god_bless_you
06-14 09:14 PM
From Today's Lou Dobb's....
Tonight, congressional leaders are unable to break a deadlock and begin work on an immigration reform compromise. A provision in the Constitution could kill the Senate immigration bill and chances for immigration reform this year.
LOUISE SCHIAVONE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It could be a real procedural holdup or just a good excuse. But for now, immigration legislation is stalled on what could be the road to nowhere.
Here's the problem...
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: A notice has been served on the Senate that a blue slip will be filed, which, in effect, says they will not consider the bill in the House because it has a revenue enhancement in it, a tax provision in it.
SCHIAVONE: A blue slip is like a legislative traffic ticket. A blue slip would be slapped on the Senate bill because, besides a guest worker program, a wall at the border, punishment for employers who hire illegals, and so on, the measure includes tax provisions, including one requiring illegal aliens to pay back taxes and another making U.S. workers overseas pay more taxes than they do now.
What's wrong with that? The Constitution says tax laws start in the House, not in the Senate. The same way, for example, that it's the Senate, not the House that confirms judges and cabinet secretaries.
REP. TOM TANCREDO (R), COLORADO: If they shot the Senate bill over here, it would be shot down in about a heartbeat simply because, for one thing, no revenue-raising bill can originate in the Senate. There's a constitutional problem.
So it can be stopped. I mean, they can try it. Have them send it. That's fine with me, because that's the end of it.
SCHIAVONE: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist suggests tacking the immigration bill on to a benign House tax bill that's been on the Senate docket so that it has a House bill designation. But Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid wants assurances that no other legislation will hitch a ride on that train. Senator Frist's office says he has offered those assurances.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHIAVONE: And Kitty, it gets even more complicated than that. Congressman Tancredo says that lawmakers on both sides of the Capitol went home for Memorial Day and heard lots of protests about that Senate immigration bill and the eventual amnesty it offers, leaving some on Capitol Hill to wonder if in this election year it might just be better to let the clock run out on this session of Congress and start fresh next year -- Kitty.
PHILLIPS: Interesting stuff. Thanks very much. America's opinions on illegal immigration and border security should affect the legislation Congress adopts and the one that President Bush signs. In his news conference this morning, however, President Bush explained the crucial role of public opinion in a democracy.
Senator Jeff Sessions says the Senate ignored the will of the people in passing an amnesty bill for illegal aliens that would cost taxpayers tens of billions each year. A CBO report Sessions commissions says that the bill will also do nothing to stop illegal aliens entering this country. I asked Senator Sessions what the purpose of the Senate immigration bill is, if not to stop the flow of illegal aliens?
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: That was the purpose, but the CBO numbers are based on the Senate bill. And they say, in a fact, there's no change in illegal immigration for 10 years. It would be 700,000 to 900,000 a year. If anything, that's certainly no less and maybe more than the current rate. So it really belies the argument that this bill is going to make any progress on enforcement. It certainly does not appear to.
PILGRIM: What does that say about the value of this bill, sir?
SESSIONS: Well I think it again is another indication that it is unacceptable, that it's terribly flawed, should never become law and will not do what it promises. It promises to enforce the border. And that's proven to be false. I think I've already said that, but the CBO confirmed it. Workplace enforcement is not there. And the future flow plans to allow millions coming in in the future at a much higher rate are just unprincipled and not valuable, not good for the United States. So we definitely need to review this legislation.
PILGRIM: House Speaker Dennis Hastert has said that he wants to take a long look at this bill and potentially hold hearings. Do you think hearings are appropriate? They're certainly not normal.
SESSIONS: No, they're not normal. But you know, the House has none of this so-called comprehensive approach to immigration. Theirs was focused primarily on enforcement. And so if they're going to consider the comprehensive bill at all, they absolutely should study it. We never had enough hearings in the Senate. This bill just basically came up and moved through with very few hearings directly related to the gray issues on immigration.
We just didn't discuss the real important issues in any significant way. For example, we've never considered whether or not we ought to adopt what Canada does, and that is to have a point system. Why haven't we even discussed that? It seems to me it makes an awful lot of sense.
PILGRIM: All right, you know, could this immigration reform bill be hammered out behind closed doors with the congressional leadership? Do you see it going that way?
SESSIONS: Well, that's a very dangerous thing. The American people's confidence in the government on a question of immigration is very low. They're very cynical. And if anyone thinks they can hammer out a bill and then ram it through without the American people being alerted, I think they're in for big trouble and just further erode public confidence in what we're doing.
PILGRIM: The Senate -- procedurally the Senate bill has to be attached to a House bill to avoid a constitutional issue. Would you support a unanimous consent to send to it the House?
SESSIONS: You know, I haven't made a decision about that. My personal view is we need to discuss this bill more. No one senator can block a bill from being considered, but can provide an opportunity for more debate. So we'll be looking at that.
PILGRIM: And timetable-wise, if this doesn't get to the House and Senate by August 1st, do you think it will make it at all in this session?
SESSIONS: You know, it may not. Then again, something could happen. But from what I'm hearing from the House, that they're so concerned about the viability of the comprehensive language in the Senate bill, not that they're so against the comprehensive bill, but just that they are uneasy and unaccepting of what we've done, then I think it's got a long way to go to become law, frankly.
Tonight, congressional leaders are unable to break a deadlock and begin work on an immigration reform compromise. A provision in the Constitution could kill the Senate immigration bill and chances for immigration reform this year.
LOUISE SCHIAVONE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It could be a real procedural holdup or just a good excuse. But for now, immigration legislation is stalled on what could be the road to nowhere.
Here's the problem...
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: A notice has been served on the Senate that a blue slip will be filed, which, in effect, says they will not consider the bill in the House because it has a revenue enhancement in it, a tax provision in it.
SCHIAVONE: A blue slip is like a legislative traffic ticket. A blue slip would be slapped on the Senate bill because, besides a guest worker program, a wall at the border, punishment for employers who hire illegals, and so on, the measure includes tax provisions, including one requiring illegal aliens to pay back taxes and another making U.S. workers overseas pay more taxes than they do now.
What's wrong with that? The Constitution says tax laws start in the House, not in the Senate. The same way, for example, that it's the Senate, not the House that confirms judges and cabinet secretaries.
REP. TOM TANCREDO (R), COLORADO: If they shot the Senate bill over here, it would be shot down in about a heartbeat simply because, for one thing, no revenue-raising bill can originate in the Senate. There's a constitutional problem.
So it can be stopped. I mean, they can try it. Have them send it. That's fine with me, because that's the end of it.
SCHIAVONE: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist suggests tacking the immigration bill on to a benign House tax bill that's been on the Senate docket so that it has a House bill designation. But Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid wants assurances that no other legislation will hitch a ride on that train. Senator Frist's office says he has offered those assurances.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHIAVONE: And Kitty, it gets even more complicated than that. Congressman Tancredo says that lawmakers on both sides of the Capitol went home for Memorial Day and heard lots of protests about that Senate immigration bill and the eventual amnesty it offers, leaving some on Capitol Hill to wonder if in this election year it might just be better to let the clock run out on this session of Congress and start fresh next year -- Kitty.
PHILLIPS: Interesting stuff. Thanks very much. America's opinions on illegal immigration and border security should affect the legislation Congress adopts and the one that President Bush signs. In his news conference this morning, however, President Bush explained the crucial role of public opinion in a democracy.
Senator Jeff Sessions says the Senate ignored the will of the people in passing an amnesty bill for illegal aliens that would cost taxpayers tens of billions each year. A CBO report Sessions commissions says that the bill will also do nothing to stop illegal aliens entering this country. I asked Senator Sessions what the purpose of the Senate immigration bill is, if not to stop the flow of illegal aliens?
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: That was the purpose, but the CBO numbers are based on the Senate bill. And they say, in a fact, there's no change in illegal immigration for 10 years. It would be 700,000 to 900,000 a year. If anything, that's certainly no less and maybe more than the current rate. So it really belies the argument that this bill is going to make any progress on enforcement. It certainly does not appear to.
PILGRIM: What does that say about the value of this bill, sir?
SESSIONS: Well I think it again is another indication that it is unacceptable, that it's terribly flawed, should never become law and will not do what it promises. It promises to enforce the border. And that's proven to be false. I think I've already said that, but the CBO confirmed it. Workplace enforcement is not there. And the future flow plans to allow millions coming in in the future at a much higher rate are just unprincipled and not valuable, not good for the United States. So we definitely need to review this legislation.
PILGRIM: House Speaker Dennis Hastert has said that he wants to take a long look at this bill and potentially hold hearings. Do you think hearings are appropriate? They're certainly not normal.
SESSIONS: No, they're not normal. But you know, the House has none of this so-called comprehensive approach to immigration. Theirs was focused primarily on enforcement. And so if they're going to consider the comprehensive bill at all, they absolutely should study it. We never had enough hearings in the Senate. This bill just basically came up and moved through with very few hearings directly related to the gray issues on immigration.
We just didn't discuss the real important issues in any significant way. For example, we've never considered whether or not we ought to adopt what Canada does, and that is to have a point system. Why haven't we even discussed that? It seems to me it makes an awful lot of sense.
PILGRIM: All right, you know, could this immigration reform bill be hammered out behind closed doors with the congressional leadership? Do you see it going that way?
SESSIONS: Well, that's a very dangerous thing. The American people's confidence in the government on a question of immigration is very low. They're very cynical. And if anyone thinks they can hammer out a bill and then ram it through without the American people being alerted, I think they're in for big trouble and just further erode public confidence in what we're doing.
PILGRIM: The Senate -- procedurally the Senate bill has to be attached to a House bill to avoid a constitutional issue. Would you support a unanimous consent to send to it the House?
SESSIONS: You know, I haven't made a decision about that. My personal view is we need to discuss this bill more. No one senator can block a bill from being considered, but can provide an opportunity for more debate. So we'll be looking at that.
PILGRIM: And timetable-wise, if this doesn't get to the House and Senate by August 1st, do you think it will make it at all in this session?
SESSIONS: You know, it may not. Then again, something could happen. But from what I'm hearing from the House, that they're so concerned about the viability of the comprehensive language in the Senate bill, not that they're so against the comprehensive bill, but just that they are uneasy and unaccepting of what we've done, then I think it's got a long way to go to become law, frankly.
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. Chris Hemsworth as Thor in
vavuvya
11-18 12:07 PM
You will not know until I-140 is filed as the preference category is requested on I-140 and not on the PERM.
Hi,
Yesterday i have received I-140 notice from my advocate and it is containg the below info.Can someone help me out is it for EB2 or EB3.
Notice Type : Premium Processing Receipt notice
Amount Received : $ 1475.00
Section : Mem of profession w/adv deg,or of exceptn'l ability
Sec .203(b)(2)
Can some one please helpme out in this regard.
Thanks in Advance,
Vavuvya.
Hi,
Yesterday i have received I-140 notice from my advocate and it is containg the below info.Can someone help me out is it for EB2 or EB3.
Notice Type : Premium Processing Receipt notice
Amount Received : $ 1475.00
Section : Mem of profession w/adv deg,or of exceptn'l ability
Sec .203(b)(2)
Can some one please helpme out in this regard.
Thanks in Advance,
Vavuvya.
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. Chris Hemsworth Attends #39;Thor#39;
gc28262
07-28 01:48 PM
Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_arizona_immigration;_ylt=AgcIIY.ht_GJNzOqM3G8sH 6s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNta2N1b3FnBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNz I4L3VzX2FyaXpvbmFfaW1taWdyYXRpb24EY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBv cHVsYXIEY3BvcwMyBHBvcwM3BHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW 5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNqdWRnZWJsb2Nrc3A-)
PHOENIX – A federal judge dealt a serious rebuke to Arizona's immigration law on Wednesday when she put most of the crackdown on hold just hours before it was to take effect.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton sets up a lengthy legal battle as Arizona fights to enact the nation's toughest-in-the-nation law. Republican Gov. Jan Brewer said the state likely appeal the ruling and seek to get the judge's order overturned.
But for now, opponents of the law have prevailed: The provisions that angered opponents will not take effect, including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.
The judge also delayed parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places — a move aimed at day laborers. In addition, the judge blocked officers from making warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants.
"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," Bolton, a Clinton appointee, said in her decision.
She said the controversial sections should be put on hold until the courts resolve the issues. Other provisions of the law, many of them procedural and slight revisions to existing Arizona immigration statute, will go into effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday.
The law was signed by Brewer in April and immediately revived the national debate on immigration, making it a hot-button issue in the midterm elections. The law has inspired similar law elsewhere, prompted a boycott against the state and led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave the state.
Lawyers for the state contend the law was a constitutionally sound attempt by Arizona to assist federal immigration agents and lessen border woes such as the heavy costs for educating, jailing and providing health care for illegal immigrants. Arizona is the busiest gateway into the country for illegal immigrants, and the border is awash in drugs and smugglers that the state badly wants to stop.
"It's a temporary bump in the road, we will move forward, and I'm sure that after consultation with our counsel we will appeal," Brewer told the Associated Press. "The bottom line is we've known all along that it is The responsibility of the feds and they haven't done their job so we were going to help them do that."
The ruling came just as police were making last-minute preparations to begin enforcement of the law and protesters were planning large demonstrations against the measure. At least one group planned to block access to federal offices, daring officers to ask them about their immigration status.
In a sign of the international interest in the law, about 100 protesters in Mexico City who had gathered in front of the U.S. Embassy broke into cheers when speakers told them about the federal judge's ruling. The demonstrators had been monitoring the news on a laptop computer on the stage.
The crowed clapped and started chanting, "Migrants, hang on, the people are rising up!"
Gisela and Eduardo Diaz went to the Mexican consulate in Phoenix on Wednesday seeking advice because they were worried about what would happen to their 3-year-old granddaughter if they were pulled over by police and taken to a detention center.
"I knew the judge would say that part of the law was just not right," said Diaz, a 50-year-old from Mexico City who came to Arizona on a since-expired tourist visa in 1989. "It's the part we were worried about. This is a big relief for us."
Opponents argued the law would lead to racial profiling, conflict with federal immigration law and distract local police from fighting more serious crimes. The U.S. Justice Department, civil rights groups and a Phoenix police officer had asked the judge for an injunction to prevent the law from being enforced.
"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. She added that a requirement of the law that police determine the immigration status of all arrested people will prompt legal immigrants to be "swept up by this requirement."
Federal authorities who are trying to overturn the law have argued that letting the Arizona law stand would create a patchwork of immigration laws nationwide that would needlessly complicate the foreign relations of the United States. Federal lawyers said the law is disrupting U.S. relations with Mexico and other countries and would burden the agency that responds to immigration-status inquiries.
Bolton noted that the expected increase in immigration checks from Arizona will divert federal resources away from other priorities and said the federal government has shown that it's likely to succeed on its claim that such mandatory checks under the Arizona law would be trumped by federal law.
Responding to the ruling, Justice Department spokeswoman Hannah August said that the agency understands the frustration of Arizona residents with the immigration system. She added that a wide range of state and local policies would seriously disrupt federal immigration enforcement.
Brewer's lawyers said Arizona shouldn't have to suffer from America's broken immigration system when it has 15,000 police officers who can arrest illegal immigrants.
Brewer is running for another term in November and has seen her political fortunes rise because of the law's popularity among conservatives. It's not yet clear how the ruling will affect her campaign, but her opponent was quick to pounce.
"Jan Brewer played politics with immigration, and she lost," Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat. "It is time to look beyond election year grandstanding and begin to repair the damage to Arizona's image and economy."
Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the law's top supporters, said he was disappointed by the ruling and that he expects it to ultimately end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
"I don't think the judge's statements in the hearings justify this ruling," Kavanagh said. "I don't think the law justified her injunction."
PHOENIX – A federal judge dealt a serious rebuke to Arizona's immigration law on Wednesday when she put most of the crackdown on hold just hours before it was to take effect.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton sets up a lengthy legal battle as Arizona fights to enact the nation's toughest-in-the-nation law. Republican Gov. Jan Brewer said the state likely appeal the ruling and seek to get the judge's order overturned.
But for now, opponents of the law have prevailed: The provisions that angered opponents will not take effect, including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.
The judge also delayed parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places — a move aimed at day laborers. In addition, the judge blocked officers from making warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants.
"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," Bolton, a Clinton appointee, said in her decision.
She said the controversial sections should be put on hold until the courts resolve the issues. Other provisions of the law, many of them procedural and slight revisions to existing Arizona immigration statute, will go into effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday.
The law was signed by Brewer in April and immediately revived the national debate on immigration, making it a hot-button issue in the midterm elections. The law has inspired similar law elsewhere, prompted a boycott against the state and led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave the state.
Lawyers for the state contend the law was a constitutionally sound attempt by Arizona to assist federal immigration agents and lessen border woes such as the heavy costs for educating, jailing and providing health care for illegal immigrants. Arizona is the busiest gateway into the country for illegal immigrants, and the border is awash in drugs and smugglers that the state badly wants to stop.
"It's a temporary bump in the road, we will move forward, and I'm sure that after consultation with our counsel we will appeal," Brewer told the Associated Press. "The bottom line is we've known all along that it is The responsibility of the feds and they haven't done their job so we were going to help them do that."
The ruling came just as police were making last-minute preparations to begin enforcement of the law and protesters were planning large demonstrations against the measure. At least one group planned to block access to federal offices, daring officers to ask them about their immigration status.
In a sign of the international interest in the law, about 100 protesters in Mexico City who had gathered in front of the U.S. Embassy broke into cheers when speakers told them about the federal judge's ruling. The demonstrators had been monitoring the news on a laptop computer on the stage.
The crowed clapped and started chanting, "Migrants, hang on, the people are rising up!"
Gisela and Eduardo Diaz went to the Mexican consulate in Phoenix on Wednesday seeking advice because they were worried about what would happen to their 3-year-old granddaughter if they were pulled over by police and taken to a detention center.
"I knew the judge would say that part of the law was just not right," said Diaz, a 50-year-old from Mexico City who came to Arizona on a since-expired tourist visa in 1989. "It's the part we were worried about. This is a big relief for us."
Opponents argued the law would lead to racial profiling, conflict with federal immigration law and distract local police from fighting more serious crimes. The U.S. Justice Department, civil rights groups and a Phoenix police officer had asked the judge for an injunction to prevent the law from being enforced.
"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. She added that a requirement of the law that police determine the immigration status of all arrested people will prompt legal immigrants to be "swept up by this requirement."
Federal authorities who are trying to overturn the law have argued that letting the Arizona law stand would create a patchwork of immigration laws nationwide that would needlessly complicate the foreign relations of the United States. Federal lawyers said the law is disrupting U.S. relations with Mexico and other countries and would burden the agency that responds to immigration-status inquiries.
Bolton noted that the expected increase in immigration checks from Arizona will divert federal resources away from other priorities and said the federal government has shown that it's likely to succeed on its claim that such mandatory checks under the Arizona law would be trumped by federal law.
Responding to the ruling, Justice Department spokeswoman Hannah August said that the agency understands the frustration of Arizona residents with the immigration system. She added that a wide range of state and local policies would seriously disrupt federal immigration enforcement.
Brewer's lawyers said Arizona shouldn't have to suffer from America's broken immigration system when it has 15,000 police officers who can arrest illegal immigrants.
Brewer is running for another term in November and has seen her political fortunes rise because of the law's popularity among conservatives. It's not yet clear how the ruling will affect her campaign, but her opponent was quick to pounce.
"Jan Brewer played politics with immigration, and she lost," Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat. "It is time to look beyond election year grandstanding and begin to repair the damage to Arizona's image and economy."
Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the law's top supporters, said he was disappointed by the ruling and that he expects it to ultimately end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
"I don't think the judge's statements in the hearings justify this ruling," Kavanagh said. "I don't think the law justified her injunction."
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. Chris Hemsworth is Thor
tinamatthew
07-23 10:45 AM
If you read the rules closely, the employer is attesting to the fact that the job will be readily available at a future date. So as long as the employer issues a letter attesting to this, there is no issue. AC21 is very specific = 180 days not less. So even with a letter from the employer, IF i-485 has not been pending 180 days, you cannot induce AC21 If you do indeed move prior to the six months, make sure you amend your H1B for the necessary changes (eg location)
Confirm with the co lawyer also. Yes, you are right. Always confirm advice with a lawyer
Hope this helps
Confirm with the co lawyer also. Yes, you are right. Always confirm advice with a lawyer
Hope this helps
more...
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. Now Thor#39;s Costume is
pappu
08-01 10:16 AM
KXAN reporter Matt Flener requested the following:
I’m looking to do a story on immigrants that get bad immigration lawyers. You know, the ones that say they’ll do it for really cheap, yet screw everything up. Do you know what I’m talking about?
Also, do you know of any other stories through your affiliation with immigration voice that I could work on? Any place where people trying to get into this country legally are not getting a fair chance.
Sincerely,
Matt Flener
Reporter
KXAN Austin News
Do we have any one here in Texas (Austin would be better as he can come by and talk to you) whose lawyer experiences are a nightmare? Let me know and I can put you in touch with Matt Flener.
Thanks for getting IV a media lead.
pls send all contact info to info at immigrationvoice.org
I’m looking to do a story on immigrants that get bad immigration lawyers. You know, the ones that say they’ll do it for really cheap, yet screw everything up. Do you know what I’m talking about?
Also, do you know of any other stories through your affiliation with immigration voice that I could work on? Any place where people trying to get into this country legally are not getting a fair chance.
Sincerely,
Matt Flener
Reporter
KXAN Austin News
Do we have any one here in Texas (Austin would be better as he can come by and talk to you) whose lawyer experiences are a nightmare? Let me know and I can put you in touch with Matt Flener.
Thanks for getting IV a media lead.
pls send all contact info to info at immigrationvoice.org
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. chris hemsworth thor shirtless
rajenk
11-18 05:51 PM
Team, My Labor is filed under PERM was Audited and now approved.
For, Qualification it says Bachelor + No Experience
However, in Skills section it says 5 years of experience in Software Development (.NET).
I got Audited and was required to provide Business Justification for 5 years experience for software developer position.
Can this be applied in EB2?
Thanks!
No body answered the OP. I will try to answer it.
I think you are risking applying for EB2. I have had a very bad experience with attorney mishaps. You will be better off applying for EB3.
If the qualification in labor was stated as Bachelor + 5 years in all places that would get you qualify straight to EB2
For, Qualification it says Bachelor + No Experience
However, in Skills section it says 5 years of experience in Software Development (.NET).
I got Audited and was required to provide Business Justification for 5 years experience for software developer position.
Can this be applied in EB2?
Thanks!
No body answered the OP. I will try to answer it.
I think you are risking applying for EB2. I have had a very bad experience with attorney mishaps. You will be better off applying for EB3.
If the qualification in labor was stated as Bachelor + 5 years in all places that would get you qualify straight to EB2
more...
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. Chris Hemsworth#39;s Thor: First
haider420
03-04 01:01 AM
Mr Haider
Please give the entire facts of the case before asking for advise.
1. You said your I-140 is cleared, that means u might be working currently or did they apply as future employee
2. What does your master's have to do with your EB3 application? if you already filed in Eb3 and your date is current there is no point in waiting for completion of the masters and then filing in EB2. Either the attorney is drunk or you are not giving the entire information.
Please give all relevant info and hopefully somebody can guide you. If you feel your attorney is messing you up, you can file for your 485 by yourself if you company agrees.
either way we need more details to help you dude
- cheers
kris
i just found out after talking to USCIS that I have to wait till my PD is current which is probably going to be in another 10 years...:(
Please give the entire facts of the case before asking for advise.
1. You said your I-140 is cleared, that means u might be working currently or did they apply as future employee
2. What does your master's have to do with your EB3 application? if you already filed in Eb3 and your date is current there is no point in waiting for completion of the masters and then filing in EB2. Either the attorney is drunk or you are not giving the entire information.
Please give all relevant info and hopefully somebody can guide you. If you feel your attorney is messing you up, you can file for your 485 by yourself if you company agrees.
either way we need more details to help you dude
- cheers
kris
i just found out after talking to USCIS that I have to wait till my PD is current which is probably going to be in another 10 years...:(
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. chris hemsworth height. thor
gc_chahiye
08-14 06:18 PM
Hi,
Assuming that one has file for the I-485 - just wanted to clarify that EAD/AP can be filed even if the priority dates are not current. In other words, EAD/AP has no dependency on the priority date being current.
Regards
ZooZee
yes EAD and AP can be filed even if your PD is not current. In fact unless the Sept 18th rally works, we'll all be filing EADs and APs every year for a LONG time waiting for our PD to become current,.
Assuming that one has file for the I-485 - just wanted to clarify that EAD/AP can be filed even if the priority dates are not current. In other words, EAD/AP has no dependency on the priority date being current.
Regards
ZooZee
yes EAD and AP can be filed even if your PD is not current. In fact unless the Sept 18th rally works, we'll all be filing EADs and APs every year for a LONG time waiting for our PD to become current,.
more...
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. Check out our Chris Hemsworth
reddymjm
08-04 07:52 AM
Me too got the same email.
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. Chris Hemsworth as Thor
va_217
12-31 12:50 PM
Not sure about the Mexico consulate, but you will most probably face problems if you go to Chennai consulate.In case if you decided to take chance and go to Mexico, make sure that you have valid F1 visa to come back to USA. Otherwise you have to stay in Mexico :-)
If I am in your position, i will not this type of chances.
how can you come on F1 back, when your status is changed to H1 as you have to show valid I-20 for F1 which you don't have or you have enrolled in any school for MS, MBA or..... as you changed from F1 to H1 you anyway need stamping.
Please correct me if I am wrong
If I am in your position, i will not this type of chances.
how can you come on F1 back, when your status is changed to H1 as you have to show valid I-20 for F1 which you don't have or you have enrolled in any school for MS, MBA or..... as you changed from F1 to H1 you anyway need stamping.
Please correct me if I am wrong
more...
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. Chris Hemsworth as Thor in
a_yaja
10-09 07:43 PM
Not sure what they do in the secondary inspection.. In my case they asked no questions at all.. Just asked me to sit and wait while they entered / checked something in their system. I was in and out within 20 mnts.
I had the same experience. However, my POE was Miami. No questions asked. My spouse and I just waited (with our USC daughter) in secondary inspection till they called my name and handed over our papers to me.
I had the same experience. However, my POE was Miami. No questions asked. My spouse and I just waited (with our USC daughter) in secondary inspection till they called my name and handed over our papers to me.
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. Chris Hemsworth Is Thor!
java4yogi
09-03 03:17 PM
Hello Friends,
Could somebody pls. help and respond to this query.
In case of approved Change of Status from H4-H1B , when can the H1B holder apply for a SSN. Do we need to wait till Oct. 1 to apply for the SSN or can we apply earlier.
I heard that it can take anytime between 2-8 weeks and the H1B holder is not supposed to start working till they receive the SSN.
Thanks a lot for your help, its greatly appreciated.
Could somebody pls. help and respond to this query.
In case of approved Change of Status from H4-H1B , when can the H1B holder apply for a SSN. Do we need to wait till Oct. 1 to apply for the SSN or can we apply earlier.
I heard that it can take anytime between 2-8 weeks and the H1B holder is not supposed to start working till they receive the SSN.
Thanks a lot for your help, its greatly appreciated.
more...
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. Chris Hemsworth Attends #39;Thor#39;
morchu
04-22 09:41 AM
Since your H4 COS is not approved yet, you are not YET in H4 status.
So you need to prove your current status based on pending H4 petition as well as your H1 paystubs. That is why you need to submit the pay stubs.
Your COS may get rejected (even the H4 COS), and in that case you need to travel outside get an H1 stamp and come back.
This is a typical situation where you should file for Premium Processing (of H1 COS).
Thank you for the quick response. I see that you are in Center City Philly. My prospective employer is also located in the same area and he does not have an immigration attorney, may be I can retain your services.
I understand the 'Yes' to the first question.
For the second - I do not have the most recent paystubs as I have not been employed for the past 2 months. In addition, I cannot provide paystubs for any period in 2009, that I was employed as I was not paid by my employer.
The last paystubs I have are for Sep 2008. I also have W2 for 2006, 2007 and 2008 (though 2008 one is deficient for 3 months).
Is it possible that I do not submit my paystubs and W2 and only submit my earlier H1 approval notice, valid I-94, and Pending H4 COS Receipt Notice? With this documentation, can we expect an H1 approval and in the worst case expect COS denial?
I am thinking, if H1 gets approved, I will travel abroad and obtain a new I-94 at POE.
Please recommend a safe approach. The new employer wants me to begin in 3 weeks, and I am wondering what is the best approach.
Thank you in advance for your time and recommendations.
So you need to prove your current status based on pending H4 petition as well as your H1 paystubs. That is why you need to submit the pay stubs.
Your COS may get rejected (even the H4 COS), and in that case you need to travel outside get an H1 stamp and come back.
This is a typical situation where you should file for Premium Processing (of H1 COS).
Thank you for the quick response. I see that you are in Center City Philly. My prospective employer is also located in the same area and he does not have an immigration attorney, may be I can retain your services.
I understand the 'Yes' to the first question.
For the second - I do not have the most recent paystubs as I have not been employed for the past 2 months. In addition, I cannot provide paystubs for any period in 2009, that I was employed as I was not paid by my employer.
The last paystubs I have are for Sep 2008. I also have W2 for 2006, 2007 and 2008 (though 2008 one is deficient for 3 months).
Is it possible that I do not submit my paystubs and W2 and only submit my earlier H1 approval notice, valid I-94, and Pending H4 COS Receipt Notice? With this documentation, can we expect an H1 approval and in the worst case expect COS denial?
I am thinking, if H1 gets approved, I will travel abroad and obtain a new I-94 at POE.
Please recommend a safe approach. The new employer wants me to begin in 3 weeks, and I am wondering what is the best approach.
Thank you in advance for your time and recommendations.
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. Chris Hemsworth quot;THORquot;
freedom_fighter
03-08 02:38 PM
another one bites the card.
more...
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. Chris Hemsworth Attends #39;Thor#39;
whitecollarslave
02-24 02:29 PM
For those who think that this is good and will not affect them -
What we are hearing now in the news is just the tip of the iceberg. It is just ground work to justify tougher measures against employment based immigration. If it continues, CIR will be passed giving path to citizenship to ILLEGAL immigrants without any measure for employment based immigration. Remember, the only folks who have been in influential position to support EB immigration has been big businesses (like Microsoft, Oracle) and AILA. With the rising unemployment rate, nobody will listen to these businesses. With the indictment of (even a few) cases of H-1B fraud, AILA will not be able to fight the impending tsunami against legal employment based immigrants.
If we don't do anything, illegals will be citizens while people with H-1 and even EAD will be forced to go back. This is the beginning of the end to employment based immigration.
What we are hearing now in the news is just the tip of the iceberg. It is just ground work to justify tougher measures against employment based immigration. If it continues, CIR will be passed giving path to citizenship to ILLEGAL immigrants without any measure for employment based immigration. Remember, the only folks who have been in influential position to support EB immigration has been big businesses (like Microsoft, Oracle) and AILA. With the rising unemployment rate, nobody will listen to these businesses. With the indictment of (even a few) cases of H-1B fraud, AILA will not be able to fight the impending tsunami against legal employment based immigrants.
If we don't do anything, illegals will be citizens while people with H-1 and even EAD will be forced to go back. This is the beginning of the end to employment based immigration.
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. Chris Hemsworth Thor
pitha
04-27 11:05 AM
I was watching an interview with John McCain on larry king live 2 or 3 days ago. Mccain said that an immigration bill would be introduced in the senate in a week or two which would focus on border security first, i am not sure what that means, focusiing on border security first, good or bad for us? would that mean our provisions will be moved to a later stage where border security is ratified first before anything can happen etc etc which is what anti-immigrants want.
does anyone know when CIR will be discussed in the house and in the Senate?
does anyone know when CIR will be discussed in the house and in the Senate?
more...
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. chris hemsworth thor costume
YesGC_NoGC
07-17 05:45 PM
Congratulations IV !!
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. Chris Hemsworth in Thor
ski_dude12
07-13 08:08 PM
You are welcome to live your life in fear of USCIS by all means. I am not interested in being a slave like you. I hope you enjoy your slavery till it lasts.
And btw, I really give two hoots to your source. I have read your other posts and frankly this post of yours does not surprise me. I value my sleep much more.
And btw, I really give two hoots to your source. I have read your other posts and frankly this post of yours does not surprise me. I value my sleep much more.
pictures of chris hemsworth as thor. chris hemsworth body thor.
srikondoji
06-18 08:44 AM
Lou Dobbs exposed...:rolleyes:
Lou Dobs is referred to as a right-wing populist demagogue. Atlast some one has the courage to speak out the truth.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/jun2006/immi-j16.shtml
He is known for bashing outsourcing and always made up statistics how outsourcing was not cost effective.
He has also compared how a job of one person is done by 10 people in Asian countries but cared less to inform the general public that cost of labor for 10 is less than that of one person here in united states.
--sri
Lou Dobs is referred to as a right-wing populist demagogue. Atlast some one has the courage to speak out the truth.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/jun2006/immi-j16.shtml
He is known for bashing outsourcing and always made up statistics how outsourcing was not cost effective.
He has also compared how a job of one person is done by 10 people in Asian countries but cared less to inform the general public that cost of labor for 10 is less than that of one person here in united states.
--sri
gunabcd
07-02 10:02 AM
Stop replying to this guy - focus on something more meaningful.
Yes, let's close the thread, it's not serving the purpose of the forum and wasting our valuable resrouces. Moderators ????
Yes, let's close the thread, it's not serving the purpose of the forum and wasting our valuable resrouces. Moderators ????
pankaj_singal
11-18 11:04 PM
This is a situation with my friend that I am posting under my name...
Questions are mostly related to regarding EAD situation
1. My friend is on H1 and have EAD (June'07 filer) for both him and his spouse... his spouse (secondary aplicant) is currently working on her EAD.. If his company lays him off... Would his wife have any effect on her employment?
2. Could he renew my EAD/AP on my own with no employer support (despite he has no job)
3. What if he goes to India on AP (or otherwise).. would that have effect on his wife's EAD/employment? If he goes to India on AP.. for how long could he go?
4. Could he take up any job and keep switching till priority date becomes current? Also what happens if and when priority date becomes current?
Thanks.
Questions are mostly related to regarding EAD situation
1. My friend is on H1 and have EAD (June'07 filer) for both him and his spouse... his spouse (secondary aplicant) is currently working on her EAD.. If his company lays him off... Would his wife have any effect on her employment?
2. Could he renew my EAD/AP on my own with no employer support (despite he has no job)
3. What if he goes to India on AP (or otherwise).. would that have effect on his wife's EAD/employment? If he goes to India on AP.. for how long could he go?
4. Could he take up any job and keep switching till priority date becomes current? Also what happens if and when priority date becomes current?
Thanks.
