hpandey
06-10 12:46 PM
I think we should also work on making sure that Mr Grassley et al don't get elected to the Senate the next time so that they are not able to bring these useless racist amendments. They will only realize it when it will hurt them politically. All the H1b's and AOS people have relatives or friends who are well qualified to vote . They should encourage everyone to vote against these bigoted people .:mad:
wallpaper Tupac Shakur Memorial Giant
maddipati1
07-11 10:12 PM
the current 485 processing dates for both NSC and TSC are in July'07.
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
which means, processing of all the 485's with a PD before July'07 are completed and ready to be assigned a visa number.
and now VISA numbers are available.
also, i heard abt namecheck ruling, they will give u GC even if ur 485 is stuck in namecheck, which was worst way of getting stuck for lot of guys.
so, every EB2-I with a PD before 01JUN06 will get a GC shortly.
140 pending, RFE, clerical error cases are exception to this.
these guys will definetely get GC in OCT'08.
surely they will make EB2-I unavailable in next month, coz, there are no more VISA #s available for this year,
but in OCT they will resume from 01JUN06 minus 'the guys whose PD is before 01JUN06 and their application processing is completed (140 approved, satisfied RFE etc ) '
it looks all good for EB2-I guys have fun.
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
which means, processing of all the 485's with a PD before July'07 are completed and ready to be assigned a visa number.
and now VISA numbers are available.
also, i heard abt namecheck ruling, they will give u GC even if ur 485 is stuck in namecheck, which was worst way of getting stuck for lot of guys.
so, every EB2-I with a PD before 01JUN06 will get a GC shortly.
140 pending, RFE, clerical error cases are exception to this.
these guys will definetely get GC in OCT'08.
surely they will make EB2-I unavailable in next month, coz, there are no more VISA #s available for this year,
but in OCT they will resume from 01JUN06 minus 'the guys whose PD is before 01JUN06 and their application processing is completed (140 approved, satisfied RFE etc ) '
it looks all good for EB2-I guys have fun.
polapragada
02-18 07:37 PM
I hope it will become law...
But my mind says NO way!!!
But my mind says NO way!!!
2011 2pac threatens ILLUM
logiclife
01-18 01:12 PM
This thread has be closed but the discussion is continued on the newer thread.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2939
Thanks.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2939
Thanks.
more...
neelu
12-12 10:48 AM
We have asked an immigration lawyer this question. Someone even quoted all the sections of INA and CFR(code of federal regulations) to make the point -- that you can have regulation changed to file 485.
The lawyer was of the opinion that you need change in INA to be able to file 485 when dates are not current. It cannot be done with administrative changes.
Hi Logiclife,
If an attorney says that it cannot be done with administrative changes, then I guess, we dont have much to argue.
But I cannot understand the logic behind why it cant be done. I mean, disallowing concurrent processing is possible by an administrative change, why is the reverse (or something similar like allowing 485 filing without pd being current), not possible?
I am sorry for not being to let go of this, but I thought, logic-life can see some logic in this!!! :)
Thank you.
The lawyer was of the opinion that you need change in INA to be able to file 485 when dates are not current. It cannot be done with administrative changes.
Hi Logiclife,
If an attorney says that it cannot be done with administrative changes, then I guess, we dont have much to argue.
But I cannot understand the logic behind why it cant be done. I mean, disallowing concurrent processing is possible by an administrative change, why is the reverse (or something similar like allowing 485 filing without pd being current), not possible?
I am sorry for not being to let go of this, but I thought, logic-life can see some logic in this!!! :)
Thank you.
smalgin
04-21 11:20 AM
I cannot attend, but only because I am far away geographically. (LA Area)
Please tell Mr. Gutierrez that I support Title 5 of STRIVE Act.
Please tell Mr. Gutierrez that I support Title 5 of STRIVE Act.
more...
jonty_11
07-11 03:41 PM
Previously, the policy was that all worldwide numbers would fall down into worldwide third and then from there, fall across to the countries impacted by retrogression (i.e. India, China). The policy was recently clarified and today the unused numbers are allocated within the same preference classification.
Can you provide the source of this info? a link or something?
Can you provide the source of this info? a link or something?
2010 Tupac Shakur Wallpaper
Jaime
09-13 12:03 PM
I think this is very important, I asked in the past about it but I got no answer.
It would be OK for me to buy a bunch of flags (50-100) and maybe get reimbursed for them at the rally if somebody wants one? I get support from anyone?
We need to do this! Any ideas on how to reimburse him? How much would it be? You can PM Core and ask!
It would be OK for me to buy a bunch of flags (50-100) and maybe get reimbursed for them at the rally if somebody wants one? I get support from anyone?
We need to do this! Any ideas on how to reimburse him? How much would it be? You can PM Core and ask!
more...
msgrewal81
02-18 05:40 PM
this bill would allow to adjust status to GC, if you lived for the last 5 years continuously except for casual absence. It does not eliminate H1B, but makes it tougher at advertisement stage for EB.
Where did you read that "except for casual absence". Because that might make it go or nogo for many people.
There would be many people who might have gone outside US to India or so for a month or so for maybe twice in last 5 years. Will that count as casual absence and forgiven ?
eg. my wife will be in US for 5 years in August'09, but she has been to India atleast twice for 2 months and 1 month respectively during these 5 years.
Where did you read that "except for casual absence". Because that might make it go or nogo for many people.
There would be many people who might have gone outside US to India or so for a month or so for maybe twice in last 5 years. Will that count as casual absence and forgiven ?
eg. my wife will be in US for 5 years in August'09, but she has been to India atleast twice for 2 months and 1 month respectively during these 5 years.
hair The Tupac Shakur Biopic: Why
CSPAvictim
07-09 06:30 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
more...
feedfront
09-21 12:52 PM
My status changed yesterday night 8.45 (odd time) , to Evidence review. Keeping fingers crossed.
May be approval is few hours away for you.
May be approval is few hours away for you.
hot Proof#39;s funeral was attented
nixstor
10-15 01:37 PM
IV has been working with officials in DHS (not USCIS) to find the exact number of AOS applications pending sorted by priority date, per country, per category.
Even though the need for requested information is clear and DHS officials agreed to push USCIS for such information, they clearly told IV to demonstrate the need by filing FOIA requests. A request from IV is already pending, but the more the number of requests, the more prioritized this request will become. There are approximately 65,000 FOIA requests pending in Track2 of USCIS queue.
FOIA can be filed with USCIS either by using G-639 or by writing a simple letter. Our request will not fit the G-639 format and a simple notarized letter will do. I am attaching a sample document that members can download from Google docs (http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddkc5z3x_4cj4sxwgh) and replace the fictitious John Doe information with theirs and mail out the letter to the address in the letter.
If you are really information hungry, this is your chance to get it.
(1) Download attachment
(2) Replace John Doe information with yours & print it
(3) Notarize it and fax/mail it. Notarizing your request prevents from frivolous rejection
Fax number (816) 350-5785. Make sure you get your confirmation if you fax it.
Even though the need for requested information is clear and DHS officials agreed to push USCIS for such information, they clearly told IV to demonstrate the need by filing FOIA requests. A request from IV is already pending, but the more the number of requests, the more prioritized this request will become. There are approximately 65,000 FOIA requests pending in Track2 of USCIS queue.
FOIA can be filed with USCIS either by using G-639 or by writing a simple letter. Our request will not fit the G-639 format and a simple notarized letter will do. I am attaching a sample document that members can download from Google docs (http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddkc5z3x_4cj4sxwgh) and replace the fictitious John Doe information with theirs and mail out the letter to the address in the letter.
If you are really information hungry, this is your chance to get it.
(1) Download attachment
(2) Replace John Doe information with yours & print it
(3) Notarize it and fax/mail it. Notarizing your request prevents from frivolous rejection
Fax number (816) 350-5785. Make sure you get your confirmation if you fax it.
more...
house icon Tupac Shakur,
Legal
07-04 09:17 PM
Another myth: USCIS processed 60,000 485 in June. It is wrong. They processed 60,000 485 over the period of 6 months to 5 years. And they just approved in June, based on earlier processing.
In their "normal" pace they would be giving finishing touches and slowly releasing them over the course of next 12 months! Do you agree?
But they worked overnight and weekend to finish up and deny benefits to the July filers? Therein lies the problem. what do you think?
In their "normal" pace they would be giving finishing touches and slowly releasing them over the course of next 12 months! Do you agree?
But they worked overnight and weekend to finish up and deny benefits to the July filers? Therein lies the problem. what do you think?
tattoo Tupac Shakur Biography.
sherlock01
09-10 04:33 PM
Talking about horses and your user id WhiteStallion is surreal. Dude looks like they are after all discussing a bill right up your alley :D
No offence. Just Kidding!!
Nice humour!
No offence. Just Kidding!!
Nice humour!
more...
pictures tupac shakur biography his
saatiish
07-13 10:04 AM
Dude! Just follow the upstream thread and you will find a .PDF document from finalgc
you seem to be right - the doc does say that ! - you made my day - MORE SOUP FOR YOU !
you seem to be right - the doc does say that ! - you made my day - MORE SOUP FOR YOU !
dresses Tupac Shakur stars in Bullet
belmontboy
05-23 02:19 PM
That is what these computer workers do. Go to forums, steal code, copy that at the appropriate place, change variable names and screw up all the copyright issues.
what is your job?
what is your job?
more...
makeup Tupac Shakur Wallpaper
new_horizon
01-18 02:33 PM
Once while visiting Niagara falls, I took a wrong turn towards the bridge to Canada, and the officer wouldn't allow me to turn back, but told me to go to Canada. Since I did not have my passport or visa with me the CA people wouldn't let me inside their country. I told I took a wrong turn when looking for a gas station, and they finally let me turn back to US. But since I did not have the passport the US guys wouldn't let me in here. I told them the same story I took a wrong turn. I was taken in for questioning by the main guy there. The officer finally took my drivers licence (and my employee id which luckily I had) and I think he checked it in his system. After a long while he came back, and told that I can get in, but told me to carry the passport & visa at all times. When this all happened I had my 15 mo daughter with me, 'coz she was in the car (wife and others were going up in the hot air baloon:)). I think my little girl helped somewhat 'coz she's a US citizen :). Above all praise God for that day!!
girlfriend tupac shakur funeral picture
vgayalu
10-05 01:34 PM
Hi Guys,
My attorney sent the response last week and it was delivered to the Dallas, TX. I am little concerned that my attorney actually sent the response to a courier address rather than the PO Box for TSC that they ask you to send. So far I have not seen any updates on my case.
Vgayalu: After how many days did you see an update after you sent the response to the RFE.
RFE received date : 09/07/10
RFE Response sent (MAIlED) : 09/29/10
(IN USPS to PO BOX by Express mail)
RFE Response Received by USICS : 09/30/10 ( On line update on same day). - Hard LUD
Again there is one more soft LUD on 10/01/10.
Approval update : Hard LUD 10/05/10.
My attorney sent the response last week and it was delivered to the Dallas, TX. I am little concerned that my attorney actually sent the response to a courier address rather than the PO Box for TSC that they ask you to send. So far I have not seen any updates on my case.
Vgayalu: After how many days did you see an update after you sent the response to the RFE.
RFE received date : 09/07/10
RFE Response sent (MAIlED) : 09/29/10
(IN USPS to PO BOX by Express mail)
RFE Response Received by USICS : 09/30/10 ( On line update on same day). - Hard LUD
Again there is one more soft LUD on 10/01/10.
Approval update : Hard LUD 10/05/10.
hairstyles of rappers Tupac Shakur,
Ganesh99
07-04 06:07 PM
I think we should use this opportunity to lobby Congress to pass Legislation to help legal immigration that are least controversial.
1. We should be able to file 485 independent of priority dates.
2. Exempt dependents from VISA cap.
In my opinion pursuing a lawsuit may not help us much.
We should raise money to pursue lobbying instead of the lawsuit.
IV should use this opportunity to reienforc the lobbying efforts and fund raising effors.
For my part, I will contribute individually and willing to particpate in any fund raising efforts in my area (North West Boston area).
1. We should be able to file 485 independent of priority dates.
2. Exempt dependents from VISA cap.
In my opinion pursuing a lawsuit may not help us much.
We should raise money to pursue lobbying instead of the lawsuit.
IV should use this opportunity to reienforc the lobbying efforts and fund raising effors.
For my part, I will contribute individually and willing to particpate in any fund raising efforts in my area (North West Boston area).
Winner
04-07 10:45 AM
it is good to hear from Pappu that IV is ready to take up this issue ...but till someone comes foward ..can IV focus on other issues like recapture, removal of country limits etc (there is no shortage of issues where focus is needed)
------------------
no comments from anyone regarding the above ?
You keep posting the same thing over and over again. I remember some questions some of the members asked you and I guess you conveniently ignored it.
Let me remind you those questions.
1) Why did you not contribute to the funding drive?
2) If IV core team agrees to work on everything you want, what are you willing to do? What will be your contribution in terms of time, effort and money?
If you have a plan where we can make something happen, please make a detailed document on how you are planning to achieve the objectives and send it to info@immigrationvoice.com. If you plan makes any sense, I'm sure core will be happy to work with you.
------------------
no comments from anyone regarding the above ?
You keep posting the same thing over and over again. I remember some questions some of the members asked you and I guess you conveniently ignored it.
Let me remind you those questions.
1) Why did you not contribute to the funding drive?
2) If IV core team agrees to work on everything you want, what are you willing to do? What will be your contribution in terms of time, effort and money?
If you have a plan where we can make something happen, please make a detailed document on how you are planning to achieve the objectives and send it to info@immigrationvoice.com. If you plan makes any sense, I'm sure core will be happy to work with you.
pappu
02-02 02:56 PM
Donation should be on the way today.
Thank you
Thank you
No comments:
Post a Comment