sledge_hammer
06-29 11:37 AM
^^^^
JunRN
08-14 03:14 PM
If it was received but no checks cashed yet, I would re-file.
gc_wow
02-05 12:05 PM
Really,I do not understand if you have MS degree why would you be doing testing? You sound like a troll from one of those hate groups.
TimeSaver
07-13 06:10 PM
Seems like it could be new August visa bulletin. With some cutoffs. but applications sent already will not be rejected. They won't be worked upon but wont be rejected.
more...
same_old_guy
10-25 01:55 PM
I said the same thing. I WILL NOT spend $1000 for nothing when my PD is not current.
Fortunately, I got my I-140 approved last week. It was sent on Mid-May. It's EB2 NSC.
So just hang in there, unless your 6th year H1 is expiring in new few days.
Fortunately, I got my I-140 approved last week. It was sent on Mid-May. It's EB2 NSC.
So just hang in there, unless your 6th year H1 is expiring in new few days.
lp2007
08-05 12:13 AM
A friend of mine got his 140 approved in 5 days through PP in June. I don't think now that option is even available since PP has been suspended until futher notice.
http://murthy.com/news/n_procon.html
Thanks
http://murthy.com/news/n_procon.html
Thanks
more...
bandhu
02-04 08:07 PM
i was totaly upse about this post, here is my correct entry
definitely your entry should be denied, you are not capable to solve your domestic problem, how come you are going to do good to this country by getting GC. (I agree these people are not good as you, but before they start domestic violence there are on citizen/GC (either one of them),
I did not know moral contractors like u r here otherwise wud hv contacted u before USCIS.
BTW: What good are YOU doing to this country?
definitely your entry should be denied, you are not capable to solve your domestic problem, how come you are going to do good to this country by getting GC. (I agree these people are not good as you, but before they start domestic violence there are on citizen/GC (either one of them),
I did not know moral contractors like u r here otherwise wud hv contacted u before USCIS.
BTW: What good are YOU doing to this country?
waitnwatch
05-25 07:40 PM
Here is my reading of the amendment.
If you look at the original bill (S2611) Section 508 reads
SEC. 508. VISAS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH ADVANCED DEGREES.
(a) Aliens With Certain Advanced Degrees Not Subject to Numerical Limitations on Employment Based Immigrants-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 201(b)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)), as amended by section 505, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(G) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math and have been working in a related field in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 3-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).
`(H) Aliens described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 203(b)(1)(A) or who have received a national interest waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B).
`(I) The spouse and minor children of an alien who is admitted as an employment-based immigrant under section 203(b).'.
**************************************************
Bingaman Amendment 4181 and 4182 on the other hand state
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this act the language in Title V Sec. 501 under the heading ``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN'' is null and void and the following shall be applicable in lien thereof.
``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN.--
``(A) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), immigrant visas issued on or after October 1, 2004, to spouses and children of employment-based immigrants shall not be counted against the numerical limitation set forth in paragraph (1).
``(B) NUMERICAL LIMITATION.--The total number of visas issued under paragraph (1)(A) and paragraph (2), excluding such visas issued to aliens pursuant to section 245B or section 245C of the Immigration and Nationality Act, may not exceed 650,000 during any fiscal year.
************************************************** ****
Reading S2611 Section 508 in conjunction with SA4811 and SA4812 specifically shows that STEM + 3 applicants as well as their spouses and children are not subject to any caps. On the other had the troubling part is that those not covered by STEM+3 will have 450,000 principal applicant slots and therefore only 200,000 spouse and children slots. This discrepancy arises from the fact that Bingaman multiplied 290,000 by 1.2 to arrive at his figure while S2611 allows for 450,000 principal applicants in the 1st 10 years to remove backlog.
SA 4188 is not currently available for reading and it will be interesting to see what change has been made to the language in 508(a)(1)(G) to allow all STEM +3 to be exempt. It would also be interesting to see whether language in Sec 508(b)(3)(III) has been changed to reflect the changes in 508(a)(1)(G)
Note that if both these sections are changed to allow all STEM+3 then labor certification too becomes easier. Hopefully changes here can provide some relief from Bingaman's torpedo.
I would appreciate comments as my analysis may be wrong.
If you look at the original bill (S2611) Section 508 reads
SEC. 508. VISAS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH ADVANCED DEGREES.
(a) Aliens With Certain Advanced Degrees Not Subject to Numerical Limitations on Employment Based Immigrants-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 201(b)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)), as amended by section 505, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(G) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math and have been working in a related field in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 3-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).
`(H) Aliens described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 203(b)(1)(A) or who have received a national interest waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B).
`(I) The spouse and minor children of an alien who is admitted as an employment-based immigrant under section 203(b).'.
**************************************************
Bingaman Amendment 4181 and 4182 on the other hand state
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this act the language in Title V Sec. 501 under the heading ``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN'' is null and void and the following shall be applicable in lien thereof.
``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN.--
``(A) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), immigrant visas issued on or after October 1, 2004, to spouses and children of employment-based immigrants shall not be counted against the numerical limitation set forth in paragraph (1).
``(B) NUMERICAL LIMITATION.--The total number of visas issued under paragraph (1)(A) and paragraph (2), excluding such visas issued to aliens pursuant to section 245B or section 245C of the Immigration and Nationality Act, may not exceed 650,000 during any fiscal year.
************************************************** ****
Reading S2611 Section 508 in conjunction with SA4811 and SA4812 specifically shows that STEM + 3 applicants as well as their spouses and children are not subject to any caps. On the other had the troubling part is that those not covered by STEM+3 will have 450,000 principal applicant slots and therefore only 200,000 spouse and children slots. This discrepancy arises from the fact that Bingaman multiplied 290,000 by 1.2 to arrive at his figure while S2611 allows for 450,000 principal applicants in the 1st 10 years to remove backlog.
SA 4188 is not currently available for reading and it will be interesting to see what change has been made to the language in 508(a)(1)(G) to allow all STEM +3 to be exempt. It would also be interesting to see whether language in Sec 508(b)(3)(III) has been changed to reflect the changes in 508(a)(1)(G)
Note that if both these sections are changed to allow all STEM+3 then labor certification too becomes easier. Hopefully changes here can provide some relief from Bingaman's torpedo.
I would appreciate comments as my analysis may be wrong.
more...
coolwiz26
07-03 12:59 AM
I will sue them too. They need to be punished for what they have done. pls tell me the procedure and I will do it.
-C
-C
praveen_mr
12-21 03:46 PM
Just fly Continental or Delta from NY to Mumbai (this is non stop)
more...
mytv
09-01 09:32 PM
Thank You
greyhair
09-30 05:12 PM
I cracked up reading the post. I never really understood why they call us losers and locusts.
Google translation maybe funny but i think the meaning of the post on Chinese forum is serious. When we giving money to IV which is working for everyone in the backlog, Chinese are only thinking for themselves. Scratch the, Chinese are not thinking for even themselves, they are cutting the same branch of the tree on which they are sitting. They are undermining the effort to address the green card backlog. They are trying to use fuzzy match to argue against removal of per country limits in the the process shooting themselves on the foot. If I understand their logic correctly, these Chinese are saying that we are ok if they have to wait in the backlog for years and years, as long as Indian don't get any benefit. That's just plain dumb for them to think like this.
The other day someone posted that Chinese are calling Charles Oppenheim at DOS, asking him to not advance the dates of Indians, and rather only advance the dates of Chinese, which apparently backfired.
I have many good friends from China and they are all very nice. But as a group why do we always see Chinese digging hole everywhere?
Google translation maybe funny but i think the meaning of the post on Chinese forum is serious. When we giving money to IV which is working for everyone in the backlog, Chinese are only thinking for themselves. Scratch the, Chinese are not thinking for even themselves, they are cutting the same branch of the tree on which they are sitting. They are undermining the effort to address the green card backlog. They are trying to use fuzzy match to argue against removal of per country limits in the the process shooting themselves on the foot. If I understand their logic correctly, these Chinese are saying that we are ok if they have to wait in the backlog for years and years, as long as Indian don't get any benefit. That's just plain dumb for them to think like this.
The other day someone posted that Chinese are calling Charles Oppenheim at DOS, asking him to not advance the dates of Indians, and rather only advance the dates of Chinese, which apparently backfired.
I have many good friends from China and they are all very nice. But as a group why do we always see Chinese digging hole everywhere?
more...
a_yaja
06-26 03:31 PM
My view is immigration intent part will not impact much. Just it is giving more power to consulate. Consulate may reject some candidates who are not having strong job offers. It is similar to F1 visa. But nowadays F1 visa rejections are very less compared to past
I disagree. It is easier for students to get F1 because they are unsure of their future (no job, no money, what will they do without either of these) and consular officers can then accept future uncertainity as "no intent to immigrate". Replace a just graduated college student with someone who has 5 - 10 years of experience but not married or does not own property. The consular officer will immediately reject the visa.
This is also the case with a lot of B1/ B2 visa applicants. I have seen many first time visa applicants who are parents who have had their visa rejected because they did not own a home and/ or they did not show proof of having substantial bank money.
H1s will also have to prove this from now on. And tell me someone who has a good job and a house and kids going to school who will want to come to US on a H1.
I disagree. It is easier for students to get F1 because they are unsure of their future (no job, no money, what will they do without either of these) and consular officers can then accept future uncertainity as "no intent to immigrate". Replace a just graduated college student with someone who has 5 - 10 years of experience but not married or does not own property. The consular officer will immediately reject the visa.
This is also the case with a lot of B1/ B2 visa applicants. I have seen many first time visa applicants who are parents who have had their visa rejected because they did not own a home and/ or they did not show proof of having substantial bank money.
H1s will also have to prove this from now on. And tell me someone who has a good job and a house and kids going to school who will want to come to US on a H1.
number30
04-25 01:57 AM
Checked with my company lawyer. According to them it is a separate document from marriage certificate.
I applied for GC only after getting married , so right from the beginning my passport etc has my wifes name in it. What caused this RFE still baffles me.
I am not sure how will I get this document sitting in USA within 2 weeks.
Is there any other alternative ? Has any one faced with this kind of RFE and has given
some substitute for "Memorandum of marriage"
It might be application you made for registering the marriage. I googled it and got this result
http://www.karigr.org/download/hindu%20marriage%20forms.pdf
I applied for GC only after getting married , so right from the beginning my passport etc has my wifes name in it. What caused this RFE still baffles me.
I am not sure how will I get this document sitting in USA within 2 weeks.
Is there any other alternative ? Has any one faced with this kind of RFE and has given
some substitute for "Memorandum of marriage"
It might be application you made for registering the marriage. I googled it and got this result
http://www.karigr.org/download/hindu%20marriage%20forms.pdf
more...
krupa
07-10 09:02 AM
Can u post the link to that bulletin announced on 9th july 2007? We didnt find anywhere ?
vaishu
Visa Bulletin
Number 108
Volume IX
Washington, D.C.
The Visa Bulletin for July 2007, posted on June 12, must be read in conjunction with the Update of July Visa Availability, posted on July 2.
The Update of July Visa Availability, posted on July 2, must be read in conjunction with the Visa Bulletin for July 2007, which was posted on June 12.
Input by Krupa:
The above is the visa bulletine. I wanted know what is the impact on leagal status of old bulelletins.
vaishu
Visa Bulletin
Number 108
Volume IX
Washington, D.C.
The Visa Bulletin for July 2007, posted on June 12, must be read in conjunction with the Update of July Visa Availability, posted on July 2.
The Update of July Visa Availability, posted on July 2, must be read in conjunction with the Visa Bulletin for July 2007, which was posted on June 12.
Input by Krupa:
The above is the visa bulletine. I wanted know what is the impact on leagal status of old bulelletins.
akp
06-30 07:35 PM
I do not know what was posted. But if it was not offensive language (and I mean offensive as in use of swear words), I do not agree that moderator or super moderator should delete it. Let it be there, if it is useless drivel, it will be ignored by most. So deleting an opinion or comment does not sound right, and it undermines the credibility of forum, especially in the US where these sort of things not taken lightly (think of communist label).
I understand the concept of keeping focus on immigration matters only, but leave it to members for most part.
The implication of our way or highway sounds childish.
Just my opinion in an "open" forum.
I understand the concept of keeping focus on immigration matters only, but leave it to members for most part.
The implication of our way or highway sounds childish.
Just my opinion in an "open" forum.
more...
indianabacklog
08-06 07:37 AM
I-140 was approved on october 08, 2002
and it was filed on may 20, 2003
i dnt think that my dad filed I-485.
Since the I140 was approved in October 2002 and the visa became current in August 2003, from my knowledge you had until August 2004 to file the I824. The CSPA seems to be very clear you have one year from the time the visa BECAME current so you would have been one year late in applying.
Be assured I know this aging out thing is awful my family is a victim of it too. I see no pleasure watching others suffer.
and it was filed on may 20, 2003
i dnt think that my dad filed I-485.
Since the I140 was approved in October 2002 and the visa became current in August 2003, from my knowledge you had until August 2004 to file the I824. The CSPA seems to be very clear you have one year from the time the visa BECAME current so you would have been one year late in applying.
Be assured I know this aging out thing is awful my family is a victim of it too. I see no pleasure watching others suffer.
pmpforgc
11-22 03:09 PM
Hi
I am working in University in US and my I-140 (EB-2 Sch-A) is approved and my I-485 is pending. I have H-1B approved from March-06 but yet not stamped.
I am planing to Go to India some time next summer.
But before that I am planing to go to MEXICO ( MATAMOROS) for H-1B and
H-4 stamping for my family.
Do I need to carry any extra documents apart from those needed for H-1 B stamping?
DO I need to Get Advance parole before going to mexico for H-1B stamping?
Does the my going out of country with pending I-485 without taking AP will affect pending application of I-485?
Your experienced advise will help me a lot.
I am working in University in US and my I-140 (EB-2 Sch-A) is approved and my I-485 is pending. I have H-1B approved from March-06 but yet not stamped.
I am planing to Go to India some time next summer.
But before that I am planing to go to MEXICO ( MATAMOROS) for H-1B and
H-4 stamping for my family.
Do I need to carry any extra documents apart from those needed for H-1 B stamping?
DO I need to Get Advance parole before going to mexico for H-1B stamping?
Does the my going out of country with pending I-485 without taking AP will affect pending application of I-485?
Your experienced advise will help me a lot.
gjoe
02-04 04:36 PM
I guess you should be good with your AP . But also there was a thread about one of the IV'ians AP experience at SFO. Please read that so can understand what AP is for and when it can be used as per the IO at SFO airport
chanduv23
12-08 04:03 PM
It will not have much impact if any president comes in the case of immigration. Anyhow most of them are not going to Veto. It is the congress who plays important role. President can just initiate the process. Bush tried his best to pass some immigration reform but divided congress defeated all the bills. Who is the reason? Not just anti immigrants but also pro immigrant groups. Expectation from pro immigrants was too much and in some cases impractical. Anti immigrants used those and defeated every time. Also anti immigrants used division in various groups like legal vs illegal, high skilled vs low skilled and H1 vs green card. Some unbiased leader need to bring a bill which should work compromise at the same time that compromise should benefit all the groups. But unfortunately most congressmen are busy in other works. Next congress is critical for any immigration reform
Please contribute to the OMNIBUS lobbying efforts.
Please contribute to the OMNIBUS lobbying efforts.
boston_gc
05-30 10:31 PM
My PD is Sept 2005 and EB3 India. With the new company I can file EB2. What will be your recommendation?
Keep in mind the consequences of the new bill. Any I-140s filed after May 21 (or 15 depends where you are reading) will be invalidated. If I was you and my PD is current, I would take the risk and hang in there, get I-485 filed and bite the bullet for 6 months or 1 year (again depending on how the bill turns out)
Keep in mind the consequences of the new bill. Any I-140s filed after May 21 (or 15 depends where you are reading) will be invalidated. If I was you and my PD is current, I would take the risk and hang in there, get I-485 filed and bite the bullet for 6 months or 1 year (again depending on how the bill turns out)
No comments:
Post a Comment