Junky
09-10 08:17 AM
Please call congressmen to support HR5882.
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-6906/ 202- 225-4236
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member new_horizon)
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV members cnag & Prashant)
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member little_willy)
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)202- 225-3072 (ALREADY SPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) 202-225-5101 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) 202-225-6676 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) 202-225-5635 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Artur Davis (D-Ala.) 202-225-2665 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Melvin L. Watt (D-N.C.)202- 225-1510 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
My apologies for re-posting...
but looks like we are all late... in the GC waiting game:rolleyes:
Hard to remain hopeful
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-6906/ 202- 225-4236
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member new_horizon)
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV members cnag & Prashant)
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member little_willy)
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)202- 225-3072 (ALREADY SPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) 202-225-5101 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) 202-225-6676 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) 202-225-5635 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Artur Davis (D-Ala.) 202-225-2665 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Melvin L. Watt (D-N.C.)202- 225-1510 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
My apologies for re-posting...
but looks like we are all late... in the GC waiting game:rolleyes:
Hard to remain hopeful
check_name
07-24 07:35 PM
I'm a new comer... I would like to contribute if I could...but what's IV?
sorry that I was away the past weekend, thus the late reply
Hi,
Thanks for contributing to our common cause if you have already done. If not, I would like your to contribute to IV. Every member in this forum has different issues and IV is working towards most of the issues.
sorry that I was away the past weekend, thus the late reply
Hi,
Thanks for contributing to our common cause if you have already done. If not, I would like your to contribute to IV. Every member in this forum has different issues and IV is working towards most of the issues.
eb3India
09-25 10:19 AM
Here is the mail from AILA,
September 25, 2006
Dear Immigration Advocates-
Your help is STILL needed TODAY! Senate Appropriators will meet late THIS AFTERNOON to decide if enforcement-only bills will be included in the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations package. Urge your Senators to oppose efforts to attach anti-immigration measures to this must-pass bill. Call or email your Senators TODAY - encourage them to weigh-in with Senate Appropriators about this urgent matter.
You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
Email your Senators through Contact Congress on AILA's website. We've already created a sample letter for you to send. All you need to do is enter your zip code, hit send, and your voice will be heard in Congress.
Call your Senators, you can find their telephone numbers in our Congressional Directory and you can use these talking points to help you when you call:
� Congress should stop playing politics with immigration and pass comprehensive immigration reform. These enforcement-only bills will do nothing to enhance border security and will not move us one inch closer to fixing our broken immigration system.
� Attaching these bills to DHS appropriations circumvents the legislative process on an issue of critical national importance; it undermines the intense and unflagging efforts of the Senate to solve this crisis; and it rewards the House for spending the summer attacking the Senate while abdicating its responsibility to the American people.
� Senators should forcefully oppose this effort by the House to nullify the Senate's bi-partison solution. If the Senate acquiesces on these provisions, the House will only be emboldened and will never return to debate comprehensive reform. This will not be "enforcement-first", it will be "enforcement-only."
� For laws to work, they must be realistic and fair. Our current immigration laws are neither: proposals like these that ignore the reality that immigrants come here to work and to be with their families are destined to fail.
� Giving the government unchecked powers to punish immigrants, and making local police chase after immigrants, will only drive undocumented immigrants further underground. It will not fix the problem; it will make matters worse.
We called you to action last week to alert you to an underhanded political strategy from immigration restrictionists to attach three enforcement-only bills to the DHS appropriations bill, a bill that must pass this year. You and your colleagues sent close to 2,000 letters to Congress, but we'll need more letters and phone calls in order to ensure that Senate Appropriators exclude these measures from the bill.
Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are working behind closed doors and using procedural mechanisms to attach enforcement-only provisions contained in three bills (H.R. 6094, H.R. 6095, and H.R. 4830) to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, a piece of legislation that must pass this year. Although House leaders label these bills "border security" legislation, they are in fact harsh enforcement measures lifted from Rep. Sensenbrenner's H.R. 4437 that endanger due process rights and do little to make our borders more secure. You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
If these provisions are attached to the must-pass DHS bill, it will be nearly impossible to defeat them. Our best defense against this backdoor strategy is to put pressure on each U.S. Senator and encourage them to oppose any attempt to attach, or further these three enforcement-only bills. We're working hard in Washington to derail these political machinations, but we can't do it alone. We need your help. Please email or call both of your Senators today.
Over the summer House leadership used dozens of faux hearings to stage public displays of aversion to immigration reform. While they kept the media busy and their restrictionist base roiled, they failed to change the minds of the majority of Americans who support a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Nor did they succeed in backing down the U.S. Senators who supported S. 2611, a strong step towards comprehensive immigration reform. Now that House leaders know that the full Senate won't pass their enforcement-only agenda, they have resorted to closed-door politicking. We must fight to prevent the breach of justice that would result from attaching these enforcement-only bills to must-pass legislation.
Please call and email your Senators today. Now is the time for action.
Sincerely,
Marshall
Marshall Fitz
Director of Advocacy, AILA
Email Marshall
The enforcement-only provisions are:
� Sections 101 and 102 of the Dangerous Alien Detention Act contained in H.R. 6094, which seek to legitimize the practice of indefinite detention of aliens awaiting removal, despite Supreme Court decisions requiring elimination of this practice;
� Section 201 of the Criminal Alien Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would expand the use of expedited removal proceedings to individuals already in the United States - even individuals who have resided here for years - in ways that would significantly increase the risk of deporting innocent people;
� Sections 301-303 of the Alien Gang Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would grant unfettered discretion to the executive branch to designate "criminal street gangs" and then strip members of such gangs of virtually all rights;
� Section 101 of H.R. 6095, which gives state and local police authority to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for civil violations of immigration status;
� Sections 301 and 302 of the Ending Catch and Release Act contained in H.R. 6095, which would limit the power of federal courts to grant injunctive relief in civil immigration proceedings, despite acknowledgement by DOJ that such relief does not interfere with efforts to end the practice of catch-and-release.
September 25, 2006
Dear Immigration Advocates-
Your help is STILL needed TODAY! Senate Appropriators will meet late THIS AFTERNOON to decide if enforcement-only bills will be included in the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations package. Urge your Senators to oppose efforts to attach anti-immigration measures to this must-pass bill. Call or email your Senators TODAY - encourage them to weigh-in with Senate Appropriators about this urgent matter.
You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
Email your Senators through Contact Congress on AILA's website. We've already created a sample letter for you to send. All you need to do is enter your zip code, hit send, and your voice will be heard in Congress.
Call your Senators, you can find their telephone numbers in our Congressional Directory and you can use these talking points to help you when you call:
� Congress should stop playing politics with immigration and pass comprehensive immigration reform. These enforcement-only bills will do nothing to enhance border security and will not move us one inch closer to fixing our broken immigration system.
� Attaching these bills to DHS appropriations circumvents the legislative process on an issue of critical national importance; it undermines the intense and unflagging efforts of the Senate to solve this crisis; and it rewards the House for spending the summer attacking the Senate while abdicating its responsibility to the American people.
� Senators should forcefully oppose this effort by the House to nullify the Senate's bi-partison solution. If the Senate acquiesces on these provisions, the House will only be emboldened and will never return to debate comprehensive reform. This will not be "enforcement-first", it will be "enforcement-only."
� For laws to work, they must be realistic and fair. Our current immigration laws are neither: proposals like these that ignore the reality that immigrants come here to work and to be with their families are destined to fail.
� Giving the government unchecked powers to punish immigrants, and making local police chase after immigrants, will only drive undocumented immigrants further underground. It will not fix the problem; it will make matters worse.
We called you to action last week to alert you to an underhanded political strategy from immigration restrictionists to attach three enforcement-only bills to the DHS appropriations bill, a bill that must pass this year. You and your colleagues sent close to 2,000 letters to Congress, but we'll need more letters and phone calls in order to ensure that Senate Appropriators exclude these measures from the bill.
Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are working behind closed doors and using procedural mechanisms to attach enforcement-only provisions contained in three bills (H.R. 6094, H.R. 6095, and H.R. 4830) to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, a piece of legislation that must pass this year. Although House leaders label these bills "border security" legislation, they are in fact harsh enforcement measures lifted from Rep. Sensenbrenner's H.R. 4437 that endanger due process rights and do little to make our borders more secure. You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
If these provisions are attached to the must-pass DHS bill, it will be nearly impossible to defeat them. Our best defense against this backdoor strategy is to put pressure on each U.S. Senator and encourage them to oppose any attempt to attach, or further these three enforcement-only bills. We're working hard in Washington to derail these political machinations, but we can't do it alone. We need your help. Please email or call both of your Senators today.
Over the summer House leadership used dozens of faux hearings to stage public displays of aversion to immigration reform. While they kept the media busy and their restrictionist base roiled, they failed to change the minds of the majority of Americans who support a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Nor did they succeed in backing down the U.S. Senators who supported S. 2611, a strong step towards comprehensive immigration reform. Now that House leaders know that the full Senate won't pass their enforcement-only agenda, they have resorted to closed-door politicking. We must fight to prevent the breach of justice that would result from attaching these enforcement-only bills to must-pass legislation.
Please call and email your Senators today. Now is the time for action.
Sincerely,
Marshall
Marshall Fitz
Director of Advocacy, AILA
Email Marshall
The enforcement-only provisions are:
� Sections 101 and 102 of the Dangerous Alien Detention Act contained in H.R. 6094, which seek to legitimize the practice of indefinite detention of aliens awaiting removal, despite Supreme Court decisions requiring elimination of this practice;
� Section 201 of the Criminal Alien Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would expand the use of expedited removal proceedings to individuals already in the United States - even individuals who have resided here for years - in ways that would significantly increase the risk of deporting innocent people;
� Sections 301-303 of the Alien Gang Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would grant unfettered discretion to the executive branch to designate "criminal street gangs" and then strip members of such gangs of virtually all rights;
� Section 101 of H.R. 6095, which gives state and local police authority to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for civil violations of immigration status;
� Sections 301 and 302 of the Ending Catch and Release Act contained in H.R. 6095, which would limit the power of federal courts to grant injunctive relief in civil immigration proceedings, despite acknowledgement by DOJ that such relief does not interfere with efforts to end the practice of catch-and-release.
AB1275
09-25 03:48 PM
Thanks for your response.....
What happens if I-140 gets revoked?
The market situation isnt that great....What if I am unable to get a job prior to I-140 being revoked?
Will my EAD be valid?
What happens if I-140 gets revoked?
The market situation isnt that great....What if I am unable to get a job prior to I-140 being revoked?
Will my EAD be valid?
more...
blacktongue
01-17 10:03 AM
Indian farmer suicides rise to 17,000 a year - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110117/wl_sthasia_afp/indiafarmingsuicideroadaccident_20110117120832)
Sad shameful
Sad shameful
FrankZulu
08-15 05:01 AM
3) Lets say I move back to India after getting the green card, is it enough to simply enter the US once a year to keep my green card active? Can I apply for citizenship after 5 years of having the green card, even though I haven't resided in the US for those 5 years?
Thanks.
You have to enter US once at least in 6 months & not 1 year.
Thanks.
You have to enter US once at least in 6 months & not 1 year.
more...
neelu
09-15 03:32 AM
Hello,
I apologize in advance, if I should have posted in a different thread - if so please let me know and I can post there (and admins can delete this one).
My priority date from Perm is Feb 2006. But I have an earlier priority date of Jan 2005 (I-140 approved). I dont know if that earlier date has been applied to my I-485 (which is based on the Perm labor). My case is in NSC.
After seeing the October VB (acc to which my RIR PD becomes current in Oct), I opened an SR to see if they interfiled my two cases. I got a letter in the mail from USCIS, but no reponse in it to my question. Instead it states the following:
"The status of this service request is:
Your case is currently being prepared for review. If further information is needed, you will be contacted. Continue to check the USCIS website for case status updates."
A few questions:
1) What does "being prepared for review" mean? Should I expect more RFEs? We had responded to Medical RFEs in April this year.
2) How can I make sure that my two cases are combined?
3) Is there any preparatory action I can take before October 1st?
I would appreciate your comments and advice on the above.
Thank you in advance.
I apologize in advance, if I should have posted in a different thread - if so please let me know and I can post there (and admins can delete this one).
My priority date from Perm is Feb 2006. But I have an earlier priority date of Jan 2005 (I-140 approved). I dont know if that earlier date has been applied to my I-485 (which is based on the Perm labor). My case is in NSC.
After seeing the October VB (acc to which my RIR PD becomes current in Oct), I opened an SR to see if they interfiled my two cases. I got a letter in the mail from USCIS, but no reponse in it to my question. Instead it states the following:
"The status of this service request is:
Your case is currently being prepared for review. If further information is needed, you will be contacted. Continue to check the USCIS website for case status updates."
A few questions:
1) What does "being prepared for review" mean? Should I expect more RFEs? We had responded to Medical RFEs in April this year.
2) How can I make sure that my two cases are combined?
3) Is there any preparatory action I can take before October 1st?
I would appreciate your comments and advice on the above.
Thank you in advance.
smartboy75
07-17 07:30 PM
Kindly reply to this thread so that it is always visible under RECENT POSTS just as a reminder to everyone ..
more...
dhesha
08-14 02:53 PM
Hello Guys,
I have E-Filed for EAD renew on jne 27th and have sent all the supporting documents the following day. But on Aug 6th recieved an RFE for the photos I haven't sent along with the documents and asked me submit 2 color passport photos. It was my understading that I don't have to send the photos while E-filing since they will be taken at the bio-metric appt. I am done with my bio-metric appt. Do i need to contact USCIS about this or is there any thing you guys can suggest me.
Regards
Vijay
p.s I have already responded to the RFE with 2 color photos.
Some times we need to think ahead!!. I sent all the stuff (Including the one they asked not to send) and got EAD on time :-)
I have E-Filed for EAD renew on jne 27th and have sent all the supporting documents the following day. But on Aug 6th recieved an RFE for the photos I haven't sent along with the documents and asked me submit 2 color passport photos. It was my understading that I don't have to send the photos while E-filing since they will be taken at the bio-metric appt. I am done with my bio-metric appt. Do i need to contact USCIS about this or is there any thing you guys can suggest me.
Regards
Vijay
p.s I have already responded to the RFE with 2 color photos.
Some times we need to think ahead!!. I sent all the stuff (Including the one they asked not to send) and got EAD on time :-)
anjalihi
04-12 07:57 AM
I had started my GC process just a couple months before my 6th yr began. But I was able to complete the requirements for PERM and apply for my Labor Cert only after my 6th yr started. I was 45 days short of 365 days requirement. But I was able to recapture all my time that I had spent outside of US on vacations in last 5 yrs and make up for the 45 days shortage.
Do keep in mind that completing the requirements for PERM itself easily takes up 2 months + time for all the initial paper work.
For your situation, you are already 4-5 months into your 6th yr.... thats going to be very tough.
Do keep in mind that completing the requirements for PERM itself easily takes up 2 months + time for all the initial paper work.
For your situation, you are already 4-5 months into your 6th yr.... thats going to be very tough.
more...
immig4me
04-29 11:09 AM
Have you sent the renewal papers to the right location? If not, after Mar 26th receive date, the applications will be sent back to the applicant - to be sent to the correct lock box.
USCIS - Change of Filing Location for Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3ca0808dfb107210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
USCIS - Change of Filing Location for Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3ca0808dfb107210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
mhtanim
02-12 11:20 PM
Sorry, if this seems off-topic.
I'm on H1B visa and my wife is on H4 visa. We file our taxes as a joint return. My wife is currently studying for MS. She has received in-state tuition fees. We received 1098-T from the university. I'm thiking about getting a lifetime learning credit which will reduce my tax bill. My questions are:
* Are people on H1/H4 allowed to take lifetime learning credit for graduate studies?
* Will this have any negative effect on our greencard in the future?
Thanks.
Yes, you are allowed to take lifetime learning credit. It has nothing to do with your visa status.
It should not have any effects on your greencard process.
I'm on H1B visa and my wife is on H4 visa. We file our taxes as a joint return. My wife is currently studying for MS. She has received in-state tuition fees. We received 1098-T from the university. I'm thiking about getting a lifetime learning credit which will reduce my tax bill. My questions are:
* Are people on H1/H4 allowed to take lifetime learning credit for graduate studies?
* Will this have any negative effect on our greencard in the future?
Thanks.
Yes, you are allowed to take lifetime learning credit. It has nothing to do with your visa status.
It should not have any effects on your greencard process.
more...
life99f
05-21 07:34 PM
Support!!!!
We should have only one focus. Eliminate EB retro first. For that a simple amendment will be, 242K visa is open to both old EB and newly created merit system. That�s all. This amendment will eliminate the retro immediately. All other discussions and efforts are waste of time and energy
We should have only one focus. Eliminate EB retro first. For that a simple amendment will be, 242K visa is open to both old EB and newly created merit system. That�s all. This amendment will eliminate the retro immediately. All other discussions and efforts are waste of time and energy
jediknight
02-08 07:02 PM
We need to work with everyone and fix the legal immigration mess.
Once that is fixed, there would be no reason for people to break the immigration law. That problem will automatically go away.
"What line?" is a good question to ask all the anti-immigration groups. I hate it when they have names like "Americans for Legal Immigration." They should publish a list of their accomplishments for legal immigrants :-)
- JZ
Once that is fixed, there would be no reason for people to break the immigration law. That problem will automatically go away.
"What line?" is a good question to ask all the anti-immigration groups. I hate it when they have names like "Americans for Legal Immigration." They should publish a list of their accomplishments for legal immigrants :-)
- JZ
more...
-.--my-love-animals--m--Ekpedoho--my-album--google--love-%25252525252526-lovely--LOVE-and-ELephants--Send-image-as-postcard-to-firends--ja-te%C5%BC-ci%C4%99-lubi%C4%99--Zwierz%C4%99ta--E_large.jpg "beautiful love birds wallpaper")
cagedcactus
04-22 08:48 AM
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) recently expanded the reinstatement of premium processing for I-140 petitions. This is a subtle change, still limiting I-140 premium processing to a small group of cases for which the I-140 approval is needed in order to obtain eligibility for additional H1B time. The change was effective March 2, 2009. The expansion includes individuals who have already reached the end of their six years in H1B status, who would be eligible for additional time upon the approval of the I-140 petition. This situation is explained here for MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers. Examples of options for individuals in H1B status are also provided.
========================
jack
Monavie Acai Juice Berry Extreme (http://www.acai.vg)
radon granite countertop (http://accurateinspections.com/radoncountertopgranite.htm)
I am sorry if I am not reading this right, but does it mean that a person on his 7th year H-1B can apply for pp? I am currently on 7nth year, and renewal is due before september. My I 140 is pending since July 2007, and no LUDs or updates. Am I elligible?
========================
jack
Monavie Acai Juice Berry Extreme (http://www.acai.vg)
radon granite countertop (http://accurateinspections.com/radoncountertopgranite.htm)
I am sorry if I am not reading this right, but does it mean that a person on his 7th year H-1B can apply for pp? I am currently on 7nth year, and renewal is due before september. My I 140 is pending since July 2007, and no LUDs or updates. Am I elligible?
member123
09-24 03:26 PM
I140 filed Apr 19 2007
I140 Approved Apr 23rd 2007
I485 filed ..on July 24th 2007 to TEXAS
LUD on I140 08/05/2007
wow the 140 filed on 4/19 and approved on 4/24 to TSC was it Premium Processing?
never knew they can be this fast. as the minimum i was seeing was 5-6 mnths. does this have anything to do with how bid the company is and all?
i have filed on the similar date and waiting for more than 6 mnths now to TSC regular processing.
I140 Approved Apr 23rd 2007
I485 filed ..on July 24th 2007 to TEXAS
LUD on I140 08/05/2007
wow the 140 filed on 4/19 and approved on 4/24 to TSC was it Premium Processing?
never knew they can be this fast. as the minimum i was seeing was 5-6 mnths. does this have anything to do with how bid the company is and all?
i have filed on the similar date and waiting for more than 6 mnths now to TSC regular processing.
more...
gceb3holder
02-27 09:19 AM
Glus
That was exactly what I was looking for.
What happen if the employer fire me because the project I am working on finishes and they can't reallocate me right away? Or for any other reasons? Of course I will not push anything to be fired, but it is a situation that can happen, specially with IT.
Tks!
That was exactly what I was looking for.
What happen if the employer fire me because the project I am working on finishes and they can't reallocate me right away? Or for any other reasons? Of course I will not push anything to be fired, but it is a situation that can happen, specially with IT.
Tks!
smisachu
12-09 05:52 PM
Just out of curiosity, what kind of jobs do you guys do? What is your educational qualification? I am getting my PhD but it is still some time before I finish, I want to know if there is any way to port from EB2 to EB1 before that.
nousername
07-22 07:57 PM
Well said
On a lighter note, you may not even want to prove your legal status. After CIR you'll be in a better position to get adjusted, faster and easier!
On a lighter note, you may not even want to prove your legal status. After CIR you'll be in a better position to get adjusted, faster and easier!
agt
05-22 11:42 AM
My Employer is not paying me salary even I am on Project.
can any one please tell me that how to report to DOL about this company.
AGT
can any one please tell me that how to report to DOL about this company.
AGT
ca_immigrant
02-13 10:07 PM
Hi Friends,
I was trying to get online tickets for my parents to come from Chennai to SFO.
..I was planning to pay from here using my credit card...but guess that might not work( see text in italics below from the airline website) , My parent have an icici debit card but that one has a limit from icici for 50,000 Rs or 75,000 Rs or so, the tickets are totally 1 lakh + so trying to figure out what might be the options....
Have the physical credit card originally used for the purchase presented by the cardholder for verification at check-in, OR on collecting the tickets, OR at the nearest Cathay Pacific Ticketing Office prior to the flight departure. The cardholder does not need to book and travel. If a transaction is successfully made with "Verified by Visa", or "MasterCard� SecureCode�", the cardholder will not be required to present the physical card used for verification.
I understand that if the cardholder fails to present the physical card originally used for booking transaction, the carrier reserves the right to -
Deny boarding, or
Collect a guarantee payment (in cash or from a new credit card).
Anyone been able to book from here for tickets starting from India ?
Thanks in Advance !!
Regards,
I was trying to get online tickets for my parents to come from Chennai to SFO.
..I was planning to pay from here using my credit card...but guess that might not work( see text in italics below from the airline website) , My parent have an icici debit card but that one has a limit from icici for 50,000 Rs or 75,000 Rs or so, the tickets are totally 1 lakh + so trying to figure out what might be the options....
Have the physical credit card originally used for the purchase presented by the cardholder for verification at check-in, OR on collecting the tickets, OR at the nearest Cathay Pacific Ticketing Office prior to the flight departure. The cardholder does not need to book and travel. If a transaction is successfully made with "Verified by Visa", or "MasterCard� SecureCode�", the cardholder will not be required to present the physical card used for verification.
I understand that if the cardholder fails to present the physical card originally used for booking transaction, the carrier reserves the right to -
Deny boarding, or
Collect a guarantee payment (in cash or from a new credit card).
Anyone been able to book from here for tickets starting from India ?
Thanks in Advance !!
Regards,
0 comments:
Post a Comment