NolaIndian32
04-28 06:13 PM
My wife came from india this sunday (4/26) @ JFK... she is working on EAD and had an expired H1b stamp in her PP.... She was asked about the purpose of the Visit by the IO and also at the AP fingerprinting, and the first IO asked about the expired H1, but she said she is working on EAD and had a valid AP.. he asked her something about how she could prove that she started working on EAD or something like that, but he didn't wait for answer... sent her to AP finger printing.... it all took less than 50 mins. I should say this is waaaaay smoother than the experience we had at EWR in 2006.
pal :)
If entering the country on AP, it is advisable to carry all other documents including the approval notice of the H1b, but do not show the H1b approval notice unless asked for. That is when the IO gets confused and asks for explanations. If entering on AP your status is parolee upon entry to the US.
pal :)
If entering the country on AP, it is advisable to carry all other documents including the approval notice of the H1b, but do not show the H1b approval notice unless asked for. That is when the IO gets confused and asks for explanations. If entering on AP your status is parolee upon entry to the US.
wallpaper tattoo aztecas. (tattoo azteca | PicsDigger) tattoo aztecas.
gultie2k
11-04 10:51 AM
Case resolved!!
All is well that ends well. Well my case got reopened, new RFE sent, and case is approved once the RFE resposne is submitted.
Reason given for the denial of the case is abadonded RFE, even though no RFE was sent in the first place.
All is well that ends well. Well my case got reopened, new RFE sent, and case is approved once the RFE resposne is submitted.
Reason given for the denial of the case is abadonded RFE, even though no RFE was sent in the first place.
neverbefore
05-12 01:53 AM
Folks
Wanted to ask if the sporadic reports one hears of unexpected delays in H1B stamping at US consulates in India due to "security checks" (link to NPR story (http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/05/07/pm_h1b_limbo/)) are becoming more the norm rather than the exception. Any ideas?
Should then one consider using their AP instead?
Cheers.
neverbefore
Wanted to ask if the sporadic reports one hears of unexpected delays in H1B stamping at US consulates in India due to "security checks" (link to NPR story (http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/05/07/pm_h1b_limbo/)) are becoming more the norm rather than the exception. Any ideas?
Should then one consider using their AP instead?
Cheers.
neverbefore
2011 Tattoo Azteca Ink - Aztec
arunsarun
05-23 11:00 AM
Got it approved for 3 yrs (L1A to H1B)....... still couldnt believe that i won the lottery.
more...
TeddyKoochu
04-22 03:42 PM
Congrats and thanks for sharing this great news. Looks like E-E Relationship memo is not being applied.
bkarnik
10-26 03:33 PM
My experience, this is at the Mumbai consulate in 2004. At that time they had the drop box in place. I mailed my documents and they returned everything back with my H1 stamped.
My wife went for her H4 stamping (second stage) in 2005. They asked for all the original documents i.e my I-797 and her I-797 but returned both of the documents back at the end of the interview. I think she had copies with her and they kept those.
Best bet is to contact VFS and inquire.
My wife went for her H4 stamping (second stage) in 2005. They asked for all the original documents i.e my I-797 and her I-797 but returned both of the documents back at the end of the interview. I think she had copies with her and they kept those.
Best bet is to contact VFS and inquire.
more...
scott
July 27th, 2005, 05:12 PM
Ok Gary..this is my interpretation.
This is what I did:
In the RAW window :
Freddy, you lose points for not cloning out the dark spot on the bloom!
This is what I did:
In the RAW window :
Freddy, you lose points for not cloning out the dark spot on the bloom!
2010 2011 tattoo aztecas. aztecas
rongha_2000
04-30 05:24 PM
Its kind of an interesting thought process, but I am curious why do you assume that NON-Perm cases will be very few? And also forgive me for being negative here but you are "assuming" all those parameters which are critical to the decision making process. This is a very interesting approach and if we can get real data to back this up, then nothing like it. (BEC cases will be a big factor in this calculation)
All,
I am planning to write a letter to USCIS and DOS , suggesting the visa cut off dates for India. Kindly critique it. I will send this letter over the weekend and also post over here.
The rational are as follows (Of course , I will word them properly).
I have grouped applicants in the following groups
BEC, PERM ROW and PERM Non Row Countries. I then will estimate the visa usage by each categories using sources like FLCdata and DHS publications. Along the way I will make some assumption but the results should be realistic.
Fact 1: Per DOL , As of April'06 50K BEC labors were certified. Certification rates were 50% of labor processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 2: Per DOL, as of Sep'07 362,000 BEC labor were processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 3: Per DHS, total EB (2, 3, 4 and 5 only) visas issued in FY’07 were 135,479 and FY’06 was 122,121.
Fact 4: FLC data center indicates that between March’05 and Oct’05, ~6000 PERM applications were filled and certified.
Fact 5: Per FLC data , 46,340 ROW PERM applications were certified in FY’06 and 47, 251 ROW applications were certified in FY’07.
Assumption 1: Based on Fact 1, let us assume for FY’06 50K Eb2 and Eb3 visas were used for the people stuck in BEC.
Assumption 2: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 2, let us assumed that in total 200,000 labors were certified between March'05 and Sep'07 by BEC.
Assumption 3: The visa backlog is not an issue for the ROW countries. In other words, their dates could be made current.
Assumption 4: NIW applications are negligible
Assumption 5: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 3, let us assume in BEC accounted for 50K visa in FY’07.
Assumption 6: 50% of visas are used by retrogressed countries.
Calculation 1: BEC visa used in FY’06 = 122,121- 6,000 – 46,340 = 69,781
Calculation 2: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2006 = 200,000-69,781-50,000= 80,219
Calculation 3: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2007: Since total visas issued in FY07 > (47,251 + 80,219) therefore negligible. Also, assume that balance 8,000 application went to NIW.
So in other words, the dates in any case has to be greater than 10/01/2005 for the retrogressed countries. For the simple reason that Non-Perm cases would very few.
All,
I am planning to write a letter to USCIS and DOS , suggesting the visa cut off dates for India. Kindly critique it. I will send this letter over the weekend and also post over here.
The rational are as follows (Of course , I will word them properly).
I have grouped applicants in the following groups
BEC, PERM ROW and PERM Non Row Countries. I then will estimate the visa usage by each categories using sources like FLCdata and DHS publications. Along the way I will make some assumption but the results should be realistic.
Fact 1: Per DOL , As of April'06 50K BEC labors were certified. Certification rates were 50% of labor processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 2: Per DOL, as of Sep'07 362,000 BEC labor were processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 3: Per DHS, total EB (2, 3, 4 and 5 only) visas issued in FY’07 were 135,479 and FY’06 was 122,121.
Fact 4: FLC data center indicates that between March’05 and Oct’05, ~6000 PERM applications were filled and certified.
Fact 5: Per FLC data , 46,340 ROW PERM applications were certified in FY’06 and 47, 251 ROW applications were certified in FY’07.
Assumption 1: Based on Fact 1, let us assume for FY’06 50K Eb2 and Eb3 visas were used for the people stuck in BEC.
Assumption 2: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 2, let us assumed that in total 200,000 labors were certified between March'05 and Sep'07 by BEC.
Assumption 3: The visa backlog is not an issue for the ROW countries. In other words, their dates could be made current.
Assumption 4: NIW applications are negligible
Assumption 5: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 3, let us assume in BEC accounted for 50K visa in FY’07.
Assumption 6: 50% of visas are used by retrogressed countries.
Calculation 1: BEC visa used in FY’06 = 122,121- 6,000 – 46,340 = 69,781
Calculation 2: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2006 = 200,000-69,781-50,000= 80,219
Calculation 3: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2007: Since total visas issued in FY07 > (47,251 + 80,219) therefore negligible. Also, assume that balance 8,000 application went to NIW.
So in other words, the dates in any case has to be greater than 10/01/2005 for the retrogressed countries. For the simple reason that Non-Perm cases would very few.
more...
ras
10-13 09:09 PM
All 3 - checks cashed on Oct 11. I got the reciept no.s on the back of the checks. When can I expect to recieve the notices? I am planning travel by the end of this month. Is that OK to travel with just the reciept no's or do I need to have the reciept notices with me. Also I have a valid H1 visa till 2009. Advice greatly appreciated.
hair tattoo aztecas. aztecas pollo
addsf345
11-13 03:12 PM
Is tehre is any way for PREMIUM PROCESSING for I485 pending case?
In my case PD is current since years the I140 is approved. Backbround check etc is over. Confirmed by various sources that my case JUST needs to be picked up by IO.
I have somebusiness trips coming up. My employer want me to find out the way to get the GC faster that way there wont be any hassle for every year renewal od AP and also EADs. and then appplying VISAs which will expire along with teh AP last date.
Along with me my employer is also fed up now:p.
Our lawyer being stupid; the employer wants me to find out the way to expedite I485. Since it is in last stages I think theer could be quicker way.
I know there is the way WOM but is there any other way?:rolleyes:
do a Ph.D. to qualify for EB-1; ask your employer to look in to EB-5 category if he is willing to invest some amount for you;marry a spouse not born in india, china, mexico, philipines or marry a spouse born in US. I don't know any other way.:D:D
In my case PD is current since years the I140 is approved. Backbround check etc is over. Confirmed by various sources that my case JUST needs to be picked up by IO.
I have somebusiness trips coming up. My employer want me to find out the way to get the GC faster that way there wont be any hassle for every year renewal od AP and also EADs. and then appplying VISAs which will expire along with teh AP last date.
Along with me my employer is also fed up now:p.
Our lawyer being stupid; the employer wants me to find out the way to expedite I485. Since it is in last stages I think theer could be quicker way.
I know there is the way WOM but is there any other way?:rolleyes:
do a Ph.D. to qualify for EB-1; ask your employer to look in to EB-5 category if he is willing to invest some amount for you;marry a spouse not born in india, china, mexico, philipines or marry a spouse born in US. I don't know any other way.:D:D
more...
hmehta
05-30 05:18 PM
As such there is no fix rule on who should get the visa and who shouldn't! It all depends on the Consular officer's Judjement of the case.
Can you list the documents that you sent and reason why the visa was denied?
Recently I sponsored my sister and her family to visit us in Summer of 2006. I had sent all the papers as required for applying for visitors visa. But the application was denied as consular was not satisfied.
Please suggest any ideas that could have helped in getting the visa. Since I was sponsoring her and taking full charge of her stay related expenses then why was it denied? What else is needed?
Thanks
Can you list the documents that you sent and reason why the visa was denied?
Recently I sponsored my sister and her family to visit us in Summer of 2006. I had sent all the papers as required for applying for visitors visa. But the application was denied as consular was not satisfied.
Please suggest any ideas that could have helped in getting the visa. Since I was sponsoring her and taking full charge of her stay related expenses then why was it denied? What else is needed?
Thanks
hot tattoo aztecas.
Phaedra
05-30 11:54 AM
Hi,
I am on OPT till August 2009.
However my F1 visa expires May 30 2009.
Also I do not have a job at present.
Does my OPT override the F1 visa expiration?Can I stay legally in the US till August even if I do not have a job?
Worried,
P
I am on OPT till August 2009.
However my F1 visa expires May 30 2009.
Also I do not have a job at present.
Does my OPT override the F1 visa expiration?Can I stay legally in the US till August even if I do not have a job?
Worried,
P
more...
house azteca tatuajes
pappu
05-11 01:24 PM
they seem to favor unskilled workers category and talk about only 5 thousand Gcs available.
tattoo tattoo aztecas. diosas aztecas
comstar8199
08-25 09:34 PM
You plan on going to wmu? (depending on your age)
Maybe, I may end up going to Umich. Still have one more year to decide...
Maybe, I may end up going to Umich. Still have one more year to decide...
more...
pictures MI PRIMER TATTOO ctm!! el
Kodi
07-03 11:08 AM
Texas service center. I think they move much faster than Nebraska.
Oh... ok. Where can I see which service station the aplication should go to? I'm in NY
Oh... ok. Where can I see which service station the aplication should go to? I'm in NY
dresses Tattoo Azteca Ink - Aztec
chanduv23
11-02 10:24 AM
Indians and other skilled workers in US will face the axe if they do not do anything for themselves.
Have you joined a State Chapter? Please do so now
Have you joined a State Chapter? Please do so now
more...
makeup hot Tattoo Design | Tattoo.com tattoo aztecas. tattoo aztecas. azteca diosas
aray
09-16 02:48 PM
There is no risk. I recently traveled and came back on AP and I changed jobs and no longer work with sponsoring employer.
There is always a nut case if you are not lucky and will probably cause some grief, but will not stop you from entering US.
surabhi,
At the Port of Entry, were you asked if you are still working for the GC sponsoring employer? Did you have to show any documentation from new employer?
I am planning to travel to India in December on AP. I recently changed jobs.
Thanks in advance.
There is always a nut case if you are not lucky and will probably cause some grief, but will not stop you from entering US.
surabhi,
At the Port of Entry, were you asked if you are still working for the GC sponsoring employer? Did you have to show any documentation from new employer?
I am planning to travel to India in December on AP. I recently changed jobs.
Thanks in advance.
girlfriend money tattoo. that your tattoo
ss777
09-16 10:25 PM
I know a friend who faced exact situation you described here. His lawyer also answered the same way your lawyer replied. He is doing fine with the approved I-140 and the original I-485 (based on first I-140(eventually denied)). He was told USCIS automatically "consolidates the cases". His attorney did not send any request for consolidation or something like that. This happened about an year back and he successfully made an overseas trip and returned on AP. This makes me feel you are OK and your lawyer is correct.
hairstyles CALENDARIO AZTECA ESPALDA 3 by
WeldonSprings
01-29 12:40 AM
Guys,
I had to open a new thread to get your attention to this. But it seems that the House Stimulus Bill passed this evening contains the 'E-Verify' . Incidently, when Sen. Menendez introduced the Visa Recapture Bill last year, he held the republican's at bay by not passing E-verify in the senate. If, E-verify is passed in the senate, then we will loose an important bargaining chip for visa recapture bill of any kind. Please read the info. below. You can also google e-verify house stimulus bill to get the latest.
Action step is to strip e-verify from the Senate Stimulus bill. Please see below.
ACTION: Stimulus Bill Includes E-verify Requirement
January 23, 2009 � 2 Comments
The House Appropriations Committee made a serious mistake when it approved an amendment to the stimulus bill (the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009) that would require all businesses and other public or private �entities� that contract to receive money from the stimulus package to use the flawed federal Basic Pilot/E-Verify program. This will not only delay use of stimulus funds, but will hurt millions of workers. It should be stripped from the bill.
The E-Verify provision in the stimulus will:
� Harm workers who are either falsely denied work or are targeted by employers abusing the E-verify program;
� Create substantial new burdens for businesses, especially small businesses, at precisely the wrong time;
� Send the wrong signal to new voters that the Congress prefers to play politics by enacting symbolic and ineffective immigration �enforcement� measures over serious and effective economic stimulus or serious immigration reform.
ACTION NEEDED
1. Call Speaker Nancy Pelosi (head of Democratic Leadership) at 202-225-0100.
2. Call Chairman Obey (chair of the House Appropriations committee) at 202-225-3365.
3. Call Democrats who sit on the appropriations committee if you live in their state.
4. Tell them:
� You are extremely disappointed that the E-Verify requirement was included on the Stimulus and you want the provision stripped from the bill.
� Including E-verify in the stimulus package completely undercuts the purpose of the bill and will only be counterproductive for American business, workers and the economy.
� Real solutions to our economic problems and immigration reform should be approached seriously and separately.
� The flawed E-Verify program�s database errors will wrongly workers their jobs.
FAIR (the Federation for American Immigration Reform) just sent out an alert to its very active network to call committee members in support of this provision. We need to counter their calls.
I had to open a new thread to get your attention to this. But it seems that the House Stimulus Bill passed this evening contains the 'E-Verify' . Incidently, when Sen. Menendez introduced the Visa Recapture Bill last year, he held the republican's at bay by not passing E-verify in the senate. If, E-verify is passed in the senate, then we will loose an important bargaining chip for visa recapture bill of any kind. Please read the info. below. You can also google e-verify house stimulus bill to get the latest.
Action step is to strip e-verify from the Senate Stimulus bill. Please see below.
ACTION: Stimulus Bill Includes E-verify Requirement
January 23, 2009 � 2 Comments
The House Appropriations Committee made a serious mistake when it approved an amendment to the stimulus bill (the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009) that would require all businesses and other public or private �entities� that contract to receive money from the stimulus package to use the flawed federal Basic Pilot/E-Verify program. This will not only delay use of stimulus funds, but will hurt millions of workers. It should be stripped from the bill.
The E-Verify provision in the stimulus will:
� Harm workers who are either falsely denied work or are targeted by employers abusing the E-verify program;
� Create substantial new burdens for businesses, especially small businesses, at precisely the wrong time;
� Send the wrong signal to new voters that the Congress prefers to play politics by enacting symbolic and ineffective immigration �enforcement� measures over serious and effective economic stimulus or serious immigration reform.
ACTION NEEDED
1. Call Speaker Nancy Pelosi (head of Democratic Leadership) at 202-225-0100.
2. Call Chairman Obey (chair of the House Appropriations committee) at 202-225-3365.
3. Call Democrats who sit on the appropriations committee if you live in their state.
4. Tell them:
� You are extremely disappointed that the E-Verify requirement was included on the Stimulus and you want the provision stripped from the bill.
� Including E-verify in the stimulus package completely undercuts the purpose of the bill and will only be counterproductive for American business, workers and the economy.
� Real solutions to our economic problems and immigration reform should be approached seriously and separately.
� The flawed E-Verify program�s database errors will wrongly workers their jobs.
FAIR (the Federation for American Immigration Reform) just sent out an alert to its very active network to call committee members in support of this provision. We need to counter their calls.
Eberth
10-21 06:26 PM
yeah!!
how can i do the poofiness??
how can i do the poofiness??
Munshi75
08-08 06:47 PM
include options for all the people in the EB-3. Are you trying to discrimiate recent applicants? I am one of them with 2006 PD.
