virald
09-11 04:41 PM
I don't understand how they calculate PD dates?
Can anyone help me here please?
Thanks
You just asked the million dollar question. I can tell you with close to a certainty that no one here can give you a 100% correct answer.
Can anyone help me here please?
Thanks
You just asked the million dollar question. I can tell you with close to a certainty that no one here can give you a 100% correct answer.
wallpaper in Album #39;Quote-unquote#39;
waitnwatch
07-06 10:58 AM
Did any of you guys read the USCIS ombudsman report in detail. It talks about FBI namechecks in some detail and specifically mentions that the namechecks are less detailed than what USCIS already does through it's available databases. In fact the FBI checks fewer things than what the USCIS already checks and so the ombudsman believes that the FBI name check is a waste of time and should be done away with.
Nevertheless USCIS still keeps the FBI name check and I believe that is for purely political reasons where they can conveniently pass the buck if something untoward happens.
Therefore harping on the FBI namecheck issue for the weekend processing may not be a good idea.
Nevertheless USCIS still keeps the FBI name check and I believe that is for purely political reasons where they can conveniently pass the buck if something untoward happens.
Therefore harping on the FBI namecheck issue for the weekend processing may not be a good idea.
manderson
09-24 02:00 PM
it has to be similar job PLUS with an established company.
from what i have gathered it seems that if USCIS issues a RFE or calls u for interview during adjucation they might ask for 2 yrs of tax filings of future employer to prove that it's an established company (although they are not suppposed to bring up 'ability to pay' issue which is already covered in approved 140 -- but being USCIS anything goes...).
i also wondered about the conflict of interest becoz it's your relative that u clearly identified in your G325 (Biographic) form -- but I guess if ppl are doing it then it's possible.
Ok. Now lets say I have EAD cards for me (primary applicant) and my wife. I can now have my wife start a company and have a job position similar to where I work. Now after 180 days, can I work for my wife's company invoking AC21 with my EAD??:D
and so when an RFE comes from USCIS , can this be shown as the similar job offer?
Really speaking, The USCIS only wants a promise of employment when they are adjudicating form 485 saying that I will be given a job after I get my green card:). So can I literally work anywhere for any job using my EAD until green card gets fully approved as long as I have a promise of employment (by my wife's company)? :p
Ofcourse i am risking the chance of being out of status if my 485 gets denied. i just want to make sure it wont get denied because the "similar job" offer is from my relatives (wife's) company.
any thoughts??:confused:
Rex
from what i have gathered it seems that if USCIS issues a RFE or calls u for interview during adjucation they might ask for 2 yrs of tax filings of future employer to prove that it's an established company (although they are not suppposed to bring up 'ability to pay' issue which is already covered in approved 140 -- but being USCIS anything goes...).
i also wondered about the conflict of interest becoz it's your relative that u clearly identified in your G325 (Biographic) form -- but I guess if ppl are doing it then it's possible.
Ok. Now lets say I have EAD cards for me (primary applicant) and my wife. I can now have my wife start a company and have a job position similar to where I work. Now after 180 days, can I work for my wife's company invoking AC21 with my EAD??:D
and so when an RFE comes from USCIS , can this be shown as the similar job offer?
Really speaking, The USCIS only wants a promise of employment when they are adjudicating form 485 saying that I will be given a job after I get my green card:). So can I literally work anywhere for any job using my EAD until green card gets fully approved as long as I have a promise of employment (by my wife's company)? :p
Ofcourse i am risking the chance of being out of status if my 485 gets denied. i just want to make sure it wont get denied because the "similar job" offer is from my relatives (wife's) company.
any thoughts??:confused:
Rex
2011 good quotes on smile. good quotes on smile. quotes
baburob2
03-15 06:25 PM
Overall no big progress w.r.t our title's though Brownback's comment on immigration numbers is good.
Senate Judiciary Committee Continues Slow Progress in Markup of Immigration Reform Legislation
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 06031540 (posted Mar. 15, 2006)"
The Senate Judiciary Committee continued its consideration today of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform sponsored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter. The Committee officially took up the bill, known as the �Chairman�s Mark,� on March 2 but has made very slow progress to date.
The following is a very brief summary of the amendments that were addressed during today�s session. See our previous update on last week�s markup sessions. We will continue to update you as action on the bill continues.
1. The Committee passed by a voice vote a compromise amendment by Feingold that would preserve some level of judicial review over naturalization applications.
2. A Specter 2nd degree amendment to a Sessions amendment on evading inspection passed.
3. A Leahy amendment on security-related issues passed by voice vote.
4. A Kennedy amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s retroactive provisions was debated and deferred.
5. A Feinstein amendment to modify the provisions of the Mark relating to border security was deferred for future action.
6. A Durbin amendment to strike the Mark�s criminalization of unlawful status was once again deferred for future consideration. Feinstein attempted to offer a 2nd degree amendment that would provide aliens with a 60-day grace period for visa overstays before they are subject to criminal prosecution under INA � 275(a), but Specter would not allow it since Durbin�s underlying amendment was set aside.
7. A Durbin amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s smuggling provision so as not to criminalize humanitarian assistance was once again debated and deferred. Kyl spoke in opposition to the amendment. Cornyn had a second degree that Hatch thought was insufficient. Hatch, Schumer and Biden spoke in opposition to Cornyn�s 2nd degree. Cornyn was not convincing, but Kyl did some damage.
8. A Sessions amendment to affirm the inherent authority of state and local law enforcement personnel to enforce federal civil immigration laws during the normal course of carrying out their duties was discussed. Specter offered a 2nd degree that would limit the inherent authority of states and localities to the enforcement of the criminal provisions of the immigration laws. Sessions would only support the 2nd degree if the provisions of the Mark criminalizing unlawful presence remain intact. Thus, if the Durbin amendment to strike those provisions passes, Sessions wants to revisit the Specter 2nd degree. Specter�s 2nd degree passed by voice vote.
9. A Sessions amendment that would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide information to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) related to aliens who may have violated certain immigration laws passed by a voice vote. The broadly worded amendment would encompass visa overstayers, other civil violators, and even members of vulnerable populations such as asylum-seekers who are improperly documented but seeking relief. Leahy and Kennedy voted against the amendment and Leahy spoke in opposition to overloading the NCIC database with individuals who do not belong in it. A Specter 2nd degree amendment that would provide a procedure for requesting removal from the database and modify the group of individuals included in it passed by voice vote.
10. A Sessions amendment that would require at least one law enforcement agency in each state to enter into a � 287(g) cooperative enforcement agreement to enforce immigration laws against alien smugglers was considered. Sessions accepted a Coburn 2nd degree amendment that would clarify: (1) that such agreements would be purely voluntary, and (2) that the �287(g) enforcement authority would not be limited to alien smuggling. There was no quorum to vote on these, however, and they were set aside.
Part way through the markup, Specter attempted to jump to a debate on the issue of the undocumented population, noting that he has reiterated to Senate Majority Leader Frist that he (Specter) opposes bringing immigration reform to the Senate Floor before the Senate Judiciary Committee had completed its consideration of the Chairman�s Mark. Biden and Kennedy voiced their support of Specter�s desire to complete work in Committee. Kennedy added, �this issue is NOT going away, like some other issues,� and urged deferral of the Title VI discussion until tomorrow (Title VI contains the provisions dealing with the undocumented population). He added that we need to deal with ALL aspects of reform to have real, lasting border security�going forward with any of these components alone will fail.
Durbin said that, to defeat the House bill (H.R. 4437), the Committee needs to pass a strong bipartisan bill with the support of about 12 members. He feels the Committee should do an extra markup session on a day when there is no other Senate business. �We need to watch the House,� noted Durbin, adding: �They have a bill we need to fight at all costs. We need bipartisan support out of this Committee.�
Brownback stated that the Committee has started a process to create broad bipartisan support for good policy, and that this is the most significant legislation of the year. �We have serious problems with immigrant numbers,� he said. �We can�t live with these and need to change them. McCain/Kennedy would deal with this. How do we get the Mark to deal with these numbers? We need a way NOT to end up here again after 10 years. We can�t move too quickly.�
Cornyn described the process as akin to �digging out of a big hole,� noting that with enforcement done first, other issues would get simpler. He believes we need to impose circularity---not permanent immigration.
Coburn said that, like it or not, we have to deal with issue of the undocumented population. He urged the Committee to split the bill in two and do enforcement first, and work to reach consensus on other parts later in the year. �No one in the country trusts us on this issue because we haven�t enforced our existing laws,� he said.
Feinstein stated her concerns about the process, and also spoke out against comprehensive immigration reform and in favor of her more limited agricultural pilot program idea. She said she had met with Senator Craig (the sponsor of AgJobs) yesterday to see if they could work out their differences but there has been no resolution yet. She also expressed much frustration with Frist�s artificial timeline. She indicated her opposition to the House bill, and said that consensus was needed in the Committee (she believes the Committee has come to some consensus on the enforcement pieces but little else). She urged Specter to go back to Frist and ask for more time.
Sessions said we need to focus on enforcement now, and then have a national discussion later on the other elements of immigration reform. He believes Congress needs to focus on enforcement to build credibility with the public. �I�m not prepared to repeat 1986,� he said. �We should slow down.�
Specter repeatedly voiced his concern about �line-jumping,� arguing that the McCain/Kennedy bill would �leap frog� the current undocumented population over individuals who have been waiting in the backlogs. He also said that he�d prefer it if the legislation contained a path to citizenship but, as Chair, was trying to balance both sides.
In other hurdles to the Judiciary Committee�s completion of work on the bill, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Grassley, who is also a member of the Judiciary Committee, argued that the Finance Committee should have jurisdiction over the provisions of the Mark relating to the Social Security Act, adding that the IRS has raised serious concerns about some of these amendments. However, several other senators argued for consideration of these provisions in the Judiciary Committee. It is also possible that Grassley could exercise the Finance Committee�s authority by managing those amendments during floor debate.
The Committee disbanded about noon, due to a number of votes on the Senate Floor and the attendant low probability of maintaining a voting quorum in the Committee.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18835
Senate Judiciary Committee Continues Slow Progress in Markup of Immigration Reform Legislation
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 06031540 (posted Mar. 15, 2006)"
The Senate Judiciary Committee continued its consideration today of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform sponsored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter. The Committee officially took up the bill, known as the �Chairman�s Mark,� on March 2 but has made very slow progress to date.
The following is a very brief summary of the amendments that were addressed during today�s session. See our previous update on last week�s markup sessions. We will continue to update you as action on the bill continues.
1. The Committee passed by a voice vote a compromise amendment by Feingold that would preserve some level of judicial review over naturalization applications.
2. A Specter 2nd degree amendment to a Sessions amendment on evading inspection passed.
3. A Leahy amendment on security-related issues passed by voice vote.
4. A Kennedy amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s retroactive provisions was debated and deferred.
5. A Feinstein amendment to modify the provisions of the Mark relating to border security was deferred for future action.
6. A Durbin amendment to strike the Mark�s criminalization of unlawful status was once again deferred for future consideration. Feinstein attempted to offer a 2nd degree amendment that would provide aliens with a 60-day grace period for visa overstays before they are subject to criminal prosecution under INA � 275(a), but Specter would not allow it since Durbin�s underlying amendment was set aside.
7. A Durbin amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s smuggling provision so as not to criminalize humanitarian assistance was once again debated and deferred. Kyl spoke in opposition to the amendment. Cornyn had a second degree that Hatch thought was insufficient. Hatch, Schumer and Biden spoke in opposition to Cornyn�s 2nd degree. Cornyn was not convincing, but Kyl did some damage.
8. A Sessions amendment to affirm the inherent authority of state and local law enforcement personnel to enforce federal civil immigration laws during the normal course of carrying out their duties was discussed. Specter offered a 2nd degree that would limit the inherent authority of states and localities to the enforcement of the criminal provisions of the immigration laws. Sessions would only support the 2nd degree if the provisions of the Mark criminalizing unlawful presence remain intact. Thus, if the Durbin amendment to strike those provisions passes, Sessions wants to revisit the Specter 2nd degree. Specter�s 2nd degree passed by voice vote.
9. A Sessions amendment that would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide information to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) related to aliens who may have violated certain immigration laws passed by a voice vote. The broadly worded amendment would encompass visa overstayers, other civil violators, and even members of vulnerable populations such as asylum-seekers who are improperly documented but seeking relief. Leahy and Kennedy voted against the amendment and Leahy spoke in opposition to overloading the NCIC database with individuals who do not belong in it. A Specter 2nd degree amendment that would provide a procedure for requesting removal from the database and modify the group of individuals included in it passed by voice vote.
10. A Sessions amendment that would require at least one law enforcement agency in each state to enter into a � 287(g) cooperative enforcement agreement to enforce immigration laws against alien smugglers was considered. Sessions accepted a Coburn 2nd degree amendment that would clarify: (1) that such agreements would be purely voluntary, and (2) that the �287(g) enforcement authority would not be limited to alien smuggling. There was no quorum to vote on these, however, and they were set aside.
Part way through the markup, Specter attempted to jump to a debate on the issue of the undocumented population, noting that he has reiterated to Senate Majority Leader Frist that he (Specter) opposes bringing immigration reform to the Senate Floor before the Senate Judiciary Committee had completed its consideration of the Chairman�s Mark. Biden and Kennedy voiced their support of Specter�s desire to complete work in Committee. Kennedy added, �this issue is NOT going away, like some other issues,� and urged deferral of the Title VI discussion until tomorrow (Title VI contains the provisions dealing with the undocumented population). He added that we need to deal with ALL aspects of reform to have real, lasting border security�going forward with any of these components alone will fail.
Durbin said that, to defeat the House bill (H.R. 4437), the Committee needs to pass a strong bipartisan bill with the support of about 12 members. He feels the Committee should do an extra markup session on a day when there is no other Senate business. �We need to watch the House,� noted Durbin, adding: �They have a bill we need to fight at all costs. We need bipartisan support out of this Committee.�
Brownback stated that the Committee has started a process to create broad bipartisan support for good policy, and that this is the most significant legislation of the year. �We have serious problems with immigrant numbers,� he said. �We can�t live with these and need to change them. McCain/Kennedy would deal with this. How do we get the Mark to deal with these numbers? We need a way NOT to end up here again after 10 years. We can�t move too quickly.�
Cornyn described the process as akin to �digging out of a big hole,� noting that with enforcement done first, other issues would get simpler. He believes we need to impose circularity---not permanent immigration.
Coburn said that, like it or not, we have to deal with issue of the undocumented population. He urged the Committee to split the bill in two and do enforcement first, and work to reach consensus on other parts later in the year. �No one in the country trusts us on this issue because we haven�t enforced our existing laws,� he said.
Feinstein stated her concerns about the process, and also spoke out against comprehensive immigration reform and in favor of her more limited agricultural pilot program idea. She said she had met with Senator Craig (the sponsor of AgJobs) yesterday to see if they could work out their differences but there has been no resolution yet. She also expressed much frustration with Frist�s artificial timeline. She indicated her opposition to the House bill, and said that consensus was needed in the Committee (she believes the Committee has come to some consensus on the enforcement pieces but little else). She urged Specter to go back to Frist and ask for more time.
Sessions said we need to focus on enforcement now, and then have a national discussion later on the other elements of immigration reform. He believes Congress needs to focus on enforcement to build credibility with the public. �I�m not prepared to repeat 1986,� he said. �We should slow down.�
Specter repeatedly voiced his concern about �line-jumping,� arguing that the McCain/Kennedy bill would �leap frog� the current undocumented population over individuals who have been waiting in the backlogs. He also said that he�d prefer it if the legislation contained a path to citizenship but, as Chair, was trying to balance both sides.
In other hurdles to the Judiciary Committee�s completion of work on the bill, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Grassley, who is also a member of the Judiciary Committee, argued that the Finance Committee should have jurisdiction over the provisions of the Mark relating to the Social Security Act, adding that the IRS has raised serious concerns about some of these amendments. However, several other senators argued for consideration of these provisions in the Judiciary Committee. It is also possible that Grassley could exercise the Finance Committee�s authority by managing those amendments during floor debate.
The Committee disbanded about noon, due to a number of votes on the Senate Floor and the attendant low probability of maintaining a voting quorum in the Committee.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18835
more...
GCard_Dream
01-03 03:47 PM
May be we need to start a immigrationvoice.org in India as well to address these issues. :D
Seriously, I had never thought about these things, specially when you have a citizenship. There may be such a few number of people going back after getting US citizenship that it's probably not even considered an issue but worth a discussion.
As days go by, it is becoming more clear everyday that I will also return back one day, sooner rather than later. I have some questions that haunt me:
- if/when I get my GC, and if I return back, is there a way to hold on to the GC status?
- if someone has a US citizenship, when companies such as Infosys hire them, do they have to get a work visa or something? Is there a concept equivalent of H1/GC for non Indians yet?
Seriously, I had never thought about these things, specially when you have a citizenship. There may be such a few number of people going back after getting US citizenship that it's probably not even considered an issue but worth a discussion.
As days go by, it is becoming more clear everyday that I will also return back one day, sooner rather than later. I have some questions that haunt me:
- if/when I get my GC, and if I return back, is there a way to hold on to the GC status?
- if someone has a US citizenship, when companies such as Infosys hire them, do they have to get a work visa or something? Is there a concept equivalent of H1/GC for non Indians yet?
Kodi
06-04 02:03 PM
Even under PERM, Atlanta office is backed up. They're still evaluating February applicants its not moving at all. I know its not bad compared to BEC but for some its still bad.
more...
sweet23guyin
11-29 11:47 PM
Myself (primary applicant) and my spouse are on h1 with EADs. If spouse starts a company(issue checks and do all admin work) and still maintain her h1 with old employer, will it invalidate her h1 just because she used EAD? Reason for asking is if some thing goes wrong with 485, can she fall back on h1?
2010 2011 eautiful quotes on smile
Libra
07-06 01:26 PM
rumor always starts at one place may be it started right here in this thread
I never saw this roumer any where..
I never saw this roumer any where..
more...
rb_248
06-10 08:13 AM
Atleast EB2 is not moving back. I hope EB2 moves forward begining this October.
EB3 guys - Hope it dosen't nove back from where it was last month come October for you all.
EB3 guys - Hope it dosen't nove back from where it was last month come October for you all.
hair quotes on smile and laughter
srikondoji
08-02 04:06 PM
Thats a mess forced onto themselves. However, iam feeling happy and lucky about it. The hardships of USCIS employees started off from mid june and will never end just because of mess & mass miss-communication between the agencies.
Since I was bored at work, I called this number and talked with a rep this morning @10. She told me that they have 76K applications pending for the receipt date as of July 27th. She said this two times thinking me to take on with surprise with this huge number. Yes, of course I am surprised. Is it only 76K apps by July 27th?
Since I was bored at work, I called this number and talked with a rep this morning @10. She told me that they have 76K applications pending for the receipt date as of July 27th. She said this two times thinking me to take on with surprise with this huge number. Yes, of course I am surprised. Is it only 76K apps by July 27th?
more...
trueguy
08-04 04:45 PM
How about if we frame a well thought out letter..and present facts and start mass mailing - maybe once a month - every month. That we they will hear from us every month - in bulk.
How about if we dont use words like bonded etc and just repeatedly request the system to be repaired. Use of words like bonded etc can send a wrong signal.
We can also add our stories in there to give that emotional/human touch - eg. I can say that I have been in this country since 1999 and still waiting. If I look at my W-2s from 2001 (when I started working), I must have consistently paid about 10k in taxes to the Federal Govt and another 3k to the State every year. that makes my tax contribution to about 90k-100k in 8years..I think thats huge and I am still waiting, for being a tax paying and law abiding citizen just because the Immigration system is broken. I am a recruiter and I recruit US Citizens in large numbers for large govt projects, offering them really high salaries - while I am helping them "indirectly" realize their American Dream - my dreams are nowhere in the horizon. My wife works in the Child Welfare System and she helps broken families get back on their feet - while she is putting together their broken families - our family is still stranded in the system with no sign of moving forward.
Just a passing thought! I thought I should run this by you all. Thanks for reading.
yes, we need a more refined and professional letter that has a better impression and give us some results. Any help from IV?
Thanks.
How about if we dont use words like bonded etc and just repeatedly request the system to be repaired. Use of words like bonded etc can send a wrong signal.
We can also add our stories in there to give that emotional/human touch - eg. I can say that I have been in this country since 1999 and still waiting. If I look at my W-2s from 2001 (when I started working), I must have consistently paid about 10k in taxes to the Federal Govt and another 3k to the State every year. that makes my tax contribution to about 90k-100k in 8years..I think thats huge and I am still waiting, for being a tax paying and law abiding citizen just because the Immigration system is broken. I am a recruiter and I recruit US Citizens in large numbers for large govt projects, offering them really high salaries - while I am helping them "indirectly" realize their American Dream - my dreams are nowhere in the horizon. My wife works in the Child Welfare System and she helps broken families get back on their feet - while she is putting together their broken families - our family is still stranded in the system with no sign of moving forward.
Just a passing thought! I thought I should run this by you all. Thanks for reading.
yes, we need a more refined and professional letter that has a better impression and give us some results. Any help from IV?
Thanks.
hot dresses good quotes on smile.
Mouns
04-30 03:19 PM
Born in China, you can't get a Visa, even if you have a job not fillable by an US guy. And same thing if you are spouse,child you need to wait for years.
Can we estimate what kind of relief would be given in these cases?
Openheim: 225K recaptured GC family and Employment. Would provide some relief, not a lot!. As for family, about 50GC would go the husband and wife. it would be a first step.
Lowsy job and recapturing wouldn't help a lot! needs to explore other possibilities...
Can we estimate what kind of relief would be given in these cases?
Openheim: 225K recaptured GC family and Employment. Would provide some relief, not a lot!. As for family, about 50GC would go the husband and wife. it would be a first step.
Lowsy job and recapturing wouldn't help a lot! needs to explore other possibilities...
more...
house small quotes on smile. Good Quotes On Smile. quotes about jesus christ.
amitjoey
06-26 02:50 PM
The bill being discussed in the senate if passed is going to be very detrimental to people that are stuck in the labor backlog centers. They wil be forced to redo their labor with the new point based system. That is not fair at all.
tattoo Lovely Quotes On Smile.
dilbert_cal
06-05 11:04 AM
Guys/Gals - Those of you who are planning to file your 140 and/or 485 and are worried about the future consequences, please stop worrying about the bill and first of all get your 140 and/or 485 filed.
Now, when you are done with it , please help IV to ensure that the current bill has enough amendments to make our future secure.
If you are one of those who can keep working on your 140/485 , worry about the bill and help IV all together in a balanced way, no need to follow the step by step process :-)
Things happen - they can always happen - they can be good - they can be bad - but Life Goes On.... so you do what you need to do for your current processing and whatever plans you have for future but just be aware that things can always change. Say you dont file your 140 assuming the world's gonna end and then before the world ends, 140 premium processing is stopped - ( not that there are any rumours regarding this ).... so get the point - carry on with your processes assuming the best out of this bill and help IV as much as you can.
Now, when you are done with it , please help IV to ensure that the current bill has enough amendments to make our future secure.
If you are one of those who can keep working on your 140/485 , worry about the bill and help IV all together in a balanced way, no need to follow the step by step process :-)
Things happen - they can always happen - they can be good - they can be bad - but Life Goes On.... so you do what you need to do for your current processing and whatever plans you have for future but just be aware that things can always change. Say you dont file your 140 assuming the world's gonna end and then before the world ends, 140 premium processing is stopped - ( not that there are any rumours regarding this ).... so get the point - carry on with your processes assuming the best out of this bill and help IV as much as you can.
more...
pictures quotes on smile with images.
mirage
08-18 11:11 AM
This is what we are sending..
Charles Oppenheim / Visa Section
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
From,
Your Name/Your Address/EB-3 India Applicant
Priority Date: May 2003
Some City,
OK-2#####
Dear Sir/Madam,
Sub: Statistics on Employment Based AOS(Adjustment of Status) applications pending at USCIS under various categories
I am writing to you to express my sense of helplessness over the unpredictability of Visa Number allotment to various employment based category. I want to bring to your attention that it�s been nearly a �Decade� since we saw any meaningful Visa Date movement from year 2001 for EB-3 Green Card applicants from India.
It is important to know that despite of severe visa retrogression and random visa cutoff date movements, USICIS or DOS hasn�t released any official information on how many Adjustment of Status applications are pending at USCIS under various categories which leaves thousands of AOS(Adjustment of Status) applicants in complete darkness and dependent on guessing games by various Law firms.
A green card application requires enormous amount of efforts and money from the beneficiary and his/her employer. People who are waiting for 7-8 years now would have had already spent average $15,000-$20,000, in maintaining their statuses and keep the Green Card process going on. Being stuck in a green card process keeps us bonded with 1 employer, job type etc.
We need to know if there is any light at the end of the tunnel. We need to know for how long we have to live our life in limbo. If there is hope than we need to be patient and plan to live like that for another 1-2 years. But if there�s no light at the end of the tunnel than we need to move on with our careers and other family commitments. Only your office and USCIS can help us by releasing statistics on the number and categories of applications pending with USCIS people waiting in this category can plan their lives accordingly.
It will be a great help if DOS or USCIS could tell us about the number of AOS application pending at USCIS along with their Categories(EB-3, EB-2, EB-1) and chargeable country.
We have been waiting for a decade and continue to wait would it be reasonable to request you for some guidance with regards to the Visa allotment. I request your office to provide some statistics on home many Adjustment of Status applications are pending at USCIS.
We understand that you work with in the limits of the law as set by the Congress and are limited by various constraints that are beyond your agency realm of work. We appreciate your hard work and sincerely thank you for all the hard work.
God Bless America!
Thank you for you attention,
(Your Name OR EB-3 India Applicant )
Priority Date: April 02
Category: EB-3
Member ImmigrationVoice.Org
Copy Sent to
Honorable Secretary of State
Dr. Condoleezza Rice
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
Honorable Director, USCIS
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20529
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
Department of Homeland Security
Attention: Case Problems
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Senator John Cornyn
Chairman - United States Senate Judiciary subCommittee on
Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship
517 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Main: 202-224-2934
Fax: 202-228-2856
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman - United States House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security, and International Law
102 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Telephone (202) 225-3072
I also wanted to send the letter, but saw a ton of comments on the original letter. It would be a good idea, if some one goes thru the comments and update the letter in the original post. I think we should all send a decent letter.
Charles Oppenheim / Visa Section
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
From,
Your Name/Your Address/EB-3 India Applicant
Priority Date: May 2003
Some City,
OK-2#####
Dear Sir/Madam,
Sub: Statistics on Employment Based AOS(Adjustment of Status) applications pending at USCIS under various categories
I am writing to you to express my sense of helplessness over the unpredictability of Visa Number allotment to various employment based category. I want to bring to your attention that it�s been nearly a �Decade� since we saw any meaningful Visa Date movement from year 2001 for EB-3 Green Card applicants from India.
It is important to know that despite of severe visa retrogression and random visa cutoff date movements, USICIS or DOS hasn�t released any official information on how many Adjustment of Status applications are pending at USCIS under various categories which leaves thousands of AOS(Adjustment of Status) applicants in complete darkness and dependent on guessing games by various Law firms.
A green card application requires enormous amount of efforts and money from the beneficiary and his/her employer. People who are waiting for 7-8 years now would have had already spent average $15,000-$20,000, in maintaining their statuses and keep the Green Card process going on. Being stuck in a green card process keeps us bonded with 1 employer, job type etc.
We need to know if there is any light at the end of the tunnel. We need to know for how long we have to live our life in limbo. If there is hope than we need to be patient and plan to live like that for another 1-2 years. But if there�s no light at the end of the tunnel than we need to move on with our careers and other family commitments. Only your office and USCIS can help us by releasing statistics on the number and categories of applications pending with USCIS people waiting in this category can plan their lives accordingly.
It will be a great help if DOS or USCIS could tell us about the number of AOS application pending at USCIS along with their Categories(EB-3, EB-2, EB-1) and chargeable country.
We have been waiting for a decade and continue to wait would it be reasonable to request you for some guidance with regards to the Visa allotment. I request your office to provide some statistics on home many Adjustment of Status applications are pending at USCIS.
We understand that you work with in the limits of the law as set by the Congress and are limited by various constraints that are beyond your agency realm of work. We appreciate your hard work and sincerely thank you for all the hard work.
God Bless America!
Thank you for you attention,
(Your Name OR EB-3 India Applicant )
Priority Date: April 02
Category: EB-3
Member ImmigrationVoice.Org
Copy Sent to
Honorable Secretary of State
Dr. Condoleezza Rice
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
Honorable Director, USCIS
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20529
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
Department of Homeland Security
Attention: Case Problems
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Senator John Cornyn
Chairman - United States Senate Judiciary subCommittee on
Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship
517 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Main: 202-224-2934
Fax: 202-228-2856
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman - United States House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security, and International Law
102 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Telephone (202) 225-3072
I also wanted to send the letter, but saw a ton of comments on the original letter. It would be a good idea, if some one goes thru the comments and update the letter in the original post. I think we should all send a decent letter.
dresses quotes on smile images.
PD_Dec2002
03-17 08:51 PM
Looks like IRS is not going to give us back 1200$ as part of the stimulus package,which they were planning to earlier.
Source > http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=179211,00.html
Basic Information on the Stimulus Payments
Updated March 14, 2008 — new 1040A-3 package
You've heard about it. Now find out how to get yours.
What is it? It's an economic stimulus payment that more than 130 million households will receive starting in May. It's not taxable, and it won't reduce your 2007 or 2008 refund or increase the amount you owe when you file your 2008 return.
Are you eligible? You're eligible if you have a valid Social Security Number (SSN) and show qualifying income of at least $3,000 on your federal tax return. Both people listed on a "married filing jointly" return must have valid SSNs to qualify for the payment — if only one has a valid SSN, neither can receive the payment.
Can you use an ITIN instead of an SSN? Taxpayers with an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) instead of an SSN are not eligible to receive a stimulus payment. Both people listed on a "married filing jointly" return must have valid SSNs to qualify for the payment — if only one has a valid SSN, neither can receive the payment.
Not eligible at the current time? If your circumstances change and you become eligible after you file your 2007 federal tax return, you can always file an amended return using Form 1040X. If you're not eligible this year but you become eligible next year, you can claim the economic stimulus payment next year on your 2008 tax return.
A very cheap attempt at sensationalism, if that's what your intention was. But if you really are clueless about this issue, then here are the facts:
There are several thousands of H-1Bs and GC aspirants who have SSNs for themselves and their spouses. This stimulus package will give rebates to these thousands so long as their AGI allows for it. Also, all H-1Bs are eligible for their rebate since they would have SSNs. It is only when their non-working spouse (H-4) does not have a SSN that the H-1B holder becomes ineligible.
Thus, the title of your thread is misleading. Change the title to "No Stimulus Package to H-1Bs whose spouses do not have SSNs". And again, this is not targetting H-1Bs or GC aspirants. Any US resident without a SSN is ineligible for the stimulus package.
Regards,
Jayant
Source > http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=179211,00.html
Basic Information on the Stimulus Payments
Updated March 14, 2008 — new 1040A-3 package
You've heard about it. Now find out how to get yours.
What is it? It's an economic stimulus payment that more than 130 million households will receive starting in May. It's not taxable, and it won't reduce your 2007 or 2008 refund or increase the amount you owe when you file your 2008 return.
Are you eligible? You're eligible if you have a valid Social Security Number (SSN) and show qualifying income of at least $3,000 on your federal tax return. Both people listed on a "married filing jointly" return must have valid SSNs to qualify for the payment — if only one has a valid SSN, neither can receive the payment.
Can you use an ITIN instead of an SSN? Taxpayers with an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) instead of an SSN are not eligible to receive a stimulus payment. Both people listed on a "married filing jointly" return must have valid SSNs to qualify for the payment — if only one has a valid SSN, neither can receive the payment.
Not eligible at the current time? If your circumstances change and you become eligible after you file your 2007 federal tax return, you can always file an amended return using Form 1040X. If you're not eligible this year but you become eligible next year, you can claim the economic stimulus payment next year on your 2008 tax return.
A very cheap attempt at sensationalism, if that's what your intention was. But if you really are clueless about this issue, then here are the facts:
There are several thousands of H-1Bs and GC aspirants who have SSNs for themselves and their spouses. This stimulus package will give rebates to these thousands so long as their AGI allows for it. Also, all H-1Bs are eligible for their rebate since they would have SSNs. It is only when their non-working spouse (H-4) does not have a SSN that the H-1B holder becomes ineligible.
Thus, the title of your thread is misleading. Change the title to "No Stimulus Package to H-1Bs whose spouses do not have SSNs". And again, this is not targetting H-1Bs or GC aspirants. Any US resident without a SSN is ineligible for the stimulus package.
Regards,
Jayant
more...
makeup love quotes and sayings with; lovely quotes on smile. lovely quotes on smile
indio0617
03-09 11:30 AM
Guys:
I think they have closed for today. Will meet again, next Wednesday, Thursday ( as per Sen Specter) to discuss more amendments....
I think they have closed for today. Will meet again, next Wednesday, Thursday ( as per Sen Specter) to discuss more amendments....
girlfriend quotes about smile
eb3retro
07-11 11:53 AM
this is surprising. really the dates should move- at least some. i keep thinking with each bulletin that EB3 will surely move now but it just has not happened. at this moment of course they have simply made it U. i wonder though if the dates will move when the october quota comes in.
is there any way, any way in this whole freakin process, that we can get some sort of explanation for eb3-I first hand from DOS or USCIS? i mean there needs to be some justification for the acts? i know there are laws to interpret these dates, but how do we know that those laws are interpreted correctly by DOS or USCIS? though i am in eb3-I , jan 2003, i personally know atleast 3 folks who are in 2002 - eb3-I. Can we get some sort of guidance here.
is there any way, any way in this whole freakin process, that we can get some sort of explanation for eb3-I first hand from DOS or USCIS? i mean there needs to be some justification for the acts? i know there are laws to interpret these dates, but how do we know that those laws are interpreted correctly by DOS or USCIS? though i am in eb3-I , jan 2003, i personally know atleast 3 folks who are in 2002 - eb3-I. Can we get some sort of guidance here.
hairstyles quotes on smile
alok_msh
07-14 02:39 PM
Sent 25$ Conf: 7YB5G-450FX
hpandey
06-12 04:23 PM
IV friends ,
Last week my lawyer has asked for copy of Driving License of me and my wife for filing the H1-B and H4 extension.
Then one of my friend told me that INS is asking for copy of the driving license for filing the h1-B extension.
My employer is supposed to file my 3 year Extension based on I-140 in Dec this year( Dec 2007) but my Licences expires on Sept 2008, So I will I be just getting the extension till Sept 2008 and Not 3 year extension.
Any Idea on that
I have already submitted my driving license to my lawyer.
Please Let me know because I was couting on that I will get 3 year extension this time :(
What if someone doesn't drive at all !! Does that mean they won't get an H1b visa or extension. It is simply not true I think.
Last week my lawyer has asked for copy of Driving License of me and my wife for filing the H1-B and H4 extension.
Then one of my friend told me that INS is asking for copy of the driving license for filing the h1-B extension.
My employer is supposed to file my 3 year Extension based on I-140 in Dec this year( Dec 2007) but my Licences expires on Sept 2008, So I will I be just getting the extension till Sept 2008 and Not 3 year extension.
Any Idea on that
I have already submitted my driving license to my lawyer.
Please Let me know because I was couting on that I will get 3 year extension this time :(
What if someone doesn't drive at all !! Does that mean they won't get an H1b visa or extension. It is simply not true I think.
desi485
11-20 04:47 PM
Which means that EAD is much safer than H1b. Then why are Attorneys insisting on the opposite (H1b against EAD?)
If this is confirmed news, i will revisit my blog and make changes
If you really think then there is a 'conflict of interest' between an applicant and an attorney. If you looks at this way, attorneys do get paid for filling of H1B extensions. isn't it? I do not say that attorneys are bad and do this on purpose, but think about all possibilities. It really depends on individual. Thoughts? :(
If this is confirmed news, i will revisit my blog and make changes
If you really think then there is a 'conflict of interest' between an applicant and an attorney. If you looks at this way, attorneys do get paid for filling of H1B extensions. isn't it? I do not say that attorneys are bad and do this on purpose, but think about all possibilities. It really depends on individual. Thoughts? :(
No comments:
Post a Comment