skgs2000
12-11 05:43 PM
Thanks for your advise on paying to IV. We posted our way of thinking!
wallpaper attend Donna Karan Spring
sandiboy
07-18 04:11 PM
Assuming the possibility that PD will be "unavailable" for the next few months at least, then on what basis do they allot visa numbers . PD or 485 receipt date
I believe Visa number is allocated only at time of Adjudicating i.e once everything is clear. At the time of adjudicating your PD should be current & you should be ahead of others per RD.
I believe Visa number is allocated only at time of Adjudicating i.e once everything is clear. At the time of adjudicating your PD should be current & you should be ahead of others per RD.
spicy_guy
09-13 12:31 PM
Hi All,
My Eb2 Perm Labor Approved. It took 2 months to get approved. It was filed on 07/09/2010 and approved on (email received by HR dept) 09/10/2010. This is just to share with all of you.
Thank you.
Pardon my lack of knowledge. Is this from beginning to end?
I think advertising and stuff takes some time. Right? and thats not included in this 2 months. Right?
My Eb2 Perm Labor Approved. It took 2 months to get approved. It was filed on 07/09/2010 and approved on (email received by HR dept) 09/10/2010. This is just to share with all of you.
Thank you.
Pardon my lack of knowledge. Is this from beginning to end?
I think advertising and stuff takes some time. Right? and thats not included in this 2 months. Right?
2011 Created with New York jewelry
JunRN
09-28 10:08 PM
Well, do you want to be the most cursed person in the world?:D
Regards,
IK
Putting myself in their shoes...that's why I don't curse them...not even once...I pray that they do their job honestly and efficiently...that's the least they can do for us...
who knows some of them are legal immigrants as well!
Regards,
IK
Putting myself in their shoes...that's why I don't curse them...not even once...I pray that they do their job honestly and efficiently...that's the least they can do for us...
who knows some of them are legal immigrants as well!
more...
gc28262
03-11 01:49 PM
My application was finally approved yesterday after almost 7 years in queue. Here is the sequence of events right before the approval.
RFE email on 02/13/09
2nd Biometrics Notice received on 02/17/09
Lawyer receives RFE for EVL, EAD cards and Marriage Certificate on 02/24/09
Completed Code 3 Biometrics on 02/26/09
Soft LUD immediately after Biometrics on 02/26/09
USCIS receives RFE reply on 02/27/09, Hard LUD and email on the same day
Another soft LUD on 03/02/09
CPO email on 03/10/09
Welcome email on 03/10/09
My PD has been current for a long time, but my application had not been touched and then suddenly USCIS became a model of efficiency. I am sure they are opening applications and approving or RFE'ing all they can. Hang in there guys.
Congrats !
Happy to see another free bird flying off USCIS cage.
RFE email on 02/13/09
2nd Biometrics Notice received on 02/17/09
Lawyer receives RFE for EVL, EAD cards and Marriage Certificate on 02/24/09
Completed Code 3 Biometrics on 02/26/09
Soft LUD immediately after Biometrics on 02/26/09
USCIS receives RFE reply on 02/27/09, Hard LUD and email on the same day
Another soft LUD on 03/02/09
CPO email on 03/10/09
Welcome email on 03/10/09
My PD has been current for a long time, but my application had not been touched and then suddenly USCIS became a model of efficiency. I am sure they are opening applications and approving or RFE'ing all they can. Hang in there guys.
Congrats !
Happy to see another free bird flying off USCIS cage.
h1techSlave
08-18 10:29 AM
I also wanted to send the letter, but saw a ton of comments on the original letter. It would be a good idea, if some one goes thru the comments and update the letter in the original post. I think we should all send a decent letter.
grupak/mirage/pani6
i support your efforts and have printed out and sent letters to the people mentioned. Momentum for release of information should build up even if we have 50-100 letters from affected people...otherwise people won't know of EB-3 IND's plight.
I suppose we should followup with phone calls in 15 days to cement our request. We should have a poll on who all has sent the letter and made the call.
grupak/mirage/pani6
i support your efforts and have printed out and sent letters to the people mentioned. Momentum for release of information should build up even if we have 50-100 letters from affected people...otherwise people won't know of EB-3 IND's plight.
I suppose we should followup with phone calls in 15 days to cement our request. We should have a poll on who all has sent the letter and made the call.
more...
ragz4u
03-16 04:03 PM
Here's a link to his website
http://frist.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=2306
I have a feeling it will have some pro-immigrant stuff too....the next 10 days are going to be very interesting
Text of Bill Frist's statement below
March 16th, 2006 - WASHINGTON, D.C. � U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, M.D. (R-TN) today announced his intention to introduce a border security bill before the recess to ensure the Senate has a border security bill ready for debate during the week of March 27:
�Our country needs security at our borders in order to slow the flow of illegal immigration and make America safer from foreign criminals and terrorists. That�s why today I will introduce a border security bill, to guarantee the Senate will have legislation available for consideration the week of March 27.
�This bill will be based on the consensus enforcement, visa reform and immigration litigation reform titles of Chairman Specter�s mark-up of border security legislation and focus on ensuring strict enforcement of our nation�s immigration laws. I look forward to bringing a border security bill to the floor during the week of March 27 and allowing the full Senate to start work on border security and interior law enforcement, as well as comprehensive immigration reform, so that America is more secure and our constituents are safer. It is my hope that the Judiciary Committee will be able to report a bill we can bring to the floor that meets these objectives. As a country of immigrants who respect the rule of law, I expect us to honor those heritages as this debate unfolds.�
http://frist.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=2306
I have a feeling it will have some pro-immigrant stuff too....the next 10 days are going to be very interesting
Text of Bill Frist's statement below
March 16th, 2006 - WASHINGTON, D.C. � U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, M.D. (R-TN) today announced his intention to introduce a border security bill before the recess to ensure the Senate has a border security bill ready for debate during the week of March 27:
�Our country needs security at our borders in order to slow the flow of illegal immigration and make America safer from foreign criminals and terrorists. That�s why today I will introduce a border security bill, to guarantee the Senate will have legislation available for consideration the week of March 27.
�This bill will be based on the consensus enforcement, visa reform and immigration litigation reform titles of Chairman Specter�s mark-up of border security legislation and focus on ensuring strict enforcement of our nation�s immigration laws. I look forward to bringing a border security bill to the floor during the week of March 27 and allowing the full Senate to start work on border security and interior law enforcement, as well as comprehensive immigration reform, so that America is more secure and our constituents are safer. It is my hope that the Judiciary Committee will be able to report a bill we can bring to the floor that meets these objectives. As a country of immigrants who respect the rule of law, I expect us to honor those heritages as this debate unfolds.�
2010 Donna Karan Jeans From
CADude
07-06 01:42 PM
I am 100% agree!! Two Govt Dept has their own ego and problems. They didn't work in tandem. Now they have to face the music of AILF. :D
For sure DoS knew that something is wrong at USCIS end. Looks like they dint get along well on this one. So instead of saying that all the visa numbers has been used up, they said " all the entire 2007 numbers has been made available". Which means they know very well USCIS are still processing the cases, even after July 2nd.
Looks like, DOS trying to clean their hands and put the blame on USCIS.
This is what happened. Again my thoughts based on last fews days before the july 2nd.
USCIS was angered by DOS making it current for all categories. Every one knows there will be a minimum 100K apps flooding their gates. Imagine the revenue loss for them just bcoz of making it current b4 30th july. They expected DOS to make it current from Aug 1st instead of July 1st. Had the immigration bill passed, as promised by the GOVT., they would have stand to gain $4B in grants to secure the border. But the bill crashed on 27th of june. So what do they do to stop this loss of revenue from our application. They have to use of the entire fiscal 2007 quota in three days so that legally they can't accept more applications. Now that is legally correct. But they way they claimed all the visas within 4 days wasn't played by the rules and where the AILF stands chance to file a lawsuit against them.
Someone in the USCIS was hell bent upon forcing the DOS to make it unavailable for July. WHY ?
For sure DoS knew that something is wrong at USCIS end. Looks like they dint get along well on this one. So instead of saying that all the visa numbers has been used up, they said " all the entire 2007 numbers has been made available". Which means they know very well USCIS are still processing the cases, even after July 2nd.
Looks like, DOS trying to clean their hands and put the blame on USCIS.
This is what happened. Again my thoughts based on last fews days before the july 2nd.
USCIS was angered by DOS making it current for all categories. Every one knows there will be a minimum 100K apps flooding their gates. Imagine the revenue loss for them just bcoz of making it current b4 30th july. They expected DOS to make it current from Aug 1st instead of July 1st. Had the immigration bill passed, as promised by the GOVT., they would have stand to gain $4B in grants to secure the border. But the bill crashed on 27th of june. So what do they do to stop this loss of revenue from our application. They have to use of the entire fiscal 2007 quota in three days so that legally they can't accept more applications. Now that is legally correct. But they way they claimed all the visas within 4 days wasn't played by the rules and where the AILF stands chance to file a lawsuit against them.
Someone in the USCIS was hell bent upon forcing the DOS to make it unavailable for July. WHY ?
more...
chanduv23
05-15 10:23 AM
Trust me your frustration is understandable......
Guys,
1. Consultant companies are making money by threatening to withdraw I-140 if an employee leaves the company for a better job
2. USCIS is already making enough money on these improper denials (I would like to call it white collar extortion)
3. Attorneys are making money on these cases
In the end we the immigrants are the losers.
Please make more noise on these kinds of issues concerned with I-140 withdrawls and I-485 denials, as this is becoming more and more apparent. Write blogs, spread in forums, write news letters. Go to your local congressman's office and make them aware of the situation. My local congresswoman's office is under the impression that my case is unique, but I am trying to convince them that this is wide spread by sending them the links of Ombudsman etc.,
We need to increase the awareness.
We do not want to get to a point where we may not utilize AC21 properly.
thanks
I agree. Act Act act. If we do not get our acts together and simply share and discuss - nothing is going to happen.
First thing you do is write to the Ombudsman's office. They are technically responsible to resolve case problems with USCIS.
In your case, i think, you also have to at the least send an email to the Ombudsman.
Guys,
1. Consultant companies are making money by threatening to withdraw I-140 if an employee leaves the company for a better job
2. USCIS is already making enough money on these improper denials (I would like to call it white collar extortion)
3. Attorneys are making money on these cases
In the end we the immigrants are the losers.
Please make more noise on these kinds of issues concerned with I-140 withdrawls and I-485 denials, as this is becoming more and more apparent. Write blogs, spread in forums, write news letters. Go to your local congressman's office and make them aware of the situation. My local congresswoman's office is under the impression that my case is unique, but I am trying to convince them that this is wide spread by sending them the links of Ombudsman etc.,
We need to increase the awareness.
We do not want to get to a point where we may not utilize AC21 properly.
thanks
I agree. Act Act act. If we do not get our acts together and simply share and discuss - nothing is going to happen.
First thing you do is write to the Ombudsman's office. They are technically responsible to resolve case problems with USCIS.
In your case, i think, you also have to at the least send an email to the Ombudsman.
hair Donna Karan. Preen
JunRN
09-28 01:37 PM
It is not even considered yet and I don't think it will ever be considered. That amendment includes not only schedule A but also others and with proposal to increase the number as well.
How could it pass if it's carrying heavy-baggage, it won't move!!!
How could it pass if it's carrying heavy-baggage, it won't move!!!
more...
gc_on_demand
04-30 03:14 PM
Hahaha... Oppenheim just got caught in his words by that guy ... yoooooo!
can you share more detail on that incident ?
can you share more detail on that incident ?
hot In This Photo: Donna Karan,
gctest
09-15 04:19 PM
That memo/document you pointed out is an interpretation. We have already said that USCIS's interpretation is incorrect. We intend to correct this interpretation with this lawsuit.
Infact, it would be wrong to call this a lawsuit.
We are aiming for an injunction (or a stay order) in step 1 of the lawsuit that would prevent USCIS from working on any interfiling/PD porting requests.
If the injunction is with retroactive effect, all the EBs (not just EB3) who have ported their PDs will have their cases frozen. USCIS would not be able to work on them.
The remainder of the lawsuit can take its sweet time... the injunction should serve the primary cause.
Incorrect.
Please read this pdf document
AFM Update: Chapter 22: Employment-based Petitions (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/afm_ch22_091206R.pdf)
Please pay attention to section (3) Priority Date Based on Earlier Petition on page 28 -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If an alien is the beneficiary of two (or more) approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions, the priority of the earlier petition may be applied to all subsequently-filed employment-based petitions.
For example:
Company A files a labor certification request on behalf of an alien ("Joe") as a janitor on January 10, 2003. The DOL issues the certification on March 20, 2003. Company A later files, and USCIS approves, a relating I-140 visa petition under the EB-3 category. On July 15, 2003, Joe files a second I-140 visa petition in his own behalf as a rocket scientist under the EB-1 category, which USCIS approves. Joe is entitled to use the January 10, 2003, priority date to apply for adjustment under either the EB-1 or the EB-3 classification.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I suggest, you talk to an attorney before using words like illegal. It may be unfair, but still be legal.
_____________________________________
Proud Indian-American and Legal Immigrant
Infact, it would be wrong to call this a lawsuit.
We are aiming for an injunction (or a stay order) in step 1 of the lawsuit that would prevent USCIS from working on any interfiling/PD porting requests.
If the injunction is with retroactive effect, all the EBs (not just EB3) who have ported their PDs will have their cases frozen. USCIS would not be able to work on them.
The remainder of the lawsuit can take its sweet time... the injunction should serve the primary cause.
Incorrect.
Please read this pdf document
AFM Update: Chapter 22: Employment-based Petitions (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/afm_ch22_091206R.pdf)
Please pay attention to section (3) Priority Date Based on Earlier Petition on page 28 -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If an alien is the beneficiary of two (or more) approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions, the priority of the earlier petition may be applied to all subsequently-filed employment-based petitions.
For example:
Company A files a labor certification request on behalf of an alien ("Joe") as a janitor on January 10, 2003. The DOL issues the certification on March 20, 2003. Company A later files, and USCIS approves, a relating I-140 visa petition under the EB-3 category. On July 15, 2003, Joe files a second I-140 visa petition in his own behalf as a rocket scientist under the EB-1 category, which USCIS approves. Joe is entitled to use the January 10, 2003, priority date to apply for adjustment under either the EB-1 or the EB-3 classification.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I suggest, you talk to an attorney before using words like illegal. It may be unfair, but still be legal.
_____________________________________
Proud Indian-American and Legal Immigrant
more...
house wore a Donna Karan jacket
yabadaba
07-11 12:37 PM
The movement EB-2 china gets some times is solely because of the visa number that category gets. This typically happens in the first Q. EB2-I and EB2-C will have different PD's . Some time in 2nd Q or mid 2nd Q, both I and C will have used up their quota and they will continue to have the same PD until the end of the fiscal year as PD is the only thing that matters.
the point was that they if their dates also move to june 2006, then it would be the first time they crossed the jan 2006 threshold.
the point was that they if their dates also move to june 2006, then it would be the first time they crossed the jan 2006 threshold.
tattoo Donna Karan, New York City
pmat
02-08 03:59 PM
Online status shows up as CERTIFIED.... :D
more...
pictures for Donna Karan New York
gcpain
04-25 04:41 PM
This is good for everybody and solve lot of problems.
dresses Donna Karan#39;s leather and
chanduv23
09-15 06:57 PM
hi! i just contributed $100.00 via paypal transaction id is : 1GE522823P5726434
U DA MAN - THANKS - PLEASE MAKE IT TO THE RALLY AND GET OTHERS ALSO
U DA MAN - THANKS - PLEASE MAKE IT TO THE RALLY AND GET OTHERS ALSO
more...
makeup C. Donna Karan New York
Raj12
01-22 05:35 PM
Labor certified in Jan 2007, RIR
EB2
PD: Sep 2004
EB2
PD: Sep 2004
girlfriend celebrity. $72.00
addsf345
11-20 03:38 PM
Some benefits can be revoked automatically (I-140, I-485), some can be revoked only after determination is made by USCIS and a beneficiary is notified and has an opportunity to respond. EAD is one of the latter.
See e.g., 8 CFR Part 205 titled "Revocation of approval of petitions". It has two sections: 205.1 Automatic revocation and 205.2 Revocation on notice.
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=203798478322+8+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve
EAD is not listed in Sec. 205.1. Moreover, 8 CFR �274a.12(c) specifically lists reasons for automatic revocation. I-485 denial is not listed as such a reason. Therefore, EAD remains valid even after I-485 denial untill it expires or until USCIS director revokes it. I do not see any basis for a different legal interpretation.
See also this court of appeals (8th Cir.) decision where the court says that automatic revocation occurs only if a specific condition specified in the laws and regs is met:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/399/399.F3d.891.04-1132.html
"The district court thought that her adoptive father's petition for immediate relative status was automatically revoked when Taylor reached age 21, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3)(i)(F), but the record does not appear to support that conclusion. The automatic revocation occurs only if the alien reaches age 21 before commencing her journey to the United States (which Taylor did not) or if the alien reaches age 21 before a decision on a pending application for adjustment of status becomes final (and there is no evidence in the record that Taylor ever applied for adjustment of status). See 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3). Thus, it is possible that the petition for immediate relative status was not revoked when Taylor reached age 21, but rather � if the 1984 visa petition was "currently valid" as of her 21st birthday � automatically converted to an approved petition for classification as an unmarried daughter of a citizen of the United States, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 204.2(i)(2). See 8 U.S.C. � 1153(a)(1). In that case, Taylor may have been legally present throughout her time in the United States."
Thank you 'lazycis' for reconfirming this. Just 2 weeks back I used to think that keep working on H1B is lot safer than using EAD :o
See e.g., 8 CFR Part 205 titled "Revocation of approval of petitions". It has two sections: 205.1 Automatic revocation and 205.2 Revocation on notice.
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=203798478322+8+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve
EAD is not listed in Sec. 205.1. Moreover, 8 CFR �274a.12(c) specifically lists reasons for automatic revocation. I-485 denial is not listed as such a reason. Therefore, EAD remains valid even after I-485 denial untill it expires or until USCIS director revokes it. I do not see any basis for a different legal interpretation.
See also this court of appeals (8th Cir.) decision where the court says that automatic revocation occurs only if a specific condition specified in the laws and regs is met:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/399/399.F3d.891.04-1132.html
"The district court thought that her adoptive father's petition for immediate relative status was automatically revoked when Taylor reached age 21, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3)(i)(F), but the record does not appear to support that conclusion. The automatic revocation occurs only if the alien reaches age 21 before commencing her journey to the United States (which Taylor did not) or if the alien reaches age 21 before a decision on a pending application for adjustment of status becomes final (and there is no evidence in the record that Taylor ever applied for adjustment of status). See 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3). Thus, it is possible that the petition for immediate relative status was not revoked when Taylor reached age 21, but rather � if the 1984 visa petition was "currently valid" as of her 21st birthday � automatically converted to an approved petition for classification as an unmarried daughter of a citizen of the United States, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 204.2(i)(2). See 8 U.S.C. � 1153(a)(1). In that case, Taylor may have been legally present throughout her time in the United States."
Thank you 'lazycis' for reconfirming this. Just 2 weeks back I used to think that keep working on H1B is lot safer than using EAD :o
hairstyles Susan Sarandon attends Donna
vayumahesh
02-04 08:35 AM
For AllvNeedGcPc,
Do I need to do anything to get it moving? How do I put a Service Request on 485? The online system to put an eRequest only lets you do it for N400 or I90.
It does not hurt to send a interfiling request letter from your attorney. You can raise a Service request (via phone) if it is outside of normal processing time (30 days past after being current).
:) Got greened on Jan 4th, 2011 (Refiled in EB2 and ported PD from EB3)
Do I need to do anything to get it moving? How do I put a Service Request on 485? The online system to put an eRequest only lets you do it for N400 or I90.
It does not hurt to send a interfiling request letter from your attorney. You can raise a Service request (via phone) if it is outside of normal processing time (30 days past after being current).
:) Got greened on Jan 4th, 2011 (Refiled in EB2 and ported PD from EB3)
tejonidhi
09-11 09:26 PM
Who is uscis answerable to ? how about sending letters to all the congress man and senators asking them to raise theor voice about the functionality of uscis?
Can AILA take this and prepare a law suite for us?
I am ready to contribute.
Can AILA take this and prepare a law suite for us?
I am ready to contribute.
heywhat
07-21 03:59 PM
Do not want to scare anyone but after checking other sites and calculation it seems that BEC for 485 is not too far away...
No comments:
Post a Comment