Canuck
02-06 04:44 PM
I don't think an employer can force you to repay the green card costs if you leave them as soon as you get it. That is illegal and against the law to make a foreign national pay for the costs of green card sponsorship!
wallpaper justin bieber wallpapers,
irrational
06-18 10:37 PM
Folks,
I am due for an EAD renewal. However, my I-485 Receipt Notice got lost in mail. :(
Can I still e-file. A lot of you said, we have to send a copy of the receipt notice as a supporting document. Can I do without it.
Any pointers would be really appreciated.
Thank You
-Bipin
I am due for an EAD renewal. However, my I-485 Receipt Notice got lost in mail. :(
Can I still e-file. A lot of you said, we have to send a copy of the receipt notice as a supporting document. Can I do without it.
Any pointers would be really appreciated.
Thank You
-Bipin
Canadian_Dream
02-27 01:31 PM
I have the exact same question for the original poster. Do you know someone or have heard from several people who were scrutinized about intent after leaving the employer upon GC approval ? I know folks who left with in few months and completed naturalization without any issues, but that's an anecdotal evidence and doesn't prove anything. Please let us know your source of information.
You have seen applications being scrutinized for employment history at the time of naturalization?. can you please provide elaborate and provide examples?. Otherwise dont scare people unnecessarily.:mad:
You have seen applications being scrutinized for employment history at the time of naturalization?. can you please provide elaborate and provide examples?. Otherwise dont scare people unnecessarily.:mad:
2011 justin bieber all new
zerozerozeven
03-25 10:46 AM
We are most fortunate, thanks to Mr. Bill Gates, Rep Smith's current bill will triple our h1b cap and it will pass. all 3 american candidates support us. we are winning:D:D:D
I remember this bill being brought up last year also and was "supposed" to be passed but never even came up for voting...why do u anticipate this will go through this time? My wife is applying for her "H1B" and she is awaiting the lotto results...
I strongly disapprove of ppl waiting for their GC voicing against H1B cap increase because they have crossed that bridge and have H1B. I am only safely assume such ppl will voice against IV and all IV activities once they receive their GC...
I remember this bill being brought up last year also and was "supposed" to be passed but never even came up for voting...why do u anticipate this will go through this time? My wife is applying for her "H1B" and she is awaiting the lotto results...
I strongly disapprove of ppl waiting for their GC voicing against H1B cap increase because they have crossed that bridge and have H1B. I am only safely assume such ppl will voice against IV and all IV activities once they receive their GC...
more...
frostrated
09-09 04:03 PM
but the question is can someone mail the AP to India by postal mail or can someone take it along with them for their spouse if they are travelling. Precisely my question is when someone has applied for AP and when its not approved, can they travel without it and come back with AP that was approved after travel to India? This is always a grey area and no one seems to have a clear answer.
the rule states that you have to be present in the country when you apply for AP. It does not say anything on where you need to be when it is approved. There are many cases where the applicant left the US to have the document mailed or taken along with someone to the person out of the US. The applicants on return were not asked anything. It was business as usual.
the rule states that you have to be present in the country when you apply for AP. It does not say anything on where you need to be when it is approved. There are many cases where the applicant left the US to have the document mailed or taken along with someone to the person out of the US. The applicants on return were not asked anything. It was business as usual.
nozerd
04-16 12:20 AM
Any additional thoughts / opinions on getting travel insurance ? My uncle and aunt are coming over for 3 months in the summer. My uncle is 65 with typical BP/ Heart problem issues and aunt has no medical problem. Is ICICI Lombardi the best option ?
Any other viewsand recomendations from those who have actually had to use the insurance and submit a claim etc ?
Thanks
Any other viewsand recomendations from those who have actually had to use the insurance and submit a claim etc ?
Thanks
more...
cagedcactus
05-03 06:59 PM
"senator_levin@levin.senate.gov" to me
show details Apr 30 (3 days ago)
Dear Mr. Amin:
Thank you for contacting me regarding immigration and border security. I appreciate receiving your views on these important issues.
Our immigration system is broken and needs reform. I believe an effective immigration policy must include comprehensive border security and comprehensive immigration reform. We must secure our borders against real threats from terrorism and protect U.S. workers, while preserving the freedoms and principles on which our nation was founded. We must address reforms realistically, stem the tide of illegal immigrants entering the country and be fair to those who are here legally.
I support comprehensive border security reform. I voted in favor of an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2007 Defense Appropriations Act (P.L.109-289) that appropriated $1.83 billion to construct 370 miles of triple-layered fencing and 461 miles of vehicle barriers along the southwest border of our country. I also supported an amendment to the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief (P.L.109-13) that provided $390 million to hire an additional 650 border patrol agents, 250 immigration investigators, and 168 immigration enforcement agents and deportation officers, as well as to fund an additional 2,000 detention beds for immigration enforcement purposes.
I believe any reform must protect U.S. workers. For this reason, I voted in favor of an amendment to the Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R.2) that would bar employers who violate immigration laws by hiring undocumented workers from receiving federal government contracts for up to 10 years. The Fair Minimum Wage Act passed the Senate on February 1, 2007, and must now be considered by a House-Senate conference committee to reconcile the differences between the Senate and House versions of the bill. I believe it is important to ensure that employers hire only those legally eligible to work and that employees are treated fairly. I support a broad-based Electronic Employment Verification (EEV) system, which builds upon the existing voluntary pilot program, to increase the reliability of employment authorization checks. In the 109th Congress, I supported a number of worker protection amendments to the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (S.2611). I voted in favor of an amendment that would have established a true prevailing wage for all occupations to ensure that U.S. workers� wages are not lowered as a result of the guest worker program, and I supported an amendment that would have required employers to make good faith efforts to recruit U.S. workers first. S.2611 passed the Senate by a bipartisan vote of 62-36. Unfortunately, S.2611 was blocked by the House because of opposition to the immigration provisions in the Senate bill. The bill was not passed before the end of the 109th Congress.
Comprehensive immigration reform must remove the �magnet� that has attracted millions of people to cross the border illegally. We should not provide amnesty, but instead permit currently undocumented workers to earn the right to obtain legal status over a long period of time, under restrictive conditions, including being required to pay fees and back taxes. These individuals would be required to apply through the same immigration process as everyone else and take their place in line behind all those whose applications are pending. I will continue to work with my colleagues in the Senate toward effective solutions that address our nation�s real immigration problems. Without a comprehensive approach to immigration reform, our current problems with illegal immigration will likely continue.
Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Carl Levin
CC to senator_levin
show details 7:36 pm (1 minute ago)
Respected Sir,
I wanted to bring to your attention the woes of immigrants who are legally here in U.S. Specifically, the high-skilled workers who are experiencing decade-long waits to get Green Cards (the employment based Green Cards). There are approximately half a million such people in U.S. today whose lives are in limbo as they wait to get their Green Cards. I encourage you to visit http://immigrationvoice.org, an organization comprising of such people who are lobbying the Congress to help get some relief urgently.
The focus of immigration reform has solely been on illegal immigration. What is not so well understood is that the fate of legal immigrants has been tied with that of the illegal immigrants (because there is just one bill that the Congress will debate - CIR/STRIVE). It is ironic that if this bill does not pass, legal immigrants would be left hanging in the dark again, even when there is bi-partisan support for their cause!
The waiting times for getting an employment-based (EB) Green Card (GC) are increasing each day for nationals of all countries. But especially hard-hit are people from India and China, whose waiting times are expected to increase to 10-15 years, if the current trend continues. The demand for EB-GC keeps increasing because over the last decade an average of about 100,000 skilled workers have joined the U.S. work-force each year (using H-1B visa, and graduating foreign students), but only 50,000 new employment-based Green Cards are issued. U.S. issues 140,000 EB GC but even family members are counted-off from this quota, which thus effectively reduces to about one-third. Therefore, each year about 50,000 skilled workers join the queue for a Green Card.
Once the wait for a Green Card starts, all major life-decisions are influenced by the Green Card application process. Decisions about traveling abroad, marrying, investing, kids' education, and changing cities are then based on the stage in which one's GC application is. The biggest impact of the wait is on the person's professional career. Once the process starts, changing jobs usually means re-filing for a GC, implying that the person starts from the end of the line again. Even promotions within the same company are not without risks, as any change in job descriptions necessitates refilling the application. So a person waiting for a GC is expected to remain in the same job with the same company and without any substantial increase (or decrease) in pay! The skilled worker therefore lives life in constant limbo.
The psychological impact of being stuck and being treated as less than equal, even while paying all taxes (including SS and Medicare, to which they are not even entitled to without becoming permanent residents) is immense.
Your help is very much needed to eliminate this unfair backlog and reform the system, so that no innocent and law abiding person should suffer anymore. Your kind reply is very valuable to me.
I appreciate your time and help.
Regards,
CC
Above is the email conversation beween me and Senetor Levine. He seems to be in support for Legal immigration, but is against Amnesty.
My reply here is basically a nice written post by a fellow member here (Eternal_hope).
So credit for writing goes to him.
A similar reply was sent to senetor Debbie Stabenow (Michigan too)
Please comment......
show details Apr 30 (3 days ago)
Dear Mr. Amin:
Thank you for contacting me regarding immigration and border security. I appreciate receiving your views on these important issues.
Our immigration system is broken and needs reform. I believe an effective immigration policy must include comprehensive border security and comprehensive immigration reform. We must secure our borders against real threats from terrorism and protect U.S. workers, while preserving the freedoms and principles on which our nation was founded. We must address reforms realistically, stem the tide of illegal immigrants entering the country and be fair to those who are here legally.
I support comprehensive border security reform. I voted in favor of an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2007 Defense Appropriations Act (P.L.109-289) that appropriated $1.83 billion to construct 370 miles of triple-layered fencing and 461 miles of vehicle barriers along the southwest border of our country. I also supported an amendment to the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief (P.L.109-13) that provided $390 million to hire an additional 650 border patrol agents, 250 immigration investigators, and 168 immigration enforcement agents and deportation officers, as well as to fund an additional 2,000 detention beds for immigration enforcement purposes.
I believe any reform must protect U.S. workers. For this reason, I voted in favor of an amendment to the Fair Minimum Wage Act (H.R.2) that would bar employers who violate immigration laws by hiring undocumented workers from receiving federal government contracts for up to 10 years. The Fair Minimum Wage Act passed the Senate on February 1, 2007, and must now be considered by a House-Senate conference committee to reconcile the differences between the Senate and House versions of the bill. I believe it is important to ensure that employers hire only those legally eligible to work and that employees are treated fairly. I support a broad-based Electronic Employment Verification (EEV) system, which builds upon the existing voluntary pilot program, to increase the reliability of employment authorization checks. In the 109th Congress, I supported a number of worker protection amendments to the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (S.2611). I voted in favor of an amendment that would have established a true prevailing wage for all occupations to ensure that U.S. workers� wages are not lowered as a result of the guest worker program, and I supported an amendment that would have required employers to make good faith efforts to recruit U.S. workers first. S.2611 passed the Senate by a bipartisan vote of 62-36. Unfortunately, S.2611 was blocked by the House because of opposition to the immigration provisions in the Senate bill. The bill was not passed before the end of the 109th Congress.
Comprehensive immigration reform must remove the �magnet� that has attracted millions of people to cross the border illegally. We should not provide amnesty, but instead permit currently undocumented workers to earn the right to obtain legal status over a long period of time, under restrictive conditions, including being required to pay fees and back taxes. These individuals would be required to apply through the same immigration process as everyone else and take their place in line behind all those whose applications are pending. I will continue to work with my colleagues in the Senate toward effective solutions that address our nation�s real immigration problems. Without a comprehensive approach to immigration reform, our current problems with illegal immigration will likely continue.
Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Carl Levin
CC to senator_levin
show details 7:36 pm (1 minute ago)
Respected Sir,
I wanted to bring to your attention the woes of immigrants who are legally here in U.S. Specifically, the high-skilled workers who are experiencing decade-long waits to get Green Cards (the employment based Green Cards). There are approximately half a million such people in U.S. today whose lives are in limbo as they wait to get their Green Cards. I encourage you to visit http://immigrationvoice.org, an organization comprising of such people who are lobbying the Congress to help get some relief urgently.
The focus of immigration reform has solely been on illegal immigration. What is not so well understood is that the fate of legal immigrants has been tied with that of the illegal immigrants (because there is just one bill that the Congress will debate - CIR/STRIVE). It is ironic that if this bill does not pass, legal immigrants would be left hanging in the dark again, even when there is bi-partisan support for their cause!
The waiting times for getting an employment-based (EB) Green Card (GC) are increasing each day for nationals of all countries. But especially hard-hit are people from India and China, whose waiting times are expected to increase to 10-15 years, if the current trend continues. The demand for EB-GC keeps increasing because over the last decade an average of about 100,000 skilled workers have joined the U.S. work-force each year (using H-1B visa, and graduating foreign students), but only 50,000 new employment-based Green Cards are issued. U.S. issues 140,000 EB GC but even family members are counted-off from this quota, which thus effectively reduces to about one-third. Therefore, each year about 50,000 skilled workers join the queue for a Green Card.
Once the wait for a Green Card starts, all major life-decisions are influenced by the Green Card application process. Decisions about traveling abroad, marrying, investing, kids' education, and changing cities are then based on the stage in which one's GC application is. The biggest impact of the wait is on the person's professional career. Once the process starts, changing jobs usually means re-filing for a GC, implying that the person starts from the end of the line again. Even promotions within the same company are not without risks, as any change in job descriptions necessitates refilling the application. So a person waiting for a GC is expected to remain in the same job with the same company and without any substantial increase (or decrease) in pay! The skilled worker therefore lives life in constant limbo.
The psychological impact of being stuck and being treated as less than equal, even while paying all taxes (including SS and Medicare, to which they are not even entitled to without becoming permanent residents) is immense.
Your help is very much needed to eliminate this unfair backlog and reform the system, so that no innocent and law abiding person should suffer anymore. Your kind reply is very valuable to me.
I appreciate your time and help.
Regards,
CC
Above is the email conversation beween me and Senetor Levine. He seems to be in support for Legal immigration, but is against Amnesty.
My reply here is basically a nice written post by a fellow member here (Eternal_hope).
So credit for writing goes to him.
A similar reply was sent to senetor Debbie Stabenow (Michigan too)
Please comment......
2010 wallpaper Will Smith, Jaden
rockstart
01-08 12:27 PM
this may help also :-
Alternate Document (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/alternate_document.htm)
Birth Affidavit (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/birth_affidavit.htm)
Birth Certificate (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/birth_cert.htm)
Birth Certificates Green Card Permanent Residency (http://www.usabal.com/permres/AOS/birth_cert_info.html)
Thanks patiently_waiting, These are really good links. I have posted these links to IV Wiki as well for future reference. Please add information to Wiki as it can be really useful to folks who are need this info. When you get an RFE you do not have luxory of time and all this info in one place really helps. Thanks once again
Alternate Document (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/alternate_document.htm)
Birth Affidavit (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/birth_affidavit.htm)
Birth Certificate (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/birth_cert.htm)
Birth Certificates Green Card Permanent Residency (http://www.usabal.com/permres/AOS/birth_cert_info.html)
Thanks patiently_waiting, These are really good links. I have posted these links to IV Wiki as well for future reference. Please add information to Wiki as it can be really useful to folks who are need this info. When you get an RFE you do not have luxory of time and all this info in one place really helps. Thanks once again
more...
GooblyWoobly
09-26 06:43 PM
My wife is in h4 now and received the EAD. I also received it, everybody is saying if she uses her EAD her H4 will be invalid. Is that a good or bad thing? What about she lost her job after three months? what will be her status? also is we travel using the AP what will be her status? or it doesn't matter as long you have the EAD and AP......
Yes, she will lose her H4 status if she uses EAD. Her new status will be 485-pending.
At this point, if she quits/loses job, that's fine, as her status is not bound to the EAD/job, but to her 485 pending status. She will be able to travel on AP, or apply for new H4 outside (I'm not sure about the later part, so, I'd suggest using AP).
The only risk is, if her 485 application gets denied, she will be out of status, and will have to leave immediately. However, if you still have your H1 valid, she can apply for an H4 again outside the country.
Yes, she will lose her H4 status if she uses EAD. Her new status will be 485-pending.
At this point, if she quits/loses job, that's fine, as her status is not bound to the EAD/job, but to her 485 pending status. She will be able to travel on AP, or apply for new H4 outside (I'm not sure about the later part, so, I'd suggest using AP).
The only risk is, if her 485 application gets denied, she will be out of status, and will have to leave immediately. However, if you still have your H1 valid, she can apply for an H4 again outside the country.
hair justin bieber and jaden smith
imm_pro
08-15 05:33 PM
Couldn't resist opening a new thread and sharing this with fellow IVians.
We got our green cards today. It is actually green (in the back).
Another announcement is that I recently relocated to northern Mississippi. Would like to join up with other state chapter members. I am willing to coordinate with the group in Memphis TN.
Thanks IV. I and my spouse benefited a lot from the July 2007VB and the work IV did concerning it. So, I will do more than just stick around but continue to be active as usual. The system is still broken and we will have to work to fix it.
Hearty Congratulations..and please continue to support IV
We got our green cards today. It is actually green (in the back).
Another announcement is that I recently relocated to northern Mississippi. Would like to join up with other state chapter members. I am willing to coordinate with the group in Memphis TN.
Thanks IV. I and my spouse benefited a lot from the July 2007VB and the work IV did concerning it. So, I will do more than just stick around but continue to be active as usual. The system is still broken and we will have to work to fix it.
Hearty Congratulations..and please continue to support IV
more...
arkie2916
July 15th, 2004, 07:52 PM
Anders these are just fantastic!! Keep up the great work.
Bev
Bev
hot JUSTIN BIEBER AND JADEN SMITH
kumarc123
01-16 10:12 AM
can we just buy a vacation for the burger king (a.ka. steve king) and ask him to go to bahamas or cancun or somewhere.... so that we can pass the recapture bill....
I appreciate your humor along with all other IV members who have enjoyed the joke so far. But humor wont help us, but our diligent and focused measures, if you have something more than humor please join us, if not please don't make fun of our measures.
I humbly request everyone to start calling.
Thank you
I appreciate your humor along with all other IV members who have enjoyed the joke so far. But humor wont help us, but our diligent and focused measures, if you have something more than humor please join us, if not please don't make fun of our measures.
I humbly request everyone to start calling.
Thank you
more...
house jaden smith and justin
samswas
05-25 03:37 PM
I think the problem is with the Poll.
The moderator of the thread needs to correct it. I got my GC but when I try to go and poll change my status to card received it tells me I have already polled. Unless I am missing something.
So 74 people were current (not sure how many of them got approved) and 24 polled to say they got approved.
So mr moderator can u correct the poll ??
Sorry guys ... Yes, problem is with the poll. I created this thread. When I created, I don't know that you can not change your response once you vote
The moderator of the thread needs to correct it. I got my GC but when I try to go and poll change my status to card received it tells me I have already polled. Unless I am missing something.
So 74 people were current (not sure how many of them got approved) and 24 polled to say they got approved.
So mr moderator can u correct the poll ??
Sorry guys ... Yes, problem is with the poll. I created this thread. When I created, I don't know that you can not change your response once you vote
tattoo justin bieber usher and jaden
sintax321
09-04 03:32 PM
You are right that picture explains everything=)
more...
pictures justin bieber and jaden smith
maverick_iv
11-27 02:03 PM
There were two ways to substitute a labor. One by applying for an I-140 with an approved labor certification. Another way was to substitute the beneficiary name in a pending labor certification application. Maybe thats what the company lawyer did.
For the latter, I am not sure if one needs the beneficiary's signature to do so. One way to check is to ask the company's lawyer for the case number and you could check the status. If the labor is pending with one of the BECs you could request for a screenshot of the case status and that would have the beneficiary's name. But since the BECs are being phased out, I am not sure if they still honor status requests.
My friend is in India during the July 15 period. He is being told by the consulting firm that they have applied for Labor Substitution. All I know about labor substitution is that you have to apply for I 140 along with the approved labor sheet that company gets from DOL. The company Lawyer kept saying that they have sent it to DOL for substitution. I just want to clarify that there is no other way of substitution other than applying I 140.
Thank you
For the latter, I am not sure if one needs the beneficiary's signature to do so. One way to check is to ask the company's lawyer for the case number and you could check the status. If the labor is pending with one of the BECs you could request for a screenshot of the case status and that would have the beneficiary's name. But since the BECs are being phased out, I am not sure if they still honor status requests.
My friend is in India during the July 15 period. He is being told by the consulting firm that they have applied for Labor Substitution. All I know about labor substitution is that you have to apply for I 140 along with the approved labor sheet that company gets from DOL. The company Lawyer kept saying that they have sent it to DOL for substitution. I just want to clarify that there is no other way of substitution other than applying I 140.
Thank you
dresses jaden smith and justin
sanojkumar
08-21 11:35 AM
Yes, My checks got cashed as well. We had filed on July 18th to NSC. Now I need one help. I have moved to Chicago area freom Michigan. We had filed from Michigan. So to change address to get FP notice in Chicago area what all I need to do? I had no Alien number on my I140. Please advice. I am looking at LIN number on the back of the checks. But for my wife she has different LIN number on three checks for I-765, I-485 & FP. Which one will be valid. Can I get any handle from these numbers to make a call to USCIS and request them to change my address online? What is the number for USCIS to call?
more...
makeup justin bieber jaden smith
qasleuth
07-17 11:51 AM
Do you have a shred of evidence that the programs you quote do not bring in a cook or a dancer or a painter or a programmer ?
I got all these from your first post. What do you call them ?
"unskilled/low skill immigrants cause higher unemployment", "unskilled/low skilled immigration == jobs not created, remain uneployed", "DV / Family based immigration brings in unskilled/low skilled immigrants"
Look around and you will see anti-immigrants spewing this 'evidence' everywhere, from blogs, to news articles, to the senate, to bars. The same arguments are made against 'skilled' immigration which you and I belong to. What numbers do they quote ? Anecdotal nonsense everywhere.
Making yourself sound more skilled but making the same flawed arguments will get us nowhere. Bashing another group is plain BS.
Skilled = anyone having skills to remain employed (or provide healthy contribution to the economy) at that point of time
So this can be a cook, dancer, painter or a programmer - if the society or economy needs one. Tomorrow, if my programmer skills are no longer required for this economy and country then I can be categorized unskilled labor too.
I am sorry if I look biased. I have no such intentions as I made clear in my first post itself. All my intentions of discussion are based on the definition given above for the word "skilled".
I got all these from your first post. What do you call them ?
"unskilled/low skill immigrants cause higher unemployment", "unskilled/low skilled immigration == jobs not created, remain uneployed", "DV / Family based immigration brings in unskilled/low skilled immigrants"
Look around and you will see anti-immigrants spewing this 'evidence' everywhere, from blogs, to news articles, to the senate, to bars. The same arguments are made against 'skilled' immigration which you and I belong to. What numbers do they quote ? Anecdotal nonsense everywhere.
Making yourself sound more skilled but making the same flawed arguments will get us nowhere. Bashing another group is plain BS.
Skilled = anyone having skills to remain employed (or provide healthy contribution to the economy) at that point of time
So this can be a cook, dancer, painter or a programmer - if the society or economy needs one. Tomorrow, if my programmer skills are no longer required for this economy and country then I can be categorized unskilled labor too.
I am sorry if I look biased. I have no such intentions as I made clear in my first post itself. All my intentions of discussion are based on the definition given above for the word "skilled".
girlfriend Justin Bieber - My World
thomachan72
03-07 09:32 AM
Deadline added to this initiative to decide whether to proceed or not.
please see post below for details.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum14-members-forum/1599353-want-to-file-485-when-pd-is-not-current-gather-here-104.html#post2412248
[QUote = ashwin_27]
As suggested by several members on this thread, IV has set a goal of April 30th, 2011 to determine if there is even enough appetite within the EB community to proceed with this USCIS Admin Fix initiative or not.
As we know the initial goal was to use this survey to determine how many members will be benefitted by I-485 filing without current priority date. Rough calculations using PERM data showed that at least 50-70K folks are waiting to file I-485 since July 2007 (around 5K-6K out of this number are those with PDs prior to June/July 2007 missed the July 2007 boat).
So far we have had around 1200 such members respond. We need to see support of at least 5000 members in order for IV to launch the public action items. These action items include, but are not limited to, writing en-masse (i.e. in thousands) over 2-3 weeks to several concerned departments about the need for this USCIS administrative fix. Few other very interesting proposals/ideas are also being considered. All we need is our folks to BELIEVE that this initiative is worth investing in.
The IV forum is the best place for the impacted EB community to gather and that is why the number of votes on the survey is a great indication of our frustration and motivation to work with IV for this important admin fix.
So, we now have a Deadline and an Objective. It is up to our impacted members to decide on whether to still stick to silly excuses (why should I become a member, why should i vote on survey etc etc.) or DO something about getting this admin fix. It is surprising that we are not more desperate for this fix and are not convincing and pushing IV harder and harder to start working with USCIS to allow I485 filing with current PD (and all the benefits like EAD, AP that go with it).
Are we more comfortable with the alternative - Waiting endelesslly to file I-485 (at least 2-5 years for post July 2007 folks from any category), keep depending on H1B extensions in an uncertain immigration scenario where H1B RFE's, rejections, visa denials due to "admin processing" etc are on a steep rise? The choice is ours to make.
As a final reminder - please act and convince your friends/colleagues to participate in this initiative and send ivcoordinator@gmail.com the details requested below.
Please keep following and participating on this thread to show your desperation for this fix.
Good post but we need more information.
How many members does IV have in total?
What % out of that total has not filed 485 yet?
Only if we know these two can we say that you need 5000 to go ahead with this plan.
I think 5000 might be too big a number given the total membership and number of those who have already filed 485.
1200 seems to be a good number.
please see post below for details.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum14-members-forum/1599353-want-to-file-485-when-pd-is-not-current-gather-here-104.html#post2412248
[QUote = ashwin_27]
As suggested by several members on this thread, IV has set a goal of April 30th, 2011 to determine if there is even enough appetite within the EB community to proceed with this USCIS Admin Fix initiative or not.
As we know the initial goal was to use this survey to determine how many members will be benefitted by I-485 filing without current priority date. Rough calculations using PERM data showed that at least 50-70K folks are waiting to file I-485 since July 2007 (around 5K-6K out of this number are those with PDs prior to June/July 2007 missed the July 2007 boat).
So far we have had around 1200 such members respond. We need to see support of at least 5000 members in order for IV to launch the public action items. These action items include, but are not limited to, writing en-masse (i.e. in thousands) over 2-3 weeks to several concerned departments about the need for this USCIS administrative fix. Few other very interesting proposals/ideas are also being considered. All we need is our folks to BELIEVE that this initiative is worth investing in.
The IV forum is the best place for the impacted EB community to gather and that is why the number of votes on the survey is a great indication of our frustration and motivation to work with IV for this important admin fix.
So, we now have a Deadline and an Objective. It is up to our impacted members to decide on whether to still stick to silly excuses (why should I become a member, why should i vote on survey etc etc.) or DO something about getting this admin fix. It is surprising that we are not more desperate for this fix and are not convincing and pushing IV harder and harder to start working with USCIS to allow I485 filing with current PD (and all the benefits like EAD, AP that go with it).
Are we more comfortable with the alternative - Waiting endelesslly to file I-485 (at least 2-5 years for post July 2007 folks from any category), keep depending on H1B extensions in an uncertain immigration scenario where H1B RFE's, rejections, visa denials due to "admin processing" etc are on a steep rise? The choice is ours to make.
As a final reminder - please act and convince your friends/colleagues to participate in this initiative and send ivcoordinator@gmail.com the details requested below.
Please keep following and participating on this thread to show your desperation for this fix.
Good post but we need more information.
How many members does IV have in total?
What % out of that total has not filed 485 yet?
Only if we know these two can we say that you need 5000 to go ahead with this plan.
I think 5000 might be too big a number given the total membership and number of those who have already filed 485.
1200 seems to be a good number.
hairstyles justin bieber and jaden smith
pbuckeye
06-25 08:02 AM
Hi Gurus / Attorneys,
I have come to this country in 1999 and have worked for company A and after 7 years , I transferred my H1B to company B based company A's approved I-140 in 2007 before July fiasco. Hence missed the July 2007.
Now I have been working for company B for the last 3 years and got my I-140 approved again and applied for H1B extension. Received RFE asking for client letter.
Client was reluctant to give the letter and my H1B got denied.
Asking client for the letter : Client says that they can't give a letter, it's against their company policy :confused:
My Options :
1. MTR : I am not sure if I can get the client letter to open MTR and also file a new H1 in parallel.
2. Go back to my home country : My employer said that they will apply for a new H1B for consular processing (does this come under quota ?)
I own a home here and now leaving everything in a week is making me worried.
Also my priority date is Nov 2002 under EB3 and I am not sure how I can pursue this from my home country, if needed.
Thanks in advance for all your help and suggestions !!
Can you try to get the MSA/SOW/PO between the client and vendor for the MTR (or client and your employer)? Sometimes the SOW reads almost like a client letter (with name, job duties, client supervisor name, signed by IT and legal department at client site).
Another option could be to get an email from the client stating that they cannot provide a letter because of company policy AND/OR get a letter from the vendor stating the same and provide the contact information of the supervisor at client location.
I have come to this country in 1999 and have worked for company A and after 7 years , I transferred my H1B to company B based company A's approved I-140 in 2007 before July fiasco. Hence missed the July 2007.
Now I have been working for company B for the last 3 years and got my I-140 approved again and applied for H1B extension. Received RFE asking for client letter.
Client was reluctant to give the letter and my H1B got denied.
Asking client for the letter : Client says that they can't give a letter, it's against their company policy :confused:
My Options :
1. MTR : I am not sure if I can get the client letter to open MTR and also file a new H1 in parallel.
2. Go back to my home country : My employer said that they will apply for a new H1B for consular processing (does this come under quota ?)
I own a home here and now leaving everything in a week is making me worried.
Also my priority date is Nov 2002 under EB3 and I am not sure how I can pursue this from my home country, if needed.
Thanks in advance for all your help and suggestions !!
Can you try to get the MSA/SOW/PO between the client and vendor for the MTR (or client and your employer)? Sometimes the SOW reads almost like a client letter (with name, job duties, client supervisor name, signed by IT and legal department at client site).
Another option could be to get an email from the client stating that they cannot provide a letter because of company policy AND/OR get a letter from the vendor stating the same and provide the contact information of the supervisor at client location.
gotgc?
02-03 10:45 AM
Hi All,
I am planning to travel to India via London, UK. I am trying to see if it requires a transit Visa.
I am on H1B/AOS status but without valid visa stamp and travelling with Advance Parole. I have checked the UK Consulate page UK Border Agency | Who is exempt from having to hold a direct airside transit visa? (http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/travellingtotheuk/transitthroughtheuk/transitdocuments/exempt/) it mentions that Indian passport holders needs a transit visa but with following exemptions;
one of them is a a valid Canadian Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 28th June 2002; Since I hold canadian permanent resident card, is it ok I can travel without UK transit Visa through UK? Based on this page, I thought so, but my travel agent said to double check eventhough I have a canadian permanent resident card, I am travelling to and from USA. Has any one done this before - travelled with canadian PR to/from USA through UK? Whom should I confirm with?
Passengers exempt from the DATV requirement
Holders of certain documents are, regardless of nationality, exempt from the requirement to hold a Direct Airside Transit Visa when transiting the UK.
A transit passenger is not required to hold a transit visa if he holds, or a person with whom he arrives in the United Kingdom holds on his behalf:
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from another country or territory to the country for which the visa is held;
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from the country for which the visa is held to another country or territory;
a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America to another country or territory, provided that the transit passenger does not seek to transit the United Kingdom on a date more than six months from the date on which they last entered Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America with a valid visa for entry to that country;
a valid USA I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21st April 1998;
a valid Canadian Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 28th June 2002;
a valid common format Category D visa for entry to an EEA State;
a valid common format residence permit issued by an EEA State pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No. 1030/2002;
a diplomatic or service passport issued by the People�s Republic of China; or
a diplomatic or official passport issued by India; or
a diplomatic or official passport issued by Vietnam.
Notes:
A valid U.S. immigrant visa packet (form 155A/155B) is a valid visa for DATV exemption purposes.
An expired I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21 April 1998 when accompanied by an I-797 letter issued by the Bureau of Citizenship authorising its extension, exempts the holder from the DATV requirement.
Holding either an I-512 Parole letter or an I-797C (Notice of Action) instead of a valid U.S. visa; or a Transportation Letter instead of a valid U.S. Permanent Residence Card issued on or after 21 April 1998; or a U.S Visa Foil endorsed, "NOT A VISA. FOIL PREPARED AT DHS REQUEST" does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Holding a valid travel document with a U.S. ADIT stamp worded � �Processed for I-551. TEMPORARY EVIDENCE OF LAWFUL ADMISSION FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE VALID UNTIL�. EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZED� does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Whether holders of non-national (including refugee travel documents) require a DATV depends on their nationality and whether they qualify for one of the exemptions listed above. So, for instance, the holder of a non-national travel document (for example, a refugee travel document) who is a national or a citizen of one of the countries listed on the DATV list (for example, Afghanistan) will require a direct airside transit visa if they are travelling to the UK to transit on to a third country.
I am planning to travel to India via London, UK. I am trying to see if it requires a transit Visa.
I am on H1B/AOS status but without valid visa stamp and travelling with Advance Parole. I have checked the UK Consulate page UK Border Agency | Who is exempt from having to hold a direct airside transit visa? (http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/travellingtotheuk/transitthroughtheuk/transitdocuments/exempt/) it mentions that Indian passport holders needs a transit visa but with following exemptions;
one of them is a a valid Canadian Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 28th June 2002; Since I hold canadian permanent resident card, is it ok I can travel without UK transit Visa through UK? Based on this page, I thought so, but my travel agent said to double check eventhough I have a canadian permanent resident card, I am travelling to and from USA. Has any one done this before - travelled with canadian PR to/from USA through UK? Whom should I confirm with?
Passengers exempt from the DATV requirement
Holders of certain documents are, regardless of nationality, exempt from the requirement to hold a Direct Airside Transit Visa when transiting the UK.
A transit passenger is not required to hold a transit visa if he holds, or a person with whom he arrives in the United Kingdom holds on his behalf:
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from another country or territory to the country for which the visa is held;
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from the country for which the visa is held to another country or territory;
a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America to another country or territory, provided that the transit passenger does not seek to transit the United Kingdom on a date more than six months from the date on which they last entered Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America with a valid visa for entry to that country;
a valid USA I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21st April 1998;
a valid Canadian Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 28th June 2002;
a valid common format Category D visa for entry to an EEA State;
a valid common format residence permit issued by an EEA State pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No. 1030/2002;
a diplomatic or service passport issued by the People�s Republic of China; or
a diplomatic or official passport issued by India; or
a diplomatic or official passport issued by Vietnam.
Notes:
A valid U.S. immigrant visa packet (form 155A/155B) is a valid visa for DATV exemption purposes.
An expired I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21 April 1998 when accompanied by an I-797 letter issued by the Bureau of Citizenship authorising its extension, exempts the holder from the DATV requirement.
Holding either an I-512 Parole letter or an I-797C (Notice of Action) instead of a valid U.S. visa; or a Transportation Letter instead of a valid U.S. Permanent Residence Card issued on or after 21 April 1998; or a U.S Visa Foil endorsed, "NOT A VISA. FOIL PREPARED AT DHS REQUEST" does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Holding a valid travel document with a U.S. ADIT stamp worded � �Processed for I-551. TEMPORARY EVIDENCE OF LAWFUL ADMISSION FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE VALID UNTIL�. EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZED� does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Whether holders of non-national (including refugee travel documents) require a DATV depends on their nationality and whether they qualify for one of the exemptions listed above. So, for instance, the holder of a non-national travel document (for example, a refugee travel document) who is a national or a citizen of one of the countries listed on the DATV list (for example, Afghanistan) will require a direct airside transit visa if they are travelling to the UK to transit on to a third country.
jayleno
08-09 10:17 PM
Hi
I have attended a Kaplan center in NY. Call Kaplan and ask them if they have the ability to sponsor an I-20. I know one in Manhattan(56th street) does.
I have attended a Kaplan center in NY. Call Kaplan and ask them if they have the ability to sponsor an I-20. I know one in Manhattan(56th street) does.
No comments:
Post a Comment