aadimanav
09-05 03:56 PM
Congratulation to all EB2 who are getting their approvals. Have a wonderful post-GC life :)
When will, we EB3s (India), see some light at the end of the tunnel.
Looks like (in my case) after waiting for more than 5 years it will still take 3-4 years. I am mad :mad:
When will, we EB3s (India), see some light at the end of the tunnel.
Looks like (in my case) after waiting for more than 5 years it will still take 3-4 years. I am mad :mad:
mckottayam
05-02 08:03 PM
mckottayam: did you tell the IO explicitly that you had I-797 extensions approved to get I-94 stamped thru end of I-797?
I gave the passports and the I797s together. IO gave me the 797s back and then I told him the dates are different as it was extended and he took them back. No more questions about this matter.
I gave the passports and the I797s together. IO gave me the 797s back and then I told him the dates are different as it was extended and he took them back. No more questions about this matter.
GC_1000Watt
03-23 04:02 PM
Hi Travellertvr! Since your extension came with a new I-94, your problems are solved automatically. There is no need for you to go out of country and come back either. As of now you are a legal resident here period.
Enjoy!!!
Enjoy!!!
girish989
05-11 01:26 PM
That is the response that this guy gave when the senetor asked what to do to reduce the backlogs and he is the head of USCIS ..... :(
more...
newfoundland
08-04 03:48 PM
Hello,
How can I inform the USCIS (I-485 pending) that my lawyer is not representing me any more? Do I need to fill up any form (like G28)?
I do not want USCIS to send ant document to my ex-lawyer anymore.
Thanks so much
EB2-NIW
PD march 2003
RD - august 2003
I-485 pending
How can I inform the USCIS (I-485 pending) that my lawyer is not representing me any more? Do I need to fill up any form (like G28)?
I do not want USCIS to send ant document to my ex-lawyer anymore.
Thanks so much
EB2-NIW
PD march 2003
RD - august 2003
I-485 pending
franklin
06-19 05:05 PM
Start worrying about LC approval notice and start working about AOS.
Aaj kal nav jawanoku, ye kya ho raha hi?
What?!
Aaj kal nav jawanoku, ye kya ho raha hi?
What?!
more...
vshivaji
09-26 02:01 PM
Even i got the Section: UNKNOWN thing from NSC. My 140 approved on MAY 2007, But online case status is still showing case pending, Is it because of this?
21stIcon
05-04 01:36 PM
Every body knows about PERM system glitches before July28,2005, they gave an oppertunity to refile for all those who got rejected on software issues, so we do not need to go back to year old data and I am quite a frequent visitor to immigrationportal, at least 5 visits a day from last sep'05
Guys, I really appreciate he was able to come up with some number, but you would be able to decide how much this is helpful, I am not buying his PERM conversion denial rate
.
Guys, I really appreciate he was able to come up with some number, but you would be able to decide how much this is helpful, I am not buying his PERM conversion denial rate
.
more...
eb3_nepa
05-03 11:07 AM
Most US citizens have NO clue about our plight. They literally have ZERO clue about our plight. What is worse is, people who came here thru family based immigration have an equal amount of lack of clue about this problem. Right now all the citizens see in us is the enemy (they take our jobs away), they have no idea what kinda stuff we have to go thru to "take their jobs away"!
EVERY open avenue should be explored. Just that b4 contacting anyone who we are not a 100% certain, discuss with the core members or on the forum.
EVERY open avenue should be explored. Just that b4 contacting anyone who we are not a 100% certain, discuss with the core members or on the forum.
morchu
05-21 12:39 AM
I believe he just meant to say "not possible with one 140".
He just mentioned it in a confusing way.
"A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date."
The petition mentioned here is an I140 for EB1/EB2/EB3.
So it doesn't hurt to have more I140s approved. Whenever you do a "subsequent" petition, you just claim the earliest priority date (of the already approved ones).
I understand two I-140s, one existing (EB-3) and second new I-140 (EB2), but you have also mentioned more. Why need more than two, in what circumstances?
He just mentioned it in a confusing way.
"A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date."
The petition mentioned here is an I140 for EB1/EB2/EB3.
So it doesn't hurt to have more I140s approved. Whenever you do a "subsequent" petition, you just claim the earliest priority date (of the already approved ones).
I understand two I-140s, one existing (EB-3) and second new I-140 (EB2), but you have also mentioned more. Why need more than two, in what circumstances?
more...
sweet23guyin
09-26 04:56 PM
800-375-5283
Options 1-2-2-6-2-2-1
u need to tell them that ur app was filed around 90 days ago and u wil get transferred to an 2nd level IO. She will ask you ur full name and DOB. If she finds you in DB , she will verify ur address or mother's maiden name.
Thanks for the info, i too got my recpt# by calling...
Options 1-2-2-6-2-2-1
u need to tell them that ur app was filed around 90 days ago and u wil get transferred to an 2nd level IO. She will ask you ur full name and DOB. If she finds you in DB , she will verify ur address or mother's maiden name.
Thanks for the info, i too got my recpt# by calling...
chanduv23
09-14 03:31 PM
Some song is playing now
more...
eb3retro
09-14 03:50 PM
NO, that part applies to a person applying for Advance Parole (humanitarian reason) and not Advance Parole (baed on peding I-485).
This confusion is because the form is used for multiple application type - Rentry Permit, Refugee Travel Document, Advance Parole (humanitarian and I-485 pending). I think USCIS should redesign separate form for each application type to remove the confusion.
If your AP is based on a pending I-485 you must be in the US to apply and receive the approval. If you need to travel before the approval, you could go to a local USCIS office to expedite the application.
frostrated, this exactly contradicts your take on this issue. I understand your family has gone to india without ap in hand and have come back with AP (approval after leaving US). My question is how safe it is to do this.
This confusion is because the form is used for multiple application type - Rentry Permit, Refugee Travel Document, Advance Parole (humanitarian and I-485 pending). I think USCIS should redesign separate form for each application type to remove the confusion.
If your AP is based on a pending I-485 you must be in the US to apply and receive the approval. If you need to travel before the approval, you could go to a local USCIS office to expedite the application.
frostrated, this exactly contradicts your take on this issue. I understand your family has gone to india without ap in hand and have come back with AP (approval after leaving US). My question is how safe it is to do this.
go_guy123
01-11 09:47 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This is still riddled with amnesty....more punitive versions will surely come which the democratic party will oppose for sure.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This is still riddled with amnesty....more punitive versions will surely come which the democratic party will oppose for sure.
more...
brb2
08-06 01:22 PM
Honorable Senator Specter
Did you know that during the immigration debates, the most shrill voices against �immigration reform� (legitimizing illegal immigrants) was by legal immigrants who are living here in the US, and waiting for green cards, while their spouses are not allowed to work (half a million at the most recent count). Others who were against the reforms were immigrants who came here legally after waiting years, and are now green card holders. Democrats and liberal Republican senators have shown no empathy for legal immigrants and US citizens in their zeal for legalizing illegal immigrants through "immigration reform". I was not surprised to see just a single statement in your article, at the far end (probably as an afterthought) about green cards for legal skilled immigrants. Over 350,000 legal immigrants (99%) of who have nothing to do with crime are stuck in FBI name checks, and are unable to naturalize. Another 500,000 highly skilled legal immigrants (Doctors, Engineers etc) most of whom studied in the US, are stuck in retrogression (from countries such as India, China, Philippines etc). These legal immigrants are not even on your radar, even as Senators such as yourself, Ms. Diane Feinstein and others loose no opportunity to try to provide amnesty for the 12 million people who crossed over the border with scant regard for US law. You want to reward these people ahead of any �reform� for legal skilled workers. So much for President Bush�s statement about �putting these undocumented workers at the back of the line�. I don't think the American citizens will ever buy this lopsided reform. Genuine Border control is being held up as bait, for legalizing 12 million people. Please attend to border control and solve legacy problems of legal skilled immigrants already in the US, before doing anything on legalizing �undocumented workers�. Why is this so hard for our honorable congressmen and women to understand?
Lastly neither USCIS nor the FBI is able to timely service the legal immigrants already here, how do you propose to process the illegal immigrants without causing huge delays for those who played by the rules?
Did you know that during the immigration debates, the most shrill voices against �immigration reform� (legitimizing illegal immigrants) was by legal immigrants who are living here in the US, and waiting for green cards, while their spouses are not allowed to work (half a million at the most recent count). Others who were against the reforms were immigrants who came here legally after waiting years, and are now green card holders. Democrats and liberal Republican senators have shown no empathy for legal immigrants and US citizens in their zeal for legalizing illegal immigrants through "immigration reform". I was not surprised to see just a single statement in your article, at the far end (probably as an afterthought) about green cards for legal skilled immigrants. Over 350,000 legal immigrants (99%) of who have nothing to do with crime are stuck in FBI name checks, and are unable to naturalize. Another 500,000 highly skilled legal immigrants (Doctors, Engineers etc) most of whom studied in the US, are stuck in retrogression (from countries such as India, China, Philippines etc). These legal immigrants are not even on your radar, even as Senators such as yourself, Ms. Diane Feinstein and others loose no opportunity to try to provide amnesty for the 12 million people who crossed over the border with scant regard for US law. You want to reward these people ahead of any �reform� for legal skilled workers. So much for President Bush�s statement about �putting these undocumented workers at the back of the line�. I don't think the American citizens will ever buy this lopsided reform. Genuine Border control is being held up as bait, for legalizing 12 million people. Please attend to border control and solve legacy problems of legal skilled immigrants already in the US, before doing anything on legalizing �undocumented workers�. Why is this so hard for our honorable congressmen and women to understand?
Lastly neither USCIS nor the FBI is able to timely service the legal immigrants already here, how do you propose to process the illegal immigrants without causing huge delays for those who played by the rules?
cjain
08-10 04:36 PM
...if you want...i'll post here..
Great find..
Please post all news related info here http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4805&highlight=media
Great find..
Please post all news related info here http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4805&highlight=media
more...
chanduv23
08-06 04:38 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Please participate in publicity campaign, click on this link
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=141453#post141453
Please participate in publicity campaign, click on this link
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=141453#post141453
monicasgupta
12-31 11:02 AM
thanks for the reply but I agree my h1 stamp is expired but h1 is valid till 2009
H1B-GC
11-30 02:32 PM
GC Delay,
Take an infopass Appointment and speak to an IO . Hope all the Mess created by USCIS in your case will be cleared. Below is the link for infopass... Since it is USCIS error, hope they will approve ur AOS as a courtesy ;)
https://infopass.uscis.gov/infopass.php
Take an infopass Appointment and speak to an IO . Hope all the Mess created by USCIS in your case will be cleared. Below is the link for infopass... Since it is USCIS error, hope they will approve ur AOS as a courtesy ;)
https://infopass.uscis.gov/infopass.php
vjkypally
08-06 12:17 PM
Where you moved from NSC to TSC or did you file at TSC?
anilsal
08-15 12:11 PM
USCIS is making contradictory statements. First they release an update that they have processed all applications mailed before July 1 but when I call customer service and tell them that my application was mailed on June 11 and that I am still waiting for the checks to be cashed they say wait for 90 days.
Many July 2nd filers have had their checks cashed (as per ). Have you verified that your application reached on June 11 via fedex?
Many July 2nd filers have had their checks cashed (as per ). Have you verified that your application reached on June 11 via fedex?