I need some help with my daughter�s EAD and AP renewal (e-filing) applications.
Here are the details. She came to US on H4 (I am the primary applicant, on H1B). As she was going to age-out in July 2007, she was transferred to F1 in April 2007. Fortunately, she was able to file I-485 in June, 2007 and got her EAD and AP. In 2008 she went abroad and came back to US using AP.
For I-765 EAD renewal (e-filing) what should be her response to following questions?
1. Manner of entry to US (visitor, student etc.)
2. Current Immigration Status (visitor, student etc.)
3. Please select your eligibility status
Similarly, for I-131 AP renewal (e-filing) what should be her response to following questions?
1. Class of admission
2. Date of intended departure
3. Expected length of trip
Also, for AP renewal does she need to write a letter to USCIS? If so, can someone provide the format of the letter?
Thanks in advance.
Here are the details. She came to US on H4 (I am the primary applicant, on H1B). As she was going to age-out in July 2007, she was transferred to F1 in April 2007. Fortunately, she was able to file I-485 in June, 2007 and got her EAD and AP. In 2008 she went abroad and came back to US using AP.
For I-765 EAD renewal (e-filing) what should be her response to following questions?
1. Manner of entry to US (visitor, student etc.)
2. Current Immigration Status (visitor, student etc.)
3. Please select your eligibility status
Similarly, for I-131 AP renewal (e-filing) what should be her response to following questions?
1. Class of admission
2. Date of intended departure
3. Expected length of trip
Also, for AP renewal does she need to write a letter to USCIS? If so, can someone provide the format of the letter?
Thanks in advance.
wallpaper heidi montag before and after
mails at around 5.45PM today. I don't think it means much. Just soft LUD, I think.
Thank you gcformeornot.
Thank you gcformeornot.
was it EB2 or EB3?
My EB2 was rejected initially but later approved due to Sheila's evalaution of my CA degree equivalent to master's degree. I did not know her but my lawyer insisted to get it done through her. She was good for me.
My EB2 was rejected initially but later approved due to Sheila's evalaution of my CA degree equivalent to master's degree. I did not know her but my lawyer insisted to get it done through her. She was good for me.
2011 heidi montag before and after
Were the letters mailed? Btw I sent my letter to IV aswell as to President.
IV will be taking the letters to their meeting with the Administration officials. Thanks for joining in the efforts :)
IV will be taking the letters to their meeting with the Administration officials. Thanks for joining in the efforts :)
Is that so hard to predict ? ;)
What's goin to happen in coming months???
What's goin to happen in coming months???
BBBBRrrrrrrrr another idiot
1) My screen name has nothing to do with the argument here. If we discuss my screen name we are going on a tangent which is very typical of desis (I rememeber womanly taunts in movies and woman gossip where they would pick anything but would niether make a point nor a valid argument)
so you can see where your argument is going..
2) Hopefull signifies optimism. A pessimist is an optimist who is very analytical or knows better. Your argument is similar to "And they lived happily ever after ...(after singing around green trees) ...." ignoring the ground reality, facts that no dent has been made and also turninga blind eye to the fact that there are people since 2001/2002 stuck. Its 2007 meaning five years and if the Dept is not willing to budge after all these efforts to a number more than 7000, and you still are HOPEFULL ignoring the facts means that you are an idiot. Yes you will get your GC before you die for sure provided you live upto the age of appx 70 and your consulting firm is around and you are not tired of the bickering with your employer.
Its just like a Yash Chora SRK movie ...it only happens in reel life and not real life ..
3) as far as the FT job goes we both knwo it deep within what it means...i hope you are smart enough to get the point and wont make me word it to emabrass you further..
4) if you would be intelligent enough to shed some light on how kindness and make you get your GC in thsi scenario ...
just a piece of advise ..STOP BEING DUMB
Guys.. plz stop responding to him. He is just one frustrated soul. Hope he finds happiness around him and distribute the same to the people around him.
1) My screen name has nothing to do with the argument here. If we discuss my screen name we are going on a tangent which is very typical of desis (I rememeber womanly taunts in movies and woman gossip where they would pick anything but would niether make a point nor a valid argument)
so you can see where your argument is going..
2) Hopefull signifies optimism. A pessimist is an optimist who is very analytical or knows better. Your argument is similar to "And they lived happily ever after ...(after singing around green trees) ...." ignoring the ground reality, facts that no dent has been made and also turninga blind eye to the fact that there are people since 2001/2002 stuck. Its 2007 meaning five years and if the Dept is not willing to budge after all these efforts to a number more than 7000, and you still are HOPEFULL ignoring the facts means that you are an idiot. Yes you will get your GC before you die for sure provided you live upto the age of appx 70 and your consulting firm is around and you are not tired of the bickering with your employer.
Its just like a Yash Chora SRK movie ...it only happens in reel life and not real life ..
3) as far as the FT job goes we both knwo it deep within what it means...i hope you are smart enough to get the point and wont make me word it to emabrass you further..
4) if you would be intelligent enough to shed some light on how kindness and make you get your GC in thsi scenario ...
just a piece of advise ..STOP BEING DUMB
Guys.. plz stop responding to him. He is just one frustrated soul. Hope he finds happiness around him and distribute the same to the people around him.
Have time to post something here? Heheee.... I am posting these message while my project is compiling and building.
How bout that!! Me too!!!! :D
How bout that!! Me too!!!! :D
2010 heidi montag before after.
If they're asking for 150% more money, is the service going to be 150% better too??? Are we going to get our forms processed 150% faster too??
Since USCIS calls itself a "customer-focussed" organization, I certainly hope so...
I agree that retrogression problem has nothing to do with this and increasing 150% fees will not process your application 150 times faster. But atleast when we are eligible to file 485, this could take a less time than it does takes right now. Even a one month earlier processing could be very helpful. Quality of service is directly dependent on the resources available and that is dependent on the funds.
I believe this will process the pending application faster than currently it takes.
Since USCIS calls itself a "customer-focussed" organization, I certainly hope so...
I agree that retrogression problem has nothing to do with this and increasing 150% fees will not process your application 150 times faster. But atleast when we are eligible to file 485, this could take a less time than it does takes right now. Even a one month earlier processing could be very helpful. Quality of service is directly dependent on the resources available and that is dependent on the funds.
I believe this will process the pending application faster than currently it takes.
.jpg "heidi montag before after.")
I applied in NSC 485/EAD/AP on July 27th. The case was transfered to CSC. 485 Application was then transfered to TSC from CSC but EAD and AP are being processed in CSC.
hair heidi montag before and after.
Following paid by company:
Attorney Fees + USCIS Fees
Medical (spouse & I): $459
Photos (just mine): $25
Fedex & USPS Express: $51
From my pocket:
Spouse EAD Fees: $180
Photos (spouse): $24
Photocopying: $61
Gas: $15
Total my pocket:$280
Attorney Fees + USCIS Fees
Medical (spouse & I): $459
Photos (just mine): $25
Fedex & USPS Express: $51
From my pocket:
Spouse EAD Fees: $180
Photos (spouse): $24
Photocopying: $61
Gas: $15
Total my pocket:$280
http://digg.com/politics/Green_card_hopefuls_to_resort_to_Gandhigiri_in_US
22 diggs already. 500 diggs will make it a top story!
Hey man! I am the 100th digger. Still a long way to go. Keep digging :)
22 diggs already. 500 diggs will make it a top story!
Hey man! I am the 100th digger. Still a long way to go. Keep digging :)
hot heidi montag before and after.
Please update your profiles in the User CP to "Yes - I will attend the rally in DC". This will enable you to receive the latest updates on the rally from IV Core.
house Heidi Montag Before After
- best place to stay, hopefully in proximity to the rally start point
- best return flight time to get back
- do I need to rent a car?
Get in touch with Abhijeet or Venky they can help you with your questions, I sent you a PM pls. check your private messages...Thanks!
- best return flight time to get back
- do I need to rent a car?
Get in touch with Abhijeet or Venky they can help you with your questions, I sent you a PM pls. check your private messages...Thanks!
tattoo heidi montag before and after
Still waiting for my receipts numbers from USCIS. July 2nd filer.
pictures heidi montag before and after
E-filed : July 22
Finger Printing : Aug 15
Card Production ordered: Sep 22
60 Days
Finger Printing : Aug 15
Card Production ordered: Sep 22
60 Days
dresses efore and after of heidi montag. heidi montag before and after before and
Hello IV and its core members,
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
makeup heidi montag before after.
Title IV, Pub.L. 105-277 (October 21, 1998) "Workforce Improvement Act" (ACWIA) of 1998
http://www.nafsa.org/_/Document/_/acwia_-_american_competitiveness.pdf
Sec. 413 (a)
��(vi)(I) It is a violation of this clause for an employer who has filed an application under this subsection to require an H�1B nonimmigrant to pay a penalty for ceasing employment with the employer prior to a date agreed to by the nonimmigrant and the employer." The employer will not be able to get anything from you. Again, it does not matter whether you sign it or not, the clause has no legal power.
http://www.nafsa.org/_/Document/_/acwia_-_american_competitiveness.pdf
Sec. 413 (a)
��(vi)(I) It is a violation of this clause for an employer who has filed an application under this subsection to require an H�1B nonimmigrant to pay a penalty for ceasing employment with the employer prior to a date agreed to by the nonimmigrant and the employer." The employer will not be able to get anything from you. Again, it does not matter whether you sign it or not, the clause has no legal power.
girlfriend heidi montag before and after
Originally Posted by pappu View Post
- How has green card changed your life after receiving it?
It created some anxiety instead of joy. Of course you will understand why in a bit. Please see explanation below. Brought a home as the uncertainty was gone. I still do have to worry about some documentation for our son but that is fine.. More opportunities opened up with direct placements instead of subcontracting etc. Feel good factor has been great
- What did you do on the day you received it?
As I said we were anxious for a bit but there was a definite relief that the ordeal of 8 yrs was over. Called up few friends and informed. Called parents in India and informed them. They were happy though they do not know of the advantages.. Thanked GOD ! Uncorked some champagne and had a good time
- How did the long wait upset your life?
Really painful with Dhobi ka kutta na ghar ka na ghat ka types.. Major decisions in life were pending and a feeling of uncertainty haunting all the time.
- How did immigrationvoice help you during this long wait?
IV has been a fabulous place to get all the information. I used to go to other sites before this but after I joined IV this has been my home for Immi related issues. It helped me stay focussed some times and also better informed due to the various initiatives that were being taken up and discussed. Sometimes there were some flaming but it happens. I still have a RED dot against me from Ms Hemione with whom I had an argument about illegals.. not that I care much about it. Its been a definite learning experience for me
- Would you like to continue your support to immigration voice and help others waiting?
I visit the forum and read the issues and make calls to the senators and congressmen. Sent letter for the administrative fixes and active in my own way. I am not participating in the local chapter which is something I would like to address this coming few months.
- Any advice for everyone?
Easier said than done ! This process is extremely frustrating for most of the people who are in the queue. We are still in the queue for our son. We should do what ever is possible from our side to espouse our case and make us heard. IV has been a leader in this and we should support the cause in whatever way we can. Not everybody can contribute in the same way but at the end of the day each drop adds to the pool.
Once anyone received his greencard, please update the IV tracker too. We like to see how many members in IV are greencard holders and what is the current trend of approvals in our membership
- I think I did, will check once again
IV you rock
- How has green card changed your life after receiving it?
It created some anxiety instead of joy. Of course you will understand why in a bit. Please see explanation below. Brought a home as the uncertainty was gone. I still do have to worry about some documentation for our son but that is fine.. More opportunities opened up with direct placements instead of subcontracting etc. Feel good factor has been great
- What did you do on the day you received it?
As I said we were anxious for a bit but there was a definite relief that the ordeal of 8 yrs was over. Called up few friends and informed. Called parents in India and informed them. They were happy though they do not know of the advantages.. Thanked GOD ! Uncorked some champagne and had a good time
- How did the long wait upset your life?
Really painful with Dhobi ka kutta na ghar ka na ghat ka types.. Major decisions in life were pending and a feeling of uncertainty haunting all the time.
- How did immigrationvoice help you during this long wait?
IV has been a fabulous place to get all the information. I used to go to other sites before this but after I joined IV this has been my home for Immi related issues. It helped me stay focussed some times and also better informed due to the various initiatives that were being taken up and discussed. Sometimes there were some flaming but it happens. I still have a RED dot against me from Ms Hemione with whom I had an argument about illegals.. not that I care much about it. Its been a definite learning experience for me
- Would you like to continue your support to immigration voice and help others waiting?
I visit the forum and read the issues and make calls to the senators and congressmen. Sent letter for the administrative fixes and active in my own way. I am not participating in the local chapter which is something I would like to address this coming few months.
- Any advice for everyone?
Easier said than done ! This process is extremely frustrating for most of the people who are in the queue. We are still in the queue for our son. We should do what ever is possible from our side to espouse our case and make us heard. IV has been a leader in this and we should support the cause in whatever way we can. Not everybody can contribute in the same way but at the end of the day each drop adds to the pool.
Once anyone received his greencard, please update the IV tracker too. We like to see how many members in IV are greencard holders and what is the current trend of approvals in our membership
- I think I did, will check once again
IV you rock
hairstyles heidi montag before. to last
I remember seeing Wipro, Satyam & Infosys reply to Durbin/Graasley. They were published in economictimes.
Gotta love this system...
Two years ago; Grassley sent a questionnaire to the top 10 Indian outsourcing companies of how they use non immigrant visas.
They did not have any legal obligation to answer his query. They answered his questions by non answering it.
Grassley then starts to increase the rhetoric and starts pressuring uscis/dol to start investigations.
uscis/dol start investigatin and denying cases and study it and find fraud.
now; Grassley is getting his way and starting to change policy.
Nascom senses game is over and come begging which is exactly what grassley wanted in the first place.
At the end; he will get these guys to agree to tough measures (ie., lca requirements for L-1; tougher measures on h-1b, etc.
See how Microsoft answered differently when they got the query and compare to these guys.
This system created in USA has a way of making you conform to their behaviour willingly or through long and painful way. Looks like they had to learn through long and painful way.
Gotta love this system...
Two years ago; Grassley sent a questionnaire to the top 10 Indian outsourcing companies of how they use non immigrant visas.
They did not have any legal obligation to answer his query. They answered his questions by non answering it.
Grassley then starts to increase the rhetoric and starts pressuring uscis/dol to start investigations.
uscis/dol start investigatin and denying cases and study it and find fraud.
now; Grassley is getting his way and starting to change policy.
Nascom senses game is over and come begging which is exactly what grassley wanted in the first place.
At the end; he will get these guys to agree to tough measures (ie., lca requirements for L-1; tougher measures on h-1b, etc.
See how Microsoft answered differently when they got the query and compare to these guys.
This system created in USA has a way of making you conform to their behaviour willingly or through long and painful way. Looks like they had to learn through long and painful way.
http://www.murthy.com/bulletin.html
Miss. Murthy reports that LS was rejected for some folks.
How does one get to know if his Labor Substitution was rejected? If a Receipt Notice was received does that mean that it was accepted? And, can they reject it later?
you missed the word "wrongly" rejected.
Miss. Murthy reports that LS was rejected for some folks.
How does one get to know if his Labor Substitution was rejected? If a Receipt Notice was received does that mean that it was accepted? And, can they reject it later?
you missed the word "wrongly" rejected.
If an RFE is issued, how long does it take to get EAD/AP? Will the USCIS still honor the 90/120 day issuance?
