ganeshpv
05-01 01:26 PM
Yeah.. I realized that. And I think I can qualify for emergency appt. BUT that wasn't my question. My question was do I HAVE to go to Chennai or can I get it done in Bangalore (they have an office that seems to have drop box like feature).
vnandster
04-13 01:12 AM
Only my lawyer got the RFE - We didn't.
stemcell
03-12 02:09 PM
congrats and best of luck.
virtual55
05-06 06:41 PM
This conference is for lawyers and employers and organized by lawyers. The organizers are charging fees for it too.
So what will IV gain by meeting lawyers and paying money to just get in?
Or by showing our face to USCIS official, Do you think by showing your face you will get your greencard and can promote IV? If that is true why don't you go and sit in front of USCIS and show your face to everyone entering that building?
And if you want to go then go. Why do you want IV to pay your $350?
First use your common sense and think positively instead of commenting posts
So what will IV gain by meeting lawyers and paying money to just get in?
Or by showing our face to USCIS official, Do you think by showing your face you will get your greencard and can promote IV? If that is true why don't you go and sit in front of USCIS and show your face to everyone entering that building?
And if you want to go then go. Why do you want IV to pay your $350?
First use your common sense and think positively instead of commenting posts
more...
rustum
10-10 12:35 AM
Application reached Nebraska on 27th July. Collected by R williams.
Got receipts for 485, 765 adn 131 from California service center(WAC XXXX).
Received Date: 27th July.
Notice date: 28th Sep.
140 is pending at Nebraska. Applied on 25th May 2007.
Got receipts for 485, 765 adn 131 from California service center(WAC XXXX).
Received Date: 27th July.
Notice date: 28th Sep.
140 is pending at Nebraska. Applied on 25th May 2007.
Mohit_Malkani
10-08 11:13 AM
Sorry to hear about your situation.
Take a look at www.immigtation-law.com. Go to the nreaking news swction. They have a great piece on I140/I485 portability.
I have also pasted it here in case you dont get to the website
All the best.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer�s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physically location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensure. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
Take a look at www.immigtation-law.com. Go to the nreaking news swction. They have a great piece on I140/I485 portability.
I have also pasted it here in case you dont get to the website
All the best.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer�s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physically location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensure. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
more...
perm2gc
05-31 12:18 PM
Recently joined.
Contributed $200.
Thank You.People who are just browsing the forum..please come forward..it is not only our issue but it is EVERYONE'S issue..if we don't act now..we will have no time to act in future.
Contributed $200.
Thank You.People who are just browsing the forum..please come forward..it is not only our issue but it is EVERYONE'S issue..if we don't act now..we will have no time to act in future.
baladev
05-04 09:58 AM
Here is the link for sending email to senators
http://senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Dev
http://senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Dev
more...
DudefromBombay
08-11 02:59 PM
Democrats are losers. Socialist. They can only sponsor illegal immigrants. Republican party is pro legal immigration.
radosav
10-04 01:47 PM
I-485 RD July 27 at Texas
I-140 AD May 25, 06 at Texas, LUD on I-140 July 28, 07
all checks (for I-485 & I-765) cashed Oct 3, 07 at California
Both I-485 cases transfered back to Texas on Oct 2, 07
I-765 shows received date as Oct 1, 07 and will stay at California. Does that mean I need to count 11 weeks from that date? And not from the date when packet was received in July?
I-140 AD May 25, 06 at Texas, LUD on I-140 July 28, 07
all checks (for I-485 & I-765) cashed Oct 3, 07 at California
Both I-485 cases transfered back to Texas on Oct 2, 07
I-765 shows received date as Oct 1, 07 and will stay at California. Does that mean I need to count 11 weeks from that date? And not from the date when packet was received in July?
more...
smuggymba
08-10 08:48 AM
Friends
This is my situation
My I 140 approved, my status is F1 COS to H1 B
My wife situation, B1 (Visitor) COS to H4.
Now we r planning to change my wife status from H4 TO F1.
Can anyone with their experience suggest How complicated is my Case!!!!
Can we file COS by ourself or do you suggest to Hire an Attorney.
Pl advice
Thanks
We did the COS from H4 (stamped) to F1 for my wife ourselves. It was easy, no lawyer but we got an RFE on the dollar amount so we replied again ourselves (giving an excel sheet etc). You can do it yourself.
This is my situation
My I 140 approved, my status is F1 COS to H1 B
My wife situation, B1 (Visitor) COS to H4.
Now we r planning to change my wife status from H4 TO F1.
Can anyone with their experience suggest How complicated is my Case!!!!
Can we file COS by ourself or do you suggest to Hire an Attorney.
Pl advice
Thanks
We did the COS from H4 (stamped) to F1 for my wife ourselves. It was easy, no lawyer but we got an RFE on the dollar amount so we replied again ourselves (giving an excel sheet etc). You can do it yourself.
p_kumar
11-30 12:22 PM
As the IO officers explained to you, instead of approving some other document(s), USCIS wrongly approved your I-485 application.
Regards
K
I wish the USCIS would wrongly approve my citizenship application even though i dont have GC yet:D
Regards
K
I wish the USCIS would wrongly approve my citizenship application even though i dont have GC yet:D
more...
dtekkedil
07-02 11:52 PM
The Honorable Emilio T. Gonzalez
Director U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20529
Director U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20529
kittu1991
03-18 04:54 PM
She can apply for EAD now and once she gets it she can apply for SSN.
more...
simple1
06-18 01:47 PM
Recently multiple threads have been created in IV forum about
* Illegal’s (now conveniently called undocumented immigrants) * their anchor babies * and CIR.
We should not support Illegal’s and their agenda.
Support CIR only after seeing something for EB non-ROW or atleast legal immigration in general.
We need to oppose CIR till we see such a provision.
* Illegal’s (now conveniently called undocumented immigrants) * their anchor babies * and CIR.
We should not support Illegal’s and their agenda.
Support CIR only after seeing something for EB non-ROW or atleast legal immigration in general.
We need to oppose CIR till we see such a provision.
WillIBLucky
12-13 12:58 PM
That was my thought process too. If the immigration systems is corrected then I believe EB3 and EB2 will become current. Then it does not make a difference. Even late 90's the retrogression was there for both Eb2 and Eb3. IN 1999 they opened up for Y2K and then again retrogressed in 2001-2002 I believe. But again after that it was all current till the current retrogression.
Given the gross uncertainity about retrogression and GC, I would not give undue importance to the GC timeline factor. Eventually job / skills are more important than the distant GC.
I was in a similar situation a few months back. I abandoned my GC process with my former employer for a new and much more promising job. I am yet to start the GC process with the new employer. For me JOB was the deciding factor.
My reasoning was simple:
In the current scenario with a broken immigration system if we are to maintain our sanity and move on in our careers he, we have to stop thinking that GC is above everything. Work on it as much as you can, but do not trade it in for good career moves.
Do what you feel is best for you and what you can make peace with. My 2 cents..
Given the gross uncertainity about retrogression and GC, I would not give undue importance to the GC timeline factor. Eventually job / skills are more important than the distant GC.
I was in a similar situation a few months back. I abandoned my GC process with my former employer for a new and much more promising job. I am yet to start the GC process with the new employer. For me JOB was the deciding factor.
My reasoning was simple:
In the current scenario with a broken immigration system if we are to maintain our sanity and move on in our careers he, we have to stop thinking that GC is above everything. Work on it as much as you can, but do not trade it in for good career moves.
Do what you feel is best for you and what you can make peace with. My 2 cents..
more...
gc_kaavaali
05-21 01:55 PM
Are you sure? it is going to be too much pain....
It is no longer available.
It is no longer available.
GCmuddu_H1BVaddu
03-20 02:10 AM
I have limited knowledge on this but my own logical thinking
1) Your best bet is to have baby in US and go to India
2) Baby will not be granted any green card as there is no application present for the baby 3) You can't get the baby to US on H-4 as a dependent bcz you are on EAD
4) Either you can file for a visitor visa (through EAD) or file for H-1B for the baby ;-) (just kidding on H1B stuff)
Go for (1).
Hi Everyone,
Our Immigration status is EAD and my wife is pregnant,
We are very happy with the news..
There is lot of possibility for us to be in India during due date, based on few important events in family.
We would like to know.. if baby is born in India then what possere ibilities are there for us to bring baby along with us?
(if mother stays in India for couple of more months)
can baby also get Green Card when we (parents) are allotted green card?
All your advices are always appreciated.
Thanks & Regards,
Satya.
Note: Admins if required, please close this thread and redirect to any existing ones, as i could not find one I have posted a new thread.
1) Your best bet is to have baby in US and go to India
2) Baby will not be granted any green card as there is no application present for the baby 3) You can't get the baby to US on H-4 as a dependent bcz you are on EAD
4) Either you can file for a visitor visa (through EAD) or file for H-1B for the baby ;-) (just kidding on H1B stuff)
Go for (1).
Hi Everyone,
Our Immigration status is EAD and my wife is pregnant,
We are very happy with the news..
There is lot of possibility for us to be in India during due date, based on few important events in family.
We would like to know.. if baby is born in India then what possere ibilities are there for us to bring baby along with us?
(if mother stays in India for couple of more months)
can baby also get Green Card when we (parents) are allotted green card?
All your advices are always appreciated.
Thanks & Regards,
Satya.
Note: Admins if required, please close this thread and redirect to any existing ones, as i could not find one I have posted a new thread.
WeShallOvercome
07-27 02:13 PM
Thanks.
I wish I should I have acted against the USCIS notice on july 2nd saying they will reject. I should have listened to Rajiv khanna website who was saying that the app should be filed even if it was sent back.
But my attorney said its no use to beat the system and I should wait till october.
I listened and kept quite for few days and later decided on July 16th that What the heck !!!. Let us submit even if it is returned and went ahead.
Every day matters as the counter is 180 days. It is like a time bomb clock.
I think now we can just mark on our calendars the 180 days which includes some months of 31 days and mark exactly the date and time and plan to celeberate it to fulliest.
When you mark your calendar, mark it for 182 days to be safe. You never know USCIS and these employers.. Keep yourself safe from all the complications that might arise if you leave on 180th or 181st day (whether first day is included or not, can I leave on 180th day or do i have to wait for 180 days to complete blah blah.. ) :)
I wish I should I have acted against the USCIS notice on july 2nd saying they will reject. I should have listened to Rajiv khanna website who was saying that the app should be filed even if it was sent back.
But my attorney said its no use to beat the system and I should wait till october.
I listened and kept quite for few days and later decided on July 16th that What the heck !!!. Let us submit even if it is returned and went ahead.
Every day matters as the counter is 180 days. It is like a time bomb clock.
I think now we can just mark on our calendars the 180 days which includes some months of 31 days and mark exactly the date and time and plan to celeberate it to fulliest.
When you mark your calendar, mark it for 182 days to be safe. You never know USCIS and these employers.. Keep yourself safe from all the complications that might arise if you leave on 180th or 181st day (whether first day is included or not, can I leave on 180th day or do i have to wait for 180 days to complete blah blah.. ) :)
fcres
08-09 10:19 AM
Here it is
Q #17 in http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
Q17: How will USCIS interpret the language of AC21 Sec 104(c) (for three-year H-1B extensions) during a period in which AOS applications could be filed?
A17. USCIS interprets AC21 �104(c) as only applicable when an alien, who is the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, is eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status but for application of the per country limitations. Any petitioner seeking an H-1B extension on behalf of a beneficiary pursuant to AC21 �104(c) must thus establish that at the time of filing for such extension, the alien is not eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status on account of the per country immigrant visa limitations.
And here is what OH says in his breaking news for July 24th after this memo
0724/2007: AC 21 Three-Year Increment H-1B Extension Petition Availability in July and August 2007
Under Section 104(c) of AC 21 Act, those who have an approved I-140 petition or pending EB-485 application with the approved I-140 petition are eligible for the H-1B extension in three-year increment, if they cannot file EB-485 or EB-485 is pending but cannot be adjudicated because of the visa number unavailability for him/her. The question remained whether visa number should be unavailable at the time of filing of H-1B extension or at the time of adjudication of filing. The USCIS FAQ indicates that it will be determined by the date of filing rather than date of adjudication.
You should ask your lawyer to get an amendment. I read here yday somebody doing that.
Q #17 in http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
Q17: How will USCIS interpret the language of AC21 Sec 104(c) (for three-year H-1B extensions) during a period in which AOS applications could be filed?
A17. USCIS interprets AC21 �104(c) as only applicable when an alien, who is the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, is eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status but for application of the per country limitations. Any petitioner seeking an H-1B extension on behalf of a beneficiary pursuant to AC21 �104(c) must thus establish that at the time of filing for such extension, the alien is not eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status on account of the per country immigrant visa limitations.
And here is what OH says in his breaking news for July 24th after this memo
0724/2007: AC 21 Three-Year Increment H-1B Extension Petition Availability in July and August 2007
Under Section 104(c) of AC 21 Act, those who have an approved I-140 petition or pending EB-485 application with the approved I-140 petition are eligible for the H-1B extension in three-year increment, if they cannot file EB-485 or EB-485 is pending but cannot be adjudicated because of the visa number unavailability for him/her. The question remained whether visa number should be unavailable at the time of filing of H-1B extension or at the time of adjudication of filing. The USCIS FAQ indicates that it will be determined by the date of filing rather than date of adjudication.
You should ask your lawyer to get an amendment. I read here yday somebody doing that.
pappu
01-24 11:47 AM
If there is going to be any more discussion on if IV should push for 485 or not push, moderators will close the threads. There has been enough discussion and arguements in the past over this and members are more than willing to give hundreds of ideas and opinions for free but only a few actually care to implement them or help IV with a mere $20. If you want to discuss it, go to other forums and discuss it and be an armchair strategist.
If you have ideas and want to implement them, join your local chapter and get active. Contribute in the funding drive so that IV can continue to be a platform for everyone in ths struggle.
If you have ideas and want to implement them, join your local chapter and get active. Contribute in the funding drive so that IV can continue to be a platform for everyone in ths struggle.
No comments:
Post a Comment