GCHope2011
11-05 08:16 AM
Please read the editorial from today's WSJ by John Boehner. We should adjust our thinking to this reality and try to eat the elephant one bite at a time. Trying to swallow anything all at once is certainly not John Boehner's idea of legislation.
================================================== =====
I grew up in a small house on a hill in Cincinnati, Ohio, with 11 brothers and sisters. My dad ran a bar, Andy's Caf�, that my grandfather Andrew Boehner opened in 1938. We didn't have much but were thankful for what we had. And we didn't think much about Washington.
That changed when I got involved with a small business, which I eventually built into a successful enterprise. I saw firsthand how government throws obstacles in the way of job-creation and stifles our prosperity. It prompted me to get involved in my government, and eventually took me to Congress.
Millions of Americans have had a similar experience. They look at Washington and see an arrogance of power. They see a Congress that doesn't listen, that is ruled by leaders who seem out of touch and dismissive, even disdainful, of the anger that Americans feel toward their government and the challenges they face in an economy struggling to create jobs.
The political landscape has been permanently reshaped over the past two years. Overreaching by elected officials�in the form of pork-laden "stimulus" spending, permanent bailouts, and policies that force responsible taxpayers to subsidize irresponsible behavior�has awakened something deep in our national character. This has led to a surge of activism by citizens demanding smaller, more accountable government and a repudiation of Washington in Tuesday's elections.
Tired of politicians who refuse to listen, Americans who previously were not involved or minimally involved in the political process are now helping to drive it. While their backgrounds are as diverse as the country itself, their message to Washington is the same: Government leaders are servants of the people; the people are not servants of their government.
View Full Image
David Klein
The members of the 112th Congress must heed this message if there is to be any hope of repairing the shattered bonds of trust between the American people and their elected leaders. And that begins with the speaker of the House, who as leader of the institution must lead by example.
Accordingly, there are several steps I believe the next speaker should be prepared to take immediately. Among them:
� No earmarks. Earmarks have become a symbol of a broken Washington, and an entire lobbying industry has been created around them. The speaker of the House shouldn't use the power of the office to raid the federal Treasury for pork-barrel projects. To the contrary, the speaker should be an advocate for ending the current earmark process, and should adhere to a personal no-earmarks policy that stands as an example for all members of Congress to follow.
I have maintained a no-earmarks policy throughout my time of service in Congress. I believe the House must adopt a moratorium on all earmarks as a signal of our commitment to ending business as usual in the spending process.
� Let Americans read bills before they are brought to a vote. The speaker of the House should not allow any bill to come to a vote that has not been posted publicly online for at least three days. Members of Congress and the American people must have the opportunity to read it.
Similarly, the speaker should insist that every bill include a clause citing where in the Constitution Congress is given the power to pass it. Bills that can't pass this test shouldn't get a vote. House Republicans' new governing agenda, "A Pledge to America," calls for the speaker to implement such reforms immediately.
� No more "comprehensive" bills. The next speaker should put an end to so-called comprehensive bills with thousands of pages of legislative text that make it easy to hide spending projects and job-killing policies. President Obama's massive "stimulus" and health-care bills, written behind closed doors with minimal public scrutiny, were the last straw for many Americans. The American people are not well-served by "comprehensive," and they are rightly suspicious of the adjective.
� No more bills written behind closed doors in the speaker's office. Bills should be written by legislators in committee in plain public view. Issues should be advanced one at a time, and the speaker should place an emphasis on smaller, more focused legislation that is properly scrutinized, constitutionally sound, and consistent with Americans' demand for a less-costly, less-intrusive government.
The speaker of the House, like all members of Congress, is a servant of the American people. The individual entrusted with that high honor and responsibility should act accordingly. A speaker's mission should not be to consolidate power in the speaker's office, but rather to ensure that elected officials uphold their oath to defend the Constitution and the American people we serve. If a speaker carries out that mission successfully, the result should be legislation that better reflects the considerable challenges we face as a nation.
The American people deserve a majority in Congress that listens to the people, focuses on their priorities and honors their demands for smaller, more accountable government. Accountability starts at the top, in the office of the speaker.
Mr. Boehner, a congressman representing Ohio's Eighth District since 1991, is the House Republican leader.
================================================== =====
I grew up in a small house on a hill in Cincinnati, Ohio, with 11 brothers and sisters. My dad ran a bar, Andy's Caf�, that my grandfather Andrew Boehner opened in 1938. We didn't have much but were thankful for what we had. And we didn't think much about Washington.
That changed when I got involved with a small business, which I eventually built into a successful enterprise. I saw firsthand how government throws obstacles in the way of job-creation and stifles our prosperity. It prompted me to get involved in my government, and eventually took me to Congress.
Millions of Americans have had a similar experience. They look at Washington and see an arrogance of power. They see a Congress that doesn't listen, that is ruled by leaders who seem out of touch and dismissive, even disdainful, of the anger that Americans feel toward their government and the challenges they face in an economy struggling to create jobs.
The political landscape has been permanently reshaped over the past two years. Overreaching by elected officials�in the form of pork-laden "stimulus" spending, permanent bailouts, and policies that force responsible taxpayers to subsidize irresponsible behavior�has awakened something deep in our national character. This has led to a surge of activism by citizens demanding smaller, more accountable government and a repudiation of Washington in Tuesday's elections.
Tired of politicians who refuse to listen, Americans who previously were not involved or minimally involved in the political process are now helping to drive it. While their backgrounds are as diverse as the country itself, their message to Washington is the same: Government leaders are servants of the people; the people are not servants of their government.
View Full Image
David Klein
The members of the 112th Congress must heed this message if there is to be any hope of repairing the shattered bonds of trust between the American people and their elected leaders. And that begins with the speaker of the House, who as leader of the institution must lead by example.
Accordingly, there are several steps I believe the next speaker should be prepared to take immediately. Among them:
� No earmarks. Earmarks have become a symbol of a broken Washington, and an entire lobbying industry has been created around them. The speaker of the House shouldn't use the power of the office to raid the federal Treasury for pork-barrel projects. To the contrary, the speaker should be an advocate for ending the current earmark process, and should adhere to a personal no-earmarks policy that stands as an example for all members of Congress to follow.
I have maintained a no-earmarks policy throughout my time of service in Congress. I believe the House must adopt a moratorium on all earmarks as a signal of our commitment to ending business as usual in the spending process.
� Let Americans read bills before they are brought to a vote. The speaker of the House should not allow any bill to come to a vote that has not been posted publicly online for at least three days. Members of Congress and the American people must have the opportunity to read it.
Similarly, the speaker should insist that every bill include a clause citing where in the Constitution Congress is given the power to pass it. Bills that can't pass this test shouldn't get a vote. House Republicans' new governing agenda, "A Pledge to America," calls for the speaker to implement such reforms immediately.
� No more "comprehensive" bills. The next speaker should put an end to so-called comprehensive bills with thousands of pages of legislative text that make it easy to hide spending projects and job-killing policies. President Obama's massive "stimulus" and health-care bills, written behind closed doors with minimal public scrutiny, were the last straw for many Americans. The American people are not well-served by "comprehensive," and they are rightly suspicious of the adjective.
� No more bills written behind closed doors in the speaker's office. Bills should be written by legislators in committee in plain public view. Issues should be advanced one at a time, and the speaker should place an emphasis on smaller, more focused legislation that is properly scrutinized, constitutionally sound, and consistent with Americans' demand for a less-costly, less-intrusive government.
The speaker of the House, like all members of Congress, is a servant of the American people. The individual entrusted with that high honor and responsibility should act accordingly. A speaker's mission should not be to consolidate power in the speaker's office, but rather to ensure that elected officials uphold their oath to defend the Constitution and the American people we serve. If a speaker carries out that mission successfully, the result should be legislation that better reflects the considerable challenges we face as a nation.
The American people deserve a majority in Congress that listens to the people, focuses on their priorities and honors their demands for smaller, more accountable government. Accountability starts at the top, in the office of the speaker.
Mr. Boehner, a congressman representing Ohio's Eighth District since 1991, is the House Republican leader.
wallpaper wallpaper of friendship
=guinness=
04-04 07:21 AM
uh i may be new but isn't ivyleaf's just a rip of a blizzard file, where the background is a little more impressive than the phrase thats all reflected?
eb3_nepa
08-13 09:39 PM
Last week we all got the LUD of 08/05/2007 also a Sunday. My lawyer said maybe it was a mass update, but now I am beginning to wonder if that is the case.
Now this is a THEORY but what if every Sunday they are updating the packages being sent from NSC to TSC. The very fact that there is an LUD update means 1 important thing
You are not a concurrent filer.
Maybe it is my wishful thinking, but i feel that seeing mass LUD updates on 2 consecutive Sundays is too much to be a mere coincidence.
Now this is a THEORY but what if every Sunday they are updating the packages being sent from NSC to TSC. The very fact that there is an LUD update means 1 important thing
You are not a concurrent filer.
Maybe it is my wishful thinking, but i feel that seeing mass LUD updates on 2 consecutive Sundays is too much to be a mere coincidence.
2011 wallpaper of friendship
ttdam
11-01 06:30 PM
I did it in Kinkos, I took all data pages in color and empty pages in black and white. It cost me around $15. (For two people). I also included all I 94 Cards.
Thanks eadguru
I did it in STAPLES almost the same,
Will keep posted with new updates...
Thanks eadguru
I did it in STAPLES almost the same,
Will keep posted with new updates...
more...
bsbawa10
08-15 09:56 AM
Why are there two "Priority Date" columns?
There is onlly one. The other ones are for the notice date and receipt dates
There is onlly one. The other ones are for the notice date and receipt dates
zeal2005
02-11 12:25 PM
My GC was filed by Chugh firm and I did not face any problems so far. I left my GC sponsoring company as well and still continuing with them for AC21 and other issues. In general, you have to carefully verify the data in the application that the firm feel up but that is applicable for any law firm you choose.
more...
logiclife
03-17 01:13 AM
3/16/2006
All immigration voice contributors:
On behalf of immigration voice I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation, for your thoughtful and generous gift. We have
reached our goal of "60K by 16th" today. Last checked, the contributions slightly reached over 60,500.
Through the support of individuals like you, Immigration Voice is able to continue our advocacy efforts in Washington DC to bring
immigration reform for legal high-skilled immigrants. With your continued support we will keep our efforts up until we have reached
our goals because its simply too important to not give up EVER.
Again, thank you for the generous support. Your gift, along with the gifts of others, will enable us to continue our advocacy efforts
through every bill and every legislation that can help us achieve legal-immigration reform.
Sincerely,
Jay Pradhan.
http://www.ebsworth.com/gallery/images/u106_thank_you.jpg
All immigration voice contributors:
On behalf of immigration voice I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation, for your thoughtful and generous gift. We have
reached our goal of "60K by 16th" today. Last checked, the contributions slightly reached over 60,500.
Through the support of individuals like you, Immigration Voice is able to continue our advocacy efforts in Washington DC to bring
immigration reform for legal high-skilled immigrants. With your continued support we will keep our efforts up until we have reached
our goals because its simply too important to not give up EVER.
Again, thank you for the generous support. Your gift, along with the gifts of others, will enable us to continue our advocacy efforts
through every bill and every legislation that can help us achieve legal-immigration reform.
Sincerely,
Jay Pradhan.
http://www.ebsworth.com/gallery/images/u106_thank_you.jpg
2010 iPhone Wallpaper Chanel
number30
04-25 01:57 AM
Checked with my company lawyer. According to them it is a separate document from marriage certificate.
I applied for GC only after getting married , so right from the beginning my passport etc has my wifes name in it. What caused this RFE still baffles me.
I am not sure how will I get this document sitting in USA within 2 weeks.
Is there any other alternative ? Has any one faced with this kind of RFE and has given
some substitute for "Memorandum of marriage"
It might be application you made for registering the marriage. I googled it and got this result
http://www.karigr.org/download/hindu%20marriage%20forms.pdf
I applied for GC only after getting married , so right from the beginning my passport etc has my wifes name in it. What caused this RFE still baffles me.
I am not sure how will I get this document sitting in USA within 2 weeks.
Is there any other alternative ? Has any one faced with this kind of RFE and has given
some substitute for "Memorandum of marriage"
It might be application you made for registering the marriage. I googled it and got this result
http://www.karigr.org/download/hindu%20marriage%20forms.pdf
more...
ash0210
11-18 03:52 PM
logiclife, thats the "trap" (& excuse) I am trying to break by providing some solution in my earlier mail...
Is "immigration" process a "Rocket" science?
When this country supports "complex" process of landing on "moon" with "efficient" high-technology that spread across Electrical, Mechanical & computational areas/divisions, why not "Immigration" process?
Look, we as "IT" guys knows that "Customer process" can be spread across different "divisons" of the organization and still we "devise" solution to implement that process by providing "homogeneous" solution...and therefore I feel that WE should not "buy" this idea of "Process" etc...
What I am saying is..If guy/gal is having EAD for more than 3-4 times, paying taxes & "have clean police record" then he/she is not threat to "security" of country and USCIS do not avail VISA# then assign a "Temporary" VISA # to such I-485 applicant who is hanging around for last 5-6 years with EAD!!
Also, when PD of China & Mexico is moving beyond April 2001 while "India" PD for last 7 months is "lingering" between April 15 & April 21, I do suspect of "Transparency". Why USCIS do not gives count# of Indians that are pending in BPCS and also NOT even "trying" to find out "How many Indians will complain" if they will pass beyond April 31, 2001?
Let USCIS pass India PD beyond April 31, 2001, let them collect the complains of Indians, compile the "statistics" and let them arrive at # Indians that are hiding behind 245(i) "Titanium" wall and then we should buy this excuse of "Process"..
Guys apart from "Political reasons", USCIS have to show some transprency for not moving "India" PD beyond April 31, 2001 to convince us...!!!
The problem with premium processing of 485 is that there a procedures in 485, like the FBI namecheck, the Fingerprinting etc, that is perfect recipe for bureaucratic nightmare.
USCIS is in the Department of Homeland security. That's where I485 starts. Then comes FBI namecheck. That's US dept of Justice. After that, comes the issue of alloting visa numbers. That is US State Department.
So you have 3 big bodies of US government who have to all work at premium speed IN SYNC with each other, without passing the buck to each other, to make premium processing possible for 485 filing.
As we all know, USCIS that alone handles I140 petitions took years to implement premium I140. Now if 3 entirely different Departments of US govt were to be asked to harmoniously streamline another procedure, then I guess its wish very less likely to come true, EVEN IF they want it as much as we do.
Is "immigration" process a "Rocket" science?
When this country supports "complex" process of landing on "moon" with "efficient" high-technology that spread across Electrical, Mechanical & computational areas/divisions, why not "Immigration" process?
Look, we as "IT" guys knows that "Customer process" can be spread across different "divisons" of the organization and still we "devise" solution to implement that process by providing "homogeneous" solution...and therefore I feel that WE should not "buy" this idea of "Process" etc...
What I am saying is..If guy/gal is having EAD for more than 3-4 times, paying taxes & "have clean police record" then he/she is not threat to "security" of country and USCIS do not avail VISA# then assign a "Temporary" VISA # to such I-485 applicant who is hanging around for last 5-6 years with EAD!!
Also, when PD of China & Mexico is moving beyond April 2001 while "India" PD for last 7 months is "lingering" between April 15 & April 21, I do suspect of "Transparency". Why USCIS do not gives count# of Indians that are pending in BPCS and also NOT even "trying" to find out "How many Indians will complain" if they will pass beyond April 31, 2001?
Let USCIS pass India PD beyond April 31, 2001, let them collect the complains of Indians, compile the "statistics" and let them arrive at # Indians that are hiding behind 245(i) "Titanium" wall and then we should buy this excuse of "Process"..
Guys apart from "Political reasons", USCIS have to show some transprency for not moving "India" PD beyond April 31, 2001 to convince us...!!!
The problem with premium processing of 485 is that there a procedures in 485, like the FBI namecheck, the Fingerprinting etc, that is perfect recipe for bureaucratic nightmare.
USCIS is in the Department of Homeland security. That's where I485 starts. Then comes FBI namecheck. That's US dept of Justice. After that, comes the issue of alloting visa numbers. That is US State Department.
So you have 3 big bodies of US government who have to all work at premium speed IN SYNC with each other, without passing the buck to each other, to make premium processing possible for 485 filing.
As we all know, USCIS that alone handles I140 petitions took years to implement premium I140. Now if 3 entirely different Departments of US govt were to be asked to harmoniously streamline another procedure, then I guess its wish very less likely to come true, EVEN IF they want it as much as we do.
hair christmas wallpaper
hasil
09-29 01:04 PM
I don't know how you can generalize like that. Sure that I was also burnt by a Desi company. But that is no excuse to say that All Desi company's are like that. I am sure this topic is very well discussed in some other thread. I am posting this as I am surprised not to see somebody jumping in against such generalizations.
So make it a promise to yourself that if you ever start a company you will not screw up anybody (desi or otherwise)
Chill man. I am just sharing my experience and giving practical opinion. If it helps you then thats fine else just ignore and move on. :)
So make it a promise to yourself that if you ever start a company you will not screw up anybody (desi or otherwise)
Chill man. I am just sharing my experience and giving practical opinion. If it helps you then thats fine else just ignore and move on. :)
more...
reddymjm
10-04 04:05 PM
GOOD. IV will be free from some head ache.:)
hot wallpapers of love poems.
gveerab
10-21 12:39 AM
Companies can pay employees expenses when they ask the employee to work in different place and employee has to travel. As long as that expense doesn't show up in your pay stub you are good.
I am working on H1B. Recently what has happened that my family lives in state A, and I am working in state B. My family could not move to state B because my sone is going to school. I have to pay alot of expenses to go back and fort from state B to A, like air ticket and cab ect. I talking to my compnay regarding this and they said that whatever are my expenses submit to every month end and he will send a check for those expenses which will be pre taxed amount. i.e. if my pre taxed salary is $ 5000 per-month , if I submit expense statemet for $500. Then my employer will send a check of 500 and paystub i.e. direct deposit after applying tax on $4500.
I am not sure whatever he is suggesting is good tyhing to do and it will not have any problem for me.
I am working on H1B. Recently what has happened that my family lives in state A, and I am working in state B. My family could not move to state B because my sone is going to school. I have to pay alot of expenses to go back and fort from state B to A, like air ticket and cab ect. I talking to my compnay regarding this and they said that whatever are my expenses submit to every month end and he will send a check for those expenses which will be pre taxed amount. i.e. if my pre taxed salary is $ 5000 per-month , if I submit expense statemet for $500. Then my employer will send a check of 500 and paystub i.e. direct deposit after applying tax on $4500.
I am not sure whatever he is suggesting is good tyhing to do and it will not have any problem for me.
more...
house Cracked Wallpaper by ~
ssdtm
12-12 03:56 PM
Leaving with expired I-94 is no issues. My wife recently went India, gave expired i-94 on passport. She did not give the latest i-94 that came with her H4. She got visa stamped from India, and came back without any issues.
tattoo cote de pablo wallpaper.
radhay
07-26 07:25 AM
My case is some what similar. My h1b extension packet was returned for lack of filing fee but before we could re-apply my old h1b expired. We applied however but USCIS approved h1B petition and didn't grant me h1b status i.e didn't issue I-94. I am required to leave the country for stamping.
Now we are filing nunc-pro-tunc petition essential pleading with USCIS it was no fault of my mine. You can do gooogle on this.
Okay, I applied for an H1 transfer late June 2006 on my own. Started at new job after receipt. Late August went on maternity leave. Came back to work in December. During maternity leave, my application was sent back due to wrong fee and no LCA (I didn't use a lawyer and was given somewhat bad advice.) By the time I did a re-application for transfer it was April 2007 (with the help of lawyers, this time). My H1 expired (6 years) near the end of June. But I was told I was okay as long as I was pending. Mid-July got a request for evidence with a date of September 20th being the latest date I can send in the evidence...pay stubs, tax returns, etc.
1. Am I currently out of status or okay because of the RFE?
2. If I apply for F-1 status now (thinking of a second Masters or PhD) will I need to send in the evidence for the H1B before that or will that not matter? It will take me a while to get all of the evidence, but I don't have time to wait in regards to getting the F-1 for school this Fall.
My lawyers suggested leaving the country, but I am fearful of that? Any suggestions, answers, advice?
Thanks.
Now we are filing nunc-pro-tunc petition essential pleading with USCIS it was no fault of my mine. You can do gooogle on this.
Okay, I applied for an H1 transfer late June 2006 on my own. Started at new job after receipt. Late August went on maternity leave. Came back to work in December. During maternity leave, my application was sent back due to wrong fee and no LCA (I didn't use a lawyer and was given somewhat bad advice.) By the time I did a re-application for transfer it was April 2007 (with the help of lawyers, this time). My H1 expired (6 years) near the end of June. But I was told I was okay as long as I was pending. Mid-July got a request for evidence with a date of September 20th being the latest date I can send in the evidence...pay stubs, tax returns, etc.
1. Am I currently out of status or okay because of the RFE?
2. If I apply for F-1 status now (thinking of a second Masters or PhD) will I need to send in the evidence for the H1B before that or will that not matter? It will take me a while to get all of the evidence, but I don't have time to wait in regards to getting the F-1 for school this Fall.
My lawyers suggested leaving the country, but I am fearful of that? Any suggestions, answers, advice?
Thanks.
more...
pictures black ops wallpaper ps3. lack
.jpg "download wallpapers for mobile")
DDash
08-06 04:36 PM
Friends, I Received the magic email today!
Yes - I cant believe my eyes, my I-485 has been approved today and card production ordered.
I do have a question: I could not file for my wife's i-485 in July/2007. So, we filed for my wife's application on Aug/01/2008 (Did a overnight express mail on July-31st) as my PD is current as of Aug-1st. So far her application check has not been deposited.
What will happen now? Is she out of status? I am getting really concerned. Gurus help me out?
Thanks in advance.
A green dot guaranteed for the response :)
Some details:
Ceter: TSC
I-485 Receipt Date: July/2/2007
I-140 Approval Date: July/3/2006
PD: 02/02/2006
Yes - I cant believe my eyes, my I-485 has been approved today and card production ordered.
I do have a question: I could not file for my wife's i-485 in July/2007. So, we filed for my wife's application on Aug/01/2008 (Did a overnight express mail on July-31st) as my PD is current as of Aug-1st. So far her application check has not been deposited.
What will happen now? Is she out of status? I am getting really concerned. Gurus help me out?
Thanks in advance.
A green dot guaranteed for the response :)
Some details:
Ceter: TSC
I-485 Receipt Date: July/2/2007
I-140 Approval Date: July/3/2006
PD: 02/02/2006
dresses point blank online wallpaper.
nixstor
07-18 09:02 AM
hi Guys,
I was thinking over this for quite some time. Why dont we hire one or two immigration attorneys on a full time basis. And lets start am immigration office where we can have all our immigration works (doubtful) but the future immigrant works ata marginally cheaper rates with high quality of service. If we keep a no profit no loss mantra, it would be helpful to everyone and also it will make this organization very strong.
Lets discuss its relevance? What does the Core think about this.?
Wow! out of 20k, 300 people have signed up for monthly contributions. Here we are thinking about hiring a couple of attorneys for the whole org. Sounds ideal, but there are many reasons why applicants will still have to go with the lawyer, their employer picks.
I was thinking over this for quite some time. Why dont we hire one or two immigration attorneys on a full time basis. And lets start am immigration office where we can have all our immigration works (doubtful) but the future immigrant works ata marginally cheaper rates with high quality of service. If we keep a no profit no loss mantra, it would be helpful to everyone and also it will make this organization very strong.
Lets discuss its relevance? What does the Core think about this.?
Wow! out of 20k, 300 people have signed up for monthly contributions. Here we are thinking about hiring a couple of attorneys for the whole org. Sounds ideal, but there are many reasons why applicants will still have to go with the lawyer, their employer picks.
more...
makeup 1366x768 wallpapers.
jlt007us
09-14 12:08 PM
I came to US on H1B in 2000. I have an engineering degree (10+2+4) from a premier institute in India in Information Systems. Before coming to US I worked for an MNC for 4+ years. I am with the current employer since 2003. Following are my case details.
Case 1:
EB2 Labor filed: April 2005
Labor Approved: December 2005
I-140 Filed: January 2006
RFE for Ability 2 pay and RFE replied.
I-140 Denied: August 2007
Never recieved the denial notice as per the lawyer
Case 2:
EB2 Labor filed: August 2005
Labor Approved: January 2006
I-140 Filed: August 2007 (I checked the status online and informed the lawyer who immediately filed for this I-140 basing on the approved labor)
I-485 Filed: August 2007
RFE for W2/wages company tax information etc that were replied on time.
I-140 Denied Sep 2009
EAD valid till October: 2010
AP Valid till Feb 2010
H1 B 8th year extension filed: July 2008 (There was a mistake during the filing as the reference was made to denied I-140 instead of the pending one)
Extension Denied based on Case 1 I-140: October 2008
I-290B Appeal to commissioner filed and pending as of date
Case 3:
Pending EB2 labor since October 2008.
I am paid more than the prevailing wages. Now the question is:
1. Should I file for MTR/Appeal (we still haven't recieved the denial notice).
2. I believe it is just a matter of time before I-485 status changes to denied. Will the EAD/AP become invalid as well?
3. If MTR/Appeal is filed for I-140, can I still continue working?
Any thoughts or suggestions will be appreciated.
Case 1:
EB2 Labor filed: April 2005
Labor Approved: December 2005
I-140 Filed: January 2006
RFE for Ability 2 pay and RFE replied.
I-140 Denied: August 2007
Never recieved the denial notice as per the lawyer
Case 2:
EB2 Labor filed: August 2005
Labor Approved: January 2006
I-140 Filed: August 2007 (I checked the status online and informed the lawyer who immediately filed for this I-140 basing on the approved labor)
I-485 Filed: August 2007
RFE for W2/wages company tax information etc that were replied on time.
I-140 Denied Sep 2009
EAD valid till October: 2010
AP Valid till Feb 2010
H1 B 8th year extension filed: July 2008 (There was a mistake during the filing as the reference was made to denied I-140 instead of the pending one)
Extension Denied based on Case 1 I-140: October 2008
I-290B Appeal to commissioner filed and pending as of date
Case 3:
Pending EB2 labor since October 2008.
I am paid more than the prevailing wages. Now the question is:
1. Should I file for MTR/Appeal (we still haven't recieved the denial notice).
2. I believe it is just a matter of time before I-485 status changes to denied. Will the EAD/AP become invalid as well?
3. If MTR/Appeal is filed for I-140, can I still continue working?
Any thoughts or suggestions will be appreciated.
girlfriend best iphone 4 ackgrounds.
LostInGCProcess
10-01 04:51 PM
In what sense he is racist? I could not understand, please explain to me.
hairstyles wallpaper high definition.
masti_Gai
11-07 12:43 PM
Just write a letter addressing the Immigration Officer stating that you reside in xyz area, work for ABC company and you take all the responsibilities like boarding , lodging and traveling expenses of your parents.
Do give them your phone no. so that they can call you and verify in case if they want to.
That would suffice:)
Do give them your phone no. so that they can call you and verify in case if they want to.
That would suffice:)
gmail
07-22 01:31 AM
Take advice of another lawyer. I have a friend who did something similar and he is simply sitting tight (on advice of his lawyer). So I would not simply start the whole process from scratch before consulting a couple of other lawyers.
there is a memorandum issued by USCIS on
12/27/2005. It clearly indicated that I can't be denied due to leaving
previous employer prior to 180 days.
http://www.immigration.com/newsletter1/amendac21.pdf
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny
portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her
employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application
pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current)
employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement
that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the
I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140
petitioner before the I- 485 has been pending 180 days will not
necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases
an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as
of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if
not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent
to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to
undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not
presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting
documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in
appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be
appropriate.
I guess that the key is to prove that it is a bona fide offer. I have worked for them for 4.5 years. So even if they won't cooperate, I can argue that it is real.
I won't want to restart the GC process again. We are talking about a big amount of money for the whole process.
there is a memorandum issued by USCIS on
12/27/2005. It clearly indicated that I can't be denied due to leaving
previous employer prior to 180 days.
http://www.immigration.com/newsletter1/amendac21.pdf
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny
portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her
employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application
pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current)
employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement
that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the
I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140
petitioner before the I- 485 has been pending 180 days will not
necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases
an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as
of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if
not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent
to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to
undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not
presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting
documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in
appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be
appropriate.
I guess that the key is to prove that it is a bona fide offer. I have worked for them for 4.5 years. So even if they won't cooperate, I can argue that it is real.
I won't want to restart the GC process again. We are talking about a big amount of money for the whole process.
shana04
05-18 05:43 PM
http://chugh.com/
Thank you very much for your response.
Thank you very much for your response.
No comments:
Post a Comment