aph0025
11-12 12:21 PM
From the day you file your case you are legal to work with your new employer until its approval or denial. When you file your case (filed in normal processing without including paystub) sometimes they just approve it and sometimes they ask for a current paystub for evidence to close the case as approved. As you start working for your new company you would get a pay stub which can be used for the query.
That's a good point as well. I am planning to go in for premium processing on the safer side. But, if there is a query for pay stubs, they would require my previous employer's pay stubs right (the one from whom I am transferring my H1B visa to begin with)? I hope you are right, and my assumption is wrong. Looking at the responses, a lot is dependant on the immigration officer.
That's a good point as well. I am planning to go in for premium processing on the safer side. But, if there is a query for pay stubs, they would require my previous employer's pay stubs right (the one from whom I am transferring my H1B visa to begin with)? I hope you are right, and my assumption is wrong. Looking at the responses, a lot is dependant on the immigration officer.
wallpaper lebron james wife name.
WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC
06-08 03:18 PM
As far as I know he was allowed to board the flight. No issues there but there can be issues when he re-enters US. Since he was on B1 (10 year Multiple) he can stay max 6 months in US so he has I 94 till Apr 09 but if he say come in Oct 09 to US again the system might not have checked him off so it might display that he is still in US and he overstayed his Visa and so CBP will call him in for secondary inspection. As far as I know it can be resolved by showing flight ticket stub and arrival stamp in destination country etc. Its more if hassle than anything.
Nothing will happen. They will not have the I-94 record at port of entry. I and many of my friends did not give our I-94's while going to india. I threw away the old ones and came in with my new one.
Nobody will ask you, u don't have to take the pain of going and informing the Port of entry.
Nothing will happen. They will not have the I-94 record at port of entry. I and many of my friends did not give our I-94's while going to india. I threw away the old ones and came in with my new one.
Nobody will ask you, u don't have to take the pain of going and informing the Port of entry.
Life2Live
01-23 10:56 AM
Hi,
When I go online to get the visa appointment for parents I'm not able to get a date and this has been going since 25 days(It asks to check back in 24 hours)
They changed the visa fee this year (2008).
The message on the vfs site says all those with HDFC receipt# obtained last year should try and get visa appointment before Jan/31/08.
What can I do now?
There is also no way I can put my name in the signature box while filling the application.(When the application is filled by someone not parents themselves they ask for siganture of the person filling the application )
What should we do in this case as we are filing online?
Will there be any problem when you don't have H1 stamping on the passport (but have valid H1 and have EAD and AP)
Will there be any problem in visa approval for parents.
Thank you.
You can use the same fee if you schedule interview before Jan 31 2008, Otherwise Visa applicants who paid the $100 application fee and who appear for an interview after January 31, 2008 will be required to bring a non-refundable demand draft for the $31 difference in fee.
Following are the information from VFS website:
United States Government announces worldwide revision of machine
readable visa application fee
December 27, 2007
The U.S.Department of State has revised the worldwide nonimmigrant Machine Readable Visa (MRV) fee from $100 to $131 effective January 1, 2008.
Visa applicants who paid the $100 application fee and who appear for an interview after January 31, 2008 will be required to bring a non-refundable demand draft for the $31 difference in fee.
The U.S. Mission in India will not be able to significantly increase the number of visa appointments in January.
Travelers are cautioned against speculative purchases of $100 MRV appointment receipts in December. Applicants who have not yet purchased a MRV fee receipt from HDFC bank are encouraged to wait until 2008 to pay the application fee to avoid the inconvenience of obtaining a demand draft for the $31 fee difference after January 31, 2008.
When I go online to get the visa appointment for parents I'm not able to get a date and this has been going since 25 days(It asks to check back in 24 hours)
They changed the visa fee this year (2008).
The message on the vfs site says all those with HDFC receipt# obtained last year should try and get visa appointment before Jan/31/08.
What can I do now?
There is also no way I can put my name in the signature box while filling the application.(When the application is filled by someone not parents themselves they ask for siganture of the person filling the application )
What should we do in this case as we are filing online?
Will there be any problem when you don't have H1 stamping on the passport (but have valid H1 and have EAD and AP)
Will there be any problem in visa approval for parents.
Thank you.
You can use the same fee if you schedule interview before Jan 31 2008, Otherwise Visa applicants who paid the $100 application fee and who appear for an interview after January 31, 2008 will be required to bring a non-refundable demand draft for the $31 difference in fee.
Following are the information from VFS website:
United States Government announces worldwide revision of machine
readable visa application fee
December 27, 2007
The U.S.Department of State has revised the worldwide nonimmigrant Machine Readable Visa (MRV) fee from $100 to $131 effective January 1, 2008.
Visa applicants who paid the $100 application fee and who appear for an interview after January 31, 2008 will be required to bring a non-refundable demand draft for the $31 difference in fee.
The U.S. Mission in India will not be able to significantly increase the number of visa appointments in January.
Travelers are cautioned against speculative purchases of $100 MRV appointment receipts in December. Applicants who have not yet purchased a MRV fee receipt from HDFC bank are encouraged to wait until 2008 to pay the application fee to avoid the inconvenience of obtaining a demand draft for the $31 fee difference after January 31, 2008.
2011 lebron james wife name.
pakrish
06-22 09:29 AM
My laywer has adviced me that the skin test is mandatory
more...
senthil1
10-15 07:03 PM
I do not think USA is losing ground. If China and India thinks that they are Really improving economy Why can't they make their currencies free Trade? Why are they artifically Keeping exchange rates. The reason is if really a country is stronger then currency should go up and US dollar should become weaker. But India and Cannot sustain as the export business will go down for India and China if their currency becomes too strong. So India and China are looking for US and europe Market. So inter dependence is always there. There is lot of speculation that India will exceed US in 2020. But it is far from true. For stronger Indian economy India needs US Consumption. For that USA needs to be stronger. May be lot of human resources are there in india. But that will be also resolved in another 20 Years because still Inflow is more than return to india. 80% of H1s are Indians apart from lot of L1 people.
dehradoon
11-13 06:08 PM
ok. let's say I-140 approved and pass 180 days. the person is working using ac21 and ead with a new company. the person is travelling using AP , the old company withdraw I-140, will he be able to come back in the us ?
once the person is working for the new company can he send the offer letter to avoid problem with 485. kinda of preemption - proactive approach or does the person needs to wait until ins request?
Dude, you really need to use the search feature on this forum. after I140 is approved and 485 pending for 180 days, the I140 stays in effect even if the company tried to revoke it.
Once you invoke AC21, it is not required (although suggested) to send papers to USCIS. I have read that you should not do anything until you get an RFE which I think is the best way, This makes sure that your case is being properly handled if you are unlucky enough to get an RFE. Y would anyone what to raise a flag by sending in paperwork to USCIS indicating the use of AC21, I personally know atleast 15 friends who have done this with out telling USCIS and have received their GC's
So, The bottom line is if -
I140 approved and 485 pending for more than 180.
START LIVING YOUR DREAM, DO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. CHANGE YOUR JOB, GET A RAISE, OPEN A COMPANY, BUY A HOUSE .... WHATEVER, DON'T GET MARRIED - SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT WHILE YOU WERE ON H1
THE AC21 IS A LAW - USE IT, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TELL ANYONE ABOUT USING A LAW UNLESS YOU HAVE TO JUSTIFY YOUR SITUATION IN FRONT OF AN AGENCY THAT REQUIRES YOU BY LAW TO PROVE IT.
OH! AND AS FAR AS TRAVEL IS CONCERNED, JUST HAVE THE DOCS IN HAND AND NOTHING ELSE MATTERS (don't commit a crime though, or be drunk in front of the immigration officer). LOL
once the person is working for the new company can he send the offer letter to avoid problem with 485. kinda of preemption - proactive approach or does the person needs to wait until ins request?
Dude, you really need to use the search feature on this forum. after I140 is approved and 485 pending for 180 days, the I140 stays in effect even if the company tried to revoke it.
Once you invoke AC21, it is not required (although suggested) to send papers to USCIS. I have read that you should not do anything until you get an RFE which I think is the best way, This makes sure that your case is being properly handled if you are unlucky enough to get an RFE. Y would anyone what to raise a flag by sending in paperwork to USCIS indicating the use of AC21, I personally know atleast 15 friends who have done this with out telling USCIS and have received their GC's
So, The bottom line is if -
I140 approved and 485 pending for more than 180.
START LIVING YOUR DREAM, DO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. CHANGE YOUR JOB, GET A RAISE, OPEN A COMPANY, BUY A HOUSE .... WHATEVER, DON'T GET MARRIED - SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT WHILE YOU WERE ON H1
THE AC21 IS A LAW - USE IT, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TELL ANYONE ABOUT USING A LAW UNLESS YOU HAVE TO JUSTIFY YOUR SITUATION IN FRONT OF AN AGENCY THAT REQUIRES YOU BY LAW TO PROVE IT.
OH! AND AS FAR AS TRAVEL IS CONCERNED, JUST HAVE THE DOCS IN HAND AND NOTHING ELSE MATTERS (don't commit a crime though, or be drunk in front of the immigration officer). LOL
more...
pcjandyala
07-21 11:31 PM
http://infopass.uscis.gov/ .Please follow the instructions on the screen. Choose "You need information or other services " option.
Wish you all the best.
Wish you all the best.
2010 2010 2011 LeBron James
enggr
10-02 09:47 AM
Dear Friends/attorneys,
Is it possible to request an EB2 to EB3 conversion after a I-140 RFE? I kindly request you all to help me.
I finished my 4-year engineering course in year 2000 and started working with the company which I got recruited. My degree has year 2002 due to the last supplementary exam. My attorney put the graduation as year 2000 and counted 5 years of experience from there (Because my degree has 2 dates on it). INS is counting only 3.5 y ears of experience after degree completion.
I think the only way I can survive this RFE is to request for an approval under EB3 category. The unlucky part is I didn't get that as an option in the RFE itself (which many people got).
The paper ad as well as labor certification is not specific about "progressive experience" or experience after degree completion. The ad just says Bachelors degree with 5 years of experience.
Please advice me how to respond to this RFE in a safe manner.
This is what the paper ad says "F/T MS Degree or equivalent in Engineering field OR BS Degree or equivalent with five years ex "
EB2 PERM : Aug 2006.
EB2 I-140 (REG) : Nov 2006.
EB2 I-485/ EAD : July 2007.
EB2 I-140 RFE received : Sep 2007.
RFE
---------------------------------------
"Please submit evidence which establishes that the beneficiary had at least five years of experience as a software engineer after receiving his bachelor's degree but prior to August XX, 2006. Since your evidence does not indicate that the beneficiary received his bachelor's degree until 2002, this does not appear possible.
If the beneficiary received a degree prior to 2002, please submit a copy of that degree."
---------------------------------------
Is it possible to request an EB2 to EB3 conversion after a I-140 RFE? I kindly request you all to help me.
I finished my 4-year engineering course in year 2000 and started working with the company which I got recruited. My degree has year 2002 due to the last supplementary exam. My attorney put the graduation as year 2000 and counted 5 years of experience from there (Because my degree has 2 dates on it). INS is counting only 3.5 y ears of experience after degree completion.
I think the only way I can survive this RFE is to request for an approval under EB3 category. The unlucky part is I didn't get that as an option in the RFE itself (which many people got).
The paper ad as well as labor certification is not specific about "progressive experience" or experience after degree completion. The ad just says Bachelors degree with 5 years of experience.
Please advice me how to respond to this RFE in a safe manner.
This is what the paper ad says "F/T MS Degree or equivalent in Engineering field OR BS Degree or equivalent with five years ex "
EB2 PERM : Aug 2006.
EB2 I-140 (REG) : Nov 2006.
EB2 I-485/ EAD : July 2007.
EB2 I-140 RFE received : Sep 2007.
RFE
---------------------------------------
"Please submit evidence which establishes that the beneficiary had at least five years of experience as a software engineer after receiving his bachelor's degree but prior to August XX, 2006. Since your evidence does not indicate that the beneficiary received his bachelor's degree until 2002, this does not appear possible.
If the beneficiary received a degree prior to 2002, please submit a copy of that degree."
---------------------------------------
more...
WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC
06-24 03:19 PM
Rupert Murdoch, Mayor Bloomberg Lobby For Immigration Reform, Path To 'Legal Status' For Illegal Immigrants (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/24/rupert-murdoch-mayor-bloo_n_623805.html)
Excellent.
Let them lobby.
Agriculture sector and Tech firms, Construction, Latinos have been lobbying for years now but nothing happened.
Immigration will be taken up during the next year. The Top Agenda is energy bill for this year. No Matter who lobbyies nothing gonna matter.
Next year if Reps gain majority in the Senate then It will be tough battle.
Amnesty will not come easy.
If the fight between reps and dems become too intense. No CIR next year either.
Adjobs,dream act,some EB relief, tough border, Fine employers may pass piece meal
which will calm down most of the Immigration lobbyist next year.
If God forbid the market does not pickup next year, jobs, housings, finance .. CIR will be nearly impossible.
Bernanke
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2010-06-08-bernanke_N.htm
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6523SN20100609
Excellent.
Let them lobby.
Agriculture sector and Tech firms, Construction, Latinos have been lobbying for years now but nothing happened.
Immigration will be taken up during the next year. The Top Agenda is energy bill for this year. No Matter who lobbyies nothing gonna matter.
Next year if Reps gain majority in the Senate then It will be tough battle.
Amnesty will not come easy.
If the fight between reps and dems become too intense. No CIR next year either.
Adjobs,dream act,some EB relief, tough border, Fine employers may pass piece meal
which will calm down most of the Immigration lobbyist next year.
If God forbid the market does not pickup next year, jobs, housings, finance .. CIR will be nearly impossible.
Bernanke
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2010-06-08-bernanke_N.htm
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6523SN20100609
hair lebron james wife name. wife
imh1b
04-28 01:12 PM
If you count the taxes these 150K legal immigrants would have paid if they were in US for a year it is more than 2.5 billion dollars.
There was a recent study claiming that 14 million illegal immigrants pay 1.5 billion dollars a year in taxes (read mostly sales taxes). And thus US should legalize these 14 million people to continue to get 1.5 billion dollars a year.
Now you can compare 150K people vs 14 million people and who pays more.
The study fails to tell that these illegals do not have insurance. So they use hospitals for free. They do not pay federal taxes because they do not have a valid documentation. Even if they are allowed to pay federal tax, many will be below poverty line.
The study did not envision an economic scenario for America if 14 million illegals are legalized. How many will claim unemployment, social security, medicare etc. I can bet the cost to government will be in billions with many zeroes after that. Someone should call the reporter and the pro illegals who created that study to answer these questions.
There was a recent study claiming that 14 million illegal immigrants pay 1.5 billion dollars a year in taxes (read mostly sales taxes). And thus US should legalize these 14 million people to continue to get 1.5 billion dollars a year.
Now you can compare 150K people vs 14 million people and who pays more.
The study fails to tell that these illegals do not have insurance. So they use hospitals for free. They do not pay federal taxes because they do not have a valid documentation. Even if they are allowed to pay federal tax, many will be below poverty line.
The study did not envision an economic scenario for America if 14 million illegals are legalized. How many will claim unemployment, social security, medicare etc. I can bet the cost to government will be in billions with many zeroes after that. Someone should call the reporter and the pro illegals who created that study to answer these questions.
more...
Sunx_2004
05-14 04:42 PM
I was under impression that there is last quarter quota still remain...
Based on below they used it all...
:confused:
I am sure this is noticed by many :
"E. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Demand for numbers, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices for adjustment of status cases, is expected to bring the Employment Third preference category very close to the annual numerical limit in June. As a result, this category is likely to experience retrogressions or visa unavailability beginning in July. Such action would only be temporary, however, and a complete recovery of the cut-off dates would occur for October, the first month of the new fiscal year. "
Based on below they used it all...
:confused:
I am sure this is noticed by many :
"E. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Demand for numbers, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices for adjustment of status cases, is expected to bring the Employment Third preference category very close to the annual numerical limit in June. As a result, this category is likely to experience retrogressions or visa unavailability beginning in July. Such action would only be temporary, however, and a complete recovery of the cut-off dates would occur for October, the first month of the new fiscal year. "
hot Lebron James Wife Savanna
eb3_nepa
02-22 05:57 PM
Hello everyone,
I have a question abt the recent contributions. Of late i have seen a SHARP drop in contributions. Have we reached a plateau now, or are the contributions not updated live?
Also i have a question abt what the agreement is with QGA. Do they do nothing till we pay the $200k or do they do things in installments (like our immigration lawyers ;)). A lot of non members, but possibly potential contributors keep asking me abt the same. If the board can answer this question i would appreciate it. If you do not want to post that info on here, please send me a Private Message.
I have a question abt the recent contributions. Of late i have seen a SHARP drop in contributions. Have we reached a plateau now, or are the contributions not updated live?
Also i have a question abt what the agreement is with QGA. Do they do nothing till we pay the $200k or do they do things in installments (like our immigration lawyers ;)). A lot of non members, but possibly potential contributors keep asking me abt the same. If the board can answer this question i would appreciate it. If you do not want to post that info on here, please send me a Private Message.
more...
house lebron james wife name,
seeking_GC
07-18 08:13 PM
Hi,
I am in the same situation. I just got the tracking number from my lawyer for the fedex that he had sent on June 30 and he has sent it to Dallas . I live and work in California. I went through the Direct Filing press release and the USCIS link :
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=eb7b5cdc2c463110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fe529c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
and now I am confused as to whether my lawyer did the right thing or its ok to send the application to Dallas??
Anyone any thoughts???
I am in the same situation. I just got the tracking number from my lawyer for the fedex that he had sent on June 30 and he has sent it to Dallas . I live and work in California. I went through the Direct Filing press release and the USCIS link :
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=eb7b5cdc2c463110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fe529c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
and now I am confused as to whether my lawyer did the right thing or its ok to send the application to Dallas??
Anyone any thoughts???
tattoo lebron james wife name. see
desi3933
08-26 02:29 PM
Are you sure about this? My wife is on H1-B right now having EAD and AP both and she wants to quit her job. So I am planning to switch her from H1-B to H4. Will that abandon her I-485 filed as a dependent?
>> Will that abandon her I-485 filed as a dependent?
No.
________________
Not a legal advise.
>> Will that abandon her I-485 filed as a dependent?
No.
________________
Not a legal advise.
more...
pictures kobe bryant wife name. lebron james wife name. see
eb3retro
03-15 01:15 PM
Filing 485 during visa unavailability, should not be the concern in this bill. Why our people are worrying about filing AOS when visa number unavailable? Man, this should not be our concern at all. Our main concern should be reinstating the AC21 provision that allow the oversubscribed countries to use excess visas in each EB category. Specter removed very important provision that eliminate per country limit in EB visas for oversubscribed countries. This is a big blow to India, China. It will stop all the benefits from this bill.
If the current form of specter bill passes, there is no benefit to any of us. If EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3) from count, that drastically increase the visa numbers. The increase is unimaginable, and I feel that it will be about 4 to 5 times than current 140K numbers. If all the listed provisions appears in the final bill, the visa number will always be �current� for all countries for many years, provided AC21 (elimination of per country limit if demand is less than supply) reinstated. If this happens, no one needs to worry about filing AOS when visa number unavailable. That situation never arises.
If current form of Specter bill passes, all the new numbers created thro above listed provisions, will not give any benefit to India/China. DOS simply say per country limit is 10% only no matter what. Remember that, 10% is total of FB+EB numbers. (480000+290000). India and China FB numbers are also heavily backlogged. Therefore our main concern is to reinstate AC21 provision not filing AOS, and keep pressure to keep the listed provisions (EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3)) in the final bill
this person is bringing some valid points to ponder. People please go through her posting and i agree with her regarding the numbers is still 10% only for india. we need to fight for removing the per country limit, or else, we may probably be in this retrogression mess for quite sometime.
If the current form of specter bill passes, there is no benefit to any of us. If EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3) from count, that drastically increase the visa numbers. The increase is unimaginable, and I feel that it will be about 4 to 5 times than current 140K numbers. If all the listed provisions appears in the final bill, the visa number will always be �current� for all countries for many years, provided AC21 (elimination of per country limit if demand is less than supply) reinstated. If this happens, no one needs to worry about filing AOS when visa number unavailable. That situation never arises.
If current form of Specter bill passes, all the new numbers created thro above listed provisions, will not give any benefit to India/China. DOS simply say per country limit is 10% only no matter what. Remember that, 10% is total of FB+EB numbers. (480000+290000). India and China FB numbers are also heavily backlogged. Therefore our main concern is to reinstate AC21 provision not filing AOS, and keep pressure to keep the listed provisions (EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3)) in the final bill
this person is bringing some valid points to ponder. People please go through her posting and i agree with her regarding the numbers is still 10% only for india. we need to fight for removing the per country limit, or else, we may probably be in this retrogression mess for quite sometime.
dresses lebron james wife name. lebron
v7461558
08-11 06:25 PM
http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/pr_1186757867585.shtm item 22.
22. The Administration Will Reform And Expedite Background Checks For Immigration. Current mechanisms for conducting immigration background checks are backed up, slowing processing times and endangering national security. The Administration is investing substantial new funds to address the backlog, and the FBI and USCIS are working together on a variety of projects designed to streamline existing processes so as to reduce waiting times without sacrificing security.
Note that there is no "bill", the DHS is not talking about passing new laws through the Congress. They are talking about using their (and FBI's) existing administrative authority to streamline and expedite background checks. Note that the rule to search the secondary name indexes that was instituted after Sept. 11, 2001 was not a law. It was an interpretation by the DHS of the existing statute, yielding a request from the DHS to the FBI to provide the DHS with the information from the secondary index name search.
Now, if someone would please be so kind as to dig up the original text of the "following reforms [that] represent steps the Administration can take within the boundaries of existing law", released by the DHS on 10 August 2007, or to come up with a conclusion that said text has not yet been made publicly available, we can take this discussion further.
22. The Administration Will Reform And Expedite Background Checks For Immigration. Current mechanisms for conducting immigration background checks are backed up, slowing processing times and endangering national security. The Administration is investing substantial new funds to address the backlog, and the FBI and USCIS are working together on a variety of projects designed to streamline existing processes so as to reduce waiting times without sacrificing security.
Note that there is no "bill", the DHS is not talking about passing new laws through the Congress. They are talking about using their (and FBI's) existing administrative authority to streamline and expedite background checks. Note that the rule to search the secondary name indexes that was instituted after Sept. 11, 2001 was not a law. It was an interpretation by the DHS of the existing statute, yielding a request from the DHS to the FBI to provide the DHS with the information from the secondary index name search.
Now, if someone would please be so kind as to dig up the original text of the "following reforms [that] represent steps the Administration can take within the boundaries of existing law", released by the DHS on 10 August 2007, or to come up with a conclusion that said text has not yet been made publicly available, we can take this discussion further.
more...
makeup lebron james wife name.
frostrated
03-16 03:06 PM
please see below.
Background:
My wife and I are currently working on EADs obtained through my previous employer filing for my green card (eb3 India, pri date: dec 2005), my wife is a dependant on this greencard petition. We last re-entered US using our AP. Two years ago, more than six months after my I-140 got approved, I changed my employer (to a similar position in the IT field itself) and my new (and current) employer filed for AC-21. They have also obtained a I-797 for me as a backup which I have used. Also prior to getting my EAD, my wife worked on an H1 visa for a year and then we got EAD, she has been working on that ever since. Our EAD was recently submitted for renewal and will be valid for the next two years.
I got accepted into a fulltime MBA program in the US, which I am planning to attend. This would mean that I quit my current job and after the two years in MBA I will be joining a different employer in a different field (ie: I will be moving out of IT into something like finance). I am assuming transition to F1 is out of question since I have shown immigration intent
Questions:
1) Will it be legal for me to go fulltime to school on an AOS pending status? Yes you can go to school while in AOS. But you cant go to school full time when in AOS if you are the primary applicant. You need to be still employed full time in your line of work.
2) Will I have trouble, re-entering the US on an AP if I travel overseas during the time I am enrolled in school? Yes. Your AP is no longer valid, as you are no more working for the sponsor of your permanent residency.
3) Can I use this EAD card to go for an internship between my first and second year (the job will not be IT)? Only if you are a dependent of the primary applicant.
4) Can I use this EAD card to work fulltime after MBA graduation, provided it is still valid for a few more months (the job will not be IT)? Only if you are a dependent of the primary applicant.
5) If my post-MBA employer files for a greencard for me in the new position which is different from IT, will I be able to use my old priority date of Dec 2005? Yes you can. You will need to file a new labor, and request that they use the old priority date. You can also file in EB2 and request they use the EB3 filing date of Dec 2005.
6) To mitigate risk, my wife is planning to go into H1 so that I can get an H4 if going to school on EAD doesn't work. Is this strategy to use H1 during school time (and travel overseas and re-enter using H4) and use EAD while internship safe? Using H1 on your wife, and you being on H4 is safe. But you cannot use the EAD anymore. Your EAD is tied to your employment, unless you are the dependent on the primary applicant for AOS.
7) If my wife cannot find a H1 job, can she work on her EAD while I am also using EAD to go to school. No. When you quit working and go to school, both of you are in illegal status. To remain in status, she either needs to convert to H1 or you need to convert to F1 and have her here as F2. Best bet, is for her to convert to H1 and you to either H4 or F1.
8) I am assuming that for any EAD based status to work, I need to have a future job offer in the same category. My current employer will not do that.I can get a future job offer from a small IT consulting firm in the same IT field for which my greencard application was filed for. Will that be good enough to keep my EAD alive while in school? No. For your EAD to be valid, you still need to be working. Stopping work does not enable you to continue to be in EAD status.
Thanks SO much for answering. I have this wonderful opportunity in front of me and I really hope immigration will not be a road block to achieve my dreams.
Background:
My wife and I are currently working on EADs obtained through my previous employer filing for my green card (eb3 India, pri date: dec 2005), my wife is a dependant on this greencard petition. We last re-entered US using our AP. Two years ago, more than six months after my I-140 got approved, I changed my employer (to a similar position in the IT field itself) and my new (and current) employer filed for AC-21. They have also obtained a I-797 for me as a backup which I have used. Also prior to getting my EAD, my wife worked on an H1 visa for a year and then we got EAD, she has been working on that ever since. Our EAD was recently submitted for renewal and will be valid for the next two years.
I got accepted into a fulltime MBA program in the US, which I am planning to attend. This would mean that I quit my current job and after the two years in MBA I will be joining a different employer in a different field (ie: I will be moving out of IT into something like finance). I am assuming transition to F1 is out of question since I have shown immigration intent
Questions:
1) Will it be legal for me to go fulltime to school on an AOS pending status? Yes you can go to school while in AOS. But you cant go to school full time when in AOS if you are the primary applicant. You need to be still employed full time in your line of work.
2) Will I have trouble, re-entering the US on an AP if I travel overseas during the time I am enrolled in school? Yes. Your AP is no longer valid, as you are no more working for the sponsor of your permanent residency.
3) Can I use this EAD card to go for an internship between my first and second year (the job will not be IT)? Only if you are a dependent of the primary applicant.
4) Can I use this EAD card to work fulltime after MBA graduation, provided it is still valid for a few more months (the job will not be IT)? Only if you are a dependent of the primary applicant.
5) If my post-MBA employer files for a greencard for me in the new position which is different from IT, will I be able to use my old priority date of Dec 2005? Yes you can. You will need to file a new labor, and request that they use the old priority date. You can also file in EB2 and request they use the EB3 filing date of Dec 2005.
6) To mitigate risk, my wife is planning to go into H1 so that I can get an H4 if going to school on EAD doesn't work. Is this strategy to use H1 during school time (and travel overseas and re-enter using H4) and use EAD while internship safe? Using H1 on your wife, and you being on H4 is safe. But you cannot use the EAD anymore. Your EAD is tied to your employment, unless you are the dependent on the primary applicant for AOS.
7) If my wife cannot find a H1 job, can she work on her EAD while I am also using EAD to go to school. No. When you quit working and go to school, both of you are in illegal status. To remain in status, she either needs to convert to H1 or you need to convert to F1 and have her here as F2. Best bet, is for her to convert to H1 and you to either H4 or F1.
8) I am assuming that for any EAD based status to work, I need to have a future job offer in the same category. My current employer will not do that.I can get a future job offer from a small IT consulting firm in the same IT field for which my greencard application was filed for. Will that be good enough to keep my EAD alive while in school? No. For your EAD to be valid, you still need to be working. Stopping work does not enable you to continue to be in EAD status.
Thanks SO much for answering. I have this wonderful opportunity in front of me and I really hope immigration will not be a road block to achieve my dreams.
girlfriend lebron james wife name. kobe
NKR
05-14 11:38 AM
Morning is over. We all are in mourning since the bulletin went out...
hairstyles lebron james wife name. lebron
FinalGC
12-02 01:21 PM
If your company is paying for GC, then go ahead and apply for GC and hope 140 will be approved, so that u can apply for H1.
Yes you have run out of time, since you have already crossed the 365 day limit before 6 year ends, before which u needed to apply for GC. Otherwise you could have applied for H1 renewal based on GC application. Now u have only 3 options.
1. Go back to India after 6year expires
2. Hope 140 gets approved before sept 30, 09 and apply for premium processing h1 if you want h1 to be done quickly
3. Convert to F1...you can send the papers for F1 to your college and you can have that available without affecting your H1, until u begin using F1 status
hope that helps
Yes you have run out of time, since you have already crossed the 365 day limit before 6 year ends, before which u needed to apply for GC. Otherwise you could have applied for H1 renewal based on GC application. Now u have only 3 options.
1. Go back to India after 6year expires
2. Hope 140 gets approved before sept 30, 09 and apply for premium processing h1 if you want h1 to be done quickly
3. Convert to F1...you can send the papers for F1 to your college and you can have that available without affecting your H1, until u begin using F1 status
hope that helps
leoindiano
07-09 01:15 PM
Mine is TSC peding since May 2006.
Upgraded to PP on Jun 19th 2007, no updates yet.
Mine is TSC too...
Upgraded to PP on Jun 19th 2007, no updates yet.
Mine is TSC too...
dontcareaboutGC
03-19 11:24 AM
Ignore this if this is a repost!
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
No comments:
Post a Comment