cygent
11-12 06:33 PM
Is that even if I-140 is not approved (pending), after I-485 is pending for 180 days, one can change jobs using the EAD?
http://www.visalaw.com/05may4/2may405.html
Read about the AC21 analysis - You can change with either H1 or EAD. You can also do so before 180 days, but not without some risk (case by case basis).
http://www.visalaw.com/05may4/2may405.html
Read about the AC21 analysis - You can change with either H1 or EAD. You can also do so before 180 days, but not without some risk (case by case basis).
wallpaper Related Links: Alex O#39;Loughlin
munnashi
10-31 06:08 AM
Guru's
My I140 is approved on October 24 2007 and original document has got my lawyer and employer, but I have not received any original document. My question is: Does I can get original document or I have to ask to my lawyer or employer?
My I140 is approved on October 24 2007 and original document has got my lawyer and employer, but I have not received any original document. My question is: Does I can get original document or I have to ask to my lawyer or employer?
madras1
01-27 12:38 PM
US needs EB1 and Ph.Ds
Others not contribute as much
Did you know your tri-valley university Ph.d does not count?
Others not contribute as much
Did you know your tri-valley university Ph.d does not count?
2011 Alex O#39;Loughlin Online
wandmaker
02-18 06:29 PM
wandmaker -
Child will be GC holder by birth, if both parents are GC holders. Child must make a trip to US before he/she turns two and trip must be with mother.
Child will, of course, need passport. But no visa.
This is one of the few exceptions when person does not need visa to travel.
Hope it helps.
_________________
Not a legal advise.
If you could post some official documentation that would help rajesh1972
Child will be GC holder by birth, if both parents are GC holders. Child must make a trip to US before he/she turns two and trip must be with mother.
Child will, of course, need passport. But no visa.
This is one of the few exceptions when person does not need visa to travel.
Hope it helps.
_________________
Not a legal advise.
If you could post some official documentation that would help rajesh1972
more...
javadeveloper
12-08 01:10 PM
We received a letter from NSC saying that both our AP applications were approved on 10/21/08.
Keep this proof while traveling , you can try to convince IO that you went outside US by assuming that the AP is approved.Thats the best you can do
Keep this proof while traveling , you can try to convince IO that you went outside US by assuming that the AP is approved.Thats the best you can do
cyclone_p
06-25 01:45 PM
I guess it depends on the employer, but usually the employer put the employee on a "Loss Of Pay" status and the employee cannot work or earn until s/he has the renewed EAD card in her/his possession.
Approvals or Receipt Notices don't work. One must have the renewed EAD card with her/him to work.
Approvals or Receipt Notices don't work. One must have the renewed EAD card with her/him to work.
more...
satishku_2000
02-21 01:09 PM
I saw that in morning , trust me its one of those things I do on my laptop everyday in the morning.
I try to access the page now and it shows the old one ...hehe :mad: ..
Hopefully they are in the process of correcting/retracting ...
I try to access the page now and it shows the old one ...hehe :mad: ..
Hopefully they are in the process of correcting/retracting ...
2010 Starring Alex O#39;Loughlin and
vallabhu
01-02 11:56 AM
Is it BA with Mathematics (honors) or BSC. in Mathematics (honors). or does it say General?
If you are asking about Labor petition It said Mathematics or related feild
if you are my qualification it is BSc with Mathematics. but my trascripts say maths1,maths2, maths3, maths4 as supposed to Mathematics1,Mathematics2,Mathematics3,Mathematics 4.
which made the difference.
but provisional said Mathematics, so adjudicator got confused.
If you are asking about Labor petition It said Mathematics or related feild
if you are my qualification it is BSc with Mathematics. but my trascripts say maths1,maths2, maths3, maths4 as supposed to Mathematics1,Mathematics2,Mathematics3,Mathematics 4.
which made the difference.
but provisional said Mathematics, so adjudicator got confused.
more...
harrydr
01-06 09:56 AM
Hey Teddy,
During you process for porting from EB3 to EB2 did you:
1. Do this within the same organization after getting your advanced degree?
2. Did you have to file for a new PERM and start from the begineeing under EB2?
3. Were you successfully able to port your PD or did you start with a new PD under EB2?
During you process for porting from EB3 to EB2 did you:
1. Do this within the same organization after getting your advanced degree?
2. Did you have to file for a new PERM and start from the begineeing under EB2?
3. Were you successfully able to port your PD or did you start with a new PD under EB2?
hair Alex thought it was funny.
gee_see
10-19 02:21 PM
I found an interesting article on AC21 portability in cyrusmetha.com
Here is the portion of the article appeared on May 27, 2005
about PORTABILITY DURING ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS
-----------
Interestingly, the memo also advises that although a difference in the wage offer on the approved labor certification or I-140 and the new employment cannot be used as a basis of denial, a substantial discrepancy between the previous and the new wage may be taken into consideration as a factor in determining if the new employment is �same or similar.� It is possible, however, for one to work in a �same or similar� occupation even if there is a substantial discrepancy in the wage. A CEO of a Fortune 100 corporation may be paid several million of dollars each year. The CEO of a start-up could make much less, say $50,000 per annum. One should be able to successfully argue that the CEO of a start-up is in a �same or similar� job to the CEO of a Fortune 100 corporation.
----------
Experts please discuss....
Here is the portion of the article appeared on May 27, 2005
about PORTABILITY DURING ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS
-----------
Interestingly, the memo also advises that although a difference in the wage offer on the approved labor certification or I-140 and the new employment cannot be used as a basis of denial, a substantial discrepancy between the previous and the new wage may be taken into consideration as a factor in determining if the new employment is �same or similar.� It is possible, however, for one to work in a �same or similar� occupation even if there is a substantial discrepancy in the wage. A CEO of a Fortune 100 corporation may be paid several million of dollars each year. The CEO of a start-up could make much less, say $50,000 per annum. One should be able to successfully argue that the CEO of a start-up is in a �same or similar� job to the CEO of a Fortune 100 corporation.
----------
Experts please discuss....
more...
pcs
04-15 01:36 PM
Tonne of jobs in IT sector. Apply through www.naukri.com.
Indian immigration system will not discriminate
All the best
Indian immigration system will not discriminate
All the best
hot Kelly and Alex O#39;Loughlin
piyu7444
05-08 07:16 PM
thanks piyu7444 ... dont we all love green (like green card, green car, green back ...)
Yeah man atleast I do love all the greeeeeeeeensssssssss from dot to dollar....lol
Yeah man atleast I do love all the greeeeeeeeensssssssss from dot to dollar....lol
more...
house Alex O#39;Loughlin Excited For
trueguy
12-11 01:43 AM
In a testimony to the House Judiciary Committee back in Apr/May 08, the USCIS clearly stated that it had changed its policy regarding which applications would be adjudicated first.
As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.
The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.
Here is how:
Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.
So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.
When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.
The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.
If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.
As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.
Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.
Very good points. I can't agree with you any more.
The question is how do we raise it as an issue so USCIS follow FIFO.
As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.
The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.
Here is how:
Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.
So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.
When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.
The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.
If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.
As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.
Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.
Very good points. I can't agree with you any more.
The question is how do we raise it as an issue so USCIS follow FIFO.
tattoo tagged reblog alex o#39;loughlin
GCard_Dream
04-27 05:15 PM
I am not sure. May be it is. Details are still not out yet and I don't see the text of the bill on thomas. Hopefully more detail will emerge in next day or so and then we will know for sure.
http://www.swnebr.net/newspaper/cgi-bin/articles/articlearchiver.pl?160478
http://www.swnebr.net/newspaper/cgi-bin/articles/articlearchiver.pl?160478
more...
pictures Tags: alex o#39;loughlin Steve
retropain
09-01 11:08 AM
What's particularly interesting is the number of 'scare words' used in this selected testimony on aspects of the CIR bill. Its a lot like Loo Dobbs "War" on the middle class. Its clear CIS, Nusa, FAIR provide the script to him on immigration matters. I knew Loo wasn't that creative in the first place
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
dresses Alex O Loughlin Graphics
gchopes
08-04 04:04 PM
my2cents - Agreed and Understood. But what if you are not on H1/H4 and just on EAD/AP aka AOS status. In that case you cannot mail the second AP and return on that. You need to return on the first AP.
Not True
All dual intention like H1b/H4 are treated differently. For those AOS applicants where they also have H1b/H4 status ( Not necessarily VISA stamped) ..they need to be here when filed and if they leave after filing then neither I-485 or I-131 will get cancelled.
After approval, you can mail them.
I have known 2 person whose spouses came without problem.
Now , If you are F1 or B1 pure non immigrant VISA and you leave without it being approved then you are in problem.
Not True
All dual intention like H1b/H4 are treated differently. For those AOS applicants where they also have H1b/H4 status ( Not necessarily VISA stamped) ..they need to be here when filed and if they leave after filing then neither I-485 or I-131 will get cancelled.
After approval, you can mail them.
I have known 2 person whose spouses came without problem.
Now , If you are F1 or B1 pure non immigrant VISA and you leave without it being approved then you are in problem.
more...
makeup It looks like Alex O#39;Loughlin
aj1234567
10-04 06:29 PM
Hi Gurus-
One of my friends had received strange letter from the consulate saying that
We are obliged to inform you that petition for temporary employment for xyz InfoTech .has been returned to the department of homeland security(DHS) for reconsideration, in your case you did not meet the necessary criteria of the visa category, we have asked DHS to revoke the petition.
With this letter we are returning your passport. no additional information or documents are required from you.
We will contact you once a final decision has been made on your application
Please advice me why they send this letter and what necessary action we need to take..
Thanks
Aj
One of my friends had received strange letter from the consulate saying that
We are obliged to inform you that petition for temporary employment for xyz InfoTech .has been returned to the department of homeland security(DHS) for reconsideration, in your case you did not meet the necessary criteria of the visa category, we have asked DHS to revoke the petition.
With this letter we are returning your passport. no additional information or documents are required from you.
We will contact you once a final decision has been made on your application
Please advice me why they send this letter and what necessary action we need to take..
Thanks
Aj
girlfriend Latest on Alex O#39;Loughlin All
learning01
04-06 10:11 PM
There is no serious effort by the republicans. They are fractured, divided, into groups. They have no motivation to get this comprehensive bill passed. I have been observing the tactics and attitudes of these republican senators and democratic senators. I am more shocked by the game of one-upmanship on the part of Frist, Kyl, Cornyn, Craig. I don't see rhyme or reason in their sppeches. The bill has no life for the next 3 weeks.
i am sorry..i couldnt follow todays proceedings..whn i cam to iv site in the evening..everyone says bill is dead
whn i went to immigration-law.com, they say the following
cud someone tell me which one is true??????????
We reported earlier the Senate Republican Members Agreement last night. Today, the Democratic Minority Leader and other Democractic leaders agreed to the proposal, turning the Republican agreement into the Bi-Partisan Agreement. This dramatic break-through opens a door to the possibility of passing the Senate version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, S. 2454, as amended before this week is over and before the Congress goes into the recess next two weeks.
The development is accompanied by three other developments:
President released statement supporting the bi-partisan agreement;
Senate rejected the Democrat's motion to cloture for the Specter amendments to S.2454;
Senate also relected the Republican Kyl' motion for his amendments.
Now we see the light at the end of the tunnel!!
i am sorry..i couldnt follow todays proceedings..whn i cam to iv site in the evening..everyone says bill is dead
whn i went to immigration-law.com, they say the following
cud someone tell me which one is true??????????
We reported earlier the Senate Republican Members Agreement last night. Today, the Democratic Minority Leader and other Democractic leaders agreed to the proposal, turning the Republican agreement into the Bi-Partisan Agreement. This dramatic break-through opens a door to the possibility of passing the Senate version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, S. 2454, as amended before this week is over and before the Congress goes into the recess next two weeks.
The development is accompanied by three other developments:
President released statement supporting the bi-partisan agreement;
Senate rejected the Democrat's motion to cloture for the Specter amendments to S.2454;
Senate also relected the Republican Kyl' motion for his amendments.
Now we see the light at the end of the tunnel!!
hairstyles Set with Alex O#39;Loughlin
silveroaks
10-03 10:37 AM
They do the same n FL and whats worse....they only issue temporary license that expires every year.
aspiration
06-17 11:26 AM
Don't think that your call doesn't matter.. They do take the number of person called for the same issue and this is the response i got from CHC Dennis Cardoza's office...
Dennis Cardoza : Well aware of the bills, i was number 15 for friday the 13th and when i asked for total number, she said we have received 100 or so calls for these bills....
And two or three lawmakers office said that we are reviewing the bills at the moment.. so definitely a positive sign...
So grab your phone and reach out to house reps... Just try to call 2 members and i bet that you will finish the rest of the calls and you'll reply to my message so you can share your experience and encourage others.
Dennis Cardoza : Well aware of the bills, i was number 15 for friday the 13th and when i asked for total number, she said we have received 100 or so calls for these bills....
And two or three lawmakers office said that we are reviewing the bills at the moment.. so definitely a positive sign...
So grab your phone and reach out to house reps... Just try to call 2 members and i bet that you will finish the rest of the calls and you'll reply to my message so you can share your experience and encourage others.
kaisersose
06-02 01:32 PM
Isnt all that in picture only when you are travelling outside ?
Nope...she is out of status if you lose your H-1b. At any point of time, inside the US, she has to have a valid status. It can be H-4, H-4 extension pending or AOS. If she is not in any of the three, then she is accrueing unlawful presence.
Nope...she is out of status if you lose your H-1b. At any point of time, inside the US, she has to have a valid status. It can be H-4, H-4 extension pending or AOS. If she is not in any of the three, then she is accrueing unlawful presence.
No comments:
Post a Comment