Libra
09-14 11:52 AM
DO YOU WANT TO WIN OR DO YOU WANT TO LET LOU DOBB WIN, YOU DECIDE.
msyedy
04-18 01:12 PM
Look how desperate we have become, someone is ready to shell 10k per family member to get GC.
I agree and disagree with you guys.
I disagree because, we all are legal immigrants, we have to be given priority as the American economy needs people like us. H1-B not only means growth in tech but also economy. All the H1-B personnel spend a good amount of money here on (Rent, car, insurance, food, travel) with all this new jobs and much more will be benificial to this country.
We should not be charged such amount to get what we deserve.
On the other hand- I agree to pay 10k per familiy member because, we are stuck at one place with lots of problems without GC.
Most of us are not sure whether they will be staying at one place to do an investments like buying a house. Wife cant work etc.
Keeping all the above in mind even If we loose 10k per member we will make that in less then 6 months when compared to waiting for a GC for years.
I agree and disagree with you guys.
I disagree because, we all are legal immigrants, we have to be given priority as the American economy needs people like us. H1-B not only means growth in tech but also economy. All the H1-B personnel spend a good amount of money here on (Rent, car, insurance, food, travel) with all this new jobs and much more will be benificial to this country.
We should not be charged such amount to get what we deserve.
On the other hand- I agree to pay 10k per familiy member because, we are stuck at one place with lots of problems without GC.
Most of us are not sure whether they will be staying at one place to do an investments like buying a house. Wife cant work etc.
Keeping all the above in mind even If we loose 10k per member we will make that in less then 6 months when compared to waiting for a GC for years.
forgerator
02-24 12:35 PM
Truly amazing performance! For 13 yrs us Pakistanis were proud of Saeed Anwar's 194 record, but I have to say I don't mind at all that its finally broken by a class act that is Tendulkar. Definitely the best batsman of all time!
PDOCT05
10-29 03:55 PM
Hi PDCOT05,
You should be OK, I am aware of same situation and they accepted the refiling.
Mine was reject due to "missing or incorrect fee" refiled on Oct 12, waiting. Strange part is we dont have any evidence of the original check. That makes it complicated..
Thanks for your info..and I wish you good luck. By any chance are you aware whether i need to send new fees or old fees? As a precaution I am going to sending the diff amount in a separate check.
You should be OK, I am aware of same situation and they accepted the refiling.
Mine was reject due to "missing or incorrect fee" refiled on Oct 12, waiting. Strange part is we dont have any evidence of the original check. That makes it complicated..
Thanks for your info..and I wish you good luck. By any chance are you aware whether i need to send new fees or old fees? As a precaution I am going to sending the diff amount in a separate check.
more...
GreenLantern
04-14 05:50 AM
The problem with that is, that most peple who play online games know what's going on with web design, and want a really really good site really really cheap.
Paisano
04-16 01:28 PM
It is WITCH HUNTING brother.
Below is the link about a case where an approved I-140 is going to be revoked because of this.
140 Revoked on April 2nd.Out of country currently.Re-Entry on AP? (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/i-140-petitions/10686-140-revoked-on-april-2nd-out-of-country-currently-re-entry-on-ap.html)
Below is the link about a case where an approved I-140 is going to be revoked because of this.
140 Revoked on April 2nd.Out of country currently.Re-Entry on AP? (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/i-140-petitions/10686-140-revoked-on-april-2nd-out-of-country-currently-re-entry-on-ap.html)
more...
deba
01-22 05:46 PM
"Twenty years from now, you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do.
So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor.
Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover."
- Mark Twain
So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor.
Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover."
- Mark Twain
kirupa
01-19 11:17 PM
Unfortunately, your entry doesn't qualify because you are using box2d :(
Really cool entry though!
Really cool entry though!
more...
clockwork
07-18 09:52 PM
Clockwork and others please note that the pdf version of the Standard Operating Procedure is from 9/28/01 -- a lot has changed since.
Hi Googler,
Please read 485 standard operating procedure along with uscismanual. uscis manual is the latest update/modify. If anyone know updates after september 2006, please post on this thread. Thanks -
Hi Googler,
Please read 485 standard operating procedure along with uscismanual. uscis manual is the latest update/modify. If anyone know updates after september 2006, please post on this thread. Thanks -
kanshul
02-01 09:36 AM
Fair enough.
You said you don't have EAD.
Did you file for 485? If yes was it in July 2007? Please update your profile.
You said you don't have EAD.
Did you file for 485? If yes was it in July 2007? Please update your profile.
more...
chanduv23
09-17 03:01 PM
Looks like no one is accepting my apologies :( maybe they will all come to DC and beat me up instead
meridiani.planum
04-17 01:18 AM
This is Off-Topic, sorry about that, but this is the best forum i could think of to ask this:
My father-in-law is visiting us from India, and he is thinking of driving a car here. He drives in India and I think in a couple of weeks (with maybe 2-3 classes with some instructor) he should get the hang of driving. Are there any risks that anyone knows of with this? (if he makes a mistake and ends up in an accident I understand that we end up being personally liable and can even be sued if there is an injured party).
Edit: This is in California
My father-in-law is visiting us from India, and he is thinking of driving a car here. He drives in India and I think in a couple of weeks (with maybe 2-3 classes with some instructor) he should get the hang of driving. Are there any risks that anyone knows of with this? (if he makes a mistake and ends up in an accident I understand that we end up being personally liable and can even be sued if there is an injured party).
Edit: This is in California
more...
eb3India
09-25 10:19 AM
Here is the mail from AILA,
September 25, 2006
Dear Immigration Advocates-
Your help is STILL needed TODAY! Senate Appropriators will meet late THIS AFTERNOON to decide if enforcement-only bills will be included in the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations package. Urge your Senators to oppose efforts to attach anti-immigration measures to this must-pass bill. Call or email your Senators TODAY - encourage them to weigh-in with Senate Appropriators about this urgent matter.
You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
Email your Senators through Contact Congress on AILA's website. We've already created a sample letter for you to send. All you need to do is enter your zip code, hit send, and your voice will be heard in Congress.
Call your Senators, you can find their telephone numbers in our Congressional Directory and you can use these talking points to help you when you call:
� Congress should stop playing politics with immigration and pass comprehensive immigration reform. These enforcement-only bills will do nothing to enhance border security and will not move us one inch closer to fixing our broken immigration system.
� Attaching these bills to DHS appropriations circumvents the legislative process on an issue of critical national importance; it undermines the intense and unflagging efforts of the Senate to solve this crisis; and it rewards the House for spending the summer attacking the Senate while abdicating its responsibility to the American people.
� Senators should forcefully oppose this effort by the House to nullify the Senate's bi-partison solution. If the Senate acquiesces on these provisions, the House will only be emboldened and will never return to debate comprehensive reform. This will not be "enforcement-first", it will be "enforcement-only."
� For laws to work, they must be realistic and fair. Our current immigration laws are neither: proposals like these that ignore the reality that immigrants come here to work and to be with their families are destined to fail.
� Giving the government unchecked powers to punish immigrants, and making local police chase after immigrants, will only drive undocumented immigrants further underground. It will not fix the problem; it will make matters worse.
We called you to action last week to alert you to an underhanded political strategy from immigration restrictionists to attach three enforcement-only bills to the DHS appropriations bill, a bill that must pass this year. You and your colleagues sent close to 2,000 letters to Congress, but we'll need more letters and phone calls in order to ensure that Senate Appropriators exclude these measures from the bill.
Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are working behind closed doors and using procedural mechanisms to attach enforcement-only provisions contained in three bills (H.R. 6094, H.R. 6095, and H.R. 4830) to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, a piece of legislation that must pass this year. Although House leaders label these bills "border security" legislation, they are in fact harsh enforcement measures lifted from Rep. Sensenbrenner's H.R. 4437 that endanger due process rights and do little to make our borders more secure. You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
If these provisions are attached to the must-pass DHS bill, it will be nearly impossible to defeat them. Our best defense against this backdoor strategy is to put pressure on each U.S. Senator and encourage them to oppose any attempt to attach, or further these three enforcement-only bills. We're working hard in Washington to derail these political machinations, but we can't do it alone. We need your help. Please email or call both of your Senators today.
Over the summer House leadership used dozens of faux hearings to stage public displays of aversion to immigration reform. While they kept the media busy and their restrictionist base roiled, they failed to change the minds of the majority of Americans who support a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Nor did they succeed in backing down the U.S. Senators who supported S. 2611, a strong step towards comprehensive immigration reform. Now that House leaders know that the full Senate won't pass their enforcement-only agenda, they have resorted to closed-door politicking. We must fight to prevent the breach of justice that would result from attaching these enforcement-only bills to must-pass legislation.
Please call and email your Senators today. Now is the time for action.
Sincerely,
Marshall
Marshall Fitz
Director of Advocacy, AILA
Email Marshall
The enforcement-only provisions are:
� Sections 101 and 102 of the Dangerous Alien Detention Act contained in H.R. 6094, which seek to legitimize the practice of indefinite detention of aliens awaiting removal, despite Supreme Court decisions requiring elimination of this practice;
� Section 201 of the Criminal Alien Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would expand the use of expedited removal proceedings to individuals already in the United States - even individuals who have resided here for years - in ways that would significantly increase the risk of deporting innocent people;
� Sections 301-303 of the Alien Gang Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would grant unfettered discretion to the executive branch to designate "criminal street gangs" and then strip members of such gangs of virtually all rights;
� Section 101 of H.R. 6095, which gives state and local police authority to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for civil violations of immigration status;
� Sections 301 and 302 of the Ending Catch and Release Act contained in H.R. 6095, which would limit the power of federal courts to grant injunctive relief in civil immigration proceedings, despite acknowledgement by DOJ that such relief does not interfere with efforts to end the practice of catch-and-release.
September 25, 2006
Dear Immigration Advocates-
Your help is STILL needed TODAY! Senate Appropriators will meet late THIS AFTERNOON to decide if enforcement-only bills will be included in the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations package. Urge your Senators to oppose efforts to attach anti-immigration measures to this must-pass bill. Call or email your Senators TODAY - encourage them to weigh-in with Senate Appropriators about this urgent matter.
You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
Email your Senators through Contact Congress on AILA's website. We've already created a sample letter for you to send. All you need to do is enter your zip code, hit send, and your voice will be heard in Congress.
Call your Senators, you can find their telephone numbers in our Congressional Directory and you can use these talking points to help you when you call:
� Congress should stop playing politics with immigration and pass comprehensive immigration reform. These enforcement-only bills will do nothing to enhance border security and will not move us one inch closer to fixing our broken immigration system.
� Attaching these bills to DHS appropriations circumvents the legislative process on an issue of critical national importance; it undermines the intense and unflagging efforts of the Senate to solve this crisis; and it rewards the House for spending the summer attacking the Senate while abdicating its responsibility to the American people.
� Senators should forcefully oppose this effort by the House to nullify the Senate's bi-partison solution. If the Senate acquiesces on these provisions, the House will only be emboldened and will never return to debate comprehensive reform. This will not be "enforcement-first", it will be "enforcement-only."
� For laws to work, they must be realistic and fair. Our current immigration laws are neither: proposals like these that ignore the reality that immigrants come here to work and to be with their families are destined to fail.
� Giving the government unchecked powers to punish immigrants, and making local police chase after immigrants, will only drive undocumented immigrants further underground. It will not fix the problem; it will make matters worse.
We called you to action last week to alert you to an underhanded political strategy from immigration restrictionists to attach three enforcement-only bills to the DHS appropriations bill, a bill that must pass this year. You and your colleagues sent close to 2,000 letters to Congress, but we'll need more letters and phone calls in order to ensure that Senate Appropriators exclude these measures from the bill.
Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are working behind closed doors and using procedural mechanisms to attach enforcement-only provisions contained in three bills (H.R. 6094, H.R. 6095, and H.R. 4830) to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, a piece of legislation that must pass this year. Although House leaders label these bills "border security" legislation, they are in fact harsh enforcement measures lifted from Rep. Sensenbrenner's H.R. 4437 that endanger due process rights and do little to make our borders more secure. You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
If these provisions are attached to the must-pass DHS bill, it will be nearly impossible to defeat them. Our best defense against this backdoor strategy is to put pressure on each U.S. Senator and encourage them to oppose any attempt to attach, or further these three enforcement-only bills. We're working hard in Washington to derail these political machinations, but we can't do it alone. We need your help. Please email or call both of your Senators today.
Over the summer House leadership used dozens of faux hearings to stage public displays of aversion to immigration reform. While they kept the media busy and their restrictionist base roiled, they failed to change the minds of the majority of Americans who support a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Nor did they succeed in backing down the U.S. Senators who supported S. 2611, a strong step towards comprehensive immigration reform. Now that House leaders know that the full Senate won't pass their enforcement-only agenda, they have resorted to closed-door politicking. We must fight to prevent the breach of justice that would result from attaching these enforcement-only bills to must-pass legislation.
Please call and email your Senators today. Now is the time for action.
Sincerely,
Marshall
Marshall Fitz
Director of Advocacy, AILA
Email Marshall
The enforcement-only provisions are:
� Sections 101 and 102 of the Dangerous Alien Detention Act contained in H.R. 6094, which seek to legitimize the practice of indefinite detention of aliens awaiting removal, despite Supreme Court decisions requiring elimination of this practice;
� Section 201 of the Criminal Alien Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would expand the use of expedited removal proceedings to individuals already in the United States - even individuals who have resided here for years - in ways that would significantly increase the risk of deporting innocent people;
� Sections 301-303 of the Alien Gang Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would grant unfettered discretion to the executive branch to designate "criminal street gangs" and then strip members of such gangs of virtually all rights;
� Section 101 of H.R. 6095, which gives state and local police authority to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for civil violations of immigration status;
� Sections 301 and 302 of the Ending Catch and Release Act contained in H.R. 6095, which would limit the power of federal courts to grant injunctive relief in civil immigration proceedings, despite acknowledgement by DOJ that such relief does not interfere with efforts to end the practice of catch-and-release.
valuablehurdle
09-11 04:15 PM
http://www.livemint.com/2007/09/11122655/Indian-IT-professionals-in-US.html
more...
franklin
07-24 11:33 PM
I just ask - why not?
JunRN
07-17 01:59 AM
All I can expect at best is that "extend up to August"....meaning, from July to end August...but will it be "current"?
more...
.jpg "short i love you quotes for")
rrk
03-18 11:35 AM
what is GC sponser? ABC company couldnt find a project for me. So i am on bench.
priderock
06-07 06:27 PM
This is a very complex bill with some provisions that could be detrimental to us. But there are some amendments that could help us (and some that could hurt us).
But I some times feel like you do. We as a groups seem to be confused. All along we want to have control over our GC process and not succumb to employers. But when this bill would have given what we wanted all along, we don't want it.
It would have been better to get some of provisions in that would help us rather than an out right opposition. As I said this is a VERY VERY VERY complex bill and there are VERY FEW that understood this completely.
But I some times feel like you do. We as a groups seem to be confused. All along we want to have control over our GC process and not succumb to employers. But when this bill would have given what we wanted all along, we don't want it.
It would have been better to get some of provisions in that would help us rather than an out right opposition. As I said this is a VERY VERY VERY complex bill and there are VERY FEW that understood this completely.
chantu
01-15 11:16 AM
I have one question that I will post here. I do not want to open a new thread.
I am inviting my in-laws and I filled their DS156 forms online. After filling everything, it generated the pdf file of DS156. In that pdf file, there is one section in upper right hand corner called "DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE". Under that section there is a line (fill in the blanks type) starting with "On ______ by _____ under section 214(b) 221(g) ".
Now after generating the pdf, the appointment date was automatically put into this section. Example: "On 01 January 2009 by ......".
I am worried why they put the date there and the date was not there when I took appointment for my parents. I also checked my collegues parents DS156, and the date was still not there. It is Mumbai consulate.
Can somebody please confirm if they had similar experience and they got their parent's or in-laws visa granted??
Thanks.
I am inviting my in-laws and I filled their DS156 forms online. After filling everything, it generated the pdf file of DS156. In that pdf file, there is one section in upper right hand corner called "DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE". Under that section there is a line (fill in the blanks type) starting with "On ______ by _____ under section 214(b) 221(g) ".
Now after generating the pdf, the appointment date was automatically put into this section. Example: "On 01 January 2009 by ......".
I am worried why they put the date there and the date was not there when I took appointment for my parents. I also checked my collegues parents DS156, and the date was still not there. It is Mumbai consulate.
Can somebody please confirm if they had similar experience and they got their parent's or in-laws visa granted??
Thanks.
abhaykul
03-28 10:58 AM
You may have submitted your papers in Jan 2007 but make sure your lawyer forwarded it in Jan 2007. Check for the date Received on the approval notice.
For my recent H1B extention for 7th year extention, I have come across strange situation.
My old H1B was valid till 5th Feb 2007. Extention was applied in Jan 2007 with approved I-140. Recently I have received approved H1B extention with new I-94, but it states validity is from 22 March 2007 to 5th Feb 2010.
I thought the extention should have been from 6th Feb 2007 to 5th Feb 2010.
what should be infered from above ? Does it mean that I was out of ststus fron 6th Feb 2007 till 21st March 2007.
I would appereciate any input on this.
If this makes me out of status , is there a way to fix this by contacting USCIS again ?
Thanks
Saurav
For my recent H1B extention for 7th year extention, I have come across strange situation.
My old H1B was valid till 5th Feb 2007. Extention was applied in Jan 2007 with approved I-140. Recently I have received approved H1B extention with new I-94, but it states validity is from 22 March 2007 to 5th Feb 2010.
I thought the extention should have been from 6th Feb 2007 to 5th Feb 2010.
what should be infered from above ? Does it mean that I was out of ststus fron 6th Feb 2007 till 21st March 2007.
I would appereciate any input on this.
If this makes me out of status , is there a way to fix this by contacting USCIS again ?
Thanks
Saurav
swarnapuri
03-31 08:49 PM
Congrats! Nice Job!
No comments:
Post a Comment