unitednations
12-21 10:52 PM
Correct me if I am wrong, but you've had unexpired H1B while you were out of work. This is not considered unlawful presence. On top of that, violation of status determination can be done only by the USCIS (IO). If they did not inform you that you violated status, you are good to go.
I don't agree that a person hasn't violated status unless uscis io informs the person.
If a person is here legally but not maintaining status (ie., unexpired I-94 card) but not adhering to the terms and conditions then the I-94 can be revoked by an IO in adjudication of immigration benefits or an immigration judge. This would mainly happen if a person is trying to extend h-1b or change employer and there existing i-94 card is still valid but immigration officer determines person wasn't maintaining status. They will not only deny the I-94 card in the new petition but they can also revoke the existing i-94 card. They very, very rarely do this.
I don't agree that a person hasn't violated status unless uscis io informs the person.
If a person is here legally but not maintaining status (ie., unexpired I-94 card) but not adhering to the terms and conditions then the I-94 can be revoked by an IO in adjudication of immigration benefits or an immigration judge. This would mainly happen if a person is trying to extend h-1b or change employer and there existing i-94 card is still valid but immigration officer determines person wasn't maintaining status. They will not only deny the I-94 card in the new petition but they can also revoke the existing i-94 card. They very, very rarely do this.
wallpaper 79 ford f150 lifted. ford f150
maximus777
06-08 06:17 PM
Plain and simple. From now on just imagine that you are working in one of those persian gulf countries - work on a visa as long as you work. This way its less stressful. If you have immigration intent, then enter illegally. :mad:
Jaime
09-12 05:19 PM
Talk to us! What is preventing you from attending??? Let's GO! Let's do this!!!!
2011 ford f150 lifted for sale.
Milind123
06-07 10:52 PM
http://www.fbi.gov/hq/nationalnamecheck.htm
more...
alex99
03-17 09:37 AM
Please vote in the poll.
copsmart
07-12 05:55 PM
:D I don't know what to say. But, keep your Fingers, Toes, Arms and Legs crossed.
Good Luck!!!
All right I am current again..exactly after 2 years
So I am having the butterflies in my tummy with nostalgia of my nail biting thriller during 2008 July-Sep bulletin, where I got royally screwed.
mwuahhhaaaa...c'mon..come to papa now :D:D
tick..tock..tick..tock :rolleyes:
Good Luck!!!
All right I am current again..exactly after 2 years
So I am having the butterflies in my tummy with nostalgia of my nail biting thriller during 2008 July-Sep bulletin, where I got royally screwed.
mwuahhhaaaa...c'mon..come to papa now :D:D
tick..tock..tick..tock :rolleyes:
more...
mirage
02-04 08:51 PM
Guys,
I know ROW country may not like this thread, but look at EB-3 India or China, put yourself in our shoes and than you may realize how unfair this country is. In this unprecedented financial turmoil, I feel there are very remote chances for CIR or any package which increase immigration etc would pass, I am taking this initiative to gather as many people I can and go to washington. Again this is not an IV effort. If you are with me , you can spare some time it could be few days in Washington!! please PM me.
Again we are not creating any organization or anything, we are not going against IV's agenda. This is also a part of IV's agenda, but for now our sole agenda will be to bring a 2 line bill to remove country quota or increase the country cap(whichever can fly).
PS : For EB-3 India, unless country cap is removed or increased, you can presume you GC application dead forever...For EB-2 India It'll be a long journey for people with PDs sooner than 2005...
Thanks
I know ROW country may not like this thread, but look at EB-3 India or China, put yourself in our shoes and than you may realize how unfair this country is. In this unprecedented financial turmoil, I feel there are very remote chances for CIR or any package which increase immigration etc would pass, I am taking this initiative to gather as many people I can and go to washington. Again this is not an IV effort. If you are with me , you can spare some time it could be few days in Washington!! please PM me.
Again we are not creating any organization or anything, we are not going against IV's agenda. This is also a part of IV's agenda, but for now our sole agenda will be to bring a 2 line bill to remove country quota or increase the country cap(whichever can fly).
PS : For EB-3 India, unless country cap is removed or increased, you can presume you GC application dead forever...For EB-2 India It'll be a long journey for people with PDs sooner than 2005...
Thanks
2010 ford f150 lifted for sale.
webr
07-12 07:09 PM
cut-off dates are equal for both India & china. Does that mean that both are going to jump in August bulletin? Hope they move it further to atleast Dec 2006.
Stop being selfish first , you will get automatically then.... You wanted to move dates , since your PD Is Dec 2006 ... There are tons waiting after your dates. Just consider others.
Stop being selfish first , you will get automatically then.... You wanted to move dates , since your PD Is Dec 2006 ... There are tons waiting after your dates. Just consider others.
more...
anurakt
12-30 11:51 PM
Add St.Louis --- www.myilaaka.com
hair 2011 79 ford f150 lifted. ford
Ramba
07-14 06:01 PM
Consult an attorney because if you applied for I-485 in July 2007 and quit employer in August, you might not be covered under AC21 since 6 months did not pass since adjucation request (I-485) was files with USCIS.
This is aboslutly incorrect. Dont spread false information.
Here is the Q&A in USCIS memo abot changing employer before 180 days
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate
This is aboslutly incorrect. Dont spread false information.
Here is the Q&A in USCIS memo abot changing employer before 180 days
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate
more...
gc_rip
09-09 12:36 PM
I get this question every day, what are the hopes for EB3-I, or rather are there any hopes for EB3-I? Are we fighting a lost battle?
What do people here really think?
1. There are X % chance that there would be some immigration bill that would help us and we will have GC in next couple of years?
2. Keep going on with life as is, till the time we can renew EAD every 2 years, and AP every year.
3. Wait for another X years, and then go back.
4. Hopefully my son/daughter will be 21 by 2020, and will sponsor my GC.
--- Hoping family based GC would still be allowed by then
5. Don't know, confused?
What do people here really think?
1. There are X % chance that there would be some immigration bill that would help us and we will have GC in next couple of years?
2. Keep going on with life as is, till the time we can renew EAD every 2 years, and AP every year.
3. Wait for another X years, and then go back.
4. Hopefully my son/daughter will be 21 by 2020, and will sponsor my GC.
--- Hoping family based GC would still be allowed by then
5. Don't know, confused?
hot ford f150 lifted for sale.
nomi
12-12 04:19 PM
USCIS is not a legislative body, they cannot pass a law. The Congress does. In order to change any existing laws Congress has to pass it and USCIS just implements it. So I do not think meeting USCIS will help. BTW what is DOS ?
I know USCIS is not legislative body and they can`t pass law either. But we need to know what USCIS can do for us to give us temp. relief. We need to know what are under their control. They do lot of rules with out going into Congress. So its nothing to lose to ask them what they can do for us without any bill. We will not lose if they say "They can`t do anything" but this will give us some hope that we did our best and also contact to USCIS too.
I know USCIS is not legislative body and they can`t pass law either. But we need to know what USCIS can do for us to give us temp. relief. We need to know what are under their control. They do lot of rules with out going into Congress. So its nothing to lose to ask them what they can do for us without any bill. We will not lose if they say "They can`t do anything" but this will give us some hope that we did our best and also contact to USCIS too.
more...
house 2004 Ford F150 Supercrew
rvr_jcop
02-12 03:55 PM
Nice read...I own a home too. If I have a GC now, I am in a position to pay off considerable amount on my mortgage. I know its a drop in the ocean but I am sure there are lot of people like me.
tattoo 79 ford f150 lifted.
greyhair
02-12 01:56 PM
This whole thread is about what Ron Gotcher published. I didn't start this thread. I am only contributing my view that based on available information some things make sense and some dont. The things that do make some sense is wastage of visa numbers in 2010. We have some facts to support the "theory" but not enough.
What doesn't make sense is Ron's assertion that USCIS wasted 13K EB visas in 2009. Facts simply don't support that.
Does this help? (Again this is my view... don't want to push it onto others)
I disagree. This thread is not about some immigration lawyer. This thread is about visa numbers wasted due to USCIS inefficiency. That's what the title of the thread says. Why do I or anybody else care about some immigration lawyer? Why is he/she relevant if its specifically proven with facts that there is no wastage of visa number. You continue to advertise the name of the immigration lawyer. The reason I say this is because in my experience immigration lawyers comment on these issues as if they have direct access to USCIS Director or god. Even after disproving the visa wastage theory with facts you still continue to over analyze immigration body shop instead of discussing the issue. I am just wondering, why would you that? Are you that immigration lawyer or employee of his law firm? Just curious.
What doesn't make sense is Ron's assertion that USCIS wasted 13K EB visas in 2009. Facts simply don't support that.
Does this help? (Again this is my view... don't want to push it onto others)
I disagree. This thread is not about some immigration lawyer. This thread is about visa numbers wasted due to USCIS inefficiency. That's what the title of the thread says. Why do I or anybody else care about some immigration lawyer? Why is he/she relevant if its specifically proven with facts that there is no wastage of visa number. You continue to advertise the name of the immigration lawyer. The reason I say this is because in my experience immigration lawyers comment on these issues as if they have direct access to USCIS Director or god. Even after disproving the visa wastage theory with facts you still continue to over analyze immigration body shop instead of discussing the issue. I am just wondering, why would you that? Are you that immigration lawyer or employee of his law firm? Just curious.
more...
pictures girlfriend ford f150 lifted
anil_gc
09-26 10:24 AM
sent e-mail to the cnn editor
dresses pictures ford f150 lifted for
485Question
09-18 10:46 PM
All I want to stress are these keywords in all our prints "Legal - Highly Skilled"
And well learned.
And well learned.
more...
makeup ford f150 for sale
k3GC
11-11 01:01 PM
I think this letter looks good, let us send it. There is no hassle in doing that.
Questions
1. Do we all need to send a copy? Is this like a campaign we are doing?
2. Do we need to send this as IV? Is that possible? Who should we talk to about that?
3. Has somebody sent such letters before the the DOS Visa Office etc. and got anything - may be they can shed some light. I know of folks who have done the the 7001 form DHS | CIS Ombudsman - Case Problems (http://www.dhs.gov/files/programs/editorial_0497.shtm). I dont think this falls under that.
My 2 cents is - this is not a campaign, we are asking for a formal answer / clarification and if we can send this as from IV may be we will get an answer.
Questions
1. Do we all need to send a copy? Is this like a campaign we are doing?
2. Do we need to send this as IV? Is that possible? Who should we talk to about that?
3. Has somebody sent such letters before the the DOS Visa Office etc. and got anything - may be they can shed some light. I know of folks who have done the the 7001 form DHS | CIS Ombudsman - Case Problems (http://www.dhs.gov/files/programs/editorial_0497.shtm). I dont think this falls under that.
My 2 cents is - this is not a campaign, we are asking for a formal answer / clarification and if we can send this as from IV may be we will get an answer.
girlfriend 2006 Ford F150 Lariat Lifted
rexjamla
03-07 08:49 AM
There is no need to let USCIS know about changing job after 180 days of 485 filing. U should have offer / empl letter from the employer when your priority date becomes current.
Job title can be different but job duties must be similar.
Salary difference is ok but it should not be less than what is mentioned in labor certification.
In addition to this couple of my close friends got GC recently and they never notify USCIs about new job(AC 21).
Cheers!
Job title can be different but job duties must be similar.
Salary difference is ok but it should not be less than what is mentioned in labor certification.
In addition to this couple of my close friends got GC recently and they never notify USCIs about new job(AC 21).
Cheers!
hairstyles ford f150 lifted for sale.
immig4me
02-04 03:52 PM
/\/\/\
coopheal
11-11 08:32 AM
If we are in sinking boat then lets sink rather than try to survive.
Guy is telling lets try to survive. Lets try.... Its far from success but towards it.
IV Core any updates?
Guy is telling lets try to survive. Lets try.... Its far from success but towards it.
IV Core any updates?
CSPAvictim
07-10 05:38 PM
Note: Administrators/Moderators, please move this post to the appropriate thread, or delete it if this has already been posted elsewhere.
Source: http://www.murthy.com
Update on AILF's Legal Action Center Visa Bulletin Litigation (Updated 7/10/07) Posted 2:45pm
The response has been so strong that currently we do not need any more potential plaintiffs who submitted an adjustment application for receipt in July, unless the individuals have an unusual situation or especially compelling facts, such as an aging-out child. At this time, we also would like to hear from the �non-filers� -- people who did not and do not plan to submit an adjustment application for receipt in July but would have done so �but for� the DOS and USCIS actions. These individuals will represent a separate class of plaintiffs. And we�d like to hear from more �other worker� adjustment applicants who applied in June, even if they have not yet received a rejection notice. These individuals will represent a separate class as well.
If the lawsuit is successful (and we fully expect it will be), the court will certify classes, and all people who meet the class descriptions will receive the relief the court orders. The class members will not need to �sign up� with AILF to enjoy those rights.
Regarding �non-filers� � As our July 7 InfoNet update explained, and as we explain in our FAQ, we will include a class of people who would have submitted their adjustment applications for receipt in July, �but for� the government�s actions. The government may try to, or the court may want to treat this class differently from the class of people who submitted applications for receipt in July. Our aim is to do the best possible for both groups.
How soon will we file the law suit? Very soon. It is not easy or quick to prepare class action litigation involving numerous people and numerous claims, but we are working quickly because of the urgency of these events for so many people.
Injunction? AILF knows many people want a quick resolution, as do we. A temporary or ill-conceived order might create more chaos and confusion than we saw in late June / early July. And the government presumably would immediately appeal, creating even more confusion about whether applications were being accepted. By contrast, we intend to seek an injunction that will be forward-looking and will not create another crisis situation for AILA members or the government.
Source: http://www.murthy.com
Update on AILF's Legal Action Center Visa Bulletin Litigation (Updated 7/10/07) Posted 2:45pm
The response has been so strong that currently we do not need any more potential plaintiffs who submitted an adjustment application for receipt in July, unless the individuals have an unusual situation or especially compelling facts, such as an aging-out child. At this time, we also would like to hear from the �non-filers� -- people who did not and do not plan to submit an adjustment application for receipt in July but would have done so �but for� the DOS and USCIS actions. These individuals will represent a separate class of plaintiffs. And we�d like to hear from more �other worker� adjustment applicants who applied in June, even if they have not yet received a rejection notice. These individuals will represent a separate class as well.
If the lawsuit is successful (and we fully expect it will be), the court will certify classes, and all people who meet the class descriptions will receive the relief the court orders. The class members will not need to �sign up� with AILF to enjoy those rights.
Regarding �non-filers� � As our July 7 InfoNet update explained, and as we explain in our FAQ, we will include a class of people who would have submitted their adjustment applications for receipt in July, �but for� the government�s actions. The government may try to, or the court may want to treat this class differently from the class of people who submitted applications for receipt in July. Our aim is to do the best possible for both groups.
How soon will we file the law suit? Very soon. It is not easy or quick to prepare class action litigation involving numerous people and numerous claims, but we are working quickly because of the urgency of these events for so many people.
Injunction? AILF knows many people want a quick resolution, as do we. A temporary or ill-conceived order might create more chaos and confusion than we saw in late June / early July. And the government presumably would immediately appeal, creating even more confusion about whether applications were being accepted. By contrast, we intend to seek an injunction that will be forward-looking and will not create another crisis situation for AILA members or the government.
0 comments:
Post a Comment