rockstart
06-15 03:42 PM
In your case you need to get a rectified copy of the BC from the same municipal corporation that issued you the original certificate. That way all your documents bear a consistent name and other information.
wallpaper Blake Lively#39;s long blonde
nuke
07-29 11:39 AM
How do I start a new thread?
ash0210
05-08 04:44 PM
Yes, I did contributed for this month..
2011 with long wavy londe hair
nixstor
12-02 10:30 PM
This is not an AD moron. I am not looking to hire anyone. I am asking about NON-IMMIGRANT VISA advice. Since the forum is titled Immigration Voice > Immigration Information > NON-IMMIGRANT VISAS, I don't think my post can be THAT far from the right section.
WTFever,
This forum is intended for Highly Skilled Immigrants who are on Non Immigrant visa and are caught in the green card log jam. Discussion topics here are predominantly related to Employment based GC. You might not get a CORRECT answer here as your situation is not some thing common for people on this forum. You should talk to a lawyer and get advice for your situation.
www.murthy.com
www.immigraton.com
www.immigration-law.com
HTH
WTFever,
This forum is intended for Highly Skilled Immigrants who are on Non Immigrant visa and are caught in the green card log jam. Discussion topics here are predominantly related to Employment based GC. You might not get a CORRECT answer here as your situation is not some thing common for people on this forum. You should talk to a lawyer and get advice for your situation.
www.murthy.com
www.immigraton.com
www.immigration-law.com
HTH
more...
dixie
10-17 01:42 PM
They can introduce all the premium processing they want, but the crux of the matter is that it is of no much use to us without the visa numbers to apply for a GC in the first place. USCIS will still end up making a lot of money - guess why - because we will have lost all our sanity by the time our PD becomes current so we wont mind shelling out money for I-485 premium processing even after having waited for ~10 years !! So more severe the retrogression, more the premium processing revenue. Not to speak of the fees for renewing the EAD,AP and so on. So much for the "USCIS certified premium processed" GC
deepimpact
09-21 11:50 AM
I am sure anybodywho has a concept of fairness understands Eb3 candidate waiting for 5 years deserves to be in Eb2 just by definition of Eb2 and he is not taking any new job which means he is not displacing any new american worker.
Per the current Labor laws, you cannot use experience gained from same employer in PERM certification unless job changes by 50%. And if the job changes by 50% then it is a new Job and you are replacing a potential American worker. And if you are still doing the same job, then even though you have gained 5 yrs experience, your job requirements did not change(ie B.S + no experience). The EB category is determined based on what is the requirement for your job rather than your qualifiction.
That is why the provision of porting is a case by case item rather than a blanket rule applying to anyone in EB3 for 5+ years. And the backlash won't be from a few EB2 folks (it will be about a 100K folks).;)
Per the current Labor laws, you cannot use experience gained from same employer in PERM certification unless job changes by 50%. And if the job changes by 50% then it is a new Job and you are replacing a potential American worker. And if you are still doing the same job, then even though you have gained 5 yrs experience, your job requirements did not change(ie B.S + no experience). The EB category is determined based on what is the requirement for your job rather than your qualifiction.
That is why the provision of porting is a case by case item rather than a blanket rule applying to anyone in EB3 for 5+ years. And the backlash won't be from a few EB2 folks (it will be about a 100K folks).;)
more...
rheoretro
08-18 01:20 PM
The I-140 stage these days isn't very slow, but at one time in the not-too-distant past it was...
2010 Modern Long Layered Hairstyle
svn
04-07 07:06 PM
After 10 years on H-1, last year we applied for my H1 extension and received a 3 year extension, based on I-140 approval. However, I am traveling out of the country and did not want to go to the consulate for a visa stamping especially since I had a tough experience the last time around. Luckily, my company also applied for EAD extension and Advance Parole. I am planning to use the Advance Parole for reentry - therefore, travel is one reason you might prefer to have an Advance Parole (though you might be able receive an Advance Parole without extending your EAD as well - am not sure of that)
Irrespective of whether EAD is used, one should always extend EAD as a backup. ( Especially in this economy)
I definitely agree. Not sure whether an EAD can be obtained in the future, if you do not keep it continuously active by extending it - you will want to look into that.
Irrespective of whether EAD is used, one should always extend EAD as a backup. ( Especially in this economy)
I definitely agree. Not sure whether an EAD can be obtained in the future, if you do not keep it continuously active by extending it - you will want to look into that.
more...
deepimpact
08-23 11:25 AM
And depending on how long you have been on H1 and if the University is a State Univ, your wife can also qualify for in state Tuition fee. These days its very rare for MS students to get funding. You can save some money that way.
hair londe hairstyles for long
martinvisalaw
07-28 11:02 AM
I still have 2 weeks before I leave for my trip, now is it advisable to apply for another AP this week and wait for it to come? Will that application make my current AP invalid?
From what I understand, you need to be here in the US while you apply for your AP, but can travel on your older AP while this one is still in process. Is this correct?
Is there a chance for AP denial, and how does that affect the chance of an AP extension in Future?
You cannot enter the US on Advance Parole (AP) unless you had that specific AP when you left. So you cannot apply for AP now, leave the US, have someone send the approved AP to you in India, and use that AP to return to the US next year..
There is always a slight chance that the AP will be denied. However that should not affect your chances of getting a new AP in the future.
From what I understand, you need to be here in the US while you apply for your AP, but can travel on your older AP while this one is still in process. Is this correct?
Is there a chance for AP denial, and how does that affect the chance of an AP extension in Future?
You cannot enter the US on Advance Parole (AP) unless you had that specific AP when you left. So you cannot apply for AP now, leave the US, have someone send the approved AP to you in India, and use that AP to return to the US next year..
There is always a slight chance that the AP will be denied. However that should not affect your chances of getting a new AP in the future.
more...
ganguteli
06-02 11:31 AM
Recently, I made my own PP photos using http://www.epassportphoto.com/
This is a great service - It creates a jpeg file from a picture that you upload, and you can choose the "free" option in which you can save the jpeg file with 4-6 pictures in one frame (A 4" x 6" photo can yield 6 pp photos of 2" x 2"), and take it to Walgreens/Costco/Kinkos for a printout for $0.25 each. Otherwise you pay about $8-$12 for 2 photos at the same stores!!
For a family of 4, this equates to savings of ~ $40!!!
The site has all the tools for meeting various types of visa/pp/etc photo requirements for various countries.
Wow that is so Great!!!!!! You saved $40.
Now how about contributing it to IV?
This is a great service - It creates a jpeg file from a picture that you upload, and you can choose the "free" option in which you can save the jpeg file with 4-6 pictures in one frame (A 4" x 6" photo can yield 6 pp photos of 2" x 2"), and take it to Walgreens/Costco/Kinkos for a printout for $0.25 each. Otherwise you pay about $8-$12 for 2 photos at the same stores!!
For a family of 4, this equates to savings of ~ $40!!!
The site has all the tools for meeting various types of visa/pp/etc photo requirements for various countries.
Wow that is so Great!!!!!! You saved $40.
Now how about contributing it to IV?
hot long blonde hairstyles for
nixstor
12-02 10:42 PM
IV is not for any particular nationals. While ROW is also affected because of retrogression, India and China are severely affected and there is hardly any movement in EB2/3 for India. The hard country limits in EB system and inability to capture unused visa numbers are just 2 of the many reasons responsible for retrogression. These forums have been misused by some people to advertise about their firm. May be the other member skimmed through the post and considered it a similar ad. OP has given a fitting response. Welcome to IV.
more...
house Christina Aguilera#39;s long
gc28262
07-28 01:48 PM
Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_arizona_immigration;_ylt=AgcIIY.ht_GJNzOqM3G8sH 6s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNta2N1b3FnBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNz I4L3VzX2FyaXpvbmFfaW1taWdyYXRpb24EY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBv cHVsYXIEY3BvcwMyBHBvcwM3BHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW 5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNqdWRnZWJsb2Nrc3A-)
PHOENIX – A federal judge dealt a serious rebuke to Arizona's immigration law on Wednesday when she put most of the crackdown on hold just hours before it was to take effect.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton sets up a lengthy legal battle as Arizona fights to enact the nation's toughest-in-the-nation law. Republican Gov. Jan Brewer said the state likely appeal the ruling and seek to get the judge's order overturned.
But for now, opponents of the law have prevailed: The provisions that angered opponents will not take effect, including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.
The judge also delayed parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places — a move aimed at day laborers. In addition, the judge blocked officers from making warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants.
"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," Bolton, a Clinton appointee, said in her decision.
She said the controversial sections should be put on hold until the courts resolve the issues. Other provisions of the law, many of them procedural and slight revisions to existing Arizona immigration statute, will go into effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday.
The law was signed by Brewer in April and immediately revived the national debate on immigration, making it a hot-button issue in the midterm elections. The law has inspired similar law elsewhere, prompted a boycott against the state and led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave the state.
Lawyers for the state contend the law was a constitutionally sound attempt by Arizona to assist federal immigration agents and lessen border woes such as the heavy costs for educating, jailing and providing health care for illegal immigrants. Arizona is the busiest gateway into the country for illegal immigrants, and the border is awash in drugs and smugglers that the state badly wants to stop.
"It's a temporary bump in the road, we will move forward, and I'm sure that after consultation with our counsel we will appeal," Brewer told the Associated Press. "The bottom line is we've known all along that it is The responsibility of the feds and they haven't done their job so we were going to help them do that."
The ruling came just as police were making last-minute preparations to begin enforcement of the law and protesters were planning large demonstrations against the measure. At least one group planned to block access to federal offices, daring officers to ask them about their immigration status.
In a sign of the international interest in the law, about 100 protesters in Mexico City who had gathered in front of the U.S. Embassy broke into cheers when speakers told them about the federal judge's ruling. The demonstrators had been monitoring the news on a laptop computer on the stage.
The crowed clapped and started chanting, "Migrants, hang on, the people are rising up!"
Gisela and Eduardo Diaz went to the Mexican consulate in Phoenix on Wednesday seeking advice because they were worried about what would happen to their 3-year-old granddaughter if they were pulled over by police and taken to a detention center.
"I knew the judge would say that part of the law was just not right," said Diaz, a 50-year-old from Mexico City who came to Arizona on a since-expired tourist visa in 1989. "It's the part we were worried about. This is a big relief for us."
Opponents argued the law would lead to racial profiling, conflict with federal immigration law and distract local police from fighting more serious crimes. The U.S. Justice Department, civil rights groups and a Phoenix police officer had asked the judge for an injunction to prevent the law from being enforced.
"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. She added that a requirement of the law that police determine the immigration status of all arrested people will prompt legal immigrants to be "swept up by this requirement."
Federal authorities who are trying to overturn the law have argued that letting the Arizona law stand would create a patchwork of immigration laws nationwide that would needlessly complicate the foreign relations of the United States. Federal lawyers said the law is disrupting U.S. relations with Mexico and other countries and would burden the agency that responds to immigration-status inquiries.
Bolton noted that the expected increase in immigration checks from Arizona will divert federal resources away from other priorities and said the federal government has shown that it's likely to succeed on its claim that such mandatory checks under the Arizona law would be trumped by federal law.
Responding to the ruling, Justice Department spokeswoman Hannah August said that the agency understands the frustration of Arizona residents with the immigration system. She added that a wide range of state and local policies would seriously disrupt federal immigration enforcement.
Brewer's lawyers said Arizona shouldn't have to suffer from America's broken immigration system when it has 15,000 police officers who can arrest illegal immigrants.
Brewer is running for another term in November and has seen her political fortunes rise because of the law's popularity among conservatives. It's not yet clear how the ruling will affect her campaign, but her opponent was quick to pounce.
"Jan Brewer played politics with immigration, and she lost," Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat. "It is time to look beyond election year grandstanding and begin to repair the damage to Arizona's image and economy."
Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the law's top supporters, said he was disappointed by the ruling and that he expects it to ultimately end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
"I don't think the judge's statements in the hearings justify this ruling," Kavanagh said. "I don't think the law justified her injunction."
PHOENIX – A federal judge dealt a serious rebuke to Arizona's immigration law on Wednesday when she put most of the crackdown on hold just hours before it was to take effect.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton sets up a lengthy legal battle as Arizona fights to enact the nation's toughest-in-the-nation law. Republican Gov. Jan Brewer said the state likely appeal the ruling and seek to get the judge's order overturned.
But for now, opponents of the law have prevailed: The provisions that angered opponents will not take effect, including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.
The judge also delayed parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places — a move aimed at day laborers. In addition, the judge blocked officers from making warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants.
"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," Bolton, a Clinton appointee, said in her decision.
She said the controversial sections should be put on hold until the courts resolve the issues. Other provisions of the law, many of them procedural and slight revisions to existing Arizona immigration statute, will go into effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday.
The law was signed by Brewer in April and immediately revived the national debate on immigration, making it a hot-button issue in the midterm elections. The law has inspired similar law elsewhere, prompted a boycott against the state and led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave the state.
Lawyers for the state contend the law was a constitutionally sound attempt by Arizona to assist federal immigration agents and lessen border woes such as the heavy costs for educating, jailing and providing health care for illegal immigrants. Arizona is the busiest gateway into the country for illegal immigrants, and the border is awash in drugs and smugglers that the state badly wants to stop.
"It's a temporary bump in the road, we will move forward, and I'm sure that after consultation with our counsel we will appeal," Brewer told the Associated Press. "The bottom line is we've known all along that it is The responsibility of the feds and they haven't done their job so we were going to help them do that."
The ruling came just as police were making last-minute preparations to begin enforcement of the law and protesters were planning large demonstrations against the measure. At least one group planned to block access to federal offices, daring officers to ask them about their immigration status.
In a sign of the international interest in the law, about 100 protesters in Mexico City who had gathered in front of the U.S. Embassy broke into cheers when speakers told them about the federal judge's ruling. The demonstrators had been monitoring the news on a laptop computer on the stage.
The crowed clapped and started chanting, "Migrants, hang on, the people are rising up!"
Gisela and Eduardo Diaz went to the Mexican consulate in Phoenix on Wednesday seeking advice because they were worried about what would happen to their 3-year-old granddaughter if they were pulled over by police and taken to a detention center.
"I knew the judge would say that part of the law was just not right," said Diaz, a 50-year-old from Mexico City who came to Arizona on a since-expired tourist visa in 1989. "It's the part we were worried about. This is a big relief for us."
Opponents argued the law would lead to racial profiling, conflict with federal immigration law and distract local police from fighting more serious crimes. The U.S. Justice Department, civil rights groups and a Phoenix police officer had asked the judge for an injunction to prevent the law from being enforced.
"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. She added that a requirement of the law that police determine the immigration status of all arrested people will prompt legal immigrants to be "swept up by this requirement."
Federal authorities who are trying to overturn the law have argued that letting the Arizona law stand would create a patchwork of immigration laws nationwide that would needlessly complicate the foreign relations of the United States. Federal lawyers said the law is disrupting U.S. relations with Mexico and other countries and would burden the agency that responds to immigration-status inquiries.
Bolton noted that the expected increase in immigration checks from Arizona will divert federal resources away from other priorities and said the federal government has shown that it's likely to succeed on its claim that such mandatory checks under the Arizona law would be trumped by federal law.
Responding to the ruling, Justice Department spokeswoman Hannah August said that the agency understands the frustration of Arizona residents with the immigration system. She added that a wide range of state and local policies would seriously disrupt federal immigration enforcement.
Brewer's lawyers said Arizona shouldn't have to suffer from America's broken immigration system when it has 15,000 police officers who can arrest illegal immigrants.
Brewer is running for another term in November and has seen her political fortunes rise because of the law's popularity among conservatives. It's not yet clear how the ruling will affect her campaign, but her opponent was quick to pounce.
"Jan Brewer played politics with immigration, and she lost," Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat. "It is time to look beyond election year grandstanding and begin to repair the damage to Arizona's image and economy."
Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the law's top supporters, said he was disappointed by the ruling and that he expects it to ultimately end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
"I don't think the judge's statements in the hearings justify this ruling," Kavanagh said. "I don't think the law justified her injunction."
tattoo long blonde hairstyles 2010-
rvurady14
04-13 02:24 PM
Congratulations!
more...
pictures http://www.hairstyles-haircuts
JunRN
12-18 04:37 PM
I was reading the AC21 memo just few minutes ago. Yes, an Approved I-140 can be reversed and denied on this case:
An approved I-140 was withdrawn after 180 days and the beneficiary did not send an AC21 letter to USCIS. USCIS will send NOID and if not responded to timely, I-140 will be reversed and denied. If NOID was responded to timely with new qualifying offer of employment, then USCIS will review if similar or same occupation, if not then case will be reversed and denied.
Therefore, yes, an approved I-140 can be reversed and denied.
Another thing is that if USCIS discovered fraud on one case against the employer and reviews all approved I-140 petition of that employer, USCIS may reverse the decision and issue denial.
An approved I-140 was withdrawn after 180 days and the beneficiary did not send an AC21 letter to USCIS. USCIS will send NOID and if not responded to timely, I-140 will be reversed and denied. If NOID was responded to timely with new qualifying offer of employment, then USCIS will review if similar or same occupation, if not then case will be reversed and denied.
Therefore, yes, an approved I-140 can be reversed and denied.
Another thing is that if USCIS discovered fraud on one case against the employer and reviews all approved I-140 petition of that employer, USCIS may reverse the decision and issue denial.
dresses Whitney Port Hairstyle
prdgl
02-19 09:06 PM
I have been thinking lately about the CIR and SKIL bills.
Though I did read some of the benifits of SKIL bill, I am not sure what's the reality is going to be IF Skil bill is passed.
Will the advanced degree holders (even in EB3) will get to apply for I-485 immediately. IF not, is it just that its going to raise the number of visas per country. If so, anybody know how much of raise in visa numbers its going to happen.
Also how far are we from this CIR or SKIL bill being passed ?
any thoughts
Though I did read some of the benifits of SKIL bill, I am not sure what's the reality is going to be IF Skil bill is passed.
Will the advanced degree holders (even in EB3) will get to apply for I-485 immediately. IF not, is it just that its going to raise the number of visas per country. If so, anybody know how much of raise in visa numbers its going to happen.
Also how far are we from this CIR or SKIL bill being passed ?
any thoughts
more...
makeup londe hairstyles long hair.
gceb3holder
02-27 09:19 AM
Glus
That was exactly what I was looking for.
What happen if the employer fire me because the project I am working on finishes and they can't reallocate me right away? Or for any other reasons? Of course I will not push anything to be fired, but it is a situation that can happen, specially with IT.
Tks!
That was exactly what I was looking for.
What happen if the employer fire me because the project I am working on finishes and they can't reallocate me right away? Or for any other reasons? Of course I will not push anything to be fired, but it is a situation that can happen, specially with IT.
Tks!
girlfriend londe hairstyles long hair.
makemygc
06-22 11:31 AM
What do you think? Any guesses?
Ok I saw your second posting now. Hmm..I'll try
thanks
Ok I saw your second posting now. Hmm..I'll try
thanks
hairstyles Short Blonde Hair.
LostInGCProcess
11-26 10:43 AM
Perhaps I am missing something. I thought you could get an extension beyond six years only if:
1. Your labor was pending for more than 360 days OR
2. Your I-140 was approved
I did not know that you could get an extension if:
Your labor was approved and your I-140 was still pending.
My understanding is that the USCIS came out with the I-140 premium processing only to address the above scenario. Perhaps someone who has dealt with this first hand can enlighthen us.
You are right. For approved labor (or pending more then a year, which is rare these days), pending more then a year, and if I-140 is still pending, you get H1 for 1 year. With approved I-140, you get 3 year extension.
1. Your labor was pending for more than 360 days OR
2. Your I-140 was approved
I did not know that you could get an extension if:
Your labor was approved and your I-140 was still pending.
My understanding is that the USCIS came out with the I-140 premium processing only to address the above scenario. Perhaps someone who has dealt with this first hand can enlighthen us.
You are right. For approved labor (or pending more then a year, which is rare these days), pending more then a year, and if I-140 is still pending, you get H1 for 1 year. With approved I-140, you get 3 year extension.
amalshe
12-09 03:32 PM
Hi,
Which address did you mail your upgrade request to? I will be doing the same early next week. My EB-1 I-140 (OR) just got approved.
Thanks in advance.
Which address did you mail your upgrade request to? I will be doing the same early next week. My EB-1 I-140 (OR) just got approved.
Thanks in advance.
ayaskant
01-31 11:08 PM
Hi,
I came to US on h1b in 2007.
I got my labor substituted in 2007 in EB3. My priority date is December 2004.
I got my 140 approved in january 2008. Its been 2 yrs since.
I dont have EAD.
I dont know when the date will be current. But the problem is,
My client wants me to join their company. Can I leave my current company and still maintain my priority date. Do h1b companies normally cancel the i140 if employees leave.
if i join the new company I am planning to start GC in EB2 again. Is it wise to do so. Can I port my Priority date. Or should I stick onto my existing employer.
How much time its taking now a days to get the Labor and 140 in EB2.
ANy help and advice in this regards will be very much appreciated
ak
I came to US on h1b in 2007.
I got my labor substituted in 2007 in EB3. My priority date is December 2004.
I got my 140 approved in january 2008. Its been 2 yrs since.
I dont have EAD.
I dont know when the date will be current. But the problem is,
My client wants me to join their company. Can I leave my current company and still maintain my priority date. Do h1b companies normally cancel the i140 if employees leave.
if i join the new company I am planning to start GC in EB2 again. Is it wise to do so. Can I port my Priority date. Or should I stick onto my existing employer.
How much time its taking now a days to get the Labor and 140 in EB2.
ANy help and advice in this regards will be very much appreciated
ak
No comments:
Post a Comment