sevenm
12-09 02:09 PM
The fiscal year starts in October 2007. Although you can apply from April 1, 2007 you can start working on October 1, 2007. You have to maintain legal status until October 1. Yor apllication for H1B does not guarantee you legal status before october 1.
wallpaper +ghosts+caught+on+camera
Dipika
11-25 02:05 PM
Thanks for correcting me. i am sorry for wrong info. i'm not able to open all links in office, as firewall block forum links, so missed to read the rule.
Here is the OFFICIAL link from US Consulate at Tijuana
Visa Services (http://tijuana.usconsulate.gov/niv.html)
Who Can Apply in Mexico
TCN Applicants residing in the United States, seeking to renew their visa in any category except B1/2 (tourist/business), if the current visa was issued in the applicant's country of nationality, former residence, or in Mexico. A spouse or dependent children may apply with the principal visa holder if the principal meets the criteria above. A renewal is a case where an applicant for the same type of visa is made and does not include persons who seek to change from one visa category to another or who are seeking any other type of “change of status” even if that change has been authorized by the Department of Homeland Security.
Here is the OFFICIAL link from US Consulate at Tijuana
Visa Services (http://tijuana.usconsulate.gov/niv.html)
Who Can Apply in Mexico
TCN Applicants residing in the United States, seeking to renew their visa in any category except B1/2 (tourist/business), if the current visa was issued in the applicant's country of nationality, former residence, or in Mexico. A spouse or dependent children may apply with the principal visa holder if the principal meets the criteria above. A renewal is a case where an applicant for the same type of visa is made and does not include persons who seek to change from one visa category to another or who are seeking any other type of “change of status” even if that change has been authorized by the Department of Homeland Security.
fullerene
11-17 01:30 PM
H1 application for 2008 starts from April 1, 2007. I believe-before that date, HR of big companies should have recruiting policy for the year already. So it might be diffult for them to adjust if the bill is passed after April 1.
I think when the time closes to April 1, the petition for changing the current H1 blackout will be pressurized. From the industry point of view, the bill for H1 will be settled luckily in Jan or Feb.
I think when the time closes to April 1, the petition for changing the current H1 blackout will be pressurized. From the industry point of view, the bill for H1 will be settled luckily in Jan or Feb.
2011 Unexplained ghostly images
GCBy3000
09-15 05:03 PM
My argument is it better to take a side on immigration issue or not. Maintaining status quo is better than including some releif for legal immigrants. I bet people in US like legal immigrants to legal immigrants, but how many people is ?. Will this favor any politicians to garner some votes or will it back fire? No one knows and that is why I said at this time of election period, it is better for them to maintain status quo than favoring legal immigrants.
If they pass something for legal immigrants for sure they are going to lose some votes who are favoring illegal immigrants which is bigger number than people favoring legals. So I dont think they will take a risk at this time to favor legal immigrants in any bills if at all there is one before the election.
I am not sure if this is entirely true. Yes we can't vote but folks who are pro-immigrant can and they will decide if legal immigration is good for this country or not. Trust me, if everyone was against legal immigration in this country then none of us would be here in the first place. Everyone knows that there is a shortage of labor and migrants are needed to fill the jobs. ............
.
If they pass something for legal immigrants for sure they are going to lose some votes who are favoring illegal immigrants which is bigger number than people favoring legals. So I dont think they will take a risk at this time to favor legal immigrants in any bills if at all there is one before the election.
I am not sure if this is entirely true. Yes we can't vote but folks who are pro-immigrant can and they will decide if legal immigration is good for this country or not. Trust me, if everyone was against legal immigration in this country then none of us would be here in the first place. Everyone knows that there is a shortage of labor and migrants are needed to fill the jobs. ............
.
more...
pappu
11-25 10:15 PM
We should not wait for CIR.
If it happens its great, but if it does not, then we should have plans ready now. There needs to be effort with the new administration for administrative relief and also to continue the dialog with USCIS and DOL that we have now. We also need to meet lawmakers again in the new congress and see any opportunities for us. All background work needs to happen long before there is even a mention of CIR timeline by lawmakers.
If it happens its great, but if it does not, then we should have plans ready now. There needs to be effort with the new administration for administrative relief and also to continue the dialog with USCIS and DOL that we have now. We also need to meet lawmakers again in the new congress and see any opportunities for us. All background work needs to happen long before there is even a mention of CIR timeline by lawmakers.
Munna Bhai
07-12 07:51 AM
Hello,
Myself and my spouse are on H1b. I am on H1b(industry) and my Spouse H1b is through non-profit.
Please let us know how best we can be a backup for each other in case of any unavoidable circumstances.
a)If I get laid-off or fired, can I jump to H4 and then come back to H1b without being subjected to cap?
b)What are the other backup plans we can have.
thanks for your time.
-M
Myself and my spouse are on H1b. I am on H1b(industry) and my Spouse H1b is through non-profit.
Please let us know how best we can be a backup for each other in case of any unavoidable circumstances.
a)If I get laid-off or fired, can I jump to H4 and then come back to H1b without being subjected to cap?
b)What are the other backup plans we can have.
thanks for your time.
-M
more...
sanju_dba
09-10 02:59 PM
hello every1,
I was wondering how many of you are here who had applied their labor with MS + 0 years of experience..
Could you please shed some light on your profile and current standing in GC process ??
Thank youu....
MS + Zero exp = I doubt if any one out there
I was wondering how many of you are here who had applied their labor with MS + 0 years of experience..
Could you please shed some light on your profile and current standing in GC process ??
Thank youu....
MS + Zero exp = I doubt if any one out there
2010 Ghostly figure caught on
gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:18 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
more...
GCNaseeb
11-14 09:36 PM
I scheduled an infopass appointment for tomorrow to discuss misspelled name on my EAD and AP. Several of my friends are saying that since these documents carry A #, and picture, in addition to name, I should be fine if I ever need to use them. But I just wanted to play safe, hence took this appointment. Will let you know guys, the outcome of my visit.
hair Greyfriar ghosts caught on
inskrish
01-23 10:16 AM
USCIS posted new processing times today,and dates are as of 11/30/2008.
Texas I-485: 11th July 2007
Nebraska I-485: 14th July 2007
Finally, they get past July 2nd 2007:-)
Regards
Texas I-485: 11th July 2007
Nebraska I-485: 14th July 2007
Finally, they get past July 2nd 2007:-)
Regards
more...
deardar
07-13 08:13 AM
and marry a celebraty
hot Can orbs be caught on camera
Blondygirl
02-18 09:46 PM
Hello, I'm wondering what steps I need to take in order to help my husband become a US resident (eventually a citizen but one step at a time). I have figured out that we need to fill out an I-130 but I keep seeing everyone talk about an I-485 and I'm curious if we need to use that one as well, and how many others???
Really quickly, our history: I'm a 19 year old US citizen by birth, and my husband is a 27 year old undocumented alien from Mexico. We just got married on Valentines day 2011 and I'm pregnant also which is why I would prefer to do this quickly as to prevent a possible deportation although he is an amazingly wonderful guy who's never had a run in with the law, it's just a constant concern of mine. =( He also has a 5 year old son from a previous marriage with an American woman (she cheated on him, and then divorced him) who we eventually would like to get custody for since his mother is a very bad person but that's another story.
I realize this is a complicated process that most people would suggest using a lawyer for, but I know there's people out there that have accomplished this without one and so that is my goal to do this on our own but I'm thinking that some advice from experienced individuals would benefit me greatly in this task. =) Any help you're willing to give would be greatly appreciated!! Thanks so much <3
Really quickly, our history: I'm a 19 year old US citizen by birth, and my husband is a 27 year old undocumented alien from Mexico. We just got married on Valentines day 2011 and I'm pregnant also which is why I would prefer to do this quickly as to prevent a possible deportation although he is an amazingly wonderful guy who's never had a run in with the law, it's just a constant concern of mine. =( He also has a 5 year old son from a previous marriage with an American woman (she cheated on him, and then divorced him) who we eventually would like to get custody for since his mother is a very bad person but that's another story.
I realize this is a complicated process that most people would suggest using a lawyer for, but I know there's people out there that have accomplished this without one and so that is my goal to do this on our own but I'm thinking that some advice from experienced individuals would benefit me greatly in this task. =) Any help you're willing to give would be greatly appreciated!! Thanks so much <3
more...
house of the camera let me know.
needhelp!
02-13 12:41 PM
We need a few catchy words to put in a community newsletter. This is for people who don't know about IV. It has to be something that will make people click on the text and come to IV website.
Here are a few suggestions I have got so far:
"Do H1Bs have the right to free speech? Check out ImmigrationVoice.org letter campaign working for you."
"Please join Immigration Voice and participate actively in the Administrative Fix campaign"
"If you are in this country legally, prepare for getting whacked"
"Is GREEN CARD holding up your future and career? - Liberate yourself by participating in the Administrative Fix campaign done by Immigration Voice.
Come on guys.. let your creative juices flow.. but keep it very short.
Here are a few suggestions I have got so far:
"Do H1Bs have the right to free speech? Check out ImmigrationVoice.org letter campaign working for you."
"Please join Immigration Voice and participate actively in the Administrative Fix campaign"
"If you are in this country legally, prepare for getting whacked"
"Is GREEN CARD holding up your future and career? - Liberate yourself by participating in the Administrative Fix campaign done by Immigration Voice.
Come on guys.. let your creative juices flow.. but keep it very short.
tattoo of the camera let me know.
chi_shark
07-16 10:55 AM
now this is weird... aside from the poster's main question: why does uscis want proof of *continuous employment* since the poster filed for 485? all they should care about is the future job... isnt that right? why do they want employment history?
willIWill, can you please post the exact wording on your RFE regarding that point?
Hi Friends,
I received an RFE last week. There were 3 points in the RFE.
The first point in the RFE says,
Submit a current and properly completed form G-325A biographic information sheet for yourself. Please Note: Answer all questions in the form 325a. If any information has changed such as your employer or marital status you must submit the required supporting evidence as indicated in the instructions for Form I-485.
Second Point and Third point are respectively
Proof of continuous employment and maintaining status since Oct 1st 2007 to till date. ( Interestingly my I-485 notice date was in the month of October 07)
Employment verification letter stating the offer still stands as per EB visa petition.
A quick brief abt my case: I'm a July 07 filer. I was single when I filed my I-485. My I-140 was approved in the beginning of 2008. I'm with the same company. I got married last year end, my wife is here with me on H4.
My question is concerning the first point.
Does the marriage certificate and my wife's H4 Visa sufficient enough to provide proof of marital status change as per I-485. In this case, Do I need to include affidavit of support etc. for my spouse now? Also do I need to provide birth certificate of my spouse?
Has any of you who were single when filing I-485 received a similar RFE ? How did you respond to the same?
Appreciate your suggestions
Thanks in advance.
willIWill, can you please post the exact wording on your RFE regarding that point?
Hi Friends,
I received an RFE last week. There were 3 points in the RFE.
The first point in the RFE says,
Submit a current and properly completed form G-325A biographic information sheet for yourself. Please Note: Answer all questions in the form 325a. If any information has changed such as your employer or marital status you must submit the required supporting evidence as indicated in the instructions for Form I-485.
Second Point and Third point are respectively
Proof of continuous employment and maintaining status since Oct 1st 2007 to till date. ( Interestingly my I-485 notice date was in the month of October 07)
Employment verification letter stating the offer still stands as per EB visa petition.
A quick brief abt my case: I'm a July 07 filer. I was single when I filed my I-485. My I-140 was approved in the beginning of 2008. I'm with the same company. I got married last year end, my wife is here with me on H4.
My question is concerning the first point.
Does the marriage certificate and my wife's H4 Visa sufficient enough to provide proof of marital status change as per I-485. In this case, Do I need to include affidavit of support etc. for my spouse now? Also do I need to provide birth certificate of my spouse?
Has any of you who were single when filing I-485 received a similar RFE ? How did you respond to the same?
Appreciate your suggestions
Thanks in advance.
more...
pictures caught by the camera .
h1bnogc
08-28 10:03 PM
Hi Martin,
Thanks once again for your reply with in no time.I really admire your service.I went through your Faqs but the part i dint understood is..
If you don't show the extension approval notice (maybe because you didn't know the case was approved before you returned), you will get just the old expiration date on your new I-94. This will then be the operative end date, not the extension date. This is because CIS has a "last action" rule, whereby the last status they give you is what governs. In this situation, the last action would be your admission until the visa and date.
As i get a new I94 attached with expiration date as my new 797 approval date(Assuming i get approval after my travel when i am in USA) .So my old I94 is valid till My present visa date and after that i have my New I 94 which is valid till my Extension approval date.So iam unable to get what complication i may get into.Only problem i can think of is if i dont get I 94 attached to my I 797 Approval Notice.Do let me know if iam missing anything.Thanks again.
san3297: Please share your experience, it will be greatly helpful to many.
Thanks once again for your reply with in no time.I really admire your service.I went through your Faqs but the part i dint understood is..
If you don't show the extension approval notice (maybe because you didn't know the case was approved before you returned), you will get just the old expiration date on your new I-94. This will then be the operative end date, not the extension date. This is because CIS has a "last action" rule, whereby the last status they give you is what governs. In this situation, the last action would be your admission until the visa and date.
As i get a new I94 attached with expiration date as my new 797 approval date(Assuming i get approval after my travel when i am in USA) .So my old I94 is valid till My present visa date and after that i have my New I 94 which is valid till my Extension approval date.So iam unable to get what complication i may get into.Only problem i can think of is if i dont get I 94 attached to my I 797 Approval Notice.Do let me know if iam missing anything.Thanks again.
san3297: Please share your experience, it will be greatly helpful to many.
dresses Caught on Camera
willwin
07-09 08:24 AM
I am starting this thread to see if IV can help CP (consular processing) filers (who are already in the US) who are the worst affected due to retrogression.
Issues:
1. CP filers do not have any interim benefits like EAD, AP, AC21 provision.
2. CP filers lose their GC application if the employer closes down business and they have to start all over from scratch (after finding a sponsor).
3. CP filers are the ones actually stuck with the same employer due to not having EAD.
4. Most CP filers would not have got the income tax rebate ($600 per individual and $300 per child) if they had filed return jointly with their spouse and if the spouse was not working. This is just insane.
As we are losing sight of, the only rescue for CP filers, recapturing bill - the only other option will be to enable CP filers to file for 485 even if their PD is not current. I am assuming this does not need a change to the legislation and can be done by DOS/USCIS. I may be wrong. Otherwise, CP filers especially EB3 India with PD 2002/2003 have high risks if they have to lose their current GC application, which I think is quite unfair.
I know, even IV hardly cares for CP filers as there is not even a provision to enter CP details in the tracker, however, just wanted to try our luck.
If IV thinks this is too much for the asking, feel free to delete this thread.
If anyone can't resist the urge to ask us, why the heck did you file for CP, well, nobody would have anticipated this plight and above all CP is not illegal!
Issues:
1. CP filers do not have any interim benefits like EAD, AP, AC21 provision.
2. CP filers lose their GC application if the employer closes down business and they have to start all over from scratch (after finding a sponsor).
3. CP filers are the ones actually stuck with the same employer due to not having EAD.
4. Most CP filers would not have got the income tax rebate ($600 per individual and $300 per child) if they had filed return jointly with their spouse and if the spouse was not working. This is just insane.
As we are losing sight of, the only rescue for CP filers, recapturing bill - the only other option will be to enable CP filers to file for 485 even if their PD is not current. I am assuming this does not need a change to the legislation and can be done by DOS/USCIS. I may be wrong. Otherwise, CP filers especially EB3 India with PD 2002/2003 have high risks if they have to lose their current GC application, which I think is quite unfair.
I know, even IV hardly cares for CP filers as there is not even a provision to enter CP details in the tracker, however, just wanted to try our luck.
If IV thinks this is too much for the asking, feel free to delete this thread.
If anyone can't resist the urge to ask us, why the heck did you file for CP, well, nobody would have anticipated this plight and above all CP is not illegal!
more...
makeup Ghosts+caught+on+camera+
memyselfandus
09-25 11:09 AM
can IV focus on this...instead of the recapture?
am just being practical.. we cant expect any meaningful immi reforms anytime soon..and with holidays approaching.. little hope for this year.. so anything that can bring abt temporary relief should be taken up!
I don't think it is advisable.. my reason is getting EAD cards on time... if they open the floodgates again... alot of folks will have problems in getting their EADs on time.. More than once we almost missed deadline by under 3-5 days...
am just being practical.. we cant expect any meaningful immi reforms anytime soon..and with holidays approaching.. little hope for this year.. so anything that can bring abt temporary relief should be taken up!
I don't think it is advisable.. my reason is getting EAD cards on time... if they open the floodgates again... alot of folks will have problems in getting their EADs on time.. More than once we almost missed deadline by under 3-5 days...
girlfriend GHOSTLY SCENE IN TRAIN WINDOW!
kunjirs
03-07 04:16 PM
MurthyDotCom : EAD Extension Delays - FAQs, Answers, Suggestions (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_eadmor.html)
hairstyles ghostly apparition caught
zigma
04-06 07:21 AM
With this bill, if the thought is that about half of the illegals (<5yrs) will have to leave the country and return, and that too without any guarantees, they are not going to do it unless the consequences are drastic. Some, even then may decide that staying illegally is a better option than going back.
IMHO, this bill amounts to saying,
1. Let's legalize some of the illegals
2. Let's push the the rest of the problem away for another 10-12 years
3. A compromise
But the question that arises is that, what prevents people who have been here legally (>5yrs) from applying for GC thorugh this method?
IMHO, this bill amounts to saying,
1. Let's legalize some of the illegals
2. Let's push the the rest of the problem away for another 10-12 years
3. A compromise
But the question that arises is that, what prevents people who have been here legally (>5yrs) from applying for GC thorugh this method?
zoozee
07-30 02:16 PM
Well said by andy garcia "Lawyer's Mercy", this journey to GC is filled with all kinda mercy from....
yetanotherguyinline
01-18 01:48 PM
Great initiative Gopal :)
No comments:
Post a Comment