MunnaBhai
07-02 03:39 PM
Medical : 400.00
Attorney Fees:2800.00
Pictures:150.00
Attorney Fees:2800.00
Pictures:150.00
wallpaper mayank miley jab hum tum
satish_hello
12-07 10:19 AM
I am still waiting for FP, i created SR, hey told i have to wait for 4-6 weeks, which is already over.
I took infopass, my name check is clear, No info abt the FP Notice.
Any one in same situation transfered cases from NSC-->CSC-->NSC not yet received FP yet.
satish
----------------------------------------------
EB2/PD-Sept'2004/I-140 Approved.
I-485 - Sent July5th. - Transferred ---> WAC ---> back to NSC
EAD- Card Received
AP - Approved.
NC- Cleared
FP-?
AD -?
---------------------------------
I took infopass, my name check is clear, No info abt the FP Notice.
Any one in same situation transfered cases from NSC-->CSC-->NSC not yet received FP yet.
satish
----------------------------------------------
EB2/PD-Sept'2004/I-140 Approved.
I-485 - Sent July5th. - Transferred ---> WAC ---> back to NSC
EAD- Card Received
AP - Approved.
NC- Cleared
FP-?
AD -?
---------------------------------
deafTunes123
08-07 10:41 AM
There is no option for the earlier part of 2004 PD filers?
2011 jab-miley-hum-tum-star-one-3-
heywhat
05-30 02:04 AM
Done
more...
dilber
06-04 05:48 PM
class action lawsuit?? for using up too many visa's too fast?
wow. for once (& only once) I feel sad for USCIS. They are damned if they do, and damned if they dont. Usually all talk of class action lawsuits have been for visa numbers that they wasted by approving too slowly. Now another one for going too fast... :D
Seriously, I would be very very happy they are for a change working really fast so no wastage of numbers this time around. common guys don't you think is it good for us over all. may be we will not see some movement for some time but at least you know that we are not suffering because of USCIS's inefficiency.
wow. for once (& only once) I feel sad for USCIS. They are damned if they do, and damned if they dont. Usually all talk of class action lawsuits have been for visa numbers that they wasted by approving too slowly. Now another one for going too fast... :D
Seriously, I would be very very happy they are for a change working really fast so no wastage of numbers this time around. common guys don't you think is it good for us over all. may be we will not see some movement for some time but at least you know that we are not suffering because of USCIS's inefficiency.
jkays94
07-09 12:00 PM
It was for about 2 minutes. The first time this issue got TV coverage I guess.
Anyone captured it on video?
CNN had a 30 second clip on it on "American Morning" on July 3rd.
Anyone captured it on video?
CNN had a 30 second clip on it on "American Morning" on July 3rd.
more...
longq
12-20 03:41 PM
Hello IV and its core members,
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
2010 mile jab hum tum wallpapers. Miley Jab Hum Tum 21st April
GCInThisLife
06-03 11:03 PM
Yes. misrepresentation is risky and dangerous and no one is asking you to do it. All I am saying is don't submit information that weren't asked and expose yourself. For example if you only need to w2s for 2006 and 2007, don't submit 2004 w2s when you were paid less etc. IOs make the decision with the information provided to them and issue RFE only if the info is not sufficient or require clarification. In fact this is what even UnitedNations wrote in other forms.. i.e. don't pro-actively submit extra documentation.
Coming to my wifes case, apparently, according to company records she was their employee since the start of H1B approval, but they were reluctant to put her on project and payroll with out SSN. When we mentioned this, the company owner was very cooperative and in fact ready to give us any letter we ask in case of an RFE or any time we request.
Btw, do you honestly think I (or my attorney/assistent who filled the entire application for us based on the documents 'he asked us to provide' - We just signed it) don't know what you were saying about mis-representation?? Remember, I didn't even know there may be problems with her 485 till I posted on this forum so no question of any deliberate mis-representation. Since our attorney asked for copy of every document 'specifically' as a bulleted list separately for both of us, we assumed that he would point out issues if there were any. :).
Also, this is exactly what I was saying.. why do come and visit this form, go back and pull my first post and quote on it?? :). If you have a suggestion or solution, please do offer.
Anyways.. Wish you all the best. I hope your wait would be over soon.
Most status related issues are wiped off after a travel outside US.
What I would worry about most is if any misrepresentation was made to USCIS as far as status goes. Years later or even during naturalization, one's could face audit and possible revocation of an approved application.
Coming to my wifes case, apparently, according to company records she was their employee since the start of H1B approval, but they were reluctant to put her on project and payroll with out SSN. When we mentioned this, the company owner was very cooperative and in fact ready to give us any letter we ask in case of an RFE or any time we request.
Btw, do you honestly think I (or my attorney/assistent who filled the entire application for us based on the documents 'he asked us to provide' - We just signed it) don't know what you were saying about mis-representation?? Remember, I didn't even know there may be problems with her 485 till I posted on this forum so no question of any deliberate mis-representation. Since our attorney asked for copy of every document 'specifically' as a bulleted list separately for both of us, we assumed that he would point out issues if there were any. :).
Also, this is exactly what I was saying.. why do come and visit this form, go back and pull my first post and quote on it?? :). If you have a suggestion or solution, please do offer.
Anyways.. Wish you all the best. I hope your wait would be over soon.
Most status related issues are wiped off after a travel outside US.
What I would worry about most is if any misrepresentation was made to USCIS as far as status goes. Years later or even during naturalization, one's could face audit and possible revocation of an approved application.
more...
Marphad
11-30 03:40 PM
Immigrationvoice team has been working on the publicly available USCIS data since its release on USCIS website and we have been discussing this data with top USCIS officials to clear doubts.
Immigration Voice is releasing the analysis of the information for the community. You can view the report at
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=36
We are putting together a list of recommendations about this data for our next meeting with USCIS. If you have suggestions, do post on the thread. We would also be updating this report on regular basis as the data is updated on USCIS site and numbers change due to approvals/pre-adjudications/field office data/ CP and spillovers. The visa bulletin movement will also be compared against the report and checked with USCIS and DOS.
Team IV
Note: Please read the entire document rather than just basing your judgment on the graph and the visa bulletin charts. There are several caveats and limitations of this data.
We feel this is a one step ahead of the IV prediction tool published by IV in the past. We will continue to refine the analysis as we receive information from DOS and USCIS through our advocacy efforts.
Thanks, good job!
Immigration Voice is releasing the analysis of the information for the community. You can view the report at
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=36
We are putting together a list of recommendations about this data for our next meeting with USCIS. If you have suggestions, do post on the thread. We would also be updating this report on regular basis as the data is updated on USCIS site and numbers change due to approvals/pre-adjudications/field office data/ CP and spillovers. The visa bulletin movement will also be compared against the report and checked with USCIS and DOS.
Team IV
Note: Please read the entire document rather than just basing your judgment on the graph and the visa bulletin charts. There are several caveats and limitations of this data.
We feel this is a one step ahead of the IV prediction tool published by IV in the past. We will continue to refine the analysis as we receive information from DOS and USCIS through our advocacy efforts.
Thanks, good job!
hair Miley Jab Hum Tum 8th
![miley jab hum tum wallpapers. [/url]](http://www.bharatwaves.com/bollywoodphotos/albums/userpics/20090201/Miley%2520Jab%2520Hum%2520Tum_07%2520(2).JPG "[/url]")
485Mbe4001
10-24 01:25 PM
Ignore the IOs, just talk to your Senator or Congressman. They will be able to help you out. I was stuck in name check for more than 3 years. My congressman did not help but the senators office had a namecheck cell and they help out with genuine cases. The person there helped me clear my name check in 2-3 months (talk, dont email, send certified letter with details after talking to them). Had i known this earlier I would have had contacted them earlier and would have gotten my GC in June 07. My lawyer sdid not allow us to contact the IOs for information and i suffered big time because of that. Based on my experience all i can say is be proactive.
I don't know if my NC is cleared. Tried to find it couple of times calling over phone but always ran into unfriendly IO officers.
Got out of BEC in dec 2006, I140 cleared in Jan 2007 but then my PD became current only in June 2007. And due to laziness of my law firm, my I-485 filing did not happen in June and got dragged into July 07 mess.
I think if USCIS had initiated my Namecheck as per normal timeline (sometime around when my I-485 filed , i.e anywhere between July - Sep 2007), then yes, I think it crossed 180 days long time back.
I don't know if my NC is cleared. Tried to find it couple of times calling over phone but always ran into unfriendly IO officers.
Got out of BEC in dec 2006, I140 cleared in Jan 2007 but then my PD became current only in June 2007. And due to laziness of my law firm, my I-485 filing did not happen in June and got dragged into July 07 mess.
I think if USCIS had initiated my Namecheck as per normal timeline (sometime around when my I-485 filed , i.e anywhere between July - Sep 2007), then yes, I think it crossed 180 days long time back.
more...
senk1s
09-30 01:34 PM
applied jul28
fp aug 16
approved aug 20
cards received on hand aug28
fp aug 16
approved aug 20
cards received on hand aug28
hot samrat miley jab hum tum
asdcrajnet
07-17 10:57 AM
Here is for some one who cannot see. I deleted the content saved by IE addons...then I got the new dates
TEXAS
-----
I-90 Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card Initial issuance or replacement January 13, 2007
I-102 Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival/Departure Record Initial issuance or replacement of a Form I-94 April 14, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker H-1B - Specialty occupation - Visa to be issued abroad May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker H-1B - Specialty occupation - Change of status in the U.S. May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker H-1B - Specialty occupation - Extension of stay in the U.S. May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker H-2A - Temporary workers June 30, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker H-2B - Other temporary workers June 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker H-3 - Temporary trainees May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker E - Treaty traders and investors May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker L - Intracompany transfers June 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker Blanket L May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker O - Extraordinary ability May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker P - Athletes, artists, and entertainers May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker Q - Cultural exchange visitors and exchange visitors participating in the Irish Peace process May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker R - Religious occupation May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker TN - North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) professional May 15, 2007
I-131 Application for Travel Document All other applicants for advance parole April 14, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Extraordinary ability January 13, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Outstanding professor or researcher January 13, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Multinational executive or manager January 13, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Schedule A Nurses January 13, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Advanced degree or exceptional ability January 13, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Advanced degree or exceptional ability requesting a National Interest Waiver January 13, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Skilled worker or professional January 13, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Unskilled worker January 13, 2007
I-360 Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant All other special immigrants October 04, 2006
I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or to Adjust Status Employment-based adjustment applications August 07, 2006
I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or to Adjust Status Based on grant of asylum more than 1 year ago August 01, 2004
I-526 Immigrant Petition By Alien Entrepreneur For use by an entrepreneur who wishes to immigrate to the United States January 13, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status Change of status to H or L dependents April 14, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status Change status to the F or M academic or vocational student categories April 14, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status Change Status to the J exchange visitor category April 14, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status All other change of status applications April 14, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status Extension of stay for H and L dependents April 14, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status Extension of Stay for F or M academic or vocational students April 14, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status Extension of Stay for J exchange visitors April 14, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status All other extension applications April 14, 2007
I-612 Application for Waiver of the Foreign Residence Requirement Application for a waiver of the 2-year foreign residence requirement based on exceptional hardship or persecution August 19, 2006
I-751 Petition to Remove the Conditions on Residence Removal of lawful permanent resident conditions (spouses of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents January 13, 2007
I-765 Application for Employment Authorization Based on a request by a qualified F-1 academic student. [(c)(3)] April 28, 2007
I-765 Application for Employment Authorization Based on a pending asylum application [(c)(8)] June 16, 2007
I-765 Application for Employment Authorization Based on a pending I-485 adjustment application [(c)(9)] April 28, 2007
I-765 Application for Employment Authorization Based on TPS for Honduras/Nicaragua [(c)(19), (a)(12)] April 28, 2007
I-765 Application for Employment Authorization Based on TPS for El Salvador [(c)(19)(a)(12)] April 28, 2007
I-765 Application for Employment Authorization All other applications for employment authorization April 28, 2007
I-817 Application for Family Unity Benefits Voluntary departure under the family unity program January 13, 2007
I-824 Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition To request further action on an approved application or petition January 13, 2007
I-829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions Removal of lawful permanent resident conditions (immigrant investors) January 13, 2007
I-829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions Removal of lawful permanent resident conditions (immigrant investors) based on PL107-273 January 13, 2007
TEXAS
-----
I-90 Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card Initial issuance or replacement January 13, 2007
I-102 Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival/Departure Record Initial issuance or replacement of a Form I-94 April 14, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker H-1B - Specialty occupation - Visa to be issued abroad May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker H-1B - Specialty occupation - Change of status in the U.S. May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker H-1B - Specialty occupation - Extension of stay in the U.S. May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker H-2A - Temporary workers June 30, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker H-2B - Other temporary workers June 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker H-3 - Temporary trainees May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker E - Treaty traders and investors May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker L - Intracompany transfers June 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker Blanket L May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker O - Extraordinary ability May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker P - Athletes, artists, and entertainers May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker Q - Cultural exchange visitors and exchange visitors participating in the Irish Peace process May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker R - Religious occupation May 15, 2007
I-129 Petition for A Nonimmigrant Worker TN - North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) professional May 15, 2007
I-131 Application for Travel Document All other applicants for advance parole April 14, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Extraordinary ability January 13, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Outstanding professor or researcher January 13, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Multinational executive or manager January 13, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Schedule A Nurses January 13, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Advanced degree or exceptional ability January 13, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Advanced degree or exceptional ability requesting a National Interest Waiver January 13, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Skilled worker or professional January 13, 2007
I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker Unskilled worker January 13, 2007
I-360 Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant All other special immigrants October 04, 2006
I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or to Adjust Status Employment-based adjustment applications August 07, 2006
I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or to Adjust Status Based on grant of asylum more than 1 year ago August 01, 2004
I-526 Immigrant Petition By Alien Entrepreneur For use by an entrepreneur who wishes to immigrate to the United States January 13, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status Change of status to H or L dependents April 14, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status Change status to the F or M academic or vocational student categories April 14, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status Change Status to the J exchange visitor category April 14, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status All other change of status applications April 14, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status Extension of stay for H and L dependents April 14, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status Extension of Stay for F or M academic or vocational students April 14, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status Extension of Stay for J exchange visitors April 14, 2007
I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status All other extension applications April 14, 2007
I-612 Application for Waiver of the Foreign Residence Requirement Application for a waiver of the 2-year foreign residence requirement based on exceptional hardship or persecution August 19, 2006
I-751 Petition to Remove the Conditions on Residence Removal of lawful permanent resident conditions (spouses of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents January 13, 2007
I-765 Application for Employment Authorization Based on a request by a qualified F-1 academic student. [(c)(3)] April 28, 2007
I-765 Application for Employment Authorization Based on a pending asylum application [(c)(8)] June 16, 2007
I-765 Application for Employment Authorization Based on a pending I-485 adjustment application [(c)(9)] April 28, 2007
I-765 Application for Employment Authorization Based on TPS for Honduras/Nicaragua [(c)(19), (a)(12)] April 28, 2007
I-765 Application for Employment Authorization Based on TPS for El Salvador [(c)(19)(a)(12)] April 28, 2007
I-765 Application for Employment Authorization All other applications for employment authorization April 28, 2007
I-817 Application for Family Unity Benefits Voluntary departure under the family unity program January 13, 2007
I-824 Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition To request further action on an approved application or petition January 13, 2007
I-829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions Removal of lawful permanent resident conditions (immigrant investors) January 13, 2007
I-829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions Removal of lawful permanent resident conditions (immigrant investors) based on PL107-273 January 13, 2007
more...
house Tou hai dramatum mile jab hum
FinalGC
03-21 07:56 AM
I just sent an email. I am bumping this thread up
I am ready to coordinate from Lansing, Michigan.
I am ready to coordinate from Lansing, Michigan.
tattoo serial Miley Jab Hum Tum
sandy_anand
11-02 02:21 PM
I'm getting my bag of M & M's and box of Kleenex tissues ready.
Hahaha funny! :D
Hahaha funny! :D
more...
pictures miley jab hum tum wallpapers
octoberbloom
12-31 12:17 PM
This thread seems to express my thoughts.
I used to wait till my dates got current. With my dates being current since November, I still wait with no sign of improvement.
I tried calling the 1-800 number. But, did not get any useful information.
Took an Infopass appointment couple of weeks back. But, it was of no use.
The officer at the local office read the same status that I see online.
She said that my case was transfered to Texas center. (I knew this since October 2007). Only additional information she gave me was that my namecheck got clreared. (Though this is important, I dont think this really matters to get my case processed).
I told her that I have been waiting since years and some of friends who filed later than me already got their GCs, she felt sorry for me but she said there is nothing she can do for me. Not even a Service Request since my dates are within the processing times.
Its getting difficult for me......Also, in this economy its getting tough everyday to hold on to the job. Who knows may be this year quota might be over too. It will definitely be a big relief if we get the GC.
I thought there is nothing I can do now till my dates goes outside the processing times. Please advice.
Good Luck to everyone.
I used to wait till my dates got current. With my dates being current since November, I still wait with no sign of improvement.
I tried calling the 1-800 number. But, did not get any useful information.
Took an Infopass appointment couple of weeks back. But, it was of no use.
The officer at the local office read the same status that I see online.
She said that my case was transfered to Texas center. (I knew this since October 2007). Only additional information she gave me was that my namecheck got clreared. (Though this is important, I dont think this really matters to get my case processed).
I told her that I have been waiting since years and some of friends who filed later than me already got their GCs, she felt sorry for me but she said there is nothing she can do for me. Not even a Service Request since my dates are within the processing times.
Its getting difficult for me......Also, in this economy its getting tough everyday to hold on to the job. Who knows may be this year quota might be over too. It will definitely be a big relief if we get the GC.
I thought there is nothing I can do now till my dates goes outside the processing times. Please advice.
Good Luck to everyone.
dresses mile jab hum tum wallpapers. Samrat+miley+jab+hum+tum
gianik
05-25 01:23 PM
Does anyone know how Quebec compares to Ontario. Specifically Montreal to Toronto. Economically, culturaly, etc.?
I would appreciate any comment. Thanks
I would appreciate any comment. Thanks
more...
makeup Samrat+miley+jab+hum+tum+
ronhira
07-07 12:35 AM
Over 60% of the US and 90% of Arizona supports the law they passed. Obama and his Attorney General are doing the wrong thing by interfering with state politics. How can these high ranking officials tell state law enforcement NOT TO enforce laws? The Supreme court will favor AZ even before the case starts. Slam Dunk.
those numbers.... 60% or 90% are all doctored...... and i'll look at the poll numbers only if both the following conditions are true -
1.) if i've no brain of my own to differentiate between right or wrong, so i must rely on the poll numbers to help me choose my position
2.) if i'm a cheap bastard running to get elected in some useless office ..... therefore i must do what is popular than what is right.... i must give up my conscience and i must choose my position looking at the poll numbers......
i'm afraid that neither of these two conditions apply on me..... so i'll have to disagree with u.....
so much for u'r slam dunk...... come back and read this after the decision by the US supreme court...... state of arizona does not have legal jurisdiction over federal immigration law. no matter how much evil we see around us... this world is made up of good men and women..... AZ will lose..... federal government is asking AZ to enforce the existing law and disband their illegal & illegitimate bill sb1070 becoz its in violation of the constitution of the country..... applying existing federal law will take supremacy over "AZ immigration law" ........
those numbers.... 60% or 90% are all doctored...... and i'll look at the poll numbers only if both the following conditions are true -
1.) if i've no brain of my own to differentiate between right or wrong, so i must rely on the poll numbers to help me choose my position
2.) if i'm a cheap bastard running to get elected in some useless office ..... therefore i must do what is popular than what is right.... i must give up my conscience and i must choose my position looking at the poll numbers......
i'm afraid that neither of these two conditions apply on me..... so i'll have to disagree with u.....
so much for u'r slam dunk...... come back and read this after the decision by the US supreme court...... state of arizona does not have legal jurisdiction over federal immigration law. no matter how much evil we see around us... this world is made up of good men and women..... AZ will lose..... federal government is asking AZ to enforce the existing law and disband their illegal & illegitimate bill sb1070 becoz its in violation of the constitution of the country..... applying existing federal law will take supremacy over "AZ immigration law" ........
girlfriend girlfriend miley jab hum tum
somegchuh
12-05 05:25 PM
Would you mind sharing the process of getting the PPF from your old employer in India? i.e. what kind of forms do I need to request? What kind of documentation is needed etc?
I closed my PPF account twice and never paid a single paisa. The second one I closed when I was in US and got the forms here through my old employer and Signed and send those form back to that employer , they filed it, Don'y know if they attached "NOC" but I got all of my money (close to INR80K) in 2 or 3 weeks at my home address in India.
I guess no one needs to pay money for to PPF in any state all you need tyo do is follow the proper instructions, It's as good as in any bank.
I closed my PPF account twice and never paid a single paisa. The second one I closed when I was in US and got the forms here through my old employer and Signed and send those form back to that employer , they filed it, Don'y know if they attached "NOC" but I got all of my money (close to INR80K) in 2 or 3 weeks at my home address in India.
I guess no one needs to pay money for to PPF in any state all you need tyo do is follow the proper instructions, It's as good as in any bank.
hairstyles mayank nupur miley jab hum tum
prince40
04-14 07:41 PM
Desi consultants should be heavily fined or shut down if they get caught in filing multiple petitions. Why doesn't USCIS take reasonable steps to avoid these kinds of fraud. i hate it when desi consultants hire people from business background and file a H1B for them as a DBA's or programmer analysts or QA's....!!!
or even mech and civil engineers become IT experts in a second
or even mech and civil engineers become IT experts in a second
Berkeleybee
02-15 09:41 PM
If you haven't already volunteered for the CA team, please get in touch with blue_kayal and get information about the weekly call. Sign up, and participate in a lawmaker meeting near you.
kumarc123
11-22 09:08 AM
I have talked to IV leadership and they have agreed to hold a rally in March 1st Week, if sufficient numbers indicate willingness to participate.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=303461
So can we please stop blaming IV leaders and start showing them our support by indicating our support?
No one is blaming IV core my friend, but we all need to unite and do something big. We cant just wait for our partner to do something.
Yes, we should hold a rally in March in DC, and what we should do is, members who agreed to come and join us good enough,
The ones who are lazy, can continue to be lazy , you all have seen the bulletin and EAD is not green card. You are welcome to take your lazy chances,
I thought INDIANS were to stand together and fight a battle, this is a battle for the justice of immigrants in this country. I understand and I am versed with life in America, it is stressful. But think for a moment,will the green card make it better? If yes then join us.
This time we will use a different approach.
1. We will have banners on DESI stores
2. We will collect money from IV members.
3. We will contact the media for attention
Lets do this,
Good Luck
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=303461
So can we please stop blaming IV leaders and start showing them our support by indicating our support?
No one is blaming IV core my friend, but we all need to unite and do something big. We cant just wait for our partner to do something.
Yes, we should hold a rally in March in DC, and what we should do is, members who agreed to come and join us good enough,
The ones who are lazy, can continue to be lazy , you all have seen the bulletin and EAD is not green card. You are welcome to take your lazy chances,
I thought INDIANS were to stand together and fight a battle, this is a battle for the justice of immigrants in this country. I understand and I am versed with life in America, it is stressful. But think for a moment,will the green card make it better? If yes then join us.
This time we will use a different approach.
1. We will have banners on DESI stores
2. We will collect money from IV members.
3. We will contact the media for attention
Lets do this,
Good Luck
