ImmiUser
07-10 08:45 PM
Following intresting info is listed on the immigration-law, wish it is true :)
"There has been going around a rumor lately that the USCIS was internally discussing retreat from the 485 rejection decision. It appears that this rumor probably started from the USCIS HQ order over the Texas Service Center to hold all the July 2007 EB-485 applications abeyanbce and not to return the applications to applicants. Unconfirmed sources indicate that because of the order, the Texas Service Center is not returning the EB-485 applications which have been received since July 2, 2007. However, there is no evidence that the decision is necessarily related to its potential decision to withdraw the rejection decision. At this point, its reasons are completion unknown. Please stay tuned. "
"There has been going around a rumor lately that the USCIS was internally discussing retreat from the 485 rejection decision. It appears that this rumor probably started from the USCIS HQ order over the Texas Service Center to hold all the July 2007 EB-485 applications abeyanbce and not to return the applications to applicants. Unconfirmed sources indicate that because of the order, the Texas Service Center is not returning the EB-485 applications which have been received since July 2, 2007. However, there is no evidence that the decision is necessarily related to its potential decision to withdraw the rejection decision. At this point, its reasons are completion unknown. Please stay tuned. "
wallpaper #39;Extremely funny and very
belmontboy
02-17 03:56 AM
Being a projct manager, If you cannot influence people to get letter that satisfy the uscis, I will not recommand you for PM.
FYI, my lc is related to testing. but I am not in testing. so If I need a letter, I will ask them whaterver they want to write + testing. probalby you can do the same.
Please be sensible when you post such responses on a public forum. What you are saying is wrong. You cannot advise people to falsify documents in an open forum.
If you cannot get experience letter, why did you go for "previous work experience" requirement in LC? AFAIK, "previous work experience" is optional
FYI, my lc is related to testing. but I am not in testing. so If I need a letter, I will ask them whaterver they want to write + testing. probalby you can do the same.
Please be sensible when you post such responses on a public forum. What you are saying is wrong. You cannot advise people to falsify documents in an open forum.
If you cannot get experience letter, why did you go for "previous work experience" requirement in LC? AFAIK, "previous work experience" is optional
Sunx_2004
10-07 05:50 PM
Hi Friends,
I am a permanent employee for "x" company, my 140 filed on May 1,2007 waiting for approval, 485 filed on August 22,2007 not been approved either, we just got our EAD's, also please note that i am on 6th year extension on h1... my company "x" moving all projects to the different company "y" from December 1, 2007. ie we are all moving to "y" with the same job title just everything is same istead of "x" it is now "y" company.
When i called my legal department and ask them about green card status they simply said nothing to worry... everything will be moved to "y" company, as a transition exployees..
Be honest with you guys...from the last 4 days... i could not sleep... i really dont know what to do in this situation, this is the reason.. i am seeking your help. can some one guide me or answer below questions please.
1. 140 filed 05/01/2007 - 11/30/2007 more than 180 days with "X" company
2. 485 filed 08/22/2007 - 11/30/2007 more than 90 days with "x" company
3. EAD approved
4. Travel documents approved
5. I am on H1 6th year extension.
6. Transition employee.
my question is
1 Can my green card status remains the same and continue the process with the new "y" company ?
2.Do "y" company has to start processing labour/140 again ??
3.Is it doable that moving everything from "x" to "y" including GC processings ??
Thanks in advance...Kindly help me out in this situation like how to proceed from here
With sincere regards...
Desy
Hi I am in similar situation, My I 140 is approved from company X in June and I applied I485 and EAD in July (receipt is pending). I am on 8th year of H1. My HR said not to worry about anything everything (H1 and GC) will be taken care of by new company (company Y). My Question is-
Do I need to worry since I will be employee of new company by this month end (less than 180 days of I 485 filing).
Do 180 days limit still valid from July?
If I change job (to company Z) after 180 days from July on EAD will it affect my GC? How?
Please help
I am a permanent employee for "x" company, my 140 filed on May 1,2007 waiting for approval, 485 filed on August 22,2007 not been approved either, we just got our EAD's, also please note that i am on 6th year extension on h1... my company "x" moving all projects to the different company "y" from December 1, 2007. ie we are all moving to "y" with the same job title just everything is same istead of "x" it is now "y" company.
When i called my legal department and ask them about green card status they simply said nothing to worry... everything will be moved to "y" company, as a transition exployees..
Be honest with you guys...from the last 4 days... i could not sleep... i really dont know what to do in this situation, this is the reason.. i am seeking your help. can some one guide me or answer below questions please.
1. 140 filed 05/01/2007 - 11/30/2007 more than 180 days with "X" company
2. 485 filed 08/22/2007 - 11/30/2007 more than 90 days with "x" company
3. EAD approved
4. Travel documents approved
5. I am on H1 6th year extension.
6. Transition employee.
my question is
1 Can my green card status remains the same and continue the process with the new "y" company ?
2.Do "y" company has to start processing labour/140 again ??
3.Is it doable that moving everything from "x" to "y" including GC processings ??
Thanks in advance...Kindly help me out in this situation like how to proceed from here
With sincere regards...
Desy
Hi I am in similar situation, My I 140 is approved from company X in June and I applied I485 and EAD in July (receipt is pending). I am on 8th year of H1. My HR said not to worry about anything everything (H1 and GC) will be taken care of by new company (company Y). My Question is-
Do I need to worry since I will be employee of new company by this month end (less than 180 days of I 485 filing).
Do 180 days limit still valid from July?
If I change job (to company Z) after 180 days from July on EAD will it affect my GC? How?
Please help
2011 O_O wow.. I didn#39;t know snakes
DallasBlue
07-05 12:19 AM
here you go...
Reversal Frustrates
Green-Card Applicants
By MIRIAM JORDAN
July 5, 2007; Page A2
The government's surprise offer, then abrupt reversal, of an opportunity for thousands of skilled foreign workers to obtain permanent residency in the U.S. highlights the problems of the overtaxed immigration system and the frenzy that results from a chance to apply for a green card.
The scramble has put tens of thousands of workers and their families in limbo after many of them and their employers spent thousands of dollars in hopes of securing permanent residency. It may result in a class-action lawsuit against the government by frustrated applicants.
The problem began on June 12 when the government seemed to open the door for thousands of foreign workers and their families to end the long wait to apply for a green card. That is when the State Department published a Visa Bulletin, which is a monthly notice closely watched by immigration attorneys and their clients because it determines who is eligible to file a green-card application the next month. The June bulletin announced that practically all skilled foreign workers who had been previously deemed eligible for an employer-sponsored visa could now take the final step of applying for a green card.
By law, the U.S. can issue about 140,000 employment-based green cards each year. Last year, the government fell short by about 10,000, despite the long waiting list; leftover visas cannot be rolled over to the next year. The June announcement aimed to prevent the visa slot from going to waste, according to a State Department spokeswoman.
The announcement was greeted with a mix of jubilation and panic by thousands of engineers, lab scientists and other high-skilled foreigners who had waited years for their place in line. Working ahead of a July 2 date for filing the application, intending immigrants rushed to gather documents, complete paperwork and obtain medical exams. Many of their dependents boarded planes for the U.S. to meet a requirement that all family members be present at the time of filing.
"The bulletin created a land rush among legal immigrants desperate to finalize their green-card applications," said Steve Miller, a Seattle-based immigration attorney.
Then, on July 2, the State Department issued an "update" that reversed the previous bulletin. It stated, effective immediately, there would be no further authorizations for employment-based cases. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which processes the applications, said it would instead simply process existing applications to meet this year's quota. "We already had sufficient applications pending without new applicants...," a spokesman said.
Mike Aytes, head of domestic operations for the USCIS, said all 147,141 employment-based green cards have now been issued for the year.
Write to Miriam Jordan at miriam.jordan@wsj.com
Reversal Frustrates
Green-Card Applicants
By MIRIAM JORDAN
July 5, 2007; Page A2
The government's surprise offer, then abrupt reversal, of an opportunity for thousands of skilled foreign workers to obtain permanent residency in the U.S. highlights the problems of the overtaxed immigration system and the frenzy that results from a chance to apply for a green card.
The scramble has put tens of thousands of workers and their families in limbo after many of them and their employers spent thousands of dollars in hopes of securing permanent residency. It may result in a class-action lawsuit against the government by frustrated applicants.
The problem began on June 12 when the government seemed to open the door for thousands of foreign workers and their families to end the long wait to apply for a green card. That is when the State Department published a Visa Bulletin, which is a monthly notice closely watched by immigration attorneys and their clients because it determines who is eligible to file a green-card application the next month. The June bulletin announced that practically all skilled foreign workers who had been previously deemed eligible for an employer-sponsored visa could now take the final step of applying for a green card.
By law, the U.S. can issue about 140,000 employment-based green cards each year. Last year, the government fell short by about 10,000, despite the long waiting list; leftover visas cannot be rolled over to the next year. The June announcement aimed to prevent the visa slot from going to waste, according to a State Department spokeswoman.
The announcement was greeted with a mix of jubilation and panic by thousands of engineers, lab scientists and other high-skilled foreigners who had waited years for their place in line. Working ahead of a July 2 date for filing the application, intending immigrants rushed to gather documents, complete paperwork and obtain medical exams. Many of their dependents boarded planes for the U.S. to meet a requirement that all family members be present at the time of filing.
"The bulletin created a land rush among legal immigrants desperate to finalize their green-card applications," said Steve Miller, a Seattle-based immigration attorney.
Then, on July 2, the State Department issued an "update" that reversed the previous bulletin. It stated, effective immediately, there would be no further authorizations for employment-based cases. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which processes the applications, said it would instead simply process existing applications to meet this year's quota. "We already had sufficient applications pending without new applicants...," a spokesman said.
Mike Aytes, head of domestic operations for the USCIS, said all 147,141 employment-based green cards have now been issued for the year.
Write to Miriam Jordan at miriam.jordan@wsj.com
more...
vet282000
04-21 12:17 PM
It is very comprehensive list. It covers every field. Graduates of pharmacy, medicine, vet medicine etc are not PhDs. They have to go through special programs to get that degree.
thanx for your reply. However I am afraid you misunderstood pharmacy, medicine, vet med PhDS with practice professionals PharmD, MD,DVM.The people who made the list of STEM have ignored the fact that Research is highly interdisciplinary. This is unfair for many researchers in biology who should be in the STEM majors but they are not in just because of technical/clerical reasons. I request you all to take a look at this anomaly.
Thanks
thanx for your reply. However I am afraid you misunderstood pharmacy, medicine, vet med PhDS with practice professionals PharmD, MD,DVM.The people who made the list of STEM have ignored the fact that Research is highly interdisciplinary. This is unfair for many researchers in biology who should be in the STEM majors but they are not in just because of technical/clerical reasons. I request you all to take a look at this anomaly.
Thanks
reachinus
12-19 03:31 PM
Question 1: If they do this, what will happen to my pending I-485, EAD & AP?
Ans: I think it will be rejected, since the 140 has been revoked.
Question 2: Lawyers are saying that they have to withdraw the LC Sub based I-140 because the job descriptions are different? Is it not possible to file a totally new I-140 and keep both of them pending?
Ans: Not sure if this is ture. There are so many people who filed in EB2 as well as EB3. Hope it will and should not be a problem. If possible do stick on to the old PD since with a 2003 LC u can get the GC 2 to 3 years earlier that the 2006. Its worth taking a risk I suppose. If the company can prove Ability to pay and your qualification matches that of the LC, then it should be ok. There is no point of withdrawing the old one.
The other option is the file the new 140 and after the approval then interfile 485 with the new and then have the old one withdrawn. If you withdraw the 140 then you will have to wait for a long long time to file ur 485 with 2006pd.
This is just my opinion. Use it at your own risk.
Ans: I think it will be rejected, since the 140 has been revoked.
Question 2: Lawyers are saying that they have to withdraw the LC Sub based I-140 because the job descriptions are different? Is it not possible to file a totally new I-140 and keep both of them pending?
Ans: Not sure if this is ture. There are so many people who filed in EB2 as well as EB3. Hope it will and should not be a problem. If possible do stick on to the old PD since with a 2003 LC u can get the GC 2 to 3 years earlier that the 2006. Its worth taking a risk I suppose. If the company can prove Ability to pay and your qualification matches that of the LC, then it should be ok. There is no point of withdrawing the old one.
The other option is the file the new 140 and after the approval then interfile 485 with the new and then have the old one withdrawn. If you withdraw the 140 then you will have to wait for a long long time to file ur 485 with 2006pd.
This is just my opinion. Use it at your own risk.
more...
la6470
04-14 11:59 PM
Immigration: 'Birth Tourism' Industry Markets U.S. Citizenship Abroad - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/birth-tourism-industry-markets-us-citizenship-abroad/story?id=10359956&partner=yahoo)
A New Baby Boom? Foreign 'Birth Tourists' Seek U.S. Citizenship for Children
More Foreign Mothers Live Abroad to Give Birth on U.S. Soil, Debate Over 14th Amendment
Millions of foreign tourists visit the United States every year, and a growing number return home with a brand new U.S. citizen in tow. housands of legal immigrants, who do not permanently reside in the United States but give birth here, have given their children the gift of citizenship, which the U.S. grants to anyone born on its soil.
The number of U.S. births to non-resident mothers rose 53 percent between 2000 and 2006, according to the most recent data from the National Center for Health Statistics. Total births rose 5 percent in the same period.
Among the foreigners who have given birth here, including international travelers passing through and foreign students studying at U.S. universities, are "birth tourists," women who travel to the United States with the explicit purpose of obtaining citizenship for their child.
Catering to the women is a nascent industry of travel agencies and hotel chains seeking to profit from the business. The Marmara Manhattan, a Turkish-owned luxury hotel on New York's City Upper East Side, markets birth tourism packages to expectant mothers abroad, luring more than a dozen pregnant guests and their families to the United States to give birth last year alone.
"What we offer is simply a one-bedroom suite accommodation for $7,750, plus taxes, for a month, with airport transfer, baby cradle and a gift set for the mother," Marmara Hotel spokeswoman Alexandra Ballantine said.
The hotel estimates the total cost of the package at $45,000.
Most women stay for two months, Ballantine said, and they make medical arrangements on their own. "Guests arrange and pay for these by themselves," she said of hospital costs that can approach $30,000.
For those with the means to pay, it's a small price to give a child the full benefits of U.S. citizenship, including the ability to travel freely to and from the United States, easy access to a U.S. education and a chance to start a life here.
"We found a company on the Internet and decided to go to Austin [Texas] for our child's birth," Turkish mother Selin Burcuoglu told Istanbul's Hurriyet Daily News. "I don't want [my daughter] to deal with visa issues. American citizenship has so many advantages."
The greatest of those advantages may be the ability of the citizen child to later sponsor the legal immigration of his or her entire family permanently to this country, experts say.
The "birth tourism" industry, which is difficult to track and remains largely anecdotal, has been on the rise for years, according to government and participants reports. Of the 4,273,225 live births in the United States in 2006, the most recent data gathered by the National Center for Health Statistics, 7,670 were children born to mothers who said they do not live here.
Many, but not all, of those mothers could be "birth tourists," experts say, although it is difficult to know for sure. The government does not track the reasons non-resident mothers are in the United States at the time of the birth or their citizenship, meaning births to illegal immigrants who live in the United States are counted in the overall total.
In recent years, many women have come from Mexico, South Korea, China and Taiwan, but the trend now extends to countries in Eastern Europe, such as Turkey, where as many as 12,000 children were born in the United States to Turkish parents since 2003 by one estimate.
The business of birth tourism is perfectly legal as long as immigrants are able to pay their own way.
The State Department and Department of Homeland Security have no specific regulations banning pregnant foreigners from entering the United States. But officials say they can and do turn away pregnant women with obvious designs on coming to the United States to take advantage of free medical care. "When determining if an individual will be allowed to enter the U.S., Customs and Border Protection officers take into consideration the date the child is due for delivery and the length of time the individual intends to stay in the U.S.," a Department of Homeland Security spokesman said.
Still, critics say the practice largely goes unchecked and exploits the true meaning of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, enacted after the Civil War to grant citizenship to descendants of slaves.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside," the amendment reads.
"It's really an incorrect interpretation of the 14th Amendment," said Jerome Corsi, a conservative author and columnist who has studied the issue of birth tourism. "Birthright citizenship is a loophole � [and] as it expands into a business for entrepreneurs in foreign countries who offer birth tourism packages, it markets the loophole to attract additional mothers to the U.S."
Lino Graglia of the University of Texas law school wrote in the Jan. 11 Texas Review of Law & Politics that the authors of the 14th Amendment never would have imagined their words bestowing citizenship to illegal or visiting immigrants.
"It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry," Graglia wrote of birthright citizenship. The Supreme Court has only addressed the issue once, ruling in 1898 that citizenship applies to U.S.-born children of legal immigrants who have yet to become citizens.
Some legislators, including U.S. Rep. Gary Miller, R-Calif., have called for revising the Constitution to forbid citizenship by birth alone and thereby end the attraction of birth tourists. But other politicos, from both sides of the aisle, say such an approach is politically unrealistic, not to mention unnecessary. "You just turn people down for being pregnant," said Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies. "That should be the default position and then there'd have to be some very good reason for an exception."
Krikorian acknowledged that some people might find a ban on pregnant visitors "outrageous," but questions the rationality of the alternative.
"Do you really think that's right that somebody here visiting Disneyland should have their children be U.S. citizens, which they'll then inevitably use to get access to the U.S.?" he asked.
Krikorian and others call the offspring of birth tourists "anchor babies," because they can serve as a foothold for future legal immigration of an entire family.
Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, said he sees the debate about birth tourists in a different light, however, noting that arguments about citizenship of children ignore a fundamental question of humanity.
"If we're a country that cares about families and family values, then why are we blaming the children for a decision the parents made. Their only decision was to take a first breath," he said.
"What is the State Department going to do? To fill out a visa application have a woman pee on a stick?"
The United States is one of the few remaining countries to grant citizenship to all children born on its soil. The United Kingdom, Ireland, India and Australia, among others, have since revised their birthright laws, no longer allowing every child born on their soil to get citizenship.
This news is not only ridiculous but also looks down on people from other country and the writer lives in the illusion that the US is the greatest country in the world.
People in other country have a life too (probably a better one) and I dont think any sane person will consider spending 15K to come to USA just to give birth and get the advantage of US citizenship. People in other countries are just like people in this country and any normal family will celebrate the birth of a kid and not worry about something as sickening as this.
After all USA is a great country but it is not the ONLY great country. Every country has their share of advantages and disadvantages.
A New Baby Boom? Foreign 'Birth Tourists' Seek U.S. Citizenship for Children
More Foreign Mothers Live Abroad to Give Birth on U.S. Soil, Debate Over 14th Amendment
Millions of foreign tourists visit the United States every year, and a growing number return home with a brand new U.S. citizen in tow. housands of legal immigrants, who do not permanently reside in the United States but give birth here, have given their children the gift of citizenship, which the U.S. grants to anyone born on its soil.
The number of U.S. births to non-resident mothers rose 53 percent between 2000 and 2006, according to the most recent data from the National Center for Health Statistics. Total births rose 5 percent in the same period.
Among the foreigners who have given birth here, including international travelers passing through and foreign students studying at U.S. universities, are "birth tourists," women who travel to the United States with the explicit purpose of obtaining citizenship for their child.
Catering to the women is a nascent industry of travel agencies and hotel chains seeking to profit from the business. The Marmara Manhattan, a Turkish-owned luxury hotel on New York's City Upper East Side, markets birth tourism packages to expectant mothers abroad, luring more than a dozen pregnant guests and their families to the United States to give birth last year alone.
"What we offer is simply a one-bedroom suite accommodation for $7,750, plus taxes, for a month, with airport transfer, baby cradle and a gift set for the mother," Marmara Hotel spokeswoman Alexandra Ballantine said.
The hotel estimates the total cost of the package at $45,000.
Most women stay for two months, Ballantine said, and they make medical arrangements on their own. "Guests arrange and pay for these by themselves," she said of hospital costs that can approach $30,000.
For those with the means to pay, it's a small price to give a child the full benefits of U.S. citizenship, including the ability to travel freely to and from the United States, easy access to a U.S. education and a chance to start a life here.
"We found a company on the Internet and decided to go to Austin [Texas] for our child's birth," Turkish mother Selin Burcuoglu told Istanbul's Hurriyet Daily News. "I don't want [my daughter] to deal with visa issues. American citizenship has so many advantages."
The greatest of those advantages may be the ability of the citizen child to later sponsor the legal immigration of his or her entire family permanently to this country, experts say.
The "birth tourism" industry, which is difficult to track and remains largely anecdotal, has been on the rise for years, according to government and participants reports. Of the 4,273,225 live births in the United States in 2006, the most recent data gathered by the National Center for Health Statistics, 7,670 were children born to mothers who said they do not live here.
Many, but not all, of those mothers could be "birth tourists," experts say, although it is difficult to know for sure. The government does not track the reasons non-resident mothers are in the United States at the time of the birth or their citizenship, meaning births to illegal immigrants who live in the United States are counted in the overall total.
In recent years, many women have come from Mexico, South Korea, China and Taiwan, but the trend now extends to countries in Eastern Europe, such as Turkey, where as many as 12,000 children were born in the United States to Turkish parents since 2003 by one estimate.
The business of birth tourism is perfectly legal as long as immigrants are able to pay their own way.
The State Department and Department of Homeland Security have no specific regulations banning pregnant foreigners from entering the United States. But officials say they can and do turn away pregnant women with obvious designs on coming to the United States to take advantage of free medical care. "When determining if an individual will be allowed to enter the U.S., Customs and Border Protection officers take into consideration the date the child is due for delivery and the length of time the individual intends to stay in the U.S.," a Department of Homeland Security spokesman said.
Still, critics say the practice largely goes unchecked and exploits the true meaning of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, enacted after the Civil War to grant citizenship to descendants of slaves.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside," the amendment reads.
"It's really an incorrect interpretation of the 14th Amendment," said Jerome Corsi, a conservative author and columnist who has studied the issue of birth tourism. "Birthright citizenship is a loophole � [and] as it expands into a business for entrepreneurs in foreign countries who offer birth tourism packages, it markets the loophole to attract additional mothers to the U.S."
Lino Graglia of the University of Texas law school wrote in the Jan. 11 Texas Review of Law & Politics that the authors of the 14th Amendment never would have imagined their words bestowing citizenship to illegal or visiting immigrants.
"It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry," Graglia wrote of birthright citizenship. The Supreme Court has only addressed the issue once, ruling in 1898 that citizenship applies to U.S.-born children of legal immigrants who have yet to become citizens.
Some legislators, including U.S. Rep. Gary Miller, R-Calif., have called for revising the Constitution to forbid citizenship by birth alone and thereby end the attraction of birth tourists. But other politicos, from both sides of the aisle, say such an approach is politically unrealistic, not to mention unnecessary. "You just turn people down for being pregnant," said Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies. "That should be the default position and then there'd have to be some very good reason for an exception."
Krikorian acknowledged that some people might find a ban on pregnant visitors "outrageous," but questions the rationality of the alternative.
"Do you really think that's right that somebody here visiting Disneyland should have their children be U.S. citizens, which they'll then inevitably use to get access to the U.S.?" he asked.
Krikorian and others call the offspring of birth tourists "anchor babies," because they can serve as a foothold for future legal immigration of an entire family.
Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, said he sees the debate about birth tourists in a different light, however, noting that arguments about citizenship of children ignore a fundamental question of humanity.
"If we're a country that cares about families and family values, then why are we blaming the children for a decision the parents made. Their only decision was to take a first breath," he said.
"What is the State Department going to do? To fill out a visa application have a woman pee on a stick?"
The United States is one of the few remaining countries to grant citizenship to all children born on its soil. The United Kingdom, Ireland, India and Australia, among others, have since revised their birthright laws, no longer allowing every child born on their soil to get citizenship.
This news is not only ridiculous but also looks down on people from other country and the writer lives in the illusion that the US is the greatest country in the world.
People in other country have a life too (probably a better one) and I dont think any sane person will consider spending 15K to come to USA just to give birth and get the advantage of US citizenship. People in other countries are just like people in this country and any normal family will celebrate the birth of a kid and not worry about something as sickening as this.
After all USA is a great country but it is not the ONLY great country. Every country has their share of advantages and disadvantages.
2010 Meet the Scam-wow!
nogc_noproblem
05-12 01:57 PM
No, it is wrong, as you can see from the link, this is the correct address effetive July 30, 2007.
What I understood from my lawyer is to send the renewal documents to address at the bottom of I-485 notice. I may have understood wrong.
Regards
GCCovet.
What I understood from my lawyer is to send the renewal documents to address at the bottom of I-485 notice. I may have understood wrong.
Regards
GCCovet.
more...
mps
07-19 05:03 PM
-Can USCIS offer premium processing on I-485 after they re-capture lost visa numbers ?
hair movie clips, funny videos
ravi.shah
03-19 10:38 AM
NO.
Mailed is not equal to received or applied for transfer. Until you have proof that USCIS has received your application, dont start at the new employer. Waiting for the receipt # is the safe route down the road even though you have to delay by a week or so.
Thanks for the info dear.
I will wait for the receipt number.
I do have one more question if someone can anser :
I have to start with new employer on 3/29/2010. Definately i will get receipt before that.
Now my question is, is it ok if i leave my current employer on 3/26/2010 ?
There will be a 2 day period(weekend) where i will be travelling for the new job.
I am worried what would be my status for those two days.
What could i do in this situation ?
Mailed is not equal to received or applied for transfer. Until you have proof that USCIS has received your application, dont start at the new employer. Waiting for the receipt # is the safe route down the road even though you have to delay by a week or so.
Thanks for the info dear.
I will wait for the receipt number.
I do have one more question if someone can anser :
I have to start with new employer on 3/29/2010. Definately i will get receipt before that.
Now my question is, is it ok if i leave my current employer on 3/26/2010 ?
There will be a 2 day period(weekend) where i will be travelling for the new job.
I am worried what would be my status for those two days.
What could i do in this situation ?
more...
leoindiano
09-19 01:47 PM
Thanks Swede,
You set a great example to this community.
You set a great example to this community.
hot WOW! Funny Animals amp; Kids
nchendica
06-27 07:28 PM
I got my H1B approval. As USICS opened premium for I-140, I am trying to file another labor in EB3 and get an ed eval from thedegreepeople.com.
Thanks,
Naga
nchendica:
Could you give what is the current status of your case and what you did? did you get new evaluation from any one? If so, could you share the info. I have a similar situation.
You can email me the details to gcperm@gmail.com
thanks in advance.
Thanks,
Naga
nchendica:
Could you give what is the current status of your case and what you did? did you get new evaluation from any one? If so, could you share the info. I have a similar situation.
You can email me the details to gcperm@gmail.com
thanks in advance.
more...
house WoW funny stuff
fromnaija
06-21 01:49 PM
As posted above, once you have the receipt call USCIS and expedite your EAD application.
tattoo funny wow macros_20. funny wow
acecupid
07-02 06:12 PM
Once you send the emails, post a message on this thread so we know how many are actively working on this.:D
Cheers!
Cheers!
more...
pictures Funny real life WoW made by
radm06
11-11 12:34 PM
I filed concurrent I140/I485 June 27, still pending :)
dresses VID_20101030_232147.mp4 video
ItIsNotFunny
03-28 08:08 AM
Hi All,
Found this on murthy site as well as on shusterman website...is this going to add any extra mile to the things we already doing for a while?
-Madhu
Looks like organization is still under construction.
Found this on murthy site as well as on shusterman website...is this going to add any extra mile to the things we already doing for a while?
-Madhu
Looks like organization is still under construction.
more...
makeup super funny hilarious worlds
vpadman
07-17 06:56 PM
I have an appointment set up with a doctor. However, the doctor is not listed as a USCIS authorized physician in the USCIS web site.
I called the doctor's office and they assure me that he does "immigration physicals" and has been doing them.( As a side note, there is another doctor in the same office who is on the approved list but he is on vacation)
Is the following website updated with list of eligible civil surgeons ? https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=offices.type&OfficeLocator.office_type=CIV
Please advise.
I called the doctor's office and they assure me that he does "immigration physicals" and has been doing them.( As a side note, there is another doctor in the same office who is on the approved list but he is on vacation)
Is the following website updated with list of eligible civil surgeons ? https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=offices.type&OfficeLocator.office_type=CIV
Please advise.
girlfriend Funny videos wow a question
RNGC
04-04 02:55 PM
Guys,
You are doing a great job....keep up the good work.
You are doing a great job....keep up the good work.
hairstyles in Funny, Video and
bestin
10-09 06:35 PM
I have a similar question. I have I-94 till Jan 2008 as my H1B visa is valid till Jan 2008. If I file an H1B extension in Dec, is that okay ? I know, approval would not come before Jan 08.I beleive as long as u dont hear something from USCIS u are still in status provided u filed before the expiry of ur I94.I also think they do send a new i94.
JunRN
09-22 12:20 PM
If it get passed both Houses of Congress, Bush will sign it in his lameduck days. Many Presidents did sign bills even a day before leaving the office.
MYGCBY2010
10-16 12:41 PM
Folks i got a LUD on my AP 7 days back and again LUD 5 days back. But the status didn't change nor i get any letter of so far.
Does this means i'm on my way to a RFE :) If they send RFE does that gets reflected on the Online Status ??
Thanks much!
Online status would change if you have a RFE on your AP(as matter of fact for all forms)... Normally it says "A notice was sent asking for additional evidence"
Does this means i'm on my way to a RFE :) If they send RFE does that gets reflected on the Online Status ??
Thanks much!
Online status would change if you have a RFE on your AP(as matter of fact for all forms)... Normally it says "A notice was sent asking for additional evidence"
