gcsim
06-12 10:11 AM
Hi All,
I'm planning to go to India for my first visa stamping in 3 yrs. Just wanted to know is it safe to go rite now will the cir on verge of being signed.
I'm planning to go to India for my first visa stamping in 3 yrs. Just wanted to know is it safe to go rite now will the cir on verge of being signed.
wallpaper steven spielberg quotes.
astral1977
07-09 11:21 AM
smartboy75,
I-131 form is used for issuing re-entry permits, refugee travel & advance parole documents.
AOS applicants are issued advance parole document. The biometrics rule is only for those individuals who are issued re-entry & refugee travel documents.
If in doubt kindly read through the text that you pasted in your message.
Thanks.
Source www.immigration-law.com
07/09/2008: USCIS Biometric Changes For Re-Entry Permits and Refugee Travel Documents 07/08/2008
USCIS has issued revised instructions for USCIS Form I-131, Application for Travel Document. The instructions include changes effective March 5, 2008 that require applicants for re-entry permits and refugee travel documents to provide biometrics (e.g., fingerprints and photographs) at a USCIS Application Support Center (ASC) for background and security checks and to meet requirements for secure travel and entry documents containing biometric identifiers.
Q. May an I-131 applicant for a re-entry permit or refugee travel document complete biometrics outside of the United States?
A. Form I-131 instructions provide guidance for certain persons who are abroad at the time of filing to visit a U.S. Embassy or consulate for fingerprinting, although all applicants are urged to file before leaving the United States. Since certain overseas offices have the discretion to accept and adjudicate applications for refugee travel documents, although it is not mandatory that they do so, an applicant for a refugee travel document may complete biometrics outside of the United States, but is encouraged to wait to travel until his or her biometrics have been collected and the document delivered. As discussed earlier, certain overseas USCIS offices may, in their discretion, adjudicate Form I-131 filed for a refugee travel document (but not re-entry permits), where the applicant has failed to apply while in the U.S. (see 8 C.F.R. � 223.2(b)(2)(ii)). However, applicants for refugee travel documents should not count on the overseas offices necessarily agreeing to adjudicate Form I-131 in all cases, particularly where it is evident that the individual could have applied while in the U.S. and attended his or her biometrics appointment. Applicants for reentry permits should attend their biometric appointment at the designated ASC. If the applicant departs the United States before the biometrics are collected, the application may be denied.
Q. Will Form I-131 re-entry permit or refugee travel document be denied if the applicant leaves the U.S. after the application has been filed and receipted but before biometrics are completed?
A. Form I-131 form instructions state, �Departure from the United States before a decision is made on an application for a Re-entry Permit usually does not affect the application. However, where biometric collection is required and the applicant departs the United States before the biometrics are collected, the application may be denied.� Travel is not advisable. If an applicant leaves and comes back, his or her application may be denied while abroad, and he or she may not be able to get back into the country. Even though an overseas USCIS office may, in its discretion, take the biometrics of an applicant for a refugee travel document, there is no guarantee that the office will necessarily exercise its discretion to do so. Therefore, USCIS again urges all I-131 applicants for whom biometrics will be required to file their applications well in advance of their scheduled departure dates. USCIS suggests applicants apply for a travel document at least 60 days prior to the date of travel.
So if we efile EAD and then 2 months down the line efile AP, do we have to go twice for biometrics ???
I-131 form is used for issuing re-entry permits, refugee travel & advance parole documents.
AOS applicants are issued advance parole document. The biometrics rule is only for those individuals who are issued re-entry & refugee travel documents.
If in doubt kindly read through the text that you pasted in your message.
Thanks.
Source www.immigration-law.com
07/09/2008: USCIS Biometric Changes For Re-Entry Permits and Refugee Travel Documents 07/08/2008
USCIS has issued revised instructions for USCIS Form I-131, Application for Travel Document. The instructions include changes effective March 5, 2008 that require applicants for re-entry permits and refugee travel documents to provide biometrics (e.g., fingerprints and photographs) at a USCIS Application Support Center (ASC) for background and security checks and to meet requirements for secure travel and entry documents containing biometric identifiers.
Q. May an I-131 applicant for a re-entry permit or refugee travel document complete biometrics outside of the United States?
A. Form I-131 instructions provide guidance for certain persons who are abroad at the time of filing to visit a U.S. Embassy or consulate for fingerprinting, although all applicants are urged to file before leaving the United States. Since certain overseas offices have the discretion to accept and adjudicate applications for refugee travel documents, although it is not mandatory that they do so, an applicant for a refugee travel document may complete biometrics outside of the United States, but is encouraged to wait to travel until his or her biometrics have been collected and the document delivered. As discussed earlier, certain overseas USCIS offices may, in their discretion, adjudicate Form I-131 filed for a refugee travel document (but not re-entry permits), where the applicant has failed to apply while in the U.S. (see 8 C.F.R. � 223.2(b)(2)(ii)). However, applicants for refugee travel documents should not count on the overseas offices necessarily agreeing to adjudicate Form I-131 in all cases, particularly where it is evident that the individual could have applied while in the U.S. and attended his or her biometrics appointment. Applicants for reentry permits should attend their biometric appointment at the designated ASC. If the applicant departs the United States before the biometrics are collected, the application may be denied.
Q. Will Form I-131 re-entry permit or refugee travel document be denied if the applicant leaves the U.S. after the application has been filed and receipted but before biometrics are completed?
A. Form I-131 form instructions state, �Departure from the United States before a decision is made on an application for a Re-entry Permit usually does not affect the application. However, where biometric collection is required and the applicant departs the United States before the biometrics are collected, the application may be denied.� Travel is not advisable. If an applicant leaves and comes back, his or her application may be denied while abroad, and he or she may not be able to get back into the country. Even though an overseas USCIS office may, in its discretion, take the biometrics of an applicant for a refugee travel document, there is no guarantee that the office will necessarily exercise its discretion to do so. Therefore, USCIS again urges all I-131 applicants for whom biometrics will be required to file their applications well in advance of their scheduled departure dates. USCIS suggests applicants apply for a travel document at least 60 days prior to the date of travel.
So if we efile EAD and then 2 months down the line efile AP, do we have to go twice for biometrics ???
ivar
02-03 07:15 PM
Congrats ivar! Good luck and God bless.
Thanks, Sunny1000, Leo07,feblc2002,whiteStallion.
feblc2002, I missed July 07 fiasco so i had file I-485 in September 2010. Got approval notice (email alert) on 01/27 and cards yesterday.
Thanks, Sunny1000, Leo07,feblc2002,whiteStallion.
feblc2002, I missed July 07 fiasco so i had file I-485 in September 2010. Got approval notice (email alert) on 01/27 and cards yesterday.
2011 and Steven Spielberg
anil
06-15 11:26 AM
Gurus, can someone please respond and guide me here?
One more confusion, guess I'm confused a lot now:confused:
Can I apply I-485 for my wife whose change of status application from H1 to H4 is pending with CIS?
Thanks a lot!
One more confusion, guess I'm confused a lot now:confused:
Can I apply I-485 for my wife whose change of status application from H1 to H4 is pending with CIS?
Thanks a lot!
more...
sledge_hammer
05-14 04:21 PM
^_^_^_^_^
Blog Feeds
01-26 08:40 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
more...
Saralayar
05-19 01:57 PM
Bullcrap....EB3 will become "U" in next one.
Too many Desis....too many competition for visa numbers....EAD is my GC for next 5 yrs.
Including you I think....;)
Too many Desis....too many competition for visa numbers....EAD is my GC for next 5 yrs.
Including you I think....;)
2010 Cartoon: steven spielberg
wandmaker
02-26 04:37 PM
10 days back My employer called me and asked provide some more documents , so that they can appeal to USCIS....
I was working on getting those documents, I was in constant touch with my employer...
two days back , he suddenly called me and said that as amandment is denied I have to leave US with in next two weeks and they don't want to appeal against the RFE denyl
If you call a nurse help line and tell them that "my kid living farfaraway city, he is sick, what options do I have to make him recover?" - The answer would be take him to a doctor. Same analogy applies here, Just mentioning 'some more document', 'doubts', 'working on getting those documents' does not give any of us the big picture. Consult an attorney and decide your course of action.
I was working on getting those documents, I was in constant touch with my employer...
two days back , he suddenly called me and said that as amandment is denied I have to leave US with in next two weeks and they don't want to appeal against the RFE denyl
If you call a nurse help line and tell them that "my kid living farfaraway city, he is sick, what options do I have to make him recover?" - The answer would be take him to a doctor. Same analogy applies here, Just mentioning 'some more document', 'doubts', 'working on getting those documents' does not give any of us the big picture. Consult an attorney and decide your course of action.
more...
sroyc
11-09 01:24 AM
I think they are talking about the number of receipts that were issued in September, not the number of AOS filings.
why more filers in Sept than June? I thought most PDs were better in June than in Sept...
why more filers in Sept than June? I thought most PDs were better in June than in Sept...
hair steven spielberg quotes. steven spielberg quotes on directing
mbartosik
03-24 01:58 PM
http://wamu.org/programs/kn/08/03/24.php#20155
Our segment is available without fast forward
If the Windows Media does not load try with Real Player that normally works better for me.
Our segment is available without fast forward
If the Windows Media does not load try with Real Player that normally works better for me.
more...
zCool
04-15 03:08 PM
(1)Do I have to re-send the new 1-94 card to the USCIS which I receive upon my return?
-- No. Plenty of folks travel during AOS. Never heard need to update. They ask while applying coz last enter date before filing of AOS is important for identifying status and validity.
(2)Will surrendering the old 1-94 and getting a new one mess up my 485 record (in case those folks want to verify anything again)?
-- You may want to keep copy of I-94s for your purpose. it's a good practice regardless. But NO. there should not be issue with surrendering.
(3)Have you heard of anyone who has had trouble re-entering the US with a pending 485; valid H1B visa; and no advanced parole?
-- Folks can have trouble re-entering for any number of reasons. but having valid h1 visa and no AP isn't one of them.
Dear Friends:
I would appreciate if someone could answer these 3 questions for me:
As you know, when we submitted our 485 (AOS-EB) applications, we also submitted a copy of our most recent 1-94 card with it. This summer I will be leaving the US for 4 months, and on my port of exit will be surrendering the 1-94 card (a copy of which is with the USCIS). On return I will be receiving a fresh 1-94 card. Now my questions are:
(1)Do I have to re-send the new 1-94 card to the USCIS which I receive upon my return?
(2)Will surrendering the old 1-94 and getting a new one mess up my 485 record (in case those folks want to verify anything again)?
(3)Have you heard of anyone who has had trouble re-entering the US with a pending 485; valid H1B visa; and no advanced parole?
Kindly let me know; I have no attorney, and your input will be so appreciated. Thanks.
-- No. Plenty of folks travel during AOS. Never heard need to update. They ask while applying coz last enter date before filing of AOS is important for identifying status and validity.
(2)Will surrendering the old 1-94 and getting a new one mess up my 485 record (in case those folks want to verify anything again)?
-- You may want to keep copy of I-94s for your purpose. it's a good practice regardless. But NO. there should not be issue with surrendering.
(3)Have you heard of anyone who has had trouble re-entering the US with a pending 485; valid H1B visa; and no advanced parole?
-- Folks can have trouble re-entering for any number of reasons. but having valid h1 visa and no AP isn't one of them.
Dear Friends:
I would appreciate if someone could answer these 3 questions for me:
As you know, when we submitted our 485 (AOS-EB) applications, we also submitted a copy of our most recent 1-94 card with it. This summer I will be leaving the US for 4 months, and on my port of exit will be surrendering the 1-94 card (a copy of which is with the USCIS). On return I will be receiving a fresh 1-94 card. Now my questions are:
(1)Do I have to re-send the new 1-94 card to the USCIS which I receive upon my return?
(2)Will surrendering the old 1-94 and getting a new one mess up my 485 record (in case those folks want to verify anything again)?
(3)Have you heard of anyone who has had trouble re-entering the US with a pending 485; valid H1B visa; and no advanced parole?
Kindly let me know; I have no attorney, and your input will be so appreciated. Thanks.
hot story on Steven Spielberg.
immi_seeker
07-14 01:19 PM
Hopefully so..Thanks
You have PD as Nov 2005, EB2.
Now the VB is on 2006.
They must have known atleast a month back.
They issued just 3 months extension
All matching perfectly and result will be good one for you....
You have PD as Nov 2005, EB2.
Now the VB is on 2006.
They must have known atleast a month back.
They issued just 3 months extension
All matching perfectly and result will be good one for you....
more...
house steven spielberg quotes magic
kumar1305
03-29 04:27 PM
Why are you still entertaining this guy. He is a liar. He wants to spread the hatred towards USA. We have already discussed about many people who were sent back from new jersey airport. No passports were held. And if USA thinks that he is a threat to this nation he will be deported.
Like he said there is no special plane which ever landed in India with these kind of people.
Like he said there is no special plane which ever landed in India with these kind of people.
tattoo Khatami amp; Steven Spielberg
mohitb272
07-16 07:24 PM
Hats off to IV :) :)
Waiting for the good news...
Waiting for the good news...
more...
pictures by Steven Spielberg and
abhijitp
01-25 02:42 PM
I am happy to inform all of you in NORCAL that the permit to conduct a signature/letter campaign at Fremont BART is with us!!!
NOTE: This cannot be used by another member at another station-- this is a non-transferrable permit SOLELY for the campaign at Fremont at the said times, but you can request a similar permit for any BART station!
Now, I need at least ONE other member to be there on a weekday evening of your choice (I am planning to go there EVERY weekday evening for 2 weeks) and help me conduct this campaign!
PLEASE.... this is the last call.. don't let us down!
NOTE: This cannot be used by another member at another station-- this is a non-transferrable permit SOLELY for the campaign at Fremont at the said times, but you can request a similar permit for any BART station!
Now, I need at least ONE other member to be there on a weekday evening of your choice (I am planning to go there EVERY weekday evening for 2 weeks) and help me conduct this campaign!
PLEASE.... this is the last call.. don't let us down!
dresses steven spielberg quotes. Directed by Steven Spielberg.
lord_labaku
04-14 12:43 AM
Your friend is capable of a lot; but incapable of asking his own questions !!! Not being cynical or rubbing salt on a wound....but whats the harm in claiming that its your own problem instead of a 3rd persons.?
Given 'your friends' patents & papers in the technical field, self employment as consultant could be possible.
Also ask opinion of attorney on actually incorporating LLC....timing of incorporating such LLC after receiving RFE can be suspect.
Good luck - to your friend.
Given 'your friends' patents & papers in the technical field, self employment as consultant could be possible.
Also ask opinion of attorney on actually incorporating LLC....timing of incorporating such LLC after receiving RFE can be suspect.
Good luck - to your friend.
more...
makeup steven spielberg quotes. #39;Volker spielberg || steven spielberg kontakt#39
sheela
09-23 09:39 AM
Gurus,
Yesterday my lawyer received receipts for my spouse and kids (485/EAD/AP) but not for myself. Now my lawyer is insisting upon sending me the copies of the receipts and do not want to send me the originals. With respect to that I have following questions:
1) Is that o.k having copies only or we should have originals? If we do not
have originals what bad may happen?
2) Either my lawyer or I have not received any of my receipts but we
received all receipts of my family. Is this normal? How long should we wait
for my receipts before contacting USCIS? By the way USCIS already gave
me my all numbers for teh receipts and according to USCIS my receipts
already mailed on Sept 14th. What would be advisable action for me in
this case?
3) None of the receipts of my family contain Priority Date. PD field is blank on all receipts. Is this O.K.?
Thanks.
- BharatPremi
1) For our point of view, only RN number should be okay-this gives us liverage to track and see updates on your filings. Frankly, I never bothered even that as I received FP notices before RN from attorney and FP notices carry RN numbers.
2) Question is should we send the 'Stamped Original FP notice' after finger printing to attorney instead of copies? (As this is a kind of document with proof of FP having done and this is our copy). My attorney asked me for original FP notices -stamped by FBI after FP-I would rather send copies and keep original with me.
Please, let me your thoughts on this
thanks
Yesterday my lawyer received receipts for my spouse and kids (485/EAD/AP) but not for myself. Now my lawyer is insisting upon sending me the copies of the receipts and do not want to send me the originals. With respect to that I have following questions:
1) Is that o.k having copies only or we should have originals? If we do not
have originals what bad may happen?
2) Either my lawyer or I have not received any of my receipts but we
received all receipts of my family. Is this normal? How long should we wait
for my receipts before contacting USCIS? By the way USCIS already gave
me my all numbers for teh receipts and according to USCIS my receipts
already mailed on Sept 14th. What would be advisable action for me in
this case?
3) None of the receipts of my family contain Priority Date. PD field is blank on all receipts. Is this O.K.?
Thanks.
- BharatPremi
1) For our point of view, only RN number should be okay-this gives us liverage to track and see updates on your filings. Frankly, I never bothered even that as I received FP notices before RN from attorney and FP notices carry RN numbers.
2) Question is should we send the 'Stamped Original FP notice' after finger printing to attorney instead of copies? (As this is a kind of document with proof of FP having done and this is our copy). My attorney asked me for original FP notices -stamped by FBI after FP-I would rather send copies and keep original with me.
Please, let me your thoughts on this
thanks
girlfriend Steven Spielberg,
JeffDG
01-26 03:28 PM
Waste of time. How many PhD's are there as compared to the others? There is already EB1/EB2-NIW for them
EB1A/EB1B/EB2NIW still consume visa numbers.
EB1A/EB1B/EB2NIW still consume visa numbers.
hairstyles Steven Spielberg
g03
05-16 10:29 AM
John Kyl from Arizona wants to put an amendment to make "current legals ineligible for this benefit for this if they go out of status from now on".
phillyag
07-20 02:14 PM
Any expected timelines for getting the receipt notice from USCIS? I filed on Jul17th.
cbadari99
05-18 04:59 PM
Wont make a major difference overall except take PhD out of the queue.
Anyway PhDs are very few per year. A lot of PhDs taking
faculty positions get EB1 anyway so this bill would mainly help those PhDs
with EB2
Unfortunately lot of fresh PhDs who apply as EB-1 even after getting a faculty position are usually denied on grounds of lacking enough professional experience. It is not easy to be qualified as a n EB-1 even if you have a PhD. So, most of the PhD's I know are in the EB-2 queue.
Anyway PhDs are very few per year. A lot of PhDs taking
faculty positions get EB1 anyway so this bill would mainly help those PhDs
with EB2
Unfortunately lot of fresh PhDs who apply as EB-1 even after getting a faculty position are usually denied on grounds of lacking enough professional experience. It is not easy to be qualified as a n EB-1 even if you have a PhD. So, most of the PhD's I know are in the EB-2 queue.
No comments:
Post a Comment