
arihant
12-28 11:08 AM
All the gurus on this forum,
I have this questions and I have feeling some of you are considering doijng this;;;;
My I-140 and 485 was concurrently filed in Dec2002. I-140 got approved. 485 is pending.
As i decided that this GC process should not hold me captive i went ahead made plans for my MBA education. Now I have an admission from INSEAD france for classes starting 2007.
IF my employer gives me Pesonal Leave of Abscene for one year....without pay
can I take off for studies without impacting the GCprocess?
Since I will be moving out of my residenec should I inform the INS of a new address friends) so that they can send EAD/AP etc..
I would love to connect to anyone who is similar situation......
PLEASE respond
:(
Why is your 485 case pending since 2002? Is it stuck in Name Check or due to retrogression. I thought that 485 cases are progressing relatively fast as long as the case is not affected by retrogression and is not stuck in the black hole called "name check"!
I have this questions and I have feeling some of you are considering doijng this;;;;
My I-140 and 485 was concurrently filed in Dec2002. I-140 got approved. 485 is pending.
As i decided that this GC process should not hold me captive i went ahead made plans for my MBA education. Now I have an admission from INSEAD france for classes starting 2007.
IF my employer gives me Pesonal Leave of Abscene for one year....without pay
can I take off for studies without impacting the GCprocess?
Since I will be moving out of my residenec should I inform the INS of a new address friends) so that they can send EAD/AP etc..
I would love to connect to anyone who is similar situation......
PLEASE respond
:(
Why is your 485 case pending since 2002? Is it stuck in Name Check or due to retrogression. I thought that 485 cases are progressing relatively fast as long as the case is not affected by retrogression and is not stuck in the black hole called "name check"!
more...
tikka
08-07 07:56 PM
and bump///
hair alison brie hot photos. alison
sanju
02-11 10:31 AM
Some people did not notice that you are not illegal immigrant, you are going thru legal process just like everyone else here. US legal system provides a way to reconcile overstay/out of status situation.
Anyway, you cannot use your lottery case as that visa number expired back in 03.
You are right! Some people did not notice that moe is not illegal. But some people did notice the moe is an anti-immigrant disguising someone he is not. moe wanted to hear exactly what you told him. Now he will bash legal immigration saying all legal immigrants are actually illegals. Please try to use your brains, maybe just a couple of times every few years.
.
Anyway, you cannot use your lottery case as that visa number expired back in 03.
You are right! Some people did not notice that moe is not illegal. But some people did notice the moe is an anti-immigrant disguising someone he is not. moe wanted to hear exactly what you told him. Now he will bash legal immigration saying all legal immigrants are actually illegals. Please try to use your brains, maybe just a couple of times every few years.
.
more...
singhsa3
11-15 09:15 AM
Voting is not enough please post your suggestion also.
hot Alison Brie (#39;Mary Elizabeth#39;)
gene-O
10-20 05:27 PM
Hello! I'm on H1B, and my spouse is on H4. We received an ITIN for my spouse for our taxpaying needs. My spouse managed to get employed using the ITIN. We filed a joint tax return this year. We received a letter from SS administration saying "We cannot put these earnings on your Social Security record until the name and SSN reported agree with our records." My lawyer says: "your spouse is now barred from GC, because when she's worked for more than X amount of days she became OOS."
When the time will come for my employer to process my GC, what consequences will my spouse's unauthorised employment have on Her ability to receive a Greencard? What are the ways to rectify the situation? Appeals? Special provisions/clauses? Cost?
Thank you,
When the time will come for my employer to process my GC, what consequences will my spouse's unauthorised employment have on Her ability to receive a Greencard? What are the ways to rectify the situation? Appeals? Special provisions/clauses? Cost?
Thank you,
more...
house alison brie hot sexy pretty
IV_Friend
03-29 04:39 PM
Dear Attorney,
My Brother is working Employer "X" on H1B.
His employer started his Green Card Processing in 2007.
His Labor (PD 2007) and 140 are approved by 2008.
Because of some reasons he had leave the employer "X" and Join Employer "Y".
Employer Y, willing to start green card process.
Can my brother use prior Priority Date?
Please advice. I Appreciate your help.
My Brother is working Employer "X" on H1B.
His employer started his Green Card Processing in 2007.
His Labor (PD 2007) and 140 are approved by 2008.
Because of some reasons he had leave the employer "X" and Join Employer "Y".
Employer Y, willing to start green card process.
Can my brother use prior Priority Date?
Please advice. I Appreciate your help.
tattoo alison brie hot pics. alison
go_guy123
01-11 09:47 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This is still riddled with amnesty....more punitive versions will surely come which the democratic party will oppose for sure.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This is still riddled with amnesty....more punitive versions will surely come which the democratic party will oppose for sure.
more...
pictures Everyone knows about Alison#39;s
pitha
05-11 08:48 AM
If you like your family so much you can always go back, you have a choice, people stuck in EB immigration have no choice they are being kicked out because of the long retrogression. Frankly all this talk about this family based immigration is nonsense. It takes 20 to 30 years for somebody to emmigrate uisng family based immigration. So does that mean that in the 20 to 30 years it takes for the "family" to come here, you dont love them in that time. The point I am trying to make is that all the people who are pumping up this family based immigration are trying to play up the emotional angle and are being hypocrites. If you can live in the US without the "family" for 20 to 30 years, I dont see any reason why they cannot live without the family comming to US at all. Let the "family" come to US on there on merit.
The point-based system will not be good for this country. Many other countries have point-based systems such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK, etc. The most who immigrate in these countries on the point-based system don't have jobs. Only those should be allowed to immigrate who has the job offer here. All the immigration fees and expenses to immigrate should be borne by the employer offering the job.
Not only this, the people who promote this point-based system are interested in shutting off immgration based on family unification. Why you would not like your own family members to be here, when they all have been allowed until this day to bring their own family members from European countries.
The point-based system will not be good for this country. Many other countries have point-based systems such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK, etc. The most who immigrate in these countries on the point-based system don't have jobs. Only those should be allowed to immigrate who has the job offer here. All the immigration fees and expenses to immigrate should be borne by the employer offering the job.
Not only this, the people who promote this point-based system are interested in shutting off immgration based on family unification. Why you would not like your own family members to be here, when they all have been allowed until this day to bring their own family members from European countries.
dresses Let#39;s start with Alison Brie,
EndlessWait
01-10 04:45 PM
So, this would mean anyone stuck in name check should never receive FP--correct? I don't think that's the case...i know of a lot of people who get FP notices every 15 (or is it 18?) months or so and are stuck in name checks forever.
The two processes Name check & FP are parallel, not sequential.
I have myself not rcvd FP - July 2nd filer NSC-CSC-NSC transfer victim :-). My way of looking at things is that CSC transferred I-485 to NSC in late September. So my I-485 is queued after an August 17th filer. August 17th filers have rcvd their FPs recently (Bay Area, CA), so it should not be that far away. (BTW, I am not dying to get FP done, i just want to shorten my stay-alert-for-FP window and get it over with it)
USCIS works in strange ways...i may be using logic that's beyond their IQ :)
Take it easy...
just exactly what ur case status says ...mine hasn't changed ever since it transferred to nebraska..it still says "the case has been transferred to NSC becoz they've jurisdiction over it etc. etc '
thanks
The two processes Name check & FP are parallel, not sequential.
I have myself not rcvd FP - July 2nd filer NSC-CSC-NSC transfer victim :-). My way of looking at things is that CSC transferred I-485 to NSC in late September. So my I-485 is queued after an August 17th filer. August 17th filers have rcvd their FPs recently (Bay Area, CA), so it should not be that far away. (BTW, I am not dying to get FP done, i just want to shorten my stay-alert-for-FP window and get it over with it)
USCIS works in strange ways...i may be using logic that's beyond their IQ :)
Take it easy...
just exactly what ur case status says ...mine hasn't changed ever since it transferred to nebraska..it still says "the case has been transferred to NSC becoz they've jurisdiction over it etc. etc '
thanks
more...
makeup alison brie hot pics.
arihant
03-14 04:43 PM
http://www.germany.info/relaunch/info/consular_services/visa/transit.html
after a legal stay in the USA (this includes holders of valid approval notices), Canada or Switzerland- return to the country whose citizenship they hold
do not need an airport transit visa
I presume the above is what you are referring to. My wife (on H4) and I (on H1B) are planning to fly to India later this year on Lufthansa. Both of our Visas have expired although we hold valid H extension approval notices. Will we need transit visas or will the above rule apply? Any body with experience of similar situation?
after a legal stay in the USA (this includes holders of valid approval notices), Canada or Switzerland- return to the country whose citizenship they hold
do not need an airport transit visa
I presume the above is what you are referring to. My wife (on H4) and I (on H1B) are planning to fly to India later this year on Lufthansa. Both of our Visas have expired although we hold valid H extension approval notices. Will we need transit visas or will the above rule apply? Any body with experience of similar situation?
girlfriend in love with Allison Brie.
NikNikon
November 14th, 2007, 01:47 PM
I've reformatted my card several times both on the D70 & D80 without issue.
hairstyles Alison Brie
abhijitp
06-21 02:48 PM
Also : 140 gets rejected in following cases:
1. Degree compatability
2. Exp + degree in EB2
3. Financial ability of firm - this only with bad records
i dont see any other reason why 140 should be rejected i am not over optimistic but any one can comment on these it would great.
BigBoy, it can get an RFE bcos of insufficient evidence to support "EB-2". A rejection can also happen for trivial reasons e.g. my labor cert was first rejected for a typo (incorrect date), and we had to re-file a week later.
I spoke to my attorney/HR and they are ok to premium process my first I-140 (which is categorized incorrectly as EB-3 by the paralegal, although the covering letter for that I-140 clearly says EB-2.)
But my Successor in interest application cannot be premium processed as the original labor app was attached to the first I-140. Apparently there is a rule you can only premium process an I-140 which has the original labor cert attached.
When I asked my attorney if USCIS will return the original labor cert at the end of the first I-140 decision, she said NO, it is not returned!! Is this true? I was hoping to at least get hold of that original labor cert, so that if the I-140 is somehow rejected then I could use the original labor cert to file a new I-140 successor in interest application under premium processing.
Comments/suggestions welcome.
Thanks!
Abhijit
1. Degree compatability
2. Exp + degree in EB2
3. Financial ability of firm - this only with bad records
i dont see any other reason why 140 should be rejected i am not over optimistic but any one can comment on these it would great.
BigBoy, it can get an RFE bcos of insufficient evidence to support "EB-2". A rejection can also happen for trivial reasons e.g. my labor cert was first rejected for a typo (incorrect date), and we had to re-file a week later.
I spoke to my attorney/HR and they are ok to premium process my first I-140 (which is categorized incorrectly as EB-3 by the paralegal, although the covering letter for that I-140 clearly says EB-2.)
But my Successor in interest application cannot be premium processed as the original labor app was attached to the first I-140. Apparently there is a rule you can only premium process an I-140 which has the original labor cert attached.
When I asked my attorney if USCIS will return the original labor cert at the end of the first I-140 decision, she said NO, it is not returned!! Is this true? I was hoping to at least get hold of that original labor cert, so that if the I-140 is somehow rejected then I could use the original labor cert to file a new I-140 successor in interest application under premium processing.
Comments/suggestions welcome.
Thanks!
Abhijit
life99f
05-31 09:07 AM
Order Details - May 31, 2007 09:44 GMT-04:00
Google Order #157436954936945
Google Order #157436954936945
sac-r-ten
03-22 10:34 AM
Sorry for any confusion. Here are the details :
My husband is on H1B visa and he is in US from past 4 years. I am on H-4 Visa and was in USA from past 2 years. We got extension in 2009 for another 3 years for H1 and H4. My husband stays in US but I came back to India for vacation. I appeared for H-4 visa stamping in US consulate in Delhi. After long wait they denied my H4 visa. My question is:
1) what are the options for me
2) Do they revoke my husband I797 H1 who is in US
3) What I have to do ..like appeal ..new petition..
Please advise..
sorry for your situation. its happening to others too. a friend (h1) and his wife(h4) went for stamping just last month in Mumbai consulate. They denied visa-stamping on the new employee-employer relationship clause. they are not fighting it with USCIS/Consulate. Its pretty ugly, USCIS approves the H1/H4 here and when people turn up for stamping they deny it. I am guessing as far as your husband is in US and in status his petition won't be revoked but if he goes for stamping outside US, then petition might get denied. Please ask your husband to talk to lawyers here in US.
Good luck.
My husband is on H1B visa and he is in US from past 4 years. I am on H-4 Visa and was in USA from past 2 years. We got extension in 2009 for another 3 years for H1 and H4. My husband stays in US but I came back to India for vacation. I appeared for H-4 visa stamping in US consulate in Delhi. After long wait they denied my H4 visa. My question is:
1) what are the options for me
2) Do they revoke my husband I797 H1 who is in US
3) What I have to do ..like appeal ..new petition..
Please advise..
sorry for your situation. its happening to others too. a friend (h1) and his wife(h4) went for stamping just last month in Mumbai consulate. They denied visa-stamping on the new employee-employer relationship clause. they are not fighting it with USCIS/Consulate. Its pretty ugly, USCIS approves the H1/H4 here and when people turn up for stamping they deny it. I am guessing as far as your husband is in US and in status his petition won't be revoked but if he goes for stamping outside US, then petition might get denied. Please ask your husband to talk to lawyers here in US.
Good luck.
No comments:
Post a Comment