kondur_007
07-24 10:26 AM
???
It really will not matter a whole lot whether you mark Yes to all three or only to the third one. What you do need to do is attach an explanation (that your wife has filed 485, copy of 485 receipt and cover letter explaining that it was filed as a "dependent" petition to your immigration petition).
This questions (all three of them) are designed to screen people with immigrant intent (the whole purpose is to answer the question: does this person have immigrant intent) and once you answer one of them yes, it serves the purpose.
Immigrant intent does not matter for H, O, P visa categories as they are exempt from sec 214(b).
So in nutshell, it would not matter whether you mark all three yes or only third one yes. If I were to be you, I will mark them all yes and attach the explanation (very brief, with highlighted statement that says that she has filed 485 and receipt is attached).
Good Luck, and yes, send it ASAP...:)
It really will not matter a whole lot whether you mark Yes to all three or only to the third one. What you do need to do is attach an explanation (that your wife has filed 485, copy of 485 receipt and cover letter explaining that it was filed as a "dependent" petition to your immigration petition).
This questions (all three of them) are designed to screen people with immigrant intent (the whole purpose is to answer the question: does this person have immigrant intent) and once you answer one of them yes, it serves the purpose.
Immigrant intent does not matter for H, O, P visa categories as they are exempt from sec 214(b).
So in nutshell, it would not matter whether you mark all three yes or only third one yes. If I were to be you, I will mark them all yes and attach the explanation (very brief, with highlighted statement that says that she has filed 485 and receipt is attached).
Good Luck, and yes, send it ASAP...:)
warrior wallpaper. Prince of Persia warrior
surya.kant
06-19 01:30 PM
Hello Unseenguy,
Thanks for the reply.
I forgot to mention that i was already on h1 before so i dont fall under H1CAP. This is the reason i applied for H1 from h4 as previously i was on H1B
You are not subject to H1 cap, since you had been on H1 status in last 6 years. However, H1 portablity applies only for H1-to-H1 transfer.
Your H1 petition is approved. You need to get H1 visa from consulate.
Surya.
Thanks for the reply.
I forgot to mention that i was already on h1 before so i dont fall under H1CAP. This is the reason i applied for H1 from h4 as previously i was on H1B
You are not subject to H1 cap, since you had been on H1 status in last 6 years. However, H1 portablity applies only for H1-to-H1 transfer.
Your H1 petition is approved. You need to get H1 visa from consulate.
Surya.
warrior wallpaper. Fantasy - Warrior Wallpaper
rajenk
02-11 03:57 PM
I-485 RFE details.
Needed evidences:
1. 2 Passport size photos in USCIS specs.
2. Form I-693 completed by civil surgeon.
We did submit all these requested I-693 and photos during the initial filing. My question is, does USCIS request for new I-693 if the original one submitted is older than one year or more?
Needed evidences:
1. 2 Passport size photos in USCIS specs.
2. Form I-693 completed by civil surgeon.
We did submit all these requested I-693 and photos during the initial filing. My question is, does USCIS request for new I-693 if the original one submitted is older than one year or more?
warrior wallpaper. Aion Female Warrior Wallpaper
eb2_immigrant
03-09 06:20 PM
Just in-case one gets layed-off and has an EAD, can that person buy a 7-Eleven or a Gas Station?
Can the EAD holder actually run the gas station/7-eleven by working/being present there? (Maybe he/she can work there and take all the profit but no salary).
What happens if there is an RFE asking for proof of employment during this period?
Can you not think anything other than a gas station or seven eeleven ? Come on guys think out side the box. I don't have a great idea to suggest you to begin with but I know gas station and grocery stores are very typical desi ideas
Can the EAD holder actually run the gas station/7-eleven by working/being present there? (Maybe he/she can work there and take all the profit but no salary).
What happens if there is an RFE asking for proof of employment during this period?
Can you not think anything other than a gas station or seven eeleven ? Come on guys think out side the box. I don't have a great idea to suggest you to begin with but I know gas station and grocery stores are very typical desi ideas
more...
warrior wallpaper. Warrior Wallpaper
vrbest
11-18 03:17 PM
One of my colleague got the same.. USCIS wanted copies of I 94, Driver License and all pages of Passport.
They wanted color - clear copies.
Hope this helps!
Hi Mena,
I have the same status online, except date is Nov14, did you recieved any mail so far, if yes can you please tell what is that USCIS is looking for.
Thanks.
They wanted color - clear copies.
Hope this helps!
Hi Mena,
I have the same status online, except date is Nov14, did you recieved any mail so far, if yes can you please tell what is that USCIS is looking for.
Thanks.
warrior wallpaper. Ghost Warrior Wallpaper
chehuan
01-26 08:04 PM
so the job description said BS + 5 years experience or Master +2 years
and they rejected him saying he was not BS +5
none took care of the second part Master +2 years and hence it got rejected
and they rejected him saying he was not BS +5
none took care of the second part Master +2 years and hence it got rejected
more...
warrior wallpaper. Fantasy - Warrior Wallpaper
ps57002
10-05 05:09 PM
Thanks tnite for reassurance/hope...really need it :)
warrior wallpaper. Sultan the Warrior Wallpaper
casinoroyale
10-01 10:21 AM
I remember reading in one of the threads here that USCIS computer system automatically generates FP notices if its more than 15 months. By the way, if they don't issue us one, why we do need to ask them using congressmen etc? Is the burden of giving FP every 15 months falls on the applicant?
more...
warrior wallpaper. Warrior desktop wallpaper
amaran18
08-13 04:23 PM
First of all, Congrats !!
You should talk to a lawyer to get this clarified.
You should talk to a lawyer to get this clarified.
warrior wallpaper. of Persia: Warrior Within
niklshah
01-06 08:58 AM
change the title of thread buddy its misleading. change to something like guessing on feb visa bulletin.. or time waste on feb visa bulettin..
more...
warrior wallpaper. Mech Warrior Wallpaper
mzdial
March 27th, 2004, 02:19 AM
Well.. speak of the devil.. I did score the publisher's tickets for the Heat game.. Not where I thought they were though.. It's section 14, row 5, seats 10,11,12,13. So I'm over in the corner behind you it appears.
Checking the Fieldhouse website it says:
"Camcorders/Recording Devices:
�Still� cameras are permitted at Pacers, Fever and Firebirds games. No Video cameras are allowed. During other events this policy will vary, and guests may be asked to check these items in at Guest Relations in the Entry Pavilion."
I've never bothered to bring a camera into the games ever.. It seems as they are pretty liberal in the policy -- kudos to them.
Now I'm going to exploit it. :-) My wife is going to the game with me and I'm guessing she is going to give me grief if I drag the borrowed 300 w/o the hood into the game.. I went down to work to borrow it this afternoon.. I'll probably have to settle for the 70-200 after she throws a fit.
Are you shooting the game Steve?
-- Matt
Checking the Fieldhouse website it says:
"Camcorders/Recording Devices:
�Still� cameras are permitted at Pacers, Fever and Firebirds games. No Video cameras are allowed. During other events this policy will vary, and guests may be asked to check these items in at Guest Relations in the Entry Pavilion."
I've never bothered to bring a camera into the games ever.. It seems as they are pretty liberal in the policy -- kudos to them.
Now I'm going to exploit it. :-) My wife is going to the game with me and I'm guessing she is going to give me grief if I drag the borrowed 300 w/o the hood into the game.. I went down to work to borrow it this afternoon.. I'll probably have to settle for the 70-200 after she throws a fit.
Are you shooting the game Steve?
-- Matt
warrior wallpaper. Ghost Warrior wallpapers
redcard
11-07 12:27 PM
Hi,
My parents got 10 year multiple entry US visa 2 years back. My brother who was residing here had sent the required documents and applied the visitor visa. My parents had visited me then for 3 months. Now I am planning to get my parents to US. But my brother no longer lives in USA. Is my parent�s visitor visa still valid since my brother is not residing here or should I re apply for my parents visitors visa. Any help or suggestions are appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Yes,, its valid for ten years..irrespective of the fact that your brother is in US or Not...
My parents got 10 year multiple entry US visa 2 years back. My brother who was residing here had sent the required documents and applied the visitor visa. My parents had visited me then for 3 months. Now I am planning to get my parents to US. But my brother no longer lives in USA. Is my parent�s visitor visa still valid since my brother is not residing here or should I re apply for my parents visitors visa. Any help or suggestions are appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Yes,, its valid for ten years..irrespective of the fact that your brother is in US or Not...
more...
warrior wallpaper. Middle ages warrior - Fantasy
H1Girl
08-16 07:19 PM
I was told by my attorneys para leagal (so who knows if this is true or not....) that the ITIN number is the same number that will be issued in the form of ssn.
Fire your Paralegal, if you can...
Fire your Paralegal, if you can...
warrior wallpaper. Dark - Warrior Wallpaper
gcformeornot
10-13 07:28 AM
She can get letter from her employer that mentions that she's on maternity leave to prove that she is still employed and also that she can join back.
you luck.
you luck.
more...
warrior wallpaper. peaceful warrior wallpaper
Prashanthi
08-21 01:54 PM
I received an RFE from USCIS 10 days after the date on the letter and need to respond in 33 days.
I came to US through Company A in June 2007 and was with them until Dec 2006. This Company A had applied for my labor and I140 and both of them were approved through them. I joined Company B in Jan of 2007(change of H1) and was with them until April of 2007. I joined Company C in April 2007(change of H1) and been with them since. Company C would not do my GC.
During the July 2007 fiasco, Company A agreed to give me an offer letter that I submitted with my 485 application and my attorney (a good reputed one) mentioned in the application that I was working for company C.
I got an RFE now stating that I did not send my sealed medical exam which I had done and we have a scan of what was sent. They also want �a current letter of employment attesting to your offer of proposed employment. This letter should be written on the company�s official letterhead and cite the date you will begin working, whether the position is temporary or permanent , a description of the position, a description of the position that you currently hold for the company (if any), and offered salary�
Is this RFE bad? What might have triggered this RFW? Now my attorney suggests that since I had filed 485 through company A and I did not really invoke AC21 that I should give a new offer letter from Company A (they are willing to give one). My question is if I do that will there be further questions? The company I work for is a bigger one and Company A is really a body shopper, so I want to go with the letter from the current company. Also since it more than 2 years since I applied for 485 can I say I invoked AC 21? When can I disassociate myself from company A as I do not want to lose my current job.
I would like the attorneys or the members valuable help. Please do offer your opinions. Thank you all in advance.
__________________
The RFE is not unusual, they are sending RFE's on all pending I-485 applications in an attempt to pre-process the applications and have them ready before the priority date becomes available.
Even though the beneficiary does not have to be working for the GC sponsoring company and the offer of employment can be a future offer, i always advice my clients to work for the sponsoring employer, if possible, otherwise the USCIS might raise the issue of the validity of the job offer, they have done this in the past. I also always advice clients to do AC-21 whenever they can, rather than depend on future employment.
It is difficult to predict what the Officers decision will be and what factors he will look at, and your attorney is not wrong in his response, however if you were my client i would advice you to use AC-21. The USCIS has not indicated that AC-21 has to be invoked as soon as you join the new employer, no deadline for invoking AC-21. However, you should have a GC sponsor at all times to keep your GC alive. In your case, company A was your sponsor until the time that company C has agreed to be your sponsor and invoke AC-21.
It is also good to invoke AC-21 because at the time of filing for citizenship they will see if you worked for your sponsoring employer for at least 6 months after getting the GC and if you did not, they will ask why dint you.
I came to US through Company A in June 2007 and was with them until Dec 2006. This Company A had applied for my labor and I140 and both of them were approved through them. I joined Company B in Jan of 2007(change of H1) and was with them until April of 2007. I joined Company C in April 2007(change of H1) and been with them since. Company C would not do my GC.
During the July 2007 fiasco, Company A agreed to give me an offer letter that I submitted with my 485 application and my attorney (a good reputed one) mentioned in the application that I was working for company C.
I got an RFE now stating that I did not send my sealed medical exam which I had done and we have a scan of what was sent. They also want �a current letter of employment attesting to your offer of proposed employment. This letter should be written on the company�s official letterhead and cite the date you will begin working, whether the position is temporary or permanent , a description of the position, a description of the position that you currently hold for the company (if any), and offered salary�
Is this RFE bad? What might have triggered this RFW? Now my attorney suggests that since I had filed 485 through company A and I did not really invoke AC21 that I should give a new offer letter from Company A (they are willing to give one). My question is if I do that will there be further questions? The company I work for is a bigger one and Company A is really a body shopper, so I want to go with the letter from the current company. Also since it more than 2 years since I applied for 485 can I say I invoked AC 21? When can I disassociate myself from company A as I do not want to lose my current job.
I would like the attorneys or the members valuable help. Please do offer your opinions. Thank you all in advance.
__________________
The RFE is not unusual, they are sending RFE's on all pending I-485 applications in an attempt to pre-process the applications and have them ready before the priority date becomes available.
Even though the beneficiary does not have to be working for the GC sponsoring company and the offer of employment can be a future offer, i always advice my clients to work for the sponsoring employer, if possible, otherwise the USCIS might raise the issue of the validity of the job offer, they have done this in the past. I also always advice clients to do AC-21 whenever they can, rather than depend on future employment.
It is difficult to predict what the Officers decision will be and what factors he will look at, and your attorney is not wrong in his response, however if you were my client i would advice you to use AC-21. The USCIS has not indicated that AC-21 has to be invoked as soon as you join the new employer, no deadline for invoking AC-21. However, you should have a GC sponsor at all times to keep your GC alive. In your case, company A was your sponsor until the time that company C has agreed to be your sponsor and invoke AC-21.
It is also good to invoke AC-21 because at the time of filing for citizenship they will see if you worked for your sponsoring employer for at least 6 months after getting the GC and if you did not, they will ask why dint you.
warrior wallpaper. Skull-faced Warrior wallpaper
vin13
09-30 03:24 PM
i called today and asked USCIS...they dont have information about it.
more...
warrior wallpaper. Samurai Warrior Wallpaper
lazycis
02-14 04:42 PM
What a fabulous ruling this is.
One question for Lazycis:
# (3) actually reads "(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions for naturalization, particularly because Plaintiffs have already undergone a name check in order to achieve LPR status and will clear the “fingerprint check” described in the Memorandum of January 25, 2008.10 The fingerprint check will show whether an LPR who is applying for naturalization has had any contact with the criminal justice system that would warrant denial of the petition."
As far as I can tell even (1) and (2) only apply to Naturalization applicants.
So the question of the hour is: are (1) and (2) true for AOS cases? I am asking this question because to argue a case for compelling recapture you need an AOS version of Baylson's ruling + the Galvez-Howerton decision (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=223315&postcount=121). Only then can you say that there was affirmative misconduct in 2003 and hence compel recapture.
Great ruling. The analysis is totally applicable to AOS. Moreover, the government admitted that it was wrong in recent memo.
"In the context of removal proceedings, ICE has determined that FBI fingerprint checks and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) checks are the required checks for purposes of the applicable regulations."
Wait a minute, isn't immigration judge able to grant AOS in removal proceedings? It means that the DHS acknowledges that it wrongfully interpreted regulations for all these years and that name check is not required by law (at least for AOS) as we were saying all along!
I love also this part: "in the unlikely event that FBI name checks reveal actionable information".
As judge Baylson pointed out, "name check" is nowhere to found in laws and regs.
One question for Lazycis:
# (3) actually reads "(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions for naturalization, particularly because Plaintiffs have already undergone a name check in order to achieve LPR status and will clear the “fingerprint check” described in the Memorandum of January 25, 2008.10 The fingerprint check will show whether an LPR who is applying for naturalization has had any contact with the criminal justice system that would warrant denial of the petition."
As far as I can tell even (1) and (2) only apply to Naturalization applicants.
So the question of the hour is: are (1) and (2) true for AOS cases? I am asking this question because to argue a case for compelling recapture you need an AOS version of Baylson's ruling + the Galvez-Howerton decision (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=223315&postcount=121). Only then can you say that there was affirmative misconduct in 2003 and hence compel recapture.
Great ruling. The analysis is totally applicable to AOS. Moreover, the government admitted that it was wrong in recent memo.
"In the context of removal proceedings, ICE has determined that FBI fingerprint checks and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) checks are the required checks for purposes of the applicable regulations."
Wait a minute, isn't immigration judge able to grant AOS in removal proceedings? It means that the DHS acknowledges that it wrongfully interpreted regulations for all these years and that name check is not required by law (at least for AOS) as we were saying all along!
I love also this part: "in the unlikely event that FBI name checks reveal actionable information".
As judge Baylson pointed out, "name check" is nowhere to found in laws and regs.
warrior wallpaper. Skull-faced Warrior wallpaper
kartikiran
01-14 10:48 AM
Mine was Renewal
warrior wallpaper. Fantasy - Warrior Wallpaper
eb2_mumbai
10-28 09:33 AM
I am not 100 % sure on how pre-approved labors are judged but isnt it true that you should be qualifying from the PD of that labor so in your case 2004. This would mean your 2007 MS will not be accepted since that is after the labor. Now your BSc + 1 Yr PGD might work only if you have them in same field. I mean not guranteed but least you have a chance to appeal. But say they are totally different fields then it might not work. Example BCom + 1 Yr Computer Diploma will not cut the ice in this difficult period. If you need better answers you need to put in more details.
nonimmi
03-11 12:25 PM
This is the problem with most of them (attorney). Once they receive full payment, they dont even care to respond or take any interest in our case. More clients they have more misbehavior we face. Anyway if we look for some real good attorney and find details about him/her it can be good for all of us. I dont think location is that important if attorney is good. Lets do a countrywide search and if someone has real good experience with their attorney please let others know.
bfadlia
03-17 02:15 PM
I am in same situation and had a meeting with my attorney to get more information, according to his experience with all his cases to date, he said there is 70 - 30 ratio, 70% have recieved rfe and 30% got approved without rfe. And after july fiasco he said it's better to wait for rfe and respond rather then ammending 485 application, now that's another question that my attorney will easily make it to top 10 list of all time worst attorneys. So I am looking for second opinion too.
actually that was my attorney's advice too. so u might just be pranoid about ur attorney hate_me :)
i am now of the opinion of doing the remaining parts and holding on to them to be ready whenever they send the RFEs.. no point trying to save some money and risk wasting a window of action when temporarily becoming current.
actually that was my attorney's advice too. so u might just be pranoid about ur attorney hate_me :)
i am now of the opinion of doing the remaining parts and holding on to them to be ready whenever they send the RFEs.. no point trying to save some money and risk wasting a window of action when temporarily becoming current.
No comments:
Post a Comment