hkimmi
12-22 01:39 PM
If you read clearly then it says that you can keep the PD in your new employer GC process. You may loose that opportunity only if there was a fraud in the previous I140 and USICS revokes that I140.
once the alien�s Form I-140 petition has been approved, the alien beneficiary retains his or her priority date as established by the filing of the labor certification for any future Form I-140 petitions, unless the previously approved Form I-140 petition has been revoked because of fraud or willful misrepresentation.
So if your current I140 is clean then you will be able to use the PD in your next application for GC with the new employer.
Check in the Sheela murthy chat session dated : December 18, 2006 and search for "my employer cancels I-I40?"
Looks like we can port the priority date ..., even our employers cancels I-140....
once the alien�s Form I-140 petition has been approved, the alien beneficiary retains his or her priority date as established by the filing of the labor certification for any future Form I-140 petitions, unless the previously approved Form I-140 petition has been revoked because of fraud or willful misrepresentation.
So if your current I140 is clean then you will be able to use the PD in your next application for GC with the new employer.
Check in the Sheela murthy chat session dated : December 18, 2006 and search for "my employer cancels I-I40?"
Looks like we can port the priority date ..., even our employers cancels I-140....
wallpaper It#39;s Howdy Doody time!
dixie
02-15 10:11 AM
Definitely an idea worth considering. Of late we hvae had too many "new members" who turn out to be 2-3 post wonders - get their questions answered and vanish without a trace. But given the subsidy mentality prelavent among our "educated and skilled" community, I doubt the idea will fly.
gccovet
09-04 01:42 PM
I beg to disagree on this thought:
I think in the above scenario, they do not invalidate your H1. You can continue till the end-date on the H1, even though it was approved based on pending I-485. I suggest you consult an attorney on this specific scenario.
You can work on h1b - you will get H1b based on existing approved 140 and pending 485.
If 140 is revoked by employer you may get a RFE or NOID or in rare cases erroneous denial but you can continue on h1b while you respond to RFE or NOID oor through MTR to erroneous denial.
Sending AC21 docs does not necessarily mean you may not get NOID - AC21 docs seldom go into your file.
LostInGCProcess, Chanduv23,
Thank you for your replies, I appreciate it.
So, I guess, it is okay to get the H1B "Transferred" and if (god forbid) I-485 gets denied, I can still work till the teneure of H1B and then go home.
Also, if i-140 is revoked , that should trigger NOID or RFE which the lawyer will handle (hopefully successfully).
Once again, Thanks a lot.
Regards.
GCCovet
I think in the above scenario, they do not invalidate your H1. You can continue till the end-date on the H1, even though it was approved based on pending I-485. I suggest you consult an attorney on this specific scenario.
You can work on h1b - you will get H1b based on existing approved 140 and pending 485.
If 140 is revoked by employer you may get a RFE or NOID or in rare cases erroneous denial but you can continue on h1b while you respond to RFE or NOID oor through MTR to erroneous denial.
Sending AC21 docs does not necessarily mean you may not get NOID - AC21 docs seldom go into your file.
LostInGCProcess, Chanduv23,
Thank you for your replies, I appreciate it.
So, I guess, it is okay to get the H1B "Transferred" and if (god forbid) I-485 gets denied, I can still work till the teneure of H1B and then go home.
Also, if i-140 is revoked , that should trigger NOID or RFE which the lawyer will handle (hopefully successfully).
Once again, Thanks a lot.
Regards.
GCCovet
2011 Tall howdy doody show.
munnu77
04-06 09:35 PM
i am sorry..i couldnt follow todays proceedings..whn i cam to iv site in the evening..everyone says bill is dead
whn i went to immigration-law.com, they say the following
cud someone tell me which one is true??????????
We reported earlier the Senate Republican Members Agreement last night. Today, the Democratic Minority Leader and other Democractic leaders agreed to the proposal, turning the Republican agreement into the Bi-Partisan Agreement. This dramatic break-through opens a door to the possibility of passing the Senate version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, S. 2454, as amended before this week is over and before the Congress goes into the recess next two weeks.
The development is accompanied by three other developments:
President released statement supporting the bi-partisan agreement;
Senate rejected the Democrat's motion to cloture for the Specter amendments to S.2454;
Senate also relected the Republican Kyl' motion for his amendments.
Now we see the light at the end of the tunnel!!
whn i went to immigration-law.com, they say the following
cud someone tell me which one is true??????????
We reported earlier the Senate Republican Members Agreement last night. Today, the Democratic Minority Leader and other Democractic leaders agreed to the proposal, turning the Republican agreement into the Bi-Partisan Agreement. This dramatic break-through opens a door to the possibility of passing the Senate version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, S. 2454, as amended before this week is over and before the Congress goes into the recess next two weeks.
The development is accompanied by three other developments:
President released statement supporting the bi-partisan agreement;
Senate rejected the Democrat's motion to cloture for the Specter amendments to S.2454;
Senate also relected the Republican Kyl' motion for his amendments.
Now we see the light at the end of the tunnel!!
more...
cbpds
06-08 02:52 PM
Appreciate your response kondur, we have submitted the original I94, hence we shd be fine.
In my opinion, you do not really have to. here are a few points (to the best of my knowledge):
1. Surrendering I 94 establishes the day/date when you left US.
2. If you have more than one I 94 (from the same entry), the "white one" will be attached to your passport and others (that came with extension or change of status) will be attached to your approval notices. THEY ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SAME NUMBER. So, technically you have to surrender them all when you leave the country, but if you surrender any one of them, it still establishes the same thing and you do not need to do anything about the rest.
3. If you forgot to return I 94 altogether, keep a record of your leaving US on specific date (copy of boarding passes, passport stamp of entry in another country etc) and you can use that as an evidence of leaving in time (if asked about it in future). OR you can return your I 94 at a laterdate with these copies attached to USCIS.
I have not heard of anyone getting in trouble because of not returning I 94 (please correct me on this if any of you have heard of it) - as long as they did not overstay.
In my opinion, you do not really have to. here are a few points (to the best of my knowledge):
1. Surrendering I 94 establishes the day/date when you left US.
2. If you have more than one I 94 (from the same entry), the "white one" will be attached to your passport and others (that came with extension or change of status) will be attached to your approval notices. THEY ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SAME NUMBER. So, technically you have to surrender them all when you leave the country, but if you surrender any one of them, it still establishes the same thing and you do not need to do anything about the rest.
3. If you forgot to return I 94 altogether, keep a record of your leaving US on specific date (copy of boarding passes, passport stamp of entry in another country etc) and you can use that as an evidence of leaving in time (if asked about it in future). OR you can return your I 94 at a laterdate with these copies attached to USCIS.
I have not heard of anyone getting in trouble because of not returning I 94 (please correct me on this if any of you have heard of it) - as long as they did not overstay.
logiclife
08-03 05:25 PM
I worked for a firm for last couple of years and then moved to another firm. Now I want to apply for a Perm process and need the Experience letter. My previous employer has issued me the experience letter without my roles and responsibility:
It was an unprotected word file, so I changed it and incorporated the roles and responsibilty and my self submitted it to my employer; Now i am afraid if they are going to verify it.
1. What is the INS verification process?
2. Do employer can verifty it by Fax?
3. What can happen if INS came to know that everything was fine except the roles and responsibilities was included afterwards?
What you did was creative (in a bad way). Sorta illegal. And sorta forgerish and borderline fraudulent. I am not judging you, I am just telling you how it sounds.
Now, how did you add material to the word document that was already signed? And therin lies the bad part.
Anyways, correspondence between USCIS and employer/lawyer/employee is always thru mail. I dont think they communicate thru faxes.
Now, if for some reason INS (and by the way, its USCIS now) came to know afterwards, then you are in a deep hole because it sounds like fraud. Fraud is grounds of denial of immigration benefits (any benefit, like H1, or GC or citizenship). Besides, roles and responsibilities are not really needed if the letter says that all conditions in labor cert and 140 are still valid and employment is still offered as per labor cert. Then you dont need detailed description of what you are doing. And even if you felt the urge to add that part in your letter, why didnt you just ask them that?
It was an unprotected word file, so I changed it and incorporated the roles and responsibilty and my self submitted it to my employer; Now i am afraid if they are going to verify it.
1. What is the INS verification process?
2. Do employer can verifty it by Fax?
3. What can happen if INS came to know that everything was fine except the roles and responsibilities was included afterwards?
What you did was creative (in a bad way). Sorta illegal. And sorta forgerish and borderline fraudulent. I am not judging you, I am just telling you how it sounds.
Now, how did you add material to the word document that was already signed? And therin lies the bad part.
Anyways, correspondence between USCIS and employer/lawyer/employee is always thru mail. I dont think they communicate thru faxes.
Now, if for some reason INS (and by the way, its USCIS now) came to know afterwards, then you are in a deep hole because it sounds like fraud. Fraud is grounds of denial of immigration benefits (any benefit, like H1, or GC or citizenship). Besides, roles and responsibilities are not really needed if the letter says that all conditions in labor cert and 140 are still valid and employment is still offered as per labor cert. Then you dont need detailed description of what you are doing. And even if you felt the urge to add that part in your letter, why didnt you just ask them that?
more...
morchu
05-14 12:09 PM
Thanks for pointing this out (Hernandez letter).
It is new information to me.
H-1B is approved from Oct/1/2009. Currently I should be on L-1B. As per this article, I think I can travel without jeopardizing my future status. They call it the 'Hernandez letter'. Is this true?
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_cosapp.html
Thanks..
It is new information to me.
H-1B is approved from Oct/1/2009. Currently I should be on L-1B. As per this article, I think I can travel without jeopardizing my future status. They call it the 'Hernandez letter'. Is this true?
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_cosapp.html
Thanks..
2010 “Howdy Doody Show” star in
Maverick1
05-14 01:49 PM
I am sure this is noticed by many :
"E. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Demand for numbers, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices for adjustment of status cases, is expected to bring the Employment Third preference category very close to the annual numerical limit in June. As a result, this category is likely to experience retrogressions or visa unavailability beginning in July. Such action would only be temporary, however, and a complete recovery of the cut-off dates would occur for October, the first month of the new fiscal year. "
"E. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Demand for numbers, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices for adjustment of status cases, is expected to bring the Employment Third preference category very close to the annual numerical limit in June. As a result, this category is likely to experience retrogressions or visa unavailability beginning in July. Such action would only be temporary, however, and a complete recovery of the cut-off dates would occur for October, the first month of the new fiscal year. "
more...
watzgc
10-24 02:55 PM
Friends, we sent our h1b extension application in Jul 12 th to Vermont (VSC) and got receipt with in a week but still under process. now it is showing processing datge Apr 2007, can we convert to premium processing now ?. Thanks,:confused:
hair stock photo : Howdy Doody
looneytunezez
04-08 04:17 PM
Employment-based: At this time the amount of demand being received in the Employment First preference is extremely low compared with that of recent years. Absent an immediate and dramatic increase in demand, this category will remain “Current” for all countries. It also appears unlikely that a Second preference cut-off date will be imposed for any countries other than China and India, where demand is extremely high. Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off date movement each month during the coming months are as follows:
Employment Second: Demand by applicants who are “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is very high, but the exact amount is not known. Such “upgrades” are in addition to the known demand already reported, and make it very difficult to predict ultimate demand based on forward movement of the China and India cut-off dates. While thousands of “otherwise unused” numbers will be available for potential use without regard to the China and India Employment Second preference per-country annual limits, it is not known how the “upgrades” will ultimately impact the cut-offs for those two countries. (The allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers is discussed below.)
China: none to three weeks expected through July. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
India: One or more weeks, possibly followed by additional movement if demand remains stable. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
Employment Third:
Worldwide: three to six weeks
China: one to three weeks
India: none to two weeks
Mexico: although continued forward movement is expected, no specific projections are possible at this time.
Philippines: three to six weeks
Please be advised that the above ranges are estimates based upon the current demand patterns, and are subject to fluctuations during the coming months. The cut-off dates for upcoming months cannot be guaranteed, and no assumptions should be made until the formal dates are announced.
Allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers in accordance with Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 202(a)(5)
INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand in a calendar quarter will be insufficient to use all available numbers in an Employment preference, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. Based on current levels of demand, there will be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment First and Second preferences. Such numbers may be allocated without regard to per-country limits, once a country has reached its preference annual limit. Since under INA Section 203(e) such numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability, greater number use by one country would indicate greater demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates. Based on amount and priority dates of pending demand and year-to-date number use, a different cut-off date could be applied to each oversubscribed country, for the purpose of assuring that the maximum amount of available numbers will be used. Note that a cut-off date imposed to control the use of “otherwise unused” numbers could be earlier than the cut-off date established to control number use under a quarterly or per-country annual limit. For example, at present the India Employment Second preference cut-off date governs the use of numbers under Section 202(a)(5), India having reached its Employment Second annual limit; the China Employment Second preference cut-off date governs number use under the quarterly limit, since China has not yet reached its Employment Second annual limit.
The rate of number use under Section 202(a)(5) is continually monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for the oversubscribed countries. This helps assure that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while insuring that numbers also remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
As mentioned earlier, the number of applicants who may be “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is unknown. As a result, the cut-off date which governs use of Section 202(a)(5) numbers has been advanced more rapidly than normal, in an attempt to ascertain the amount of “upgrade” demand in the pipeline while at the same time administering use of the available numbers. This action risks a surge in demand that could adversely impact the cut-off date later in the fiscal year. However, it also limits the possibility that potential demand would not materialize and the annual limit would not be reached due to lack of cut-off date movement.
Employment Second: Demand by applicants who are “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is very high, but the exact amount is not known. Such “upgrades” are in addition to the known demand already reported, and make it very difficult to predict ultimate demand based on forward movement of the China and India cut-off dates. While thousands of “otherwise unused” numbers will be available for potential use without regard to the China and India Employment Second preference per-country annual limits, it is not known how the “upgrades” will ultimately impact the cut-offs for those two countries. (The allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers is discussed below.)
China: none to three weeks expected through July. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
India: One or more weeks, possibly followed by additional movement if demand remains stable. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
Employment Third:
Worldwide: three to six weeks
China: one to three weeks
India: none to two weeks
Mexico: although continued forward movement is expected, no specific projections are possible at this time.
Philippines: three to six weeks
Please be advised that the above ranges are estimates based upon the current demand patterns, and are subject to fluctuations during the coming months. The cut-off dates for upcoming months cannot be guaranteed, and no assumptions should be made until the formal dates are announced.
Allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers in accordance with Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 202(a)(5)
INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand in a calendar quarter will be insufficient to use all available numbers in an Employment preference, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. Based on current levels of demand, there will be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment First and Second preferences. Such numbers may be allocated without regard to per-country limits, once a country has reached its preference annual limit. Since under INA Section 203(e) such numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability, greater number use by one country would indicate greater demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates. Based on amount and priority dates of pending demand and year-to-date number use, a different cut-off date could be applied to each oversubscribed country, for the purpose of assuring that the maximum amount of available numbers will be used. Note that a cut-off date imposed to control the use of “otherwise unused” numbers could be earlier than the cut-off date established to control number use under a quarterly or per-country annual limit. For example, at present the India Employment Second preference cut-off date governs the use of numbers under Section 202(a)(5), India having reached its Employment Second annual limit; the China Employment Second preference cut-off date governs number use under the quarterly limit, since China has not yet reached its Employment Second annual limit.
The rate of number use under Section 202(a)(5) is continually monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for the oversubscribed countries. This helps assure that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while insuring that numbers also remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
As mentioned earlier, the number of applicants who may be “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is unknown. As a result, the cut-off date which governs use of Section 202(a)(5) numbers has been advanced more rapidly than normal, in an attempt to ascertain the amount of “upgrade” demand in the pipeline while at the same time administering use of the available numbers. This action risks a surge in demand that could adversely impact the cut-off date later in the fiscal year. However, it also limits the possibility that potential demand would not materialize and the annual limit would not be reached due to lack of cut-off date movement.
more...
GCwaitforever
06-03 11:08 PM
Sen. Sessions relied on Heritage Foundation report (Robert Rector) extensively. Does any body know the history of Heritage Foundation and who is the engine behind it?
hot Out jun starthowdy doody show
watertown
03-04 11:02 AM
Gurus,
I'm in Boston area and would like to know your opinion if I should file WOM!!!!
My case was filed in Aug, 2006 and I-485 was transferred to local office for interview on May 22, 2007. The interview went well and the lady officer indicated that I should get my card in 1 month!! That day was so nice!!!
Anyway, the reason for interview was I guess the previous I-485 submitted by my ex-wife after our seperation to put me in trouble in 2001 but I never took any benefit for that and I hand-delivered a letter to the IO when they asked me to come for interview in 2002. I explained that it should have been abandoned coz I sent letter even at the time for finger-print notice! Long story short, my ex and I had fight and I called the cop who took both of us to the custody and in the morning let us go. I didn't see the judge and.
So on this last I-485 (EB-2 ROW) I answered the question NO of if I had ever filled any immigration petition and NO to if I had ever been arrested.
Last year I was getting anxious when the card didn't arrive and Infopass told me that I was stuck in FBI-name check! I asked the congressman Ed Markey and his office told that my name check was cleared in Dec, 2006!!! I took another Infopass and again IO told me about Namecheck but when I told him about the info provided by Congressman, he then told me that it was going thru additional review!!
Now , guys....hsall I file a WOM? Whats your take?
I'm in Boston area and would like to know your opinion if I should file WOM!!!!
My case was filed in Aug, 2006 and I-485 was transferred to local office for interview on May 22, 2007. The interview went well and the lady officer indicated that I should get my card in 1 month!! That day was so nice!!!
Anyway, the reason for interview was I guess the previous I-485 submitted by my ex-wife after our seperation to put me in trouble in 2001 but I never took any benefit for that and I hand-delivered a letter to the IO when they asked me to come for interview in 2002. I explained that it should have been abandoned coz I sent letter even at the time for finger-print notice! Long story short, my ex and I had fight and I called the cop who took both of us to the custody and in the morning let us go. I didn't see the judge and.
So on this last I-485 (EB-2 ROW) I answered the question NO of if I had ever filled any immigration petition and NO to if I had ever been arrested.
Last year I was getting anxious when the card didn't arrive and Infopass told me that I was stuck in FBI-name check! I asked the congressman Ed Markey and his office told that my name check was cleared in Dec, 2006!!! I took another Infopass and again IO told me about Namecheck but when I told him about the info provided by Congressman, he then told me that it was going thru additional review!!
Now , guys....hsall I file a WOM? Whats your take?
more...
house howdy doody show. Howdy Doody the Ventriloquist
smuggymba
09-22 07:35 PM
Oh My God. These three won't stop, would they.
tattoo The Howdy Doody Show (1947-60)
snathan
04-13 07:45 AM
US needs EB1 and Ph.Ds
Others not contribute as much
But defintely not fake EB1C...they can take your GC and give it to other deserving people:D
Others not contribute as much
But defintely not fake EB1C...they can take your GC and give it to other deserving people:D
more...
pictures It#39;s no wonder you#39;re seeing
admin
06-01 11:02 PM
This is a PM from for_ac21iv to me. He couldn't post here as I had closed the thread.
Hi Admin,
I started the new thread and poll "Separate bill for legal immigrants from CIR provisions", with the intention to help realise and pursue what appeard to me as a option/opportunity that might help us legal immigrants. It just seems to me from media and other forums that cir may take a long long time.
I donot have complete knowledge of the process and timing of how legislation and lobbying works. Educating myself from aritles and posts on this and similar forums.
It has been almost 5 years since I started my gc process and am really looking for ways that might make it faster for people like me and future applicants going forward and I really appreciate what IV is doing in this direction.
I apologize if my poll, thread or intentions came across as anything but the above. Also, I will change my username, it has "iv" and may have lead others to interpret my messages as from IV.
Please post this message in that thread for me. It looks like "Separate bill for legal immigrants from CIR provisions" thread is closed.
Sincerely,
Hi Admin,
I started the new thread and poll "Separate bill for legal immigrants from CIR provisions", with the intention to help realise and pursue what appeard to me as a option/opportunity that might help us legal immigrants. It just seems to me from media and other forums that cir may take a long long time.
I donot have complete knowledge of the process and timing of how legislation and lobbying works. Educating myself from aritles and posts on this and similar forums.
It has been almost 5 years since I started my gc process and am really looking for ways that might make it faster for people like me and future applicants going forward and I really appreciate what IV is doing in this direction.
I apologize if my poll, thread or intentions came across as anything but the above. Also, I will change my username, it has "iv" and may have lead others to interpret my messages as from IV.
Please post this message in that thread for me. It looks like "Separate bill for legal immigrants from CIR provisions" thread is closed.
Sincerely,
dresses howdy doody show. wallfunny howdy doody feb; wallfunny howdy doody feb
ghost
09-19 04:32 PM
agreed, I just mean that publicly we whould not be asking explicitly to increase visa numbers.
It depends on who our audience is:
In interviews with newspapers for example, going into specifics like increasing visa numbers puts off the avg American, bec all he reads is increasing immigration.
But in speaking with a knowledgeable audience, like of course when approaching politicians, this can and should be done.
Excellent Strategy
It depends on who our audience is:
In interviews with newspapers for example, going into specifics like increasing visa numbers puts off the avg American, bec all he reads is increasing immigration.
But in speaking with a knowledgeable audience, like of course when approaching politicians, this can and should be done.
Excellent Strategy
more...
makeup Pictures of Howdy Doody Show
piyu7444
05-08 02:21 PM
:confused:
I am changing job and moving to EAD from h1b. My 140 is approved and 485 has been pending more than 180 days. I am in EB2 category.
Question 1 - New employer wants to inform USCIS about job change and I dont want to do so as it just might delay AOS process? suggestions/thoughsts?
Question 2 - New employer wants to apply for EAD and AP via corporate attorney and I prefer that my attorney do that but if i will have no choice I will have to give up BUT can corporate lawyers apply for my EAD and AP without me changing my legal rep with USCIS?
Question 3 - The job title was "Sr Systems Analyst" and now it would be "System Quality Analyst 5" 5 is the highest level in this company after which it goes to Tech. Manager. I dont see issue with the title...do you see any issue? (job description are similar-I would say about 70%)
Question 4 - Salary at the time of filing 140 was 60k offered for the Sr. System Analyst position and now with the new job is 100k. Can that be a problem?
I am changing job and moving to EAD from h1b. My 140 is approved and 485 has been pending more than 180 days. I am in EB2 category.
Question 1 - New employer wants to inform USCIS about job change and I dont want to do so as it just might delay AOS process? suggestions/thoughsts?
Question 2 - New employer wants to apply for EAD and AP via corporate attorney and I prefer that my attorney do that but if i will have no choice I will have to give up BUT can corporate lawyers apply for my EAD and AP without me changing my legal rep with USCIS?
Question 3 - The job title was "Sr Systems Analyst" and now it would be "System Quality Analyst 5" 5 is the highest level in this company after which it goes to Tech. Manager. I dont see issue with the title...do you see any issue? (job description are similar-I would say about 70%)
Question 4 - Salary at the time of filing 140 was 60k offered for the Sr. System Analyst position and now with the new job is 100k. Can that be a problem?
girlfriend The Howdy Doody Show - 40
ashkam
03-19 02:05 PM
low hanging fruit (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=I-485+low-hanging+fruit&btnG=Google+Search)
hairstyles Amazon.com: New Howdy Doody
ramus
06-28 04:42 PM
I am sorry.. I don't mean to hurt your feelings.. But this is rumer..
Can you give me link or any other offical source which is saying same thing..
You could have just put this in rumer thred.. Tell me is this helping one...
Everybody is so busy and workiing hard on getting paper work done.. Why do we want to put more burden on them? IF this is true then everybody will know it from different sources. And plus even if this is true what can you do? Can you fight against USCIS?
Hi ramus can you point to the others threads going on this subject?:o I did check other threads to put this info. In fact I don�t want create any new threads. After looking for one that is appropriate, which I did not find, I started this one. The closest one would be the �June 1st filers - receipt � which is a diffrent subject.
This is not a rumor, this a fact and I thought I should share with all so that every one will chill, take it easy and will not stressout in anticipation of 485 approval.
thx.
Can you give me link or any other offical source which is saying same thing..
You could have just put this in rumer thred.. Tell me is this helping one...
Everybody is so busy and workiing hard on getting paper work done.. Why do we want to put more burden on them? IF this is true then everybody will know it from different sources. And plus even if this is true what can you do? Can you fight against USCIS?
Hi ramus can you point to the others threads going on this subject?:o I did check other threads to put this info. In fact I don�t want create any new threads. After looking for one that is appropriate, which I did not find, I started this one. The closest one would be the �June 1st filers - receipt � which is a diffrent subject.
This is not a rumor, this a fact and I thought I should share with all so that every one will chill, take it easy and will not stressout in anticipation of 485 approval.
thx.
pappu
08-14 09:54 AM
The IV Advocacy kit is now available to all donors and state chapter leaders. Please contact your state chapter leaders to get the kit.
bsbawa10
02-12 05:13 AM
looks like this is what happening...
They have 100's of 1000's of cases....thrown in one dark room.
They have this Q on their computers, with cases approved Namecheck, background check, I-140, FP complete....
Now, when they are assigned with a case, they will try to find the file....Just imagine its not easy to find the case, but USCIS doesnt put any effort to sort them either.
So, he will leave that case there, go to next one...This is just my guess...
EXACTLY, they seem not to be organized and they do not have the will to be organized. They do not have will to find the files and they do not have will to process the case. The easiest thing for them is to pick up the file which they can grab from the top and process it if the PD is current. If you are lucky, you will get GC, otherwise , your file is burried somewhere and nobody excepting you has the desire to locate it. On the top of that , they have no accountability..nobody to check if the IO is doing the right thing or not. Nobody to check if the customer service is giving the right answers or not. Nobody to check if customer service is directing to the right people or not.
They have 100's of 1000's of cases....thrown in one dark room.
They have this Q on their computers, with cases approved Namecheck, background check, I-140, FP complete....
Now, when they are assigned with a case, they will try to find the file....Just imagine its not easy to find the case, but USCIS doesnt put any effort to sort them either.
So, he will leave that case there, go to next one...This is just my guess...
EXACTLY, they seem not to be organized and they do not have the will to be organized. They do not have will to find the files and they do not have will to process the case. The easiest thing for them is to pick up the file which they can grab from the top and process it if the PD is current. If you are lucky, you will get GC, otherwise , your file is burried somewhere and nobody excepting you has the desire to locate it. On the top of that , they have no accountability..nobody to check if the IO is doing the right thing or not. Nobody to check if the customer service is giving the right answers or not. Nobody to check if customer service is directing to the right people or not.
No comments:
Post a Comment