FUNTIMES
08-20 11:08 AM
I am also in the same situation. My GC has been approved on August 5th 2008 and my wife's case is still pending, with no LUD. Did anyone else receive any approval.
wallpaper lack ops prestige emblems in
benbear
11-08 03:49 PM
If this 655K number of AOS is true, then the number of pending EB AOS is NOT big.
The total number of pending AOS in June, right before the July VB fiasco, is 597K.
Because DOS controls FB cut off date pretty well, we don�t expect receiving spike and approving spike for FB cases in July VB fiasco. In another word, the number of FB received cases and the number of FB approved cases
should be about same.
EB pending cases in September only grows (655K-597K= 58K) compared with the number in June.
This 58K cases probably are evenly distributed from 2001 to 2007, roughly10K
every year.
So, we should see big jump in EB Visa bulletin, since there are no BEC, 245i excuses any more and all the cases are in the hand of USCIS.
per USCIS released information approx 655K AOS pending application as of end of Sept 2007.
It's also has 281K EAD & 188K AP pending applications.
So long way to go for GC journey...
Source: http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/APPLICATIONS%20FOR%20IMMIGRATION%20BENEFITS_Septem ber07.pdf
The total number of pending AOS in June, right before the July VB fiasco, is 597K.
Because DOS controls FB cut off date pretty well, we don�t expect receiving spike and approving spike for FB cases in July VB fiasco. In another word, the number of FB received cases and the number of FB approved cases
should be about same.
EB pending cases in September only grows (655K-597K= 58K) compared with the number in June.
This 58K cases probably are evenly distributed from 2001 to 2007, roughly10K
every year.
So, we should see big jump in EB Visa bulletin, since there are no BEC, 245i excuses any more and all the cases are in the hand of USCIS.
per USCIS released information approx 655K AOS pending application as of end of Sept 2007.
It's also has 281K EAD & 188K AP pending applications.
So long way to go for GC journey...
Source: http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/APPLICATIONS%20FOR%20IMMIGRATION%20BENEFITS_Septem ber07.pdf
WeldonSprings
05-27 12:44 PM
You probably won't get a FP notice if you have done biometrics done before for I-485.
So may just have to wait for approval.
I E-filed on Apr-13th. Sent doc's on Apr-19th. LUD Apr-21st. No Photo's sent with doc's.
Waiting for FP/Approval.
So may just have to wait for approval.
I E-filed on Apr-13th. Sent doc's on Apr-19th. LUD Apr-21st. No Photo's sent with doc's.
Waiting for FP/Approval.
2011 the lack ops prestige icons.
rockstart
01-08 09:35 PM
Thank you so much guys for the info
more...
funny
09-16 12:31 PM
Everything else can wait till tomorrow....All the "Help needed..." Threads and "HOW USCIS Sucks..." "Please Help.." threads can wait till tomorrow....Only thing that matters today is YOUR phone Call...
mita
08-20 12:46 PM
I just called USCIS and according to the person I spoke with, it takes approximately 30 days from the date of approval of primary applicant for approval of dependents.
more...
hetuweb
10-24 08:15 PM
My case went directly to CSC for H1 extension and is pending since July 10 any idea others have same problem.
Application Type: I129, PETITION FOR A NON IMMIGRANT WORKER
Current Status: Your I129 PETITION FOR A NON IMMIGRANT WORKER was received on July 10, 2006. We will mail you a decision as soon as processing is complete. You can use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done. Follow the the link below for current processing dates.
Edit/Delete Message
i have applied on july 09, 2007 at vermont, but still no reply. hope this helps u.
Application Type: I129, PETITION FOR A NON IMMIGRANT WORKER
Current Status: Your I129 PETITION FOR A NON IMMIGRANT WORKER was received on July 10, 2006. We will mail you a decision as soon as processing is complete. You can use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done. Follow the the link below for current processing dates.
Edit/Delete Message
i have applied on july 09, 2007 at vermont, but still no reply. hope this helps u.
2010 the lack ops prestige icons.
arihant
04-12 05:00 PM
I whole heartedly agree that labor substitution elimination makes sense. However, the 45 day proposal built into this rule can be disasterous. I just posted my experience with the 45 day letter from BEC in another thread.
Basically, BEC sent the 45 day letter on March 7th, and my lawyer received it on March 14th. However, it was not brought to the attention of my HR until Apr 10th. A delay of almost a month. When we only have a month and a half to deal with it, such a delay may be disasterous. Granted, that the fault lies entirely with my lawyer, but it just goes to prove that 45 days is too short for something so important! Any number of reasons can create a delay of a few weeks.
If they want to put a limit on it, why don't they set to it to a more reasonable period such as 6 months, or a year. It will be really bad if, after waiting for years for Labor to clear, people are denied GC because they did not apply for the next step within 45 days!
Basically, BEC sent the 45 day letter on March 7th, and my lawyer received it on March 14th. However, it was not brought to the attention of my HR until Apr 10th. A delay of almost a month. When we only have a month and a half to deal with it, such a delay may be disasterous. Granted, that the fault lies entirely with my lawyer, but it just goes to prove that 45 days is too short for something so important! Any number of reasons can create a delay of a few weeks.
If they want to put a limit on it, why don't they set to it to a more reasonable period such as 6 months, or a year. It will be really bad if, after waiting for years for Labor to clear, people are denied GC because they did not apply for the next step within 45 days!
more...
bluez25
07-15 02:46 PM
My Priority date is Feb 1st 2006. I got my 140 approved some time in May 2006 and Here I am today..
hair all lack ops prestige icons.
Libra
08-10 03:03 PM
Signed up for 50$ monthly
more...
perm2gc
12-01 06:23 PM
this info is incorrect. from a murthy chat transcript...... available at :
http://www.murthy.com/chatlogs/ch102306_P.html
Chat User : I have used 6 years of my H1B and have got extension for 3 more years. Can I change employers based on a 7th-year approval? Is it legal to do so? Thank you very much for advice.
Attorney Murthy : After one has an I-140 petition approved in her/his name, s/he is allowed to file for a new 3-year H1B extension with a new or different employer based on the I-140 petition approval with another employer. Then, during the 3-year H1B timeframe, the person could potentially start a new PERM/LC process with the new employer and, thereafter, rely on the new filing for future H1B extensions, in case the earlier employer cancels or revokes the earlier LC or I-140 petition.
hmm..its a news for me.thks for correcting me.
http://www.murthy.com/chatlogs/ch102306_P.html
Chat User : I have used 6 years of my H1B and have got extension for 3 more years. Can I change employers based on a 7th-year approval? Is it legal to do so? Thank you very much for advice.
Attorney Murthy : After one has an I-140 petition approved in her/his name, s/he is allowed to file for a new 3-year H1B extension with a new or different employer based on the I-140 petition approval with another employer. Then, during the 3-year H1B timeframe, the person could potentially start a new PERM/LC process with the new employer and, thereafter, rely on the new filing for future H1B extensions, in case the earlier employer cancels or revokes the earlier LC or I-140 petition.
hmm..its a news for me.thks for correcting me.
hot cod lack ops prestige icons.
pd_recapturing
04-04 03:25 PM
It also talks about 180 days rule. On the other hand, they are still sending denial notices to ppl whose 140 have been revoked by the employer.
"In most cases, the job offer in the Form I-140 must remain valid and available to the alien beneficiary until s/he obtains permanent resident status. In some limited circumstances, the law allows adjustment applicants to change employers without interrupting their eligibility for adjustment of status if the Form I-140 has been approved and the adjustment application has been pending for at least 180 days. USCIS recognizes that some workers may want to take advantage of this provision in the law and has increased its emphasis on processing the underlying employer petitions independent of the availability of a visa for the finalization of the adjustment of status application"
"In most cases, the job offer in the Form I-140 must remain valid and available to the alien beneficiary until s/he obtains permanent resident status. In some limited circumstances, the law allows adjustment applicants to change employers without interrupting their eligibility for adjustment of status if the Form I-140 has been approved and the adjustment application has been pending for at least 180 days. USCIS recognizes that some workers may want to take advantage of this provision in the law and has increased its emphasis on processing the underlying employer petitions independent of the availability of a visa for the finalization of the adjustment of status application"
more...
house the lack ops prestige icons.
guygeek007
11-04 01:17 PM
Update : My 140 got approved on Oct 31 @ NSC after ability to pay RFE was addressed with CPA eval documentation. Thanks for all your assistance and support!
This is my GC application history
1. PD for Labor - Aug 2003
2. Labor(Regular) Application Approved - Nov 2005
3. i-140 applied in Jan 2006
4. RFE received question was for company not self, i-140 withdrawn.
5. Transferred my H1 to the companys sister concern and reapplied for i140 in June 2006.
6. Applied for i140 premium processing on June 22nd, 2007.
Current status for i-140 : Recieved and pending at Nebraska service center.
Questions
Q1. What is i-140 receipt date for premium processing. Is it the date the fed-ex package is recvd by USCIS or is it a date issued by USCIS that should reach my lawyer?
Q2. If in case the USCIS need to provide my attorney a receipt date, we have NOT received one as yet. Does that mean they have not even looked at the application as yet?
Q3. Can i apply for i485 in the worst case that i do not receive approval for i140 by Aug 17th under the concurrent filing rule.
Any assistance would be highly appreciated.
This is my GC application history
1. PD for Labor - Aug 2003
2. Labor(Regular) Application Approved - Nov 2005
3. i-140 applied in Jan 2006
4. RFE received question was for company not self, i-140 withdrawn.
5. Transferred my H1 to the companys sister concern and reapplied for i140 in June 2006.
6. Applied for i140 premium processing on June 22nd, 2007.
Current status for i-140 : Recieved and pending at Nebraska service center.
Questions
Q1. What is i-140 receipt date for premium processing. Is it the date the fed-ex package is recvd by USCIS or is it a date issued by USCIS that should reach my lawyer?
Q2. If in case the USCIS need to provide my attorney a receipt date, we have NOT received one as yet. Does that mean they have not even looked at the application as yet?
Q3. Can i apply for i485 in the worst case that i do not receive approval for i140 by Aug 17th under the concurrent filing rule.
Any assistance would be highly appreciated.
tattoo lack ops prestige symbols
sundeep14
09-27 11:01 AM
this topic is interesting....i do buy/sell stocks usin zecco / BoA etc...which are sites where i can do day trade..im interested to venture into it...
suggestions??
suggestions??
more...
pictures lack ops prestige 15
tinku01
07-15 03:10 PM
MY PD is June 2004 at Delhi consulate. Lets see what happens. Hey any one could update about PCC (Police Clearance Certificate). if my date becomes current in Aug then would not have time to go to any US consulate to get the PCC.
In this case how we should get the PCC for consular processing:cool:
In this case how we should get the PCC for consular processing:cool:
dresses the lack ops prestige icons.
jettu77
11-19 10:04 AM
I also received only 2 AP papers. Does it matter.
I checked my case online on 11/09/07 and found that AP of my spouse and
myself have been approved.
Today my attorney sent the document and on my spouse's AP document
the Date issued is //199 at the top right corner. It should have been a correct date and not //199
and in the paragraph below
.....presentation of the original of this document prior to //199 allows a customs....
I think it is the mistake of USCIS and I will follow up with my Attorney and also USCIS on monday.
If anyone had this same issue please reply as to what needs to be done.
Thank you...
I checked my case online on 11/09/07 and found that AP of my spouse and
myself have been approved.
Today my attorney sent the document and on my spouse's AP document
the Date issued is //199 at the top right corner. It should have been a correct date and not //199
and in the paragraph below
.....presentation of the original of this document prior to //199 allows a customs....
I think it is the mistake of USCIS and I will follow up with my Attorney and also USCIS on monday.
If anyone had this same issue please reply as to what needs to be done.
Thank you...
more...
makeup lack ops prestige icons 1-15.
sr123
02-15 11:27 AM
I agree with you. It is indeed very difficult to make people pull out a card and pay. As you said it will indeed increase the irrelevant post which will require increased monitoring.
girlfriend lack ops prestige levels
GCBy3000
09-19 07:16 PM
I have heard such cases and as per law, you are responsible to bring it to the USCIS notice about their mistake. Since you have one more month left, it is better to work with your attorney to iron out this issue. Make sure you bring this to UCSIS notice.
TO get 3 year extension your attorney needs to file the copy of approved 140along with the request for H1b extension. Make sure to ask for H4 also if you have one.
TO get 3 year extension your attorney needs to file the copy of approved 140along with the request for H1b extension. Make sure to ask for H4 also if you have one.
hairstyles Black Ops Prestige Symbols All
eb3_nepa
04-17 05:04 PM
The illegals aren't Americans either and the email from Kennedy's staff basically talks about how well-received his Apr 10th speech in DC was and how the senator intends to fight to push immigration reform through the congress.
A lot of people signing up will give the staff the right impetus.
Appu can you pls post some link or documentation showing that this is indeed in our favour. If it is then i have no problem supporting it. But from the looks of it, it seems like it is against H1Bs and temporary workers.
Let us pls be careful as to what we sign/support. A couple of mistakes could spell disaster for all of us.
A lot of people signing up will give the staff the right impetus.
Appu can you pls post some link or documentation showing that this is indeed in our favour. If it is then i have no problem supporting it. But from the looks of it, it seems like it is against H1Bs and temporary workers.
Let us pls be careful as to what we sign/support. A couple of mistakes could spell disaster for all of us.
bfadlia
03-22 09:51 AM
may be two weeks later than the website indicated, but i got the approval.
cool_guy_onnet1
06-01 01:28 PM
New Immigration Bill Amendment Could Help Keep Foreign Tech Workers In U.S.
A proposal to create a dual green-card system that favors high tech talent has bi-partisan support in the Senate.
By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee
InformationWeek
May 31, 2007 04:50 PM
A bi-partisan group of U.S. senators next week is expected to introduce to the immigration reform bill an amendment that proposes to retain a pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored green cards for foreign workers seeking permanent residence in the United States.
Amendment S.1249, being co-sponsored by senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash), John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Orrin Hatch (R-Pa.), and Robert Bennett (R-Utah) proposes that the U.S. create a dual green-card system that, in addition to a new merit-point green card system that's proposed in the main bill, would also keep an annual pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored based green cards for foreign workers.
The revised legislation also proposes the United States establish no limit on H-1B visas for foreign professionals with masters or doctoral degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM fields.
"This would set up a complementary and parallel employer-sponsored system to the merit system" said Robert Hoffman, Oracle VP of government affairs and co-chair of Compete America, a coalition of technology companies. "This system would be more like Australia's" where immigration is granted in dual programs that includes employer-based sponsorship and merit points.
By the U.S. retaining a system allowing employer-based green cards to be issued each year, businesses would have better control over the talent they'd like to keep in the U.S., say tech employers.
One of the biggest criticisms that tech employers have about the current immigration reform bill being hammered out in the Senate is the proposed merit-based green card system. The process awards individuals with points based on the person's education, skills, and other factors.
Tech companies complain that a point-based system would shift to government bureaucrats too much control about the kind of talent pool that's available to employers in U.S. Amendment S.1249 proposes retaining employer-based immigration and expanding permanent residency to those foreigners with advanced STEM degrees, said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes eliminating caps on H-1B visas issued to foreign students who have advanced degrees from U.S. universities. Right now, in addition to the 65,000 H-1B visas issued each year by the United States, an additional 20,000 H-1B visas are available to foreign students with advanced degrees from U.S. universities. The new amendment would eliminate that annual ceiling for advanced U.S. degrees.
In addition, the amendment also proposes providing 20,000 H-1B visas annually to foreigners with advanced degrees in STEM fields from foreign schools.
"Masters and PhDs would be exempt from the cap on H-1Bs and green cards," said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes retracting a provision in the immigration reform bill that H-1B visa holders must have degrees that match their jobs. However, under the amendment, an H-1B visa holder with a degree in mathematics could continue to apply for work in a software engineering job, even without the software engineering degree.
"We're strongly in favor of this amendment," said Hoffman. "It's the single most important amendment in this [immigration] bill," he said.
Not everyone feels the same way. In a statement, U.S tech-professional advocacy group the Programmers Guild, called the amendment "a declaration of war on American tech workers."
A proposal to create a dual green-card system that favors high tech talent has bi-partisan support in the Senate.
By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee
InformationWeek
May 31, 2007 04:50 PM
A bi-partisan group of U.S. senators next week is expected to introduce to the immigration reform bill an amendment that proposes to retain a pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored green cards for foreign workers seeking permanent residence in the United States.
Amendment S.1249, being co-sponsored by senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash), John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Orrin Hatch (R-Pa.), and Robert Bennett (R-Utah) proposes that the U.S. create a dual green-card system that, in addition to a new merit-point green card system that's proposed in the main bill, would also keep an annual pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored based green cards for foreign workers.
The revised legislation also proposes the United States establish no limit on H-1B visas for foreign professionals with masters or doctoral degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM fields.
"This would set up a complementary and parallel employer-sponsored system to the merit system" said Robert Hoffman, Oracle VP of government affairs and co-chair of Compete America, a coalition of technology companies. "This system would be more like Australia's" where immigration is granted in dual programs that includes employer-based sponsorship and merit points.
By the U.S. retaining a system allowing employer-based green cards to be issued each year, businesses would have better control over the talent they'd like to keep in the U.S., say tech employers.
One of the biggest criticisms that tech employers have about the current immigration reform bill being hammered out in the Senate is the proposed merit-based green card system. The process awards individuals with points based on the person's education, skills, and other factors.
Tech companies complain that a point-based system would shift to government bureaucrats too much control about the kind of talent pool that's available to employers in U.S. Amendment S.1249 proposes retaining employer-based immigration and expanding permanent residency to those foreigners with advanced STEM degrees, said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes eliminating caps on H-1B visas issued to foreign students who have advanced degrees from U.S. universities. Right now, in addition to the 65,000 H-1B visas issued each year by the United States, an additional 20,000 H-1B visas are available to foreign students with advanced degrees from U.S. universities. The new amendment would eliminate that annual ceiling for advanced U.S. degrees.
In addition, the amendment also proposes providing 20,000 H-1B visas annually to foreigners with advanced degrees in STEM fields from foreign schools.
"Masters and PhDs would be exempt from the cap on H-1Bs and green cards," said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes retracting a provision in the immigration reform bill that H-1B visa holders must have degrees that match their jobs. However, under the amendment, an H-1B visa holder with a degree in mathematics could continue to apply for work in a software engineering job, even without the software engineering degree.
"We're strongly in favor of this amendment," said Hoffman. "It's the single most important amendment in this [immigration] bill," he said.
Not everyone feels the same way. In a statement, U.S tech-professional advocacy group the Programmers Guild, called the amendment "a declaration of war on American tech workers."
No comments:
Post a Comment