humdesi
03-13 01:23 AM
There is a add on Sulekha ...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/add
transitive verb
1: to join or unite so as to bring about an increase or improvement <adds 60 acres to his land> <wine adds a creative touch to cooking>
2: to say further : append
3: to combine (numbers) into an equivalent simple quantity or number
4: to include as a member of a group <don't forget to add me in>
intransitive verb
1 a: to perform addition b: to come together or unite by addition
2 a: to serve as an addition <the movie will add to his fame> b: to make an addition <added to her savings>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/AD
Main Entry: 1ad
Pronunciation: \ˈad\
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Date: 1841
1 : advertisement 2
2 : advertising
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/add
transitive verb
1: to join or unite so as to bring about an increase or improvement <adds 60 acres to his land> <wine adds a creative touch to cooking>
2: to say further : append
3: to combine (numbers) into an equivalent simple quantity or number
4: to include as a member of a group <don't forget to add me in>
intransitive verb
1 a: to perform addition b: to come together or unite by addition
2 a: to serve as an addition <the movie will add to his fame> b: to make an addition <added to her savings>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/AD
Main Entry: 1ad
Pronunciation: \ˈad\
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Date: 1841
1 : advertisement 2
2 : advertising
Abhinaym
09-04 02:09 PM
That would be sweet I guess. My PD is Oct. 07. :)
Same here. Would like the prayers along with waitforevergc....
:D
Same here. Would like the prayers along with waitforevergc....
:D
panky72
06-20 02:28 PM
I would like to know if we can travel on AP without a I485 notice, do they ask for it at POE??
Our attorney never told us that he did not receive my I485 notice till date!! we filed in July and he received one of the notice in Oct 2007. He is telling me now when I about to fly in a months time. He has also asked me apply for the renewal of AP & EAD, he has asked me attach the biometric notice instead of I485 notice and my husbands I485 notice.
Can anyone who has traveled on AP without a I485 notice share their experience. Any suggestions are welcome...
Thanks
You can travel on H-1 without I-485 receipt according to new USCIS rule but for travel on AP you still need the receipt for 485.
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_firule.html
Our attorney never told us that he did not receive my I485 notice till date!! we filed in July and he received one of the notice in Oct 2007. He is telling me now when I about to fly in a months time. He has also asked me apply for the renewal of AP & EAD, he has asked me attach the biometric notice instead of I485 notice and my husbands I485 notice.
Can anyone who has traveled on AP without a I485 notice share their experience. Any suggestions are welcome...
Thanks
You can travel on H-1 without I-485 receipt according to new USCIS rule but for travel on AP you still need the receipt for 485.
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_firule.html
inskrish
08-03 12:27 PM
I am freaking out thinking that my application fell behind a desk somewhere....
That seems better than my case. I had a dream in which the mail room clerk used my application to put his donuts and coffee.:)
Regards,
IK
That seems better than my case. I had a dream in which the mail room clerk used my application to put his donuts and coffee.:)
Regards,
IK
more...
ruchigup
08-06 12:38 PM
Many Congratulations !!!
Vsach
07-17 05:20 PM
Thanks To You All It Would Not Have Been Possible Without Your Support!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
more...
flresident
04-08 01:55 PM
Question regarding Current Immigration Status field on EAD renewal form:
I am applying for EAD renewal for my spouse. Currently she is on H-4 but I am soon planning to use EAD to start another job. I guess my spouse's status will also change from H-4 to AOS (I guess) at the same time. What should be current immigration status for my spouse when I have already started working on another job using EAD.
BTW, I used paper filing for both of us.
Thanks for your input.
I am applying for EAD renewal for my spouse. Currently she is on H-4 but I am soon planning to use EAD to start another job. I guess my spouse's status will also change from H-4 to AOS (I guess) at the same time. What should be current immigration status for my spouse when I have already started working on another job using EAD.
BTW, I used paper filing for both of us.
Thanks for your input.
Waitingnvain
07-31 09:04 PM
H visa by nature is dual intent. One does not lose it after getting EAD.
more...
rajenk
08-09 01:02 AM
That's why I did a premium processing in June. I applied on June 15th in Premium and got it approved by 25th June, I got 3 years. That is correct, they approve H1B for 3 years based on the current Visa bulletin if you are extending Visa beyond 6 years.
But you can apply for 3 years when you are left with 6 months of currently approved Visa. Hope this clarifies your doubt.
-Raj
But you can apply for 3 years when you are left with 6 months of currently approved Visa. Hope this clarifies your doubt.
-Raj
jayleno
08-09 10:17 PM
Hi
I have attended a Kaplan center in NY. Call Kaplan and ask them if they have the ability to sponsor an I-20. I know one in Manhattan(56th street) does.
I have attended a Kaplan center in NY. Call Kaplan and ask them if they have the ability to sponsor an I-20. I know one in Manhattan(56th street) does.
more...
shreekhand
08-03 12:45 AM
FYI - Those "guide lines" are known as CFR - Code of Federal Regulations based on US Code (The Law). There is not much they can do outside of a clear CFR.
If the ROW numbers are not used up, they could be used for EB3/EB2 for India 9and China to some extent) at the end of the Fiscal year. All these AILF/AILA lawyers are saying there is no law for doing this.
But I don't see anyone mentioning anywhere that Law prohibits explicitly using those numbers for India EB3, like they did this year. The Visa bulletin provides guidelines on the country cap, but it does not address the unused numbers condition at the end of fiscal year. SO using them for some backlogged countries is not against the law. I think it finally depends on the internal USCIS officials who interprets the law. They will do whatever they want internally within those guide lines. If nothing is written explicitly that it is against the law, then they are not breaking the law. i am not sure if my assumption and interpretation is correct. But these are my thoughts based on events. But This thread has very good observations and study of the past events. Thanks to Dollar500 and Sanju.
If the ROW numbers are not used up, they could be used for EB3/EB2 for India 9and China to some extent) at the end of the Fiscal year. All these AILF/AILA lawyers are saying there is no law for doing this.
But I don't see anyone mentioning anywhere that Law prohibits explicitly using those numbers for India EB3, like they did this year. The Visa bulletin provides guidelines on the country cap, but it does not address the unused numbers condition at the end of fiscal year. SO using them for some backlogged countries is not against the law. I think it finally depends on the internal USCIS officials who interprets the law. They will do whatever they want internally within those guide lines. If nothing is written explicitly that it is against the law, then they are not breaking the law. i am not sure if my assumption and interpretation is correct. But these are my thoughts based on events. But This thread has very good observations and study of the past events. Thanks to Dollar500 and Sanju.
Libra
09-14 03:38 PM
DC ad..........on radio now
more...
camarasa
07-08 10:08 PM
Stueym I posted this response to your video.
Well you answered your question in your own video - your family are legal immigrants who by your own admission pay taxes (as you should do) � whereas illegal immigrants don�t pay taxes for fear of being caught. The government thinks it�s best to make them legal quicker so they feel safe to pay taxes like everyone else� go figure?
Well you answered your question in your own video - your family are legal immigrants who by your own admission pay taxes (as you should do) � whereas illegal immigrants don�t pay taxes for fear of being caught. The government thinks it�s best to make them legal quicker so they feel safe to pay taxes like everyone else� go figure?
Humpakistani
03-26 02:13 AM
its processing time is not more then a week
more...
LondonTown
03-07 11:33 PM
i missed the second part of your question.
i personally know a friend whose 1-140 was denied and their 485 is obviously pending....he is working on EAD, they have appealed for the 140. While the case is pending the EAD has been extended by 2 years.
Hope this helps.
Stemcell: My 140 was also denied and immediately thereafter 485 was also denied. We appealed 140 which is currently pending, we have never used EAD. My lawyer told that if 140 will get approved as a result of appeal, we can re-open denied 485s.
Are you saying that your friends 485 was NOT denied though his 140 is denied? Please re-confirm with your friend and let us know.
i personally know a friend whose 1-140 was denied and their 485 is obviously pending....he is working on EAD, they have appealed for the 140. While the case is pending the EAD has been extended by 2 years.
Hope this helps.
Stemcell: My 140 was also denied and immediately thereafter 485 was also denied. We appealed 140 which is currently pending, we have never used EAD. My lawyer told that if 140 will get approved as a result of appeal, we can re-open denied 485s.
Are you saying that your friends 485 was NOT denied though his 140 is denied? Please re-confirm with your friend and let us know.
deardar
09-14 03:44 PM
i understood that. I was just kidding :D
The newly acquired ART OF BASHING has kept me on toes.
Scared to post .:p
The newly acquired ART OF BASHING has kept me on toes.
Scared to post .:p
more...
arihant
03-14 04:43 PM
http://www.germany.info/relaunch/info/consular_services/visa/transit.html
after a legal stay in the USA (this includes holders of valid approval notices), Canada or Switzerland- return to the country whose citizenship they hold
do not need an airport transit visa
I presume the above is what you are referring to. My wife (on H4) and I (on H1B) are planning to fly to India later this year on Lufthansa. Both of our Visas have expired although we hold valid H extension approval notices. Will we need transit visas or will the above rule apply? Any body with experience of similar situation?
after a legal stay in the USA (this includes holders of valid approval notices), Canada or Switzerland- return to the country whose citizenship they hold
do not need an airport transit visa
I presume the above is what you are referring to. My wife (on H4) and I (on H1B) are planning to fly to India later this year on Lufthansa. Both of our Visas have expired although we hold valid H extension approval notices. Will we need transit visas or will the above rule apply? Any body with experience of similar situation?
yabadaba
05-24 02:18 PM
Thank you for your comment and the information. Wayne Greene, city editor
>>> <XXXXXX@hotmail.com> 05/23/06 8:32 PM >>>
Name: Y abadaba
Email: XXXXXXXXX
Phone:
City: Atlanta
State: GA
Headline: Still waiting for green card
Publish Date: 5/23/2006
Intended for Publication: No
Comments:
Sir,
This article hits the nail right on the head. However there is one footnote that
needs to be added.
Assuming Salil Pradhan is in the EB-2 Category (Alien with Exceptional Ability
or Advanced degree), if he was born in Mexico he could apply for his I-485, also called adjustment of status, right away.
Just because he was born in India he is being subjected to this backlog
>>> <XXXXXX@hotmail.com> 05/23/06 8:32 PM >>>
Name: Y abadaba
Email: XXXXXXXXX
Phone:
City: Atlanta
State: GA
Headline: Still waiting for green card
Publish Date: 5/23/2006
Intended for Publication: No
Comments:
Sir,
This article hits the nail right on the head. However there is one footnote that
needs to be added.
Assuming Salil Pradhan is in the EB-2 Category (Alien with Exceptional Ability
or Advanced degree), if he was born in Mexico he could apply for his I-485, also called adjustment of status, right away.
Just because he was born in India he is being subjected to this backlog
REEF�
06-06 11:44 AM
The girl looks too blurry but nice :).
And I thought RED means EVIL and BLUE means GOOD :puzzle:?
And I thought RED means EVIL and BLUE means GOOD :puzzle:?
Mohit_Malkani
10-08 11:13 AM
Sorry to hear about your situation.
Take a look at www.immigtation-law.com. Go to the nreaking news swction. They have a great piece on I140/I485 portability.
I have also pasted it here in case you dont get to the website
All the best.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer�s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physically location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensure. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
Take a look at www.immigtation-law.com. Go to the nreaking news swction. They have a great piece on I140/I485 portability.
I have also pasted it here in case you dont get to the website
All the best.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer�s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physically location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensure. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
chalamurariusa
04-29 09:28 PM
Yes getting her here on an F1 Visa is your best option. You can hv the wedding in India but she shd not disclose abt her wedding and shd cm here on her maiden name and after afew months you can hv a registered marriage here. That is what my cousin did and they flew together to US.
No comments:
Post a Comment