Can we get the copy of I-140 Approval Notice under the Freedom Of Independence Act (FOIA)? If so, please advise the way to do it.
My Details are:
EB2-India-PD-Dec2005-Perm-I 140 Approved in May2006
Thanks in advance for the help.
My Details are:
EB2-India-PD-Dec2005-Perm-I 140 Approved in May2006
Thanks in advance for the help.
wallpaper Cartoon People Walking Away
Last year when I converted my out of state DL to a NYS DL, the DMV gave me a 5 year valid license (expiring on my DOB on 5th year i.e. in 2011) but on the fornt of the DL mentioned in BOLD RED the epriery of my I-797 date as 'TEMP VISITOR EXP.'.
So guess I am good till 2011 ...
So guess I am good till 2011 ...
Here is what people forget in this debate. They point out disadvantages of Canada over US. Fewer jobs, High taxes, extreme cold etc.
No doubt US is better than Canada for most people. That is why US is our first choice and Canada is backup - not the other way around.
We arent talking about people who have a choice here. If you had choice between US GC and Canadian PR we would always choose US blind folded.
But we are people without much choice. Yes we have choice to go back to India, and it may be a good choice for thoise who have come recently and have work exp in India. But some of us have spent 10 plus yrs in the US, have US degrees, never worked in India etc. For us it is extremely difficult to move back to India when we dont have a days work exp there. Ofcourse if you are SC/ST or OBC o reserved category your kids have great future there but not for other "normal" people.
So what other choice do we have. Well English speaking countries you can migrate to and who are taking people as PR's are:
1) CANADA
2) AUSTRALIA
3) NEW ZEALAND
4) SINGAPORE
5) UK.
UK is very difficult to go to as PR. The points required are extremely high. Unless you have MBA from top 10 school or make over 100 K it is difficult.
Singapore is a good option also, but cost of living is high and you can only apply for PR after working in Singapore for 3 plus yrs. Also Singapore is not a democracy.
New Zealand economy is 10 times worse than Canada
That leaves Australia and Canada. Well Canada is closer to US, but Australia has better weather. Canada is less racist but Australia has cricket :).
So bottom line is conduct this discussion as if US is not the option. If we could stay here with PR for sure we wouldnt even be having this discussion.
No doubt US is better than Canada for most people. That is why US is our first choice and Canada is backup - not the other way around.
We arent talking about people who have a choice here. If you had choice between US GC and Canadian PR we would always choose US blind folded.
But we are people without much choice. Yes we have choice to go back to India, and it may be a good choice for thoise who have come recently and have work exp in India. But some of us have spent 10 plus yrs in the US, have US degrees, never worked in India etc. For us it is extremely difficult to move back to India when we dont have a days work exp there. Ofcourse if you are SC/ST or OBC o reserved category your kids have great future there but not for other "normal" people.
So what other choice do we have. Well English speaking countries you can migrate to and who are taking people as PR's are:
1) CANADA
2) AUSTRALIA
3) NEW ZEALAND
4) SINGAPORE
5) UK.
UK is very difficult to go to as PR. The points required are extremely high. Unless you have MBA from top 10 school or make over 100 K it is difficult.
Singapore is a good option also, but cost of living is high and you can only apply for PR after working in Singapore for 3 plus yrs. Also Singapore is not a democracy.
New Zealand economy is 10 times worse than Canada
That leaves Australia and Canada. Well Canada is closer to US, but Australia has better weather. Canada is less racist but Australia has cricket :).
So bottom line is conduct this discussion as if US is not the option. If we could stay here with PR for sure we wouldnt even be having this discussion.
2011 cartoon people walking away.
Folks I had an infopass this morning for EAD pending more than 90 days. The officer basically told me cannot issue EAD but will contact NSC to check status and gave a customer information receipt saying "Our records indicate that your I765 is pending. I will contact NSC for further review of your application"
I was very disappointed by this. Is there anything else I can do to get interim EAD? I still don't see a LUD on my case.
I took 3 infopass appointments but not one helped, but if they take your FP in the infopass appt, you may get your EAD approved after 4-5 weeks(as happened with me)
I was very disappointed by this. Is there anything else I can do to get interim EAD? I still don't see a LUD on my case.
I took 3 infopass appointments but not one helped, but if they take your FP in the infopass appt, you may get your EAD approved after 4-5 weeks(as happened with me)
Folks,
In our legal immigrant community, we have the following Groups (G) of people:
G1) Handful of leaders - folks who clearly understand that only legislative fixes and administrative fixes can provide realistic help
G2) Dozens of volunteers - who are willing to take that extra step and contribute time and effort for the sake of others
G3) Hundreds of donors, both regular or one-time - who trust IV leadership and commit to the cause without any qualms whatsoever
G4) Thousands of members - who try to understand the issues we are facing but do not have a realistic assessment of how bad things are
G5) Many more - who either are not bothered by this wait or who simply gave up on this process and became dormant of some sorts of their career
While the predictions thread provided some clarity and entertainment for EB2 folks, this September 2010 bulletin is a blessing in disguise for all of us.
Current state of our Members (M):
M1) We have recently greened EB2 folks (2005-2006 EB2 folks), who have a fresh memory of the painful wait
M2) We have folks who relied on predictions (May 2006 - Jul 2007 EB2 folks), who must be frustrated and disappointed with today's bulletin
M3) We have folks who were looking forward to Jul-Sep 2011 (Aug 2007 - Dec 2008 EB2 folks), who now realize that their wait is even longer than assumed
M4) We have EB-3 folks waiting forever and feeling that they are being neglected in IV advocacy efforts
Folks who are in M2/M3/M4 state above should take some time and contemplate the options they have between now and Sep 2011.
I can see three Options (O):
O1) "Wait and Watch" option:
This applies to folks who are either close to the PD being current or folks who are on EADs or folks who are happy with their current career state
O2) "You are on your own" option:
EB-3 folks - can try find a job where the employer is ready to start their EB-2 GC process within the next 6 months (make sure your current GC application has an approved 140)
EB-2 folks - can try find a job where the employer is ready to start their EB-1 GC process
O3) "We are in this together" option
All EB-2 and EB-3 folks sign up for a concerted effort where IV leadership is in the driver's seat.
Each one of us should be able to relate to one combination of Group/Member/Option (GMOs) from the above list.
Personally I'm G3M3O3, what are you?
In our legal immigrant community, we have the following Groups (G) of people:
G1) Handful of leaders - folks who clearly understand that only legislative fixes and administrative fixes can provide realistic help
G2) Dozens of volunteers - who are willing to take that extra step and contribute time and effort for the sake of others
G3) Hundreds of donors, both regular or one-time - who trust IV leadership and commit to the cause without any qualms whatsoever
G4) Thousands of members - who try to understand the issues we are facing but do not have a realistic assessment of how bad things are
G5) Many more - who either are not bothered by this wait or who simply gave up on this process and became dormant of some sorts of their career
While the predictions thread provided some clarity and entertainment for EB2 folks, this September 2010 bulletin is a blessing in disguise for all of us.
Current state of our Members (M):
M1) We have recently greened EB2 folks (2005-2006 EB2 folks), who have a fresh memory of the painful wait
M2) We have folks who relied on predictions (May 2006 - Jul 2007 EB2 folks), who must be frustrated and disappointed with today's bulletin
M3) We have folks who were looking forward to Jul-Sep 2011 (Aug 2007 - Dec 2008 EB2 folks), who now realize that their wait is even longer than assumed
M4) We have EB-3 folks waiting forever and feeling that they are being neglected in IV advocacy efforts
Folks who are in M2/M3/M4 state above should take some time and contemplate the options they have between now and Sep 2011.
I can see three Options (O):
O1) "Wait and Watch" option:
This applies to folks who are either close to the PD being current or folks who are on EADs or folks who are happy with their current career state
O2) "You are on your own" option:
EB-3 folks - can try find a job where the employer is ready to start their EB-2 GC process within the next 6 months (make sure your current GC application has an approved 140)
EB-2 folks - can try find a job where the employer is ready to start their EB-1 GC process
O3) "We are in this together" option
All EB-2 and EB-3 folks sign up for a concerted effort where IV leadership is in the driver's seat.
Each one of us should be able to relate to one combination of Group/Member/Option (GMOs) from the above list.
Personally I'm G3M3O3, what are you?
I didn't do any mathematical calculations, but my guess is:
EB2 I:
Practically speaking: EB2 I moves to 01 APR 2004
Optimistically speaking: EB2 I moves to 01 JUNE 2004
Frantically speaking: EB2 I moves to 01 JAN 2005
EB3 I:
EB3 I move forward by at least a quarter.
Just plain guess, my friends.
EB2 I:
Practically speaking: EB2 I moves to 01 APR 2004
Optimistically speaking: EB2 I moves to 01 JUNE 2004
Frantically speaking: EB2 I moves to 01 JAN 2005
EB3 I:
EB3 I move forward by at least a quarter.
Just plain guess, my friends.
Tejonidhi,
Thanks for the sequence, it is helpful.
Hello Everybody,
I know many of us are frustrated because of EAD delay. I am one of them and today I called up USCIS.
Here is the sequence.
1) 1 800 375 5283
2) 1,2,2,6,1 receipt notice# 1,3,4
3) you will have to wait for 10 to 15 minutes and one of the officer will come online for you.......
Thanks for the sequence, it is helpful.
Hello Everybody,
I know many of us are frustrated because of EAD delay. I am one of them and today I called up USCIS.
Here is the sequence.
1) 1 800 375 5283
2) 1,2,2,6,1 receipt notice# 1,3,4
3) you will have to wait for 10 to 15 minutes and one of the officer will come online for you.......
2010 a 3d Turtle Mascot Walking
Guys,
First of all, please be decent to each other. Now, to the PBEC issue - this is a major problem, and a huge issue for all of us. Currently, the debate in Senate/Congress is centered around Immigration reform and this is a definitely a good time to raise these issues.
There are a few things we should strive for:
1. Keep all provisions of Specter's bill related to EB.
2. Re-instate per country soft limit.
If both of these provisions are passed, Priority dates for all countries will be current in EB2 and will rapidly move in EB3. A lot of folks in PBEC might be able to use PERM to apply another labor and priority dates will loose their importance, so it is important that these provisions pass.
This is just the kind of disingenuous logic we do not want. To suggest that folks stuck at PBEC should just file PERM is (a) just like asking people to drink coke instead of tackling water scarcity (b) reflective of the ignorance of the situation faced by many stuck at PBEC.
Note that IV has a stated goal of solving the BEC issue (6th listed goal on the homepage). The goal is not to make light of the BEC problem by using apparently simple but false logic; the goal is to resolve the BEC mess.
Do not try to play down what is important to others and hijack the agenda to suit your problems. We have all come together behind each of the stated goals of IV. Let's keep it that way.
First of all, please be decent to each other. Now, to the PBEC issue - this is a major problem, and a huge issue for all of us. Currently, the debate in Senate/Congress is centered around Immigration reform and this is a definitely a good time to raise these issues.
There are a few things we should strive for:
1. Keep all provisions of Specter's bill related to EB.
2. Re-instate per country soft limit.
If both of these provisions are passed, Priority dates for all countries will be current in EB2 and will rapidly move in EB3. A lot of folks in PBEC might be able to use PERM to apply another labor and priority dates will loose their importance, so it is important that these provisions pass.
This is just the kind of disingenuous logic we do not want. To suggest that folks stuck at PBEC should just file PERM is (a) just like asking people to drink coke instead of tackling water scarcity (b) reflective of the ignorance of the situation faced by many stuck at PBEC.
Note that IV has a stated goal of solving the BEC issue (6th listed goal on the homepage). The goal is not to make light of the BEC problem by using apparently simple but false logic; the goal is to resolve the BEC mess.
Do not try to play down what is important to others and hijack the agenda to suit your problems. We have all come together behind each of the stated goals of IV. Let's keep it that way.
----------
Hi sertha1,
I have a similar situation. Can you please tell me how you resolved this problem?
Thanks
r
If you knew you wanted to convert back, you should have filed a 539 along with your husband's petition. Not too late, you can still do it but to revert back, they may come back asking for last 3 paystubs to prove you were still in status ona H-1.
HRPRO
Hi sertha1,
I have a similar situation. Can you please tell me how you resolved this problem?
Thanks
r
If you knew you wanted to convert back, you should have filed a 539 along with your husband's petition. Not too late, you can still do it but to revert back, they may come back asking for last 3 paystubs to prove you were still in status ona H-1.
HRPRO
hair cartoon people walking away.
Can we lower minimum recurring amount to $10 a month? I can request some of my colleagues to contribute a recurring amount of $10 a month. We can probably get more ppl to join more lower limits.
I think this has been discussed on some other thread.. would it be a good idea to make the contributions public.. may be, this encourages others to contribute, when they realize how much more is needed to reach the monetary goal.
In January, IV already said that they raised nearly 200K in 2006. Also, there are federal reports on www.opensecrets.org and senate's office of public records about how Immigration Voice spent money. They spent nearly 140,000 in 2006.
I think that is enough transparency. There will be more when they file tax returns.
Its not that people dont trust IV with money. I think people are just fine with waiting for 10 more years for Greencard. That's why, the core group should shut down this nonsense and do something better with their time.
In January, IV already said that they raised nearly 200K in 2006. Also, there are federal reports on www.opensecrets.org and senate's office of public records about how Immigration Voice spent money. They spent nearly 140,000 in 2006.
I think that is enough transparency. There will be more when they file tax returns.
Its not that people dont trust IV with money. I think people are just fine with waiting for 10 more years for Greencard. That's why, the core group should shut down this nonsense and do something better with their time.
hot cartoon people walking away
Guys,
Here are my thoughts:
---------------------
There are Four group of people (Became current with July bulletin) who are affected and suffered.
1) The people whose applications reached to USCIS before 10:00 AM
07/02/07, i.e. before USCIS's new revision/update.
Note: Legally this group is the SAFEST one as their file reached to the
USCIS table on time while USCIS's first bulletin was in effect. Their
case is strong as far as "Law and Justice" is concerned.
2) The people whose applications reached on 07/02/07 but after USCIS's
declaration of new revision.
Note: This group can be fit in a category "Who did not receive ample
notice from USCIS for its intention to change the bulletin. And so
may be considered "Probable beneficiaries" by the judiciary
3) The people whose applications reached or will reach to USCIS from any
time between 12:00 AM 07/03/07 to 11:59 PM 07/31/07.
Note: This group will have a "Strongest" weak argument and case. Their
act of sending files perhaps may not be considered "Law-abiding" as
they have already received ample notice from USCIS and clear
statement of USCIS about "Rejecting applications upon receiving"
then also this group sent the applications.
4) The People who will not send applications at all with respect to the
USCIS's revision.
Note: In my oinion and mostly I believe in Judiciary's opinion thsi group will
be considered "Law-abiding" and who acted as per USCIS's
instruction within the periphery of respecting legal authority.
Now other points to be noted are as under:
-----------------------------------------
DOS and USCIS screwed up? Yes... Did not happen ever and now it happened , yes.. People suffered stress..expenses.. yes. Now what is stressed on is one time bulletin per month is a tradition and it is a long time tradition but probably DOS has a power to change that... It seems that there is no such law that DOS can not do that so there exactly Lawsuite filer may have a weak case. Now USCIS is supposed to follow DOS and make bulletin as per DOS's guideline and that is what USCIS did so where is the "Law-Breaking" ? USCIS acted perfectly in legal manner. Probably if Lawsuite filer decide to file the lawsuite on the basis of "Why the helll USCIS declared "All Current" at the first place" then there they have a chance to make a case strong but if they go another route like "Why USCIS revised the bulletin" then I personally do not see "much worth".
Now having said this, to me it looks like whether you file till in July or not OR whether you become plantiff or not, it should not matter. AILF and/or any other organization ethically and perhaps legally can not define "Class" narrowly to the limited group of people. If real justice is prevalent in this country judiciary should not allow any entity to define "Class" narrowly. To me "ALL affected" is the "Class" and if judiciary is considering it as a "class action" then it should consider "All affected" as a class. Now US justice system would go this way, I do not know but if it is not going that way then I would consider that as abig black loop hole in justice system itself. My guess is that if AILF would go defining "Class" narrowly, there will be some mechanism by which individually or with group you should be able to challenge that legally as well.
Now Judiciary, in my opinion may not take stand that ok this is a "Class lawsuite" and now Mr.X has become the plantiff so he would only be the beneficary if lawsuite is won. Either ALL affected should be considered for whatever the benefits come out or everybody looses it. Same argument goes for people who are not filing. By not filing they are obeying the legal instruction of government department of USA and for that they should not be punished and can not be punished by not granting any benefit to them whereas granting the benefits to the people who clearly challenged USCIS's revision by filing from 07/03 and onwards....
If USCIS is smart, it should accept all files now and create the process to have them rotted in the queue for years and that way it will be able to save its own face and limit on visa numbers will automatically send whole bunch of files for eating the dust for years.
I personally see our strong point only at have reimbursement of the money and time if "We are not getting current before one year (Validity of Medicals)
Any thoughts?
Here are my thoughts:
---------------------
There are Four group of people (Became current with July bulletin) who are affected and suffered.
1) The people whose applications reached to USCIS before 10:00 AM
07/02/07, i.e. before USCIS's new revision/update.
Note: Legally this group is the SAFEST one as their file reached to the
USCIS table on time while USCIS's first bulletin was in effect. Their
case is strong as far as "Law and Justice" is concerned.
2) The people whose applications reached on 07/02/07 but after USCIS's
declaration of new revision.
Note: This group can be fit in a category "Who did not receive ample
notice from USCIS for its intention to change the bulletin. And so
may be considered "Probable beneficiaries" by the judiciary
3) The people whose applications reached or will reach to USCIS from any
time between 12:00 AM 07/03/07 to 11:59 PM 07/31/07.
Note: This group will have a "Strongest" weak argument and case. Their
act of sending files perhaps may not be considered "Law-abiding" as
they have already received ample notice from USCIS and clear
statement of USCIS about "Rejecting applications upon receiving"
then also this group sent the applications.
4) The People who will not send applications at all with respect to the
USCIS's revision.
Note: In my oinion and mostly I believe in Judiciary's opinion thsi group will
be considered "Law-abiding" and who acted as per USCIS's
instruction within the periphery of respecting legal authority.
Now other points to be noted are as under:
-----------------------------------------
DOS and USCIS screwed up? Yes... Did not happen ever and now it happened , yes.. People suffered stress..expenses.. yes. Now what is stressed on is one time bulletin per month is a tradition and it is a long time tradition but probably DOS has a power to change that... It seems that there is no such law that DOS can not do that so there exactly Lawsuite filer may have a weak case. Now USCIS is supposed to follow DOS and make bulletin as per DOS's guideline and that is what USCIS did so where is the "Law-Breaking" ? USCIS acted perfectly in legal manner. Probably if Lawsuite filer decide to file the lawsuite on the basis of "Why the helll USCIS declared "All Current" at the first place" then there they have a chance to make a case strong but if they go another route like "Why USCIS revised the bulletin" then I personally do not see "much worth".
Now having said this, to me it looks like whether you file till in July or not OR whether you become plantiff or not, it should not matter. AILF and/or any other organization ethically and perhaps legally can not define "Class" narrowly to the limited group of people. If real justice is prevalent in this country judiciary should not allow any entity to define "Class" narrowly. To me "ALL affected" is the "Class" and if judiciary is considering it as a "class action" then it should consider "All affected" as a class. Now US justice system would go this way, I do not know but if it is not going that way then I would consider that as abig black loop hole in justice system itself. My guess is that if AILF would go defining "Class" narrowly, there will be some mechanism by which individually or with group you should be able to challenge that legally as well.
Now Judiciary, in my opinion may not take stand that ok this is a "Class lawsuite" and now Mr.X has become the plantiff so he would only be the beneficary if lawsuite is won. Either ALL affected should be considered for whatever the benefits come out or everybody looses it. Same argument goes for people who are not filing. By not filing they are obeying the legal instruction of government department of USA and for that they should not be punished and can not be punished by not granting any benefit to them whereas granting the benefits to the people who clearly challenged USCIS's revision by filing from 07/03 and onwards....
If USCIS is smart, it should accept all files now and create the process to have them rotted in the queue for years and that way it will be able to save its own face and limit on visa numbers will automatically send whole bunch of files for eating the dust for years.
I personally see our strong point only at have reimbursement of the money and time if "We are not getting current before one year (Validity of Medicals)
Any thoughts?
house People Walking Away; cartoon
Personally I think these processing dates are crap , It use to be valuble before July-07 but not any more.
I think if CIS use computers and run a small query they know how many cases are pending which fall under processing dates
The only advantage with the dates is opening SRs, which dont have any value and complete waste of time.
My EB3 140 was filed on July 5 th 2007 at NSC and transfered to TSC on April 07 08 , for TSC 140 processing dates are Aug 26 07 . I guess they have their own rules for transfer cases .
CIS is giving preference to priority date current cases as they need to use the numbers, all others are in limbo .
God please give us more strength and patience .
I think if CIS use computers and run a small query they know how many cases are pending which fall under processing dates
The only advantage with the dates is opening SRs, which dont have any value and complete waste of time.
My EB3 140 was filed on July 5 th 2007 at NSC and transfered to TSC on April 07 08 , for TSC 140 processing dates are Aug 26 07 . I guess they have their own rules for transfer cases .
CIS is giving preference to priority date current cases as they need to use the numbers, all others are in limbo .
God please give us more strength and patience .
tattoo 2011 cartoon girl walking away
I am happy to see both guys comments i.e shimul99 & vkkkk
These statement gives some possitive streanth....as all of us are going some phase...
May we hear the some good news before end of December 2007
:)
These statement gives some possitive streanth....as all of us are going some phase...
May we hear the some good news before end of December 2007
:)
pictures I#39;m walking away now, walking
Hi Yabadaba,
Try this forum http://britishexpats.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=33 for all your questions on Canadian immigration. This has lots of usefull information. When you post a question, post it to the attention of Mr Andrew Miller. He is a immigration consultant who provides free advise on that forum and responds pretty fast.
Best of luck !
Lasantha
Try this forum http://britishexpats.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=33 for all your questions on Canadian immigration. This has lots of usefull information. When you post a question, post it to the attention of Mr Andrew Miller. He is a immigration consultant who provides free advise on that forum and responds pretty fast.
Best of luck !
Lasantha
dresses GUY: Don#39;t walk away.
‘(C) qualified to be a candidate country due to special circumstances, including natural disasters or public health emergencies.
‘(2) ELIGIBLE ALIEN- The term ‘eligible alien’ means an alien who--
‘(A) has been lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence; and
‘(B) is a physician or other healthcare worker.
‘(c) Consultation- The Secretary of Homeland Security shall consult with the Secretary of State in carrying out this section.
‘(d) Publication- The Secretary of State shall publish--
‘(1) not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this section, a list of candidate countries;
‘(2) an updated version of the list required by paragraph (1) not less often than once each year; and
‘(3) an amendment to the list required by paragraph (1) at the time any country qualifies as a candidate country due to special circumstances under subsection (b)(1)(C).’.
(2) RULEMAKING-
(A) REQUIREMENT- Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall promulgate regulations to carry out the amendments made by this subsection.
(B) CONTENT- The regulations promulgated pursuant to paragraph (1) shall--
(i) permit an eligible alien (as defined in section 317A of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as added by paragraph (1)) and the spouse or child of the eligible alien to reside in a foreign country to work as a physician or other healthcare worker as described in subsection (a) of such section 317A for not less than a 12-month period and not more than a 24-month period, and shall permit the Secretary to extend such period for an additional period not to exceed 12 months, if the Secretary determines that such country has a continuing need for such a physician or other healthcare worker;
(ii) provide for the issuance of documents by the Secretary to such eligible alien, and such spouse or child, if appropriate, to demonstrate that such eligible alien, and such spouse or child, if appropriate, is authorized to reside in such country under such section 317A; and
(iii) provide for an expedited process through which the Secretary shall review applications for such an eligible alien to reside in a foreign country pursuant to subsection (a) of such section 317A if the Secretary of State determines a country is a candidate country pursuant to subsection (b)(1)(C) of such section 317A.
(3) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS-
(A) DEFINITION- Section 101(a)(13)(C)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(13)(C)(ii)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ‘except in the case of an eligible alien, or the spouse or child of such alien, who is authorized to be absent from the United States under section 317A,’.
(B) DOCUMENTARY REQUIREMENTS- Section 211(b) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1181(b)) is amended by inserting ‘, including an eligible alien authorized to reside in a foreign country under section 317A and the spouse or child of such eligible alien, if appropriate,’ after ‘101(a)(27)(A),’.
(C) INELIGIBLE ALIENS- Section 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(7)(A)(i)(I)) is amended by inserting ‘other than an eligible alien authorized to reside in a foreign country under section 317A and the spouse or child of such eligible alien, if appropriate,’ after ‘Act,’.
(D) CLERICAL AMENDMENT- The table of contents of such Act is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 317 the following:
‘Sec. 317A. Temporary absence of aliens providing health care in developing countries.’.
(4) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There are authorized to be appropriated to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services such sums as may be necessary to carry out this subsection and the amendments made by this subsection.
(d) Attestation by Health Care Workers-
(1) ATTESTATION REQUIREMENT- Section 212(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(5)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
‘(E) HEALTH CARE WORKERS WITH OTHER OBLIGATIONS-
‘(i) IN GENERAL- An alien who seeks to enter the United States for the purpose of performing labor as a physician or other health care worker is inadmissible unless the alien submits to the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Secretary of State, as appropriate, an attestation that the alien is not seeking to enter the United States for such purpose during any period in which the alien has an outstanding obligation to the government of the alien’s country of origin or the alien’s country of residence.
‘(ii) OBLIGATION DEFINED- In this subparagraph, the term ‘obligation’ means an obligation incurred as part of a valid, voluntary individual agreement in which the alien received financial assistance to defray the costs of education or training to qualify as a physician or other health care worker in consideration for a commitment to work as a physician or other health care worker in the alien’s country of origin or the alien’s country of residence.
‘(iii) WAIVER- The Secretary of Homeland Security may waive a finding of inadmissibility under clause (i) if the Secretary determines that--
‘(I) the obligation was incurred by coercion or other improper means;
‘(II) the alien and the government of the country to which the alien has an outstanding obligation have reached a valid, voluntary agreement, pursuant to which the alien’s obligation has been deemed satisfied, or the alien has shown to the satisfaction of the Secretary that the alien has been unable to reach such an agreement because of coercion or other improper means; or
‘(III) the obligation should not be enforced due to other extraordinary circumstances, including undue hardship that would be suffered by the alien in the absence of a waiver.’.
(2) EFFECTIVE DATE; APPLICATION-
(A) EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendment made by paragraph (1) shall take effect on the date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(B) APPLICATION BY THE SECRETARY- Not later than the effective date described in subparagraph (A), the Secretary of Homeland Security shall begin to carry out subparagraph (E) of section 212(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as added by paragraph (1), including the requirement for the attestation and the granting of a waiver described in clause (iii) of such subparagraph (E), regardless of whether regulations to implement such subparagraph have been promulgated.
SEC. 3. NURSE TRAINING AND RETENTION DEMONSTRATION GRANT ACT OF 2008.
(a) Findings- Congress makes the following findings:
(1) America’s healthcare system depends on an adequate supply of trained nurses to deliver quality patient care.
(2) Over the next 15 years, this shortage is expected to grow significantly. The Health Resources and Services Administration has projected that by 2020, there will be a shortage of nurses in every State and that overall only 64 percent of the demand for nurses will be satisfied, with a shortage of 1,016,900 nurses nationally.
(3) To avert such a shortage, today’s network of healthcare workers should have access to education and support from their employers to participate in educational and training opportunities.
(4) With the appropriate education and support, incumbent healthcare workers and incumbent bedside nurses are untapped sources which can meet these needs and address the nursing shortage and provide quality care as the American population ages.
(b) Purposes of Grant Program- It is the purpose of this section to authorize grants to--
(1) address the projected shortage of nurses by funding comprehensive programs to create a career ladder to nursing (including Certified Nurse Assistants, Licensed Practical Nurses, Licensed Vocational Nurses, and Registered Nurses) for incumbent ancillary healthcare workers;
(2) increase the capacity for educating nurses by increasing both nurse faculty and clinical opportunities through collaborative programs between staff nurse organizations, healthcare providers, and accredited schools of nursing; and
(3) provide training programs through education and training organizations jointly administered by healthcare providers and healthcare labor organizations or other organizations representing staff nurses and frontline healthcare workers, working in collaboration with accredited schools of nursing and academic institutions.
‘(2) ELIGIBLE ALIEN- The term ‘eligible alien’ means an alien who--
‘(A) has been lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence; and
‘(B) is a physician or other healthcare worker.
‘(c) Consultation- The Secretary of Homeland Security shall consult with the Secretary of State in carrying out this section.
‘(d) Publication- The Secretary of State shall publish--
‘(1) not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this section, a list of candidate countries;
‘(2) an updated version of the list required by paragraph (1) not less often than once each year; and
‘(3) an amendment to the list required by paragraph (1) at the time any country qualifies as a candidate country due to special circumstances under subsection (b)(1)(C).’.
(2) RULEMAKING-
(A) REQUIREMENT- Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall promulgate regulations to carry out the amendments made by this subsection.
(B) CONTENT- The regulations promulgated pursuant to paragraph (1) shall--
(i) permit an eligible alien (as defined in section 317A of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as added by paragraph (1)) and the spouse or child of the eligible alien to reside in a foreign country to work as a physician or other healthcare worker as described in subsection (a) of such section 317A for not less than a 12-month period and not more than a 24-month period, and shall permit the Secretary to extend such period for an additional period not to exceed 12 months, if the Secretary determines that such country has a continuing need for such a physician or other healthcare worker;
(ii) provide for the issuance of documents by the Secretary to such eligible alien, and such spouse or child, if appropriate, to demonstrate that such eligible alien, and such spouse or child, if appropriate, is authorized to reside in such country under such section 317A; and
(iii) provide for an expedited process through which the Secretary shall review applications for such an eligible alien to reside in a foreign country pursuant to subsection (a) of such section 317A if the Secretary of State determines a country is a candidate country pursuant to subsection (b)(1)(C) of such section 317A.
(3) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS-
(A) DEFINITION- Section 101(a)(13)(C)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(13)(C)(ii)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ‘except in the case of an eligible alien, or the spouse or child of such alien, who is authorized to be absent from the United States under section 317A,’.
(B) DOCUMENTARY REQUIREMENTS- Section 211(b) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1181(b)) is amended by inserting ‘, including an eligible alien authorized to reside in a foreign country under section 317A and the spouse or child of such eligible alien, if appropriate,’ after ‘101(a)(27)(A),’.
(C) INELIGIBLE ALIENS- Section 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(7)(A)(i)(I)) is amended by inserting ‘other than an eligible alien authorized to reside in a foreign country under section 317A and the spouse or child of such eligible alien, if appropriate,’ after ‘Act,’.
(D) CLERICAL AMENDMENT- The table of contents of such Act is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 317 the following:
‘Sec. 317A. Temporary absence of aliens providing health care in developing countries.’.
(4) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There are authorized to be appropriated to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services such sums as may be necessary to carry out this subsection and the amendments made by this subsection.
(d) Attestation by Health Care Workers-
(1) ATTESTATION REQUIREMENT- Section 212(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(5)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
‘(E) HEALTH CARE WORKERS WITH OTHER OBLIGATIONS-
‘(i) IN GENERAL- An alien who seeks to enter the United States for the purpose of performing labor as a physician or other health care worker is inadmissible unless the alien submits to the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Secretary of State, as appropriate, an attestation that the alien is not seeking to enter the United States for such purpose during any period in which the alien has an outstanding obligation to the government of the alien’s country of origin or the alien’s country of residence.
‘(ii) OBLIGATION DEFINED- In this subparagraph, the term ‘obligation’ means an obligation incurred as part of a valid, voluntary individual agreement in which the alien received financial assistance to defray the costs of education or training to qualify as a physician or other health care worker in consideration for a commitment to work as a physician or other health care worker in the alien’s country of origin or the alien’s country of residence.
‘(iii) WAIVER- The Secretary of Homeland Security may waive a finding of inadmissibility under clause (i) if the Secretary determines that--
‘(I) the obligation was incurred by coercion or other improper means;
‘(II) the alien and the government of the country to which the alien has an outstanding obligation have reached a valid, voluntary agreement, pursuant to which the alien’s obligation has been deemed satisfied, or the alien has shown to the satisfaction of the Secretary that the alien has been unable to reach such an agreement because of coercion or other improper means; or
‘(III) the obligation should not be enforced due to other extraordinary circumstances, including undue hardship that would be suffered by the alien in the absence of a waiver.’.
(2) EFFECTIVE DATE; APPLICATION-
(A) EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendment made by paragraph (1) shall take effect on the date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(B) APPLICATION BY THE SECRETARY- Not later than the effective date described in subparagraph (A), the Secretary of Homeland Security shall begin to carry out subparagraph (E) of section 212(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as added by paragraph (1), including the requirement for the attestation and the granting of a waiver described in clause (iii) of such subparagraph (E), regardless of whether regulations to implement such subparagraph have been promulgated.
SEC. 3. NURSE TRAINING AND RETENTION DEMONSTRATION GRANT ACT OF 2008.
(a) Findings- Congress makes the following findings:
(1) America’s healthcare system depends on an adequate supply of trained nurses to deliver quality patient care.
(2) Over the next 15 years, this shortage is expected to grow significantly. The Health Resources and Services Administration has projected that by 2020, there will be a shortage of nurses in every State and that overall only 64 percent of the demand for nurses will be satisfied, with a shortage of 1,016,900 nurses nationally.
(3) To avert such a shortage, today’s network of healthcare workers should have access to education and support from their employers to participate in educational and training opportunities.
(4) With the appropriate education and support, incumbent healthcare workers and incumbent bedside nurses are untapped sources which can meet these needs and address the nursing shortage and provide quality care as the American population ages.
(b) Purposes of Grant Program- It is the purpose of this section to authorize grants to--
(1) address the projected shortage of nurses by funding comprehensive programs to create a career ladder to nursing (including Certified Nurse Assistants, Licensed Practical Nurses, Licensed Vocational Nurses, and Registered Nurses) for incumbent ancillary healthcare workers;
(2) increase the capacity for educating nurses by increasing both nurse faculty and clinical opportunities through collaborative programs between staff nurse organizations, healthcare providers, and accredited schools of nursing; and
(3) provide training programs through education and training organizations jointly administered by healthcare providers and healthcare labor organizations or other organizations representing staff nurses and frontline healthcare workers, working in collaboration with accredited schools of nursing and academic institutions.
makeup Egyptian people are happy!
What is your issue? All he said was that Rahman was better in other movies and how do you link that with terrorists? I guess you get cheap laughter by igniting some stupid issues like this. All we need is people like you to be the spokesperson for immigrationvoice.
Let me guess, you are a pakistani terrorist. Now you are jealous that how come an Indian muslim win 2 oscars? How will you give out your hateful message to other pakistanis terrorists that indian muslims are being torchured, so you have to "save" indian muslims. Too bad, no pakistani got an oscar. I know why, because the terror capital of the world is going down the drain pretty fast.
.
Let me guess, you are a pakistani terrorist. Now you are jealous that how come an Indian muslim win 2 oscars? How will you give out your hateful message to other pakistanis terrorists that indian muslims are being torchured, so you have to "save" indian muslims. Too bad, no pakistani got an oscar. I know why, because the terror capital of the world is going down the drain pretty fast.
.
girlfriend makeup People Walking Cartoon.
^
hairstyles walk away! cartoon people
Please feel free to comment or correct any facts.
Excellent job
Common man may not understand this - too complicated for a common man who is not well versed with immigration stuff.
Can english_august or franklin help modify this so that a commoner will understand the facts and what kind of mess he is in.
Excellent job
Common man may not understand this - too complicated for a common man who is not well versed with immigration stuff.
Can english_august or franklin help modify this so that a commoner will understand the facts and what kind of mess he is in.
What if USCIS doesnt return the applications , and releases a press note ,s aying that all applications are being accepted , but they would be processed later (not approving EAD and AP). That would be creating more havoc in our lives.
I personally feel a very likelihood of this. After the lawsuit, they can negotiate that all right, we are not going to reject any application becuase it is going to create problem for the customer so we are just going to hold it but will not process until the visa is made available. They can simply kill 2 birds with one stone. Hope they don't ready my post and come up with this idea. ;)
I personally feel a very likelihood of this. After the lawsuit, they can negotiate that all right, we are not going to reject any application becuase it is going to create problem for the customer so we are just going to hold it but will not process until the visa is made available. They can simply kill 2 birds with one stone. Hope they don't ready my post and come up with this idea. ;)
I am on EAD.. Yes my previous employer was a desi employer. Is it ok to continue working on ead.
