senk1s
05-02 09:08 AM
thats all the more reason to recapture visa numbers ... forever.
If they hit 90-95% of the target for the current year - the following year the exact number will be known - and that can be allotted
If they hit 90-95% of the target for the current year - the following year the exact number will be known - and that can be allotted
wallpaper LeBron James house in Miami is
Libra
07-06 03:43 PM
You might be senior member than me, i may not post my comments more offenly, i just read what others are saying. Even i dont mean to disrespect you, and whatever i said below is not to offend you. I hope you understand
I don't mean to disrespect you but I guess you are going too far with your words. [COLOR="Black"]We are with IV much before you born.[/COLOR...really core born in 1970's i cant beleive that]. ok so do not dare teach us what we should be doing, with your 49 posts there are many who had 200 to 300 posts but dont say a sensible word
Now back to your comments. You seem to be lost in some dreamy world. What do you mean by just accept the application, so that you can save yourself from loosing money. Do you worry about your GC/EAD or saving your money. From your posts it look like you are more interested in getting your money back than the eligibility to file for EAD.
this is not my agenda, and by the way am not asking USCIS to give back my money which i paid in fees, i have that much sense, if they dont accept my app then they dont draw my money. first read my post properly and then comment and am not living in any dream, when USCIS can do anything they can do this one too. and this is my opinion not IV's. I made that comment because many of them discouraging other by -ve talk
I'm sure IV does not agree with you and that's not the IV goal. Focus is on to make USCIS accept what they promise and that is accepting the applications files on July for AOS.
What you are trying to do is twist your own agenda of getting your money back by making it as an IV goal. It's not a bad thing to save money or asking the money back from USCIS, which you anyway going to get when they reject your application and send your check back. As far as attorney's fees are concerned, lot of attorney's are going to refile without any charge or for some additional meagre fees.
Now the decision is yours, whether you want to get your money or you want the eligibility to file for EAD/GC/AP.
I don't mean to disrespect you but I guess you are going too far with your words. [COLOR="Black"]We are with IV much before you born.[/COLOR...really core born in 1970's i cant beleive that]. ok so do not dare teach us what we should be doing, with your 49 posts there are many who had 200 to 300 posts but dont say a sensible word
Now back to your comments. You seem to be lost in some dreamy world. What do you mean by just accept the application, so that you can save yourself from loosing money. Do you worry about your GC/EAD or saving your money. From your posts it look like you are more interested in getting your money back than the eligibility to file for EAD.
this is not my agenda, and by the way am not asking USCIS to give back my money which i paid in fees, i have that much sense, if they dont accept my app then they dont draw my money. first read my post properly and then comment and am not living in any dream, when USCIS can do anything they can do this one too. and this is my opinion not IV's. I made that comment because many of them discouraging other by -ve talk
I'm sure IV does not agree with you and that's not the IV goal. Focus is on to make USCIS accept what they promise and that is accepting the applications files on July for AOS.
What you are trying to do is twist your own agenda of getting your money back by making it as an IV goal. It's not a bad thing to save money or asking the money back from USCIS, which you anyway going to get when they reject your application and send your check back. As far as attorney's fees are concerned, lot of attorney's are going to refile without any charge or for some additional meagre fees.
Now the decision is yours, whether you want to get your money or you want the eligibility to file for EAD/GC/AP.
immi_twinges
07-20 04:02 PM
Senator Kennedy gave big speeches on immigration.
he talks about amnesty to people who stayed illegally for 10 years
How about staying legally for 10 years...
The Democrats falsely accused the anti-amnesty forces of "opposing immigration" and "racism." Actually more Democrats voted Nay.
I though Kennedy was pro immigration...looks like he just cares about illegal immigration..
Lets ask the so called pro immigration senators who voted naey...why they did it
Arent they aware of the USCIS wasting so many visas and plight of legal immigrants
They want to convert illegals to legal...
Lets ask them to First fix the Legal immigration:mad:
he talks about amnesty to people who stayed illegally for 10 years
How about staying legally for 10 years...
The Democrats falsely accused the anti-amnesty forces of "opposing immigration" and "racism." Actually more Democrats voted Nay.
I though Kennedy was pro immigration...looks like he just cares about illegal immigration..
Lets ask the so called pro immigration senators who voted naey...why they did it
Arent they aware of the USCIS wasting so many visas and plight of legal immigrants
They want to convert illegals to legal...
Lets ask them to First fix the Legal immigration:mad:
2011 lebron-james-house-in-miami-25
ImmiLosers
12-23 06:38 PM
I have recently contacted CIS Ombudsman (3-4 Months ago) regarding my I-485 application.
My lawyer is perpetually suggesting it may jeopardize the case.
Is it true? and Why?
My lawyer is perpetually suggesting it may jeopardize the case.
Is it true? and Why?
more...
Cheran
07-11 03:23 PM
Let's get this straight, We don't know each other, outside this website I see you as my competitor. Tomorrow you and I could compete for the same job right? Now add in the fact, that by crude luck you get your Green Card in 10 months and I get it in 10 years, how do you think that it is fair on my part?
You are here in Immigrationvoice, because you want your Green Card, so lets not act as if we are saving the world.
I don't want you suffer but at the same time I don't want to suffer so that others could live a hearty life...
I really sympathise with your situation, But your comments are outrageous.
R you saying Just because you suffered every body has to suffer.:mad:
You are here in Immigrationvoice, because you want your Green Card, so lets not act as if we are saving the world.
I don't want you suffer but at the same time I don't want to suffer so that others could live a hearty life...
I really sympathise with your situation, But your comments are outrageous.
R you saying Just because you suffered every body has to suffer.:mad:
beppenyc
03-08 02:30 PM
beppenyc, any particular reason that ur interested in the guest worker program?
Yes, I worked in the restuarant business. Let me know if i can partecipate or not.
Thanks
Yes, I worked in the restuarant business. Let me know if i can partecipate or not.
Thanks
more...
Keeme
08-14 05:05 PM
guys i think USCIS is not interested in giving EB 3 guys GC...
as mostly EB 3 guys r ppl with Bachelors (and less than 5 yrs exp) or who are stuck with EB3 due to there company (like me)...
EB 2 guys r mostly with ppl having masters degree from US...so i guess they will definetly get more preference than eb3...
I guess US wants to raise there economy by giving GCs...so that ppl more ppl will buy houses....
I hope something happens for EB3 also...but I guess in Oct bulletin PD for EB3 will b some month in 2001....
so gud luck to all of us
I don't agree with it and hope not ! As latest Visa bulleting states - DOS people had predicted and planned - They will move EB3 dates forward to cover all June applicants - that means moving cut-off dates for EB3 - India to Jun 2003 as per Jun 2007 bulletin. For some reason - they see heavey demand now and it may not be the case in next bulletin. Still they beleive its diffcult to predict any dates for EB3 before mid Sept. They are working and intention are there to help EB3 applicants. That leads to make me believe that dates for EB3 - India would move to somewhere Nov-Dec 2002 to Jan-Feb 2003 in next bulletin.
as mostly EB 3 guys r ppl with Bachelors (and less than 5 yrs exp) or who are stuck with EB3 due to there company (like me)...
EB 2 guys r mostly with ppl having masters degree from US...so i guess they will definetly get more preference than eb3...
I guess US wants to raise there economy by giving GCs...so that ppl more ppl will buy houses....
I hope something happens for EB3 also...but I guess in Oct bulletin PD for EB3 will b some month in 2001....
so gud luck to all of us
I don't agree with it and hope not ! As latest Visa bulleting states - DOS people had predicted and planned - They will move EB3 dates forward to cover all June applicants - that means moving cut-off dates for EB3 - India to Jun 2003 as per Jun 2007 bulletin. For some reason - they see heavey demand now and it may not be the case in next bulletin. Still they beleive its diffcult to predict any dates for EB3 before mid Sept. They are working and intention are there to help EB3 applicants. That leads to make me believe that dates for EB3 - India would move to somewhere Nov-Dec 2002 to Jan-Feb 2003 in next bulletin.
2010 lebron james miami house of
mdmd10
07-24 04:03 PM
After all sardarji can make a joke:D
Please refrain from making comments like that! You have no right to stereotype folks. Please remain objective in the discussions.
Please refrain from making comments like that! You have no right to stereotype folks. Please remain objective in the discussions.
more...
gsc999
03-17 09:33 PM
All tax payers are eligible(atleast mostly)
folks like Bayarea07 are plain and stupid
--
Lets not be so harsh. Bayarea07, thought he had a valid concern, although it is not true.
Did anybody notice this in the IRS communication that was sent out to taxpayers:
For taxpyers, the amount of money will be "reduced" or " completely phased out" for individuals making adjusted gross income or more than $75K ( or more than $150 if married and filing jointly).
How about that?
folks like Bayarea07 are plain and stupid
--
Lets not be so harsh. Bayarea07, thought he had a valid concern, although it is not true.
Did anybody notice this in the IRS communication that was sent out to taxpayers:
For taxpyers, the amount of money will be "reduced" or " completely phased out" for individuals making adjusted gross income or more than $75K ( or more than $150 if married and filing jointly).
How about that?
hair Miami: Lebron James Home
swo
07-20 01:22 PM
It makes me laugh. Everyone screams and jumps up and down that they can't be part of a 750,000 person flood to USCIS.
And then they get that right.
And then they get all mad that they have to wait for their EADs.
I don't see how USCIS could ever make anyone happy!
And then they get that right.
And then they get all mad that they have to wait for their EADs.
I don't see how USCIS could ever make anyone happy!
more...
mallu
04-02 02:29 PM
You don't need to be harsh on your comments. You can go ahead and file a case with USCIS. That's what I've been saying here all the time.
Calling me a numbskull I think is inappropriate. You can disagree with me and I can disagree with you which is the essence of this forum but not to abuse each other.
I didn't call you numbskull and I will never call anyone numbskull, so I guess you owe me an apology.
That is right. People can express their opinions. No name calling and rough language.
Calling me a numbskull I think is inappropriate. You can disagree with me and I can disagree with you which is the essence of this forum but not to abuse each other.
I didn't call you numbskull and I will never call anyone numbskull, so I guess you owe me an apology.
That is right. People can express their opinions. No name calling and rough language.
hot Fun in the sun: LeBron
ksrk
02-26 02:02 PM
On what basis you are saying that? Do you have any data/links to support this?
That's my question too! Just speculation or based on something solid?
That's my question too! Just speculation or based on something solid?
more...
house miami. lebron james house.
dan19
05-25 01:09 PM
PD : Sep 2002 (RIR)
45 Day letter: Dec 2004 (After that no news)
I had 2 queries when the case was pending with the state labour office before being shipped to BEC.
The issues were related to low wages and insufficient experience. The company fixed the issues and ammended the Labour petition.
Will that cause a problem when it comes to the approval stage? Again, will that negatively affect I-140?
45 Day letter: Dec 2004 (After that no news)
I had 2 queries when the case was pending with the state labour office before being shipped to BEC.
The issues were related to low wages and insufficient experience. The company fixed the issues and ammended the Labour petition.
Will that cause a problem when it comes to the approval stage? Again, will that negatively affect I-140?
tattoo Miami: Lebron James Home
saimrathi
08-10 01:46 PM
Did you file concurrent?
Its random at best then anything else. According to my lawyer, my application (EB2) was there July 2nd morning.
Its random at best then anything else. According to my lawyer, my application (EB2) was there July 2nd morning.
more...
pictures /open-house/LeBron-James-
ashutrip
06-20 11:00 AM
I understand your concern. Hope for the best. Good luck friend!
thanks for the good luck.....we all need a ton of it!
thanks for the good luck.....we all need a ton of it!
dresses Lebron James 50 Million Dollar
pappu
06-06 04:33 PM
/\/\/\/
more...
makeup lebron james house in miami
Junky
09-12 08:23 AM
Same loser MF AssHole give me a red with the remark. "gimme red!" for my following post
:D:D:D:D:D
:D:D:D:D:D
girlfriend lebron james house miami beach
ArkBird
03-05 09:28 PM
My PD is March-2003 and I didn't get the labor cleared till Late 2006
I just can't help wondering how did you get your labor in 2004 with the PD of May-2003? How come snake of BEC didn't bite you? :)
My adjustment application is pending for almost five years now. I was not in the habit of tracking LUDs but of late I was tracking and concluded that most of the time it means nothing.
Here is what happened today. My attorney had applied for my travel document on Jan 28. I got three soft LUDs between Feb 8 to 10. Status remaing same "Case received and pending". To my surprise today I received my travel documents from my attorney. The issue date on the document is March 5. My attorney mailed it to me on March 3, I believe as soon as he received it.
The last LUD on my case is still Feb 10 and the status still says "Received and Pending".
I think we should not go too much by the LUDs.
I just can't help wondering how did you get your labor in 2004 with the PD of May-2003? How come snake of BEC didn't bite you? :)
My adjustment application is pending for almost five years now. I was not in the habit of tracking LUDs but of late I was tracking and concluded that most of the time it means nothing.
Here is what happened today. My attorney had applied for my travel document on Jan 28. I got three soft LUDs between Feb 8 to 10. Status remaing same "Case received and pending". To my surprise today I received my travel documents from my attorney. The issue date on the document is March 5. My attorney mailed it to me on March 3, I believe as soon as he received it.
The last LUD on my case is still Feb 10 and the status still says "Received and Pending".
I think we should not go too much by the LUDs.
hairstyles LeBron James x House of Hoops
addsf345
11-20 03:38 PM
Some benefits can be revoked automatically (I-140, I-485), some can be revoked only after determination is made by USCIS and a beneficiary is notified and has an opportunity to respond. EAD is one of the latter.
See e.g., 8 CFR Part 205 titled "Revocation of approval of petitions". It has two sections: 205.1 Automatic revocation and 205.2 Revocation on notice.
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=203798478322+8+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve
EAD is not listed in Sec. 205.1. Moreover, 8 CFR �274a.12(c) specifically lists reasons for automatic revocation. I-485 denial is not listed as such a reason. Therefore, EAD remains valid even after I-485 denial untill it expires or until USCIS director revokes it. I do not see any basis for a different legal interpretation.
See also this court of appeals (8th Cir.) decision where the court says that automatic revocation occurs only if a specific condition specified in the laws and regs is met:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/399/399.F3d.891.04-1132.html
"The district court thought that her adoptive father's petition for immediate relative status was automatically revoked when Taylor reached age 21, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3)(i)(F), but the record does not appear to support that conclusion. The automatic revocation occurs only if the alien reaches age 21 before commencing her journey to the United States (which Taylor did not) or if the alien reaches age 21 before a decision on a pending application for adjustment of status becomes final (and there is no evidence in the record that Taylor ever applied for adjustment of status). See 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3). Thus, it is possible that the petition for immediate relative status was not revoked when Taylor reached age 21, but rather � if the 1984 visa petition was "currently valid" as of her 21st birthday � automatically converted to an approved petition for classification as an unmarried daughter of a citizen of the United States, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 204.2(i)(2). See 8 U.S.C. � 1153(a)(1). In that case, Taylor may have been legally present throughout her time in the United States."
Thank you 'lazycis' for reconfirming this. Just 2 weeks back I used to think that keep working on H1B is lot safer than using EAD :o
See e.g., 8 CFR Part 205 titled "Revocation of approval of petitions". It has two sections: 205.1 Automatic revocation and 205.2 Revocation on notice.
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=203798478322+8+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve
EAD is not listed in Sec. 205.1. Moreover, 8 CFR �274a.12(c) specifically lists reasons for automatic revocation. I-485 denial is not listed as such a reason. Therefore, EAD remains valid even after I-485 denial untill it expires or until USCIS director revokes it. I do not see any basis for a different legal interpretation.
See also this court of appeals (8th Cir.) decision where the court says that automatic revocation occurs only if a specific condition specified in the laws and regs is met:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/399/399.F3d.891.04-1132.html
"The district court thought that her adoptive father's petition for immediate relative status was automatically revoked when Taylor reached age 21, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3)(i)(F), but the record does not appear to support that conclusion. The automatic revocation occurs only if the alien reaches age 21 before commencing her journey to the United States (which Taylor did not) or if the alien reaches age 21 before a decision on a pending application for adjustment of status becomes final (and there is no evidence in the record that Taylor ever applied for adjustment of status). See 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3). Thus, it is possible that the petition for immediate relative status was not revoked when Taylor reached age 21, but rather � if the 1984 visa petition was "currently valid" as of her 21st birthday � automatically converted to an approved petition for classification as an unmarried daughter of a citizen of the United States, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 204.2(i)(2). See 8 U.S.C. � 1153(a)(1). In that case, Taylor may have been legally present throughout her time in the United States."
Thank you 'lazycis' for reconfirming this. Just 2 weeks back I used to think that keep working on H1B is lot safer than using EAD :o
mbawa2574
07-07 07:47 PM
Can Patton Boggs do better? Haven't we had more legislative success, I mean traction, when we partnered with Quinn Gillespie? Are we receiving sound advice on which of our grievances require legislative action and which ones can be redressed by a mere change in policy on the part of the executive? It looks like most of our current problems were not ushered in by any new law, but rather by a stroke of a pen in a memo by the incompetent and indifferent INS, USCIS, DOL and the State Department. No change in law was needed to make then deny us concurrent filing in Oct 2005 and allow it in July 2007. No change in law was required to deny us visa revalidation. One could argue that no change in law is required to belatedly use unused visas from the previous years. The list goes on. It should be easier to lobby a handful of buffoons in the executive branch with real power than 500+ buffoons on Capitol Hill. Has Patton Boggs served us well?
We are hitting the wrong doors. We are not doing anything which gives us some visibility with media and politicians or administration. Time is running out guys
We are hitting the wrong doors. We are not doing anything which gives us some visibility with media and politicians or administration. Time is running out guys
ItIsNotFunny
10-21 04:41 PM
It is tricky. The intent can be proved only by how long the employee has worked for sponsor. If he/she worked considerable period (lets say for 2-3 years in non-immigrant visa (H.L,E) before filing 485 and worked for about 1 year after filing 485) then, it is very easy for the employee to prove his/her intent to have a permanent employment relationship with sponser, if employer try to revoke 140 based on the fact that employee does not have intent. The longivity of the employment relationship with sponser is a great proof. Some people are abusing (by misguidence of few lawyers, as they claim GC is for future job) AC21, without even working for single day with sponser, trying to get GC. USCIS may be controlling that kind of abuse.
One historical background reason for AC21 is that, in 2000, even though all catagories are "current", INS was very slow in approving 485. The delay for approval of 485 in year 2000 is caused by USCIS poor customer service. It took atleast 2 years for 485 approval, though the visa numbers were continously available for the entire 2 years. Therefore, the AC21 is an incentive for USCIS delay.
Now, if the visa numbers are continously available (for example EB1, EB2-ROW) USCIS is approving 485 within 6 months, except july 07 fiasco surge. So now AC21 users are only those who suffers in retrogression, not by USCIS administartive delay. That may be the another reason why USCIS becoming hard on AC21.
I understand what you say but interpretation differs from IO to IO. It still goes to chances....
One historical background reason for AC21 is that, in 2000, even though all catagories are "current", INS was very slow in approving 485. The delay for approval of 485 in year 2000 is caused by USCIS poor customer service. It took atleast 2 years for 485 approval, though the visa numbers were continously available for the entire 2 years. Therefore, the AC21 is an incentive for USCIS delay.
Now, if the visa numbers are continously available (for example EB1, EB2-ROW) USCIS is approving 485 within 6 months, except july 07 fiasco surge. So now AC21 users are only those who suffers in retrogression, not by USCIS administartive delay. That may be the another reason why USCIS becoming hard on AC21.
I understand what you say but interpretation differs from IO to IO. It still goes to chances....
No comments:
Post a Comment