rani77
09-18 11:59 AM
My case is little bit different.
EAD was approved on August 11th and I got the card in mail couple of days after I received the email. But, I haven't received the approval notice for my EAD yet. The status on the EAD shows that the approval notice was sent on August 13th. I had no issues with AP though.
Application Type: I765, APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION
Current Status: Approval notice sent.
On August 13, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I765 APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION.
You dont get any approval notice except the card with white card folder. So you are good ,dont expect any Form 767 approval notice.
EAD was approved on August 11th and I got the card in mail couple of days after I received the email. But, I haven't received the approval notice for my EAD yet. The status on the EAD shows that the approval notice was sent on August 13th. I had no issues with AP though.
Application Type: I765, APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION
Current Status: Approval notice sent.
On August 13, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I765 APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION.
You dont get any approval notice except the card with white card folder. So you are good ,dont expect any Form 767 approval notice.
wallpaper avril lavigne maxim 2010 3
desi3933
09-25 03:22 PM
Thanks a lot for the information. I understood now how that works after H1B is approved and also to come into H1B status. So, If I apply for H1B extension, Will USCIS expect I-94 which is not older than 6 months or something like that?
>> Will USCIS expect I-94 which is not older than 6 months or something like that?
No. Just submit your latest (expired) I-94 along with copy of current EAD card. This will show that you are in status. Your lawyer should know this.
*** Not a legal advise ***
____________________________________
Proud Indian-American and Legal Immigrant
>> Will USCIS expect I-94 which is not older than 6 months or something like that?
No. Just submit your latest (expired) I-94 along with copy of current EAD card. This will show that you are in status. Your lawyer should know this.
*** Not a legal advise ***
____________________________________
Proud Indian-American and Legal Immigrant
godbless
05-31 07:46 PM
I'm surprised that with a November 2001 PD that you are getting an interview already, since EB-3 is still retrogressed--EB3 world is only at July 1 2001 for June 2006
The PD fot EB3 is April 07 2001 I think. Anyway.... there should not be a cause for concern. The reason you got an AOS interview is that USCIS is adjudicating cases pending Visa availability. If there had been a concern then there would have been another RFE on it. You should be happy that some progress has taken place.
Cheers!!!!!!
The PD fot EB3 is April 07 2001 I think. Anyway.... there should not be a cause for concern. The reason you got an AOS interview is that USCIS is adjudicating cases pending Visa availability. If there had been a concern then there would have been another RFE on it. You should be happy that some progress has taken place.
Cheers!!!!!!
2011 avril lavigne maxim 2011.
larmani
10-26 01:50 PM
I am not sure about 1 week prior to appt they will allow or not. If you have real valid reason you may try talk to the officer(not the guard) and explain the situation. Kids are allowed. Our daughter is citizen and we took her with us.
more...
vallabhu
01-14 12:22 PM
The source is Immigration-law.com
This bill was introduced by Rep. Shela Jackson-Lee of Texas. Here is the full-text of the bill. It is a shocker, highly prejudiced against the employment-based immigration. Another shocker is a proposal to increaase Diversity Visa from 55,000 to 110,000 when the general opinion in the Congress was even to eliminate the DV program.
SEC. 701. UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
Section 274B (8 U.S.C. 1324b) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(5)--
(A) by amending the paragraph heading to read `Prohibition of Intimidation, Retaliation, or Unlawful Discrimination in Employment';
(B) by moving the text down and to the right 2 ems;
(C) by inserting before such text the following: `(A) IN GENERAL- '; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
`(B) FEDERAL LABOR OR EMPLOYMENT LAWS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer to directly or indirectly threaten any individual with removal or any other adverse consequences pertaining to that individual's immigration status or employment benefits for the purpose of intimidating, pressuring, or coercing any such individual not to exercise any right protected by State or Federal labor or employment law (including section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 157)), or for the purpose of retaliating against any such individual for having exercised or having stated an intention to exercise any such right.
`(C) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON IMMIGRATION STATUS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer, except to the extent specifically authorized or required by law, to discriminate in any term or condition of employment against any individual employed by such employer on the basis of such individual's immigration status.'; and
(2) in subsection (c)(2), by adding at the end the following: `The Special Counsel shall not disclose to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, and shall not cause to be published in a manner that discloses to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, any information obtained by the Special Counsel in any manner concerning the immigration status of any individual who has filed a charge under this section, or the identity of any individual or entity that is a party or witness to a proceedings brought pursuant to such charge. The Secretary of Homeland Security may not rely, in whole or in part, in any enforcement action or removal proceeding, upon any information obtained as a result of the filing or prosecution of an unfair immigration-related employment practice charge. For purposes of this paragraph, the term `Special Counsel' includes individuals formerly appointed to the position of Special Counsel and any current or former employee of the office of the Special Counsel. Whoever knowingly uses, publishes, or permits information to be used in violation of this paragraph shall be fined not more than $10,000.'.
SEC. 702. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TASK FORCE.
The Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall conduct a national study of American workplaces to determine the causes, extent, circumstances, and consequences, of exploitation of undocumented alien workers by their employers. As part of this study, the Secretary of Labor shall create a plan for targeted review of Federal labor law enforcement in industries with a substantial immigrant workforce, for the purpose of identifying, monitoring, and deterring frequent or egregious violators of wage and hour, antidiscrimination, National Labor Relations Act, and workplace safety and health requirements. Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall submit to the Congress a report describing the results of the study and the Secretary's recommendations based on the study.
SEC. 703. RECRUITMENT OF AMERICAN WORKERS.
Section 214 is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (m) (as added by section 105 of Public Law 106-313), (n) (as added by section 107(e) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1513(c) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1102(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act), and (p) (as added by section 1503(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act) as subsections (n), (o), (p), (q), and (r), respectively; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
`(s)(1) No petition to accord employment status under the nonimmigrant classifications described in sections 101(a)(15)(E)(iii) and (H) shall be granted in the absence of an affidavit from the petitioner describing the efforts that were made to recruit an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence or a citizen of the United States before resorting to a petition to obtain a foreign employee. The recruitment efforts must have included substantial attempts to find employees in minority communities. Recruitment efforts in minority communities should include at least one of the following, if appropriate for the employment being advertised:
`(A) Advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker in local newspapers in the labor market that is likely to be patronized by a potential worker for at least 5 consecutive days.
`(B) Undertake efforts to advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker through advertisements in public transportation systems.
`(C) To the extent permitted by local laws and regulations, engage in recruitment activities in secondary schools, recreation centers, community centers, and other places throughout the communities within 50 miles of the job site that serve minorities.
`(2)(A) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a 10 percent surcharge on all fees collected for petitions to accord employment status and shall use these funds to establish an employment training program which will include unemployed workers in the United States who need to be trained or retrained. The purpose of this program shall be to increase the number of lawful permanent residents and citizens of the United States who are available for employment in the occupations that are the subjects of such petitions. At least 50 percent of the funds generated by this provision must be used to train American workers in rural and inner-city areas.
`(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall reserve and make available to the Secretary of Labor a portion of the funds collected under this paragraph. Such funds shall be used by the Secretary of Labor to establish an `Office to Preserve American Jobs' within the Department of Labor. The purpose of this office shall be to establish policies intended to ensure that employers in the United States will hire available workers in the United States before resorting to foreign labor, giving substantial emphasis to hiring minority workers in the United States.'.
This bill was introduced by Rep. Shela Jackson-Lee of Texas. Here is the full-text of the bill. It is a shocker, highly prejudiced against the employment-based immigration. Another shocker is a proposal to increaase Diversity Visa from 55,000 to 110,000 when the general opinion in the Congress was even to eliminate the DV program.
SEC. 701. UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
Section 274B (8 U.S.C. 1324b) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(5)--
(A) by amending the paragraph heading to read `Prohibition of Intimidation, Retaliation, or Unlawful Discrimination in Employment';
(B) by moving the text down and to the right 2 ems;
(C) by inserting before such text the following: `(A) IN GENERAL- '; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
`(B) FEDERAL LABOR OR EMPLOYMENT LAWS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer to directly or indirectly threaten any individual with removal or any other adverse consequences pertaining to that individual's immigration status or employment benefits for the purpose of intimidating, pressuring, or coercing any such individual not to exercise any right protected by State or Federal labor or employment law (including section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 157)), or for the purpose of retaliating against any such individual for having exercised or having stated an intention to exercise any such right.
`(C) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON IMMIGRATION STATUS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer, except to the extent specifically authorized or required by law, to discriminate in any term or condition of employment against any individual employed by such employer on the basis of such individual's immigration status.'; and
(2) in subsection (c)(2), by adding at the end the following: `The Special Counsel shall not disclose to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, and shall not cause to be published in a manner that discloses to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, any information obtained by the Special Counsel in any manner concerning the immigration status of any individual who has filed a charge under this section, or the identity of any individual or entity that is a party or witness to a proceedings brought pursuant to such charge. The Secretary of Homeland Security may not rely, in whole or in part, in any enforcement action or removal proceeding, upon any information obtained as a result of the filing or prosecution of an unfair immigration-related employment practice charge. For purposes of this paragraph, the term `Special Counsel' includes individuals formerly appointed to the position of Special Counsel and any current or former employee of the office of the Special Counsel. Whoever knowingly uses, publishes, or permits information to be used in violation of this paragraph shall be fined not more than $10,000.'.
SEC. 702. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TASK FORCE.
The Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall conduct a national study of American workplaces to determine the causes, extent, circumstances, and consequences, of exploitation of undocumented alien workers by their employers. As part of this study, the Secretary of Labor shall create a plan for targeted review of Federal labor law enforcement in industries with a substantial immigrant workforce, for the purpose of identifying, monitoring, and deterring frequent or egregious violators of wage and hour, antidiscrimination, National Labor Relations Act, and workplace safety and health requirements. Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall submit to the Congress a report describing the results of the study and the Secretary's recommendations based on the study.
SEC. 703. RECRUITMENT OF AMERICAN WORKERS.
Section 214 is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (m) (as added by section 105 of Public Law 106-313), (n) (as added by section 107(e) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1513(c) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1102(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act), and (p) (as added by section 1503(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act) as subsections (n), (o), (p), (q), and (r), respectively; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
`(s)(1) No petition to accord employment status under the nonimmigrant classifications described in sections 101(a)(15)(E)(iii) and (H) shall be granted in the absence of an affidavit from the petitioner describing the efforts that were made to recruit an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence or a citizen of the United States before resorting to a petition to obtain a foreign employee. The recruitment efforts must have included substantial attempts to find employees in minority communities. Recruitment efforts in minority communities should include at least one of the following, if appropriate for the employment being advertised:
`(A) Advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker in local newspapers in the labor market that is likely to be patronized by a potential worker for at least 5 consecutive days.
`(B) Undertake efforts to advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker through advertisements in public transportation systems.
`(C) To the extent permitted by local laws and regulations, engage in recruitment activities in secondary schools, recreation centers, community centers, and other places throughout the communities within 50 miles of the job site that serve minorities.
`(2)(A) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a 10 percent surcharge on all fees collected for petitions to accord employment status and shall use these funds to establish an employment training program which will include unemployed workers in the United States who need to be trained or retrained. The purpose of this program shall be to increase the number of lawful permanent residents and citizens of the United States who are available for employment in the occupations that are the subjects of such petitions. At least 50 percent of the funds generated by this provision must be used to train American workers in rural and inner-city areas.
`(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall reserve and make available to the Secretary of Labor a portion of the funds collected under this paragraph. Such funds shall be used by the Secretary of Labor to establish an `Office to Preserve American Jobs' within the Department of Labor. The purpose of this office shall be to establish policies intended to ensure that employers in the United States will hire available workers in the United States before resorting to foreign labor, giving substantial emphasis to hiring minority workers in the United States.'.
kevinkris
08-16 12:36 PM
Hi All,
My employer filed my I-140 in Texas Service center and I-485/ I-765/ I-131 filed in Nebraska Service center. Is this OK?
When i asked for the reason they are saying they did intentionally. Please clarify.
My employer filed my I-140 in Texas Service center and I-485/ I-765/ I-131 filed in Nebraska Service center. Is this OK?
When i asked for the reason they are saying they did intentionally. Please clarify.
more...
teachamerica07
08-14 01:14 PM
Thanks for posting updated information . Are these Received dates or Notice dates?
2010 pictures Avril Lavigne
lacrossegc
09-23 11:40 AM
You can work for a while but it will be considered UNAUTHORISED employment. Accumulation of 6 months of UNAUTHORISED STAY + UNAUTHORISED EMPLOYMENT will make you ineligible for I485. That is a huge risk to take.....
OH law firm : A flood of foreign workers and their family members filed around this time last year the employment-based EB-485 applications along with or followed by filing of their ancillary applications of EAD and/or Advance Parole. Since the initial EAD was valid only for one year. these applicants are currently filing the EAD renewals en masse. However, some of these applicants are likely to face failure of receiving the renewed cards timely before the initial card expires for either the USCIS backlogs or security check issues. Those who face such gap should remember that the unauthorized employment will make them ineligible for I-485 approval unless they are eligible for the 245(K) relief. In this regard, the recently released 245(K) Memorandum was "very timely" particularly for the July 2007 VB fiasco filers of I-485 applications in that any period of unauthorized employment "after" filing of their I-485 applications is added and tacked on any period of their violation of nonimmigrant status and/or unauthorized employment which had been aggregated within six months "immediately prior to" filing of their I-485 applications since their "last admission to the U.S." For instance, if one filed I-485 applications with the record of less than six months of violation of nonimmigrant status and/or unauthorized employment immediately prior to filing I-485 application since the last admission to the U.S., he or she was eligible for I-485 application filing deespite their violation of the law. However, should the same applicant engage in unauthorized employment while they wait for the I-485 applications, he or she could exceed total of six months of violations when they aggregate the total period of violation prior to I-485 filing and "post" filing of I-485 application. Assuming the same individual accumulated overstay of I-94 for two months and unauthorized employment for two months resulting in total violation for a period of four months immediately before he or she submitted I-485 application, any unauthorized employment "after" filing and while waiting for I-485 application that exceeds two months will make him or her ineligible for I-485 approval. Close reading of the 245(K) Memorandum will tell such applicant that any employment between expiration of the current EAD and the renewed EAD is considered unauhorized employment for the purpose of 245(K) eligibility. Pending renewal application does not give the alien any employment authorization. Accordingly, should the extension of EAD be not received aftre the expiration of the initial EAD, he or she should immediately stop the work until the renewed EAD card is received to toll the running of click of clock of unauthorized employment and potential deadly consequences of ineligibility of the I-485 approval. This advisory applies only to those who work solely on the EAD rather than on a valid H-1B or L visa status.
OH law firm : A flood of foreign workers and their family members filed around this time last year the employment-based EB-485 applications along with or followed by filing of their ancillary applications of EAD and/or Advance Parole. Since the initial EAD was valid only for one year. these applicants are currently filing the EAD renewals en masse. However, some of these applicants are likely to face failure of receiving the renewed cards timely before the initial card expires for either the USCIS backlogs or security check issues. Those who face such gap should remember that the unauthorized employment will make them ineligible for I-485 approval unless they are eligible for the 245(K) relief. In this regard, the recently released 245(K) Memorandum was "very timely" particularly for the July 2007 VB fiasco filers of I-485 applications in that any period of unauthorized employment "after" filing of their I-485 applications is added and tacked on any period of their violation of nonimmigrant status and/or unauthorized employment which had been aggregated within six months "immediately prior to" filing of their I-485 applications since their "last admission to the U.S." For instance, if one filed I-485 applications with the record of less than six months of violation of nonimmigrant status and/or unauthorized employment immediately prior to filing I-485 application since the last admission to the U.S., he or she was eligible for I-485 application filing deespite their violation of the law. However, should the same applicant engage in unauthorized employment while they wait for the I-485 applications, he or she could exceed total of six months of violations when they aggregate the total period of violation prior to I-485 filing and "post" filing of I-485 application. Assuming the same individual accumulated overstay of I-94 for two months and unauthorized employment for two months resulting in total violation for a period of four months immediately before he or she submitted I-485 application, any unauthorized employment "after" filing and while waiting for I-485 application that exceeds two months will make him or her ineligible for I-485 approval. Close reading of the 245(K) Memorandum will tell such applicant that any employment between expiration of the current EAD and the renewed EAD is considered unauhorized employment for the purpose of 245(K) eligibility. Pending renewal application does not give the alien any employment authorization. Accordingly, should the extension of EAD be not received aftre the expiration of the initial EAD, he or she should immediately stop the work until the renewed EAD card is received to toll the running of click of clock of unauthorized employment and potential deadly consequences of ineligibility of the I-485 approval. This advisory applies only to those who work solely on the EAD rather than on a valid H-1B or L visa status.
more...
gcpadmavyuh
09-21 03:58 PM
You both are right!
Employer can revoke an unapproved 140 any time, but the revocation does not affect your 485 approval. The IO will approve your 485 in due course if 140 was approvable at the time of application (ie, if it has'nt been revoked).
However the trouble with invoking AC21 without 140 being approved is when there is an RFC. This 140 was not approvable at the time of application, because of additional documentation requirement... The original employer should be willing to answer it or else 140 will be denied and so will the 485.
Can someone use AC21 if the I-140 is not approved? I think it is risky because employer can revoke I-140 and you will be OOS
employer can revoke the I-140 at any time. If you have crossed 180 days since filing I-485, the revocation does not effect your I-485 approval.
Employer can revoke an unapproved 140 any time, but the revocation does not affect your 485 approval. The IO will approve your 485 in due course if 140 was approvable at the time of application (ie, if it has'nt been revoked).
However the trouble with invoking AC21 without 140 being approved is when there is an RFC. This 140 was not approvable at the time of application, because of additional documentation requirement... The original employer should be willing to answer it or else 140 will be denied and so will the 485.
Can someone use AC21 if the I-140 is not approved? I think it is risky because employer can revoke I-140 and you will be OOS
employer can revoke the I-140 at any time. If you have crossed 180 days since filing I-485, the revocation does not effect your I-485 approval.
hair wallpaper avril lavigne maxim
srsga
09-01 04:30 PM
I don't think so...today I got the Card Production Ordered email , after attending the interview at a local office a month ago. My PD is 06/30/2004 . You should be getting it soon, good luck.
more...
zdash
10-26 03:11 PM
DREAM act just got shot in the heart but it's still alive. On September 22, 2010, Richard Durbin introduced the bill once again along with Richard Lugar.
I don't know what you mean by starting the GC process, you mean file I485?
I don't know what you mean by starting the GC process, you mean file I485?
hot Avril Lavigne Maxim November
jcrajput
10-16 11:41 AM
I am a July 2nd filer with PD of OCT 2006. I am planning to switch my employer using EAD. Should I notify USCIS with AC21? What is my best option? What is the risk?
I appriciate your help.
Thank you
I appriciate your help.
Thank you
more...
house avril lavigne maxim 2004.
soma
01-15 10:07 AM
Cut and paste for me by my attorney:
Some Observations from DOS on India EB-2 Unavailability
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 08011461 (posted Jan. 14, 2008)"
On January 10, 2007, AILA Liaison contacted Charlie Oppenheim, Chief of Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting at the State Department, to speak about the announcement of India EB-2 visa unavailability in the February 2008 Visa Bulletin. By early November, indications were that USCIS demand for India EB-2 visa numbers would place significant pressure on the overall annual limitation, leading to the decision to roll back the priority date for India EB-2 for December 2007 to 01JAN02, and for January 2008 to 01JAN00. Even with those significant retrogressions, USCIS requested almost 300 India EB-2 for December. (As an indication of the rate of demand and how close to the quarterly and annual limits usage is, the USCIS requested three India EB-2 numbers for January, all with dates prior to 01 JAN 00.) There is some possibility that India EB-2 could again become available if it appears that the demand for India EB-1 will not exceed the annual limit, but, that determination will not be able to be made until the second half of the fiscal year.
For China-mainland born EB-2, if demand remains as has been seen over the last couple of months, it is expected that the 01 JAN 03 cut-off date will hold, and it is likely that all numbers will be used within the current cut-off date.
That means they used up 2497 visas in october noveber? The numbers are quite high, so were they only working on EB2 files from india in oct-nov, unlikely. So have they really used up 2800 visas for sure? Can that be found out?
Some Observations from DOS on India EB-2 Unavailability
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 08011461 (posted Jan. 14, 2008)"
On January 10, 2007, AILA Liaison contacted Charlie Oppenheim, Chief of Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting at the State Department, to speak about the announcement of India EB-2 visa unavailability in the February 2008 Visa Bulletin. By early November, indications were that USCIS demand for India EB-2 visa numbers would place significant pressure on the overall annual limitation, leading to the decision to roll back the priority date for India EB-2 for December 2007 to 01JAN02, and for January 2008 to 01JAN00. Even with those significant retrogressions, USCIS requested almost 300 India EB-2 for December. (As an indication of the rate of demand and how close to the quarterly and annual limits usage is, the USCIS requested three India EB-2 numbers for January, all with dates prior to 01 JAN 00.) There is some possibility that India EB-2 could again become available if it appears that the demand for India EB-1 will not exceed the annual limit, but, that determination will not be able to be made until the second half of the fiscal year.
For China-mainland born EB-2, if demand remains as has been seen over the last couple of months, it is expected that the 01 JAN 03 cut-off date will hold, and it is likely that all numbers will be used within the current cut-off date.
That means they used up 2497 visas in october noveber? The numbers are quite high, so were they only working on EB2 files from india in oct-nov, unlikely. So have they really used up 2800 visas for sure? Can that be found out?
tattoo Avril Lavigne Covers Maxim
mantagon
07-22 04:30 PM
Even if you use AP to re-enter, instead of a H1 visa, you may still be able to maintain your H1 status, provided you continue working for the same employer.
Hope this helps!
is this is right?
-> H1 (797 approval notice) is valid
-> you enter USA on AP, you will get AOS status.
-> H1 is still valid but unusable as the status is AOS.
-> If anything happens to GC processing then you loose status, H1 will NOT become a backup.
-> The only way you change from AOS to visa status is by renewing your H1 or change jobs with H1 ( or reenter USA on H1 Visa ).
PS : I understand , H1 ( 791 approval notice ) and H1Visa are different.
Hope this helps!
is this is right?
-> H1 (797 approval notice) is valid
-> you enter USA on AP, you will get AOS status.
-> H1 is still valid but unusable as the status is AOS.
-> If anything happens to GC processing then you loose status, H1 will NOT become a backup.
-> The only way you change from AOS to visa status is by renewing your H1 or change jobs with H1 ( or reenter USA on H1 Visa ).
PS : I understand , H1 ( 791 approval notice ) and H1Visa are different.
more...
pictures 2011 avril lavigne maxim 2010
chanduv23
04-18 02:09 PM
Hello,
I am July 2nd 2007 AOS filer. My AOS application (including dependants') was received by USCIS mailroom on July 2nd 2007 at 10.20 am (according to FedEx Tracker), but the I-485 Receipt Date is Aug. 8th, 2007, and Notice Date is Oct 2nd, 2007. (USCIS took almost a month to enter our cases in their system). Now, USICS has sent rejection notices that our PD is not current in Aug.2007. Our cases are EB2, and PD is 05/2004, and PD was current in July.2007, as most of the July.2007 filers might know. The denial notice also has I-290B for us to file Appeal or Motion. I have contacted my law firm also. I remember seeing a similar thread, but couldn't find it now. I appreciate your suggestions and guidance. I have also sent a private message to Pappu, asking IV's help on this matter.
Thanks in advance.
Don't stress - take it easy. This can be fixed. i sent you a private message
I am July 2nd 2007 AOS filer. My AOS application (including dependants') was received by USCIS mailroom on July 2nd 2007 at 10.20 am (according to FedEx Tracker), but the I-485 Receipt Date is Aug. 8th, 2007, and Notice Date is Oct 2nd, 2007. (USCIS took almost a month to enter our cases in their system). Now, USICS has sent rejection notices that our PD is not current in Aug.2007. Our cases are EB2, and PD is 05/2004, and PD was current in July.2007, as most of the July.2007 filers might know. The denial notice also has I-290B for us to file Appeal or Motion. I have contacted my law firm also. I remember seeing a similar thread, but couldn't find it now. I appreciate your suggestions and guidance. I have also sent a private message to Pappu, asking IV's help on this matter.
Thanks in advance.
Don't stress - take it easy. This can be fixed. i sent you a private message
dresses Avril Lavigne - Goodbye
amar123
07-28 04:25 PM
Geez, how hard can it be!!
Read the lines.
Prereqs:
1. I-485 applied for EB-2 India
2. PD after Jun 1st 2006 (i.e. ,PD is not current)
3. There was an LUD on 07/27
Only then, reply to the thread!!
SunnySurya with date after PD Jun 1st 2006 replied yes, which means this update has nothing to do with the PD being current.
Read the lines.
Prereqs:
1. I-485 applied for EB-2 India
2. PD after Jun 1st 2006 (i.e. ,PD is not current)
3. There was an LUD on 07/27
Only then, reply to the thread!!
SunnySurya with date after PD Jun 1st 2006 replied yes, which means this update has nothing to do with the PD being current.
more...
makeup Avril Lavigne Maxim US
bigboy007
11-21 02:07 AM
You can call UK consulate and ask them for this information. They have a paid phone service (~2 dollars per minute) available. If you do not mind me asking, why are you going through the pain of getting a transit visa?
they advice atleast 4-6 weeks even though avg processing time is 10 business days, you may email them its better than paying for same info
they advice atleast 4-6 weeks even though avg processing time is 10 business days, you may email them its better than paying for same info
girlfriend Avril Lavigne#39;s Maxim
RRG
07-11 05:46 PM
Now that we have the people aware through Flowers, we can go for the big kill.
Advertize in Newspapers in D.C., State capitals or National newspapers
We can contribute ti IV and IV can advertize.
Half page ad with facts, events and Rep. Lofgren letter.
Nothing works better than mass media awareness
What do you think IV?
Advertize in Newspapers in D.C., State capitals or National newspapers
We can contribute ti IV and IV can advertize.
Half page ad with facts, events and Rep. Lofgren letter.
Nothing works better than mass media awareness
What do you think IV?
hairstyles Petite Beauty Avril Lavigne
lskreddy
07-02 03:59 PM
I am not sure about whether you could sue or not but USCIS's processing order is wreaking havoc, and if there was any way to bring the buggers to task, that would be great.
For the person who asked whether you saw 2008 application approved before 2007, I am a prime case. I have couple of I140's going, one in EB3 and the other in EB2. EB3's I140 was filed in July 2007 and EB2's I140 was filed in Feb 2008. The one filed in Feb 2008 was approved a few days back and the July app is still pending.
Had they followed Kaiser's logic, they would not have approved my Feb app too as my Feb app is no where current, but there is hardly any sense to their order. Its as if the applications come in, they put it in crates and stashed somewhere. The crates are pulled in random order.
As a theory, they might be approving much later filed apps as a means to acheive better 'average' processing times. If you take me as an example, I have one app pending for 12 months and the other approved in 4 months. So, the average is 8 and that might be what the higher up might care for. But, none of this is fathomable by souls like us...
For the person who asked whether you saw 2008 application approved before 2007, I am a prime case. I have couple of I140's going, one in EB3 and the other in EB2. EB3's I140 was filed in July 2007 and EB2's I140 was filed in Feb 2008. The one filed in Feb 2008 was approved a few days back and the July app is still pending.
Had they followed Kaiser's logic, they would not have approved my Feb app too as my Feb app is no where current, but there is hardly any sense to their order. Its as if the applications come in, they put it in crates and stashed somewhere. The crates are pulled in random order.
As a theory, they might be approving much later filed apps as a means to acheive better 'average' processing times. If you take me as an example, I have one app pending for 12 months and the other approved in 4 months. So, the average is 8 and that might be what the higher up might care for. But, none of this is fathomable by souls like us...
bbct
01-22 03:13 PM
Also note - you are allowed only 4 part payments in a year. Especially with ICICI bank. So plan carefully. That way you are left with only 13 EMI's with a smaller amount.
piyu7444
04-18 07:22 PM
I am currently on h1b with Company X (h1b expires in April 2011)
(I-140 approved, filed 485 on july 2 so am past 180 days)
If I take a job on EAD with Company Y without h1b tranfer to comapny Y.
Now after 1 year if I want to move back to comapny X (as a result of AOS denial or without a reason) can I still use the same h1b petition to move back to comapny X or not? If not how can I move back to comapny X and what all it will take to get a new h1b ?
Also do I need to leave USA?:confused::confused::confused:
(I-140 approved, filed 485 on july 2 so am past 180 days)
If I take a job on EAD with Company Y without h1b tranfer to comapny Y.
Now after 1 year if I want to move back to comapny X (as a result of AOS denial or without a reason) can I still use the same h1b petition to move back to comapny X or not? If not how can I move back to comapny X and what all it will take to get a new h1b ?
Also do I need to leave USA?:confused::confused::confused:
