EB3_SEP04
08-22 11:24 AM
I applied on June 12 (paper file) at TSC , Notice date June 18th , RD June 13th and received EAD cards on Aug 18th (CPO mail on Aug 15th).
Hope this info helps.
My RD is 7/2/08, still waiting for approval, not even an LUD after notice date. I see EB2 folks getting renewals within 30 days or so. Isn't this descrimination?
Hope this info helps.
My RD is 7/2/08, still waiting for approval, not even an LUD after notice date. I see EB2 folks getting renewals within 30 days or so. Isn't this descrimination?
wallpaper outbreak of ww1. at the outbreak of WW1 and; at the outbreak of WW1 and
bbenhill
01-14 05:59 PM
Hi ca_immigrant, agree with ur point. I gave you green :-)
Thx
bbenhill
Congrats !
and thank you to desi485 for posting the link
Good one and particulary moving was the last point ... -:)
14. And yes, move the family first commitment at the top of your must-do list, now that you have less worry about re-entry, and make that long-delayed trip home to see your old folks one more time. (I am visiting my 83-yr old Dad, who still has more hair than I do, and less gray too, in June.)
I first laughed when I read about the hair..(I too have less and a lot grey at 35 ...LOL and actually had grey hair since 20....donnno y....
but then after a few minutes for some reason I almost had tears rolling down my eyes (reminded me about parents.....) ....well call my an emtional fool....
neways...I always pray to God that whaterver happens please always help me remeber my parents !! and never forget all the great things they have done for us !!!
(They are in India with my elder borther)
oops...sorry for writing something out of context....
but again Congrats !!
Thx
bbenhill
Congrats !
and thank you to desi485 for posting the link
Good one and particulary moving was the last point ... -:)
14. And yes, move the family first commitment at the top of your must-do list, now that you have less worry about re-entry, and make that long-delayed trip home to see your old folks one more time. (I am visiting my 83-yr old Dad, who still has more hair than I do, and less gray too, in June.)
I first laughed when I read about the hair..(I too have less and a lot grey at 35 ...LOL and actually had grey hair since 20....donnno y....
but then after a few minutes for some reason I almost had tears rolling down my eyes (reminded me about parents.....) ....well call my an emtional fool....
neways...I always pray to God that whaterver happens please always help me remeber my parents !! and never forget all the great things they have done for us !!!
(They are in India with my elder borther)
oops...sorry for writing something out of context....
but again Congrats !!
rajuram
01-15 01:47 AM
I think more members will join and people will be willing to contribute more if they see positive things happening. Right now we seem to be going no where. Even if a basic thing like filing for 485 during retrogression gets passed, people will gain confidence in IV and they will be willing to contribute money.
2011 outbreak of ww1. to the
sunny26
04-26 09:48 PM
I traveled recently from DTW to india using lufthansa. Allowed two baggage for me and 2 for my son(4yrs old) without any problem
more...
raju6855
02-06 09:49 AM
What number do you call?
Thx
Thx
PDOCT05
08-15 01:17 PM
Sent on 07/02, reached on 07/03. Notice date is 08/13. Checks were encashed on 08/14. :):)
140 was approved from Nebraska.
Good luck to all of you. You will get it soon.
Congrats.Can you share who signed your packet and what time it reached NSC? I am just curious whether i will have any luck..to get the RN in next couple of days.
140 was approved from Nebraska.
Good luck to all of you. You will get it soon.
Congrats.Can you share who signed your packet and what time it reached NSC? I am just curious whether i will have any luck..to get the RN in next couple of days.
more...
smisachu
11-06 09:38 AM
Any one knows which Airline is good (Cost & Service) from Newark to Bangalore? I have flown AI with stop over in Bom, but would prefer something direct to Bangalore.
Thanks
Thanks
2010 after the outbreak of WWI
sertasheep
05-24 01:52 PM
Great job, Salil. Can you share your experience working with the press? Was it easy getting the newspaper to carry this article, or did you have to pursue this for a long time? The reason I am asking this is, its hard for one to determine what the media will print. They may take one quote from you but might use it in a different context. I came very close to quoting on Seattle Times but stayed put as the reporter wanted my opinion on the "other" current debate that's going on, and she was not willing to carry an article on Legal immigration alone.
more...
WillIBLucky
11-17 12:19 PM
if EB reform is discussed as a part of CIR in 2007, i am sure it will be 2008 by the time they start implementing it and 2009 by the time you will see any tangible benefits from it. CIR is not something that will be discussed and approved in a month. After CIR is approved (thats big if) it will take a few months for CIS to come up with the guidelines and prepare itself to handle the increased work load. Look for substantial delays.
IMO, Our best hope is if EB relief is picked up earlier and approved on its own before they talk about CIR.
SKIL is the best bet for us. Hopefully we will see it being discussed soon in Senate.
IMO, Our best hope is if EB relief is picked up earlier and approved on its own before they talk about CIR.
SKIL is the best bet for us. Hopefully we will see it being discussed soon in Senate.
hair outbreak of World War One.
chanduv23
09-14 03:23 PM
He is the best - I am at work - but will listen to the radio.
Way to go logiclife - we are with you
Way to go logiclife - we are with you
more...
shahuja
02-04 05:07 PM
imneedy..mine is renewal..they have my pp..ND consulate..and today is 23rd calendar day..
hot outbreak of World War One
pointlesswait
01-21 11:22 AM
it sounds like it came right out of his a$$
:p
This rumour sounds like its straight out of timesofindia :p;)
:p
This rumour sounds like its straight out of timesofindia :p;)
more...
house At the outbreak of the WW1 the
saurav_4096
06-19 09:53 AM
Mr. EndlessWait -
You extended your status, not visa. Please get your basics correct.
1. Nonimmigrant Visa number
Visa Number for the last issued visa (does not matter if is expired)
2. Date Visa Issued
Date of Issue for Visa in #1
3. Consulate Where Visa was Issued.
Place of Issue for Visa in #1
Good Luck
Please check and verify details with your attorney/lawyer. This is NOT a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
If there is sufficeint time left on H1B, can one go for stamping at consulate although I485 is filed.
You extended your status, not visa. Please get your basics correct.
1. Nonimmigrant Visa number
Visa Number for the last issued visa (does not matter if is expired)
2. Date Visa Issued
Date of Issue for Visa in #1
3. Consulate Where Visa was Issued.
Place of Issue for Visa in #1
Good Luck
Please check and verify details with your attorney/lawyer. This is NOT a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
If there is sufficeint time left on H1B, can one go for stamping at consulate although I485 is filed.
tattoo at the eginning of WWI;
VDaminator
06-11 05:59 PM
trust me if there wasnt a bra in the pic I used then there wouldn't be a bra on the pic I posted lmao.
more...
pictures 2010 role in the start of WWI.
vedicman
01-04 08:34 AM
Ten years ago, George W. Bush came to Washington as the first new president in a generation or more who had deep personal convictions about immigration policy and some plans for where he wanted to go with it. He wasn't alone. Lots of people in lots of places were ready to work on the issue: Republicans, Democrats, Hispanic advocates, business leaders, even the Mexican government.
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
dresses the outbreak of WWI,
mchundi
07-27 08:41 PM
Hi everyone,
I have a question on changing jobs. I am on my second H1b and my h1 expires in a little over a year. I have a possible offer for a job and would like to change. My question is if i DO change jobs right now, can i still apply for my PERM and will i be eligible for further h1b extentions?
A friend mentioned to me that your labour needs to be applied for atleast one whole year (even if it has been approved in PERM), to be able to apply for any kind of H1 extentions.
Can someone on here please tell me what the law is on H1B extentions and how it works exactly in a case like mine.
Thanks
If ur current employer did not apply for a labor, it doesnot matter anyway, as u r in the same position.
Ur friend is right. However if ur I-140 is also approved, u will continue to get H1-B extensions beyond 6 years.
--MC
I have a question on changing jobs. I am on my second H1b and my h1 expires in a little over a year. I have a possible offer for a job and would like to change. My question is if i DO change jobs right now, can i still apply for my PERM and will i be eligible for further h1b extentions?
A friend mentioned to me that your labour needs to be applied for atleast one whole year (even if it has been approved in PERM), to be able to apply for any kind of H1 extentions.
Can someone on here please tell me what the law is on H1B extentions and how it works exactly in a case like mine.
Thanks
If ur current employer did not apply for a labor, it doesnot matter anyway, as u r in the same position.
Ur friend is right. However if ur I-140 is also approved, u will continue to get H1-B extensions beyond 6 years.
--MC
more...
makeup 1914 saw the outbreak of WW1
jonty_11
07-12 12:00 PM
if u switch status from h1 to h4...i think u willl be subjected to cap next time u file for H1..as its a fresh H1 and not H1-Transfer
girlfriend outbreak of ww1. outbreak of WWI prevented; outbreak of WWI prevented
ivgclive
04-13 09:24 AM
It is good that you came out at last to check in IV.
You and your employer are tied on a fraud rope strongly, you can not get out of it. If he wants to jump into the water or you, you guys pull each other.
Hi,
I am on H1B without job and no paystubs.
My employer has been trying to find a project for me but till now he couldnt get anything.
Its been 6 months alreay since I am on H1B visa.
He made me modify my actual experience to include fake projects .
Now I am thinking of filing a complaint to DOL.
I have my H1B petition and offer letter from the employer.
But I am worried that if I file complaint ,my employer will threaten me telling that I faked my experience and submitted fake resumes.
What should I do? Will DOL take any action against me?
Any success stories of DOL complaint filing?
You and your employer are tied on a fraud rope strongly, you can not get out of it. If he wants to jump into the water or you, you guys pull each other.
Hi,
I am on H1B without job and no paystubs.
My employer has been trying to find a project for me but till now he couldnt get anything.
Its been 6 months alreay since I am on H1B visa.
He made me modify my actual experience to include fake projects .
Now I am thinking of filing a complaint to DOL.
I have my H1B petition and offer letter from the employer.
But I am worried that if I file complaint ,my employer will threaten me telling that I faked my experience and submitted fake resumes.
What should I do? Will DOL take any action against me?
Any success stories of DOL complaint filing?
hairstyles outbreak of ww1. outbreak of ww1. outbreak of ww1. MacBytes
vinodp1978
06-29 09:30 PM
Guys,
I am in a situation where if i dont file I-140 by PP i will not be eligible for H1b extension. My Labor date is april 27,2007 and my 6th year H1b expiration date is Feb 2,2008..so the 365 days rule wont work. The only way i can be in this country is if my 140/485 gets accepted and i get EAD or PP for 140 gets reinstated for me to extend.
Also if PP for 140 goes away what is the typical time to process from NSC?
can anyone tell me if i am reading the laws right?? any other options?
Thanks.
I am in a situation where if i dont file I-140 by PP i will not be eligible for H1b extension. My Labor date is april 27,2007 and my 6th year H1b expiration date is Feb 2,2008..so the 365 days rule wont work. The only way i can be in this country is if my 140/485 gets accepted and i get EAD or PP for 140 gets reinstated for me to extend.
Also if PP for 140 goes away what is the typical time to process from NSC?
can anyone tell me if i am reading the laws right?? any other options?
Thanks.
snathan
02-09 09:23 PM
Infact, I got good news today. My MTR approved after 3 months. My 485 was denied due to withdrawal of I140 by previous employer (AC21 case).
So I had applied MTR and approved today. Looks like USCIS understood the error and approving all MTR (I didn't hear a single MTR rejection on AC21 case )
Celebrate the good news and donate here at
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23597&page=1000
So I had applied MTR and approved today. Looks like USCIS understood the error and approving all MTR (I didn't hear a single MTR rejection on AC21 case )
Celebrate the good news and donate here at
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23597&page=1000
pd052009
04-14 11:51 AM
Considering,
- EB3-EB2 upgrade
- Slow VB date movement
- No FB spillover
- Growing economy (which will further reduce the spillover/across numbers further in coming years)
Have you ever wondered what are the options you have?
We know, we are stuck with H1. Some of our problems are
- Resumes are rejected as many(most) companies prefer Citizens/GC/EAD than H1.
- Many RFEs and question with H1 Extn.
- Getting visa stamp at consulates is a (mental) pain.
- Consider the time spent from vacation for getting visastamps.
- Problems at port of entry( So many questions). We don't know what is new in store when we comeback from vacation.
- Pain of planning for a short visit(week) for emergency issues/family functions.
- Hard time in finding a H1 sponsor for H4 dependants
We know for sure that we are not going to get GC now. We don't know the exact wait time. What is our interim relief? Have you ever wondered how an EAD and AP will help you in the current situation? Have you ever dreamt the return of summer of 2007?
If you think/believe that EAD+AP can bring positive change in your life, please join us. Show your support by voting in http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum14-members-forum/1599353-want-to-file-485-when-pd-is-not-current-gather-here.html
Lets gather in that thread for our relief.
- EB3-EB2 upgrade
- Slow VB date movement
- No FB spillover
- Growing economy (which will further reduce the spillover/across numbers further in coming years)
Have you ever wondered what are the options you have?
We know, we are stuck with H1. Some of our problems are
- Resumes are rejected as many(most) companies prefer Citizens/GC/EAD than H1.
- Many RFEs and question with H1 Extn.
- Getting visa stamp at consulates is a (mental) pain.
- Consider the time spent from vacation for getting visastamps.
- Problems at port of entry( So many questions). We don't know what is new in store when we comeback from vacation.
- Pain of planning for a short visit(week) for emergency issues/family functions.
- Hard time in finding a H1 sponsor for H4 dependants
We know for sure that we are not going to get GC now. We don't know the exact wait time. What is our interim relief? Have you ever wondered how an EAD and AP will help you in the current situation? Have you ever dreamt the return of summer of 2007?
If you think/believe that EAD+AP can bring positive change in your life, please join us. Show your support by voting in http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum14-members-forum/1599353-want-to-file-485-when-pd-is-not-current-gather-here.html
Lets gather in that thread for our relief.
0 comments:
Post a Comment