gsc999
07-08 02:49 PM
1) No postings on the windows of those Bharat Bajars and Cash N Carrys and Kumuds. Can't the i-phone designers and router gurus make Ashas and Abhijeets invisible with some eye catching posters?
This march was organised by a Chinese member and we didn't get much notice. We have decided to do this on a bigger scale and in a more organized manner on the 14th July
I like your ideas, Can you and your friends help me with this. Please PM me your Ph # and we can coordinate today.
Please seee response above
This march was organised by a Chinese member and we didn't get much notice. We have decided to do this on a bigger scale and in a more organized manner on the 14th July
I like your ideas, Can you and your friends help me with this. Please PM me your Ph # and we can coordinate today.
Please seee response above
wallpaper girlfriend Dugi#39;s WoW
man-woman-and-gc
09-15 12:41 PM
Hi,
Thank You for taking initiation. Please add my name in the spreadsheet.
Chandrasekhar Nachu, . My contribution is $100.
Thanks buddy..can u please send me ur email ID too? I guess in the future when we have # of pledges grow, we will use email as the way to communicate the status on this effort.
Thank You for taking initiation. Please add my name in the spreadsheet.
Chandrasekhar Nachu, . My contribution is $100.
Thanks buddy..can u please send me ur email ID too? I guess in the future when we have # of pledges grow, we will use email as the way to communicate the status on this effort.
indyanguy
09-26 12:58 PM
By Self employment, do you mean working on 1099 or by starting a business and working for it?
Per my lawyer,
1. USCIS does not mandate that you must inform when you invoke AC21. You can inform them if and when you get RFE.
2. I strongly believe that we should not accept job offers that is not related to the job you originally applied for. My lawyer says it is usually vague and if USCIS determines other wise I will be in trouble. And for the same reason I am hesitant to accept very good employee offer from my current client.
3. Self employment is ok as long as the requirements are met and that is what is I am doing now.
Per my lawyer,
1. USCIS does not mandate that you must inform when you invoke AC21. You can inform them if and when you get RFE.
2. I strongly believe that we should not accept job offers that is not related to the job you originally applied for. My lawyer says it is usually vague and if USCIS determines other wise I will be in trouble. And for the same reason I am hesitant to accept very good employee offer from my current client.
3. Self employment is ok as long as the requirements are met and that is what is I am doing now.
2011 New World of Warcraft
BECsufferer
09-09 07:41 PM
EB3 Folks!
This is pathetic ... And it's time for most of you to seriously think about converting to EB2. Now I have no idea how difficult or immpossible this would be, as I had always been EB2, but their are several threads on this forum that can assist you. I strongly suggest you to seriously start researching your way out of this mess. I wan't expecting EB2 to stay beyond 05, but it is going to be like that for another month. Are all the 2004 EB2-I applicants exhausted? ... I don't know, but I know EB3 just keeps on retrogressing.
If this abyss continues, think about it ... you will always remain struck where you had been for past so many years. This is no life.
Ask yourselves ... how can I convert to EB2. Take control!
This is pathetic ... And it's time for most of you to seriously think about converting to EB2. Now I have no idea how difficult or immpossible this would be, as I had always been EB2, but their are several threads on this forum that can assist you. I strongly suggest you to seriously start researching your way out of this mess. I wan't expecting EB2 to stay beyond 05, but it is going to be like that for another month. Are all the 2004 EB2-I applicants exhausted? ... I don't know, but I know EB3 just keeps on retrogressing.
If this abyss continues, think about it ... you will always remain struck where you had been for past so many years. This is no life.
Ask yourselves ... how can I convert to EB2. Take control!
more...
priti8888
10-08 08:34 PM
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
Well said !
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
Well said !
obviously
03-08 08:53 AM
and reduce your depression!
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...?t=3361&page=2
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...?t=3361&page=2
more...
jsb
09-10 10:07 AM
I don't know what this means. This is what it say in the Mumbai website.
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 22 July 2003 22 July 2003
FX 1 March 2003 1 March 2003
F2A 1 June 2005 1 June 2005
F2B 22 August 2001 22 August 2001
F3 15 Janurary 2001 15 Janurary 2001
F4 15 April 1999 15 April 1999
E1 Current Current
E2 22 January 2005 Current
E3 22 February 2002 1 June 2002
EW 1 June 2001 1 June 2001
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
For E3 India, Mumbai guys copied from the China column of the original Visa Bulletin. I guess they will have to correct it.
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 22 July 2003 22 July 2003
FX 1 March 2003 1 March 2003
F2A 1 June 2005 1 June 2005
F2B 22 August 2001 22 August 2001
F3 15 Janurary 2001 15 Janurary 2001
F4 15 April 1999 15 April 1999
E1 Current Current
E2 22 January 2005 Current
E3 22 February 2002 1 June 2002
EW 1 June 2001 1 June 2001
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
For E3 India, Mumbai guys copied from the China column of the original Visa Bulletin. I guess they will have to correct it.
2010 Alliance world of warcraft art
lasvegas
02-05 08:59 AM
Thanks to all who responsed.
I will be sending private msgs to those who have asked me to do so.
I will be sending private msgs to those who have asked me to do so.
more...
GCcomesoon
06-09 01:37 PM
Hi
I recived the case nos from TSC , they had received mine & my wife's applications ( 485, 765,131 ) on 4th June , I see one set of checks cashed.
I expect the other set to be cleared some time Mon-Tues
The case nos start with SRC
Thanks
GCcomesoon
I recived the case nos from TSC , they had received mine & my wife's applications ( 485, 765,131 ) on 4th June , I see one set of checks cashed.
I expect the other set to be cleared some time Mon-Tues
The case nos start with SRC
Thanks
GCcomesoon
hair Alliance World Of Warcraft
simple1
05-02 03:21 PM
I am unable to get into the donar thread. I did donate yesterday.
Could you please post the information in this thread. or Admin provide me access to donar thread ?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=338410#post338410
Could you please post the information in this thread. or Admin provide me access to donar thread ?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=338410#post338410
more...
jaihind
04-24 11:41 AM
Dear Friend:
Do not give up hope.
Take a second opinion.
Go to India and spend time with your loved ones. Many times that heals things in a magic way !
On your GC situation do these :
1)Send an appeal to your local senator under CC to the Secretary of State, Homeland Security and the President to intervene and do some thing
2)Send an appeal to the Director of USCIS in charge of AOS explaining the situation
3)Consult a good attorney to know the options in the exiting scenario
My entire family will say a prayer for you today at 8 PM. I request all IV members to join the prayers if possible.
God Bless You
Balaji
Do not give up hope.
Take a second opinion.
Go to India and spend time with your loved ones. Many times that heals things in a magic way !
On your GC situation do these :
1)Send an appeal to your local senator under CC to the Secretary of State, Homeland Security and the President to intervene and do some thing
2)Send an appeal to the Director of USCIS in charge of AOS explaining the situation
3)Consult a good attorney to know the options in the exiting scenario
My entire family will say a prayer for you today at 8 PM. I request all IV members to join the prayers if possible.
God Bless You
Balaji
hot Marvel Ultimate Alliance 6
kondur_007
07-28 02:08 PM
As I mentioned in my previous post in this thread, I am now posting information that explains why this "horizontal" spill occurred and no amount of campaign will reverse it (other than change in law).
If this is repetition of what has already been discussed elsewhere on the site, I apologize.
First, let me point out when and how the interpretation changed:
Following is from immigration-information.com site (Ron Gotcher):
�Last week, I wrote to Charles Oppenheim of the State Department, asking several specific questions. This morning, I had a long talk with him, when he very graciously called to respond to the questions I e-mailed him earlier. In the course of our discussion, I learned a great deal about the present backlog situation and what is being done about it. First, let me deal with the questions I had asked.
Mr. Oppenheim explained that while the Visa Office initially took the view that visa numbers had to fall down into employment third preference before the could fall across to the individual country quotas, but after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first.�
Direct link to above post:
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5456
Some more information from Ron Gotcher�s site can be found at following link
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5703
Now, let�s look at the actual law on this (above is only the interpretation from Mr Oppenheim, following is the actual text of the law: (my comment is in italics)
8 CFR Sec 202(a)
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph (read as under that EB category: if it is EB1, it goes to EB1 and if it is EB2 it goes to EB2) shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Read the entire Sec 202 (a) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
A glimpse of Sec 203(b) is:
b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): �.
Please read the entire section 203(b) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
So, in nutshell:
1. The law is actually clear on this.
2. Now Mr. Oppenheim has interpreted it correctly as well.
3. It don�t think we can convince anyone to change the interpretation (because interpretation appears to be correct. If it was interpreted differently in past, then that was a mistake).
4. The only way to deal with it is to CHANGE THE LAW.
5. More importantly, push for bills to increase overall numbers (recapture, STEM exemption) etc�
6. The big picture: All these is likely to look completely different once CIR comes in, and we need to include our agenda in CIR that would benefit every category for several years to come (not just my GC or your GC).
If this is repetition of what has already been discussed elsewhere on the site, I apologize.
First, let me point out when and how the interpretation changed:
Following is from immigration-information.com site (Ron Gotcher):
�Last week, I wrote to Charles Oppenheim of the State Department, asking several specific questions. This morning, I had a long talk with him, when he very graciously called to respond to the questions I e-mailed him earlier. In the course of our discussion, I learned a great deal about the present backlog situation and what is being done about it. First, let me deal with the questions I had asked.
Mr. Oppenheim explained that while the Visa Office initially took the view that visa numbers had to fall down into employment third preference before the could fall across to the individual country quotas, but after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first.�
Direct link to above post:
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5456
Some more information from Ron Gotcher�s site can be found at following link
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5703
Now, let�s look at the actual law on this (above is only the interpretation from Mr Oppenheim, following is the actual text of the law: (my comment is in italics)
8 CFR Sec 202(a)
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph (read as under that EB category: if it is EB1, it goes to EB1 and if it is EB2 it goes to EB2) shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Read the entire Sec 202 (a) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
A glimpse of Sec 203(b) is:
b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): �.
Please read the entire section 203(b) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
So, in nutshell:
1. The law is actually clear on this.
2. Now Mr. Oppenheim has interpreted it correctly as well.
3. It don�t think we can convince anyone to change the interpretation (because interpretation appears to be correct. If it was interpreted differently in past, then that was a mistake).
4. The only way to deal with it is to CHANGE THE LAW.
5. More importantly, push for bills to increase overall numbers (recapture, STEM exemption) etc�
6. The big picture: All these is likely to look completely different once CIR comes in, and we need to include our agenda in CIR that would benefit every category for several years to come (not just my GC or your GC).
more...
house warcraft wallpaper
kosu
06-15 08:22 PM
Mailed to TSC on: June 5th 2007
Mailed From State: VA
Received at TSC on: June 6th 2007
140 approved from : TSC
Receipt Date: June 11th 2007.
Got the Case Number from check image. Still not received my Receipt Notice.
Mailed From State: VA
Received at TSC on: June 6th 2007
140 approved from : TSC
Receipt Date: June 11th 2007.
Got the Case Number from check image. Still not received my Receipt Notice.
tattoo of warcraft android wrynn,
atlfp
05-05 10:36 PM
He introduced the bill because he knows the problem very well. So we don't really need to flood him to push him (to thank him makes sense). The focus should be try to get other Senators onboard.
keep pressure on Cronyn to put it on debate by contacting him by fone or fax
keep pressure on Cronyn to put it on debate by contacting him by fone or fax
more...
pictures Dell XPS M1730 World Of
.jpg "world of warcraft night elf")
eb3_nepa
08-18 03:02 PM
Wasn't that appropriate here? Aren't they use this word in day to day life?
Yes they may be by some people. But the rules of this forum state quite clearly, that cussing is NOT welcome. This website is often frequented by members of the Senate/Congress (not the actual lawmakers themselves ofcourse, but their support staff). Do we really want them to see "highly skilled professionals" cussing left and right on them? No.
Just because the IV moderators cannot moderate this forum 24/7 does not mean that we take advantage and post garbage on here
Yes they may be by some people. But the rules of this forum state quite clearly, that cussing is NOT welcome. This website is often frequented by members of the Senate/Congress (not the actual lawmakers themselves ofcourse, but their support staff). Do we really want them to see "highly skilled professionals" cussing left and right on them? No.
Just because the IV moderators cannot moderate this forum 24/7 does not mean that we take advantage and post garbage on here
dresses warcraft+logo+alliance
anukcs
09-30 03:13 PM
I'm currently on my 4th EAD & AP, and I used AC21 twice so far to switch jobs (similar job descriptions, including the specific technologies I worked on). On both occasions, I have not informed USCIS. My attorney said one is not legally required to do so, and that we could respond if there is any RFE.
But I also know that there are lot of attorneys out there who recommend informing USCIS about the job change. I don't personally know of anyone who have used AC21 and went on to get the green card, so I can't really tell which approach is better. In either case, make sure to have all relevant paper work with you - specifically the experience letters from old employers with proper job descriptions.
As for the salary increases when changing jobs, I did talk to more than one attorney about this. And what I heard consistently was that higher salary is not as much of a problem as lower salary could be. In my case, I had salary increases of more than 30% each time I changed jobs, and I am doing fine so far. Whether that becomes a problem for me or not, I will deal with it when it happens.
I traveled out of the country a couple of times using AP. On my return to US, at the port of entry (SFO), I was asked if I still worked for the company that originally sponsored my GC application. I told them I changed employers using AC21, and that I was not legally required to inform USCIS about the job change. And they let me go without causing any trouble. Not sure if anyone else had different experiences in such case, but the immigration officers at SFO seem to be somewhat easier to deal with (assuming you haven't done anything wrong, of course).
I did have trouble with AC21 once. I ended up having a gap between my 2nd and 3rd EADs (so did my wife too), as we tried to do too much 'optimization' of EADs. Well, we learned the hard way that 'optimization' effort is bad, as both of us had to stop working during the gap. It's not a very pleasant feeling having to explain our respective employers that we had such issue. We lost money too, as we couldn't be legally paid during the gap - in addition to the unnecessary stress. I wish USCIS issues EADs with longer validity period - something like 3 years (but I once heard Aman say that they couldn't do so due to a software glitch in their system!!). In any case, we are now filing for EAD renewals well in advance of the current one's expiry.
Other issues with AC21 that we faced are things like having to pay for EAD and AP renewals every year, which is quite expensive. I guess you could negotiate this with your new employer when changing jobs. And the sheer inability to change your job roles or take on more responsibilities (on paper too!) is frustrating, but that is more of a lengthy GC processing symptom than an AC21 issue.
All things considered, I think AC21 is good. It's got it's set of issues, especially if you don't use it wisely, but it at least lets you have some kind of progress in your careers. The way I see it, if there is no career progress, I can at least make more money. You got to gain something over years of waiting to keep you going!
Thanks for the info. How early we should renew the EAD? TIA. anukcs
But I also know that there are lot of attorneys out there who recommend informing USCIS about the job change. I don't personally know of anyone who have used AC21 and went on to get the green card, so I can't really tell which approach is better. In either case, make sure to have all relevant paper work with you - specifically the experience letters from old employers with proper job descriptions.
As for the salary increases when changing jobs, I did talk to more than one attorney about this. And what I heard consistently was that higher salary is not as much of a problem as lower salary could be. In my case, I had salary increases of more than 30% each time I changed jobs, and I am doing fine so far. Whether that becomes a problem for me or not, I will deal with it when it happens.
I traveled out of the country a couple of times using AP. On my return to US, at the port of entry (SFO), I was asked if I still worked for the company that originally sponsored my GC application. I told them I changed employers using AC21, and that I was not legally required to inform USCIS about the job change. And they let me go without causing any trouble. Not sure if anyone else had different experiences in such case, but the immigration officers at SFO seem to be somewhat easier to deal with (assuming you haven't done anything wrong, of course).
I did have trouble with AC21 once. I ended up having a gap between my 2nd and 3rd EADs (so did my wife too), as we tried to do too much 'optimization' of EADs. Well, we learned the hard way that 'optimization' effort is bad, as both of us had to stop working during the gap. It's not a very pleasant feeling having to explain our respective employers that we had such issue. We lost money too, as we couldn't be legally paid during the gap - in addition to the unnecessary stress. I wish USCIS issues EADs with longer validity period - something like 3 years (but I once heard Aman say that they couldn't do so due to a software glitch in their system!!). In any case, we are now filing for EAD renewals well in advance of the current one's expiry.
Other issues with AC21 that we faced are things like having to pay for EAD and AP renewals every year, which is quite expensive. I guess you could negotiate this with your new employer when changing jobs. And the sheer inability to change your job roles or take on more responsibilities (on paper too!) is frustrating, but that is more of a lengthy GC processing symptom than an AC21 issue.
All things considered, I think AC21 is good. It's got it's set of issues, especially if you don't use it wisely, but it at least lets you have some kind of progress in your careers. The way I see it, if there is no career progress, I can at least make more money. You got to gain something over years of waiting to keep you going!
Thanks for the info. How early we should renew the EAD? TIA. anukcs
more...
makeup Theme; WoW Alliance Theme
coopheal
11-18 01:04 AM
Done
girlfriend THA - Companion Cube Wallpaper
geevikram
07-20 01:32 PM
Pl don't make blanket statements such as this. BTW, I contributed to DC advocacy and many other EB3s also did the same.
Fixing the language so that folks do not take it personally.
looivy, Please have a conversation and don't turn this into a pissing contest.
What the other post said is very true. We have 45000 members in this board, a significant majority of them are EB3. Even if 50% of the members 22000 (as an example ) contributed 25$ each, IV would have more than half a million bucks. With this money EB backlog plight could easily come out in mainstream media. Just because you, as a person, contributed does not mean all of EB people are contributing. Realizing our problem is the first step in solving it. Problem is people are not willing to contribute to IV, either their money or time, but want issues solved. Doesn't work that way..
Again the original poster is correct in his statement.
my .02$
Fixing the language so that folks do not take it personally.
looivy, Please have a conversation and don't turn this into a pissing contest.
What the other post said is very true. We have 45000 members in this board, a significant majority of them are EB3. Even if 50% of the members 22000 (as an example ) contributed 25$ each, IV would have more than half a million bucks. With this money EB backlog plight could easily come out in mainstream media. Just because you, as a person, contributed does not mean all of EB people are contributing. Realizing our problem is the first step in solving it. Problem is people are not willing to contribute to IV, either their money or time, but want issues solved. Doesn't work that way..
Again the original poster is correct in his statement.
my .02$
hairstyles house Wallpaper, warcraft, wow
zeta7
06-22 01:36 PM
Hey all,
I completed my landing in Toronto some 4 weeks ago. My pertinent details:
-No valid H1B stamp in passport
-485 was filed
-Planned on using AP to return
The risk at the time (since there was no clear consensus here) was returning to the US using AP with a Canadian Immigrant visa stamp in my passport. I should point out that my passport was literally a year old, and the Canadian visa was bang in the middle pages; it popped out as soon as the passport was flipped open. It couldn't be missed.
Toronto immigration was smooth. The only comment the officer made was that I had only a week left before my Canadian visa was due to expire, and she was surprised I had waited till the last minute (I suspect she'll be seeing quite a few more cases like this soon though!). I provided a Canadian address to receive my PR card over there.
I spent two days only in Canada. I decided to travel across the Atlantic and meet up with the family since I was leaving the U.S. anyways. Plus I figured on returning, if I was asked what the purpose of my travel was, I could honestly say "visiting family" as opposed to beating about the bush about the Canadian PR.
I returned 2 weeks later to NY-JFK. At the immigration counter I was asked to go to a separate desk to have my AP paperwork done. The Officer there asked me what my area of employment was, which I responded to. I was then asked to wait. 20-30 minutes later I was called again and my passport and AP documents were returned. No other questions were asked.
I was extremely paranoid about the whole thing, but there were literally no issues. Of course luck plays a big part, so it's up to you to roll the dice; chances of problems arising seem low though.
It's been almost 4 weeks and I still haven't received the Canadian PR card; if anyone else has an idea of how long it takes, I'd appreciate it if they could apprise me. Also I'm under the impression that since I'm not earning any income in Canada, there is no tax paperwork to be filed there. Is this correct?
I completed my landing in Toronto some 4 weeks ago. My pertinent details:
-No valid H1B stamp in passport
-485 was filed
-Planned on using AP to return
The risk at the time (since there was no clear consensus here) was returning to the US using AP with a Canadian Immigrant visa stamp in my passport. I should point out that my passport was literally a year old, and the Canadian visa was bang in the middle pages; it popped out as soon as the passport was flipped open. It couldn't be missed.
Toronto immigration was smooth. The only comment the officer made was that I had only a week left before my Canadian visa was due to expire, and she was surprised I had waited till the last minute (I suspect she'll be seeing quite a few more cases like this soon though!). I provided a Canadian address to receive my PR card over there.
I spent two days only in Canada. I decided to travel across the Atlantic and meet up with the family since I was leaving the U.S. anyways. Plus I figured on returning, if I was asked what the purpose of my travel was, I could honestly say "visiting family" as opposed to beating about the bush about the Canadian PR.
I returned 2 weeks later to NY-JFK. At the immigration counter I was asked to go to a separate desk to have my AP paperwork done. The Officer there asked me what my area of employment was, which I responded to. I was then asked to wait. 20-30 minutes later I was called again and my passport and AP documents were returned. No other questions were asked.
I was extremely paranoid about the whole thing, but there were literally no issues. Of course luck plays a big part, so it's up to you to roll the dice; chances of problems arising seem low though.
It's been almost 4 weeks and I still haven't received the Canadian PR card; if anyone else has an idea of how long it takes, I'd appreciate it if they could apprise me. Also I'm under the impression that since I'm not earning any income in Canada, there is no tax paperwork to be filed there. Is this correct?
pitha
07-09 11:47 AM
The text you quoted below only states that the AOS petition can only be approved if a visa number is available, no where does it say that AOS petition cannot be accepted if visa number is not available. we are not asking for AOS petition to be approved we are only asking that AOS petition be filed and accepted by USCIS.
INA: ACT 245 - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF NONIMMIGRANT TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
Sec. 245. [8 U.S.C. 1255]
(a) The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States 1/ or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification as a VAWA self-petitioner may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if
(1) the alien makes an application for such adjustment,
(2) the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed.
============================
My points -
a. 140k GCs are NOT available on Oct 1st. Only 27% (37,800) are available and are subject to 7% country cap. DoS estimated the PD based on the number of I-485 applications pending and other related factors.
b. A person can file I-485 as long as his PD is before PD mentioned in the visa bulletin. This is how "immediately available" is defined.
c. Since revised visa bulletin update states that no visa number is available for FY USCIS, by law, can not accept new I-485 applications.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
INA: ACT 245 - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF NONIMMIGRANT TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
Sec. 245. [8 U.S.C. 1255]
(a) The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States 1/ or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification as a VAWA self-petitioner may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if
(1) the alien makes an application for such adjustment,
(2) the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed.
============================
My points -
a. 140k GCs are NOT available on Oct 1st. Only 27% (37,800) are available and are subject to 7% country cap. DoS estimated the PD based on the number of I-485 applications pending and other related factors.
b. A person can file I-485 as long as his PD is before PD mentioned in the visa bulletin. This is how "immediately available" is defined.
c. Since revised visa bulletin update states that no visa number is available for FY USCIS, by law, can not accept new I-485 applications.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
Venky Sreedhar
02-26 03:13 PM
Contributed $ 100/=
Web Accept Payment Sent (Unique Transaction ID #356076680R804971P)
Original Transaction
Date Type Status Details Amount
Feb 23, 2011 Payment To Immigration Voice Completed ... -$100.00 USD
Unforunately I will not be able to attend because of a surgery.
Good luck with all your efforts and I am sure we will be able to achieve something positive.
Web Accept Payment Sent (Unique Transaction ID #356076680R804971P)
Original Transaction
Date Type Status Details Amount
Feb 23, 2011 Payment To Immigration Voice Completed ... -$100.00 USD
Unforunately I will not be able to attend because of a surgery.
Good luck with all your efforts and I am sure we will be able to achieve something positive.
No comments:
Post a Comment