vallabhu
03-09 03:45 PM
Eating away from the regular Quota does not make sense to me, all the people who get the visas after the end of quota will not count for next year. Assuming this is true the number of required visas goes down for next year? Which may be partially good news.
I don�t know, I am just guessing things here.
I don�t know, I am just guessing things here.
wallpaper Britney Spears officially
sunsuri
07-04 06:10 PM
It would be helpful if you few addresses for senators so that everyone can send letters right away.
sam2006
09-12 09:08 PM
Looks like you will soon cross My 350 Contribution ;)
I pledge 100$ more once Milind123 equals 400 !!:D
Any Takers !!!
thats the Least we non attending :( :(
folks can do
I pledge 100$ more once Milind123 equals 400 !!:D
Any Takers !!!
thats the Least we non attending :( :(
folks can do
2011 “Hold It Against Me”
karan2004m
01-05 08:39 PM
ya just because u need green card, you agree with professor sahib. once u get ur green card u will also talk bad about india and indian workers.. i think gone r days when it was a cheap labor.. do u think our education systems/colleges IIT's/REC's are crap.
just because he favored GC applicant you should not agree..he straightway projected india as third world nation in eductaion, resource quality etc ..
I totally totally agree with Professor Sahib! I wish the government listens to him. What he is saying is good for everyone. As Indians we want America to succeed and prosper and we want to be a big part of the reason they prosper.
Please see this and give it a good review -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvqqYDmLgjY
Gayatri
just because he favored GC applicant you should not agree..he straightway projected india as third world nation in eductaion, resource quality etc ..
I totally totally agree with Professor Sahib! I wish the government listens to him. What he is saying is good for everyone. As Indians we want America to succeed and prosper and we want to be a big part of the reason they prosper.
Please see this and give it a good review -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvqqYDmLgjY
Gayatri
more...
BlueCard
10-01 12:13 PM
If this news is true, then we can see "wild" approvals before the end of September. Some people with complete cases may overtake others.
Mine was probably such a wild case. With a PD of DEC2004 Eb3 ROW, I-140 approved in 2006, filed I-485 in June (ND: June 27), FP: August 1st, "Notice sent welcoming permanent resident" on September 17th, received my card 4 days later, even before the notices. Less than 3 months total processing time, end to end.
I guess they just picked the low hanging fruit and fast-tracked like crazy to waste as little visa numbers as possible. But still not fast enough...
Mine was probably such a wild case. With a PD of DEC2004 Eb3 ROW, I-140 approved in 2006, filed I-485 in June (ND: June 27), FP: August 1st, "Notice sent welcoming permanent resident" on September 17th, received my card 4 days later, even before the notices. Less than 3 months total processing time, end to end.
I guess they just picked the low hanging fruit and fast-tracked like crazy to waste as little visa numbers as possible. But still not fast enough...
lskreddy
04-30 03:17 PM
Guiterrez (spelt wrong) was brilliant in stating how screwed the FB system. He was particularly clear on his examples for FB. Kudos to him..
And, they talked about the statute and bulletin mismatch of words...
And, they talked about the statute and bulletin mismatch of words...
more...
Macaca
09-14 06:25 PM
Foreign workers with skills find open door After waffling, the U.S. suspends the wait to apply for green cards (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=127944&postcount=788) By Teresa Watanabe (teresa.watanabe@latimes.com) | Times Staff Writer, July 21, 2007
2010 Britney Spears “Hold It
raju123
06-01 04:00 PM
This might be useful to you.
Age-Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "Child Status Protection Act"
The "Child Status Protection Act", effective August 6, 2002, addresses the problems of minor children losing their eligibility for certain immigration benefits as a result of INS (now USCIS) processing delays. Prior to the passage of this law, a child's eligibility in Employment-Based Immigration situations to be part of his or her parent's application as a derivative beneficiary was based on the child's age at the time that the child's I-485 was adjudicated. Because of enormous backlogs and processing delays, many children turned 21 before the their I-485 applications were adjudicated. In such cases, the children "age-out" and are no longer considered to be part of the parent's application and lose their eligibility to obtain green cards as a derivative beneficiary.
Children who otherwise would have aged out may successfully adjust their status through the additional interplay of the new Concurrent Filing rule and the "Child Status Protection Act." According to the "Child Status Protection Act," the eligibility of these aging-out children will be determined by their age at the date a visa becomes available to them minus the number of days that the Employment-Based immigration petition was pending. Furthermore, these children must file for permanent resident status within one year of such availability. For a clearer illustration of this rule, please see the different scenarios below.
Example 1
The Labor Certification application that was submitted on John's behalf on January 1, 2000 was later approved on December 31, 2000. Afterwards, his employer submits an I-140 (EB-2) immigration petition on John's behalf on January 1, 2002. At that time, John's son, Junior, is 20 years and 7 months old. John's I-140 petition was pending for six months and was approved on July 1, 2002, one month after Junior turns 21 years of age. The visa number for EB-2 was available for John on July 1, 2002. Under the old law without the Child Status Protection Act, Junior has aged out because he is now 21 years old. However, under the new law, his age is fixed as of the date that a visa number becomes available minus the number of days that the I-140 was pending. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, these six months must be subtracted from Junior's age at the time the visa number became available on July 1, 2002. Subtracting six months from Junior's age of 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, Junior's age is fixed at 20 years and 7 months. Thus, even though he was already 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, he is still considered a "child" for purposes of accompanying his parents in adjusting his status to permanent residence. However, Junior has to file his I-485 within one year from the date of I-140 approval, that is before July 1, 2003. The length of time that is takes the USCIS to adjudicate Junior's case is no longer important in these cases.
According to "Child Status Protection Act", if through the above calculation, the child's age is fixed at 21 or older, the child would be automatically reclassified to an appropriate category and retains the principal beneficiary's original priority date. Please see the next example below.
Example 2
Same facts as above except that Junior is 21 years and seven months old at the time of John's I-140 approval. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, Junior's age will be fixed at 21 years and one month. Even with the Child Status Protection Act, Junior still ages out and may not adjust his status at this time. However, he will automatically be reclassified to an appropriate category, family-based 2B, and retain his father's original priority date, January 1, 2000, which is the date John's employer filed John's Labor Certification application.
Example 3
Richard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. Richard's son, Simon, is 21 years and one month old. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Richard filed his I-485 because the visa number was currently available for Richard at that time. However, Simon cannot file his I-485 with his father because he aged out.
Example 4
Howard's daughter, Rachel, is 20 years and 10 months old. Howard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Howard and Rachel filed their I-485 since the visa number was available for Howard at that time. Thus, according to the "Child Status Protection Act," no matter how much time Howard's I-140 is pending, Rachel will not age out.
Visa numbers are currently available to all EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. Thus, with the new Concurrent Filing rule, any person who is a beneficiary (or applicant) of an I-140 petition that has already been filed or is filing the I-140 at this time is now eligible to file the I-485 application as well. Family members will be eligible to file the I-485 along with the principal alien. However, since the Concurrent Filing rule became effective, visa numbers may become unavailable in the future because more eligible aliens will be filing their I-485. Thus, eligible aliens with aging-out children should file their I-485 as soon as possible. Please see next example.
Example 5
Jenny filed her I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 10, 2002. Jenny has a son, Benny, who is 20 years and eleven months old. However, due to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, many aliens have filed their I-140 and I-485 together and the visa number for EB-2 has been exhausted. However, the visa number will not be current until December 2002 when Benny will be 21 years and three months old. If Jenny's I-140 is pending for six months and will be approved in February 2003, these six months will be reduced from Benny's age in December 2002 when he is 21 years and three months old. Thus, his age is fixed as 20 years nine months. However, if Jenny's I-140 petition is pending for only two months and will be approved in October 2002, Benny's age will be fixed as 21 years and one month. Thus, Benny ages out in this scenario and must wait until his priority date under family-based 2B immigration becomes current.
Example 6
Jason filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on June 30, 2002. Jason has a son, Ken, who is 20 years and ten months old at that time. According to the visa bulletin, an immigration visa number became available for Jason on July 31, 2002. Ken was 20 years and eleven months on July 31, and he is not in the U.S. but in his home country. Because of the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule Jason filed his I-485 on August 10, 2002. If Jason's I-140 is pending for 6 months until December 31, 2002, one month pending period from June 30 to July 31, 2002 should be subtracted from Ken's age on July 31, 2002. Thus, Ken's age is fixed as 20 years and 10 months. Ken may apply for his immigrant visa through Consular Processing at U.S. Consulate in his home country within one year from July 31, 2002.
For more information about "Age Out", please click the following topics:
What is "Age Out"
Child Status Protection Act
If you are a USC, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
If you are an LPR or will be an LPR, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
Age Out Problems in Employment-Based Immigration
Age Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "CSPA"
Child of Asylee and Refugee
Unmarried Sons or Daughters of Naturalized Citizens
Effective Date of the CSPA
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
Age-Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "Child Status Protection Act"
The "Child Status Protection Act", effective August 6, 2002, addresses the problems of minor children losing their eligibility for certain immigration benefits as a result of INS (now USCIS) processing delays. Prior to the passage of this law, a child's eligibility in Employment-Based Immigration situations to be part of his or her parent's application as a derivative beneficiary was based on the child's age at the time that the child's I-485 was adjudicated. Because of enormous backlogs and processing delays, many children turned 21 before the their I-485 applications were adjudicated. In such cases, the children "age-out" and are no longer considered to be part of the parent's application and lose their eligibility to obtain green cards as a derivative beneficiary.
Children who otherwise would have aged out may successfully adjust their status through the additional interplay of the new Concurrent Filing rule and the "Child Status Protection Act." According to the "Child Status Protection Act," the eligibility of these aging-out children will be determined by their age at the date a visa becomes available to them minus the number of days that the Employment-Based immigration petition was pending. Furthermore, these children must file for permanent resident status within one year of such availability. For a clearer illustration of this rule, please see the different scenarios below.
Example 1
The Labor Certification application that was submitted on John's behalf on January 1, 2000 was later approved on December 31, 2000. Afterwards, his employer submits an I-140 (EB-2) immigration petition on John's behalf on January 1, 2002. At that time, John's son, Junior, is 20 years and 7 months old. John's I-140 petition was pending for six months and was approved on July 1, 2002, one month after Junior turns 21 years of age. The visa number for EB-2 was available for John on July 1, 2002. Under the old law without the Child Status Protection Act, Junior has aged out because he is now 21 years old. However, under the new law, his age is fixed as of the date that a visa number becomes available minus the number of days that the I-140 was pending. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, these six months must be subtracted from Junior's age at the time the visa number became available on July 1, 2002. Subtracting six months from Junior's age of 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, Junior's age is fixed at 20 years and 7 months. Thus, even though he was already 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, he is still considered a "child" for purposes of accompanying his parents in adjusting his status to permanent residence. However, Junior has to file his I-485 within one year from the date of I-140 approval, that is before July 1, 2003. The length of time that is takes the USCIS to adjudicate Junior's case is no longer important in these cases.
According to "Child Status Protection Act", if through the above calculation, the child's age is fixed at 21 or older, the child would be automatically reclassified to an appropriate category and retains the principal beneficiary's original priority date. Please see the next example below.
Example 2
Same facts as above except that Junior is 21 years and seven months old at the time of John's I-140 approval. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, Junior's age will be fixed at 21 years and one month. Even with the Child Status Protection Act, Junior still ages out and may not adjust his status at this time. However, he will automatically be reclassified to an appropriate category, family-based 2B, and retain his father's original priority date, January 1, 2000, which is the date John's employer filed John's Labor Certification application.
Example 3
Richard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. Richard's son, Simon, is 21 years and one month old. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Richard filed his I-485 because the visa number was currently available for Richard at that time. However, Simon cannot file his I-485 with his father because he aged out.
Example 4
Howard's daughter, Rachel, is 20 years and 10 months old. Howard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Howard and Rachel filed their I-485 since the visa number was available for Howard at that time. Thus, according to the "Child Status Protection Act," no matter how much time Howard's I-140 is pending, Rachel will not age out.
Visa numbers are currently available to all EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. Thus, with the new Concurrent Filing rule, any person who is a beneficiary (or applicant) of an I-140 petition that has already been filed or is filing the I-140 at this time is now eligible to file the I-485 application as well. Family members will be eligible to file the I-485 along with the principal alien. However, since the Concurrent Filing rule became effective, visa numbers may become unavailable in the future because more eligible aliens will be filing their I-485. Thus, eligible aliens with aging-out children should file their I-485 as soon as possible. Please see next example.
Example 5
Jenny filed her I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 10, 2002. Jenny has a son, Benny, who is 20 years and eleven months old. However, due to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, many aliens have filed their I-140 and I-485 together and the visa number for EB-2 has been exhausted. However, the visa number will not be current until December 2002 when Benny will be 21 years and three months old. If Jenny's I-140 is pending for six months and will be approved in February 2003, these six months will be reduced from Benny's age in December 2002 when he is 21 years and three months old. Thus, his age is fixed as 20 years nine months. However, if Jenny's I-140 petition is pending for only two months and will be approved in October 2002, Benny's age will be fixed as 21 years and one month. Thus, Benny ages out in this scenario and must wait until his priority date under family-based 2B immigration becomes current.
Example 6
Jason filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on June 30, 2002. Jason has a son, Ken, who is 20 years and ten months old at that time. According to the visa bulletin, an immigration visa number became available for Jason on July 31, 2002. Ken was 20 years and eleven months on July 31, and he is not in the U.S. but in his home country. Because of the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule Jason filed his I-485 on August 10, 2002. If Jason's I-140 is pending for 6 months until December 31, 2002, one month pending period from June 30 to July 31, 2002 should be subtracted from Ken's age on July 31, 2002. Thus, Ken's age is fixed as 20 years and 10 months. Ken may apply for his immigrant visa through Consular Processing at U.S. Consulate in his home country within one year from July 31, 2002.
For more information about "Age Out", please click the following topics:
What is "Age Out"
Child Status Protection Act
If you are a USC, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
If you are an LPR or will be an LPR, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
Age Out Problems in Employment-Based Immigration
Age Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "CSPA"
Child of Asylee and Refugee
Unmarried Sons or Daughters of Naturalized Citizens
Effective Date of the CSPA
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
more...
ingegarcia
06-18 01:05 PM
Is your case being audited?
hair Britney Spears continues to
ameryki
01-10 07:37 PM
Hello All I just received mine and my wifey's AP's. We weren't able to track our file since did not get a receipt and did not have the file numbers. But to my knowledge my lawyer had sent our app's on Aug 1st. The AP shows approved on Dec 7th and we received it from the lawyer today now when I checked online status with the file number stated on the approval it shows "On December 26, 2007 we mailed the document to the address we have on file". So in practicality out of the 12 months an applicant looses a month in transition time from being approved to physically seeing the approval in hand.
more...
ocpmachine
03-05 09:52 PM
My 485 had soft LUD on 2/27/09. Although, my husband's dependent application dint have one.
My PD is May'06 EB2 -I and got a soft lud on 2/27/09 for me/wifey case.
This makes me think that, USCIS is probably pulling all the cases systematically based on PD.
My PD is May'06 EB2 -I and got a soft lud on 2/27/09 for me/wifey case.
This makes me think that, USCIS is probably pulling all the cases systematically based on PD.
hot “Hold It Against Me” is the
pbojja
09-11 04:10 PM
I m in ...They really dont know what they are doing ...How hard is it to find pending applications in thier database ?
Move to 2006 and approve 2006 cases and move it back to 2003 ...wow they really need help
Move to 2006 and approve 2006 cases and move it back to 2003 ...wow they really need help
more...
house +spears+hold+it+against+me
raydon
08-05 07:28 PM
lonedesi,
Much as I'd like to participate in this campaign, it's the employer's signature that I can't guarantee. My employer is a big and prestigious (supposedly) company and will not want to sign this petition or do anything against the counsel of the attorney. The attorney is not gaining anything by expedited processing of the I-140 and won't support this either. He's an AILA member too, if that's of any significance.
If this is worthless without the employer's signature, then I'm unable to participate in this campaign, though it is a worthy effort.I would urge all members who can get the employer's consent to definitely participate and wake up the USCIS from it's slumber.They need a big kick up their you-know-where, especially the TSC.
Much as I'd like to participate in this campaign, it's the employer's signature that I can't guarantee. My employer is a big and prestigious (supposedly) company and will not want to sign this petition or do anything against the counsel of the attorney. The attorney is not gaining anything by expedited processing of the I-140 and won't support this either. He's an AILA member too, if that's of any significance.
If this is worthless without the employer's signature, then I'm unable to participate in this campaign, though it is a worthy effort.I would urge all members who can get the employer's consent to definitely participate and wake up the USCIS from it's slumber.They need a big kick up their you-know-where, especially the TSC.
tattoo “Hold It Against Me“!
bpratap
05-28 06:34 PM
Fha
more...
pictures Britney Spears - Hold It
gchope07
07-18 03:36 PM
Immm,
Please update us on this thread when you receive the physical notice and let us know if the receipt date was Jun15th or something else. That will give us some vital information abt what the defintion of receipt date is.
Thanks...
My application was sent on June, 14th and delivered on June 15th (I have the FedEx tracking info and signature page confirming 6/15).
The case status online based on receipt number (obtained by calling them a few times until I got lucky) says:
"On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case."
Not sure if the online status is referring to the receipt date or the notice date when it says "On July 11, 2007, we received" when, in fact, they received it on June 15th!!
.
Please update us on this thread when you receive the physical notice and let us know if the receipt date was Jun15th or something else. That will give us some vital information abt what the defintion of receipt date is.
Thanks...
My application was sent on June, 14th and delivered on June 15th (I have the FedEx tracking info and signature page confirming 6/15).
The case status online based on receipt number (obtained by calling them a few times until I got lucky) says:
"On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case."
Not sure if the online status is referring to the receipt date or the notice date when it says "On July 11, 2007, we received" when, in fact, they received it on June 15th!!
.
dresses A new Britney Spears song
jaihind
07-20 02:28 PM
Dear ALL and CORE
Please remove such hypothetical - fear mongering threads. PLease friends do your jobs - support IV efforts - and all will be fine.
If this person spends the time to send the Thank You notes to the people concerend that will be better.
Jaihind !!
Please remove such hypothetical - fear mongering threads. PLease friends do your jobs - support IV efforts - and all will be fine.
If this person spends the time to send the Thank You notes to the people concerend that will be better.
Jaihind !!
more...
makeup Britney-Spears-Hold-It-Against
sukhwinderd
09-12 11:04 AM
Order Details - Sep 12, 2007 11:01 AM EDT
Google Order #546380134380844
just contributed $100 .. will try to attend rally.
Google Order #546380134380844
just contributed $100 .. will try to attend rally.
girlfriend Britney Spears - Hold It
pappu
12-10 04:06 PM
Good they have seem to have read recently published IV analysis and recommendations and provided a much more detailed bulletin this month for the community.
hairstyles jam “Hold It Against Me”
gcnirvana
08-07 12:53 PM
Got it this time...looks like a refresh issue. Thanks!
Hi,
No,it is edited now.go thru the link once again and see.It is edited to 7/1/2007.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes080307.pdf
vaishu
Hi,
No,it is edited now.go thru the link once again and see.It is edited to 7/1/2007.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes080307.pdf
vaishu
JAWAD
05-03 09:33 AM
Mine has a priority date of October 2002.
Got the 45-day letter last January (2005) and responded - It's been 15 months since......and NOTHING.
Got the 45-day letter last January (2005) and responded - It's been 15 months since......and NOTHING.
nixstor
03-31 08:52 PM
How insane am I? How insane are u? If it was not the USCIS, u wudn't have put ur foot into this country using ur H1B visa. U r in a foreign land and u want things happen like at the snap of ur finger? U think immigration is the only issue US has. U donno nothing about other issues the Govt is facing. If u dont like the administration...just get out. How in the world can a foreigner think about changing USCIS management process? What rights do u have? U cant even vote and u want to change the management process of a Govt body. U think u r a citizen and have all the rights. Kudos to the US Govt for making us feel at home and letting us talk like this. IV can fight upto some extent by the kind of campaigns they are hosting. But its USCIS' prerogative what they want to do. In the first place IV is fighting for Employment Based GCs. The fight which should actually be fought by Employers and above all ppl like u have the audacity to talk about the irregular management in USCIS and even going to the extent of changing it. And they took the shortest and safest way out? U think they wudn't have gotten away by NOT letting u have ur EAD now? U must be from India where there is lot of corruption. How wud u feel if US citizens came to India and propose a change in the Government. US citizens who are immigrants in India - Did u even think about it? U dont even know how to think properly. I will still say...SHAME ON U.
Are you saying that USCIS bestowed up on every EB based immigrant with H1B visas and did all of us a huge favor? The simple point is there is a need and all of us happened to be the applicants. If there was never a need, none of us would have been here, irrespective of how many applications came in. People immigrate to US because there is more predictability and accountability in all walks of life when compared to other countries. Lately that has been changing for what ever reasons in the US, while other countries are emulating US's past success formula. There is a difference between in thought process of "deserve it" or "will take what ever I am given". Its not the US government that is letting any one talk. The underpinning principles of this country that make people talk. I think people on the forum are asking for some predictability and accountability after years of mishaps. If you feel that you have no rights what so ever thats fine. It appears a bit premature to say and "We have NO RIGHTS WHATSOEVER to ask for ".
Are you saying that USCIS bestowed up on every EB based immigrant with H1B visas and did all of us a huge favor? The simple point is there is a need and all of us happened to be the applicants. If there was never a need, none of us would have been here, irrespective of how many applications came in. People immigrate to US because there is more predictability and accountability in all walks of life when compared to other countries. Lately that has been changing for what ever reasons in the US, while other countries are emulating US's past success formula. There is a difference between in thought process of "deserve it" or "will take what ever I am given". Its not the US government that is letting any one talk. The underpinning principles of this country that make people talk. I think people on the forum are asking for some predictability and accountability after years of mishaps. If you feel that you have no rights what so ever thats fine. It appears a bit premature to say and "We have NO RIGHTS WHATSOEVER to ask for ".
No comments:
Post a Comment