Green.Tech
04-17 12:19 PM
My wife (going to use AP), My little son (US citizen) & my mother-in-law (Visitor Visa) are coming back to Dallas from India on Monday. My mother-in-law left USA in November 2008 and coming back again now. Would it be safe to send all three of them to the same counter at the POE? or would it be safe to send them to 2 separate counters.
My worry is that if they go together, the officer may think that my mother-in-law is here again for baby sitting or something like that since her leaving USA is less than 6 months. I know that there is no such requirement that a person has to be outside US for a certain period of time before entering again, but I am still wondering would it cause any problems. On the flip side if they go to different counters they may let her in without any issues, since my mother-in-law doesn't know English (I am planning to give a letter for the purpose of her trip), Please suggest?
kriskris,
IMHO, I don't think it matters. In the end, it is the IO's decision. There are no guarantees either way, and similarly there should not be an issue either way. Personally, I would want all three to be standing at one counter than at different counters.
My worry is that if they go together, the officer may think that my mother-in-law is here again for baby sitting or something like that since her leaving USA is less than 6 months. I know that there is no such requirement that a person has to be outside US for a certain period of time before entering again, but I am still wondering would it cause any problems. On the flip side if they go to different counters they may let her in without any issues, since my mother-in-law doesn't know English (I am planning to give a letter for the purpose of her trip), Please suggest?
kriskris,
IMHO, I don't think it matters. In the end, it is the IO's decision. There are no guarantees either way, and similarly there should not be an issue either way. Personally, I would want all three to be standing at one counter than at different counters.
wallpaper hair jennifer lopez hair
sunilsj
01-21 02:10 PM
Like I mentioned earlier, I personally know 2 cases as I am writing this. Both visited Mumbai office and both are stuck with 221(g). It may not therefore be generalized that Mumbai is better or worse than any other place. It is a matter of who you encounter with, timing and luck.
authrd
08-23 10:59 AM
bumping/hoping for replies
2011 Up-dos have been seen all over
prioritydate
08-14 01:04 PM
the op modified his post.. his post ended with the question "am i missing something here?" and i replied to that as yes you are.. as to what he/she is missing is anyone's guess. maybe some common sense?
how would uscis have the ability to decode between a direct hire and a non direct hire application?
abc corporation is abc corporation. what OP was implying was that employees at companies with well established brand names would get it faster. but there are thousands of legitimate companies in various fields other than software that have 0 brand recognition outside their industry.
I don't appreciate your comments. How come common sense come into this picture when I said I may be wrong!
how would uscis have the ability to decode between a direct hire and a non direct hire application?
abc corporation is abc corporation. what OP was implying was that employees at companies with well established brand names would get it faster. but there are thousands of legitimate companies in various fields other than software that have 0 brand recognition outside their industry.
I don't appreciate your comments. How come common sense come into this picture when I said I may be wrong!
more...
fatjoe
10-31 12:46 PM
Didn't they stopped issuing interim EADs half an year ago?
It was stopped. I went to the local office and found that.
It was stopped. I went to the local office and found that.
loveiv
05-25 10:23 PM
Most of I-485 applications are currently stuck with the State Department's Visa Bulletin retrogression which are many years behind. However, aside delays which are attributed to the visa number retrogressions, the cases which were filed during the July 2007 Visa Bulletin fiasco period are expected to take nearly three years from the end of the USCIS itsself processing and adjudications in terms of the workloads, according to the CRS report. July 2007 VB fiasco filers, go figure!
According to the CRS report, the USCIS issues before the Congress are as follows from the perspectives of FY 2009 budget:
USCIS Issues for Congress. USCIS issues for Congress include the surgein immigration benefit applications that occurred in FY2007 and which resulted in an increase in the agency’s backlog, and the use of the Federal Bureau ofInvestigation’s (FBI’s) National Name Check program to vet immigration benefitapplications.
Surge in Benefit Applications and Resulting Backlog. According to the testimony of USCIS Director Emilo T. Gonzalez, USCIS experienced an increasein its backlog of naturalization applications in the second half of FY2007.116 From May through July of 2007 USCIS received three and a half times more applications than during the same three months in the previous year.117 Consequently, published accounts indicate that processing time for applications filed during the FY2007 “surge” would be between 16-18 months, as compared to 6-7 months for applications filed in the same period during FY2006.118 For all immigration benefits, the USCIS director testified that the agency received over 1.2 million more applications during the FY2007 surge than in the same period during FY2006, for a total of over 3 million applications. According to media reports, USCIS officials believe that the backlog created by the application surge could take close to three years to clear. Although citizenship campaigns and a contentious national immigration debate have been cited as contributing factors, many observers believe most of the surge in
applications may be attributed to the USCIS fee increase of July 30, 2007. These fee adjustments followed an internal cost review and they increased application fees by a weighted average of 96% for each benefit. The cost of naturalization, formmigration benefit applications that occurred in FY2007 and which resulted in an increase in the agency’s backlog, and the use of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI’s) National Name Check program to vet immigration benefit applications.example, increased from $330 to $595. Critics of this new naturalization backlog have mainly raised concerns that applicants would not naturalize in time toparticipate in the 2008 election. USCIS did not include a request for direct appropriations to hire additional temporary personnel to adjudicate the backlog.
Use of FBI National Name Check Program. An additional potential issue for Congress concerns USCIS’ use of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) National Name Check Program. USCIS officials have estimated that roughly 44% of 320,000 pending name checks for immigration benefit applications have taken more than six months to process, including applications for legal permanent residence (LPR) and naturalization. As a result, the White House has authorized USCIS to grant approximately 47,000 LPR applicants their immigration benefits without requiring completed FBI name checks. Critics of this decision believe it could expose the United States to more security threats. The USCIS ombudsman, however, has argued that USCIS employment of the FBI name check process is of limited value to public safety or national security because in most cases the applicants are living and working in the United States without restriction.
Source: www.immigration-law.com
Three years clock ticks from the day filed, one year is down, two to go.
According to the CRS report, the USCIS issues before the Congress are as follows from the perspectives of FY 2009 budget:
USCIS Issues for Congress. USCIS issues for Congress include the surgein immigration benefit applications that occurred in FY2007 and which resulted in an increase in the agency’s backlog, and the use of the Federal Bureau ofInvestigation’s (FBI’s) National Name Check program to vet immigration benefitapplications.
Surge in Benefit Applications and Resulting Backlog. According to the testimony of USCIS Director Emilo T. Gonzalez, USCIS experienced an increasein its backlog of naturalization applications in the second half of FY2007.116 From May through July of 2007 USCIS received three and a half times more applications than during the same three months in the previous year.117 Consequently, published accounts indicate that processing time for applications filed during the FY2007 “surge” would be between 16-18 months, as compared to 6-7 months for applications filed in the same period during FY2006.118 For all immigration benefits, the USCIS director testified that the agency received over 1.2 million more applications during the FY2007 surge than in the same period during FY2006, for a total of over 3 million applications. According to media reports, USCIS officials believe that the backlog created by the application surge could take close to three years to clear. Although citizenship campaigns and a contentious national immigration debate have been cited as contributing factors, many observers believe most of the surge in
applications may be attributed to the USCIS fee increase of July 30, 2007. These fee adjustments followed an internal cost review and they increased application fees by a weighted average of 96% for each benefit. The cost of naturalization, formmigration benefit applications that occurred in FY2007 and which resulted in an increase in the agency’s backlog, and the use of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI’s) National Name Check program to vet immigration benefit applications.example, increased from $330 to $595. Critics of this new naturalization backlog have mainly raised concerns that applicants would not naturalize in time toparticipate in the 2008 election. USCIS did not include a request for direct appropriations to hire additional temporary personnel to adjudicate the backlog.
Use of FBI National Name Check Program. An additional potential issue for Congress concerns USCIS’ use of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) National Name Check Program. USCIS officials have estimated that roughly 44% of 320,000 pending name checks for immigration benefit applications have taken more than six months to process, including applications for legal permanent residence (LPR) and naturalization. As a result, the White House has authorized USCIS to grant approximately 47,000 LPR applicants their immigration benefits without requiring completed FBI name checks. Critics of this decision believe it could expose the United States to more security threats. The USCIS ombudsman, however, has argued that USCIS employment of the FBI name check process is of limited value to public safety or national security because in most cases the applicants are living and working in the United States without restriction.
Source: www.immigration-law.com
Three years clock ticks from the day filed, one year is down, two to go.
more...
like_watching_paint_dry
08-20 10:58 PM
Before I slowly forget all the various pain points from the past, I'm going to add this one detail that people usually neglect:
The new process requires you to deposit a the visa processing fees at a local branch of Nova Scotia Bank and get a deposit slip to submit with the visa application when you go into the consulate. Most banks open at 9 am - 10 am. So if you have an early appointment, be sure to go there the previous business day and get the fees stuff taken care of. If not, you will find yourself scrambling to get this done at the last minute.
The new process requires you to deposit a the visa processing fees at a local branch of Nova Scotia Bank and get a deposit slip to submit with the visa application when you go into the consulate. Most banks open at 9 am - 10 am. So if you have an early appointment, be sure to go there the previous business day and get the fees stuff taken care of. If not, you will find yourself scrambling to get this done at the last minute.
2010 jennifer lopez hair color 2011
gc007
08-04 01:36 PM
I think you are right. G-28 for I-140 shud be signed by layer and employer
And there shud be 3 separate G-28 's req for I-485/131/765 signed by layer and the actual applicant.
Mine was filled this way.
May be you shud get some information from others too who have done with one G28
Hope it helps
Hi,
My employer is filing my I-140 and I-485/131/765 concurrently. My lawyer/representative send a list which says G-28 signed by lawyer and my employer. I understand for I-140, G-28 is signed by lawyer and employer(petitioner). When filed concurrently is one G-28 is enough for whole forms?
I read we need to have G-28 form for each form and for 485/131/765 forms G-28 should be signed by the actual applicant and the lawyer instead of the petitioner(my employer). Right now in my case there is only G-28 form they were sending that was signed by my employer(petitioner) and the lawyer...is one G-28 is fine for whole application packet when filed concurrently...
USCIS website clearly says without G-28 form they will reject the application right away...but it didn't mentioned for each form though...but all my colleagues says they signed three G-28 forms one each 485/765/131...i am little confused and concerend..please suggest..
thanks in advance..
And there shud be 3 separate G-28 's req for I-485/131/765 signed by layer and the actual applicant.
Mine was filled this way.
May be you shud get some information from others too who have done with one G28
Hope it helps
Hi,
My employer is filing my I-140 and I-485/131/765 concurrently. My lawyer/representative send a list which says G-28 signed by lawyer and my employer. I understand for I-140, G-28 is signed by lawyer and employer(petitioner). When filed concurrently is one G-28 is enough for whole forms?
I read we need to have G-28 form for each form and for 485/131/765 forms G-28 should be signed by the actual applicant and the lawyer instead of the petitioner(my employer). Right now in my case there is only G-28 form they were sending that was signed by my employer(petitioner) and the lawyer...is one G-28 is fine for whole application packet when filed concurrently...
USCIS website clearly says without G-28 form they will reject the application right away...but it didn't mentioned for each form though...but all my colleagues says they signed three G-28 forms one each 485/765/131...i am little confused and concerend..please suggest..
thanks in advance..
more...
fromnaija
03-28 01:05 PM
You will need to have your H1 amended to show that you are employed part time. You should be fine with that.
My LC is languishing in Philly backlog center. Not sure if I beleive that they will have it completed by Sep 2007. In any case, I am blessed enough to be able to switch to a part time status at work. I am enrolling in a part time graduate program. My question is - will going part time at work hurt me with LC or even later with 140, 485, or maybe even green card interview?? Thanks.
My LC is languishing in Philly backlog center. Not sure if I beleive that they will have it completed by Sep 2007. In any case, I am blessed enough to be able to switch to a part time status at work. I am enrolling in a part time graduate program. My question is - will going part time at work hurt me with LC or even later with 140, 485, or maybe even green card interview?? Thanks.
hair Jennifer Lopez, who count
gbof
08-01 11:55 AM
....gC ka mousamm aa gya....
more...
mayitbesoon
08-22 04:41 PM
This could be a second part of campaign for administative fixes. also, please include some strategy to fight for FIFO processing. This is also very important issue
hot Jennifer Lopez in July of 2009
Anders �stberg
May 1st, 2005, 02:26 PM
Very nice, love the "wheel spin". I can see how it would take a couple of shots to get a good one with that shutter speed.
more...
house Jennifer Lopez looked stunning
tish
06-25 06:01 PM
Consult a lawyer.
I personally think putting your canadian vist as the last place of entry might not show up in records as no stamping took place and also the I94 part which is taken by the customs and sent to INS in kentucky did not happen in your case. So when USCIS checks u'r I94, all they will see is the date in 2000 when you came to US.
In your case since you jumped from F1 to H1B via OPT you might not have had any gaps in chaging status and USCIS did not ask you to leave the country for gettting the H1B stamped(Change of status was approved )
This situation of yours hinges on technicality and better talk to a lawyer.
what happens if the passport gets stamped and got a new I94 in the vancouver airport and no inspection after coming back to US.
what should we enter as last entry into us
I personally think putting your canadian vist as the last place of entry might not show up in records as no stamping took place and also the I94 part which is taken by the customs and sent to INS in kentucky did not happen in your case. So when USCIS checks u'r I94, all they will see is the date in 2000 when you came to US.
In your case since you jumped from F1 to H1B via OPT you might not have had any gaps in chaging status and USCIS did not ask you to leave the country for gettting the H1B stamped(Change of status was approved )
This situation of yours hinges on technicality and better talk to a lawyer.
what happens if the passport gets stamped and got a new I94 in the vancouver airport and no inspection after coming back to US.
what should we enter as last entry into us
tattoo 2010 Best Jennifer Lopez
nogc_noproblem
04-24 09:48 AM
Live webcast can be viewed during the hearing
http://judiciary.house.gov/schedule.aspx
Check Box for "Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law" to be selected to see the appropriate schedule.
http://judiciary.house.gov/schedule.aspx
Check Box for "Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law" to be selected to see the appropriate schedule.
more...
pictures March 30, 2010 – Beverly Hills
NewToImmigrationVoice
04-08 02:21 PM
[B]
How come EB3 is getting major share from the annual limit for last three years(2007,2006, and 2005)
Gurus : please through some light on this?
I guess EB3 applications are more than EB2.
How come EB3 is getting major share from the annual limit for last three years(2007,2006, and 2005)
Gurus : please through some light on this?
I guess EB3 applications are more than EB2.
dresses images Hair; jennifer lopez
hoolahoous
04-17 01:19 PM
when I travelled aboard last two times, I went to Citizen's line (my daughter is citizen and I am on H1b) and IO didn't have any issue at all.
more...
makeup hot Jennifer+lopez+hair+color+
sanjeev_2004
05-26 03:08 PM
As for as my knowlege pending I140s wont be effected. Senior members can currect me if i am wrong.
Thx.
Thx.
girlfriend JENNIFER LOPEZ photo
ksrk
08-21 07:40 PM
I have a strange situation where I was thinking of AC21 all the while since January (Jul 02 Filer, TSC with Receipt# SRC 0722...).
Now, I finally made my mind and about to get an offer (after labor day, they say).
The lawyer says "don't think about AC21 now, because most probably your GC will be here within 3 months"
My PD is July 31st, 2006.
Dilemma: I don't want to screw up (or stretch the case un-necessarily) by changing employment just in case if there is an RFE. But then, I have to stay with my current employer for 6+ months AFTER GC as well, to be able to prove "permanent employment" intent.
please advise if the timing (within 3 months) makes sense.
Please also shed light on the permanent intent thing .
Many thanks
Not sure of terminology here, but some companies have policies to "go after" employees who leave immediately after getting their employment-based permanent residence. God knows there may be a law that allows the company to sue you for your "intent" of staying with the company for the sole purpose of getting your green card and not because you have a vested interest in doing your job for the company.
While these policies/laws allow for the employee to leave the company after a "reasonable" amount of time (usually six months), if, however, the employee leaves the company within that timeframe, the company has good cause to argue that the employee had an intent of leaving the company from the beginning right after s/he obtained employment-based permanent residence.
Not sure how much sense this made - the law is kinda fuzzy here, AFAIK. As is good with such matters, get professional advice from a good immigration attorney about what you need to do - always worth the money; the risk is not.
Now, I finally made my mind and about to get an offer (after labor day, they say).
The lawyer says "don't think about AC21 now, because most probably your GC will be here within 3 months"
My PD is July 31st, 2006.
Dilemma: I don't want to screw up (or stretch the case un-necessarily) by changing employment just in case if there is an RFE. But then, I have to stay with my current employer for 6+ months AFTER GC as well, to be able to prove "permanent employment" intent.
please advise if the timing (within 3 months) makes sense.
Please also shed light on the permanent intent thing .
Many thanks
Not sure of terminology here, but some companies have policies to "go after" employees who leave immediately after getting their employment-based permanent residence. God knows there may be a law that allows the company to sue you for your "intent" of staying with the company for the sole purpose of getting your green card and not because you have a vested interest in doing your job for the company.
While these policies/laws allow for the employee to leave the company after a "reasonable" amount of time (usually six months), if, however, the employee leaves the company within that timeframe, the company has good cause to argue that the employee had an intent of leaving the company from the beginning right after s/he obtained employment-based permanent residence.
Not sure how much sense this made - the law is kinda fuzzy here, AFAIK. As is good with such matters, get professional advice from a good immigration attorney about what you need to do - always worth the money; the risk is not.
hairstyles Portmanlopez
amslonewolf
01-26 11:52 AM
This is an important step zero. I am sure Reid will push this through in the Senate.
But in this congress it's all about what the House does.. Need to see the House version of this bill..
But in this congress it's all about what the House does.. Need to see the House version of this bill..
pappu
01-15 11:00 PM
Any body else from Alabama? Please sign up here if you are from alabama. Lets start our state chapter activities. I am willing to take the lead to start the activities. So all you alabama residents please sign up.
Thanks Harsh.
Thanks Harsh.
gc_dedo
03-30 04:42 PM
I am not really sure why this really makes a difference. My perm was approved in EB3 in about 7 months but if I have to wait 30 years to get a GC what difference does it make ?!?
It makes a difference for people who are porting from EB3 to EB2
It makes a difference for people who are porting from EB3 to EB2
No comments:
Post a Comment