bachelor
09-24 08:08 AM
Hi All
I just saw the USCIS GC approval email notice - EB2-I - Dec 20'th 2005 Priority Date
I have same issue as few others have. I'm not married yet. I have applied for GC and luckily the GC has been approved (when I really don't want it to be approved). ... Trust me I was praying god all the time.
My priority date is EB2-I Dec 20'th 2005 and god knows how they approved it much before every one else. When all others really want their GC's.
There are lots people who are in queue with Jan 2004 and later priority dates and whose cases are still pending... How could they approve my case so soon...
I have scheduled for a travel to India on August 15'th 2008 to get married. I wanted to marry and get my wife to USA. I 'm engaged with girl at India and all set for marriage this month (August 2008).
I believe my H1-B has been automatically canceled on immediate approval of GC.
How do I get my future wife to USA?. What are the options left out to me now?.
Please excuse me if this is a duplicate thread. I'm really in hurry and could not check all threads properly.
--Suresh
Hi Suresh,
I'm in the same situation as you are in.. Can you please let me know which option did you choose?..
Thanks in advance.
I just saw the USCIS GC approval email notice - EB2-I - Dec 20'th 2005 Priority Date
I have same issue as few others have. I'm not married yet. I have applied for GC and luckily the GC has been approved (when I really don't want it to be approved). ... Trust me I was praying god all the time.
My priority date is EB2-I Dec 20'th 2005 and god knows how they approved it much before every one else. When all others really want their GC's.
There are lots people who are in queue with Jan 2004 and later priority dates and whose cases are still pending... How could they approve my case so soon...
I have scheduled for a travel to India on August 15'th 2008 to get married. I wanted to marry and get my wife to USA. I 'm engaged with girl at India and all set for marriage this month (August 2008).
I believe my H1-B has been automatically canceled on immediate approval of GC.
How do I get my future wife to USA?. What are the options left out to me now?.
Please excuse me if this is a duplicate thread. I'm really in hurry and could not check all threads properly.
--Suresh
Hi Suresh,
I'm in the same situation as you are in.. Can you please let me know which option did you choose?..
Thanks in advance.
wallpaper Zoe Bell and Tracie Thoms
sanprabhu
07-14 12:29 PM
If they can attach Dream Act as an amendment to the Defence policy Act why cannot they attach SKILL to the same. That is the question we should be acting on.
I think expecting Sen. Cornyn to do something now is kind of remote. He is going to be facing elections soon in 08. May be Cantwell is the one to do it.
What do you guys think?
I think expecting Sen. Cornyn to do something now is kind of remote. He is going to be facing elections soon in 08. May be Cantwell is the one to do it.
What do you guys think?
Devils_Advocate
05-19 09:12 PM
They should have a system like they have in UK, where they straight-away grant permanent residency to any international graduate from a list of top universities compiled by them.
2011 See All Zoe Bell Pics »
kondur_007
06-10 04:17 PM
I 100% agree with you about visa capture...there is no way any of us will get GC without "spill over" from ROW category and that will happen if visa capture happens...
Without the spill over from ROW it will be 20+ yrs (many people have posted the calculations...).
However, The one thing that just does not make any sense (It is also there in Mr. Oppenheim's statement):
They have 120k preadjudicated applications and if they have quota of 140k next fiscal year, are they goint to give GC to those 120k.....??????
Not really, because many of those 120k include people with highly retrogressed PD.
For example: if EB2 ROW is "current" in Jan 2010, and say someone from EB2ROW files 485 (his PD may be in mid 2008), they will have to give him GC first eventhough they may have a "preadjudicated" EB2 India case with PD of 2005. (if it is not current then).
Additionally, they can "spill over" only in the last quarter...
So all in all, I do not see much of GC approval till the last quarter of next fiscal year; those 120k preadjudicated cases will sit in show case....
I used to like Ron Gotchers ideas and used to visit his site/blog; but after initial few months, I realized that he does not know any more than any of us...he just throws in ideas; some of which are completely base less....I feel bad about those people who believed his ideas and opted for CP while USCIS has already preadjudicated large number of applications....(he predicted at that time that July fiasco will happen every year, so do CP)
And yes. CIR....NO BODY knows the final form in which it will pass and what impact would it have on legal EB immigration....no way to tell. I have no basis to say this but this is just my personal opinion: For all of us on this forum going through immigration process; our best bet is to get something before CIR actually passes and comes in to the play....I do not have good feeling about CIR.
Without the spill over from ROW it will be 20+ yrs (many people have posted the calculations...).
However, The one thing that just does not make any sense (It is also there in Mr. Oppenheim's statement):
They have 120k preadjudicated applications and if they have quota of 140k next fiscal year, are they goint to give GC to those 120k.....??????
Not really, because many of those 120k include people with highly retrogressed PD.
For example: if EB2 ROW is "current" in Jan 2010, and say someone from EB2ROW files 485 (his PD may be in mid 2008), they will have to give him GC first eventhough they may have a "preadjudicated" EB2 India case with PD of 2005. (if it is not current then).
Additionally, they can "spill over" only in the last quarter...
So all in all, I do not see much of GC approval till the last quarter of next fiscal year; those 120k preadjudicated cases will sit in show case....
I used to like Ron Gotchers ideas and used to visit his site/blog; but after initial few months, I realized that he does not know any more than any of us...he just throws in ideas; some of which are completely base less....I feel bad about those people who believed his ideas and opted for CP while USCIS has already preadjudicated large number of applications....(he predicted at that time that July fiasco will happen every year, so do CP)
And yes. CIR....NO BODY knows the final form in which it will pass and what impact would it have on legal EB immigration....no way to tell. I have no basis to say this but this is just my personal opinion: For all of us on this forum going through immigration process; our best bet is to get something before CIR actually passes and comes in to the play....I do not have good feeling about CIR.
more...
mrane1
10-15 06:42 AM
Thats true..everybody are bothered about EAD and FP. I am here for more than 8 years in this country. IV should emphasise this and USICS should allow affected candidates like us to file I-485 and atleast get EAD. we have priority date earlier compared to others.
Hey thats not fair... everyone has their own problems and they are discussing... It was your luck... thats all... If you had gotten a chance to file 485 you too would be discussing about EAD and AP... I came to US in 95.., filed my first Labor in 2000... got laid off in 01... started my labor process with 2nd company... the company shut down!! filed 3rd labor in 2003... All this time the 485 was current all the way till sept 30th 2005... But I was stuck in PBEC... Labor cleared 1 week after retrogression in 2005! Finally filed in June 07... got GC 3 days after finger printing! thats life... you just do what you have to do and move on!
Hey thats not fair... everyone has their own problems and they are discussing... It was your luck... thats all... If you had gotten a chance to file 485 you too would be discussing about EAD and AP... I came to US in 95.., filed my first Labor in 2000... got laid off in 01... started my labor process with 2nd company... the company shut down!! filed 3rd labor in 2003... All this time the 485 was current all the way till sept 30th 2005... But I was stuck in PBEC... Labor cleared 1 week after retrogression in 2005! Finally filed in June 07... got GC 3 days after finger printing! thats life... you just do what you have to do and move on!
dingudi
11-19 01:51 PM
I dont know what to do. I opened an SR on Oct 8,2007. My ND is Sept 10. And so far no FP appointment yet. My app is at TSC.
Apahilaj/anyone with similar dates , did you guys get the FP yet.
Apahilaj/anyone with similar dates , did you guys get the FP yet.
more...
Marphad
06-17 10:04 AM
I support.
2010 Zoe Bell and Eulala Scheel
PD_Dec2002
06-19 03:04 PM
You would need employee letter as well. The employee letter will state that the position is still open and they are willing the pay the amount that was initially agreed to while filing for labor.....so pay stub is not enough.....
desi3933 and WillIBLucky:
My lawyer as well as my wife's lawyer confirmed that an employment letter is not required if using pay stubs. Several posters on this forum have gotten the same information from their lawyers. Anyway, let's not get into a debate on who's correct or incorrect.
It's a different thing to have the employment letter to make the case stronger (probably), but you will definitely not get a RFE for using the pay stubs. And in "sats123"'s case, this is a less expensive and reliable option.
Of course, one could argue it's worth paying $5000 if it ensures a smooth adjucation, but then that would depend on the financial situation of the applicant. I cannot comment on that for "sats123".
Having written all this, please check with your own lawyers and do what they advise.
Thanks,
Jayant
desi3933 and WillIBLucky:
My lawyer as well as my wife's lawyer confirmed that an employment letter is not required if using pay stubs. Several posters on this forum have gotten the same information from their lawyers. Anyway, let's not get into a debate on who's correct or incorrect.
It's a different thing to have the employment letter to make the case stronger (probably), but you will definitely not get a RFE for using the pay stubs. And in "sats123"'s case, this is a less expensive and reliable option.
Of course, one could argue it's worth paying $5000 if it ensures a smooth adjucation, but then that would depend on the financial situation of the applicant. I cannot comment on that for "sats123".
Having written all this, please check with your own lawyers and do what they advise.
Thanks,
Jayant
more...
admin
02-16 09:41 AM
Once again CA is leading the way for the rest of us to follow. Thanks for posting the detailed minutes of the meeting and the follow up.
Everyone, please note how easy it is do it and how much effect it has.
Everyone, please note how easy it is do it and how much effect it has.
hair Zoe Bell has made a name
Sheila Danzig
02-25 09:33 PM
I personally do not know of anyone who has attempted admission into a University with a CA.
Professors expert letters range up to $900.00+ with most firms. We rarely charge more than $550.00 Each case is different and it depends on the research needed.
In India, only UGC (University Grant Commission) is qualified to issue equivalency letters. Professor letter can be supplemental, but it can not be authentic certification, as UGC is only one to issue that.
>> The professor's letters are not cheap but effective.
Care to explain what do you mean by "not cheap"?
Is there any university that have taken CA qualified for PhD programme?
Professors expert letters range up to $900.00+ with most firms. We rarely charge more than $550.00 Each case is different and it depends on the research needed.
In India, only UGC (University Grant Commission) is qualified to issue equivalency letters. Professor letter can be supplemental, but it can not be authentic certification, as UGC is only one to issue that.
>> The professor's letters are not cheap but effective.
Care to explain what do you mean by "not cheap"?
Is there any university that have taken CA qualified for PhD programme?
more...
Macaca
09-03 08:50 AM
In a key finding, government data document that a moratorium on legal immigrants entering the country could devastate the Social Security system by ballooning the size of the actuarial deficit by almost one-third -- 31 percent -- over a 50-year period. (page 1)
To compensate for the loss of revenue caused by a moratorium would require increasing Social Security taxes on Americans by $506 billion in present value over 50 years and $611 billion over 75 years. Such a tax increase would cost an American earning $60,000 in 2004 more than $1,860 in higher payroll taxes over the next 10 years.
A forty-one percent reduction in legal immigration, which Congress considered in 1996, would increase the actuarial deficit by 13 percent over 50 years and require $212 billion in tax increases (in present value) over 50 years (and $246 billion over 75 years) to make up for the lost revenue caused by the severe legal immigration reductions.
A thirty-three percent reduction in legal immigration would increase the actuarial deficit by 10 percent over 50 years and result in lost revenues of $163 billion in present value over 50 years and $207 billion over 75 years, which would need to be made up for through higher taxes or other means.
Such a tax increase would cost an American earning $60,000 in 2004 more than $720 in higher payroll taxes over the next 10 years, in the case of a 41% reduction in legal immigration, and $600 over the next 10 years for a 33% legal immigration reduction.
Increases in legal immigration would provide a significant boost to Social Security. The size of the actuarial deficit would be reduced over 50 years by 10 percent if legal immigration increased 33 percent (an additional 264,000 immigrants a year) and by 6 percent for a 20 percent rise in legal immigration annually (160,000 more immigrants a year.)
A 33 percent increase in legal immigration would increase revenues to Social Security by a present value of $169 billion over 50 years and $216 billion over 75 years. A 20 percent legal immigration increase would add $101 billion in present value to the trust fund over 50 years and $128 billion over a 75-year period.
A thirty-three percent increase in legal immigration would mean that an
American earning $60,000 in 2004 could have their Social Security taxes reduced by $600 over 10 years (or $360 in the case of a 160,000 legal immigration rise) and Social Security would maintain the actuarial balance that is currently projected over that period.
Halting legal immigration to the United States would reduce both the growth rate of the U.S. labor force and the rate of the country�s economic growth (the rate of growth of the nation�s Gross Domestic Product) by approximately one quarter of one percent (0.25%) per year, initially, a notable amount.
To compensate for the loss of revenue caused by a moratorium would require increasing Social Security taxes on Americans by $506 billion in present value over 50 years and $611 billion over 75 years. Such a tax increase would cost an American earning $60,000 in 2004 more than $1,860 in higher payroll taxes over the next 10 years.
A forty-one percent reduction in legal immigration, which Congress considered in 1996, would increase the actuarial deficit by 13 percent over 50 years and require $212 billion in tax increases (in present value) over 50 years (and $246 billion over 75 years) to make up for the lost revenue caused by the severe legal immigration reductions.
A thirty-three percent reduction in legal immigration would increase the actuarial deficit by 10 percent over 50 years and result in lost revenues of $163 billion in present value over 50 years and $207 billion over 75 years, which would need to be made up for through higher taxes or other means.
Such a tax increase would cost an American earning $60,000 in 2004 more than $720 in higher payroll taxes over the next 10 years, in the case of a 41% reduction in legal immigration, and $600 over the next 10 years for a 33% legal immigration reduction.
Increases in legal immigration would provide a significant boost to Social Security. The size of the actuarial deficit would be reduced over 50 years by 10 percent if legal immigration increased 33 percent (an additional 264,000 immigrants a year) and by 6 percent for a 20 percent rise in legal immigration annually (160,000 more immigrants a year.)
A 33 percent increase in legal immigration would increase revenues to Social Security by a present value of $169 billion over 50 years and $216 billion over 75 years. A 20 percent legal immigration increase would add $101 billion in present value to the trust fund over 50 years and $128 billion over a 75-year period.
A thirty-three percent increase in legal immigration would mean that an
American earning $60,000 in 2004 could have their Social Security taxes reduced by $600 over 10 years (or $360 in the case of a 160,000 legal immigration rise) and Social Security would maintain the actuarial balance that is currently projected over that period.
Halting legal immigration to the United States would reduce both the growth rate of the U.S. labor force and the rate of the country�s economic growth (the rate of growth of the nation�s Gross Domestic Product) by approximately one quarter of one percent (0.25%) per year, initially, a notable amount.
hot Zoe Bell Pics
thomachan72
08-30 09:59 AM
International students come on F1 visa and get instate tuition fee from state universities. Our kids are on H4s so that will not qualify them to attend undergraduate in state schools? Is F1 required to get instate tuition fee? I am not understanding the situation here. Please somebody clarify if possible.
more...
house stunt woman Zoe Bell.
shivapb80
06-05 04:22 PM
actually this memo, as far as my understanding goes, does not say it. there is no where the clause that filling AC21 documents means that it will become urgent for USCIS to make a decision on your i-140.
it is more applicable to the i-485 i.e. if your i-485 comes up for adjudication and you have file ac21 and your i-140 is pending as well, then the portability is only valid if i-140 is approved. of course after that to make sure that the portability is valid they will apply the "similar job" criteria.
it is more applicable to the i-485 i.e. if your i-485 comes up for adjudication and you have file ac21 and your i-140 is pending as well, then the portability is only valid if i-140 is approved. of course after that to make sure that the portability is valid they will apply the "similar job" criteria.
tattoo with Zoe Bell precariously
piperwarrior
08-16 01:37 PM
I work with corporate lawyers everyday, and yes they are very smart. However, immigration lawyers are the bottom of the barrel.
I have nothing against lawyers, most are hard-working and smart. But that smartness also makes them confuse others and ultimately its the clients who have to pay for the smartness of the lawyers.
I am totally against that.
making a living is one thing, but talk about confusing people and milking them for the money !!!
I have nothing against lawyers, most are hard-working and smart. But that smartness also makes them confuse others and ultimately its the clients who have to pay for the smartness of the lawyers.
I am totally against that.
making a living is one thing, but talk about confusing people and milking them for the money !!!
more...
pictures 10/09/2009 - Zoe Bell
Jimi_Hendrix
12-12 01:01 PM
In short they do not want us here.. they want to suck the money out of you, all the money you earned and saved.
Were you making sure that we are not disappointed? :)
Thanks for living upto the expectations buddy :D
Were you making sure that we are not disappointed? :)
Thanks for living upto the expectations buddy :D
dresses zoe bell stuntwoman
gc007
01-07 10:25 PM
Oh No ! Thats too bad. I was really hoping that it was possible to use the old H1B. And can be used anytime to change the status.
I am hoping someone wud come up and say Yes its possible.....
keep me posted if find anywhere about the same.
Thanks !
I am in exact same situation. The company that is going to sponsor my H1 checked with two attorneys and both said that I will need a fresh H1 in April07 and I can start working from Oct07. Even I never got to work on my earlier H1. I guess this is because you need previous paystubs for H1 transfer. Let me know if you hear otherwise from your attorneys.
I am hoping someone wud come up and say Yes its possible.....
keep me posted if find anywhere about the same.
Thanks !
I am in exact same situation. The company that is going to sponsor my H1 checked with two attorneys and both said that I will need a fresh H1 in April07 and I can start working from Oct07. Even I never got to work on my earlier H1. I guess this is because you need previous paystubs for H1 transfer. Let me know if you hear otherwise from your attorneys.
more...
makeup we befriended Zoe Bell…
brkl1935
04-01 08:33 PM
Both fax sent
girlfriend Gallery | zoe bell bio
chanduv23
07-10 09:31 AM
The idea is - use this guy and expose media that gives false news or that supresses real issues and force those types of media to bring our issue to limelight.
I have heard all media saying "We are immigrant nation", "we need skilled immigrants", "'We are not racist", etc.. then again the same media says "Immigrants are overstaying visas", "There is quota, we cannot do anything", same media has supressed microsoft's news about the Canada development center just because it involved immigration.
I am of a strong opinion that media is controlled by politicians, the reporters who said they will cover the flower campaign - chances are that their bosses may ask them not to or give them another assignment ???
I have heard all media saying "We are immigrant nation", "we need skilled immigrants", "'We are not racist", etc.. then again the same media says "Immigrants are overstaying visas", "There is quota, we cannot do anything", same media has supressed microsoft's news about the Canada development center just because it involved immigration.
I am of a strong opinion that media is controlled by politicians, the reporters who said they will cover the flower campaign - chances are that their bosses may ask them not to or give them another assignment ???
hairstyles to see Zoe Bell in front
friend_in_NC
07-04 02:35 PM
Medicals - $600
Application fee = $1490
Lawyer fees = $1500
Certificates/copy/fedex/photos = $250
Loss in pay (in gathering medical/certificates/mailing) = $500
TOTAL = $4340
Application fee = $1490
Lawyer fees = $1500
Certificates/copy/fedex/photos = $250
Loss in pay (in gathering medical/certificates/mailing) = $500
TOTAL = $4340
JunRN
08-13 10:44 PM
Is it possible to second file I-485 using a different I-140 as basis?
anilsal
10-11 04:38 PM
either missed BEC by luck (pre-PERM folks) or used substitute labor. They all have GCs.
And there are people like me, still waiting waiting waiting.
It is not fair on people whose labor went into BEC and others filed PERM, got approved faster - have EADs/FP.
Nothing is fair.
And there are people like me, still waiting waiting waiting.
It is not fair on people whose labor went into BEC and others filed PERM, got approved faster - have EADs/FP.
Nothing is fair.
No comments:
Post a Comment