chanduv23
11-11 05:58 PM
Don't worry about the comments and the dots. I agree, things are going to get very tough in coming years.
And, the work of every president in the modern history has been diagonally opposite to the expectation. Example, conservatives voted for Bush to ban abortion, stop illegal immigration, balance budget etc. On all these issues, he was a major upset to his supporters. Based on what I know (and don't know), I think that the expectations of most people from Obama administration are likely to dash against the rock. Specifically, people on immigration forums like this one, who feels being in the proximity of a miracle will soon realize the dangerously flawed situation. The apathy of this community will consume it. Live and learn....
.
Almost all my personal friends I spoke to recently who did not want to help with IV stuff, now proudly claim "As Obama has become the president, he will do something for us to get the green card"
The hope continues :)
People come on IV only to blame IV and admins for all the problems in their lives, but when asked to help for IV stuff - they give red dots and leave bad comments
And, the work of every president in the modern history has been diagonally opposite to the expectation. Example, conservatives voted for Bush to ban abortion, stop illegal immigration, balance budget etc. On all these issues, he was a major upset to his supporters. Based on what I know (and don't know), I think that the expectations of most people from Obama administration are likely to dash against the rock. Specifically, people on immigration forums like this one, who feels being in the proximity of a miracle will soon realize the dangerously flawed situation. The apathy of this community will consume it. Live and learn....
.
Almost all my personal friends I spoke to recently who did not want to help with IV stuff, now proudly claim "As Obama has become the president, he will do something for us to get the green card"
The hope continues :)
People come on IV only to blame IV and admins for all the problems in their lives, but when asked to help for IV stuff - they give red dots and leave bad comments
wallpaper Untitled Wallpaper - aeroplane
vamsi_poondla
09-26 10:55 PM
I don't know who senthil1 is, nor do i care. If you nothing to reply please don't waste white space. My comments are not to stir up arguments but an observation.
IV is sticking to employment based green card reforms. Green Card == Immigrant Visa. So, it would be silly not to use 'immigrant' in this context.
IV is not for just those currently in the 485/140 stage. It will be for future green card applicants as well and that includes H1Bs and F1 holders.
IV is sticking to employment based green card reforms. Green Card == Immigrant Visa. So, it would be silly not to use 'immigrant' in this context.
IV is not for just those currently in the 485/140 stage. It will be for future green card applicants as well and that includes H1Bs and F1 holders.
-04.jpg "fighting Falcon F16 aeroplane")
Ramba
07-09 07:44 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
I feel that they did not violate any clause. Till June 30 which is end of third quarter, they are authorized to approve (3*27%*140K) 113,400. However they approved only 66,400 till May 31. That yields about 47,000 for June alone(10%+any number not used in previous months). The reamining visas are eligible for Jul 1, which is 13,000. Put together June and July1, it comes 60,000. Therefore they did not violate any law. This makes only 126,000. The remaining number was splitted for Consular processing.
my 2 cents...
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
I feel that they did not violate any clause. Till June 30 which is end of third quarter, they are authorized to approve (3*27%*140K) 113,400. However they approved only 66,400 till May 31. That yields about 47,000 for June alone(10%+any number not used in previous months). The reamining visas are eligible for Jul 1, which is 13,000. Put together June and July1, it comes 60,000. Therefore they did not violate any law. This makes only 126,000. The remaining number was splitted for Consular processing.
my 2 cents...
2011 f16 wallpaper. F-16 Falcon
Macaca
07-01 11:28 AM
http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Oppenheim070606.pdf
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division, Visa Services Office, U.S. Department of State, June 6, 2007.
Are you aware of a similar document that explains
country caps.
conditions that lead to initial retrogression. That is, from current to settingcurrent dates. This is what happened in Oct 2005 and will happen now when all dates are current. This is different from VB's that reset existing current dates.
Spencer HSU, Washington Post likes to rape USCIS. We can send him our issues if July VB is reset in the middle.
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division, Visa Services Office, U.S. Department of State, June 6, 2007.
Are you aware of a similar document that explains
country caps.
conditions that lead to initial retrogression. That is, from current to settingcurrent dates. This is what happened in Oct 2005 and will happen now when all dates are current. This is different from VB's that reset existing current dates.
Spencer HSU, Washington Post likes to rape USCIS. We can send him our issues if July VB is reset in the middle.
more...
Madhuri
06-11 11:47 AM
Done
pappu
06-14 12:25 PM
You can get the following forms :
1. I-693
2. I-485
3. I-765
4. I-131
5. G-325
from :
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
Here is the link for form I693.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=eb1f3591ec04d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
SOP
http://immigrationvoice.org/media/forums/iv/485SOP_Section1_MailRoom.swf
======================
Here is link to I-485 Standard Operating Procedures (dated 2002)
http://www.ilw.com/seminars/august2002_citation2b.pdf
This adjustment of status SOP document would make clear the procedure, priority and order of the decision making process of the I-485 at CIS.
Though might not be most updated, it would give a glimpse of what happens inside the black box!
Enjoy!
http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cissop.html
1. I-693
2. I-485
3. I-765
4. I-131
5. G-325
from :
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
Here is the link for form I693.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=eb1f3591ec04d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
SOP
http://immigrationvoice.org/media/forums/iv/485SOP_Section1_MailRoom.swf
======================
Here is link to I-485 Standard Operating Procedures (dated 2002)
http://www.ilw.com/seminars/august2002_citation2b.pdf
This adjustment of status SOP document would make clear the procedure, priority and order of the decision making process of the I-485 at CIS.
Though might not be most updated, it would give a glimpse of what happens inside the black box!
Enjoy!
http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cissop.html
more...
Abhinaym
09-10 10:42 AM
It seems I don't have the number of posts necessary to log in. Is there anyway I can just view the live updates?
2010 fighting Falcon F16 aeroplane
spicy_guy
06-10 07:50 PM
Done!
more...
thesparky007
03-07 07:19 PM
is any one good at blender3d?
hair Egypt Wallpaper Backgrounds.
nomi
12-11 02:23 PM
Originally Posted by god_bless_you
SO if USCIS wants to make a new rule of filing I485 for the one whose I 140 is cleared and priority date is not current, It CAN DO That RULE Right?
We do not need any Congress approval for that Right?
If so can we explore this option??
Originally Posted by Nomi
I agree with you. Why we don`t explore this option ???? USCIS make so many rule by itself then why they don`t make this rule to file 485 while PD is not current without going in Senate. Like they start premium processing of I-140. They make this rule without any bill in US Senate. correct me if I am wrong
I think, core team should look this option or ask us to find more information about it. I think, core team can meet with high official from USCIS.
what do you guys think about it ??
thx.
SO if USCIS wants to make a new rule of filing I485 for the one whose I 140 is cleared and priority date is not current, It CAN DO That RULE Right?
We do not need any Congress approval for that Right?
If so can we explore this option??
Originally Posted by Nomi
I agree with you. Why we don`t explore this option ???? USCIS make so many rule by itself then why they don`t make this rule to file 485 while PD is not current without going in Senate. Like they start premium processing of I-140. They make this rule without any bill in US Senate. correct me if I am wrong
I think, core team should look this option or ask us to find more information about it. I think, core team can meet with high official from USCIS.
what do you guys think about it ??
thx.
more...
gc03
07-24 09:02 AM
I totally agree with you. Excellent point.
hot Wallpaper 800x600
willwin
04-03 02:02 PM
Not yet Filed EAD. PD MARCH 2005
Oops! that's pretty bad.
Looks like you missed the boat last July!
I know guys with PD 2006 and got their GC approved during July-Sep 2007.
Hope the date moves this summer so that you could file your 485.
Oops! that's pretty bad.
Looks like you missed the boat last July!
I know guys with PD 2006 and got their GC approved during July-Sep 2007.
Hope the date moves this summer so that you could file your 485.
more...
house F16 Fighter PSP Wallpaper
richi121175
01-17 02:19 PM
I tried to send you something in a private msg but your quota is fullShameless creatures, not even a single guy came and blasted me out for such comments ..! This means that I am telling the truth. You guys don't even have any self dignity left to come and face off with me.
:mad: :mad:
:mad: :mad:
tattoo wallpaper. f16 wallpaper.
MDix
03-10 03:14 PM
I hope I have answered your question (in red). :)
Let me ask you again, there are two "they". Same or Different?
Here is your statement again
>> Once they (USCIS) reached last quarter then they(DOS) will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB.
Remember, this is a trap question.
Let me ask you again, there are two "they". Same or Different?
Here is your statement again
>> Once they (USCIS) reached last quarter then they(DOS) will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB.
Remember, this is a trap question.
more...
pictures F-16 Wallpaper
webm
02-27 09:51 PM
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4398
So, those who done their FP in July 2007 or afterwards will have their FP refreshed. So they don't need to go for FP once the previous FP expires. All those who did FP prior to July 2007 will have to go to ASC for FP .
Holy cow!! night mare..again FP process for prior July filers...:(
So, those who done their FP in July 2007 or afterwards will have their FP refreshed. So they don't need to go for FP once the previous FP expires. All those who did FP prior to July 2007 will have to go to ASC for FP .
Holy cow!! night mare..again FP process for prior July filers...:(
dresses f16 wallpaper.
LONGGCQUE
06-10 03:59 PM
Just sent it Nebraska Senators
more...
makeup Top rated Wallpapers/f-16-
logiclife
12-20 04:54 PM
Please lookup 245(k).
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if—
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days—
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission.
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if—
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days—
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission.
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
girlfriend f-16 wallpaper
rsayed
11-20 11:13 PM
Guys.
Please do not mind, my writing this - I honestly think we should stop writing insensible comments like "sick people getting frustrated" and the like...
IV is a professional not for profit outfit, with a set agenda. We should work together towards achieving our goal, through legal, available channels.
If things work out - great! If they don't, it's disappointing but not the end of the world.
People who chose to stay and wait longer for their Permanent Residency will do so; those who cannot (for whatever reasons) will find other alternatives...
Let's not make this a platform for venting out our frustrations.
Please do not mind, my writing this - I honestly think we should stop writing insensible comments like "sick people getting frustrated" and the like...
IV is a professional not for profit outfit, with a set agenda. We should work together towards achieving our goal, through legal, available channels.
If things work out - great! If they don't, it's disappointing but not the end of the world.
People who chose to stay and wait longer for their Permanent Residency will do so; those who cannot (for whatever reasons) will find other alternatives...
Let's not make this a platform for venting out our frustrations.
hairstyles Two PAF F-16A photographed
reddog
07-24 09:44 AM
As in, if you have a delivery confirmation from Fedex/UPS does it have any significance? It is still not clear if it will be accepted/ rejected AFAIK.
Have there been any applications that were not even "accepted" because the "packet" suggested it was an AOS application?
More likely, applications can be rejected for being "improperly filed" but you would only come to know about it whenever they are rejected. No one would know this in advance, so no point worrying about it.
This is probably about those people whose packets were returned by USCIS, I know someone whose packet was returned. These people will have to refile(ofcourse). They could not have rejected a case filed on July 2nd(too less a time to open and see if the required documents are in order).
Have there been any applications that were not even "accepted" because the "packet" suggested it was an AOS application?
More likely, applications can be rejected for being "improperly filed" but you would only come to know about it whenever they are rejected. No one would know this in advance, so no point worrying about it.
This is probably about those people whose packets were returned by USCIS, I know someone whose packet was returned. These people will have to refile(ofcourse). They could not have rejected a case filed on July 2nd(too less a time to open and see if the required documents are in order).
voldemar
06-20 06:06 PM
1) Is it ok if I file EAD & AP separately from I-485?
Or should i wait till I-485 approval is received and then file EAD & AP.
When you get 485 approval you will not need EAD or AP :D
It's OK to file for EAD and AP yourself, I did it 4 times but you need I-485 receipt notice and I-140 receipt and then approval notice to do that. So if you are wiling to wait till your lawyer get notices (it could be months for those who are filing in July) and your employer and lawyer will provide you a copy of all notices - it's fine to file yourself.
Or should i wait till I-485 approval is received and then file EAD & AP.
When you get 485 approval you will not need EAD or AP :D
It's OK to file for EAD and AP yourself, I did it 4 times but you need I-485 receipt notice and I-140 receipt and then approval notice to do that. So if you are wiling to wait till your lawyer get notices (it could be months for those who are filing in July) and your employer and lawyer will provide you a copy of all notices - it's fine to file yourself.
mallikonnet
06-10 09:26 PM
done
No comments:
Post a Comment