BlueSunD
03-09 08:40 PM
I�m trying to finish all the work I�ve got so I can finally spend some time to finish my entry. It�s kind of bothering not being able to add all the things you want this time, but soulty�s right, you can do it later. I would like to catch some sleep tonight too... but guess that will have to wait too :P
wallpaper its BlackBerry Curve 8530.
Dolly20
10-03 01:14 PM
Hi!
When i was in India, my company applied for H1B visa. In the meantime I got married and came to US on H4 visa. After a month, my H1B was approved. Now, my company is planning to apply for a change of status. I have the following queries:
1. Do we have to fill in I 539 form or I 129 form
2. How long is the processing time?
3. Will i be eligible to work from Oct 1st, 2007 even though the change of status case is in process? Or should i wait till its been approved?
please help me. Your responses will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance :)
When i was in India, my company applied for H1B visa. In the meantime I got married and came to US on H4 visa. After a month, my H1B was approved. Now, my company is planning to apply for a change of status. I have the following queries:
1. Do we have to fill in I 539 form or I 129 form
2. How long is the processing time?
3. Will i be eligible to work from Oct 1st, 2007 even though the change of status case is in process? Or should i wait till its been approved?
please help me. Your responses will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance :)
sri1234
05-27 11:44 AM
I wonder what are the required documents for America born citizens if they don't have passports. Just a driver license? or they have to carry birth certificates always?
I think American Citizens Drivers Licence do not have "Status Check" date where as Non-Immigrants have it.
I think American Citizens Drivers Licence do not have "Status Check" date where as Non-Immigrants have it.
2011 metro pcs blackberry price
logiclife
02-13 12:49 PM
It is an item on the organization's agenda.
Both for USCIS and BECs to show some transparency. More posts mean more attention, but the posts are made by 800 members and majority of them are stuck in Dallas and Philly BECs or waiting for 485 to be filed so that they can get portability benefit beyond 6th year.
That is much more important than speed of 485 processing. It is on the agenda of the org but the reason you dont see those posts is because its not a problem yet for the majority on this forum. That's just how it works. First things first. You dont find people on student visas worried about Labor backlogs coz they need to find H1 first. You dont find people stuck in labor worried about retrogression coz they need to get their labor approved first without which retrogression or no-retrogression makes no difference to them.
I agree with your idea and understand that USCIS handling of 485 is a serious issue, just trying to explain why you dont see too many posts here for that issue.
Both for USCIS and BECs to show some transparency. More posts mean more attention, but the posts are made by 800 members and majority of them are stuck in Dallas and Philly BECs or waiting for 485 to be filed so that they can get portability benefit beyond 6th year.
That is much more important than speed of 485 processing. It is on the agenda of the org but the reason you dont see those posts is because its not a problem yet for the majority on this forum. That's just how it works. First things first. You dont find people on student visas worried about Labor backlogs coz they need to find H1 first. You dont find people stuck in labor worried about retrogression coz they need to get their labor approved first without which retrogression or no-retrogression makes no difference to them.
I agree with your idea and understand that USCIS handling of 485 is a serious issue, just trying to explain why you dont see too many posts here for that issue.
more...
jasmin45
07-16 05:45 PM
Its interesting to see how organized they are and how arrogant their wordings are .. Looks like they have quiet a bit of influence in political spectrum.
NKR
10-16 05:04 PM
I think you know pretty well what I am talking about. USCIS has not "reacted" in any malicious way against the immigrant community wrt. to July 07 actions. If you find they have done so they will be severely answerable to various laws in the country. Do you think the lawyers will keep quite when they sense blood in the water? There has been no "reaction" by USCIS, except as a figment of imagination in the minds of this community.
What happened to your sense of judgment, whoever said that USCIS is doing it maliciously? They reacted for sure but within legal boundaries. I do not understand why you keep twisted people�s answers.
USCIS has always gone by RD, not PD to a large extent (there have been deviations here and there, but none of them are due to policy issues).
That is exactly I am saying, I am asking why should it be this way, this is totally wrong. They should go by PD. Even if my application was not moved to another centre mine still would not have gotten approved because I applied in Aug and not July. I mentioned that to tell you that I have to wait even more now.
Now if you ask me why I applied in Aug and not in Jul, it is because my family was not in US at that time. If you had told me beforehand about the impending fiasco I wouldn�t have sent them in the first place. I had to call them back and cancel my trip spending hundreds of $s.
PD based processing is not sustainable as I had highlighted before. If you applied for 485 before someone else, you should be approved first. Now I am saying applied for 485, not Labor/Perm. Now dont come back with a post saying I applied July 2 00:01, but someone with July 3rd 23:55 is getting approved before I am. Afford some granularity of a week or so.
Why is it not sustainable, now you are defending something that is wrong, why should I have to wait though my GC was started ages before?
I did not say USCIS is "doodh ka dula", but DoL and USCIS are two different entities. You cant blame one for the problems of the other. USCIS has its share of blames, but to blame everything on USCIS just shows that you have lost your objectivity. You don't want to be blamed for the actions of your colleague, so why do you blame USCIS for things which are not their doing??
Just because I said USCIS is doing something wrong (not following processing order..) doesn�t mean I said that DOS did something right.. you keep assuming things..
If you keep blaming USCIS for everything (I am sure some of you want to blame the economic crisis, the Darfur issue etc. on USCIS too, come on!, you know you wanted to ;) ), the community's credibility comes into question.
Again you are running your imagination wild, who blamed all the other things on USCIS?..
End of the day, you (and/or others) are distracting the OP's idea with FUD. If you have constructive ideas to channel OPs enthusiasm you should suggest alternatives. Not make her/him fearful with untenable accusations of retribution from USCIS.
Dude, show me one post of mine which said anything against the idea. I even gave a green for what he is trying to do, at least he is doing something while the rest of us are watching�.
What happened to your sense of judgment, whoever said that USCIS is doing it maliciously? They reacted for sure but within legal boundaries. I do not understand why you keep twisted people�s answers.
USCIS has always gone by RD, not PD to a large extent (there have been deviations here and there, but none of them are due to policy issues).
That is exactly I am saying, I am asking why should it be this way, this is totally wrong. They should go by PD. Even if my application was not moved to another centre mine still would not have gotten approved because I applied in Aug and not July. I mentioned that to tell you that I have to wait even more now.
Now if you ask me why I applied in Aug and not in Jul, it is because my family was not in US at that time. If you had told me beforehand about the impending fiasco I wouldn�t have sent them in the first place. I had to call them back and cancel my trip spending hundreds of $s.
PD based processing is not sustainable as I had highlighted before. If you applied for 485 before someone else, you should be approved first. Now I am saying applied for 485, not Labor/Perm. Now dont come back with a post saying I applied July 2 00:01, but someone with July 3rd 23:55 is getting approved before I am. Afford some granularity of a week or so.
Why is it not sustainable, now you are defending something that is wrong, why should I have to wait though my GC was started ages before?
I did not say USCIS is "doodh ka dula", but DoL and USCIS are two different entities. You cant blame one for the problems of the other. USCIS has its share of blames, but to blame everything on USCIS just shows that you have lost your objectivity. You don't want to be blamed for the actions of your colleague, so why do you blame USCIS for things which are not their doing??
Just because I said USCIS is doing something wrong (not following processing order..) doesn�t mean I said that DOS did something right.. you keep assuming things..
If you keep blaming USCIS for everything (I am sure some of you want to blame the economic crisis, the Darfur issue etc. on USCIS too, come on!, you know you wanted to ;) ), the community's credibility comes into question.
Again you are running your imagination wild, who blamed all the other things on USCIS?..
End of the day, you (and/or others) are distracting the OP's idea with FUD. If you have constructive ideas to channel OPs enthusiasm you should suggest alternatives. Not make her/him fearful with untenable accusations of retribution from USCIS.
Dude, show me one post of mine which said anything against the idea. I even gave a green for what he is trying to do, at least he is doing something while the rest of us are watching�.
more...
sumansk
12-20 04:04 PM
:D;)
I dont think you need to worry.. for you knwo what I am saying ...:D
I dont think you need to worry.. for you knwo what I am saying ...:D
2010 METROPCS BLACKBERRY CURVE 8530 OEM CARRYING CASE CLIP | eBay
DDD
02-16 08:41 PM
looking good eilsoe.... I wish I had time to join. Wanna give myself a modo project.
more...
BharatPremi
09-26 10:08 AM
It is not about politics, it is about ignorance of the people (including reporters). It is explainable, though - what do you know about... I don't know, laws around transporting hazardous materials, something you have never been exposed or subject to? Next to nothing. That's what an average American knows about immigration - their closest brush with that law was when their co-worker adopted a child from abroad. Of course, they do not know the difference between worker visas, and employment based immigrant visas (don't they even sound alike?).
Hermione,
How confident are you to call them "Ignorant".... It could be very planned and calculative agenda. Writer writes in CNN. Never ever be ignorant about their tactful agenda, capacity and wilful application of the polity.
I belive, IV MUST talk to CNN and force them to accept the "error" in that article publicly by publishing at earliest.
Hermione,
How confident are you to call them "Ignorant".... It could be very planned and calculative agenda. Writer writes in CNN. Never ever be ignorant about their tactful agenda, capacity and wilful application of the polity.
I belive, IV MUST talk to CNN and force them to accept the "error" in that article publicly by publishing at earliest.
hair MetroPCS Blackberry Curve 8530 USB Data Cable Headphone | eBay
DSLStart
09-10 02:33 PM
curretnly debating on HR6020 about illegal immigrants.
more...
sw33t
01-18 08:19 PM
Since my statement about making copies of offical US documents is causing confusion, let me rephrase & elaborate -
I, as many of you were, was stopped and requested to provide proof of immigration status. I had a color photocopy of my US Visa Stamp of my passport.
Besides the fact that the Border Patrol agent denied the photocopy as proof of immigration status, he did let me go as soon as I provided my College ID and a DL, warning me that it is against the law to make a photocopy of an official US IMMIGRATION document FOR PERSONAL USE. I did argue about the scenario if I ended up losing my passport and vital documents, which is why I had made copies. He shook his head and repeated the same - NO PHOTOCOPIES OF OFFICIAL US IMMIGRATION DOCUMENTS FOR PERSONAL USE. So, while you are allowed to provide photocopies of official US documents for official government purposes, you cannot make copies of official US IMMIGRATION documents for personal use. I have a pretty busy schedule so I don't have the patience to search, cut and paste the section of the law which refers to this since I did research this at that time and deemed correct the Border Agent's warning.
I, as many of you were, was stopped and requested to provide proof of immigration status. I had a color photocopy of my US Visa Stamp of my passport.
Besides the fact that the Border Patrol agent denied the photocopy as proof of immigration status, he did let me go as soon as I provided my College ID and a DL, warning me that it is against the law to make a photocopy of an official US IMMIGRATION document FOR PERSONAL USE. I did argue about the scenario if I ended up losing my passport and vital documents, which is why I had made copies. He shook his head and repeated the same - NO PHOTOCOPIES OF OFFICIAL US IMMIGRATION DOCUMENTS FOR PERSONAL USE. So, while you are allowed to provide photocopies of official US documents for official government purposes, you cannot make copies of official US IMMIGRATION documents for personal use. I have a pretty busy schedule so I don't have the patience to search, cut and paste the section of the law which refers to this since I did research this at that time and deemed correct the Border Agent's warning.
hot metro pcs blackberry review
actaccord
02-07 03:58 PM
donate 25000 Hilton points (accumulated for future vacation use but this is more important :-) ) , worth one night stay close to DC (10miles) or two night stay (25 miles from DC). This stay can be shared by 2 or 3 ppls. Also, I can take care of picking you from hotel to DC and back to hotel.
more...
house Blackberry curve 8530/8520
prioritydate
12-20 07:03 PM
Please lookup 245(k).
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
Thanks for the clarification, Logiclife. I enter U.S in the first week of Feb, 2001. The economy was bad and I didn't manage to get a job. In fact, I didn't managed to get a job for a year. My then employer didn't revoked my H1B and the I-94 was valid until Oct, 2002. I didn't know that I was out of status till now. I don't remember seeing any section in I-485 form, asking for information about out of status. I did attach my previous H1-B approval notice(2000 -2002) while filing I-485. One thing I want to know is, did anyone got a query(RFE), asking to provide all W2 forms since their entry into this country? I am interested to know that.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
Thanks for the clarification, Logiclife. I enter U.S in the first week of Feb, 2001. The economy was bad and I didn't manage to get a job. In fact, I didn't managed to get a job for a year. My then employer didn't revoked my H1B and the I-94 was valid until Oct, 2002. I didn't know that I was out of status till now. I don't remember seeing any section in I-485 form, asking for information about out of status. I did attach my previous H1-B approval notice(2000 -2002) while filing I-485. One thing I want to know is, did anyone got a query(RFE), asking to provide all W2 forms since their entry into this country? I am interested to know that.
tattoo Verizon BlackBerry Curve 8530
gimme_GC2006
04-07 06:45 PM
first of all cut this BS. citizens and GC holders have different queues at POE and all visa people have different queues.how the hell ur friends heard the officers questions.do they have snake ears or what.use ur common sense.
i came recently on march 20th and how come i did not see when there were 50 desis in the visa's queues.stop these rumours.
i went to sbi when i was in india. that sbi manager came to know this and he was telling about that.i thought it might be a rumour but it still gave me couple of sleepless nights.see how fast this BS is spreading.
Well..you cut your BS first..just because Its not first hand doesnt mean it is unreal..just because I posted on IV doesnt mean I expected IV to take up this case..just b'coz sucker like you saw two different lanes in the airport doesnt mean all airports are like that..I posted my experience in the airport I travelled thru..I dont have to prove to morons like you.
You dont need to be best and brightest to tell me that Airports have different lanes..Oh..yeah...how will I know..I sneaked through Texas border...I never said all ppl stand in the same lane..I said, queues are different but unless you are deaf to your a** you can hear most of the conversation..atleast I did..I dont care if you didnt in your case?
You believe or dont believe I give a rats a**..this is a free forum..I posted what a PERSON told me directly..I never read in the rules that I have to post along with a video recording of my conversation.
huh... _ _ ^ _ _ :cool:
i came recently on march 20th and how come i did not see when there were 50 desis in the visa's queues.stop these rumours.
i went to sbi when i was in india. that sbi manager came to know this and he was telling about that.i thought it might be a rumour but it still gave me couple of sleepless nights.see how fast this BS is spreading.
Well..you cut your BS first..just because Its not first hand doesnt mean it is unreal..just because I posted on IV doesnt mean I expected IV to take up this case..just b'coz sucker like you saw two different lanes in the airport doesnt mean all airports are like that..I posted my experience in the airport I travelled thru..I dont have to prove to morons like you.
You dont need to be best and brightest to tell me that Airports have different lanes..Oh..yeah...how will I know..I sneaked through Texas border...I never said all ppl stand in the same lane..I said, queues are different but unless you are deaf to your a** you can hear most of the conversation..atleast I did..I dont care if you didnt in your case?
You believe or dont believe I give a rats a**..this is a free forum..I posted what a PERSON told me directly..I never read in the rules that I have to post along with a video recording of my conversation.
huh... _ _ ^ _ _ :cool:
more...
pictures on Metro PCS. Blackberry
amitjoey
07-05 12:50 PM
Fellow IV fighters, members. I know, it seems like there is always a target for funds and we dont achieve it. Well! that is not true, we set a new target when the first one is achieved.
Funds, There are more ideas than funds. For every new campaign, plan, we need funds. So it is an ever needed commodity. The reason so many of us are so very aggresive is that we just need more funds, plain and simple.
Inspite of several hundreds contributing, it is not enough. But we will soon reach a day when we would be okay, (given a lot of us/you, sign up for a recurring contribution).
Trusting IV with funds is a major stumbling block, but remember IV is a non-profit, so every "naya-paisa" (penny) is accounted for.
People handling money (core IV) are sincere, honest hardworking people on work-visas, they have much to lose from not being accountable.
And the most important thing is, please take a look at these hard-working IV CORE PEOPLE, please. Some of them have put thousands of dollars (I mean 5 and ten thousand) into this effort. I am not counting personal expenses, travelling to DC, lost work hours etc.
So your $100 at the bowling arena wont get you much farther, but contribute it to IV to get your way ahead paved and bull-dozed over.
Funds, There are more ideas than funds. For every new campaign, plan, we need funds. So it is an ever needed commodity. The reason so many of us are so very aggresive is that we just need more funds, plain and simple.
Inspite of several hundreds contributing, it is not enough. But we will soon reach a day when we would be okay, (given a lot of us/you, sign up for a recurring contribution).
Trusting IV with funds is a major stumbling block, but remember IV is a non-profit, so every "naya-paisa" (penny) is accounted for.
People handling money (core IV) are sincere, honest hardworking people on work-visas, they have much to lose from not being accountable.
And the most important thing is, please take a look at these hard-working IV CORE PEOPLE, please. Some of them have put thousands of dollars (I mean 5 and ten thousand) into this effort. I am not counting personal expenses, travelling to DC, lost work hours etc.
So your $100 at the bowling arena wont get you much farther, but contribute it to IV to get your way ahead paved and bull-dozed over.
dresses Blackberry+curve+8530+red
Abhinaym
09-10 11:22 AM
This is taken from the chat page:
To access this area you must have: a.) Over 50 posts b.) Over 30 reputation points
Right! Then it means 30 reputation points and not dots!
Thanks for that.
To access this area you must have: a.) Over 50 posts b.) Over 30 reputation points
Right! Then it means 30 reputation points and not dots!
Thanks for that.
more...
makeup 25% Off Blackberry Curve 8530
abhathakur
03-08 11:30 PM
The last time I managed to ping an admin assistant level person at the Records and Information Dissemination Section at FBI that is responsible for NNCP, she said the analysts were looking at the 2002/2003 files and this was when I called in November 2005 (No amount of cajoling or pleading or trickery would make her say a word beyond that, very intimidating the female!!!). I am not sure if the 2002/2003 was a reference to the receipt date or the priority date, my guess is it must have been the receipt date of the I-485 application.
Considering the receipt date of my application is in Nov., 2004...it is going to be a wait and the India EB-2 Visa availability in the interim for my PD can pretty much oscillate from being available to not and back and I'll still be waiting!!!
Anyway, it was good to know through a privacy act request to the FOIA division of the FBI that the index check in their central name check database produced no hits for me.....now if their NNCP bretheren would come to the same conclusion SOON, that would be something!!! By the way, I spoke with the FOIA liasion at the FBI and he did say that the NNCP department was in the process of making status inquiry possible again...dunno how long thats gonna take though!
On a different note, have made my second contribution to IV and have inspired an impacted friend to do the same and have exhorted others to make a contribution as well....my reason for aligning with IV, I like to fight the right fight not just because it is my fight right now.
Considering the receipt date of my application is in Nov., 2004...it is going to be a wait and the India EB-2 Visa availability in the interim for my PD can pretty much oscillate from being available to not and back and I'll still be waiting!!!
Anyway, it was good to know through a privacy act request to the FOIA division of the FBI that the index check in their central name check database produced no hits for me.....now if their NNCP bretheren would come to the same conclusion SOON, that would be something!!! By the way, I spoke with the FOIA liasion at the FBI and he did say that the NNCP department was in the process of making status inquiry possible again...dunno how long thats gonna take though!
On a different note, have made my second contribution to IV and have inspired an impacted friend to do the same and have exhorted others to make a contribution as well....my reason for aligning with IV, I like to fight the right fight not just because it is my fight right now.
girlfriend BLACKBERRY METRO PCS FLASHING
ghost
08-12 07:30 AM
I feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that EB3 needs IV's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for EB3, as INS merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
Unsolicited advice - Let's put a small amount as a deposit before we begin these efforts - 6 USD per week for 6 months (signing up for 25 USD per month for 6 months)...I did it and took me 5 minutes, now I am more dedicated to this effort than ever before and am sure that this dedication will have a positive impact on our future efforts...thanks for reading!
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
Unsolicited advice - Let's put a small amount as a deposit before we begin these efforts - 6 USD per week for 6 months (signing up for 25 USD per month for 6 months)...I did it and took me 5 minutes, now I am more dedicated to this effort than ever before and am sure that this dedication will have a positive impact on our future efforts...thanks for reading!
hairstyles Free Blackberry Curve 8530
reachinus
02-07 09:01 AM
I can donate 16000 US Airways miles from 2 accounts. Please let me know the process.
phillyag
07-13 12:19 PM
sorry if this has been asked...
if you are current, when can you expect to get an approval notice ?
My online I485 status continues to be in "Initial Review" stage and the last date of change on my file was back in 2008.
Is there anything we can do to shake this up or just wait.
if you are current, when can you expect to get an approval notice ?
My online I485 status continues to be in "Initial Review" stage and the last date of change on my file was back in 2008.
Is there anything we can do to shake this up or just wait.
gc_bucs
02-18 04:33 PM
Not sure where you read that H1B would be eliminated totally. It does mention Elimination of H-1B Classification for Fashion Models
Below is the text
TITLE VII--EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRATIONCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
SEC. 701. UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
Section 274B (8 U.S.C. 1324b) is amended--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) in subsection (a)(5)--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(A) by amending the paragraph heading to read �Prohibition of Intimidation, Retaliation, or Unlawful Discrimination in Employment�;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(B) by moving the text down and to the right 2 ems;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(C) by inserting before such text the following: �(A) IN GENERAL- �; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(D) by adding at the end the following:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(B) FEDERAL LABOR OR EMPLOYMENT LAWS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer to directly or indirectly threaten any individual with removal or any other adverse consequences pertaining to that individual�s immigration status or employment benefits for the purpose of intimidating, pressuring, or coercing any such individual not to exercise any right protected by State or Federal labor or employment law (including section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 157)), or for the purpose of retaliating against any such individual for having exercised or having stated an intention to exercise any such right.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(C) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON IMMIGRATION STATUS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer, except to the extent specifically authorized or required by law, to discriminate in any term or condition of employment against any individual employed by such employer on the basis of such individual�s immigration status.�; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(2) in subsection (c)(2), by adding at the end the following: �The Special Counsel shall not disclose to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, and shall not cause to be published in a manner that discloses to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, any information obtained by the Special Counsel in any manner concerning the immigration status of any individual who has filed a charge under this section, or the identity of any individual or entity that is a party or witness to a proceedings brought pursuant to such charge. The Secretary of Homeland Security may not rely, in whole or in part, in any enforcement action or removal proceeding, upon any information obtained as a result of the filing or prosecution of an unfair immigration-related employment practice charge. For purposes of this paragraph, the term �Special Counsel� includes individuals formerly appointed to the position of Special Counsel and any current or former employee of the office of the Special Counsel. Whoever knowingly uses, publishes, or permits information to be used in violation of this paragraph shall be fined not more than $10,000.�.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
SEC. 702. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TASK FORCE.
The Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall conduct a national study of American workplaces to determine the causes, extent, circumstances, and consequences, of exploitation of undocumented alien workers by their employers. As part of this study, the Secretary of Labor shall create a plan for targeted review of Federal labor law enforcement in industries with a substantial immigrant workforce, for the purpose of identifying, monitoring, and deterring frequent or egregious violators of wage and hour, antidiscrimination, National Labor Relations Act, and workplace safety and health requirements. Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall submit to the Congress a report describing the results of the study and the Secretary�s recommendations based on the study.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
SEC. 703. RECRUITMENT OF AMERICAN WORKERS.
Section 214 is amended--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) by redesignating subsections (m) (as added by section 105 of Public Law 106-313), (n) (as added by section 107(e) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1513(c) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1102(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act), and (p) (as added by section 1503(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act) as subsections (n), (o), (p), (q), and (r), respectively; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(2) by adding at the end the following:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(s)(1) No petition to accord employment status under the nonimmigrant classifications described in sections 101(a)(15)(E)(iii) and (H) shall be granted in the absence of an affidavit from the petitioner describing the efforts that were made to recruit an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence or a citizen of the United States before resorting to a petition to obtain a foreign employee. The recruitment efforts must have included substantial attempts to find employees in minority communities. Recruitment efforts in minority communities should include at least one of the following, if appropriate for the employment being advertised:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(A) Advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker in local newspapers in the labor market that is likely to be patronized by a potential worker for at least 5 consecutive days.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(B) Undertake efforts to advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker through advertisements in public transportation systems.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(C) To the extent permitted by local laws and regulations, engage in recruitment activities in secondary schools, recreation centers, community centers, and other places throughout the communities within 50 miles of the job site that serve minorities.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(2)(A) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a 10 percent surcharge on all fees collected for petitions to accord employment status and shall use these funds to establish an employment training program which will include unemployed workers in the United States who need to be trained or retrained. The purpose of this program shall be to increase the number of lawful permanent residents and citizens of the United States who are available for employment in the occupations that are the subjects of such petitions. At least 50 percent of the funds generated by this provision must be used to train American workers in rural and inner-city areas.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall reserve and make available to the Secretary of Labor a portion of the funds collected under this paragraph. Such funds shall be used by the Secretary of Labor to establish an �Office to Preserve American Jobs� within the Department of Labor. The purpose of this office shall be to establish policies intended to ensure that employers in the United States will hire available workers in the United States before resorting to foreign labor, giving substantial emphasis to hiring minority workers in the United States.�.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
SEC. 1403. NONIMMIGRANT CATEGORY FOR FASHION MODELS.
(a) Elimination of H-1B Classification for Fashion Models- Section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b)) is amended--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) by striking �or as a fashion model�; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(2) by striking �or, in the case of a fashion model, is of distinguished merit and ability�.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(b) New Classification- Section 101(a)(15)(O) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(O)) is amended--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) in clause (iii), by striking �clause (i) or (ii)� and inserting �clause (i), (ii), or (iii)� and by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (iv); andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(2) by inserting after clause (ii) the following new clause:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(iii) is a fashion model who is of distinguished merit and ability and who is seeking to enter the United States temporarily to perform fashion modeling services that involve events or productions which have a distinguished reputation or that are performed for an organization or establishment that has a distinguished reputation for, or a record of, utilizing prominent modeling talent; or�.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(c) Effective Date and Implementation-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h264/show
This bill is ending H1B for sure, but how will people get EB when there is no h1B or H1B renewal to wait for EB.
Please add your views about this bill.
Also, is there a IL chapter for IV?
Below is the text
TITLE VII--EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRATIONCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
SEC. 701. UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
Section 274B (8 U.S.C. 1324b) is amended--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) in subsection (a)(5)--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(A) by amending the paragraph heading to read �Prohibition of Intimidation, Retaliation, or Unlawful Discrimination in Employment�;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(B) by moving the text down and to the right 2 ems;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(C) by inserting before such text the following: �(A) IN GENERAL- �; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(D) by adding at the end the following:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(B) FEDERAL LABOR OR EMPLOYMENT LAWS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer to directly or indirectly threaten any individual with removal or any other adverse consequences pertaining to that individual�s immigration status or employment benefits for the purpose of intimidating, pressuring, or coercing any such individual not to exercise any right protected by State or Federal labor or employment law (including section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 157)), or for the purpose of retaliating against any such individual for having exercised or having stated an intention to exercise any such right.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(C) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON IMMIGRATION STATUS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer, except to the extent specifically authorized or required by law, to discriminate in any term or condition of employment against any individual employed by such employer on the basis of such individual�s immigration status.�; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(2) in subsection (c)(2), by adding at the end the following: �The Special Counsel shall not disclose to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, and shall not cause to be published in a manner that discloses to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, any information obtained by the Special Counsel in any manner concerning the immigration status of any individual who has filed a charge under this section, or the identity of any individual or entity that is a party or witness to a proceedings brought pursuant to such charge. The Secretary of Homeland Security may not rely, in whole or in part, in any enforcement action or removal proceeding, upon any information obtained as a result of the filing or prosecution of an unfair immigration-related employment practice charge. For purposes of this paragraph, the term �Special Counsel� includes individuals formerly appointed to the position of Special Counsel and any current or former employee of the office of the Special Counsel. Whoever knowingly uses, publishes, or permits information to be used in violation of this paragraph shall be fined not more than $10,000.�.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
SEC. 702. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TASK FORCE.
The Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall conduct a national study of American workplaces to determine the causes, extent, circumstances, and consequences, of exploitation of undocumented alien workers by their employers. As part of this study, the Secretary of Labor shall create a plan for targeted review of Federal labor law enforcement in industries with a substantial immigrant workforce, for the purpose of identifying, monitoring, and deterring frequent or egregious violators of wage and hour, antidiscrimination, National Labor Relations Act, and workplace safety and health requirements. Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall submit to the Congress a report describing the results of the study and the Secretary�s recommendations based on the study.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
SEC. 703. RECRUITMENT OF AMERICAN WORKERS.
Section 214 is amended--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) by redesignating subsections (m) (as added by section 105 of Public Law 106-313), (n) (as added by section 107(e) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1513(c) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1102(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act), and (p) (as added by section 1503(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act) as subsections (n), (o), (p), (q), and (r), respectively; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(2) by adding at the end the following:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(s)(1) No petition to accord employment status under the nonimmigrant classifications described in sections 101(a)(15)(E)(iii) and (H) shall be granted in the absence of an affidavit from the petitioner describing the efforts that were made to recruit an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence or a citizen of the United States before resorting to a petition to obtain a foreign employee. The recruitment efforts must have included substantial attempts to find employees in minority communities. Recruitment efforts in minority communities should include at least one of the following, if appropriate for the employment being advertised:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(A) Advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker in local newspapers in the labor market that is likely to be patronized by a potential worker for at least 5 consecutive days.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(B) Undertake efforts to advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker through advertisements in public transportation systems.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(C) To the extent permitted by local laws and regulations, engage in recruitment activities in secondary schools, recreation centers, community centers, and other places throughout the communities within 50 miles of the job site that serve minorities.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(2)(A) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a 10 percent surcharge on all fees collected for petitions to accord employment status and shall use these funds to establish an employment training program which will include unemployed workers in the United States who need to be trained or retrained. The purpose of this program shall be to increase the number of lawful permanent residents and citizens of the United States who are available for employment in the occupations that are the subjects of such petitions. At least 50 percent of the funds generated by this provision must be used to train American workers in rural and inner-city areas.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall reserve and make available to the Secretary of Labor a portion of the funds collected under this paragraph. Such funds shall be used by the Secretary of Labor to establish an �Office to Preserve American Jobs� within the Department of Labor. The purpose of this office shall be to establish policies intended to ensure that employers in the United States will hire available workers in the United States before resorting to foreign labor, giving substantial emphasis to hiring minority workers in the United States.�.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
SEC. 1403. NONIMMIGRANT CATEGORY FOR FASHION MODELS.
(a) Elimination of H-1B Classification for Fashion Models- Section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b)) is amended--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) by striking �or as a fashion model�; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(2) by striking �or, in the case of a fashion model, is of distinguished merit and ability�.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(b) New Classification- Section 101(a)(15)(O) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(O)) is amended--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) in clause (iii), by striking �clause (i) or (ii)� and inserting �clause (i), (ii), or (iii)� and by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (iv); andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(2) by inserting after clause (ii) the following new clause:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
�(iii) is a fashion model who is of distinguished merit and ability and who is seeking to enter the United States temporarily to perform fashion modeling services that involve events or productions which have a distinguished reputation or that are performed for an organization or establishment that has a distinguished reputation for, or a record of, utilizing prominent modeling talent; or�.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(c) Effective Date and Implementation-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h264/show
This bill is ending H1B for sure, but how will people get EB when there is no h1B or H1B renewal to wait for EB.
Please add your views about this bill.
Also, is there a IL chapter for IV?
No comments:
Post a Comment