sbabunle
01-31 02:58 PM
Well again...if they allow to file 485, most of those folks will
file EAD and Parole too.. more money and more money :D
Its the same reason they wont discontinue Green Card lottery.
I think last time about 5mil people participated with $100 entry fee.
So its $500 Mil dollars..thats half a billion.....Nobody would kill the
goose who lays golden eggs... :D :D :D :D
Well, you are bringing up a very good point. May be we can setup a webfax event to USCIS, for allowing us to I-485 even if PD is not current, so that they can reap the exact benefit of this fees hike.
Core members - what say you???
file EAD and Parole too.. more money and more money :D
Its the same reason they wont discontinue Green Card lottery.
I think last time about 5mil people participated with $100 entry fee.
So its $500 Mil dollars..thats half a billion.....Nobody would kill the
goose who lays golden eggs... :D :D :D :D
Well, you are bringing up a very good point. May be we can setup a webfax event to USCIS, for allowing us to I-485 even if PD is not current, so that they can reap the exact benefit of this fees hike.
Core members - what say you???
wallpaper Abstract Wallpaper Abstract
gcdreamer05
01-05 11:14 AM
Folks,
I agree 100% with the previous post person.
I myself am a PMP. It is very easy to do one, you need to have the right project mgmt experience (PMI may audit it) and you need to prepare for few months and you can clear it easily.
But the question is, more than the exam it is the practical experience, sometimes this job can be so frustrating and you feel like a sandwich being hit on both sides.
If you already have a PM experience and you dont have the certification, definetly go for it, it is worth the spending.
Again remember it expires in 3 yrs , you got to keep renewing your PDUs to stay current... its not like MCSD or MCAD which is for life long...
I agree 100% with the previous post person.
I myself am a PMP. It is very easy to do one, you need to have the right project mgmt experience (PMI may audit it) and you need to prepare for few months and you can clear it easily.
But the question is, more than the exam it is the practical experience, sometimes this job can be so frustrating and you feel like a sandwich being hit on both sides.
If you already have a PM experience and you dont have the certification, definetly go for it, it is worth the spending.
Again remember it expires in 3 yrs , you got to keep renewing your PDUs to stay current... its not like MCSD or MCAD which is for life long...
saketkapur
11-19 03:03 PM
anything to make the que move faster...........
FIFO would be ideal but then so would be expecting anything meaningful from the USCIS......
FIFO would be ideal but then so would be expecting anything meaningful from the USCIS......
2011 Old Bridge abstract Widescreen
logiclife
05-22 04:47 PM
I think I made a mistake by being sarcastic about the bill. Members assume that I have given up hope.
That is not true.
I am going to close this thread.
This was a joke on the bill and meant to point out the injustice. Please ignore this.
I have been to DC 4 times this year in 2007 and I or other core group members are not going to give up on amendments. And Aman has been there every 2 weeks. I am not kidding. He has been there either on Mon-Tue or Thu-Fri 2 times each month doing meetings in Senate offices and educating and finding sponsors. We are not going to give up now after all that hard work just because the bill is ridiculous.
Just because I am taunting the injustice of the bill doesnt mean that I or others have given up. WE ARE in position to put in amendments. How much, I dont know. But pretty sure that we will make a good amount of difference.
That is not true.
I am going to close this thread.
This was a joke on the bill and meant to point out the injustice. Please ignore this.
I have been to DC 4 times this year in 2007 and I or other core group members are not going to give up on amendments. And Aman has been there every 2 weeks. I am not kidding. He has been there either on Mon-Tue or Thu-Fri 2 times each month doing meetings in Senate offices and educating and finding sponsors. We are not going to give up now after all that hard work just because the bill is ridiculous.
Just because I am taunting the injustice of the bill doesnt mean that I or others have given up. WE ARE in position to put in amendments. How much, I dont know. But pretty sure that we will make a good amount of difference.
more...
raysaikat
07-19 09:33 PM
OK guys, here is what I think. Being in US on a visitor visa, and then applying for an I-485 does seem like a violation of visa terms, but the other way round seem to be fine. I mean she can apply for an I-485 first in India, and then apply for a visitor visa later while her I-485 application is pending. While applying for a visitor visa she just has to honestly tell the consulate officer that her I-485 is pending and there should be no problems.
If she applies for I-485, she has *beyond a shadow of doubt" expressed immigration intent. Her visitor visa request will immediately be rejected.
If this is not so, then it means that all those who have filed I-485 in their home countries through consular processing route are in effect barred from entering US till some decision is taken on their application. This sounds bizarre. Does not make sense. What do you say?
Once someone applies for I-485, then s/he has expressed immigration intent. From that time onwards s/he cannot apply for any visa that requires intent for non-immigration, such as visitor's visa, student visa, etc. He/she can only apply for a dual-intent visa, such as H1/L1/H4, etc., after expressing immigration intent.
It is your own personal problem if you find this rule as "bizarre", but that's the rule.
If she applies for I-485, she has *beyond a shadow of doubt" expressed immigration intent. Her visitor visa request will immediately be rejected.
If this is not so, then it means that all those who have filed I-485 in their home countries through consular processing route are in effect barred from entering US till some decision is taken on their application. This sounds bizarre. Does not make sense. What do you say?
Once someone applies for I-485, then s/he has expressed immigration intent. From that time onwards s/he cannot apply for any visa that requires intent for non-immigration, such as visitor's visa, student visa, etc. He/she can only apply for a dual-intent visa, such as H1/L1/H4, etc., after expressing immigration intent.
It is your own personal problem if you find this rule as "bizarre", but that's the rule.
ak_manu
12-22 01:35 PM
Hello All,
I have applied for PIO card for my son (who is US citizen) a month ago. We need to travel to India in end of Jan 2011 (have 1 more month). I am not sure when i would get my PIO card. Not sure if I would need to apply for ENTRY VISA to India for my son. I concern is I would have to also send out his original passport along with VISA application. I am worried if it might get lost. Q's -
1 Does any one have idea how long it took to get the entry visa?
2. Has anyone applied for entry visa and has any nightmares like loosing passport etc?
Thanks
AK_MANU
I have applied for PIO card for my son (who is US citizen) a month ago. We need to travel to India in end of Jan 2011 (have 1 more month). I am not sure when i would get my PIO card. Not sure if I would need to apply for ENTRY VISA to India for my son. I concern is I would have to also send out his original passport along with VISA application. I am worried if it might get lost. Q's -
1 Does any one have idea how long it took to get the entry visa?
2. Has anyone applied for entry visa and has any nightmares like loosing passport etc?
Thanks
AK_MANU
more...
add78
06-12 03:11 PM
If there was ever a greater need to call your congressman/woman/senator/CHC member, the time is NOW. As the momentum builds, we need to call in greater numbers to mobilize congressional support in terms of more sponsors. Please CALL per action items. Call now. Ask others to call. Make it a resolution to get one friend a day to call. And persuade that one friend to donate.
Together, we CAN make the change happen.
Together, we WILL be the change that we seek.
Yes We Can.
Yes We Will.
Yes We Are.
Together, we CAN make the change happen.
Together, we WILL be the change that we seek.
Yes We Can.
Yes We Will.
Yes We Are.
2010 3 Abstract Aurora Gold
Legal
05-29 04:53 PM
That's not true. They will still process backlogged applications filed prior
when he says no green cards will be issued he means no I-140s will be
approved which is true.
when he says no green cards will be issued he means no I-140s will be
approved which is true.
more...
GC_Wait2002
07-31 09:58 PM
Hi Sanbaj,
You are very helpful and thanks once again for sharing your experiences and knowlege on interfiling.
Regards
GC_wait2002
You are very helpful and thanks once again for sharing your experiences and knowlege on interfiling.
Regards
GC_wait2002
hair Wallpaper by: relhom | Posted
RajForGC
06-07 12:10 PM
EB3 140 is already approved on Jan 2006, we re-applied 140 again on EB2 but got the Priority date of EB3 for EB2 of Sep 2005. But I Think priority date is only for Labor not 140, so my 140 for EB2 is still May 21 isn't it?
more...
redcard
12-12 02:04 PM
im waiting for the groans and moans
You don't have to wait you could do some work at your office.
You don't have to wait you could do some work at your office.
hot hp wallpapers widescreen. hd
arc
10-03 11:21 AM
Transfer people are stuck for FP notices... If only csc could have done the FP along with the ead/ap...
more...
house abstract-wallpaper-widescreen-
factoryman
06-21 11:22 AM
for folks even if PD is not current, then it CF went away. Now not there for such folks.
CF only if PD is current.
Isn't concurrent filing still available?
CF only if PD is current.
Isn't concurrent filing still available?
tattoo abstract wallpaper. free
Berkeleybee
03-09 04:46 PM
Report back
On speeding up Labor certification
When one of us said congress's intention for LC is 21-60 days, the staffer replied that was before 911. How can we make this happen and speeded up the work in PBEC/DBEC?
The staffer also mentioned that a lot of time is spent on "background check" and mentioned it was suggested it might be better for FBI to do it. But of course the FBI had other things to do and that suggestion didn't fly.
One of us mentioned the clogging due to 245-i. LCs could be speeded up -- if the paper work of those on the 245-1 (Apr.,25,2001) track is different from us, then could those be handled differently/ in another place to speed up our LCs in PBEC and DBEC.
Bluekayal
Great summary Bluekayal!
A few points of response about congressional intent and reality and the 9-11 defense [all, you need to read our presentation to follow this discussion]
(1) Labor Cert: Intent = 21-60 days; This stage has nothing to do with 9-11! Nothing at all! There has been no change in process here, maybe there are more applications, but that doesn't change the intent reality story. Again, they need to fund the program in order to achieve intent.
(2) I-485/I-140: Intent = 6 months; Remember that the presidential mandate for 6 month times is a post-9-11 mandate -- CIS's own director has testified before Congress that they are trying to achieve this goal. So the 9-11 argument doesn't wash here either -- they need to fund the operation properly so that the president's mandate is satisfied.
(3) Background checks
(a) USCIS queries the IBIS database maintained by Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
(b) FBI conducts a finger print check
(c) FBI conducts a name check.
So I don't know what she meant by FBI can do it. They already are.
On speeding up Labor certification
When one of us said congress's intention for LC is 21-60 days, the staffer replied that was before 911. How can we make this happen and speeded up the work in PBEC/DBEC?
The staffer also mentioned that a lot of time is spent on "background check" and mentioned it was suggested it might be better for FBI to do it. But of course the FBI had other things to do and that suggestion didn't fly.
One of us mentioned the clogging due to 245-i. LCs could be speeded up -- if the paper work of those on the 245-1 (Apr.,25,2001) track is different from us, then could those be handled differently/ in another place to speed up our LCs in PBEC and DBEC.
Bluekayal
Great summary Bluekayal!
A few points of response about congressional intent and reality and the 9-11 defense [all, you need to read our presentation to follow this discussion]
(1) Labor Cert: Intent = 21-60 days; This stage has nothing to do with 9-11! Nothing at all! There has been no change in process here, maybe there are more applications, but that doesn't change the intent reality story. Again, they need to fund the program in order to achieve intent.
(2) I-485/I-140: Intent = 6 months; Remember that the presidential mandate for 6 month times is a post-9-11 mandate -- CIS's own director has testified before Congress that they are trying to achieve this goal. So the 9-11 argument doesn't wash here either -- they need to fund the operation properly so that the president's mandate is satisfied.
(3) Background checks
(a) USCIS queries the IBIS database maintained by Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
(b) FBI conducts a finger print check
(c) FBI conducts a name check.
So I don't know what she meant by FBI can do it. They already are.
more...
pictures abstract-wallpaper-widescreen.
Chiwere
05-29 11:21 PM
Done
dresses river Widescreen wallpaper
EndlessWait
10-02 01:30 PM
Hi,
Filed at NSC on Jul 21st. Received as per FedEx receipt on Jul 23rd. Transferred I-485s, EADs and APs applications from NSC to CSC.
Received EADs and APs on Sept 25th from CSC.
Sept 18th notice received that I-485s have been moved back from CSC to NSC.
Rceipt date for transfer notice is Sept 18th. Dont see my actual Jul 23rd date anywhere.
When I posted this on , posters suggested that there is a "Receipt Notice" versus a "Transfer Notice".
My lawyer received the receipt notice. Will check with him about the Receipt date on that notice and post later today.
Any other ideas what this all means would be appreciated.
Seems like a ping pong ball being hit from one center to another with no result
:(
recipet notice would keep the 23rd july date..in ur case
Filed at NSC on Jul 21st. Received as per FedEx receipt on Jul 23rd. Transferred I-485s, EADs and APs applications from NSC to CSC.
Received EADs and APs on Sept 25th from CSC.
Sept 18th notice received that I-485s have been moved back from CSC to NSC.
Rceipt date for transfer notice is Sept 18th. Dont see my actual Jul 23rd date anywhere.
When I posted this on , posters suggested that there is a "Receipt Notice" versus a "Transfer Notice".
My lawyer received the receipt notice. Will check with him about the Receipt date on that notice and post later today.
Any other ideas what this all means would be appreciated.
Seems like a ping pong ball being hit from one center to another with no result
:(
recipet notice would keep the 23rd july date..in ur case
more...
makeup Rays Abstract Wallpaper
raysaikat
07-20 12:50 AM
[snip...]
Life is like a game of chess. Make the move which makes the best sense at any stage. What is the point in thinking about past moves?
To put it mathematically why this is the wrong perspective: life is not a Markov chain (at least, not under the definition of state being the "status quo")!
Life is like a game of chess. Make the move which makes the best sense at any stage. What is the point in thinking about past moves?
To put it mathematically why this is the wrong perspective: life is not a Markov chain (at least, not under the definition of state being the "status quo")!
girlfriend Widescreen Wallpapers You
LegallyGC
08-09 10:46 AM
Guys,
There was a question and answer section on this site and i found this which might help us..
---------------------------------
12. Question(08/03/10): It has taken several years for me to receive the I-485 approval yesterday based on the employment-based petition filed by my employer. I have never changed employer. Neither have I invoked AC 21 change of employment. Since the 485 is approved, I am seeking new employment and started sending out employment applications to various employers. Is there any law that forces me to work for the green card sponsoring employer even after the green card is approved?
Answer: The green card employment is "permanent" employment. "Permanent" means the employment term is not temporary and must be for a period of "indefinite" duration. Inasmuch as there is no ending date, it can be considered a permanent terms of employment. The employer sponsed employment based immigration requires both the employer and employee to retain "intent" to offer such permanent employment and accept such permanent employment on or before the I-485 is approved. If the employer does not maintain such "intent" and file a labor certification and I-140 petition, It can be construed a fraud. If the employee does not have such "intent" and sign the labor certification application and and file I-485 application based on the employer-sponsored I-140 petition, it can also be considered a fraud. The issue is "intent" which is a mental state as judged from the actions of the employer or employee. AC-21 portability of approved I-140 petition changed the picture and both the employer and employee are freed from such obligation if two conditions are met. One is that until AC-21 is invoked, the employer and employee retain such intent. Practically, in the context of AC-21, such oblication is limited until the alien invokes the AC-21 change of employment after 180 days of filing of I-485 application in similar or same occupational classification. There is a grey area where the alien does not invoke AC-21 and change of employment. In such context, it may be assumed that both the employer and the employee retain such intent at the time I-485 is approved. In old days, the legacy INS was active in initiating a revocation of green card proceeding before the immigration courts to stip off the approved green card and launch a deportation proceeding based either on the ground that there was a fraud on the parties or the INS approved the I-485 application without the knowledge of such fact of ill-conceived intent of the parties. The theory of the law is that "had the agency known the true facts." the agency would not have approved the employment-based I-485 because the I-485 could have been ineligible without such intent. Intent is proven in most cases by the circumstantial evidence since no one can go into the state of mind of other person. The evidence they used to use was the evidence of search of another employment immediately before or after I-485 was approved. For the reasons, even though there is no fixed period of time for a new green card holder to work for the sponsoring employer, legal counsels advised the employees not to send out employment application in writing to other employers immediately prior to the approval of I-485 application or at least for certain period of time like two months not to change employment, because such behavior can be construed as relection of the true state of mind and intent of the employee not to work for the sponsoring employer before or on the date of approval of I-485 application owing to short period of time that lapsed when they changed employment. This problem used to pop up during the naturalization proceeding when the agency learned that the alien changed employment immediately before or after the green card is granted. The foregoing inent issue can be overridden when the alien left the job because of employer's decision to terminate the employment or because of change of circumstances which are beyond the control of the parties such as slow-down of business and layoffs. Again AC-21 affected this issue, and it appears that the agency may no longer actively look for this issue. But theoretically, the issue still exists and a law is a law. Accordingly, there is always a potential risk of this issue popping up after green card is approved, especially when there is a grudged sponsoring employer who obtained and possessed such adverse evidence and contact the agency to revoke the green card. Just beware.
------------------------
Hope this helps.
Pappu, there is nothing wrong in seeking exact clarification though from USCIS because things are not really clear on this regard and its better to get clear cut answer to the immigrant community..
There was a question and answer section on this site and i found this which might help us..
---------------------------------
12. Question(08/03/10): It has taken several years for me to receive the I-485 approval yesterday based on the employment-based petition filed by my employer. I have never changed employer. Neither have I invoked AC 21 change of employment. Since the 485 is approved, I am seeking new employment and started sending out employment applications to various employers. Is there any law that forces me to work for the green card sponsoring employer even after the green card is approved?
Answer: The green card employment is "permanent" employment. "Permanent" means the employment term is not temporary and must be for a period of "indefinite" duration. Inasmuch as there is no ending date, it can be considered a permanent terms of employment. The employer sponsed employment based immigration requires both the employer and employee to retain "intent" to offer such permanent employment and accept such permanent employment on or before the I-485 is approved. If the employer does not maintain such "intent" and file a labor certification and I-140 petition, It can be construed a fraud. If the employee does not have such "intent" and sign the labor certification application and and file I-485 application based on the employer-sponsored I-140 petition, it can also be considered a fraud. The issue is "intent" which is a mental state as judged from the actions of the employer or employee. AC-21 portability of approved I-140 petition changed the picture and both the employer and employee are freed from such obligation if two conditions are met. One is that until AC-21 is invoked, the employer and employee retain such intent. Practically, in the context of AC-21, such oblication is limited until the alien invokes the AC-21 change of employment after 180 days of filing of I-485 application in similar or same occupational classification. There is a grey area where the alien does not invoke AC-21 and change of employment. In such context, it may be assumed that both the employer and the employee retain such intent at the time I-485 is approved. In old days, the legacy INS was active in initiating a revocation of green card proceeding before the immigration courts to stip off the approved green card and launch a deportation proceeding based either on the ground that there was a fraud on the parties or the INS approved the I-485 application without the knowledge of such fact of ill-conceived intent of the parties. The theory of the law is that "had the agency known the true facts." the agency would not have approved the employment-based I-485 because the I-485 could have been ineligible without such intent. Intent is proven in most cases by the circumstantial evidence since no one can go into the state of mind of other person. The evidence they used to use was the evidence of search of another employment immediately before or after I-485 was approved. For the reasons, even though there is no fixed period of time for a new green card holder to work for the sponsoring employer, legal counsels advised the employees not to send out employment application in writing to other employers immediately prior to the approval of I-485 application or at least for certain period of time like two months not to change employment, because such behavior can be construed as relection of the true state of mind and intent of the employee not to work for the sponsoring employer before or on the date of approval of I-485 application owing to short period of time that lapsed when they changed employment. This problem used to pop up during the naturalization proceeding when the agency learned that the alien changed employment immediately before or after the green card is granted. The foregoing inent issue can be overridden when the alien left the job because of employer's decision to terminate the employment or because of change of circumstances which are beyond the control of the parties such as slow-down of business and layoffs. Again AC-21 affected this issue, and it appears that the agency may no longer actively look for this issue. But theoretically, the issue still exists and a law is a law. Accordingly, there is always a potential risk of this issue popping up after green card is approved, especially when there is a grudged sponsoring employer who obtained and possessed such adverse evidence and contact the agency to revoke the green card. Just beware.
------------------------
Hope this helps.
Pappu, there is nothing wrong in seeking exact clarification though from USCIS because things are not really clear on this regard and its better to get clear cut answer to the immigrant community..
hairstyles land widescreen wallpaper
willwin
02-20 01:06 PM
judging by how much class you're displaying sorry to say your pet dog deserves a gc more than you do. :p
Mantric, you are absolutely right. Also, I am totally agree with your points and whatever you have mentioned in your message is appreciable.
LOL. What a punch!!!
Mantric, you are absolutely right. Also, I am totally agree with your points and whatever you have mentioned in your message is appreciable.
LOL. What a punch!!!
Kitiara
02-11 08:59 AM
And I'll never forget it. ;)
That accounts for two of my votes, and a few others have said they voted for me, but I think there's one or two mystery votes. Same for everyone, really. :)
That accounts for two of my votes, and a few others have said they voted for me, but I think there's one or two mystery votes. Same for everyone, really. :)
gauravsh
02-21 01:22 PM
I worked at a university and I140 approved TSC/AOS at TSC
Sorry for my ignorance but what is TSC/AOS at TSC?
Did you got your GC yet?
My I140 got approved in sep'08 and I am a permament employe for a american company.
Sorry for my ignorance but what is TSC/AOS at TSC?
Did you got your GC yet?
My I140 got approved in sep'08 and I am a permament employe for a american company.
No comments:
Post a Comment