njboy
07-26 11:22 AM
sky..definetly wait..they are going to introduce i140 premium processing for eb3 next month, and for eb2 maybe a month later. then for 1000 bucks you can have your i140 cleared ..(there is a good possibility it will clear by itself before that)
wallpaper Dianna+agron+gq+tattoo
zvezdast
07-04 08:50 PM
I did the fingerprinting on 06/02/07, first and only time. So, it took exactly one month between FP and 485 approval.
I hope it goes like that for everyone.
I hope it goes like that for everyone.
Muj@ck0_it
03-11 03:20 AM
I'll cast my vote for paddy...:yes:
2011 dianna agron gq photos
pragir
12-11 01:57 PM
Mohit, when you invoke AC21 your job profile needs to be same as that listed on the job description on your LC. As long as your new company is willing to declare that your new job profile matches the one on your LC, you should be ok.
I am not a lawyer, please consult one.
I am not a lawyer, please consult one.
more...
krishna_brc
05-05 08:54 AM
Yes, we don't need original I-485 receipt notice to travel.
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
vinabath
03-24 03:10 PM
Thanks for the news vinabath. You know what?
Indian cricket team won the world cup last night. They beat West Indies.
Congratulate Kapil, Srikanth, Ravi shastri, Gavaskar, Mohindar Amarnath and other team members.
Nice one buddy. LOL.
Indian cricket team won the world cup last night. They beat West Indies.
Congratulate Kapil, Srikanth, Ravi shastri, Gavaskar, Mohindar Amarnath and other team members.
Nice one buddy. LOL.
more...
.png "Dianna+agron+gq+wallpaper")
Soltan
11-16 05:08 PM
Oh wow, I have a similar situation like yours. Who is your employer, send me a pm. I am in the process of converting it to Premium.
I have talked to an immigration attorney and confirmed that it surely can be converted to PP. Good luck to you. If you go to other forums, I have seen a similar discussion, check it out there as well.
I have talked to an immigration attorney and confirmed that it surely can be converted to PP. Good luck to you. If you go to other forums, I have seen a similar discussion, check it out there as well.
2010 and Dianna Agron in GQ
skark
03-03 09:53 AM
what am I missing here? other than the hassle of getting paper copies filled out/ printed and the advantage of getting a refund a few weeks earlier, what is the advantage of e-filing?
Those are pretty desirable advantages plus there is a chance that your mail could be lost and there is no confirmation with paper filing!
Anyway I efiled it and it was accepted as well. I had no response from IRS regarding the letter we sent about getting a new SSN!
Those are pretty desirable advantages plus there is a chance that your mail could be lost and there is no confirmation with paper filing!
Anyway I efiled it and it was accepted as well. I had no response from IRS regarding the letter we sent about getting a new SSN!
more...
surabhi
06-02 11:25 AM
Surabi. thanks a lot. gave a good insight. will contact an attorney.
but ONe thing I missed to mention : my h1 is only lottery-selected as of now.
So even if I apply for L1 extn, I dont know which might get approved first !! .
does that change anything ?
Nothing would change. If any, it'd be for better I guess.
So you dont know what the "last" action would be. If your L1 extension gets approved immediately with premium processing and H1 approval comes later with COS, then you dont have to go out.
If the situation is reversed, then it would be 1st or 3rd scenario, since 2nd scenario is not applicable.
but ONe thing I missed to mention : my h1 is only lottery-selected as of now.
So even if I apply for L1 extn, I dont know which might get approved first !! .
does that change anything ?
Nothing would change. If any, it'd be for better I guess.
So you dont know what the "last" action would be. If your L1 extension gets approved immediately with premium processing and H1 approval comes later with COS, then you dont have to go out.
If the situation is reversed, then it would be 1st or 3rd scenario, since 2nd scenario is not applicable.
hair dianna agron and lea michele.
BharatPremi
10-31 02:19 PM
I am a consultant hence i have given a friends address who own a home so that i dont need to change it often.
This trick was good five years back but in my opinion it is risky nowadays.The idea and intention was good as not to have bothered avout address change frequently. But To solve one problem you have created another mess. If you will not keep an eye on that you may face problems during naturalization and/or even getting new project where background check is required.
In my opinion, now you will have to keep a practice to give your friend's address as your address while mentioning your residence history. For an example, you want to do a project in new Fortune 1000 client. (Note: Nowadays almost all fortune companies go for background check and medical test before taking one on board)That client will go through your medical/background test and in the form which may be fille up , there do not forget to mention your friend's address as your residence address otherwise you may face problem. Same goes with naturalization process..
This trick was good five years back but in my opinion it is risky nowadays.The idea and intention was good as not to have bothered avout address change frequently. But To solve one problem you have created another mess. If you will not keep an eye on that you may face problems during naturalization and/or even getting new project where background check is required.
In my opinion, now you will have to keep a practice to give your friend's address as your address while mentioning your residence history. For an example, you want to do a project in new Fortune 1000 client. (Note: Nowadays almost all fortune companies go for background check and medical test before taking one on board)That client will go through your medical/background test and in the form which may be fille up , there do not forget to mention your friend's address as your residence address otherwise you may face problem. Same goes with naturalization process..
more...
meridiani.planum
04-04 01:35 AM
I just spoke with my company's attorney and she said that I shouldnt get RFE on my I-140. And just in case I get she will inform me and work with the counsel of my ported company to submit a response. Hooray....I am going. My employer is a big known MNC so the only RFE that I may get is exp letter which is very unlikely. With economy going down I dont want to wait for another 6 months for my I-140.
ok then go for it dude. Do keep us posted on how this works out, I hope you get your I-140 approved soon without an RFE..
ok then go for it dude. Do keep us posted on how this works out, I hope you get your I-140 approved soon without an RFE..
hot dianna agron gq glee. dianna
jonty_11
07-17 06:10 PM
might serve IV community better if we contribute for funds...
more...
house Version of her andagron dianna
desi485
03-24 02:42 PM
Now everything is queued..... no more cutting lines.
You are a senior member. Why are you creating useless thread? People browse IV forums for valuable and important information. People (volunteers) works extra time on limited resources to have this website up & running. I do not understand what made you start this useless thread and waste others time?:eek:
You are a senior member. Why are you creating useless thread? People browse IV forums for valuable and important information. People (volunteers) works extra time on limited resources to have this website up & running. I do not understand what made you start this useless thread and waste others time?:eek:
tattoo dianna agron gq tattoo. dianna
vijay1974
07-29 06:06 PM
I think they should change the title on their page to How may I harass you? :)
more...
pictures Dianna+agron+gq+wallpaper
manand24
10-15 02:12 PM
I don't think so,
my wife and my self had 3 LUDs after FP on both of our 485.
I called TSC, mine and my wife's application is pending secrutiy clearance.
Yes, I know that I will not be getting the GC anytime soon, my PD is 2006 EB2 India.
my wife and my self had 3 LUDs after FP on both of our 485.
I called TSC, mine and my wife's application is pending secrutiy clearance.
Yes, I know that I will not be getting the GC anytime soon, my PD is 2006 EB2 India.
dresses by GQ magazine shows from
seekerofpeace
09-09 10:16 AM
Gimmegreen,
I received same email as you did....just "Approval notice sent" and that too for me nothing so far for my wife....
I was wondering that the difference between..."approval notice sent" and "welcome/CPO email" is that the former is still far from getting the card and needs some actions and more stress test done before the actual cards and the latter is all clear...
Also my case was "Texas original" though it moved to CSC and back....I think different centers are sending different emails...." a WAC case...
Will keep my finger crossed...just worried that my wife may miss the boat this time too...she was a dependent and our files must have moved together....Her status is still the old one "Case transfered to the center which has jurisdiction"
SoP
I received same email as you did....just "Approval notice sent" and that too for me nothing so far for my wife....
I was wondering that the difference between..."approval notice sent" and "welcome/CPO email" is that the former is still far from getting the card and needs some actions and more stress test done before the actual cards and the latter is all clear...
Also my case was "Texas original" though it moved to CSC and back....I think different centers are sending different emails...." a WAC case...
Will keep my finger crossed...just worried that my wife may miss the boat this time too...she was a dependent and our files must have moved together....Her status is still the old one "Case transfered to the center which has jurisdiction"
SoP
more...
makeup dianna agron gq photos.
vadicherla
05-08 12:15 PM
Contribution $25 for this month.
Subscription Payment Sent (Unique Transaction ID #11R03083P3635964R)
In reference to: S-1RN47603HG965415U
Subscription Payment Sent (Unique Transaction ID #11R03083P3635964R)
In reference to: S-1RN47603HG965415U
girlfriend Lea Michele and Dianna Agron
JunRN
10-31 07:08 PM
Today is the 90th day of my EAD application...no status change at all...
hairstyles dianna agron gq photoshoot
Blog Feeds
09-18 10:20 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3plDqwd_0mqbmOBOuS79eIAMkAVi80rj5yAwqjp7V5HIpA8EpksuPRiTUc3m5UKlRCIAMsA3aqgR01TqwFr-VuKVvtsgmASONLLzGQtwu3niMpPiCHQuF-XKDoSIAdL1IJWs9MXmO5-c/s320/Wilson+Liar.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3plDqwd_0mqbmOBOuS79eIAMkAVi80rj5yAwqjp7V5HIpA8EpksuPRiTUc3m5UKlRCIAMsA3aqgR01TqwFr-VuKVvtsgmASONLLzGQtwu3niMpPiCHQuF-XKDoSIAdL1IJWs9MXmO5-c/s1600-h/Wilson+Liar.jpg)During President Obama's address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, Congressman Joe Wilson (R. SC), shouted "LIAR!" when President Obama stated that the proposed health care plan would not cover "illegal aliens." Now, Joe Wilson said he should know this because he once was an immigration lawyer (http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2009/09/rep-joe-wilson-speaks-to-rwv.html). Whether that meant immigration from or to South Carolina, I am not sure, but one thing is for sure, no one I know ever knew Joe Wilson the immigration lawyer. If by "immigration lawyer" Mr. Wilson meant that he once helped an immigrant get deported, I am not sure that really counts. But if "Joe the Immigration Lawyer" is like "Joe the Plumber," then maybe he thinks he really was one.
After all, an immigration lawyer would likely be able to understand what exactly the law means when it says that only citizens and permanent residents are covered under the Obama plan. What has caused Joe Wilson to react like this, besides a serious lack of self control, is the provision in the proposed legislation that eliminates the requirement of using the "SAVE" system to verify whether someone who is an immigrant, is legally in the United States. Use of this program has stopped very few undocumented immigrants from getting public benefits, but has stopped literally thousands of U.S. citizens, mostly poor, from obtaining benefits because of their lack of accessible proof of their citizenship.
Factcheck.org has presented a short article on Seven Falsehoods About Health Care (http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/seven-falsehoods-about-health-care/). One of those applies directly to this point:
False: Illegal Immigrants Will Be Covered. One Republican congressman issued
a press release claiming that "5,600,000 Illegal Aliens May Be Covered Under Obamacare (http://steveking.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Newsroom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=a294b300-19b9-b4b1-1296-659af869849a&Region_id=&Issue_id=)," and we�ve been peppered with queries about similar claims. They�re not true. In fact, the House bill (the only bill to be formally introduced in its entirety) specifically says that no federal money would be spent on giving illegal immigrants health coverage:
H.R. 3200: Sec 246 � NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS. Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.
Also, under current law, those in the country illegally don�t qualify for federal health programs. Of interest: About half of illegal immigrants have health insurance now, according to the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, which says those who lack insurance do so principally because their employers don�t offer it."Misleading GOP Health Care Claims" (http://factcheck.org/2009/07/misleading-gop-health-care-claims/) July 23 � by Brooks Jackson, Viveca Novak, Lori Robertson and Jess Henig.
I can certainly see both sides of the debate, and, frankly, neither side is being completely honest or clear. What is quite clear, is how immigration, and our broken immigration system, keeps coming up in the context of the debate of national agenda items, such as the health care debate.
Several weeks ago I blogged on the danger that the tone of the Health care debate (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/08/healthcare-debate-and-immigration.html)had for the coming immigration reform debate. Calling the President a Liar during his speech to a joint session to Congress is Exhibit A in what we have in store for the coming debate. If Joe Wilson the Immigration Lawyer can misrepresent the consequences of legislative language as straight forward as these two particular sections, we have to be prepared for the extraordinary misrepresentations of any positive aspects of an immigration reform bill. Whether it is "amnesty," "rewarding law breakers," "open borders," "Liars," or even "destroyers of American culture" we have to understand how to phrase and present the response. Without a doubt, the response from those of us who understand the need to balance immigration reform, with security concerns, and with economic growth has to be not only vocal, but focused. We, as Real Immigration Lawyers, must know the language of the proposed legislation, we must know the myths that are out there, and we need to be vocal in our response.
Next week, more than 40 talk radio hosts are descending on Capital Hill for the FAIR (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=846)Annual Scare the Crap Out of Congress Boondoggle. The outrageous claims of the downfall of America caused by illegal immigration, along with similarly nutty myths will be presented as facts. Actual real news organization will cite the Center for Immigration Studies as a legitimate source of information. We must be prepared to call into our local radio stations, whose hosts are in D.C. next week, and be prepared to present the facts of immigration. Not by sugar coating the problems that are caused by illegal immigration, but rather by pointing out which specific laws are broken (INA 212(a)(9) anyone?) and how having a comprehensive solution can actually fix the immigration pothole in the legislative superhighway. Immigration Lawyers it is time to Stand Up and be vocal and beat back the immigration myths (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?bc=27924).
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-8070452709764975137?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/liar-what-does-health-care-have-to-do.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3plDqwd_0mqbmOBOuS79eIAMkAVi80rj5yAwqjp7V5HIpA8EpksuPRiTUc3m5UKlRCIAMsA3aqgR01TqwFr-VuKVvtsgmASONLLzGQtwu3niMpPiCHQuF-XKDoSIAdL1IJWs9MXmO5-c/s320/Wilson+Liar.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3plDqwd_0mqbmOBOuS79eIAMkAVi80rj5yAwqjp7V5HIpA8EpksuPRiTUc3m5UKlRCIAMsA3aqgR01TqwFr-VuKVvtsgmASONLLzGQtwu3niMpPiCHQuF-XKDoSIAdL1IJWs9MXmO5-c/s1600-h/Wilson+Liar.jpg)During President Obama's address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, Congressman Joe Wilson (R. SC), shouted "LIAR!" when President Obama stated that the proposed health care plan would not cover "illegal aliens." Now, Joe Wilson said he should know this because he once was an immigration lawyer (http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2009/09/rep-joe-wilson-speaks-to-rwv.html). Whether that meant immigration from or to South Carolina, I am not sure, but one thing is for sure, no one I know ever knew Joe Wilson the immigration lawyer. If by "immigration lawyer" Mr. Wilson meant that he once helped an immigrant get deported, I am not sure that really counts. But if "Joe the Immigration Lawyer" is like "Joe the Plumber," then maybe he thinks he really was one.
After all, an immigration lawyer would likely be able to understand what exactly the law means when it says that only citizens and permanent residents are covered under the Obama plan. What has caused Joe Wilson to react like this, besides a serious lack of self control, is the provision in the proposed legislation that eliminates the requirement of using the "SAVE" system to verify whether someone who is an immigrant, is legally in the United States. Use of this program has stopped very few undocumented immigrants from getting public benefits, but has stopped literally thousands of U.S. citizens, mostly poor, from obtaining benefits because of their lack of accessible proof of their citizenship.
Factcheck.org has presented a short article on Seven Falsehoods About Health Care (http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/seven-falsehoods-about-health-care/). One of those applies directly to this point:
False: Illegal Immigrants Will Be Covered. One Republican congressman issued
a press release claiming that "5,600,000 Illegal Aliens May Be Covered Under Obamacare (http://steveking.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Newsroom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=a294b300-19b9-b4b1-1296-659af869849a&Region_id=&Issue_id=)," and we�ve been peppered with queries about similar claims. They�re not true. In fact, the House bill (the only bill to be formally introduced in its entirety) specifically says that no federal money would be spent on giving illegal immigrants health coverage:
H.R. 3200: Sec 246 � NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS. Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.
Also, under current law, those in the country illegally don�t qualify for federal health programs. Of interest: About half of illegal immigrants have health insurance now, according to the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, which says those who lack insurance do so principally because their employers don�t offer it."Misleading GOP Health Care Claims" (http://factcheck.org/2009/07/misleading-gop-health-care-claims/) July 23 � by Brooks Jackson, Viveca Novak, Lori Robertson and Jess Henig.
I can certainly see both sides of the debate, and, frankly, neither side is being completely honest or clear. What is quite clear, is how immigration, and our broken immigration system, keeps coming up in the context of the debate of national agenda items, such as the health care debate.
Several weeks ago I blogged on the danger that the tone of the Health care debate (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/08/healthcare-debate-and-immigration.html)had for the coming immigration reform debate. Calling the President a Liar during his speech to a joint session to Congress is Exhibit A in what we have in store for the coming debate. If Joe Wilson the Immigration Lawyer can misrepresent the consequences of legislative language as straight forward as these two particular sections, we have to be prepared for the extraordinary misrepresentations of any positive aspects of an immigration reform bill. Whether it is "amnesty," "rewarding law breakers," "open borders," "Liars," or even "destroyers of American culture" we have to understand how to phrase and present the response. Without a doubt, the response from those of us who understand the need to balance immigration reform, with security concerns, and with economic growth has to be not only vocal, but focused. We, as Real Immigration Lawyers, must know the language of the proposed legislation, we must know the myths that are out there, and we need to be vocal in our response.
Next week, more than 40 talk radio hosts are descending on Capital Hill for the FAIR (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=846)Annual Scare the Crap Out of Congress Boondoggle. The outrageous claims of the downfall of America caused by illegal immigration, along with similarly nutty myths will be presented as facts. Actual real news organization will cite the Center for Immigration Studies as a legitimate source of information. We must be prepared to call into our local radio stations, whose hosts are in D.C. next week, and be prepared to present the facts of immigration. Not by sugar coating the problems that are caused by illegal immigration, but rather by pointing out which specific laws are broken (INA 212(a)(9) anyone?) and how having a comprehensive solution can actually fix the immigration pothole in the legislative superhighway. Immigration Lawyers it is time to Stand Up and be vocal and beat back the immigration myths (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?bc=27924).
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-8070452709764975137?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/liar-what-does-health-care-have-to-do.html)
diptam
02-18 02:38 PM
Any H employer is supposed to pay the minimum wage to the employee , so paystub seems natural in this process. But if you are genuine and just missed the paystubs for some reason you can send some alternatives :
a) Timesheet signed.
b) benefits confirmation ,
c) email correspondence to indirectly prove that you were working in H1 status and getting paid
Hope this helps
Is paystub needed When a person is on H1B and is out of project when AOS on 485.
a) Timesheet signed.
b) benefits confirmation ,
c) email correspondence to indirectly prove that you were working in H1 status and getting paid
Hope this helps
Is paystub needed When a person is on H1B and is out of project when AOS on 485.
swashbuckler
06-17 08:23 PM
Thanks to every one for considering my message and answering to the questions.
Today I have received a mail from our Immigration team saying that they are going to file my GC petition next month (July-2010) for Employment-3rd category (EB-3). But I have 17 years of education (in India, 10+2+3+2) plus 11 years of progressive experience. Am I not qualified for EB-2 category? When I asked the same to our Immigration team, they said, "You do not qualify for EB2 because you do not meet the minimum salary and educational requirements. USCIS does not accept a 3-year Bachelor + 2-year Master education combination to qualify for EB2". What does it mean? Please some one let me know what are the requirements to qualify for EB-2 category? Thank you again in advance.
Regards,
swashbuckler
Today I have received a mail from our Immigration team saying that they are going to file my GC petition next month (July-2010) for Employment-3rd category (EB-3). But I have 17 years of education (in India, 10+2+3+2) plus 11 years of progressive experience. Am I not qualified for EB-2 category? When I asked the same to our Immigration team, they said, "You do not qualify for EB2 because you do not meet the minimum salary and educational requirements. USCIS does not accept a 3-year Bachelor + 2-year Master education combination to qualify for EB2". What does it mean? Please some one let me know what are the requirements to qualify for EB-2 category? Thank you again in advance.
Regards,
swashbuckler
No comments:
Post a Comment