senthil1
04-21 10:11 AM
No bill was introduced in Senate. Where is the question of voting? If anti immigrants some how make waste these 2 weeks of time in Senate then there will not be enough time to discuss. Now 60% chance. If no bill is introduced in Senate before end of may it will come down to 40%.
I believe it was House committee hearing http://judiciary.house.gov/oversight.aspx?ID=299
I believe it was House committee hearing http://judiciary.house.gov/oversight.aspx?ID=299
wallpaper happy birthday wishes poems.
rbalaji5
10-16 07:01 PM
Wish you & your family a very very happy, healthy, recession free and prosperous Deepawali !!!
Sorry IV-ians -Story deleted due to bad comments.
Sorry IV-ians -Story deleted due to bad comments.
immi_enthu
08-10 04:40 PM
I got an approval in March 2007 and status still says 'the notice that USCIS sent was returned as undeliverable". As I guess approval notice was sent to my employer's old address and so returned. My employer got address changed and sent request to Nebraska Service Centere to resent the documents, but documents not received yet. Still waiting.
Thanks!
How did you employer request to Nebraska Service Centere to resent the documents ?
Thanks!
How did you employer request to Nebraska Service Centere to resent the documents ?
2011 happy birthday wishes poems.
jonty_11
07-17 06:08 PM
not as long as I see it on USCIS website..
Thisis Murthy website...
Thisis Murthy website...
more...
vin13
03-09 12:15 PM
I guess then she should ask her employer to cancel her H1 (best approach) or least keep documentation of her resignation letter (backup for future RFE). Smart way is to step out of country & come back on parole. Shortcut is to work in some place for a week on I9 like Walmart.
The employee need not do anything. As long as the employee has a valid status to live, they are fine.
Definately there is no need to step out of country and come back. There is no need to trigger the change by going through these steps.
I have changed H1-B several times in the last 11 years i have been in this country. I have invoked AC-21 twice. None of my previous employers revoked my H1-B. I am currently working on EAD. I did not have to leave the country and come back on parole.
The employee need not do anything. As long as the employee has a valid status to live, they are fine.
Definately there is no need to step out of country and come back. There is no need to trigger the change by going through these steps.
I have changed H1-B several times in the last 11 years i have been in this country. I have invoked AC-21 twice. None of my previous employers revoked my H1-B. I am currently working on EAD. I did not have to leave the country and come back on parole.
a_yaja
01-16 11:44 AM
In a way you are right but not entirely. It is the responsibility of the sponsoring company (that filed H1 for the person) to pay while he/she is employed with the company. Its does not matter whether he/she has a client project or not. So, as long as the sponsoring company say they are going to pay him he/she is legal.
The original poster said that she was "laid off". So the question of her sponsoring company paying her does not arise. And hence she is without a job and she knows it. On this basis I said that it would be considered fraud if she goes for H1B stamping.
The original poster said that she was "laid off". So the question of her sponsoring company paying her does not arise. And hence she is without a job and she knows it. On this basis I said that it would be considered fraud if she goes for H1B stamping.
more...
frostrated
08-18 12:56 PM
Well if it is clearly mentioned in the offer letter that Employer will cover the GC cost, then isnt the employer supposed to pay for it irrespective of when the labor was filed. It was filed in 2006.
Btw, i am on AOS if that is what was meant from my legal status..
Thanks for all the responses to my thread so far..
The employer can change the contents of the offer, as long as it does not affect the job functions. GC is just a by-product of the job offer. Since you no longer work for the employer, you do not have any basis for recouping the costs. If you are in AOS status, it requires that there by an underlying immigrant petition by an employer. In your case, the employer on your petition no longer employs you, and therefore, if you go by the book, you are not in legal status. Rather than try to get money from your old employer, I'd suggest that you look for an employer who will take over your GC process. If you keep pestering your prior employer, they can revoke your I-140, which then invalidates your EAD and your I-485 application. So tread with care.
Btw, i am on AOS if that is what was meant from my legal status..
Thanks for all the responses to my thread so far..
The employer can change the contents of the offer, as long as it does not affect the job functions. GC is just a by-product of the job offer. Since you no longer work for the employer, you do not have any basis for recouping the costs. If you are in AOS status, it requires that there by an underlying immigrant petition by an employer. In your case, the employer on your petition no longer employs you, and therefore, if you go by the book, you are not in legal status. Rather than try to get money from your old employer, I'd suggest that you look for an employer who will take over your GC process. If you keep pestering your prior employer, they can revoke your I-140, which then invalidates your EAD and your I-485 application. So tread with care.
2010 happy birthday wishes poems.
chintals
11-05 06:29 PM
No FP yet!
more...
vallabhu
01-14 12:22 PM
The source is Immigration-law.com
This bill was introduced by Rep. Shela Jackson-Lee of Texas. Here is the full-text of the bill. It is a shocker, highly prejudiced against the employment-based immigration. Another shocker is a proposal to increaase Diversity Visa from 55,000 to 110,000 when the general opinion in the Congress was even to eliminate the DV program.
SEC. 701. UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
Section 274B (8 U.S.C. 1324b) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(5)--
(A) by amending the paragraph heading to read `Prohibition of Intimidation, Retaliation, or Unlawful Discrimination in Employment';
(B) by moving the text down and to the right 2 ems;
(C) by inserting before such text the following: `(A) IN GENERAL- '; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
`(B) FEDERAL LABOR OR EMPLOYMENT LAWS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer to directly or indirectly threaten any individual with removal or any other adverse consequences pertaining to that individual's immigration status or employment benefits for the purpose of intimidating, pressuring, or coercing any such individual not to exercise any right protected by State or Federal labor or employment law (including section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 157)), or for the purpose of retaliating against any such individual for having exercised or having stated an intention to exercise any such right.
`(C) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON IMMIGRATION STATUS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer, except to the extent specifically authorized or required by law, to discriminate in any term or condition of employment against any individual employed by such employer on the basis of such individual's immigration status.'; and
(2) in subsection (c)(2), by adding at the end the following: `The Special Counsel shall not disclose to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, and shall not cause to be published in a manner that discloses to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, any information obtained by the Special Counsel in any manner concerning the immigration status of any individual who has filed a charge under this section, or the identity of any individual or entity that is a party or witness to a proceedings brought pursuant to such charge. The Secretary of Homeland Security may not rely, in whole or in part, in any enforcement action or removal proceeding, upon any information obtained as a result of the filing or prosecution of an unfair immigration-related employment practice charge. For purposes of this paragraph, the term `Special Counsel' includes individuals formerly appointed to the position of Special Counsel and any current or former employee of the office of the Special Counsel. Whoever knowingly uses, publishes, or permits information to be used in violation of this paragraph shall be fined not more than $10,000.'.
SEC. 702. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TASK FORCE.
The Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall conduct a national study of American workplaces to determine the causes, extent, circumstances, and consequences, of exploitation of undocumented alien workers by their employers. As part of this study, the Secretary of Labor shall create a plan for targeted review of Federal labor law enforcement in industries with a substantial immigrant workforce, for the purpose of identifying, monitoring, and deterring frequent or egregious violators of wage and hour, antidiscrimination, National Labor Relations Act, and workplace safety and health requirements. Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall submit to the Congress a report describing the results of the study and the Secretary's recommendations based on the study.
SEC. 703. RECRUITMENT OF AMERICAN WORKERS.
Section 214 is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (m) (as added by section 105 of Public Law 106-313), (n) (as added by section 107(e) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1513(c) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1102(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act), and (p) (as added by section 1503(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act) as subsections (n), (o), (p), (q), and (r), respectively; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
`(s)(1) No petition to accord employment status under the nonimmigrant classifications described in sections 101(a)(15)(E)(iii) and (H) shall be granted in the absence of an affidavit from the petitioner describing the efforts that were made to recruit an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence or a citizen of the United States before resorting to a petition to obtain a foreign employee. The recruitment efforts must have included substantial attempts to find employees in minority communities. Recruitment efforts in minority communities should include at least one of the following, if appropriate for the employment being advertised:
`(A) Advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker in local newspapers in the labor market that is likely to be patronized by a potential worker for at least 5 consecutive days.
`(B) Undertake efforts to advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker through advertisements in public transportation systems.
`(C) To the extent permitted by local laws and regulations, engage in recruitment activities in secondary schools, recreation centers, community centers, and other places throughout the communities within 50 miles of the job site that serve minorities.
`(2)(A) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a 10 percent surcharge on all fees collected for petitions to accord employment status and shall use these funds to establish an employment training program which will include unemployed workers in the United States who need to be trained or retrained. The purpose of this program shall be to increase the number of lawful permanent residents and citizens of the United States who are available for employment in the occupations that are the subjects of such petitions. At least 50 percent of the funds generated by this provision must be used to train American workers in rural and inner-city areas.
`(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall reserve and make available to the Secretary of Labor a portion of the funds collected under this paragraph. Such funds shall be used by the Secretary of Labor to establish an `Office to Preserve American Jobs' within the Department of Labor. The purpose of this office shall be to establish policies intended to ensure that employers in the United States will hire available workers in the United States before resorting to foreign labor, giving substantial emphasis to hiring minority workers in the United States.'.
This bill was introduced by Rep. Shela Jackson-Lee of Texas. Here is the full-text of the bill. It is a shocker, highly prejudiced against the employment-based immigration. Another shocker is a proposal to increaase Diversity Visa from 55,000 to 110,000 when the general opinion in the Congress was even to eliminate the DV program.
SEC. 701. UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
Section 274B (8 U.S.C. 1324b) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(5)--
(A) by amending the paragraph heading to read `Prohibition of Intimidation, Retaliation, or Unlawful Discrimination in Employment';
(B) by moving the text down and to the right 2 ems;
(C) by inserting before such text the following: `(A) IN GENERAL- '; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
`(B) FEDERAL LABOR OR EMPLOYMENT LAWS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer to directly or indirectly threaten any individual with removal or any other adverse consequences pertaining to that individual's immigration status or employment benefits for the purpose of intimidating, pressuring, or coercing any such individual not to exercise any right protected by State or Federal labor or employment law (including section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 157)), or for the purpose of retaliating against any such individual for having exercised or having stated an intention to exercise any such right.
`(C) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON IMMIGRATION STATUS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer, except to the extent specifically authorized or required by law, to discriminate in any term or condition of employment against any individual employed by such employer on the basis of such individual's immigration status.'; and
(2) in subsection (c)(2), by adding at the end the following: `The Special Counsel shall not disclose to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, and shall not cause to be published in a manner that discloses to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, any information obtained by the Special Counsel in any manner concerning the immigration status of any individual who has filed a charge under this section, or the identity of any individual or entity that is a party or witness to a proceedings brought pursuant to such charge. The Secretary of Homeland Security may not rely, in whole or in part, in any enforcement action or removal proceeding, upon any information obtained as a result of the filing or prosecution of an unfair immigration-related employment practice charge. For purposes of this paragraph, the term `Special Counsel' includes individuals formerly appointed to the position of Special Counsel and any current or former employee of the office of the Special Counsel. Whoever knowingly uses, publishes, or permits information to be used in violation of this paragraph shall be fined not more than $10,000.'.
SEC. 702. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TASK FORCE.
The Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall conduct a national study of American workplaces to determine the causes, extent, circumstances, and consequences, of exploitation of undocumented alien workers by their employers. As part of this study, the Secretary of Labor shall create a plan for targeted review of Federal labor law enforcement in industries with a substantial immigrant workforce, for the purpose of identifying, monitoring, and deterring frequent or egregious violators of wage and hour, antidiscrimination, National Labor Relations Act, and workplace safety and health requirements. Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall submit to the Congress a report describing the results of the study and the Secretary's recommendations based on the study.
SEC. 703. RECRUITMENT OF AMERICAN WORKERS.
Section 214 is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (m) (as added by section 105 of Public Law 106-313), (n) (as added by section 107(e) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1513(c) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1102(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act), and (p) (as added by section 1503(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act) as subsections (n), (o), (p), (q), and (r), respectively; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
`(s)(1) No petition to accord employment status under the nonimmigrant classifications described in sections 101(a)(15)(E)(iii) and (H) shall be granted in the absence of an affidavit from the petitioner describing the efforts that were made to recruit an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence or a citizen of the United States before resorting to a petition to obtain a foreign employee. The recruitment efforts must have included substantial attempts to find employees in minority communities. Recruitment efforts in minority communities should include at least one of the following, if appropriate for the employment being advertised:
`(A) Advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker in local newspapers in the labor market that is likely to be patronized by a potential worker for at least 5 consecutive days.
`(B) Undertake efforts to advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker through advertisements in public transportation systems.
`(C) To the extent permitted by local laws and regulations, engage in recruitment activities in secondary schools, recreation centers, community centers, and other places throughout the communities within 50 miles of the job site that serve minorities.
`(2)(A) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a 10 percent surcharge on all fees collected for petitions to accord employment status and shall use these funds to establish an employment training program which will include unemployed workers in the United States who need to be trained or retrained. The purpose of this program shall be to increase the number of lawful permanent residents and citizens of the United States who are available for employment in the occupations that are the subjects of such petitions. At least 50 percent of the funds generated by this provision must be used to train American workers in rural and inner-city areas.
`(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall reserve and make available to the Secretary of Labor a portion of the funds collected under this paragraph. Such funds shall be used by the Secretary of Labor to establish an `Office to Preserve American Jobs' within the Department of Labor. The purpose of this office shall be to establish policies intended to ensure that employers in the United States will hire available workers in the United States before resorting to foreign labor, giving substantial emphasis to hiring minority workers in the United States.'.
hair irthday wishes poems
anyway
01-25 06:36 PM
You can add a MouseLeftButtonDown event to pretty much any element! Just select and use the Events tab to set your event handler name: http://www.kirupa.com/net/creating_simple_wpf_gui_app_pg5.htm
Both Blend and VS will auto-generate the event handler where you can insert some code :)
Thanks. I actually figured it out, sort of.
So what I did was drag and drop the icon into my project then turned the icon into a control using the 'Make into control' option (right click option); selected Button from the list and left everthing else as is. From here, I selected button from the tab (says [Button]) under the project name. example: mainpage.xmal).
So basic what this does is overlay the icon image with an actual button control.
Moving on.
I then selected the button (icon image) in my project and in the properties panel (on the right) under 'Common Properties' removed the word "button" from the 'Content' label.
Switched to event view (it's the rectangle with the lighting bolt -- top right) and in the box next to 'Click' gave it a meaningful name, i.e. query_Click or query or something. I think after this the MainPage.xaml.cs should open.
Both Blend and VS will auto-generate the event handler where you can insert some code :)
Thanks. I actually figured it out, sort of.
So what I did was drag and drop the icon into my project then turned the icon into a control using the 'Make into control' option (right click option); selected Button from the list and left everthing else as is. From here, I selected button from the tab (says [Button]) under the project name. example: mainpage.xmal).
So basic what this does is overlay the icon image with an actual button control.
Moving on.
I then selected the button (icon image) in my project and in the properties panel (on the right) under 'Common Properties' removed the word "button" from the 'Content' label.
Switched to event view (it's the rectangle with the lighting bolt -- top right) and in the box next to 'Click' gave it a meaningful name, i.e. query_Click or query or something. I think after this the MainPage.xaml.cs should open.
more...
rvenkat1976
04-09 08:46 AM
Thanks Fide Champ.
Both the employer and the Attorney are tight lipped on my first I-140. Is there a way to take help of some other Attorney and ask them to get the details regarding my first I-140?
Both the employer and the Attorney are tight lipped on my first I-140. Is there a way to take help of some other Attorney and ask them to get the details regarding my first I-140?
hot happy birthday wishes poems
ragz4u
04-10 09:30 AM
Bump ^^^
more...
house Happy Birthday Wishes Poems.
immiusa
04-09 01:26 PM
Congrats. Very long wait. I am happy for you. Seems USCIS is trying to close all old applications. That is good sign for all long wait memebers
tattoo Happy Birthday Wishes Poems.
sankap
07-05 03:28 PM
http://online.wsj.com/article_print/SB118359095890657571.html
Reversal Frustrates Green-Card Applicants
By MIRIAM JORDAN
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: July 5, 2007
The U.S. government's surprise offer, then abrupt reversal, of an opportunity for thousands of skilled foreign workers to obtain permanent residency in the U.S. highlights the problems of the overtaxed immigration system and the frenzy that results from a rare chance to apply for a green card.
The scramble has put tens of thousands of workers and their families in limbo after many of them and their employers spent thousands of dollars in hopes of securing permanent residency. It may result in a class-action lawsuit against the government by frustrated applicants.
The problem began June 12 when the government seemed to open the door for thousands of foreign workers and their families to end the long wait to apply for a green card. That is when the State Department published a Visa Bulletin, which is a monthly notice closely watched by immigration attorneys and their clients because it determines who is eligible to file a green-card application the next month. The June bulletin announced that practically all skilled foreign workers who had been previously deemed eligible for an employer-sponsored visa could now take the final step of applying for a green card.
By law, the U.S. can issue about 140,000 employment-based green cards each year. Last year, the government fell short by about 10,000, despite the long waiting list; leftover visas can't be rolled over to the next year. The June announcement aimed to prevent the visa slot from going to waste, according to a State Department spokeswoman.
[Green-Card Limbo]
The announcement was greeted with a mix of jubilation and panic by thousands of engineers, lab scientists and other high-skilled foreigners who had waited years for their place in line. Working ahead of a July 2 date for filing the application, intending immigrants rushed to gather documents, complete paperwork and obtain medical exams. Many of their dependents -- such as children enrolled in college overseas -- boarded planes for the U.S. to meet a requirement that all family members be present at the time of filing.
"The bulletin created a land rush among legal immigrants desperate to finalize their green-card applications," said Steve Miller, a Seattle-based immigration attorney and head of the state chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.
Then, on July 2, the State Department issued an "update" that reversed the previous bulletin. It stated, effective immediately, there would be no further authorizations for employment-based cases. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which processes the applications, said it would instead simply process existing applications to meet this year's quota. "We already had sufficient applications pending without new applicants," an agency spokesman said.
Mike Aytes, head of domestic operations for the USCIS, said all 147,141 employment-based green cards have now been issued for the year. "We are very sympathetic to the fact that people really had expectations � Folks spent a lot of time and effort, but it turned out they couldn't file, after all," he said.
In the July 2 announcement, USCIS said it was "rejecting applications" to secure green cards, and the agency spokesman said it would return the paperwork of all the applicants. New cases will be entertained again in the government's next fiscal year, starting Oct. 1. However, applicants must wait their turn again, which might not happen for years.
News of the revocation of the previously announced bulletin dashed the hopes of thousands of foreign workers, many of them currently on an H-1B professional visa normally valid for up to six years. These workers face the possibility of being forced to return home if their visa expires before they get the chance to apply for a green card.
"My employer and I spent tens of thousands of dollars preparing for the day when we could file for our Change in Status application, only to have the [government] pull the rug out from under us," said Lawrence LeBlanc, a Canadian executive at AES Corp. in Arlington, Virginia. "We were devastated to hear this unprecedented news. We're not sure how we're going to tell our children."
Because there are more employer-based applicants for immigrant visas than are available each year, people wait each month to see whether they have gotten to the front of the line. Often people wait years for the green light to apply, especially if they come from countries like India and China.
The June 12 announcement set off a stampede to government-approved doctors, because green-card applicants must pass medical exams. Apurva Pratap, a Seattle-based senior manager for a multinational corporation, said he and his wife traveled 40 miles for a medical exam after they couldn't secure an appointment in town. To fulfill a requirement for a vaccination, they waited eight hours in a line that snaked around a mobile unit in Tacoma. Mr. Pratap, a native of India, has been in the U.S. since 1999.
A spokeswoman for the American Immigration Lawyers Association said it has called for a congressional investigation. An affiliated organization is expected to take legal action via a class-action lawsuit. "This is an example of how badly our immigration system is broken," says Kathleen Walker, president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.
Write to Miriam Jordan at miriam.jordan@wsj.com1
Reversal Frustrates Green-Card Applicants
By MIRIAM JORDAN
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: July 5, 2007
The U.S. government's surprise offer, then abrupt reversal, of an opportunity for thousands of skilled foreign workers to obtain permanent residency in the U.S. highlights the problems of the overtaxed immigration system and the frenzy that results from a rare chance to apply for a green card.
The scramble has put tens of thousands of workers and their families in limbo after many of them and their employers spent thousands of dollars in hopes of securing permanent residency. It may result in a class-action lawsuit against the government by frustrated applicants.
The problem began June 12 when the government seemed to open the door for thousands of foreign workers and their families to end the long wait to apply for a green card. That is when the State Department published a Visa Bulletin, which is a monthly notice closely watched by immigration attorneys and their clients because it determines who is eligible to file a green-card application the next month. The June bulletin announced that practically all skilled foreign workers who had been previously deemed eligible for an employer-sponsored visa could now take the final step of applying for a green card.
By law, the U.S. can issue about 140,000 employment-based green cards each year. Last year, the government fell short by about 10,000, despite the long waiting list; leftover visas can't be rolled over to the next year. The June announcement aimed to prevent the visa slot from going to waste, according to a State Department spokeswoman.
[Green-Card Limbo]
The announcement was greeted with a mix of jubilation and panic by thousands of engineers, lab scientists and other high-skilled foreigners who had waited years for their place in line. Working ahead of a July 2 date for filing the application, intending immigrants rushed to gather documents, complete paperwork and obtain medical exams. Many of their dependents -- such as children enrolled in college overseas -- boarded planes for the U.S. to meet a requirement that all family members be present at the time of filing.
"The bulletin created a land rush among legal immigrants desperate to finalize their green-card applications," said Steve Miller, a Seattle-based immigration attorney and head of the state chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.
Then, on July 2, the State Department issued an "update" that reversed the previous bulletin. It stated, effective immediately, there would be no further authorizations for employment-based cases. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which processes the applications, said it would instead simply process existing applications to meet this year's quota. "We already had sufficient applications pending without new applicants," an agency spokesman said.
Mike Aytes, head of domestic operations for the USCIS, said all 147,141 employment-based green cards have now been issued for the year. "We are very sympathetic to the fact that people really had expectations � Folks spent a lot of time and effort, but it turned out they couldn't file, after all," he said.
In the July 2 announcement, USCIS said it was "rejecting applications" to secure green cards, and the agency spokesman said it would return the paperwork of all the applicants. New cases will be entertained again in the government's next fiscal year, starting Oct. 1. However, applicants must wait their turn again, which might not happen for years.
News of the revocation of the previously announced bulletin dashed the hopes of thousands of foreign workers, many of them currently on an H-1B professional visa normally valid for up to six years. These workers face the possibility of being forced to return home if their visa expires before they get the chance to apply for a green card.
"My employer and I spent tens of thousands of dollars preparing for the day when we could file for our Change in Status application, only to have the [government] pull the rug out from under us," said Lawrence LeBlanc, a Canadian executive at AES Corp. in Arlington, Virginia. "We were devastated to hear this unprecedented news. We're not sure how we're going to tell our children."
Because there are more employer-based applicants for immigrant visas than are available each year, people wait each month to see whether they have gotten to the front of the line. Often people wait years for the green light to apply, especially if they come from countries like India and China.
The June 12 announcement set off a stampede to government-approved doctors, because green-card applicants must pass medical exams. Apurva Pratap, a Seattle-based senior manager for a multinational corporation, said he and his wife traveled 40 miles for a medical exam after they couldn't secure an appointment in town. To fulfill a requirement for a vaccination, they waited eight hours in a line that snaked around a mobile unit in Tacoma. Mr. Pratap, a native of India, has been in the U.S. since 1999.
A spokeswoman for the American Immigration Lawyers Association said it has called for a congressional investigation. An affiliated organization is expected to take legal action via a class-action lawsuit. "This is an example of how badly our immigration system is broken," says Kathleen Walker, president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.
Write to Miriam Jordan at miriam.jordan@wsj.com1
more...
pictures happy birthday wishes poems.
supers789
10-09 05:36 PM
Can IV core put some light on -
Is there quarterly Visa spillover or its only at the end of every USCIS year (July-sept) ?
If NO, any way to add that in?
Thank!
Is there quarterly Visa spillover or its only at the end of every USCIS year (July-sept) ?
If NO, any way to add that in?
Thank!
dresses Wish them Happy Birthday with
grupak
03-25 11:34 AM
Income must be passive type meaning it should not exceed the income which iam getting on my present H1job or anything else which iam missing.
Not sure the precise definition of passive exists. I would take it to be not involved in any business decisions or day-to-day running of the business. Just putting in the money and letting the CEO and the rest make all the decisions as in buying stock is passive. I may be wrong.
Not sure the precise definition of passive exists. I would take it to be not involved in any business decisions or day-to-day running of the business. Just putting in the money and letting the CEO and the rest make all the decisions as in buying stock is passive. I may be wrong.
more...
makeup one happy birthday wishes
gcpain
05-19 01:31 PM
Hello All,
My I485 was filed at TSC and received date is July 26,2007 and notice date is sept 19,2007. MY EAD and AP and other finger prints are done after two months of filed. My priority date (Jun10, 2003) is current for last two months and it is going to retogress after this month end.There is no update for I485 for me and my wife. Now processing times for TSC shows they are working on Aug 08, 2007 filers. In this case cane youguys advice me on following things?
1. Is it good to take Info pass appointment and go for office before end of this month (as it is going to retrogress) and find out status? Before info pass do i need to get any other enquiry?
2. Processing dates for TSC-I485 shows Aug 08, 2007. Is this date recevied date or I485-Notice date?
3.Does Info-pass enquiry cause any negative effects on my I485 processing?
4. Any other guys in the same boat and what you guys are doing?
I really appreciate your advice. Thanks in advance for your good work.
My I485 was filed at TSC and received date is July 26,2007 and notice date is sept 19,2007. MY EAD and AP and other finger prints are done after two months of filed. My priority date (Jun10, 2003) is current for last two months and it is going to retogress after this month end.There is no update for I485 for me and my wife. Now processing times for TSC shows they are working on Aug 08, 2007 filers. In this case cane youguys advice me on following things?
1. Is it good to take Info pass appointment and go for office before end of this month (as it is going to retrogress) and find out status? Before info pass do i need to get any other enquiry?
2. Processing dates for TSC-I485 shows Aug 08, 2007. Is this date recevied date or I485-Notice date?
3.Does Info-pass enquiry cause any negative effects on my I485 processing?
4. Any other guys in the same boat and what you guys are doing?
I really appreciate your advice. Thanks in advance for your good work.
girlfriend Happy Birthday Pictures For
desperatlyinwaiting
06-15 10:19 PM
Thank you for the quick response and advise.
Do they stamp the I-551 on a current passport, when he gets it renewed, even if we have not receive the approval letter? How do they verify this?
I do not have experience with this, so I greatly appreciate your patience.
Do they stamp the I-551 on a current passport, when he gets it renewed, even if we have not receive the approval letter? How do they verify this?
I do not have experience with this, so I greatly appreciate your patience.
hairstyles happy birthday wishes poems. happy birthday wishes poems.
Outkastpb231
11-02 03:51 PM
Without trying to sound too harsh, I think my dog could knock up something more worth going freelance about. :D
No hard feelings. I just really need to get back on my feet, since I am relatively busy I just got my own place, and I really need an idea to set me in motion. I am not a spontaneous artist in any sense at all.
No hard feelings. I just really need to get back on my feet, since I am relatively busy I just got my own place, and I really need an idea to set me in motion. I am not a spontaneous artist in any sense at all.
kukitron
12-14 08:28 AM
Most of them get cash,
Where I live in a chicago suburb, we got flooded in the last 3 years with them, it is just insane the amount of people who arrived in such a short time,
You'll see them in the store buying everything in cash,
maybe some of the have my or your SSN, those guys don't respect anything...
Where I live in a chicago suburb, we got flooded in the last 3 years with them, it is just insane the amount of people who arrived in such a short time,
You'll see them in the store buying everything in cash,
maybe some of the have my or your SSN, those guys don't respect anything...
asdqwe2k
07-04 04:40 PM
Another possible example here: I heard a case where one labor led to TWO green cards. My understanding this is not possible and might have happened because of the rush USCIS was approving cases.
A friend of mine got 485 approval on June 29th. He was not expecting it to be approved for a specific reason: his company applied his GC using a pre-approved labor. The original labor was with a differnet person who left the company after his 485 was pending for six months (during retrogession time). That person later joined a company and eventually got his 485 approved. Meanwhile the company applied for the I140 withdrawal and simultaneously went ahead applying for I140 and 485 for my friend (he played along since nothing worse going to happen to anyone; and he had a complicated visa situation). They were not hopeful of approval but suddenly they saw the approval on June 29th.
Who knows how many more irregularities happened there during last two weeks.
There is nothing wrong in people getting approvals on july 2nd or for that matter entire this week or this month.. That is because, eventhough people get approval notice e-mails as july 2nd or any date after that, the actual approval happened 2-3 weeks before..
For example, for most of NSC approval in june 18th week, people have indicated that there Green card physical copy showed approval as June 4th. They got approval notice, and actual green cards starting only in June 3rd week. There has been flood of approvals, at least in NSC region.. Just ask any last month GC approved person, to tell what is the date for "Resident Since" on the green card..
A friend of mine got 485 approval on June 29th. He was not expecting it to be approved for a specific reason: his company applied his GC using a pre-approved labor. The original labor was with a differnet person who left the company after his 485 was pending for six months (during retrogession time). That person later joined a company and eventually got his 485 approved. Meanwhile the company applied for the I140 withdrawal and simultaneously went ahead applying for I140 and 485 for my friend (he played along since nothing worse going to happen to anyone; and he had a complicated visa situation). They were not hopeful of approval but suddenly they saw the approval on June 29th.
Who knows how many more irregularities happened there during last two weeks.
There is nothing wrong in people getting approvals on july 2nd or for that matter entire this week or this month.. That is because, eventhough people get approval notice e-mails as july 2nd or any date after that, the actual approval happened 2-3 weeks before..
For example, for most of NSC approval in june 18th week, people have indicated that there Green card physical copy showed approval as June 4th. They got approval notice, and actual green cards starting only in June 3rd week. There has been flood of approvals, at least in NSC region.. Just ask any last month GC approved person, to tell what is the date for "Resident Since" on the green card..
No comments:
Post a Comment