rustamehind
07-17 08:25 PM
my lawyer missed the 2nd july deadline even when he had all the papers. Now i am asking him to meet 30th july deadline he is not responding . what are the papers needed to file I485. Can I file it without lawyers help? He does have my immunization papers
Do it yourself man.These lawyers are God sent.I know lot of lawyer victimes , who sent their applications a month in advance and they sent to USCIS on 2nd July and these were the folks whose date became current in June.
Do it yourself man.These lawyers are God sent.I know lot of lawyer victimes , who sent their applications a month in advance and they sent to USCIS on 2nd July and these were the folks whose date became current in June.
wallpaper londe hair color ideas for
meridiani.planum
11-12 02:26 PM
6months is to comply with AC21. I donot recall any one saying wait xyz time to switch after you get a GC.
Its indeed a bit of a grey area, though lawyers say stick for 6 more months to be conservative. See:
MurthyDotCom : 485 FAQs (http://www.murthy.com/485faq.html#13)
How soon can I leave the employer after I get my GC - ImmigrationPortal Forums (http://forums.immigration.com/blog.php?bt=668)
Its indeed a bit of a grey area, though lawyers say stick for 6 more months to be conservative. See:
MurthyDotCom : 485 FAQs (http://www.murthy.com/485faq.html#13)
How soon can I leave the employer after I get my GC - ImmigrationPortal Forums (http://forums.immigration.com/blog.php?bt=668)
desi3933
03-09 11:58 AM
She is a derivative on my pending AOS, has a valid EAD/AP. She used to work on H1 and stopped work sometime ago. Does she need to do anything/is she automatically considered to be in AoS status?
Nothing is needed from employee.
Employer needs to notify USCIS about termination.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Nothing is needed from employee.
Employer needs to notify USCIS about termination.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
2011 londe hair color ideas for
CreatedToday
02-11 05:55 PM
To lighten up the moment after March Visa bulletin holds no prospects...
http://thepinkchaddicampaign.blogspot.com/
http://thepinkchaddicampaign.blogspot.com/
more...
HRPRO
05-04 01:47 PM
When the employe and employer are two different entity...why can not?
I will have a very good employer- employe relationship...:D
When you start your own company arent you the employer or part of the ownership and when you sponsor your H, arent you the employee too? Sorry if I am missing something here
I will have a very good employer- employe relationship...:D
When you start your own company arent you the employer or part of the ownership and when you sponsor your H, arent you the employee too? Sorry if I am missing something here
rickys_in
06-03 12:21 PM
I am Confused Too -- Why Are People Sending DL and Passport Copies.
It Clear Says do NOT send any Identification Copies Unless requested by USCIS
I am not sending the DL and Passport copies.
It Clear Says do NOT send any Identification Copies Unless requested by USCIS
I am not sending the DL and Passport copies.
more...
makemygc
04-02 09:31 PM
Hi Desiguy786,
I've used employer A labor to get a 7th year extension while employed with employer B but I didn't have that RFE situation. Since, you are employed with employer A currently and got an RFE, asking for H1 transfer + 1 year extension could be tricky.
Hi Satyasaich,
I have been working for employer A for more than 3 years and I dont know the reason for RFE, but it is related to the employer, following is the RFE, My LC is approved and applied 140 in Nov'06 which is pending. Since it's such a huge RFE ( 16 questions ), I was looking for some backup...please advice.
In short, My RFE is asking for..
Current number of employess: DHS records indicate that the petitioner has filed a disproportionately higher numberof H1b, and/or L-1 petitions than the number of employess shown on the petition. Submit an explanatoin for filing such an unusally high number of peitions in proportion to the low number of employees shown on you petition.
Copies of all H and L approval notices, petitioner's organizational chart, Form 941 Quarterly wage report, Payroll Summary, Federal Income Taxes, IRS tax return filing status transcripts, lease agreement, floor plan, office photos etc..
Consultants and Staffing Agencies: If the petitioner is, in any way , engaged in the business of consulting, employment staffing, or job placement that contracts short-term employment for workers who are traditionally self-employer, submit evidence to establish whether a specialty occupation exists for the beneficiary.
No matter whether the alien will be working within the employment contractor's operation on projects for the client or whether the alien will work at the end-client's place of business - uscis must examine the ultimate employment of the alien, and determine whether the postion qualifies as a specialty occupation. Please clarify the petitioner's employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary and, if not already provided, submit a description of conditions of employment as provided in contractual agreements, statements of work, work orders, service agreements, or letters from authorized officials of the ultimate end-client companies where the work will actually be performed that lists the name, descritipon of the duties..etc..
I've used employer A labor to get a 7th year extension while employed with employer B but I didn't have that RFE situation. Since, you are employed with employer A currently and got an RFE, asking for H1 transfer + 1 year extension could be tricky.
Hi Satyasaich,
I have been working for employer A for more than 3 years and I dont know the reason for RFE, but it is related to the employer, following is the RFE, My LC is approved and applied 140 in Nov'06 which is pending. Since it's such a huge RFE ( 16 questions ), I was looking for some backup...please advice.
In short, My RFE is asking for..
Current number of employess: DHS records indicate that the petitioner has filed a disproportionately higher numberof H1b, and/or L-1 petitions than the number of employess shown on the petition. Submit an explanatoin for filing such an unusally high number of peitions in proportion to the low number of employees shown on you petition.
Copies of all H and L approval notices, petitioner's organizational chart, Form 941 Quarterly wage report, Payroll Summary, Federal Income Taxes, IRS tax return filing status transcripts, lease agreement, floor plan, office photos etc..
Consultants and Staffing Agencies: If the petitioner is, in any way , engaged in the business of consulting, employment staffing, or job placement that contracts short-term employment for workers who are traditionally self-employer, submit evidence to establish whether a specialty occupation exists for the beneficiary.
No matter whether the alien will be working within the employment contractor's operation on projects for the client or whether the alien will work at the end-client's place of business - uscis must examine the ultimate employment of the alien, and determine whether the postion qualifies as a specialty occupation. Please clarify the petitioner's employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary and, if not already provided, submit a description of conditions of employment as provided in contractual agreements, statements of work, work orders, service agreements, or letters from authorized officials of the ultimate end-client companies where the work will actually be performed that lists the name, descritipon of the duties..etc..
2010 londe and lack hair color
asdfgh
11-28 12:02 AM
I had LUD on I-140 on 11/25 as well. 140 was approved late last year.
more...
willigetgc?
10-11 09:18 AM
Stop watching for VB and start meeting with your Senators!
hair hairstyles lack hair blonde
desi3933
03-09 12:01 PM
This is my understanding.
when someone is on H1 status, employer is bound to pay him/her unless they have explicitly terminated the employment by a termination letter/H1 cancellation/Change of status/resignation letter from the employee.
How will USCIS know that the beneficiary has switched out of H1 status ?
You are right.
Employer must pay H-1 employee salary until
1. employee is notified of job termination (or employee resigns)
AND
2. USCIS is notified of such termination by request to cancel the H-1B petition.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
when someone is on H1 status, employer is bound to pay him/her unless they have explicitly terminated the employment by a termination letter/H1 cancellation/Change of status/resignation letter from the employee.
How will USCIS know that the beneficiary has switched out of H1 status ?
You are right.
Employer must pay H-1 employee salary until
1. employee is notified of job termination (or employee resigns)
AND
2. USCIS is notified of such termination by request to cancel the H-1B petition.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
more...
seahawks
10-25 11:14 PM
bump, bump and bump
hot londe hair dyed. londe hair
needhelp!
01-08 07:09 PM
Is principal applicant's I-485 Receipt copy required when filing AP for derivative?
Thanks.
Thanks.
more...
house londe hair color ideas for
pappu
02-02 02:54 PM
House Immigration Subcommittee Holds Hearing on Naturalization
On January 17, the House Immigration Subcommittee held its first oversight hearing of the year, and the subject was the naturalization processing backlogs. Due to a confluence of factors, including a very significant fee increase that went into effect on July 30, 2007, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) received approximately double the number of naturalization applications in its Fiscal Year 2007 than it had during the previous year. USCIS is saying that, as of now, anyone who applied for naturalization after June 1, 2007, can expect to wait 16 to 18 months to have their application processed.
Remarks by Subcommittee Members
In her opening comment, Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Chair of the Subcommittee, noted that one year ago, the Subcommittee had a hearing on the proposed fee increase, and was told by USCIS that it need the fee increase to increase efficiency. At the time, the processing time for citizenship applications was six months.
Representative Steve King (R-IA), the ranking Republican on the Subcommittee, played the role of immigration historian. In his opening statement (and in his questioning), he focused almost exclusively on the INS� Citizenship USA program of ten years ago�back in the day before computers were standard issue in the immigration agency. In that effort to deal with a naturalization backlog, some applicants were granted citizenship before criminal background checks were completed, and some who received citizenship were found later not to be eligible. (Since then, however, much more stringent processes have been put in place to screen applications for naturalization. And the agency now does have computers.)
USCIS Director Emilio Gonzalez
Emilio Gonzalez, Director of USCIS, gave some background on the development of the backlog and summarized what USCIS was doing about it. During June, July, and August of last year, USCIS received three million immigration benefit applications of all kinds. Their first priority was issuing receipts for those applications. Next, they processed and sent work authorizations, which they are required to do within 90 days.
In the meantime, a large number of naturalization applications piled up. To deal with the extra workload, USCIS is hiring 1,500 new employees (in addition to the extra staff they planned to hire after the new fees went into effect). The agency is also re-hiring former (retired) employees. While waiting for the additional staff to be trained and deployed, the agency will be asking current staff to work overtime, using budgeted overtime early in the Fiscal Year.
Other steps are also being taken. Still, Mr. Gonzalez noted (in his written testimony) that it will take until the third quarter of Fiscal Year 2010 before the agency is back to a six-month processing time.
During the question and answer session, there was a fair amount of discussion about a portion of the backlog that preceded the surge in applications and was caused by a delay in the background checks conducted by the FBI. Some individuals have been in limbo for well over a year waiting for clearance from the FBI, and Mr. Gonzalez noted that last year more than 5,000 lawsuits were filed against the agency�80% on the FBI name check delays. The FBI, he said, has a paper-based system that is only beginning to be addressed. For now, it takes people to handle the files. The FBI has brought on some additional contract personnel and full-time employees to work on this problem.
Rep. Lofgren said that she would ask the FBI to come before the Subcommittee to explain its perspective on the name check delays. [Subsequently, we were told that the full Judiciary Committee will have a hearing with the FBI on a range of issues, including the name check issue.]
Non-Government Witnesses
Also testifying at the hearing were Arturo Vargas, Director of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials and Fred Tsao, Policy Director for the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. Mr. Vargas said that his organization kept USCIS apprised of its efforts to get immigrants to become citizens and the agency should have taken that information, plus experience with past fee increases, into account to take steps to be better prepared for the surge in applications. NALEO is recommending that the agency focus sufficiently on reducing the backlog so that all immigrants who applied for naturalization in Fiscal Year 2007 (which ended September 30, 2007) are sworn in as citizens by July 4, 2008. Otherwise, many immigrants who applied for citizenship last summer will not be able to vote in the elections this November.
Mr. Tsao echoed the point about USCIS having ample information that a surge in applications was coming. He recommended that USCIS (and the FBI) report regularly to the Subcommittee regarding progress being made on reducing the backlog.
In concluding the hearing, Rep. Lofgren suggested that she might also conduct a hearing on the agency�s information technology.
Additional Information
In a subsequent meeting with community-based organizations, Michael Aytes, Associate Director for Domestic Operations of USCIS, gave some additional specifics on the status of the naturalization backlogs. He noted that the total number of new employees being hired will be approximately 3,000�between the additional staff they are hiring to deal with the backlog and the extra staff being paid for by the fee increases. Regarding the FBI name check issue, he noted that, during the House hearing, every member of the Subcommittee�Republican and Democrat�inquired about the name check issue, and that this issue is now being dealt with at high levels both in the Justice Department (in which the FBI is located) and in DHS. He indicated that decisions have been made on the hiring of many of the new adjudicators that are being brought on board, but training and placement are still weeks away, at least.
He also said that the agency is starting Saturday and evening interviews, and applicants should be encouraged to make every effort to show up for their interviews.
On January 17, the House Immigration Subcommittee held its first oversight hearing of the year, and the subject was the naturalization processing backlogs. Due to a confluence of factors, including a very significant fee increase that went into effect on July 30, 2007, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) received approximately double the number of naturalization applications in its Fiscal Year 2007 than it had during the previous year. USCIS is saying that, as of now, anyone who applied for naturalization after June 1, 2007, can expect to wait 16 to 18 months to have their application processed.
Remarks by Subcommittee Members
In her opening comment, Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Chair of the Subcommittee, noted that one year ago, the Subcommittee had a hearing on the proposed fee increase, and was told by USCIS that it need the fee increase to increase efficiency. At the time, the processing time for citizenship applications was six months.
Representative Steve King (R-IA), the ranking Republican on the Subcommittee, played the role of immigration historian. In his opening statement (and in his questioning), he focused almost exclusively on the INS� Citizenship USA program of ten years ago�back in the day before computers were standard issue in the immigration agency. In that effort to deal with a naturalization backlog, some applicants were granted citizenship before criminal background checks were completed, and some who received citizenship were found later not to be eligible. (Since then, however, much more stringent processes have been put in place to screen applications for naturalization. And the agency now does have computers.)
USCIS Director Emilio Gonzalez
Emilio Gonzalez, Director of USCIS, gave some background on the development of the backlog and summarized what USCIS was doing about it. During June, July, and August of last year, USCIS received three million immigration benefit applications of all kinds. Their first priority was issuing receipts for those applications. Next, they processed and sent work authorizations, which they are required to do within 90 days.
In the meantime, a large number of naturalization applications piled up. To deal with the extra workload, USCIS is hiring 1,500 new employees (in addition to the extra staff they planned to hire after the new fees went into effect). The agency is also re-hiring former (retired) employees. While waiting for the additional staff to be trained and deployed, the agency will be asking current staff to work overtime, using budgeted overtime early in the Fiscal Year.
Other steps are also being taken. Still, Mr. Gonzalez noted (in his written testimony) that it will take until the third quarter of Fiscal Year 2010 before the agency is back to a six-month processing time.
During the question and answer session, there was a fair amount of discussion about a portion of the backlog that preceded the surge in applications and was caused by a delay in the background checks conducted by the FBI. Some individuals have been in limbo for well over a year waiting for clearance from the FBI, and Mr. Gonzalez noted that last year more than 5,000 lawsuits were filed against the agency�80% on the FBI name check delays. The FBI, he said, has a paper-based system that is only beginning to be addressed. For now, it takes people to handle the files. The FBI has brought on some additional contract personnel and full-time employees to work on this problem.
Rep. Lofgren said that she would ask the FBI to come before the Subcommittee to explain its perspective on the name check delays. [Subsequently, we were told that the full Judiciary Committee will have a hearing with the FBI on a range of issues, including the name check issue.]
Non-Government Witnesses
Also testifying at the hearing were Arturo Vargas, Director of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials and Fred Tsao, Policy Director for the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. Mr. Vargas said that his organization kept USCIS apprised of its efforts to get immigrants to become citizens and the agency should have taken that information, plus experience with past fee increases, into account to take steps to be better prepared for the surge in applications. NALEO is recommending that the agency focus sufficiently on reducing the backlog so that all immigrants who applied for naturalization in Fiscal Year 2007 (which ended September 30, 2007) are sworn in as citizens by July 4, 2008. Otherwise, many immigrants who applied for citizenship last summer will not be able to vote in the elections this November.
Mr. Tsao echoed the point about USCIS having ample information that a surge in applications was coming. He recommended that USCIS (and the FBI) report regularly to the Subcommittee regarding progress being made on reducing the backlog.
In concluding the hearing, Rep. Lofgren suggested that she might also conduct a hearing on the agency�s information technology.
Additional Information
In a subsequent meeting with community-based organizations, Michael Aytes, Associate Director for Domestic Operations of USCIS, gave some additional specifics on the status of the naturalization backlogs. He noted that the total number of new employees being hired will be approximately 3,000�between the additional staff they are hiring to deal with the backlog and the extra staff being paid for by the fee increases. Regarding the FBI name check issue, he noted that, during the House hearing, every member of the Subcommittee�Republican and Democrat�inquired about the name check issue, and that this issue is now being dealt with at high levels both in the Justice Department (in which the FBI is located) and in DHS. He indicated that decisions have been made on the hiring of many of the new adjudicators that are being brought on board, but training and placement are still weeks away, at least.
He also said that the agency is starting Saturday and evening interviews, and applicants should be encouraged to make every effort to show up for their interviews.
tattoo londe and lack hair color
EndRetro
04-19 01:49 PM
Has anyone had an experience with h1 restamping at Mumbai when they were not resident of Mumbai Embassy district.
I have an apptmt in Mumbai for May 12th for an H-1 staming and I am WORKING in USA and the address in the passport is in KERALA (Chennai consulate).
This is the response to a MAIL that I had sent to the MUMBAI consulate!!
************************************************** ********
MUMBAI, N IV to me
Apr 18 (1 day ago)
"Returning workers can apply in any of the four U.S. consulates in India."
It is advisable to apply in your own district. That is the last place in India where you resided for at least 6 months before going to the U.S.
It may be harder to qualify for the visa if you are not applying in your
own district.
The visa officers at the U. S. Embassy or Consulate at an applicant's designated consulate are generally more familiar with his or her circumstances and documents than the officers somewhere else would be.You should also be aware that even if this post allows you to apply, it is still possible that the interviewing officer will refuse to adjudicate your case and will refer you to your own district anyway.
Application fees in this case will NOT be refunded.
Best regards,
Non Immigrant Visa Section/wds
U.S. Consulate General Mumbai
************************************************** ********
I have an apptmt in Mumbai for May 12th for an H-1 staming and I am WORKING in USA and the address in the passport is in KERALA (Chennai consulate).
This is the response to a MAIL that I had sent to the MUMBAI consulate!!
************************************************** ********
MUMBAI, N IV to me
Apr 18 (1 day ago)
"Returning workers can apply in any of the four U.S. consulates in India."
It is advisable to apply in your own district. That is the last place in India where you resided for at least 6 months before going to the U.S.
It may be harder to qualify for the visa if you are not applying in your
own district.
The visa officers at the U. S. Embassy or Consulate at an applicant's designated consulate are generally more familiar with his or her circumstances and documents than the officers somewhere else would be.You should also be aware that even if this post allows you to apply, it is still possible that the interviewing officer will refuse to adjudicate your case and will refer you to your own district anyway.
Application fees in this case will NOT be refunded.
Best regards,
Non Immigrant Visa Section/wds
U.S. Consulate General Mumbai
************************************************** ********
more...
pictures lack hairstyles braided
GCBy3000
04-10 03:58 PM
I am from Wisconsin. I sent an email expressing to volunteer from WI State.
dresses hair londe and lack hair
thesparky007
04-16 11:36 AM
here is a new one
more...
makeup londe and lack hair ideas
go_getter007
10-19 06:57 PM
/\ Bump /\
girlfriend londe hair color ideas for
seratbabu
11-18 08:42 PM
I just was able to submit by AR11, and then I started submitting COA for my I140 and I485. I successfully completed for I140, but when I started doing my I485, it said that my session timed out... Is there any way to submit just for I485? Should I submit a AR11 and then do 485? or as you said, is calling them the only option?
Please suggest.
I have been trying to change my address online for the last two days and it looks like the system is down. I called them up and they are not able to do it either. What a mess. I hope they don't mail our applications till the issues are resolved.
Also if I only want to change address on pending applications but not AR-11, there is no such option (other than calling them).
It looks like their systems are down since yesterday. Today even case status wasnt working for a while (it seems to be working now).
Anyone else having issues?
Please suggest.
I have been trying to change my address online for the last two days and it looks like the system is down. I called them up and they are not able to do it either. What a mess. I hope they don't mail our applications till the issues are resolved.
Also if I only want to change address on pending applications but not AR-11, there is no such option (other than calling them).
It looks like their systems are down since yesterday. Today even case status wasnt working for a while (it seems to be working now).
Anyone else having issues?
hairstyles londe and lack hair ideas
small2006
06-09 01:43 PM
Guys,
Chill out...Everybody is unnecessarily getting worked up just because our frustrations are not reflected in the article.
It doesn't say "that people are waiting for GC because of strict rules". That is totally taken out of context. Re-read the article.
Keep in mind where the article has appeared - BBC. Keep in mind the audience of the article - people who don't know anything about this issue. From that perspective it does a decent job of providing someone with some idea as to what the H1B/GC issues are about. It is in no way meant to be (or attempts to do) a thorough in depth report on what is going on. Think of it as just a "big picture" overview of the PATHETIC state of US immigration system as it applies to H1Bs and GCs.
On the point of painting "H1B issue as Indian issue" - Although the article doesn't claim to do that, don't you think that when 65% of H1Bs are taken up by Indian nationals (at least in 2000, probably more later, http://www.murthy.com/news/UDtechi.html)
, it is at least a "65% Indian issue."
In any case, my intent was not to be rude but just to point out that there is no need to get so riled up on an article that neither hurts or helps our cause.
Take it easy.
The reporter does not seem to know the issue at all and coming from an Indian/Pakistani background painted the whole issue as if it were a Desi issue.
Dude writes that visas dry up and he quotes USCIS spokes person saying we are sitting at 45,000 from week 1 and haven't still moved an inch. Damn it! Gimme a break! Get real
The attorney featured sings to his tune and talks about all things Indian, Indian companies, Indian nationals, India. Wow! Does any one need more ammunition to take charge and paint H1B issue as Indian issue? Sorry to be harsh but this is more of a bad press than any thing helpful.
Then he goes on to say that people are waiting for GC because of strict rules?? Excuse me! until Jul 2007 rules were not implemented. This guy says strict rules.
Chill out...Everybody is unnecessarily getting worked up just because our frustrations are not reflected in the article.
It doesn't say "that people are waiting for GC because of strict rules". That is totally taken out of context. Re-read the article.
Keep in mind where the article has appeared - BBC. Keep in mind the audience of the article - people who don't know anything about this issue. From that perspective it does a decent job of providing someone with some idea as to what the H1B/GC issues are about. It is in no way meant to be (or attempts to do) a thorough in depth report on what is going on. Think of it as just a "big picture" overview of the PATHETIC state of US immigration system as it applies to H1Bs and GCs.
On the point of painting "H1B issue as Indian issue" - Although the article doesn't claim to do that, don't you think that when 65% of H1Bs are taken up by Indian nationals (at least in 2000, probably more later, http://www.murthy.com/news/UDtechi.html)
, it is at least a "65% Indian issue."
In any case, my intent was not to be rude but just to point out that there is no need to get so riled up on an article that neither hurts or helps our cause.
Take it easy.
The reporter does not seem to know the issue at all and coming from an Indian/Pakistani background painted the whole issue as if it were a Desi issue.
Dude writes that visas dry up and he quotes USCIS spokes person saying we are sitting at 45,000 from week 1 and haven't still moved an inch. Damn it! Gimme a break! Get real
The attorney featured sings to his tune and talks about all things Indian, Indian companies, Indian nationals, India. Wow! Does any one need more ammunition to take charge and paint H1B issue as Indian issue? Sorry to be harsh but this is more of a bad press than any thing helpful.
Then he goes on to say that people are waiting for GC because of strict rules?? Excuse me! until Jul 2007 rules were not implemented. This guy says strict rules.
cnachu2
02-04 01:15 PM
Yes i did. It was the same way for my dad when i was on H-1B.
I sent him the copies of my 140, 485, and EAD and also an employment letter from my new employer , as i have used AC-21.
He was asked what i am doing and he told them i am working for XYX company and has also filed his GC. The office said all the best to him and granted my dad a 10 year multiple visa. If you have any questions, please send me a message.
I hope this helps.
GO IV GO. TOGETHER WE CAN.
Hi,
I am also planning to send papers for my father. now i am on AOS with I485, i changed the employer, but didn't file AC21. will it be an issue if i send papers to my father without filing AC21? You says you used AC21, that means did you file AC21?
Thanks,
Chandra.
I sent him the copies of my 140, 485, and EAD and also an employment letter from my new employer , as i have used AC-21.
He was asked what i am doing and he told them i am working for XYX company and has also filed his GC. The office said all the best to him and granted my dad a 10 year multiple visa. If you have any questions, please send me a message.
I hope this helps.
GO IV GO. TOGETHER WE CAN.
Hi,
I am also planning to send papers for my father. now i am on AOS with I485, i changed the employer, but didn't file AC21. will it be an issue if i send papers to my father without filing AC21? You says you used AC21, that means did you file AC21?
Thanks,
Chandra.
GCOP
09-24 10:39 AM
Guys, HR 5882 is having Total recapture of 550,000 visas (Employment Based + Family Based) . We all were hoping that this bill would pass, but it did not pass in Judiciary Committee so far. Probably because of opposition from some lawmakers, may be group of some people due to current state of Economy.
But How about, if we would just try for "Recapture for Employment Based visas , for Adjustment of Status" ( EB Visa recapture Numbers are arround 218,000). By this way, no American job would be taken away as this is just a recpture of visas for just Adjustment of Status. So, if we can drop Family Based Visa Recapture from the bill (approx.332,000 visa), this bill might pass in the congress. Looks like, we do not have any choice and bill might still have possibility of passing in lame duck session. Don't get me wrong, I also want to keep Family Based Visas in the Current State of HR 5882 Bill. But if we would be able to pass just recapture of Employment Based visas at this stage, Family based visas recapture can be taken up later on. This is just a thought. IV core group and members can discuss this idea for further action.
But How about, if we would just try for "Recapture for Employment Based visas , for Adjustment of Status" ( EB Visa recapture Numbers are arround 218,000). By this way, no American job would be taken away as this is just a recpture of visas for just Adjustment of Status. So, if we can drop Family Based Visa Recapture from the bill (approx.332,000 visa), this bill might pass in the congress. Looks like, we do not have any choice and bill might still have possibility of passing in lame duck session. Don't get me wrong, I also want to keep Family Based Visas in the Current State of HR 5882 Bill. But if we would be able to pass just recapture of Employment Based visas at this stage, Family based visas recapture can be taken up later on. This is just a thought. IV core group and members can discuss this idea for further action.
