desi485
12-03 01:28 PM
There is a different thread also going on, but sharing it here for anyone who have not noticed it yet. RG updated his website with below information.
Good news concerning AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
(http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?p=25832)
Looks like the header of that thread is misleading...though its a good news for those suffering because CIS error, it can mislead some IV visitors that issue is over. Unfortunately this is not the case, though it is some what relief to know that MTR are successful. However in first place, an applicant should not have to go through this HORROR. I wish CIS comes out and accept this error and make sure that this is not repeated again in future.
Good news concerning AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
(http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?p=25832)
Looks like the header of that thread is misleading...though its a good news for those suffering because CIS error, it can mislead some IV visitors that issue is over. Unfortunately this is not the case, though it is some what relief to know that MTR are successful. However in first place, an applicant should not have to go through this HORROR. I wish CIS comes out and accept this error and make sure that this is not repeated again in future.
GC_1000Watt
03-06 01:37 PM
Sorry to hear about your ordeals. The good news is that EB3- ROW should move forward at a good clip in a few months - some estimates from a lawyer I talked to seem to indicate a jump into early 2006 by the end of this year, so hang in there and remember that it is darkest before dawn.
If you are keen on a backup, have you considered immigrating to New Zealand? It is a great option if you need a peaceful life and the weather is just like California (unlike Canada) and they have universal health care too. For people who have worked in the US for a few years in recognized fields, NZ is quite easy to immigrate to and very quick. Your English seems to be quite good so I don't see why you should be so disheartened. I guess this advice also applies to Indians who are frustrated with the delays.
Good luck!
Thanks for the info buddy. Where to find more information on immigration to NZ? Please guide me on that.
If you are keen on a backup, have you considered immigrating to New Zealand? It is a great option if you need a peaceful life and the weather is just like California (unlike Canada) and they have universal health care too. For people who have worked in the US for a few years in recognized fields, NZ is quite easy to immigrate to and very quick. Your English seems to be quite good so I don't see why you should be so disheartened. I guess this advice also applies to Indians who are frustrated with the delays.
Good luck!
Thanks for the info buddy. Where to find more information on immigration to NZ? Please guide me on that.
pankajkakkar
08-08 02:22 PM
Pankaj, the writeup is spot on except for the above. I am not sure it takes anyone in the EB category, 20 years to get the GC. It may happen in the future if retrogression is not fixed.
IMHO, it is important that we stick to facts when we write articles/op eds etc.
You make a good point. However, since I have mentioned both EB and FB in the article, I think it is appropriate to include that it can in fact take 20 years to get the GC. The Senate bill does have provisions to ameliorate both EB and FB backlogs, as far as I remember.
Pankaj
IMHO, it is important that we stick to facts when we write articles/op eds etc.
You make a good point. However, since I have mentioned both EB and FB in the article, I think it is appropriate to include that it can in fact take 20 years to get the GC. The Senate bill does have provisions to ameliorate both EB and FB backlogs, as far as I remember.
Pankaj
raju123
06-01 04:00 PM
This might be useful to you.
Age-Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "Child Status Protection Act"
The "Child Status Protection Act", effective August 6, 2002, addresses the problems of minor children losing their eligibility for certain immigration benefits as a result of INS (now USCIS) processing delays. Prior to the passage of this law, a child's eligibility in Employment-Based Immigration situations to be part of his or her parent's application as a derivative beneficiary was based on the child's age at the time that the child's I-485 was adjudicated. Because of enormous backlogs and processing delays, many children turned 21 before the their I-485 applications were adjudicated. In such cases, the children "age-out" and are no longer considered to be part of the parent's application and lose their eligibility to obtain green cards as a derivative beneficiary.
Children who otherwise would have aged out may successfully adjust their status through the additional interplay of the new Concurrent Filing rule and the "Child Status Protection Act." According to the "Child Status Protection Act," the eligibility of these aging-out children will be determined by their age at the date a visa becomes available to them minus the number of days that the Employment-Based immigration petition was pending. Furthermore, these children must file for permanent resident status within one year of such availability. For a clearer illustration of this rule, please see the different scenarios below.
Example 1
The Labor Certification application that was submitted on John's behalf on January 1, 2000 was later approved on December 31, 2000. Afterwards, his employer submits an I-140 (EB-2) immigration petition on John's behalf on January 1, 2002. At that time, John's son, Junior, is 20 years and 7 months old. John's I-140 petition was pending for six months and was approved on July 1, 2002, one month after Junior turns 21 years of age. The visa number for EB-2 was available for John on July 1, 2002. Under the old law without the Child Status Protection Act, Junior has aged out because he is now 21 years old. However, under the new law, his age is fixed as of the date that a visa number becomes available minus the number of days that the I-140 was pending. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, these six months must be subtracted from Junior's age at the time the visa number became available on July 1, 2002. Subtracting six months from Junior's age of 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, Junior's age is fixed at 20 years and 7 months. Thus, even though he was already 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, he is still considered a "child" for purposes of accompanying his parents in adjusting his status to permanent residence. However, Junior has to file his I-485 within one year from the date of I-140 approval, that is before July 1, 2003. The length of time that is takes the USCIS to adjudicate Junior's case is no longer important in these cases.
According to "Child Status Protection Act", if through the above calculation, the child's age is fixed at 21 or older, the child would be automatically reclassified to an appropriate category and retains the principal beneficiary's original priority date. Please see the next example below.
Example 2
Same facts as above except that Junior is 21 years and seven months old at the time of John's I-140 approval. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, Junior's age will be fixed at 21 years and one month. Even with the Child Status Protection Act, Junior still ages out and may not adjust his status at this time. However, he will automatically be reclassified to an appropriate category, family-based 2B, and retain his father's original priority date, January 1, 2000, which is the date John's employer filed John's Labor Certification application.
Example 3
Richard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. Richard's son, Simon, is 21 years and one month old. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Richard filed his I-485 because the visa number was currently available for Richard at that time. However, Simon cannot file his I-485 with his father because he aged out.
Example 4
Howard's daughter, Rachel, is 20 years and 10 months old. Howard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Howard and Rachel filed their I-485 since the visa number was available for Howard at that time. Thus, according to the "Child Status Protection Act," no matter how much time Howard's I-140 is pending, Rachel will not age out.
Visa numbers are currently available to all EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. Thus, with the new Concurrent Filing rule, any person who is a beneficiary (or applicant) of an I-140 petition that has already been filed or is filing the I-140 at this time is now eligible to file the I-485 application as well. Family members will be eligible to file the I-485 along with the principal alien. However, since the Concurrent Filing rule became effective, visa numbers may become unavailable in the future because more eligible aliens will be filing their I-485. Thus, eligible aliens with aging-out children should file their I-485 as soon as possible. Please see next example.
Example 5
Jenny filed her I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 10, 2002. Jenny has a son, Benny, who is 20 years and eleven months old. However, due to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, many aliens have filed their I-140 and I-485 together and the visa number for EB-2 has been exhausted. However, the visa number will not be current until December 2002 when Benny will be 21 years and three months old. If Jenny's I-140 is pending for six months and will be approved in February 2003, these six months will be reduced from Benny's age in December 2002 when he is 21 years and three months old. Thus, his age is fixed as 20 years nine months. However, if Jenny's I-140 petition is pending for only two months and will be approved in October 2002, Benny's age will be fixed as 21 years and one month. Thus, Benny ages out in this scenario and must wait until his priority date under family-based 2B immigration becomes current.
Example 6
Jason filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on June 30, 2002. Jason has a son, Ken, who is 20 years and ten months old at that time. According to the visa bulletin, an immigration visa number became available for Jason on July 31, 2002. Ken was 20 years and eleven months on July 31, and he is not in the U.S. but in his home country. Because of the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule Jason filed his I-485 on August 10, 2002. If Jason's I-140 is pending for 6 months until December 31, 2002, one month pending period from June 30 to July 31, 2002 should be subtracted from Ken's age on July 31, 2002. Thus, Ken's age is fixed as 20 years and 10 months. Ken may apply for his immigrant visa through Consular Processing at U.S. Consulate in his home country within one year from July 31, 2002.
For more information about "Age Out", please click the following topics:
What is "Age Out"
Child Status Protection Act
If you are a USC, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
If you are an LPR or will be an LPR, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
Age Out Problems in Employment-Based Immigration
Age Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "CSPA"
Child of Asylee and Refugee
Unmarried Sons or Daughters of Naturalized Citizens
Effective Date of the CSPA
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
Age-Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "Child Status Protection Act"
The "Child Status Protection Act", effective August 6, 2002, addresses the problems of minor children losing their eligibility for certain immigration benefits as a result of INS (now USCIS) processing delays. Prior to the passage of this law, a child's eligibility in Employment-Based Immigration situations to be part of his or her parent's application as a derivative beneficiary was based on the child's age at the time that the child's I-485 was adjudicated. Because of enormous backlogs and processing delays, many children turned 21 before the their I-485 applications were adjudicated. In such cases, the children "age-out" and are no longer considered to be part of the parent's application and lose their eligibility to obtain green cards as a derivative beneficiary.
Children who otherwise would have aged out may successfully adjust their status through the additional interplay of the new Concurrent Filing rule and the "Child Status Protection Act." According to the "Child Status Protection Act," the eligibility of these aging-out children will be determined by their age at the date a visa becomes available to them minus the number of days that the Employment-Based immigration petition was pending. Furthermore, these children must file for permanent resident status within one year of such availability. For a clearer illustration of this rule, please see the different scenarios below.
Example 1
The Labor Certification application that was submitted on John's behalf on January 1, 2000 was later approved on December 31, 2000. Afterwards, his employer submits an I-140 (EB-2) immigration petition on John's behalf on January 1, 2002. At that time, John's son, Junior, is 20 years and 7 months old. John's I-140 petition was pending for six months and was approved on July 1, 2002, one month after Junior turns 21 years of age. The visa number for EB-2 was available for John on July 1, 2002. Under the old law without the Child Status Protection Act, Junior has aged out because he is now 21 years old. However, under the new law, his age is fixed as of the date that a visa number becomes available minus the number of days that the I-140 was pending. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, these six months must be subtracted from Junior's age at the time the visa number became available on July 1, 2002. Subtracting six months from Junior's age of 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, Junior's age is fixed at 20 years and 7 months. Thus, even though he was already 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, he is still considered a "child" for purposes of accompanying his parents in adjusting his status to permanent residence. However, Junior has to file his I-485 within one year from the date of I-140 approval, that is before July 1, 2003. The length of time that is takes the USCIS to adjudicate Junior's case is no longer important in these cases.
According to "Child Status Protection Act", if through the above calculation, the child's age is fixed at 21 or older, the child would be automatically reclassified to an appropriate category and retains the principal beneficiary's original priority date. Please see the next example below.
Example 2
Same facts as above except that Junior is 21 years and seven months old at the time of John's I-140 approval. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, Junior's age will be fixed at 21 years and one month. Even with the Child Status Protection Act, Junior still ages out and may not adjust his status at this time. However, he will automatically be reclassified to an appropriate category, family-based 2B, and retain his father's original priority date, January 1, 2000, which is the date John's employer filed John's Labor Certification application.
Example 3
Richard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. Richard's son, Simon, is 21 years and one month old. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Richard filed his I-485 because the visa number was currently available for Richard at that time. However, Simon cannot file his I-485 with his father because he aged out.
Example 4
Howard's daughter, Rachel, is 20 years and 10 months old. Howard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Howard and Rachel filed their I-485 since the visa number was available for Howard at that time. Thus, according to the "Child Status Protection Act," no matter how much time Howard's I-140 is pending, Rachel will not age out.
Visa numbers are currently available to all EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. Thus, with the new Concurrent Filing rule, any person who is a beneficiary (or applicant) of an I-140 petition that has already been filed or is filing the I-140 at this time is now eligible to file the I-485 application as well. Family members will be eligible to file the I-485 along with the principal alien. However, since the Concurrent Filing rule became effective, visa numbers may become unavailable in the future because more eligible aliens will be filing their I-485. Thus, eligible aliens with aging-out children should file their I-485 as soon as possible. Please see next example.
Example 5
Jenny filed her I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 10, 2002. Jenny has a son, Benny, who is 20 years and eleven months old. However, due to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, many aliens have filed their I-140 and I-485 together and the visa number for EB-2 has been exhausted. However, the visa number will not be current until December 2002 when Benny will be 21 years and three months old. If Jenny's I-140 is pending for six months and will be approved in February 2003, these six months will be reduced from Benny's age in December 2002 when he is 21 years and three months old. Thus, his age is fixed as 20 years nine months. However, if Jenny's I-140 petition is pending for only two months and will be approved in October 2002, Benny's age will be fixed as 21 years and one month. Thus, Benny ages out in this scenario and must wait until his priority date under family-based 2B immigration becomes current.
Example 6
Jason filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on June 30, 2002. Jason has a son, Ken, who is 20 years and ten months old at that time. According to the visa bulletin, an immigration visa number became available for Jason on July 31, 2002. Ken was 20 years and eleven months on July 31, and he is not in the U.S. but in his home country. Because of the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule Jason filed his I-485 on August 10, 2002. If Jason's I-140 is pending for 6 months until December 31, 2002, one month pending period from June 30 to July 31, 2002 should be subtracted from Ken's age on July 31, 2002. Thus, Ken's age is fixed as 20 years and 10 months. Ken may apply for his immigrant visa through Consular Processing at U.S. Consulate in his home country within one year from July 31, 2002.
For more information about "Age Out", please click the following topics:
What is "Age Out"
Child Status Protection Act
If you are a USC, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
If you are an LPR or will be an LPR, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
Age Out Problems in Employment-Based Immigration
Age Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "CSPA"
Child of Asylee and Refugee
Unmarried Sons or Daughters of Naturalized Citizens
Effective Date of the CSPA
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
more...
frostrated
07-06 11:25 AM
It is true that a lot of the members signed up just so that they can follow the happenings, and maybe post an immediate question that they might have. We may have a huge membership base, but without any action from such a base can make any plan from the core a failure. What we need to do is to energize the baselevel members. The senate is comprised of senators from our respective states, and the house has reps from each state. We have individual state chapeters for IV. I think the Core will need to plan out a strategy to help the state chapters approach their senators and house reps, while the core concentrates on contacting the DoJ committees. Meeting a few senators here and there will not help. We need to contact ALL the senators and apprise them of the situations. Rather than have a different message sent to each senator, the core will need to define an agenda, and the communication needed. The state chapters will need to take that and follow up with their respective senators and reps, without diluting any of the messages. Having the core meet all the senators is not proper, we need to pitch in too. Unless we work as a team, nothing that the core has planned will work.
I was/am a member in immigration.com where all the talk of starting this forum happened. I have interacted with the core on many occassions before, and I was also one of the first to join this community. But work and family pressures prompted me to stay away, and in the meantime, my handle and password were forgotten. I had to resign up, and what I find today is that there is no understanding between the members. Be thankful that this forum was set up, and contribute positively in any way you can. Without your support, the core cant do it all. Lets stop worring about donations and membership fees. We are all intelligent, and highly paid. We have the brains to talk to senators and house reps. Lets move forward to get at least piecemeal legislations passed. Lets not wait for CIR. CIR is not going to happen, so dont believe in it.
I was/am a member in immigration.com where all the talk of starting this forum happened. I have interacted with the core on many occassions before, and I was also one of the first to join this community. But work and family pressures prompted me to stay away, and in the meantime, my handle and password were forgotten. I had to resign up, and what I find today is that there is no understanding between the members. Be thankful that this forum was set up, and contribute positively in any way you can. Without your support, the core cant do it all. Lets stop worring about donations and membership fees. We are all intelligent, and highly paid. We have the brains to talk to senators and house reps. Lets move forward to get at least piecemeal legislations passed. Lets not wait for CIR. CIR is not going to happen, so dont believe in it.
raysaikat
01-06 09:50 PM
...I do have a point and that is not to let someone throw in unsubstantiated statistics to bring bad name to some Indian universities....
How come observations made over years on 100's to 1000's of students are "unsubstantiated"? Of course you may want not to believe me; that is your prerogative, and so is writing my own experience mine.
How come observations made over years on 100's to 1000's of students are "unsubstantiated"? Of course you may want not to believe me; that is your prerogative, and so is writing my own experience mine.
more...
Dhundhun
06-23 05:18 PM
People,
I am preparing an article for NY times explaining our sufferings! Please contribute your thoughts.
1. What is America losing because of our prolonged wait for Green Cards?
2. How people who have green cards are contributing to the country as a whole ?
3. What if the whole green card process takes less than 3 years ?
Few obvious things are we would have bought a house, gone up in our carrier ladder, spend more and contribute to the economy, our spouse could have started working etc....
I am looking for thoughts and experience other than the above things.
USA is made by illegal immigrants (over 13 millions) and bonded labors (H1B - GC).
Losses suffered by illegal immigrants and H1B-GC people fuels US economy (or at least contributes to that). My contributions so far might have been above half a millions. Indirect beneficiaris are top most companies.
You may get some valuable inputs from http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19766 although I did not fully endorse the thread:
Good observation.
It will be breaking more than making - it will be like this news: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Is_Hindu_marriage_law_breaking_homes/articleshow/3154827.cms
America is not loosing by delaying any process of streamlining any illegal immigrants or H1B-GC process.
I am preparing an article for NY times explaining our sufferings! Please contribute your thoughts.
1. What is America losing because of our prolonged wait for Green Cards?
2. How people who have green cards are contributing to the country as a whole ?
3. What if the whole green card process takes less than 3 years ?
Few obvious things are we would have bought a house, gone up in our carrier ladder, spend more and contribute to the economy, our spouse could have started working etc....
I am looking for thoughts and experience other than the above things.
USA is made by illegal immigrants (over 13 millions) and bonded labors (H1B - GC).
Losses suffered by illegal immigrants and H1B-GC people fuels US economy (or at least contributes to that). My contributions so far might have been above half a millions. Indirect beneficiaris are top most companies.
You may get some valuable inputs from http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19766 although I did not fully endorse the thread:
Good observation.
It will be breaking more than making - it will be like this news: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Is_Hindu_marriage_law_breaking_homes/articleshow/3154827.cms
America is not loosing by delaying any process of streamlining any illegal immigrants or H1B-GC process.
Leo07
05-06 12:28 PM
I appreciate your comments! I was contemplating what's more effective. I think I agree with you now.:)
We have sent letters in the past only to get a standard CANNED answer. It is my opinion that the letters we send do not have any impact, cos as soon as they see "Immigration" as the subject, they (staff) sends the standard letter they have definining the position back.
I do not mean to discourage you, but the need of the hour is to call all the senators. There are 100 of them.
If you were going to do something in addition to the phone calls, Please set up an appointment w/the senator or staff and do a 20 minute Powerpoint presentation. That is more effective.
We have sent letters in the past only to get a standard CANNED answer. It is my opinion that the letters we send do not have any impact, cos as soon as they see "Immigration" as the subject, they (staff) sends the standard letter they have definining the position back.
I do not mean to discourage you, but the need of the hour is to call all the senators. There are 100 of them.
If you were going to do something in addition to the phone calls, Please set up an appointment w/the senator or staff and do a 20 minute Powerpoint presentation. That is more effective.
more...
ssnd03
04-02 03:18 PM
You don't need to be harsh on your comments. You can go ahead and file a case with USCIS. That's what I've been saying here all the time.
Calling me a numbskull I think is inappropriate. You can disagree with me and I can disagree with you which is the essence of this forum but not to abuse each other.
I didn't call you numbskull and I will never call anyone numbskull, so I guess you owe me an apology.
No you or D.E.D. do not deserve an apology for being numbskulls as you both have an agenda of fear mongering so that folks do not raise voices for legitimate reasons.
Calling me a numbskull I think is inappropriate. You can disagree with me and I can disagree with you which is the essence of this forum but not to abuse each other.
I didn't call you numbskull and I will never call anyone numbskull, so I guess you owe me an apology.
No you or D.E.D. do not deserve an apology for being numbskulls as you both have an agenda of fear mongering so that folks do not raise voices for legitimate reasons.
sledge_hammer
04-17 10:21 AM
EAD is not a visa status. It is an employment authorization document. Of course they will not accept it in lieu of H-1B.
What you need to do is show them the receipt of your I-485 application with the A#.
In my case too he asked me if I was on EAD and I said yes. He said that I should then give him a copy of I-485 receipt. However, since I also maintain H-1B visa, I just gave him that.
HSBC denied my refinance application because of EAD status. They said EAD is not one of the statuses they accept. They needed either H1B or GC status. I lost my $325 rate locking fee, not sure what else my real estate attorney is going to charge me because of this denial. I am in the process of talking to other banks.
Hope this helps someone not to loose money.
What you need to do is show them the receipt of your I-485 application with the A#.
In my case too he asked me if I was on EAD and I said yes. He said that I should then give him a copy of I-485 receipt. However, since I also maintain H-1B visa, I just gave him that.
HSBC denied my refinance application because of EAD status. They said EAD is not one of the statuses they accept. They needed either H1B or GC status. I lost my $325 rate locking fee, not sure what else my real estate attorney is going to charge me because of this denial. I am in the process of talking to other banks.
Hope this helps someone not to loose money.
more...
coolpal
02-04 12:23 PM
Hello everyone.
Please share your experiences if you renewed your NJ DL with EAD renewal notice.
My nj dl is due for renewal. I have applied for EAD renewal. I have the receipt notice and am working on EAD.
Thanks
Hi,
I assume you want to renew DL based on the receipt notice for your EAD renewal not the valid EAD itself. If so, I know the Edison DMV located on kilmer rd (near edison train st) gives you 6 mo. renewal... I got it from them in dec based on my h1 rcpt notice...
If you have a valid ead, then they'd renew your DL till the expiry shown on EAD.
pal :)
Please share your experiences if you renewed your NJ DL with EAD renewal notice.
My nj dl is due for renewal. I have applied for EAD renewal. I have the receipt notice and am working on EAD.
Thanks
Hi,
I assume you want to renew DL based on the receipt notice for your EAD renewal not the valid EAD itself. If so, I know the Edison DMV located on kilmer rd (near edison train st) gives you 6 mo. renewal... I got it from them in dec based on my h1 rcpt notice...
If you have a valid ead, then they'd renew your DL till the expiry shown on EAD.
pal :)
leoindiano
06-11 09:19 AM
i dont agree with you, These things are against the law.
1)
All we need is a recapture. Lets concentrate on the bills in congress and senate and get them passed. This needs very less effort than what you prescribed.
2) If 1 fails,
There is no descrimination as such, this is more of a outdated law and bureacratic delay caused wastage of numbers, lets fight it in legal system. Some asylum case won against wastage, why not ours? We have big numbers, If everyone can contribute, this will happen. Hire the same lawyer and am sure he/she wont charge more than what(if any) they charged to an asylum case....
1)
All we need is a recapture. Lets concentrate on the bills in congress and senate and get them passed. This needs very less effort than what you prescribed.
2) If 1 fails,
There is no descrimination as such, this is more of a outdated law and bureacratic delay caused wastage of numbers, lets fight it in legal system. Some asylum case won against wastage, why not ours? We have big numbers, If everyone can contribute, this will happen. Hire the same lawyer and am sure he/she wont charge more than what(if any) they charged to an asylum case....
more...
skv
06-22 11:22 AM
Still per my attorney it shows "In-Process". Mine was filed on Feb 5th...
Visa Bulletin suggests that severe cut-off date retrogressions are likely to occur early in FY 2008, which starts on October 1, 2007.
So we still have some time on our side.
Visa Bulletin suggests that severe cut-off date retrogressions are likely to occur early in FY 2008, which starts on October 1, 2007.
So we still have some time on our side.
immigration07
05-22 10:47 PM
//
wondering how yu came up with a list of contributors.......if i provide my transfer confirmations to IV and still cannot find my name in the list then how will I trust the veracity of yur list.....
....not for an argument but a query
wondering how yu came up with a list of contributors.......if i provide my transfer confirmations to IV and still cannot find my name in the list then how will I trust the veracity of yur list.....
....not for an argument but a query
more...
inspectorfox
09-14 06:45 AM
I don't agree with your opinion on blocking anyone from interfiling. You have a choice to file in any EB category. Share the reason why you filed EB3 instead of EB1? Grow some balls you efin crybaby!
TeddyKoochu
12-11 10:51 AM
I share your pain buddy.I also miss the July 2007 fiasco by 1 month due to my &^@#$% lawyer who took 1 year to apply for labor and kept me in dark .The most painful thing is to see my wife's frustration who inspite of job offers can't join becoz company does not want to sponsor.Just being optimistic is the only hope.
Does anybody have any updates on the I485 Pre--Filing new procedure, that last I read was that this has got postponed to June (USCIS half yearly agenda). This is the only raft and lifeboat for us in the deep sea!
Does anybody have any updates on the I485 Pre--Filing new procedure, that last I read was that this has got postponed to June (USCIS half yearly agenda). This is the only raft and lifeboat for us in the deep sea!
more...
GCwaitforever
06-30 01:30 PM
Got my LC approved June 05 2006.
Took only (!) 4 years from first application...
DOL recevied: Dec 5, 2002.
Got my 45 day letter in Feb 2005.
EB3-RIR
Filed in Philly DOL.
3 others from the same company got theirs LC approved 2.5 years ago and 2 of them have their green card since a year ago. And Im the only one with a US masters degree. Great system...
Congratulations and good luck with remaining stages in GC. Believe me, we need lots of luck not to get stuck in other stages. I am still waiting ever since filing labor petition in November 2001.
Took only (!) 4 years from first application...
DOL recevied: Dec 5, 2002.
Got my 45 day letter in Feb 2005.
EB3-RIR
Filed in Philly DOL.
3 others from the same company got theirs LC approved 2.5 years ago and 2 of them have their green card since a year ago. And Im the only one with a US masters degree. Great system...
Congratulations and good luck with remaining stages in GC. Believe me, we need lots of luck not to get stuck in other stages. I am still waiting ever since filing labor petition in November 2001.
needhelp!
09-10 05:06 PM
vandanaverdia's friend, stillhopefull , asanghi, axp817, xtetic , srgadi, gcnirvana, himu73, iqube00, desperatedesi , Harivinder, vijay1974 , manugee, niva
tinamatthew
07-21 05:44 PM
Hi Tina,
Do you know any employer or recruiting agency (in NY) who can help sponsoring physical therapists for 140 & 485.
I got a NY work permit and got my crdentials evaluated but unfortunately that emplyer is no longer having job vacancy. Now I am stuck and don't know if I can get benefit from some other employer.
Any input would be greatly helpful.
Hi GC
Are you EB2/EB3?
Did your previous employer put up the notice for 10 business days?
Are you willing to relocate if you don't find a sponsor in NY. Time is not on our side if you are EB3.
Even if you found an employer who is willing to sponsor you now, you still have the problem of the 40 day poster.
Let me know.
Do you know any employer or recruiting agency (in NY) who can help sponsoring physical therapists for 140 & 485.
I got a NY work permit and got my crdentials evaluated but unfortunately that emplyer is no longer having job vacancy. Now I am stuck and don't know if I can get benefit from some other employer.
Any input would be greatly helpful.
Hi GC
Are you EB2/EB3?
Did your previous employer put up the notice for 10 business days?
Are you willing to relocate if you don't find a sponsor in NY. Time is not on our side if you are EB3.
Even if you found an employer who is willing to sponsor you now, you still have the problem of the 40 day poster.
Let me know.
gc9906
01-09 06:00 PM
CA-EB2-RIR
Case Source: Region
Priority Date: 12/02/2003
Case Received Date: 12/08/2004
My attorney received a letter from DOL 11/21/2005 noticed the case closure, replied the next day mentioned this is an error to close this case.
FedEex another letter to DOL to reiniate reopen this case on 11/29/2005.
Still no message from DOL now.
ETA#: P-04324-XXXXX
45DL Sent: 03/10/2005 - Attorney & Company did NOT receive it
Notice of Case Closure: 11/21/2005
Try to reopen now
What should I do for this error cause by DOL or USPS?
Case Source: Region
Priority Date: 12/02/2003
Case Received Date: 12/08/2004
My attorney received a letter from DOL 11/21/2005 noticed the case closure, replied the next day mentioned this is an error to close this case.
FedEex another letter to DOL to reiniate reopen this case on 11/29/2005.
Still no message from DOL now.
ETA#: P-04324-XXXXX
45DL Sent: 03/10/2005 - Attorney & Company did NOT receive it
Notice of Case Closure: 11/21/2005
Try to reopen now
What should I do for this error cause by DOL or USPS?
ashutrip
06-20 01:09 PM
Mine was filed in Feb 07. My lawyer has opened an inquiry and its pending too
Atalanta sucks
Atalanta sucks
