pamith
05-13 08:42 PM
3-4 months may be, but you can apply for AP and EAD.
wallpaper pub lunch yesterday. New
geesee
07-23 04:10 PM
It mentions that in any of the incorrect filing, cases will be rejected...
does that mean I-485 is rejected for good or one cannot apply it again until PD becomes current in future?
does that mean I-485 is rejected for good or one cannot apply it again until PD becomes current in future?
gapala
06-04 01:08 PM
Guys, there is nothing to be excited about for EB folks in this bill.. This appears to help FB folks and in the name of re-union, which is a good thing ofcourse but, for us.. If I read between the lines, I have a bad feeling... Are they trying to re-capture the EB wasted visa numbers along with FB wasted and allocate all those to FB folks? :confused:
Let the EB folks live this same life?
God knows...
Let the EB folks live this same life?
God knows...
2011 footballer Wayne Bridge
lacrossegc
12-05 09:49 PM
You mean Visa Bulletin programmer?
Hillarious !! you the man pappu !:eek:
Hillarious !! you the man pappu !:eek:
more...
mohanrajgoyal
06-02 04:42 PM
Hi,
I also went through similar scenario with my WIFE EAD. We didn't receive the receipt notice for her. When we called Texas Service center, CS told us he can't regenerate it again. We got the approval email on Saturday night.
Filed on April 7, 2008
Approval Email on May 31, 2008
I also went through similar scenario with my WIFE EAD. We didn't receive the receipt notice for her. When we called Texas Service center, CS told us he can't regenerate it again. We got the approval email on Saturday night.
Filed on April 7, 2008
Approval Email on May 31, 2008
ata1234
07-14 12:22 PM
Receipt Number: lin0720551219
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Case received and pending.
On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice .
Whoever it is, they are lucky! All the best!!
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Case received and pending.
On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice .
Whoever it is, they are lucky! All the best!!
more...
roseball
07-28 04:32 PM
Roseball and sumkum,
Thanks for the reply. One more question. What is the validity date of your new AP? Does it start from the date of your current AP expiration date or is it from the date of approval.
My new AP starts from the date my current AP expires.
Thanks for the reply. One more question. What is the validity date of your new AP? Does it start from the date of your current AP expiration date or is it from the date of approval.
My new AP starts from the date my current AP expires.
2010 MAN City star Wayne Bridge
kshitijnt
10-05 02:23 AM
I went to Kanha and Bandhavgarh National parks, the last two times I had been to India. The december season is not the best one for tiger viewing, however; if you give it 2-3 days, you will see some activity.
I will recommend Bandhavgarh. Although not as accessible as Kanha, the forest has best tiger density of all Indian parks and hence improves your chance of sighting. The forest area is much smaller than Kanha, so you will see less of other wildlife, there are no bisons or barasinghas in Bandhavgarh, but you will definitely see tigers. Took 4 game drives, sighted twice, once two tigers were fighting ferociously. Captured it all like on Animal planet.
Kanha: Is a much bigger& beautiful forest, is more easily accessible. I took 3 game drives in 2008, no sightings. You have better chance of sighting other animals such as sloth bears, nilgai, bisons here. Spotting a tiger can be and in any forest will be a matter of chance. Kanha still has a tiger show in the morning in which if they see a tiger they take you by elephant to the tiger. This show is no more in play @ Bandhavgarh.
All of my 7 game drives were a thrill & most memorable experiences. You can take a flight to Jabalpur from Delhi and either forest is a 6 hr drive from there. Watching a tiger in the wild and the thrill to seek it was one of the most memorable moments of my life.
Or you can go to Kajuraho from Delhi by flight and Bandhavgargh is a 6 hr drive.
Have fun in what you do.
I will recommend Bandhavgarh. Although not as accessible as Kanha, the forest has best tiger density of all Indian parks and hence improves your chance of sighting. The forest area is much smaller than Kanha, so you will see less of other wildlife, there are no bisons or barasinghas in Bandhavgarh, but you will definitely see tigers. Took 4 game drives, sighted twice, once two tigers were fighting ferociously. Captured it all like on Animal planet.
Kanha: Is a much bigger& beautiful forest, is more easily accessible. I took 3 game drives in 2008, no sightings. You have better chance of sighting other animals such as sloth bears, nilgai, bisons here. Spotting a tiger can be and in any forest will be a matter of chance. Kanha still has a tiger show in the morning in which if they see a tiger they take you by elephant to the tiger. This show is no more in play @ Bandhavgarh.
All of my 7 game drives were a thrill & most memorable experiences. You can take a flight to Jabalpur from Delhi and either forest is a 6 hr drive from there. Watching a tiger in the wild and the thrill to seek it was one of the most memorable moments of my life.
Or you can go to Kajuraho from Delhi by flight and Bandhavgargh is a 6 hr drive.
Have fun in what you do.
more...
summitpointe
02-20 11:53 AM
How can you use I-140 from Company A and 485 from Company B. I think you can't do it.
But I think you can use AC21 with Company B as 180 days has crossed after filing 485 and your I-140 is pending. This is very risky.
I would suggest you to consult an Attorney before taking any decision.
But I think you can use AC21 with Company B as 180 days has crossed after filing 485 and your I-140 is pending. This is very risky.
I would suggest you to consult an Attorney before taking any decision.
hair Wayne Bridge and Frankie
HumHongeKamiyab
12-17 09:03 AM
I have met Rahul reddy for my immigration related work. The lawyer I am looking for is to discuss my "non-compete" agreement. So I am looking for an employment related attorney and not an immigration attorney. Thank you very much for your response. Regards,http://www.rvreddy.com/
more...
gesu
04-20 12:35 PM
Hi,
Does anybody know the procedure to transfer H4 to F1. Do I need I- 20 for that?
Regards,
Gesu
Does anybody know the procedure to transfer H4 to F1. Do I need I- 20 for that?
Regards,
Gesu
hot Wayne Bridge and Frankie
morchu
04-28 03:39 PM
:) if an RFE was issued, that means some of the evidences submitted are not enough to prove that the I-140 is "approvable". I dont want to argue, but "approvable" is the exact term used by USCIS.
what if there is an rfe on the 140 when the case is not approved (but is approvable) and the employee has already quit? wont the 140 sponsor have to respond saying that employee nada exists? so, even though "approvabe" may be the right legalese, isnt "approved" more practical and relevant for us as beneficiaries.
what if there is an rfe on the 140 when the case is not approved (but is approvable) and the employee has already quit? wont the 140 sponsor have to respond saying that employee nada exists? so, even though "approvabe" may be the right legalese, isnt "approved" more practical and relevant for us as beneficiaries.
more...
house City defender Wayne Bridge
felix31
12-04 11:09 PM
the scary thing with imm lawyers is that they can mismanage client's case for one reason or another, but the client is the one who gets penalized...
I mean, what's the purpose in hiring a lawyer, if one is expected to know every single nuance of ever changing imm laws...
I mean, what's the purpose in hiring a lawyer, if one is expected to know every single nuance of ever changing imm laws...
tattoo Frankie Sandford, from The
Anders �stberg
October 7th, 2005, 02:14 AM
My experience is that even with the "1/focal length" rule (or maybe it should be "1/(focal length x crop factor)") is a bit optimistic with these long tele shots. Maybe it can work if you have really good technique and a sturdy tripod but I like to use a much shorter shutter time if possible.
more...
pictures FRANKIE SATURDAYS WAYNE BRIDGE
ivar
07-12 06:30 PM
Is it legal to file two I-485's ? If anyone can point to exact legal document or clause number.
dresses Wayne Bridge | Pictures
yestogc
03-04 10:21 PM
I am apologetic if my message sent any wrong signals anywhere.
But Sledge Hammer........... plz mind the words that you write we are all civilized people and need to behave live one.
But Sledge Hammer........... plz mind the words that you write we are all civilized people and need to behave live one.
more...
makeup Frankie and Wayne Bridge
rahulpaper
11-17 07:48 AM
Your priority date should be prior to cutoff date in visa bulletin to file a 485.
Also...your priority date should be prior to cutoff date in visa bulletin for you to get final approval (visa number and green card).
The administrative processing (FP/NameCheck etc) continue if the cutoff date retrogresses after one has filed 485 but the final approval will not happen untill your PD is greater than cutoff date in visa bulletin.
I have applied for my 485 in July because then the PD's were current. Now the PD's are moved back . Does that i will get my GC delayed too. Does the processing of 485 is related to PD's . I thought the PD's are only related to the dates when you can apply for 485 not processing. Correct me if i am wrong.if PD's are also related to getting GC's then what the I-485 processing dates?
Also...your priority date should be prior to cutoff date in visa bulletin for you to get final approval (visa number and green card).
The administrative processing (FP/NameCheck etc) continue if the cutoff date retrogresses after one has filed 485 but the final approval will not happen untill your PD is greater than cutoff date in visa bulletin.
I have applied for my 485 in July because then the PD's were current. Now the PD's are moved back . Does that i will get my GC delayed too. Does the processing of 485 is related to PD's . I thought the PD's are only related to the dates when you can apply for 485 not processing. Correct me if i am wrong.if PD's are also related to getting GC's then what the I-485 processing dates?
girlfriend footballer Wayne Bridge,
Matt Peru
08-19 10:13 PM
Hi Guys,
Finally my H1 petition got approved!!! Actually I received EAC number on 17th August and when I checked online with the EAC number it is updated in the USCIS website that they received my application on August 8th, it is in the "Accepted" status. The explanaton says "USCIS is in process of reviewing". On the next day, I mean on August 18th petition has been updated from "Accepted" Status to "Decision" status and in the explanation area they stated that my H1 petition is approved. Hurray :) !!!
Thank you very much guys for your suggestions guys.
-Matt
Finally my H1 petition got approved!!! Actually I received EAC number on 17th August and when I checked online with the EAC number it is updated in the USCIS website that they received my application on August 8th, it is in the "Accepted" status. The explanaton says "USCIS is in process of reviewing". On the next day, I mean on August 18th petition has been updated from "Accepted" Status to "Decision" status and in the explanation area they stated that my H1 petition is approved. Hurray :) !!!
Thank you very much guys for your suggestions guys.
-Matt
hairstyles After dinner Frankie and Wayne
gc28262
07-16 07:30 AM
Murthy Bulletin
VOL. XVI, no. 29; Jul 2010, week 3
Posted : 16.Jul.2010
MurthyDotCom : MurthyBulletin (http://murthy.com/bulletin.html)
Many MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers have inquired about whatever happened to those H1B workers who encountered problems at the Newark, New Jersey port of entry (POE) in January 2010. The incidents in Newark struck fear in the hearts of many H1B foreign nationals who needed or wanted to travel abroad or return to the United States from abroad. This is the success story of one such traveler, who was denied entry at the Newark POE, and was banned at the POE from returning to the United States for five years under an order of expedited removal. He came to the Murthy Law Firm for help after he had returned to his home country under the order of expedited removal. This client of our firm has generously allowed us to share his success story with MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers. Information about a client or a case is never reported to our readers without consent of the client.
Background of Denial of Entry to the U.S. in January 2010
The problems of this individual were similar to those described in our January 14, 2010 NewsFlash entitled, Note to H1Bs Traveling to the U.S. and Working for Consulting Companies. The airport at issue was Newark International Airport in New Jersey. The traveler was returning to the U.S. and, rather than the routine verification of documents and basic information, he was questioned in detail about his employment. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers questioned him regarding the validity of his H1B employment, the identity of his employer's customers, and whether or not his employer had sufficient work for him. As explained below, the CBP was not satisfied with the information it gathered and, ultimately, exercised its authority to issue an expedited removal order against the foreign national, who became a client of the Murthy Law Firm after he was sent back to India.
Travel Outside of the United States
The foreign national had traveled outside of the United States and returned to his home country to get married. He carried with him a letter from his H1B employer, verifying that he would resume his H1B employment upon his return to the U.S. After his wedding celebration, his wife applied for an H-4 dependent visa through a U.S. consulate in the couple's home country. They presented the employer's letter to the consular office in support of the H-4 visa application. The consulate was satisfied with the evidence presented, and issued the H-4 visa. The gentleman who later became our client then attempted to return to the United States alone, with plans for his wife to follow soon after.
CBP Checks on Returning H1B Workers
When the individual attempted to reenter the United States, his experience at the POE was far from ordinary. The CBP officers placed him into what is known as secondary inspection. This is the procedure for foreign nationals who cannot be quickly and routinely processed through the standard primary inspection. The traveler was questioned about his employer, his work, and the end-client where he was performing his work. He was asked whether or not his employer had enough work to keep him employed throughout the duration of his H1B petition. One CBP officer contacted his employer, using the contact information on the employer's letter. The H1B employer was surprised by the call from CBP and did not firmly state that he had sufficient work to keep this particular H1B worker fully employed for the rest of the duration of the H1B petition.
The CBP officer took this information and determined that the foreign national was not returning to resume valid nonimmigrant work on his H1B visa. The officer instead considered the foreign national to be an intending immigrant seeking admission to the United States without a proper immigrant visa. This is one of the grounds under the law that permits an expedited removal. The officer cancelled the individual's H1B visa stamp in his passport and entered an expedited removal order against him, which carries the penalty of a five-year bar to reentering the U.S. The gentleman was then ordered to depart the U.S. on the next flight back to his home country.
Removed H1B Worker Contacts Murthy to Take Action
The foreign national contacted Murthy Law Firm after this unfortunate incident, and requested our assistance. The case was assigned to our Special Projects department, and we quickly made contact with the CBP officers at the port of entry involved. Our attorneys analyzed the case and found several legal mistakes that were made in the process of cancelling the H1B visa as well as in issuing the expedited removal order. A detailed legal argument was drafted and sent to the lead CBP official for the POE.
New H1B Petition Approval
While the Murthy Law Firm team was working on this case, our client obtained a new job offer from his H1B employer's end-client. The job involved duties identical to his previous position, but as a direct employee of the prior end-client company. The new employer obtained an approval of its H1B petition for consular processing. The only thing standing between our client and a great job was the five-year ban on his return to the United States that was created by the expedited removal order. The attorney assigned to this case contacted a U.S. senator representing the state where the new employer is located and began a series of actions that led to a review of the expedited removal.
Murthy Takes Action to Reverse Earlier CBP Decision
The review and reconsideration of expedited removal orders is not explicitly provided for in the regulations that control the day-to-day operations of the CBP. The Murthy Law Firm team succeeded in showing that the events that transpired for our client were extremely unusual and required review by leaders at CBP. Due to the new employer's need for this individual's skills, the attorney contacted several officers at CBP, filed a second official request with CBP, and worked with the U.S. senator's office to show that there was a serious and urgent need for a decision.
Determined Follow-up Leads to Relief
The persistence of our excellent legal team paid off. After almost ten weeks of communications with the CBP and other government offices, the CBP issued a letter stating that, while there is no appeal of expedited removal orders under the law, CBP was exercising its discretion and overturning its prior expedited removal order. The letter was quickly forwarded to our client, who scheduled his H1B visa interview at the appropriate U.S. consulate in India. He was issued his H1B visa at the conclusion of his consular interview and he then made the arrangements necessary for his wife and himself to return to the United States so that he could commence his new H1B employment.
Conclusion
We at the Murthy Law Firm are proud to share another of our many successful stories with our readers. We would like to extend our deep appreciation for the hard work and cooperation of the CBP officers in reconsidering their prior decision and taking the bold step, even though there was no law or regulation for an appeal or reconsideration of an earlier CBP decision. We also send our thanks the U.S. senator's staff, who worked to resolve the incorrect expedited removal order, which would have resulted in the five-year bar to our client's ability to return to the United States. Finally, our gratitude is offered once again to our client for his permission, allowing us to share his story, thereby providing hope to others.
VOL. XVI, no. 29; Jul 2010, week 3
Posted : 16.Jul.2010
MurthyDotCom : MurthyBulletin (http://murthy.com/bulletin.html)
Many MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers have inquired about whatever happened to those H1B workers who encountered problems at the Newark, New Jersey port of entry (POE) in January 2010. The incidents in Newark struck fear in the hearts of many H1B foreign nationals who needed or wanted to travel abroad or return to the United States from abroad. This is the success story of one such traveler, who was denied entry at the Newark POE, and was banned at the POE from returning to the United States for five years under an order of expedited removal. He came to the Murthy Law Firm for help after he had returned to his home country under the order of expedited removal. This client of our firm has generously allowed us to share his success story with MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers. Information about a client or a case is never reported to our readers without consent of the client.
Background of Denial of Entry to the U.S. in January 2010
The problems of this individual were similar to those described in our January 14, 2010 NewsFlash entitled, Note to H1Bs Traveling to the U.S. and Working for Consulting Companies. The airport at issue was Newark International Airport in New Jersey. The traveler was returning to the U.S. and, rather than the routine verification of documents and basic information, he was questioned in detail about his employment. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers questioned him regarding the validity of his H1B employment, the identity of his employer's customers, and whether or not his employer had sufficient work for him. As explained below, the CBP was not satisfied with the information it gathered and, ultimately, exercised its authority to issue an expedited removal order against the foreign national, who became a client of the Murthy Law Firm after he was sent back to India.
Travel Outside of the United States
The foreign national had traveled outside of the United States and returned to his home country to get married. He carried with him a letter from his H1B employer, verifying that he would resume his H1B employment upon his return to the U.S. After his wedding celebration, his wife applied for an H-4 dependent visa through a U.S. consulate in the couple's home country. They presented the employer's letter to the consular office in support of the H-4 visa application. The consulate was satisfied with the evidence presented, and issued the H-4 visa. The gentleman who later became our client then attempted to return to the United States alone, with plans for his wife to follow soon after.
CBP Checks on Returning H1B Workers
When the individual attempted to reenter the United States, his experience at the POE was far from ordinary. The CBP officers placed him into what is known as secondary inspection. This is the procedure for foreign nationals who cannot be quickly and routinely processed through the standard primary inspection. The traveler was questioned about his employer, his work, and the end-client where he was performing his work. He was asked whether or not his employer had enough work to keep him employed throughout the duration of his H1B petition. One CBP officer contacted his employer, using the contact information on the employer's letter. The H1B employer was surprised by the call from CBP and did not firmly state that he had sufficient work to keep this particular H1B worker fully employed for the rest of the duration of the H1B petition.
The CBP officer took this information and determined that the foreign national was not returning to resume valid nonimmigrant work on his H1B visa. The officer instead considered the foreign national to be an intending immigrant seeking admission to the United States without a proper immigrant visa. This is one of the grounds under the law that permits an expedited removal. The officer cancelled the individual's H1B visa stamp in his passport and entered an expedited removal order against him, which carries the penalty of a five-year bar to reentering the U.S. The gentleman was then ordered to depart the U.S. on the next flight back to his home country.
Removed H1B Worker Contacts Murthy to Take Action
The foreign national contacted Murthy Law Firm after this unfortunate incident, and requested our assistance. The case was assigned to our Special Projects department, and we quickly made contact with the CBP officers at the port of entry involved. Our attorneys analyzed the case and found several legal mistakes that were made in the process of cancelling the H1B visa as well as in issuing the expedited removal order. A detailed legal argument was drafted and sent to the lead CBP official for the POE.
New H1B Petition Approval
While the Murthy Law Firm team was working on this case, our client obtained a new job offer from his H1B employer's end-client. The job involved duties identical to his previous position, but as a direct employee of the prior end-client company. The new employer obtained an approval of its H1B petition for consular processing. The only thing standing between our client and a great job was the five-year ban on his return to the United States that was created by the expedited removal order. The attorney assigned to this case contacted a U.S. senator representing the state where the new employer is located and began a series of actions that led to a review of the expedited removal.
Murthy Takes Action to Reverse Earlier CBP Decision
The review and reconsideration of expedited removal orders is not explicitly provided for in the regulations that control the day-to-day operations of the CBP. The Murthy Law Firm team succeeded in showing that the events that transpired for our client were extremely unusual and required review by leaders at CBP. Due to the new employer's need for this individual's skills, the attorney contacted several officers at CBP, filed a second official request with CBP, and worked with the U.S. senator's office to show that there was a serious and urgent need for a decision.
Determined Follow-up Leads to Relief
The persistence of our excellent legal team paid off. After almost ten weeks of communications with the CBP and other government offices, the CBP issued a letter stating that, while there is no appeal of expedited removal orders under the law, CBP was exercising its discretion and overturning its prior expedited removal order. The letter was quickly forwarded to our client, who scheduled his H1B visa interview at the appropriate U.S. consulate in India. He was issued his H1B visa at the conclusion of his consular interview and he then made the arrangements necessary for his wife and himself to return to the United States so that he could commence his new H1B employment.
Conclusion
We at the Murthy Law Firm are proud to share another of our many successful stories with our readers. We would like to extend our deep appreciation for the hard work and cooperation of the CBP officers in reconsidering their prior decision and taking the bold step, even though there was no law or regulation for an appeal or reconsideration of an earlier CBP decision. We also send our thanks the U.S. senator's staff, who worked to resolve the incorrect expedited removal order, which would have resulted in the five-year bar to our client's ability to return to the United States. Finally, our gratitude is offered once again to our client for his permission, allowing us to share his story, thereby providing hope to others.
RandyK
10-29 02:48 PM
Source: NumbersUSA.com
A new immigration enforcement bill that would remove the jobs magnet for illegal immigration is expected to be introduced in the House very soon. The SAVE Act (Secure America with Verification Enforcement) will be sponsored by Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) and is expected to have bi-partisan support. NumbersUSA believes this bill originating on the Democratic side of the House is just the vehicle to give us a chance to actually pass immigration legislation through a Democratic-controlled Congress that would significantly improve the lives of most Americans. Specifically, The SAVE Act would eventually require every employee in America to go through the E-Verify system, identifying all illegal aliens and removing any "glitches" that once allowed them to pass through the system and into the workforce undetected.
--------------------
I don't see anything wrong with this act, infact I was wondering if there was any possibility that we can ride this bill and add EB reforms to it.
A new immigration enforcement bill that would remove the jobs magnet for illegal immigration is expected to be introduced in the House very soon. The SAVE Act (Secure America with Verification Enforcement) will be sponsored by Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) and is expected to have bi-partisan support. NumbersUSA believes this bill originating on the Democratic side of the House is just the vehicle to give us a chance to actually pass immigration legislation through a Democratic-controlled Congress that would significantly improve the lives of most Americans. Specifically, The SAVE Act would eventually require every employee in America to go through the E-Verify system, identifying all illegal aliens and removing any "glitches" that once allowed them to pass through the system and into the workforce undetected.
--------------------
I don't see anything wrong with this act, infact I was wondering if there was any possibility that we can ride this bill and add EB reforms to it.
texanguy
08-12 02:29 PM
Has there been any updates on the combined EAD + AP document? After the disappointing Sept 2010 VB, this atleast will lessen the pain...
1) Combine EAD and AP into one document and issue for 3 years.
USCIS is in the process of developing a combination work authorization (EAD) and Advance Parole (AP) card. An announcement regarding this combination card will be made later this year.
1) Combine EAD and AP into one document and issue for 3 years.
USCIS is in the process of developing a combination work authorization (EAD) and Advance Parole (AP) card. An announcement regarding this combination card will be made later this year.
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿