pappu
04-30 12:17 PM
I was also taken aback initially when I read this. The 8 year wait doesnt apply to title 5. Title 5 already is designed to clear the backlog of EB immigration from 6 years to 0/at best minimum since quota is increased and there are exemptions. The 8 year backlog refers to family based.
wallpaper elusive Alyson Hannigan!
ufo2002
08-18 01:12 PM
Just wondering if anybody ever complains of I140 being slow? :p
amalshe
12-09 06:13 PM
PhD in Business from an accredited US institution; currently working as Asst Prof.
2011 Alyson Hannigan will admit it:
dontcareanymore
04-02 01:37 PM
Just so all can understand :
Did you go for visa stamping while your current visa was valid and you came back to US with old (but valid) stamp while they are processing your request because they wanted more info?
Did you go for visa stamping while your current visa was valid and you came back to US with old (but valid) stamp while they are processing your request because they wanted more info?
more...
quizzer
11-16 01:03 PM
Hi Raj
If ur case is pending more than 30days from the processing time shown on there website ur lawyer or employer can open a service request(SR).they will send u the decision usually within30days from the date of SR.
Quizzer rd is dec2006 EB2. But there site shows they r processing feb2007 case so after 30 days his lawyer opened a SR and got response that what he meant.
Sunny is right.
The approval came after 27 days of opening the SR.
If ur case is pending more than 30days from the processing time shown on there website ur lawyer or employer can open a service request(SR).they will send u the decision usually within30days from the date of SR.
Quizzer rd is dec2006 EB2. But there site shows they r processing feb2007 case so after 30 days his lawyer opened a SR and got response that what he meant.
Sunny is right.
The approval came after 27 days of opening the SR.
EndlessWait
05-21 01:35 PM
cmon anyone?? should IV contact Indian govt. Its now or never guys
more...
gcformeornot
02-03 02:14 PM
AILA/CBP Liaison Practice Alert : H-1B Admissions at Newark, NJ Airport
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10020237 (posted Feb. 2, 2010)"
AILA CBP Liaison Committee Practice Alert
H-1B Admissions � Newark, New Jersey Airport
(2/2/2010)
The AILA U.S. Customs and Border Protection (�CBP�) Liaison Committee received reports from AILA members that CBP inspectors at the Newark, New Jersey airport port of entry were apparently assisting in an investigation involving certain H-1B nonimmigrants from India and certain H-1B petitioner companies. The inspectors� questions focused on who the individuals worked for, how their pay was computed, who paid their salary, their job duties, and what they were paid. In some cases, the individuals were subjected to expedited removal and visa cancellation.
After inquiring with CBP headquarters (�HQ�) about these incidents, the CBP Liaison Committee was advised by HQ that several of these cases involved companies under investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (�ICE�) and/or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (�USCIS�) for ongoing fraud. CBP HQ noted that they use as much advance information as possible to target specific individuals who warrant additional inspection. HQ also noted that recent enforcement cases reviewed ranged from simple documentary deficiency to visa/petition fraud. Upon an inadmissibility finding, the determination to either allow the applicant to withdraw his or her application for admission or to subject the applicant to expedited removal is based on �the totality of the circumstances and reviewed on a case by case basis.� In the Newark enforcement actions, CBP Newark worked closely with USCIS � Fraud Detection and National Security (�FDNS�) and the Department of Labor � Office of Investigations. CBP HQ stated that those questioned were offered the opportunity to contact their consulate and that CBP officers contacted the petitioner and/or current employer when clarification was needed. CBP HQ confirmed that they screen ALL employment-based visa holders to determine admissibility and ensure compliance with entry requirements.
In addition, on January 27, AILA members attending a CBP meeting in the Newark, New Jersey area were informed that a new policy has been instituted at Newark Airport. This policy involves conducting random checks for returning H-1B, L-1, and other employment-based visa holders. Based upon the initial check, if the person�s admissibility is questionable, then he or she will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview. In some cases, if CBP discovers discrepancies in previously filed petitions, then the applicant may be asked to withdraw his/her application for admission into the United States or be subject to expedited removal.
During that same local CBP meeting, attendees were advised that if CBP discovers that a returning Lawful Permanent Resident has a post-1998 conviction, the Lawful Permanent Resident may be detained. The Newark airport port of entry has adopted a mandatory detention policy for crimes that were committed after 1998. In the event that CBP cannot get a copy of the conviction record in twenty-four hours, the person may be released. The only exceptions are that CBP will release a Lawful Permanent Resident for humanitarian reasons; extenuating circumstances such as if the foreign national is traveling with children and there is no one to pick up the children; or when the person is a sole provider for United States Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident children. Please refer to the CBP Committee advisory as to the detention of returning Lawful Permanent Residents. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09100122).
Individuals with pending I-751 petitions returning to the United States via the Newark airport port of entry, who have a I-751 filing receipt documenting that an I-751 has been properly filed or an ADIT Legal Permanent Resident stamp, will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview to verify the validity of the I-751 Petition. It is unclear if CBP will undertake a substantive review of the I-751 Petition.
In all cases, attorneys should remind their clients to thoroughly prepare for their trip to the United States and their inspection upon application for admission by reviewing all pertinent documents to their petition and to consider carrying evidence to support the assertions made in the petition filed on their behalf by their employer. Similarly, employers must be prepared for telephone inquiries from CBP officers at ports of entry to confirm the assertions made in any nonimmigrant petition and supporting documentation. Finally, employers must be advised that the government may review information in any public venues such as websites and other media for consistency with petition content. Thus, keeping such public information accurate and current is essential.
Note the new fraud related language added to I-797 approval notices �
NOTICE: Although this application/petition has been approved, DHS reserves the right to verify the information submitted in this application, petition, and/or supporting documentation to ensure conformity with applicable laws, rules, regulations, and other authorities. Methods used for verifying information may include, but are not limited to, the review of public information and records, contact by correspondence, the Internet, or telephone, and site inspections of businesses and residences. Information obtained during the course of verification will be used to determine whether revocation, rescission, and/or removal proceedings are appropriate. Applicants, petitioners, and representatives of record will be provided an opportunity to address derogatory information before any formal proceeding is initiated.
Please do not forget to contact the CBP port director to follow up on case problems at a particular port. In addition, as needed, file complaints through the CBP complaint process referenced on InfoNet. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09090364).
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10020237 (posted Feb. 2, 2010)"
AILA CBP Liaison Committee Practice Alert
H-1B Admissions � Newark, New Jersey Airport
(2/2/2010)
The AILA U.S. Customs and Border Protection (�CBP�) Liaison Committee received reports from AILA members that CBP inspectors at the Newark, New Jersey airport port of entry were apparently assisting in an investigation involving certain H-1B nonimmigrants from India and certain H-1B petitioner companies. The inspectors� questions focused on who the individuals worked for, how their pay was computed, who paid their salary, their job duties, and what they were paid. In some cases, the individuals were subjected to expedited removal and visa cancellation.
After inquiring with CBP headquarters (�HQ�) about these incidents, the CBP Liaison Committee was advised by HQ that several of these cases involved companies under investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (�ICE�) and/or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (�USCIS�) for ongoing fraud. CBP HQ noted that they use as much advance information as possible to target specific individuals who warrant additional inspection. HQ also noted that recent enforcement cases reviewed ranged from simple documentary deficiency to visa/petition fraud. Upon an inadmissibility finding, the determination to either allow the applicant to withdraw his or her application for admission or to subject the applicant to expedited removal is based on �the totality of the circumstances and reviewed on a case by case basis.� In the Newark enforcement actions, CBP Newark worked closely with USCIS � Fraud Detection and National Security (�FDNS�) and the Department of Labor � Office of Investigations. CBP HQ stated that those questioned were offered the opportunity to contact their consulate and that CBP officers contacted the petitioner and/or current employer when clarification was needed. CBP HQ confirmed that they screen ALL employment-based visa holders to determine admissibility and ensure compliance with entry requirements.
In addition, on January 27, AILA members attending a CBP meeting in the Newark, New Jersey area were informed that a new policy has been instituted at Newark Airport. This policy involves conducting random checks for returning H-1B, L-1, and other employment-based visa holders. Based upon the initial check, if the person�s admissibility is questionable, then he or she will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview. In some cases, if CBP discovers discrepancies in previously filed petitions, then the applicant may be asked to withdraw his/her application for admission into the United States or be subject to expedited removal.
During that same local CBP meeting, attendees were advised that if CBP discovers that a returning Lawful Permanent Resident has a post-1998 conviction, the Lawful Permanent Resident may be detained. The Newark airport port of entry has adopted a mandatory detention policy for crimes that were committed after 1998. In the event that CBP cannot get a copy of the conviction record in twenty-four hours, the person may be released. The only exceptions are that CBP will release a Lawful Permanent Resident for humanitarian reasons; extenuating circumstances such as if the foreign national is traveling with children and there is no one to pick up the children; or when the person is a sole provider for United States Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident children. Please refer to the CBP Committee advisory as to the detention of returning Lawful Permanent Residents. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09100122).
Individuals with pending I-751 petitions returning to the United States via the Newark airport port of entry, who have a I-751 filing receipt documenting that an I-751 has been properly filed or an ADIT Legal Permanent Resident stamp, will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview to verify the validity of the I-751 Petition. It is unclear if CBP will undertake a substantive review of the I-751 Petition.
In all cases, attorneys should remind their clients to thoroughly prepare for their trip to the United States and their inspection upon application for admission by reviewing all pertinent documents to their petition and to consider carrying evidence to support the assertions made in the petition filed on their behalf by their employer. Similarly, employers must be prepared for telephone inquiries from CBP officers at ports of entry to confirm the assertions made in any nonimmigrant petition and supporting documentation. Finally, employers must be advised that the government may review information in any public venues such as websites and other media for consistency with petition content. Thus, keeping such public information accurate and current is essential.
Note the new fraud related language added to I-797 approval notices �
NOTICE: Although this application/petition has been approved, DHS reserves the right to verify the information submitted in this application, petition, and/or supporting documentation to ensure conformity with applicable laws, rules, regulations, and other authorities. Methods used for verifying information may include, but are not limited to, the review of public information and records, contact by correspondence, the Internet, or telephone, and site inspections of businesses and residences. Information obtained during the course of verification will be used to determine whether revocation, rescission, and/or removal proceedings are appropriate. Applicants, petitioners, and representatives of record will be provided an opportunity to address derogatory information before any formal proceeding is initiated.
Please do not forget to contact the CBP port director to follow up on case problems at a particular port. In addition, as needed, file complaints through the CBP complaint process referenced on InfoNet. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09090364).
2010 This moves me on to my next
kaylamarie
01-28 12:12 PM
Can any one please reply... 70 views and no replies
more...
lazycis
01-24 12:38 PM
I do not think there will be any issues. It's cheaper for the company to apply for EAD renewal than for H1B extension, though...
hair who is alyson hannigan married
kshitijnt
06-21 12:24 PM
I came back to US on Mar 30 2008 using advance parole. The officer wrote on I-94 , paroled until Mar 29, 2008 (I am assuming its an oversight).
I didnt detect the oversight till yesterday. What my current status and what actions should I take to rectify the error.
I am still working for my employer that sponsored the H1B which is valid till Feb 2009, although the stamp on the passport was valid only till Feb 2008
Thanks
Immediately contact your lawyer and get it rectified through USCIS
I didnt detect the oversight till yesterday. What my current status and what actions should I take to rectify the error.
I am still working for my employer that sponsored the H1B which is valid till Feb 2009, although the stamp on the passport was valid only till Feb 2008
Thanks
Immediately contact your lawyer and get it rectified through USCIS
more...
rorypirrie
02-24 10:24 AM
Now that you have all your documentation, the biggest hurdle would appear to be that you didn't mention the DUI earlier. I would possibly go ahead and contact an immigration lawyer but i'm sure this is an issue which can be resolved without affecting your application.
hot Alyson Hannigan#39;s married
indio0617
01-12 02:31 PM
I can understand your concerns. A few years back we had similar questions and concerns when my MIL travelled. She was old and had never travelled alone before. Could not speak any english either. We thought it was best for her to travel with wheelchair assistance and it worked good. She has travelled twice ( on lufthansa) with no issues.
One thing we did to help her was give a covering letter that she could present to the airline staff which would explain her needs if any while travelling. We also prepared and gave her several flash cards (one liners) written in both the local Indian language alongwith the English translation for her to communicate if she needs anything on the flight.
Non -verbal communication works well sometimes. It worked for us.
One thing we did to help her was give a covering letter that she could present to the airline staff which would explain her needs if any while travelling. We also prepared and gave her several flash cards (one liners) written in both the local Indian language alongwith the English translation for her to communicate if she needs anything on the flight.
Non -verbal communication works well sometimes. It worked for us.
more...
house hannigan were married
axp817
06-15 01:10 PM
I see no risk in this, unless he is also on an H-1B visa. The H-1B requires him to always be employed, and being on the bench (not getting paid) would be a violation of those terms.
But if he is using his EAD to work and is in a period of authorized stay (pending AOS), travelling with the AP is not an issue at all, as long as he always has a future job offer (in good faith) in hand.
Confirm this with your attorney (I assume you use one to file/extend your EAD/APs)
But if he is using his EAD to work and is in a period of authorized stay (pending AOS), travelling with the AP is not an issue at all, as long as he always has a future job offer (in good faith) in hand.
Confirm this with your attorney (I assume you use one to file/extend your EAD/APs)
tattoo Hannigan and Denisof met on
gcdreamer05
10-22 06:59 PM
I think this is what is happening in your cases,
If you efile for your AP and If your last fingerprinting was done 18 months before Then you will get Fingerprinting notice and you got to go n give new finger prints.
If you paper file, Whether or not your FP expired (18 months) you will never get finger printing notice. (unless your PD is current and they are adjudicating your case and sending a RFE).
Always better to paper file.
If you efile for your AP and If your last fingerprinting was done 18 months before Then you will get Fingerprinting notice and you got to go n give new finger prints.
If you paper file, Whether or not your FP expired (18 months) you will never get finger printing notice. (unless your PD is current and they are adjudicating your case and sending a RFE).
Always better to paper file.
more...
pictures Alyson and Alexis were married
dallasdude
05-08 02:20 PM
It's well worth the risk now that EB2 is back to 2000. But talk to your attorney and see what he thinks is best for you and your family. I would go ahead and file for EB1 if I were you.
dresses Married to photoshoot film
GC_Govinda
10-15 09:56 AM
Hello Gurus,
I am EB3 India with PD September 2002.
After all these years of endless waiting I am called for
an interview at the local office in Philadelphia
in Nov 26th 2007.
Here are my details:
Labour Applied: September 2002
Labour approved: September 2003
I-140/I-485 Applied: April 2004
I-140 Pproved: August 2004
Got married: August 2005
Applied I-485 for Wife: June 2007
Current Status of Wife: H1-B
Countelss EADs and APs for me and a recent EAD approval
for my wife with her AP still pending and status is still H1-B.
In the beginning of this year, I resigned from the
company who was the original sponsorer of my GC.
I then started contracting on hourly basis and worked for
a decent hourly rate for the first half of this year.
Finally I got a full time offer with decent salary and
benefits and took the job. I started working for this
job - remotely and also took up another contracting job
on an hourly basis (Got greedy as I waited too long :-))
and started working on both these jobs.
The point is - it is a different technology and not even
remotely connected to my original job where my Labour
cert was applied and approved. I was a developer
back then and with all the experience, I couldn't
continue as the pay was too low and no growth at all.
I can have a letter of future employment that
states that I have on offer in the same technology
in which my original labour was applied and approved
and that is not a problem at all.
Please advise me on how to go about it. I can
afford to pay and take the best attorney with me
to the interview - some one who is very well known in
the Philadelphia area.
Any inputs/advise are really appreciated.
IMP: Icing on the cake - my PD was mentioned wrong in
the interview notice - it says april 2004 !!
That was when my i-140 was applied and not labour.
My labour was applied in September 2002 !!!
Advise on this is also appreciated.
Thanks a lot.
I am EB3 India with PD September 2002.
After all these years of endless waiting I am called for
an interview at the local office in Philadelphia
in Nov 26th 2007.
Here are my details:
Labour Applied: September 2002
Labour approved: September 2003
I-140/I-485 Applied: April 2004
I-140 Pproved: August 2004
Got married: August 2005
Applied I-485 for Wife: June 2007
Current Status of Wife: H1-B
Countelss EADs and APs for me and a recent EAD approval
for my wife with her AP still pending and status is still H1-B.
In the beginning of this year, I resigned from the
company who was the original sponsorer of my GC.
I then started contracting on hourly basis and worked for
a decent hourly rate for the first half of this year.
Finally I got a full time offer with decent salary and
benefits and took the job. I started working for this
job - remotely and also took up another contracting job
on an hourly basis (Got greedy as I waited too long :-))
and started working on both these jobs.
The point is - it is a different technology and not even
remotely connected to my original job where my Labour
cert was applied and approved. I was a developer
back then and with all the experience, I couldn't
continue as the pay was too low and no growth at all.
I can have a letter of future employment that
states that I have on offer in the same technology
in which my original labour was applied and approved
and that is not a problem at all.
Please advise me on how to go about it. I can
afford to pay and take the best attorney with me
to the interview - some one who is very well known in
the Philadelphia area.
Any inputs/advise are really appreciated.
IMP: Icing on the cake - my PD was mentioned wrong in
the interview notice - it says april 2004 !!
That was when my i-140 was applied and not labour.
My labour was applied in September 2002 !!!
Advise on this is also appreciated.
Thanks a lot.
more...
makeup Hot Couple #71: Alyson
gondalguru
09-02 07:31 PM
I got 2 red dots for this .....Crazy people
I will give you one green to compensate.
I will give you one green to compensate.
girlfriend Alexis Denisof in Alyson
cr52401
04-23 08:57 PM
Guys, today I got our permanent residence visa from Canadian consular in LA that I almost had applied three years ago.
The visa is valid until June 9, 2007 and I really can not get my job done here in US until then. It is just too close. Even kinds will be in school by then.
Any one knows that if I can apply for an extension or not? I really don�t want to let it go since we spent so much money for it.
Any help is appreciated.
Thank you.
The visa is valid until June 9, 2007 and I really can not get my job done here in US until then. It is just too close. Even kinds will be in school by then.
Any one knows that if I can apply for an extension or not? I really don�t want to let it go since we spent so much money for it.
Any help is appreciated.
Thank you.
hairstyles Alyson Hannigan
aadimanav
12-10 04:28 PM
Hi Everyone,
Here is the scenario:
Category: EB3-INDIA
PD: APRIL 2004:
140: Approved.
485 filed on July 2nd, 2007 (of course, still pending)
Changed Employer after invoking AC21 (without sending any documentation to USCIS)
There is possibility that my new employer (where I am working on EAD) may get ready to file gc for me in EB2.
Now, here are my question:
1) Since my EB3 485 is pending, is it possible for another employer to file under EB2? Is this the process which is called Inter-filing? Has anyone done that?
2) At what stage previous EB3 PD can be used ? At the time of 140 filing, 140 approval or new 485 filing?
3) What if new EB2 I40 gets rejected? Does it have any impact on old EB3 approved 140 and pending 485?
4) Does the scenario look too risky?
5) Any one in the same boat?
Thanks in advance.
Here is the scenario:
Category: EB3-INDIA
PD: APRIL 2004:
140: Approved.
485 filed on July 2nd, 2007 (of course, still pending)
Changed Employer after invoking AC21 (without sending any documentation to USCIS)
There is possibility that my new employer (where I am working on EAD) may get ready to file gc for me in EB2.
Now, here are my question:
1) Since my EB3 485 is pending, is it possible for another employer to file under EB2? Is this the process which is called Inter-filing? Has anyone done that?
2) At what stage previous EB3 PD can be used ? At the time of 140 filing, 140 approval or new 485 filing?
3) What if new EB2 I40 gets rejected? Does it have any impact on old EB3 approved 140 and pending 485?
4) Does the scenario look too risky?
5) Any one in the same boat?
Thanks in advance.
harikris
05-20 08:09 PM
President Obama recently mentioned plans for holding a White House meeting to discuss proceeding with immigration reform legislation. And now he is keeping that promise by setting June 8th, just three weeks from now, to hold the meeting. According to Politico: "The meeting will be an opportunity to launch a policy conversation that we hope will be able to start a debate that will take place in Congress later in the year," the official, who asked not to be named, said. Asked if the session would be billed as a summit or a forum, like similar meetings on health care...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/05/obama-sets-date-for-immigration-reform-white-house-conversation.html)
After a long period, this piece of news is most welcome. This is precisely what we need - people that really matter are going to take up this issue. Hopefully, they reach some logical conclusion on legal immigrant petitions. All we can do from outside is to influence their discussions/debates by making our views heard.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/05/obama-sets-date-for-immigration-reform-white-house-conversation.html)
After a long period, this piece of news is most welcome. This is precisely what we need - people that really matter are going to take up this issue. Hopefully, they reach some logical conclusion on legal immigrant petitions. All we can do from outside is to influence their discussions/debates by making our views heard.
gunabcd
07-02 09:52 AM
I see people not supporting the CIR which was suppose to be a pro Immigration bill, no matter which part of the society it was supporting. My question is Are you guys out here a Pro or an anti immigration forum?
Or are you guys out here are to fulfill their selfish dreams, stand on others to reach the top.
Can anyone answer me? I really doubt the people out here.
If you knew the difference between Legal and Illegal immigration, and had you read the CIR bill and all amendments then you would not ask this question. Please do some homework before asking such questions.
Or are you guys out here are to fulfill their selfish dreams, stand on others to reach the top.
Can anyone answer me? I really doubt the people out here.
If you knew the difference between Legal and Illegal immigration, and had you read the CIR bill and all amendments then you would not ask this question. Please do some homework before asking such questions.
No comments:
Post a Comment