waitforevergc
02-18 02:58 PM
All,
I am thinking of writing to the DHS Secretary about this never ending wait for AOS and about retrogression.
Could you all contribute with different points please?
Someone has to take initiative someday.
Thanks,
I am thinking of writing to the DHS Secretary about this never ending wait for AOS and about retrogression.
Could you all contribute with different points please?
Someone has to take initiative someday.
Thanks,
ramus
07-18 03:24 PM
Great.. Thank you.. Please ask your neighbours to join IV i they have not yet.
Thanks for all your efforts.
Made a contribution of $100
Confirmation Number: 1LX38419RG209364L.
Thanks for all your efforts.
Made a contribution of $100
Confirmation Number: 1LX38419RG209364L.
Green.Tech
06-06 09:35 AM
...and contribute....
santb1975
05-29 12:06 AM
They gotto
more...
gc_perm2k6
03-05 05:26 PM
My 485 had soft LUD on 2/27/09. Although, my husband's dependent application dint have one.
laksmi
02-27 02:38 PM
Fax to Texas
214-962-2632
Providing an covering letter along with a copy of your supporting documents
214-962-2632
Providing an covering letter along with a copy of your supporting documents
more...
kevinkris
12-10 03:54 PM
Guys,
When USCIS will release the report which shows number of pending apps per country and overall. With that we can see how many numbers per category and per country are used.
Is it now or in Jan?
When USCIS will release the report which shows number of pending apps per country and overall. With that we can see how many numbers per category and per country are used.
Is it now or in Jan?
ameryki
01-19 11:39 AM
Hello Rameshk75,
Thank you very much for your reply. It gave me a mental peace. Do anyone believe if I go to the local office on next tuesday they will do something for me ?
i don't think going to local office is going to help. be patient you should get it. In my case it took almost 4 weeks since it got approved to physically receive AP. Although I don't know how long my lawyer held it prior to mailing it to me.
Thank you very much for your reply. It gave me a mental peace. Do anyone believe if I go to the local office on next tuesday they will do something for me ?
i don't think going to local office is going to help. be patient you should get it. In my case it took almost 4 weeks since it got approved to physically receive AP. Although I don't know how long my lawyer held it prior to mailing it to me.
more...
bidhanc
03-11 10:51 AM
I guess it's not a VERY GOOD IDEA THEN.
In all the docs that I went thru I could not see a difference between
"I-140 approved/I-485 pending and porting" and "I-140/I-485 pending and porting" (most docs refer to the latter).
I am guessing when it comes to "porting", both are the same in the eyes of USCIS??
(What I mean to ask is there any leniency with an approved I-140 and then trying to port?)
Anyone see otherwise?
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
as per this document, you can port to yourself. (Question #8)
But below are the reasons why I am backing off of opening an LLC on spouse name and porting to that.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=8231099851
also google 'UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf"
http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf
"This suggests, fairly clearly, that any communication to the USCIS per the Cronin Memo that the adjustment applicant intends to become self-employed is likely to trigger an RFE to inquire into the legitimacy of this arrangement. Legitimacy in this context is likely to be gauged by the concrete steps the beneficiary has taken in furtherance of the self-employment arrangement, understanding that only full-time and permanent employment will suffice for immigration purposes. Such steps would include the completion of legal and corporate formalities, the securing of financing, the purchase or lease of business premises and equipment,the development of a detailed business plan, the hiring of employees, and any other measures typically taken in the establishment of a business. Vague aspirational statements, however ambitious, about future plans to develop a business are unlikely, in the absence of tangible proof, to be accepted as probative of the requisite legitimacy of the self-employer and job offer."
Also, one relevant footnote in the document -
"At the AILA National Conference in 2003, a USCIS officer indicated that an attempt to invoke �106(c) in a selfemployment context is likely to raise �a big red flag� for an adjudicator, and that self-employment may be viewed as �an easy alternative� for aliens who are unable to find employment to sustain their adjustment-of-status applications. Schorr & Yale-Loehr, supra note 2, at 499. It should also be noted that the Memos view the possibility of an adjustment applicant becoming a public charge (and thus being inadmissible under INA �212(a)(4)) as being �a relevant inquiry� and that an RFE requesting information about a self-employment arrangement is likely to probe whether or not the applicant has sufficient financial resources to avoid becoming such a public charge."
In all the docs that I went thru I could not see a difference between
"I-140 approved/I-485 pending and porting" and "I-140/I-485 pending and porting" (most docs refer to the latter).
I am guessing when it comes to "porting", both are the same in the eyes of USCIS??
(What I mean to ask is there any leniency with an approved I-140 and then trying to port?)
Anyone see otherwise?
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
as per this document, you can port to yourself. (Question #8)
But below are the reasons why I am backing off of opening an LLC on spouse name and porting to that.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=8231099851
also google 'UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf"
http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf
"This suggests, fairly clearly, that any communication to the USCIS per the Cronin Memo that the adjustment applicant intends to become self-employed is likely to trigger an RFE to inquire into the legitimacy of this arrangement. Legitimacy in this context is likely to be gauged by the concrete steps the beneficiary has taken in furtherance of the self-employment arrangement, understanding that only full-time and permanent employment will suffice for immigration purposes. Such steps would include the completion of legal and corporate formalities, the securing of financing, the purchase or lease of business premises and equipment,the development of a detailed business plan, the hiring of employees, and any other measures typically taken in the establishment of a business. Vague aspirational statements, however ambitious, about future plans to develop a business are unlikely, in the absence of tangible proof, to be accepted as probative of the requisite legitimacy of the self-employer and job offer."
Also, one relevant footnote in the document -
"At the AILA National Conference in 2003, a USCIS officer indicated that an attempt to invoke �106(c) in a selfemployment context is likely to raise �a big red flag� for an adjudicator, and that self-employment may be viewed as �an easy alternative� for aliens who are unable to find employment to sustain their adjustment-of-status applications. Schorr & Yale-Loehr, supra note 2, at 499. It should also be noted that the Memos view the possibility of an adjustment applicant becoming a public charge (and thus being inadmissible under INA �212(a)(4)) as being �a relevant inquiry� and that an RFE requesting information about a self-employment arrangement is likely to probe whether or not the applicant has sufficient financial resources to avoid becoming such a public charge."
Macaca
09-12 04:20 PM
Or do you need us to write to each of them?
I will send to washington post, new york times, AP and Reuters. I have posted the reporters that I will correspond with.
These lists are not complete. I am updating the lists.
I will send to washington post, new york times, AP and Reuters. I have posted the reporters that I will correspond with.
These lists are not complete. I am updating the lists.
more...
leoindiano
03-07 07:52 AM
We may have to believe him....
It doesnt mention Hillarys lastname though, thought that is funny....She was in Brussels this week though...
Like Hillary, Who?
It doesnt mention Hillarys lastname though, thought that is funny....She was in Brussels this week though...
Like Hillary, Who?
sunnysharma
07-18 04:28 PM
My application was sent on June, 14th and delivered on June 15th (I have the FedEx tracking info and signature page confirming 6/15).
The case status online based on receipt number (obtained by calling them a few times until I got lucky) says:
"On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case."
Not sure if the online status is referring to the receipt date or the notice date when it says "On July 11, 2007, we received" when, in fact, they received it on June 15th!!
.
You will be able to see your actual RD in the reciept notice...Donot worry..
The case status online based on receipt number (obtained by calling them a few times until I got lucky) says:
"On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case."
Not sure if the online status is referring to the receipt date or the notice date when it says "On July 11, 2007, we received" when, in fact, they received it on June 15th!!
.
You will be able to see your actual RD in the reciept notice...Donot worry..
more...
alterego
09-11 11:54 PM
Dear XXXX,
The issue of comprehensive immigration reform has received widespread coverage in the media over the last few months.
The issue of legal immigration, though a part of the CIR was less controversial and therefore sadly received less coverage.
Legal employment based immigration represents just 14% of all legal immigration and comprises mostly of high demand skills such as scientists, doctors, engineers, and other such occupations which in addition to filling an unmet need, creates further employment opportunities in the US economy. These are also the occupations that represent the most vital human capital of the 21st century for US economic competitiveness. Many of these people are US educated atleast in part and are currently gainfully employed and contributing to this vibrant economy.
Unfortunately the current immigration policy is doing a great injustice to this group of individuals who have quietly and patiently been waiting their turn. Many have waited 5-10 yrs and are still awaiting their green cards. The current backlogs are ominous.
Many have organized into a grassroots organization called Immigration Voice and are planning a pro legal employment based immigration rally in Washington DC on Sep't 18th. We would appreciate coverage of this first of a kind event which puts the spotlight on a just cause which for far too long has gone ignored by our lawmakers.
The issue of comprehensive immigration reform has received widespread coverage in the media over the last few months.
The issue of legal immigration, though a part of the CIR was less controversial and therefore sadly received less coverage.
Legal employment based immigration represents just 14% of all legal immigration and comprises mostly of high demand skills such as scientists, doctors, engineers, and other such occupations which in addition to filling an unmet need, creates further employment opportunities in the US economy. These are also the occupations that represent the most vital human capital of the 21st century for US economic competitiveness. Many of these people are US educated atleast in part and are currently gainfully employed and contributing to this vibrant economy.
Unfortunately the current immigration policy is doing a great injustice to this group of individuals who have quietly and patiently been waiting their turn. Many have waited 5-10 yrs and are still awaiting their green cards. The current backlogs are ominous.
Many have organized into a grassroots organization called Immigration Voice and are planning a pro legal employment based immigration rally in Washington DC on Sep't 18th. We would appreciate coverage of this first of a kind event which puts the spotlight on a just cause which for far too long has gone ignored by our lawmakers.
JunRN
05-15 11:20 PM
Thanks for your wishes.
I agree with you regarding the timeline and evidence. I have mentioned it to my attorney numerous times. My attorney was insistent that adjudicating officers can see all my info on their computer screens. It is only a matter of looking at the info correctly.
It looks like the first MTR went to the same IO who denied my I-485. I could say it from ID in both the denial letters.
Sometimes lawyers are used to their old ways of doing things. However, IOs are not the same people of the old. Most IOs are new hires and still in their learning curve.
I think the problem with your info. on USCIS screen is that the previously approved I-140 was changed to "denied" on same date it was approved. USCIS probably didn't have a log of the change.
The only evidence to prove that it was "approved" before is your copy of approval notice and it seems they don't believe the legitimacy of your copy. USCIS relied solely in their faulty database system.
Did you have a screen capture of the I-140 approval in CRIS? I screened captured mine just in case because it's another proof that one point in time, I-140 was approved.
I agree with you regarding the timeline and evidence. I have mentioned it to my attorney numerous times. My attorney was insistent that adjudicating officers can see all my info on their computer screens. It is only a matter of looking at the info correctly.
It looks like the first MTR went to the same IO who denied my I-485. I could say it from ID in both the denial letters.
Sometimes lawyers are used to their old ways of doing things. However, IOs are not the same people of the old. Most IOs are new hires and still in their learning curve.
I think the problem with your info. on USCIS screen is that the previously approved I-140 was changed to "denied" on same date it was approved. USCIS probably didn't have a log of the change.
The only evidence to prove that it was "approved" before is your copy of approval notice and it seems they don't believe the legitimacy of your copy. USCIS relied solely in their faulty database system.
Did you have a screen capture of the I-140 approval in CRIS? I screened captured mine just in case because it's another proof that one point in time, I-140 was approved.
more...
ItIsNotFunny
07-06 02:25 PM
Guys,
Please stay away from hard language. Having suggestion for election is a completely acceptable but please lets not accuse anyone. If anyone needs accoutability, I don't IV Core people would have any issues to give you those in person. I know they are really really shy discussing them openly.
Please don't forget end goal, to have a fair GC process. Any suggestions for action items are encouraged like snathan has a nice action item suggested for visa re-stamping. Please support.
You don't need IV core's approval to do something good for community. They are only concerned when you use IV's name.
Please stay away from hard language. Having suggestion for election is a completely acceptable but please lets not accuse anyone. If anyone needs accoutability, I don't IV Core people would have any issues to give you those in person. I know they are really really shy discussing them openly.
Please don't forget end goal, to have a fair GC process. Any suggestions for action items are encouraged like snathan has a nice action item suggested for visa re-stamping. Please support.
You don't need IV core's approval to do something good for community. They are only concerned when you use IV's name.
Milind123
09-13 08:59 AM
Yesterday I contributed $300 and I hope I do better than that today, but I need help from all those people who have never contributed. So please pull the trigger. I am only one contribution (of $100) away from a first time contributor. As soon as I get that I will post my contribution. As soon as I do that sam2006 is going to make his contribution of $100.
more...
Milind123
09-12 05:29 PM
Hi IV members,
Thanks for all the work and effort put into making the life of many simple.
Just made a small contribution from my side
Details
$100 from paypal Receipt ID: 0140-0216-9540-2146
Thanks
-Ska
Way to go first post and a contribution.
Thanks for all the work and effort put into making the life of many simple.
Just made a small contribution from my side
Details
$100 from paypal Receipt ID: 0140-0216-9540-2146
Thanks
-Ska
Way to go first post and a contribution.
spicy_guy
09-01 11:30 AM
Landed here on jan 1st, 1998 (F1)
Survived 2 recessions
No hope as labour filled in eb3
Oh man! Landed here in 1998. But your PD is 2008 and IN EB3?!?!?
You must be the oldest person in this thread as well. :D
Survived 2 recessions
No hope as labour filled in eb3
Oh man! Landed here in 1998. But your PD is 2008 and IN EB3?!?!?
You must be the oldest person in this thread as well. :D
lonedesi
08-06 09:24 AM
Diptam, thats a tricky situation. I am not so well versed to know if Ombudsman's office will accept the form without employer's signature. let me check with few attorney's and the IV core group and get back to you.
saketkapur
05-07 12:51 PM
can cal we also have an efax campaign going alongside??
javadeveloper
07-18 04:25 PM
Hello All,
Some food for thought.
As I understand we (i.e IV) has 21000 members and 14000 active members. If even each active member contrubute $ 20 per month, that would be $ 420,000 per month or about $ 5 Mn per year.
Imagine the miracles that we can do with that kind of fund!! And I am damn sure that we can afford $ 20 per month. Cost of few gallons of gas per month.
Non contributing, active members! Please wake up atleast now and do some soul searching!!!
I do agree , but I do not see any $20 contribution in google checkout or paypal.We have to mail the checks.I guess we can get more contributions if we include $25,$50,$75 contributions in google checkout as well as paypal.Correct me If I am missing some thing.
Some food for thought.
As I understand we (i.e IV) has 21000 members and 14000 active members. If even each active member contrubute $ 20 per month, that would be $ 420,000 per month or about $ 5 Mn per year.
Imagine the miracles that we can do with that kind of fund!! And I am damn sure that we can afford $ 20 per month. Cost of few gallons of gas per month.
Non contributing, active members! Please wake up atleast now and do some soul searching!!!
I do agree , but I do not see any $20 contribution in google checkout or paypal.We have to mail the checks.I guess we can get more contributions if we include $25,$50,$75 contributions in google checkout as well as paypal.Correct me If I am missing some thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment