kevinkris
06-05 02:46 PM
Instead of giving like that why don't IV open a "IV Store" and sell T-shirts for 100 or 200$ ?
we can use
http://www.cafepress.com/ or other sites which provide this service.
Great Idea conchshell !!
I am keeping an eye on the funding drive... and it seems that there is progress but somewhat slow. I think we need new ideas to promote the same. What about giving IV T-Shirts to all those who contribute $100+ for our 20K to 50K drive?
we can use
http://www.cafepress.com/ or other sites which provide this service.
Great Idea conchshell !!
I am keeping an eye on the funding drive... and it seems that there is progress but somewhat slow. I think we need new ideas to promote the same. What about giving IV T-Shirts to all those who contribute $100+ for our 20K to 50K drive?
wallpaper Home // Shows // Keeping Up
NKR
06-25 11:47 AM
When a guy comes to US for education the average age is around 23 - 24 years. MS completed by 25. Most guys at that time have burning desire to do something new and innovative (either in job or starting own business).
And then you lose your libido :). Agreed�. With the delay you lose the golden period in your career and end up at a lower level. Most of the self made millionaires rockstarted young when they had the drive and desire. I still say America gains more than what they lose by delaying GC process. If they hand out GCs faster then who will work for those millionaires and billionaires?.
And then you lose your libido :). Agreed�. With the delay you lose the golden period in your career and end up at a lower level. Most of the self made millionaires rockstarted young when they had the drive and desire. I still say America gains more than what they lose by delaying GC process. If they hand out GCs faster then who will work for those millionaires and billionaires?.
srikondoji
08-13 04:02 PM
congrats.
This is the first receipt i am noticing for an application received on July 2nd at 7:55AM and signed by R. Williams.
All other recipts so far were either received at 9 AM or 10:25 Am or so (july 2nd, 3rd, 5th etc) but none of them were at 7:55 AM.
Signature has all relevant information.
This is the first receipt i am noticing for an application received on July 2nd at 7:55AM and signed by R. Williams.
All other recipts so far were either received at 9 AM or 10:25 Am or so (july 2nd, 3rd, 5th etc) but none of them were at 7:55 AM.
Signature has all relevant information.
2011 iPhone is trying to keep up
baburob2
03-16 11:23 AM
oops.
more...
s_r_e_e
08-10 12:32 PM
I am sorry for posting in here, but I was wondering if someone actually went in person to the Houston Consulate to get their passport renewed. Also, do we need to have any reason to attend in person at the Consulate such as emergency, etc.
I am from India and my passport is expiring on Aug 17. I read before in the forum that it is better to go in person to renew the passport. Any experiences please let me know.
Thanks a bunch
If you are around houston, it would be better to go in person. I think they accept the applications only until noon. They would tell u a Pickup date or u have an option to get it mailed. The passport is ready for pickup in 10 working days or so.
I am from India and my passport is expiring on Aug 17. I read before in the forum that it is better to go in person to renew the passport. Any experiences please let me know.
Thanks a bunch
If you are around houston, it would be better to go in person. I think they accept the applications only until noon. They would tell u a Pickup date or u have an option to get it mailed. The passport is ready for pickup in 10 working days or so.
kartikiran
12-11 08:35 AM
Looks like they are changing the spillover rules again from Horizontal to Vertical this is bad news for EB2 I
Because the spillover projection is given only for EB2(China and India). This is due to fact that only EB2-Row is current due to which there is a possbility of spillover which flows to China and India and not to EB3-Row(if it was vertical).
Because the spillover projection is given only for EB2(China and India). This is due to fact that only EB2-Row is current due to which there is a possbility of spillover which flows to China and India and not to EB3-Row(if it was vertical).
more...
santb1975
05-29 10:48 PM
Thankyou for your contribution
Receipt ID: 0375-0762-4300-7538
Let's keep 'em comming!
Receipt ID: 0375-0762-4300-7538
Let's keep 'em comming!
2010 Do you worry about keep up
tcsonly
07-21 04:49 PM
Here is a list of 53 members so far registered in SoCal chapter:
Jimi_Hendrix
GCSOON-Ihope
eagerr2i
days_go_by
485Mbe4001
yogkc
tcsonly
willgetgc2005
MY_GC_DREAMS
payal_nag
genius
Not2Happy
thirumalkn
meetdebasish
GC Process
baleraosreedhar
caydee
rkotamurthy
hourglass
murali77
satishku_2000
acruix
imv116
santb1975
amaruns
IN2US
twinbrothers
kumhyd2
xstal
mashu
zoooom
tcsonly
drona
DCQC
jasmin45
gctoget
rsamudrala
satishbsk
SDdesi
Progressive
abhisam
smuthu2000
hmehta
rfarkiya
eb3stuck
imv116
northstar1
manishs7
navkap
mangelschots
Pia
kkcal2002
GC_Applicant
I doubt if Jimi_Hendrix is still active in SoCal chapter.
-C.
Jimi_Hendrix
GCSOON-Ihope
eagerr2i
days_go_by
485Mbe4001
yogkc
tcsonly
willgetgc2005
MY_GC_DREAMS
payal_nag
genius
Not2Happy
thirumalkn
meetdebasish
GC Process
baleraosreedhar
caydee
rkotamurthy
hourglass
murali77
satishku_2000
acruix
imv116
santb1975
amaruns
IN2US
twinbrothers
kumhyd2
xstal
mashu
zoooom
tcsonly
drona
DCQC
jasmin45
gctoget
rsamudrala
satishbsk
SDdesi
Progressive
abhisam
smuthu2000
hmehta
rfarkiya
eb3stuck
imv116
northstar1
manishs7
navkap
mangelschots
Pia
kkcal2002
GC_Applicant
I doubt if Jimi_Hendrix is still active in SoCal chapter.
-C.
more...
ItIsNotFunny
10-21 11:06 AM
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Guys,
This is one of the most serious issue we are facing in current time. Lay offs are happening left and right and on top of that employers learned that AC21 is giving troubles, they started squeezing more (I myself is partially victim of that).
We need sincere efforts sending emails to ombudsman. This will not take more than 5 minutes as NK2006 put efforts on even giving you the email template.
I sincerely urge everyone to send emails to addresses NK2006 mentioned above and even request your collegues, spouse to do so. We need volume to show our presence.
One more request, please take one more minute and make sure that you post here that you sent emails. This will give us real picture and give others motivation too!
I sent my emails (actually twice ;)).
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Guys,
This is one of the most serious issue we are facing in current time. Lay offs are happening left and right and on top of that employers learned that AC21 is giving troubles, they started squeezing more (I myself is partially victim of that).
We need sincere efforts sending emails to ombudsman. This will not take more than 5 minutes as NK2006 put efforts on even giving you the email template.
I sincerely urge everyone to send emails to addresses NK2006 mentioned above and even request your collegues, spouse to do so. We need volume to show our presence.
One more request, please take one more minute and make sure that you post here that you sent emails. This will give us real picture and give others motivation too!
I sent my emails (actually twice ;)).
hair Keeping Up With The Jones#39;s
lazycis
11-20 10:26 PM
I am not 100% sure but if person has not completed 6 years, he can continue till he completes 6 years. If person has already crossed 6 years limit, H1 extension or transfer does not stand valid without any underlying pending AOS. This is what RG termed as opposite to conventional internet wisdom. Also, the law requires to provide a notice to cancel EAD, but not to cancel H1B. Correct me if I am wrong!
Ron is absolutely right regarding H1 extensions past 6 years! If I-485 is denied, the extension cannot be granted (we all know that USCIS may still approve it, but if they follow AC21 guidance, they should not). As for cancelling H1, the law does require USCIS to provide notice in one case: if it determines that H1 holder is no longer working for the sponsoring employer. We already discussed automatic revocation scenarios.
See also this explanation from Fragomen (I know, I know, they are bad, but read anyway):
http://pubweb.fdbl.com/news1.nsf/9abe5d703b986cff86256e310080943a/8cda1a2a9589440c8525746d00574cf9?OpenDocument
Ron is absolutely right regarding H1 extensions past 6 years! If I-485 is denied, the extension cannot be granted (we all know that USCIS may still approve it, but if they follow AC21 guidance, they should not). As for cancelling H1, the law does require USCIS to provide notice in one case: if it determines that H1 holder is no longer working for the sponsoring employer. We already discussed automatic revocation scenarios.
See also this explanation from Fragomen (I know, I know, they are bad, but read anyway):
http://pubweb.fdbl.com/news1.nsf/9abe5d703b986cff86256e310080943a/8cda1a2a9589440c8525746d00574cf9?OpenDocument
more...
ashutrip
06-16 06:44 PM
If you are stuck at Atlanta PERM backlog center , please email your case number and explain them that your application has been pending for a LONG time and request them to help us get out of this grave situation. Also, please post on this thread after you have sent an email so that others can be motivated to do the same. We need to send as many emails as possible to get any positive feedback. I know that DOL mentioned that they will start processing our applications soon, but we need to keep up the pressure from our end so that it has some positive effect.
I know most of the people on this forum are not in this situation ..... but let's see how many can come out of this selfishness and help others by emailing / phoning DOL Atlanta to help other brothers who want to file AOS just like them...... When phone campaigns / email campaigns happen .... we who are stuck at Atlanta help others tooo... so let's see how many on this form help us now...
Here is the info :
email : Perm.DFLC@dol.gov
Phone : 404-893-0101
Thanks
Champak (Same as 1 and 2)
what is your PD?
I know most of the people on this forum are not in this situation ..... but let's see how many can come out of this selfishness and help others by emailing / phoning DOL Atlanta to help other brothers who want to file AOS just like them...... When phone campaigns / email campaigns happen .... we who are stuck at Atlanta help others tooo... so let's see how many on this form help us now...
Here is the info :
email : Perm.DFLC@dol.gov
Phone : 404-893-0101
Thanks
Champak (Same as 1 and 2)
what is your PD?
hot Keeping up with the Jones: Sunderland striker Kenwyne eyes Liverpool move
tinamatthew
07-20 09:18 PM
If you are stuck at Atlanta PERM backlog center , please email your case number and explain them that your application has been pending for a LONG time and request them to help us get out of this grave situation. Also, please post on this thread after you have sent an email so that others can be motivated to do the same. We need to send as many emails as possible to get any positive feedback. I know that DOL mentioned that they will start processing our applications soon, but we need to keep up the pressure from our end so that it has some positive effect.
I know most of the people on this forum are not in this situation ..... but let's see how many can come out of this selfishness and help others by emailing / phoning DOL Atlanta to help other brothers who want to file AOS just like them...... When phone campaigns / email campaigns happen .... we who are stuck at Atlanta help others tooo... so let's see how many on this form help us now...
Here is the info :
email : Perm.DFLC@dol.gov
Phone : 404-893-0101
Thanks
Champak (Same as 1 and 2)
I am not in this situation (schedule A), but I would love to call. Do you think it is ok to call without a case number?
I know most of the people on this forum are not in this situation ..... but let's see how many can come out of this selfishness and help others by emailing / phoning DOL Atlanta to help other brothers who want to file AOS just like them...... When phone campaigns / email campaigns happen .... we who are stuck at Atlanta help others tooo... so let's see how many on this form help us now...
Here is the info :
email : Perm.DFLC@dol.gov
Phone : 404-893-0101
Thanks
Champak (Same as 1 and 2)
I am not in this situation (schedule A), but I would love to call. Do you think it is ok to call without a case number?
more...
house Keeping up with the Jones\\
lazycis
05-14 12:17 PM
No man.........I am waiting for the outcome.......In fact to be frank I am bracing myself for Writ of Mandamus Lawsuit.....frustration....
Congressman's liason may be able to help, but to be on the safe side, fork out $350 and dispute the denial in federal district court. It is different from mandamus, it's an agency action which is not in accordance with the law. Court filing may help you to preserve status/EAD/AP.
Congressman's liason may be able to help, but to be on the safe side, fork out $350 and dispute the denial in federal district court. It is different from mandamus, it's an agency action which is not in accordance with the law. Court filing may help you to preserve status/EAD/AP.
tattoo Keeping Up With The Jones .
karthiknv143
08-13 04:44 PM
Rcvd Receipt Notice from my Attorney.
Filed: July 2nd
PD: Jan 2006
I-140 Apporved: Nov 2006
Receipt Date: 8/10/2007 (Attorney on Received 8/13 Today)
NSC or TSC ? what time it reached :) Who signed for u?
Filed: July 2nd
PD: Jan 2006
I-140 Apporved: Nov 2006
Receipt Date: 8/10/2007 (Attorney on Received 8/13 Today)
NSC or TSC ? what time it reached :) Who signed for u?
more...
pictures Keeping up with the Jones#39;
JunRN
10-01 03:16 PM
Pls excse my noob-ness, i have read all the pages of this thread but cudnt find a precise answer.
I am in the Rn program, and wud be graduating in may08, hopefylly pass nclex and start OPT by june08. i can then start with my visa screen, and I140 as these are not retrogressed, but if retrogression continues and i am not able to file I485, do i still get an EAD. my guess is 'not' but just trying to confirm as i wud have to plan to continue with studies after 1 yr of OPT.
and btw thanks for tons of usefull info!
There is no such thing as retrogression for I-140. Any employer can file I-140for you anytime.
For nurses, we are Labor Certification exempt, meaning we don't have to go through this long process. Our LC process is very short, only 40 days and need not be sent to DOL. What I would suggest is that you start looking for sponsor once you're on OPT so that you can establish early priority date by filing I-140 asap.
PD is the date you file I-140. Once your PD is current as per Department of State Visa Bulletin, then you can apply for Adjustment of Status (i-485). EAD (I-765) can accompany that AOS application.
So, the answer to your question is NO. You cannot apply for EAD if you're applying for I-140 only. To file for EAD, it must be accompanied by I-485.
You get 1-yr EAD though once you do your OPT and hope before it expires, your PD becomes current and you can apply for EAD based on pending I-485.
I am in the Rn program, and wud be graduating in may08, hopefylly pass nclex and start OPT by june08. i can then start with my visa screen, and I140 as these are not retrogressed, but if retrogression continues and i am not able to file I485, do i still get an EAD. my guess is 'not' but just trying to confirm as i wud have to plan to continue with studies after 1 yr of OPT.
and btw thanks for tons of usefull info!
There is no such thing as retrogression for I-140. Any employer can file I-140for you anytime.
For nurses, we are Labor Certification exempt, meaning we don't have to go through this long process. Our LC process is very short, only 40 days and need not be sent to DOL. What I would suggest is that you start looking for sponsor once you're on OPT so that you can establish early priority date by filing I-140 asap.
PD is the date you file I-140. Once your PD is current as per Department of State Visa Bulletin, then you can apply for Adjustment of Status (i-485). EAD (I-765) can accompany that AOS application.
So, the answer to your question is NO. You cannot apply for EAD if you're applying for I-140 only. To file for EAD, it must be accompanied by I-485.
You get 1-yr EAD though once you do your OPT and hope before it expires, your PD becomes current and you can apply for EAD based on pending I-485.
dresses “Keeping up with the
MY_GC_DREAMS
11-14 01:31 PM
Hi All,
I am an IV member living in Southern California. I wanted to give a loud 'hello' out to all members in this region. It will be great to know some of the members so that we can interact. Can you please post back a response with what counties you live in? This way we can get some idea about where members are residing.
Looking forward to your responses.
Cheers,
Jimi
Hello to all,
reporting from LA county - Los angeles
I am an IV member living in Southern California. I wanted to give a loud 'hello' out to all members in this region. It will be great to know some of the members so that we can interact. Can you please post back a response with what counties you live in? This way we can get some idea about where members are residing.
Looking forward to your responses.
Cheers,
Jimi
Hello to all,
reporting from LA county - Los angeles
more...
makeup Tough to keep up with Jonathan
nursekm
10-03 11:47 PM
Jun - r u from PIC country??
I do not believe the 800,000 figure for I-485 alone. It could be a misquote from Aytes. The 800,000 is possibly combination of all immigration related applications such as I-140, 485, 131, 765, etc.
Even during last year when EBs are current, it didn't reach that many applications. I believe Matthew OH is more accurate in saying there's a total of 320,000 I-485 applications.
With that figure, average 2.5 years waiting is in order. But that should not be distributed equally among all countries due to per country limit. I would guess, for India and China, it would be 3 years wait, and for the rest, 2 years.
I do not believe the 800,000 figure for I-485 alone. It could be a misquote from Aytes. The 800,000 is possibly combination of all immigration related applications such as I-140, 485, 131, 765, etc.
Even during last year when EBs are current, it didn't reach that many applications. I believe Matthew OH is more accurate in saying there's a total of 320,000 I-485 applications.
With that figure, average 2.5 years waiting is in order. But that should not be distributed equally among all countries due to per country limit. I would guess, for India and China, it would be 3 years wait, and for the rest, 2 years.
girlfriend Keeping Up With The Jones#39;s
learning01
04-25 01:56 PM
Let's talk about how backlog has affected us or our green card process. Let's discuss, write, post here about how to ask law makers to increase visa numbers for green cards affected by retrogression. Let's ask the USCIS to revert for concurrent filing. Write about these. Write letters to editors, to law makers, to companies. Let's stay focussed. Already there is the CIR is stalled for lack of agreement between Sen. Frist and Sen. Reid.
Let's take this PD definition discussion offline, as at present this is not a goal of IV. Am I correct?
The priority date based on the person first entering the US on H1B visa, or converting to a H1 status from any other visa status in the US is an excellent one.
This eliminates all the issues that H1Bs face today when applying for a GC. Employer portability, Visa retrogression etc ( and not to mention employer manipulation of H1Bs workers in delaying to file GCs ) are applied in fairness to everyone. This takes the fear out of H1B workers to change jobs at will without regard to negative impact on their pending GC applications..
Way to go.. Why can't IV propose to add this one liner to any of the impending amendments or find another lawmaker to support this which can alleviate most issues faced by H1Bs today.
Let's take this PD definition discussion offline, as at present this is not a goal of IV. Am I correct?
The priority date based on the person first entering the US on H1B visa, or converting to a H1 status from any other visa status in the US is an excellent one.
This eliminates all the issues that H1Bs face today when applying for a GC. Employer portability, Visa retrogression etc ( and not to mention employer manipulation of H1Bs workers in delaying to file GCs ) are applied in fairness to everyone. This takes the fear out of H1B workers to change jobs at will without regard to negative impact on their pending GC applications..
Way to go.. Why can't IV propose to add this one liner to any of the impending amendments or find another lawmaker to support this which can alleviate most issues faced by H1Bs today.
hairstyles Keeping up with the Jones#39;. starring Cherry Jones - Doubt
nogc_noproblem
05-01 10:24 AM
Somebody tried to approve or disapprove your message but he/she already got exhausted. They might be in spraying spree earlier in giving Red and Green dots to others and currently don�t have enough �credit� to approve or disapprove other�s message.
I have some black dots in my Control Panel? What is the meaning of a black dot?
And how does one give black dot to some one? When I try to add reputation to a post, I can only see I approve or I disapprove options. I would imagine I approve=green and I disapprove=red. Where does a black dot fit into this scheme?
I have some black dots in my Control Panel? What is the meaning of a black dot?
And how does one give black dot to some one? When I try to add reputation to a post, I can only see I approve or I disapprove options. I would imagine I approve=green and I disapprove=red. Where does a black dot fit into this scheme?
qualified_trash
05-31 04:41 PM
Did get solved by Andrew Wiles in in the mid-nineties. To read about the history and drama behind this theorem, I suggest reading 'Fermat's Enigma' by Simon Singh. So I guess if that can be solved, PBEC could find a way out for all of us.
thanks for the pointer!! I was aware that Wiles proved it but there was a flaw in his work. was not aware of the subsequent proof.
anyone at PBEC listening??
thanks for the pointer!! I was aware that Wiles proved it but there was a flaw in his work. was not aware of the subsequent proof.
anyone at PBEC listening??
viskota
07-15 05:06 PM
Paid $10 through bill pay
No comments:
Post a Comment