madhu345
02-24 04:18 PM
May be our kids in future will have to wait inline for Indian Residency:p
wallpaper Print middot; Email. Nightmare
bsbawa10
09-12 07:36 AM
I wouldnt mind sending old bata slippers:D to beat themselves with
That is right. I said before and I am saying again. I am against sending flowers or calculators because.
1. They cost money (Some people may not do that just because of that).
2. USCIS will like those toys for their kids (Please come out of the movie mood, movies impress a lot but they are a lot different from real life). Believe me they will treat these things as wonderful gifts and we will end up spending time and money for these.
3. It will not make any difference to USCIS.
4. USCIS can always redirect all those flowers to orphanage or other places, what they cannot do is redirect our posters trying to put them to shame.
I have been appealing a lot about this. Why do not we have a letter compain along with posters which should put them to shame. These should not only be sent to USCIS, but also to the press, congressmen, president of US and yes the director of USCIS. I have created several posters here.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd4vkcmm_124c6jh9dg6&invite=mqk525
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd4vkcmm_127xvp53jdx&invite=cn4gjw5
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd4vkcmm_12895rfwtcw&invite=g7kcrzz
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd4vkcmm_130cvdpx4cg&invite=7bb9vs
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd4vkcmm_132g6jcsffz&invite=hczhh8x
The letter campaign thread is
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21340
Does anybody here agree with me ? Singhsa, your thoughts ?
That is right. I said before and I am saying again. I am against sending flowers or calculators because.
1. They cost money (Some people may not do that just because of that).
2. USCIS will like those toys for their kids (Please come out of the movie mood, movies impress a lot but they are a lot different from real life). Believe me they will treat these things as wonderful gifts and we will end up spending time and money for these.
3. It will not make any difference to USCIS.
4. USCIS can always redirect all those flowers to orphanage or other places, what they cannot do is redirect our posters trying to put them to shame.
I have been appealing a lot about this. Why do not we have a letter compain along with posters which should put them to shame. These should not only be sent to USCIS, but also to the press, congressmen, president of US and yes the director of USCIS. I have created several posters here.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd4vkcmm_124c6jh9dg6&invite=mqk525
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd4vkcmm_127xvp53jdx&invite=cn4gjw5
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd4vkcmm_12895rfwtcw&invite=g7kcrzz
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd4vkcmm_130cvdpx4cg&invite=7bb9vs
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd4vkcmm_132g6jcsffz&invite=hczhh8x
The letter campaign thread is
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21340
Does anybody here agree with me ? Singhsa, your thoughts ?
chanduv23
07-06 10:14 AM
Be careful in choosing the wording. Don't bad mouth the agencies or talk about scandals and security lapses. Just concentrate on how this fiasco affected you and millions of people legally waiting in line
2011 FOR SALE 108 Ocean Ave
vinabath
07-20 03:46 PM
Preparing for future is one thing but if you think that this is a valuable thread then go with it and enjoy, i just find it disheartening that people are trying to undermine whatever has been achieved by such threads (Like i said, he might be completely right but is there a need to tell it this way) and what are you going to prepare for the future ;) Do you know it ? (If you do, please keep it to yourself and enjoy or cry about it). Right now, i want to be positive and enjoy the fruits of what IV has done to get some relief, why use negative logic to undermine it and that is what i am saying. Leave us alone, who like IV and who want to have a moment's respite. Chill out dude, no offence meant and this my only response, will not reply if you attack me, so cool off.
He is 100% right. Unless USCIS hire people, our EADs and APs will get delayed. People like me have travel plans in Jan. I do not want to go for Visa stamping. I am concerned.
He is 100% right. Unless USCIS hire people, our EADs and APs will get delayed. People like me have travel plans in Jan. I do not want to go for Visa stamping. I am concerned.
more...
santb1975
05-24 03:39 PM
Can we do better?
vina92
12-16 09:44 PM
I agree with you. In order to achieve something, you have to give up something. Either it's the money, labor,time and effort. I sense that apart from very few , rest would like the fruits of labor without any type of contribution and effort. It would take herculean effort to change everyone's attitude. I hope Gandhiji will lend us an invisible hand in our struggle.
more...
sirinme
07-15 12:47 PM
Contributions for both self and spouse!
2010 Amityville Horror house for
vpadman
01-04 12:06 PM
One my friends got his wife's AP approved by scheduling an appointment with local InfoPass office. but you need a valid reason and proof for that. In his case he got his father in law's medical certificate from India.
Julsun,
When your friend went for INFOPASS, did he get a single copy of the AP, or two copies of the AP ?
I want to know if there is a difference between getting APs through mail or INFOPASS.
Thanks,
-Viju
Julsun,
When your friend went for INFOPASS, did he get a single copy of the AP, or two copies of the AP ?
I want to know if there is a difference between getting APs through mail or INFOPASS.
Thanks,
-Viju
more...
Kodi
06-29 02:40 PM
From what I see, they're still processing February.
hair Ah yes, the house of my
thomachan72
04-10 12:53 PM
min contribution required is $25 per month
Hi Pappu,
I just joined the 12 mth subscription of $25. Please enroll me into the donor forum. Thanks
Hi Pappu,
I just joined the 12 mth subscription of $25. Please enroll me into the donor forum. Thanks
more...
yabadaba
07-11 12:01 PM
heres the thing..we have been talking about the 2004 hump for eb2 for a while now. if you download the perm data from 2005 you will see only 7000+ PERM approvals for India. this included a significant number of EB3 other worker categories like pipe welder, cook, etc ( i am assuming they were eb3 -other worker...correct me if i m wrong)
this was the breakdown per month for perm 2005
March-1
April -13
May-72
June-324
July-351
Aug-833
Sept-1172
Oct-1212
Nov-1541
Dec-1771
7290 - includes everybody - eb2, eb3, eb3 other workers
the whole question was the hump of 2004-march2005
ithis is the first time since when retrogression started on oct 1 2005, that the dates have moved beyond 2005.
this was the breakdown per month for perm 2005
March-1
April -13
May-72
June-324
July-351
Aug-833
Sept-1172
Oct-1212
Nov-1541
Dec-1771
7290 - includes everybody - eb2, eb3, eb3 other workers
the whole question was the hump of 2004-march2005
ithis is the first time since when retrogression started on oct 1 2005, that the dates have moved beyond 2005.
hot Amityville Horror House For
bidhanc
03-10 05:42 PM
vparam/ anyone,
i have 2 questions
when i move into my own LLC how far do I need to go in terms of documents/ pay-stubs to prove to the USCIS that it's a legitimate company/ job offer? i guess i am a bit confused as to how to present to USCIS my dual role as owner/ employee with 140 job description?
also from your experiences is it practical (in terms of taxation) to just run your own payroll (from consulting) through your LLC - meaning you are the only employee in your company?
thanks in advance,
manderson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ref (Murthy): " Foreign nationals can port their cases to a self-employed position! This is a very favorable stance, as many foreign nationals desire to establish their own companies and, in that way, control their own destinies. The entrepreneurial spirit is strong among many immigrants. The Memo reiterates the need to show that the new position or job is the same or similar. It also states that the new employer and job offer must be legitimate.
�MurthyDotCom
In these situations, the USCIS is to focus upon whether the original job offer was really the intended employment at the time the I-140 and I-485 were filed. That is, the petitioning company must have intended to employ the foreign national beneficiary and the foreign national beneficiary must have intended to accept the position at the time of filing the I-140 and the I-485."
Source: http://www.murthy.com/news/n_yatmay.html
I think the 2nd paragraph means USCIS might want additional RFEs from your 140 employer later on to prove that original 140 employment offer was valid.
From the above paragraph (quoted on Murthy site), it seems that it would be very much possible to just get self-employed (of course job description should be same and legal).
But here are the Questions:
1). How will USCIS be convinced that the original job offer was really the intended employment at the time the I-140 and I-485 were filed??
2). How do you prove to USCIS that the original job offer was something that you intended to take on getting your GC?
From the below excerpt (same Murthy site and part of above doc)
Ability of New Sponsor to Pay
m
The Memo clarifies that there should not be requests for "ability to pay" proof from the new sponsor as part of the I-140 approval process. However, the Memo does state that it would be appropriate to check the legitimacy of the new employer and the job offer in connection with the I-485 approval. So, the new employer may have to show financial viability and prove that there is a valid job offer in order for the foreign national employee and any family members to obtain the I-485 approval.
Questions:
3).Doesn�t the above mean that USCIS will still check to see if your (lets say) spouse�s company or start-up company has the ability to pay you?
4). So, even though USCIS is saying �Yes� to self employment, will they (excerpt from mandersons musings)
�..ask for 2 yrs of tax filings of future employer to prove that it's an established company (although they are not supposed to bring up 'ability to pay' issue which is already covered in approved 140 -- but being USCIS anything goes...)???
i have 2 questions
when i move into my own LLC how far do I need to go in terms of documents/ pay-stubs to prove to the USCIS that it's a legitimate company/ job offer? i guess i am a bit confused as to how to present to USCIS my dual role as owner/ employee with 140 job description?
also from your experiences is it practical (in terms of taxation) to just run your own payroll (from consulting) through your LLC - meaning you are the only employee in your company?
thanks in advance,
manderson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ref (Murthy): " Foreign nationals can port their cases to a self-employed position! This is a very favorable stance, as many foreign nationals desire to establish their own companies and, in that way, control their own destinies. The entrepreneurial spirit is strong among many immigrants. The Memo reiterates the need to show that the new position or job is the same or similar. It also states that the new employer and job offer must be legitimate.
�MurthyDotCom
In these situations, the USCIS is to focus upon whether the original job offer was really the intended employment at the time the I-140 and I-485 were filed. That is, the petitioning company must have intended to employ the foreign national beneficiary and the foreign national beneficiary must have intended to accept the position at the time of filing the I-140 and the I-485."
Source: http://www.murthy.com/news/n_yatmay.html
I think the 2nd paragraph means USCIS might want additional RFEs from your 140 employer later on to prove that original 140 employment offer was valid.
From the above paragraph (quoted on Murthy site), it seems that it would be very much possible to just get self-employed (of course job description should be same and legal).
But here are the Questions:
1). How will USCIS be convinced that the original job offer was really the intended employment at the time the I-140 and I-485 were filed??
2). How do you prove to USCIS that the original job offer was something that you intended to take on getting your GC?
From the below excerpt (same Murthy site and part of above doc)
Ability of New Sponsor to Pay
m
The Memo clarifies that there should not be requests for "ability to pay" proof from the new sponsor as part of the I-140 approval process. However, the Memo does state that it would be appropriate to check the legitimacy of the new employer and the job offer in connection with the I-485 approval. So, the new employer may have to show financial viability and prove that there is a valid job offer in order for the foreign national employee and any family members to obtain the I-485 approval.
Questions:
3).Doesn�t the above mean that USCIS will still check to see if your (lets say) spouse�s company or start-up company has the ability to pay you?
4). So, even though USCIS is saying �Yes� to self employment, will they (excerpt from mandersons musings)
�..ask for 2 yrs of tax filings of future employer to prove that it's an established company (although they are not supposed to bring up 'ability to pay' issue which is already covered in approved 140 -- but being USCIS anything goes...)???
more...
house #39;Amityville Horror#39; house
desi485
11-18 03:50 PM
We must also step forward and work towards resolving other things
(1) Create blog on how to report Employer wage violations to Wage and Hour division
(2) USCIS poor customer service - inconsistencies, rude answers ....... We must create a blog to let people know how to contact Ombudsman to report issues
(3) Any other pressing issues....
Folks please add anything you feel must be addressed
One more update: Found another thread on RG's forum. This one is very specific.
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showpost.php?p=25447&postcount=7
Re: EAD & wrongful denial of 485 due to I-140 revoked by employer after 180 days AC21
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let my try to clarify my answer, since I didn't do that good a job previously.
An EAD remains valid until it expires, unless it is explicitly revoked. Sometimes, but not always, when the CIS denies an I-485, they also revoke the EAD.
For argument's sake, let's assume that an employer has attempted to revoke an approved I-140 in a case where the applicant's I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. Let's further assume that the CIS denies the I-485 on this basis and also revokes the EAD.
In my opinion, since there is no legal authority for such a denial, and the denial violates the law, it is invalid. Now, I want to make it clear that this is a very unusual situation. It is extremely rare that you find a situation where a CIS adjustment of status denial is clearly and unequivocally illegal, but this is one of those situations.
Because a denial of this type is illegal, the revocation of the applicant's employment authorization is also improper. If an applicant, in this highly unusual and extremely limited situation, works without authorization, then in my opinion that falls into the "beyond his control" exception and no penalty can be imposed.
(1) Create blog on how to report Employer wage violations to Wage and Hour division
(2) USCIS poor customer service - inconsistencies, rude answers ....... We must create a blog to let people know how to contact Ombudsman to report issues
(3) Any other pressing issues....
Folks please add anything you feel must be addressed
One more update: Found another thread on RG's forum. This one is very specific.
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showpost.php?p=25447&postcount=7
Re: EAD & wrongful denial of 485 due to I-140 revoked by employer after 180 days AC21
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let my try to clarify my answer, since I didn't do that good a job previously.
An EAD remains valid until it expires, unless it is explicitly revoked. Sometimes, but not always, when the CIS denies an I-485, they also revoke the EAD.
For argument's sake, let's assume that an employer has attempted to revoke an approved I-140 in a case where the applicant's I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. Let's further assume that the CIS denies the I-485 on this basis and also revokes the EAD.
In my opinion, since there is no legal authority for such a denial, and the denial violates the law, it is invalid. Now, I want to make it clear that this is a very unusual situation. It is extremely rare that you find a situation where a CIS adjustment of status denial is clearly and unequivocally illegal, but this is one of those situations.
Because a denial of this type is illegal, the revocation of the applicant's employment authorization is also improper. If an applicant, in this highly unusual and extremely limited situation, works without authorization, then in my opinion that falls into the "beyond his control" exception and no penalty can be imposed.
tattoo Amityville Horror House on
desi485
12-03 01:28 PM
There is a different thread also going on, but sharing it here for anyone who have not noticed it yet. RG updated his website with below information.
Good news concerning AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
(http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?p=25832)
Looks like the header of that thread is misleading...though its a good news for those suffering because CIS error, it can mislead some IV visitors that issue is over. Unfortunately this is not the case, though it is some what relief to know that MTR are successful. However in first place, an applicant should not have to go through this HORROR. I wish CIS comes out and accept this error and make sure that this is not repeated again in future.
Good news concerning AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
(http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?p=25832)
Looks like the header of that thread is misleading...though its a good news for those suffering because CIS error, it can mislead some IV visitors that issue is over. Unfortunately this is not the case, though it is some what relief to know that MTR are successful. However in first place, an applicant should not have to go through this HORROR. I wish CIS comes out and accept this error and make sure that this is not repeated again in future.
more...
pictures The Amityville Horror - Movies
InTheMoment
07-18 10:59 PM
Other than that RD also comes into play in deciding the order in which the file comes under review of an officer. This is irrespective of what the visa bulletin says..and is called in CIS parlance as pre-adjudication if the PD is not available.("pre" as in adjudication before a visa number is available).
Such files that have undergone adjudicator review/FBI name and fingerprint as well as IBIS checks and are complete in all other respects but for visa# are now placed in separate area shelf for quickly assigning #'s, stamping, signing and ordering cards when PD is current for such petitions.
So the work of reviewing files goes roughly in FIFO order (that is based on RD) all round the year whether the bulletin says C, U, A, B or JAN01STONEAGE!
You guys are mistaken one thing. No matter what PD has to be current at the time of I-485 processing. But if both applicant have PD current than RD comes into play. Other than that RD does not play any role at all.
Such files that have undergone adjudicator review/FBI name and fingerprint as well as IBIS checks and are complete in all other respects but for visa# are now placed in separate area shelf for quickly assigning #'s, stamping, signing and ordering cards when PD is current for such petitions.
So the work of reviewing files goes roughly in FIFO order (that is based on RD) all round the year whether the bulletin says C, U, A, B or JAN01STONEAGE!
You guys are mistaken one thing. No matter what PD has to be current at the time of I-485 processing. But if both applicant have PD current than RD comes into play. Other than that RD does not play any role at all.
dresses movie, Amityville Horror.
jchan
09-10 10:00 AM
Looks like last night's particle accelerator experiement sent us back in time!:D
haha this is a good one :)
haha this is a good one :)
more...
makeup Amityville Horror House Ghost
LONGGCQUE
04-23 09:52 PM
SGP, It took 3-4 weeks for a co-worker in eb2 to get an approval once labor was filed(excludes Pre activities like ads etc)
Hello.... Anyone there?:confused:
Hello.... Anyone there?:confused:
girlfriend Amityville Horror house for
kicca
12-28 09:37 AM
filed with nebraska center 8/16/2007; receipt date 8/24/2007.
i did receive my EAD, but no AP, yet....
i did receive my EAD, but no AP, yet....
hairstyles From The Amityville Horror
eb3_nepa
07-14 03:49 PM
done both (contributed and updated signature)
Nicely done. People please update your signatures. In case some people miss this active thread, they may see the "High Five" campaign in someone's signature.
Nicely done. People please update your signatures. In case some people miss this active thread, they may see the "High Five" campaign in someone's signature.
BharatPremi
07-05 02:57 PM
Guys,
Please Pound on this as well.
http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/485
- BharatPRemi
Please Pound on this as well.
http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/485
- BharatPRemi
priti8888
07-23 04:14 PM
this is a 2004 EB3 approval! This is the first one I am seeing from 2004. So looks like they have really cleaned the pipes here, and things should be better going forward.
The nicest thing of this whole fiasco is that they seem to have ignored country-limits and approved as many as possible. Last year they did only 9.8K EB Indians (teh final count was 17k, but that was due to ScheduleA). THis year (2007) if they have gotten 20-30K India applications out, the dates should move better in the future.
Eagerly awaiting 2 USCIS stats:
1. per-country per-category EB approvals in 2007
2. number of 485 applications received by August 17th
They indeed are clearing up the pipes, so the situation is not as horrible as it seems to be. A pd of 2004 is considered "old" so as soon as visa nos become available in october, they would be the first ones to get approved.
The nicest thing of this whole fiasco is that they seem to have ignored country-limits and approved as many as possible. Last year they did only 9.8K EB Indians (teh final count was 17k, but that was due to ScheduleA). THis year (2007) if they have gotten 20-30K India applications out, the dates should move better in the future.
Eagerly awaiting 2 USCIS stats:
1. per-country per-category EB approvals in 2007
2. number of 485 applications received by August 17th
They indeed are clearing up the pipes, so the situation is not as horrible as it seems to be. A pd of 2004 is considered "old" so as soon as visa nos become available in october, they would be the first ones to get approved.
No comments:
Post a Comment