hatighora
07-30 02:54 PM
I think there is a chance if the baby becomes a celebrity baby. If our babies become a hollywood star,sports star or a baby genius, there should be some possibility of getting greencard thru that baby, but with an ordinary baby chances are slim with the current immigration rules.
wallpaper 2008 Nissan Sentra 2.0 Jersey
waitin_toolong
11-18 04:47 PM
the new FP EAD will be the one that you file for renewal, they will not automatically issue a new one.
They stand to gain $340 from it.
For the person worried about his EAD dont go by what the customer rep said, they are forever giving out incorrect information, majority of EADs issued in the last 3 months have been without biometrics.
Wait for 10 days or get infopass appointment.
They stand to gain $340 from it.
For the person worried about his EAD dont go by what the customer rep said, they are forever giving out incorrect information, majority of EADs issued in the last 3 months have been without biometrics.
Wait for 10 days or get infopass appointment.
sanjay02
11-21 12:55 PM
I saw the following status on I-131
Application Type: I131, APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
On November 21, 2007 we mailed the document to the address we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
Does it mean that I-131 is approved?
Application Type: I131, APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
On November 21, 2007 we mailed the document to the address we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
Does it mean that I-131 is approved?
2011 2008 Nissan Sentra 2.0 Easton,
psk79
10-15 01:10 PM
Is this her first time into US? if so, i guess they are trying to make sure your h1b is still valid. Since they see that you entered on AP, it might be confusing them. I am assuming you work for the same h1 employer who also sponsored your GC. Now all attorneys have told us that the law says you can resume your h1b once you are back on AP but lot of IO's don't care about it. Now you can just send an employer/personal letter stating that you are currently in the same job for which your H1 is approved and also have a I140 pending/approved for the same. Mention that you are still on H1b while you entered using your AP. Hence you never got your H1b visa stamped at the consulate. It shouldn't be a problem unless you are trying to get H$4 via a H1b from a former employer while you are working on EAD for someone else.
more...
WeShallOvercome
11-07 12:10 PM
If EB2 PD is 1 APR 2004 then what does the ProcessingTimeFrame Date(August 25, 2006) mean for I-485 in Texas Service Center.
Can anyone clarify. Guys exuse my Ignorance...I just want to know the rule
sury,
What that means is "All applications received before August 25, 2006 AND whose PD is current , are being processed"
If your PD is 2003 but you filed your I-485 after Aug'2006 your app will not be adjudicated.
If you filed before Aug'2006 but your PD is after Apr'2004, your app will not be adjudicated.
If your PD is before Apr'2004 and you filed your app before August 25, 2006, your app will be adjudicated..
This is to make sure people don't start expecting approvals and calling them left and right one day after filing if their PD is current. they need some time for every application, so they put in this 'processing date' which works in conjunction with 'priority date' to check if a case is approvable at any given time. They normally won't entertain calls enquiring about a case if the filing date does not fall within this processing date.
Can anyone clarify. Guys exuse my Ignorance...I just want to know the rule
sury,
What that means is "All applications received before August 25, 2006 AND whose PD is current , are being processed"
If your PD is 2003 but you filed your I-485 after Aug'2006 your app will not be adjudicated.
If you filed before Aug'2006 but your PD is after Apr'2004, your app will not be adjudicated.
If your PD is before Apr'2004 and you filed your app before August 25, 2006, your app will be adjudicated..
This is to make sure people don't start expecting approvals and calling them left and right one day after filing if their PD is current. they need some time for every application, so they put in this 'processing date' which works in conjunction with 'priority date' to check if a case is approvable at any given time. They normally won't entertain calls enquiring about a case if the filing date does not fall within this processing date.
krishnam70
07-18 12:34 PM
There's no need for you to be negative.
Obviously you have benefitted already from what's happened. Think about people who are stuck (just as you were up until recently) and want to 'try' to make things work for them too....
wish people were more understanding of others also. Why is it people forget what it was like for them when they were in same boat?
ps57002
There have been numerous threads in this forum about the utility of sending more flowers to USCIS, whitehouse, condi, Bush etc etc and there is no consenus on that. Now If you need to try to bring to attention the delays of the BEC try something innovative or if you feel flowers are the way to go
then go do it, but before doing that try to find out your audience, how many people are affected by this. In case of 485 retro there were thousands of people who were affected and so there was a tremendous response. Now while i do not deny that there might be same kind of numbers stuck in BEC you need to bring the issue in to focus and make a drive to bring in the believers.
The flower campaign started off as a small remark and some people believed it would work and just kept working on it and ultimately it 'may' have worked because of the organized activity that took place. Now if you believe it will work for BEC centers too go ahead with your plan( I am not sure IV will support it, initally the Gandhigiri did not have IV support too if i recall). If people believe it will work they will join the campaign. Publicise your efforts and you will see results.
go do it..
cheers
edit:
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1
IV has recommendation to not use flowers going forward
BEC reduction is one of they key goals of IV going forward. so stay tight you should hear something soon
Obviously you have benefitted already from what's happened. Think about people who are stuck (just as you were up until recently) and want to 'try' to make things work for them too....
wish people were more understanding of others also. Why is it people forget what it was like for them when they were in same boat?
ps57002
There have been numerous threads in this forum about the utility of sending more flowers to USCIS, whitehouse, condi, Bush etc etc and there is no consenus on that. Now If you need to try to bring to attention the delays of the BEC try something innovative or if you feel flowers are the way to go
then go do it, but before doing that try to find out your audience, how many people are affected by this. In case of 485 retro there were thousands of people who were affected and so there was a tremendous response. Now while i do not deny that there might be same kind of numbers stuck in BEC you need to bring the issue in to focus and make a drive to bring in the believers.
The flower campaign started off as a small remark and some people believed it would work and just kept working on it and ultimately it 'may' have worked because of the organized activity that took place. Now if you believe it will work for BEC centers too go ahead with your plan( I am not sure IV will support it, initally the Gandhigiri did not have IV support too if i recall). If people believe it will work they will join the campaign. Publicise your efforts and you will see results.
go do it..
cheers
edit:
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1
IV has recommendation to not use flowers going forward
BEC reduction is one of they key goals of IV going forward. so stay tight you should hear something soon
more...
kumarc123
11-06 03:44 PM
Thanks for your comment,
2010 2008 Nissan Sentra Katy, TX
paskal
09-07 12:45 PM
those who have sent their details:
i know you are eagerly awaiting confirmation of appointments etc for monday. plesae be assured that this is work in progress and you will hear about your schedules in the next few days. thank you for replying to the lobby day e mails and for coming to DC to make our collective voice heard.
those who have not done so: please be there on monday and please do the needful as requested above so appointments can be arranged for you.
if you can stay back wednesday- please provide your information too, appointments may be arranged that day as well.
i know you are eagerly awaiting confirmation of appointments etc for monday. plesae be assured that this is work in progress and you will hear about your schedules in the next few days. thank you for replying to the lobby day e mails and for coming to DC to make our collective voice heard.
those who have not done so: please be there on monday and please do the needful as requested above so appointments can be arranged for you.
if you can stay back wednesday- please provide your information too, appointments may be arranged that day as well.
more...
meridiani.planum
06-15 11:10 PM
I have a masters degree in mechanical engineering and I have been working as a system analyst for the last 2 years, does anybody here can advise if I can apply for EB2?
If yes what are the chances that there would be an RFE asking why is masters needed, I do think having done my masters i am able to understand and do the job better, but there is really no specif need for it.
Has anyone else gone through this confusion? What are the things to keep in mind?
Is there a special need how the job requirement should be?
Please advise.
Thanks
education and experience requirements are tied to a position, not to the person. So the LC is going to look into whether the position of a systems analyst requires a masters, and if it does what kind (as the minimum requriements). At I-140 they see if YOU match the position for which the LC has been approved. If the LC said systems-analyst needs a masters in computer-science or electrical engineering, then you will have a problem.
You can potentially get two questions in the RFE:
- why does the job need a Masters (EB2 justification for LC)
- why does a masters in mechanical engineering satisfy the requirement of a masters for a system analyst position (whether you meet the requirement, at I-140 stage).
Since you yourself say the position does not require a masters, proviing it needs a masters in mech. engg might be even harder. Did you ask your company attorney about this? what do they say?
If yes what are the chances that there would be an RFE asking why is masters needed, I do think having done my masters i am able to understand and do the job better, but there is really no specif need for it.
Has anyone else gone through this confusion? What are the things to keep in mind?
Is there a special need how the job requirement should be?
Please advise.
Thanks
education and experience requirements are tied to a position, not to the person. So the LC is going to look into whether the position of a systems analyst requires a masters, and if it does what kind (as the minimum requriements). At I-140 they see if YOU match the position for which the LC has been approved. If the LC said systems-analyst needs a masters in computer-science or electrical engineering, then you will have a problem.
You can potentially get two questions in the RFE:
- why does the job need a Masters (EB2 justification for LC)
- why does a masters in mechanical engineering satisfy the requirement of a masters for a system analyst position (whether you meet the requirement, at I-140 stage).
Since you yourself say the position does not require a masters, proviing it needs a masters in mech. engg might be even harder. Did you ask your company attorney about this? what do they say?
hair 2008 Nissan Sentra Fort
raju123
06-26 12:25 PM
NumberUSA reported following possible amendments. Nothing for EB !!!
If this is the case, we should strongly oppose the bill.
http://www.numbersusa.com/hottopic/senateaction0507.html
According to El Bolet�n, �the official Senate Democratic Hispanic Task Force newsletter,� the following proposals are now under consideration for possible consideration if cloture is invoked:
Democratic Amendments
* Dodd-Menendez S.A. 1199: would increase the annual cap on green cards for parents and extend the parent visitor visa.
* Webb S.A. 1313: Community ties for [amnesty]
* Baucus-Tester S.A. 1236: would strike all reference[s] to REAL ID.
* Sanders-Grassley S.A. 1332 : prohibits companies that have announced mass lay-offs from receiving any new visas, unless these companies could prove that overall employment at their companies would not be reduced by these lay-offs.
* Byrd-Gregg-Cochran S.A. 1344: adds a $500 fee to obtain [amnesty] and sets aside the revenues collected in order to fund border and interior enforcement.
* Menendez-Obama-Feingold S.A. 1317: increases family points in merit system
* Brown S.A. 1340: requires that before employers can be approved to employ Y-1 workers, they must have listed the specific job opportunity with the state employment service agency.
* McCaskill S.A. 1468: increases ban on federal contracts, grants or cooperative agreements to employers who are repeat violators of hiring immigrants who are not authorized to work
* Levin-Brownback S.A.1486: gives access to Iraqis to apply for refugee status under existing U.S. law.
* Leahy S.A. 1386: protect scholars who have been persecuted in their home countries on account of their beliefs, scholarship, or identity.
* Schumer: provides for tamper-proof biometric social security cards
* Boxer S.A. 1198: reduces Y visa cap by number of Y workers who overstay
Republican Amendments
* Alexander S.A. 1161: requires DHS and the Department of State to notify a foreign embassy when one of their nationals has become a U.S. citizen
* Bond S.A. 1255: prohibits green cards for [illegal aliens granted amnesty]
* Coleman S.A. 1473: outlaws state and local policies that prevent public officials * including police and health and safety workers (except for emergency medical assistance)*from inquiring about the immigration status of those they serve if there is �probable cause� to believe the individual being questioned is undocumented.
* Domenici S.A. 1335/1258: increases Federal judgeships
* Ensign S.A. 1490: redetermines work history for current beneficiaries of social security depending on their citizenship status
* Graham S.A. 1465: enforcement. Still being drafted.
* Grassley-Baucus-Obama S.A. 1441: strikes and replaces Title III on employer enforcement
* Hutchinson S.A. 1440: changes the �touchback� requirement from the time of applying for adjustment of status, as it currently stands in the Senate proposed bill, to the time of applying for the Z visa. Increases the number of individuals required to touchback
* Thune S.A. 1174: prevents [illegal aliens] from [being granted amnesty] until all triggers have been met.
* Chambliss S.A. 1318: Totalization agreements
* Isakson S.A. 1282: Preemption/Home Depot
* Graham: Criminal penalties/mandatory minimums for overstays
If this is the case, we should strongly oppose the bill.
http://www.numbersusa.com/hottopic/senateaction0507.html
According to El Bolet�n, �the official Senate Democratic Hispanic Task Force newsletter,� the following proposals are now under consideration for possible consideration if cloture is invoked:
Democratic Amendments
* Dodd-Menendez S.A. 1199: would increase the annual cap on green cards for parents and extend the parent visitor visa.
* Webb S.A. 1313: Community ties for [amnesty]
* Baucus-Tester S.A. 1236: would strike all reference[s] to REAL ID.
* Sanders-Grassley S.A. 1332 : prohibits companies that have announced mass lay-offs from receiving any new visas, unless these companies could prove that overall employment at their companies would not be reduced by these lay-offs.
* Byrd-Gregg-Cochran S.A. 1344: adds a $500 fee to obtain [amnesty] and sets aside the revenues collected in order to fund border and interior enforcement.
* Menendez-Obama-Feingold S.A. 1317: increases family points in merit system
* Brown S.A. 1340: requires that before employers can be approved to employ Y-1 workers, they must have listed the specific job opportunity with the state employment service agency.
* McCaskill S.A. 1468: increases ban on federal contracts, grants or cooperative agreements to employers who are repeat violators of hiring immigrants who are not authorized to work
* Levin-Brownback S.A.1486: gives access to Iraqis to apply for refugee status under existing U.S. law.
* Leahy S.A. 1386: protect scholars who have been persecuted in their home countries on account of their beliefs, scholarship, or identity.
* Schumer: provides for tamper-proof biometric social security cards
* Boxer S.A. 1198: reduces Y visa cap by number of Y workers who overstay
Republican Amendments
* Alexander S.A. 1161: requires DHS and the Department of State to notify a foreign embassy when one of their nationals has become a U.S. citizen
* Bond S.A. 1255: prohibits green cards for [illegal aliens granted amnesty]
* Coleman S.A. 1473: outlaws state and local policies that prevent public officials * including police and health and safety workers (except for emergency medical assistance)*from inquiring about the immigration status of those they serve if there is �probable cause� to believe the individual being questioned is undocumented.
* Domenici S.A. 1335/1258: increases Federal judgeships
* Ensign S.A. 1490: redetermines work history for current beneficiaries of social security depending on their citizenship status
* Graham S.A. 1465: enforcement. Still being drafted.
* Grassley-Baucus-Obama S.A. 1441: strikes and replaces Title III on employer enforcement
* Hutchinson S.A. 1440: changes the �touchback� requirement from the time of applying for adjustment of status, as it currently stands in the Senate proposed bill, to the time of applying for the Z visa. Increases the number of individuals required to touchback
* Thune S.A. 1174: prevents [illegal aliens] from [being granted amnesty] until all triggers have been met.
* Chambliss S.A. 1318: Totalization agreements
* Isakson S.A. 1282: Preemption/Home Depot
* Graham: Criminal penalties/mandatory minimums for overstays
more...
GC_2007
12-22 12:09 PM
http://www.immigration.com/newsletter1/h1bguidextn6yr.pdf
hot 2008 Nissan Sentra Se-r Spec V
youngindia
06-08 01:27 AM
Its not abt H1-B abuse, its abt the way it was brought up. Instead of looking into his own house (USCIS and DOL) Sen.Durbin held Indian companies responsible and almost started bashing them. Little did he anticipate that they will come back in this way.
H1-B abuse is a different issue. Sen. Durbin should have looked into rulemaking part of the game than bashing players of the game.
When the US was instrumental in doing WTO negotiations during late 90's (BTW-your's truely grew up during that period witnessing this through newspaper articles - was an exact reversal of roles played by India and US then)they never realized that globalizing markets would lead to globalizing labor market also. Now, IT has become a virtual industry with a pretty much open labor market. Professionals making Rs.50000 ($1200) are competing with those making $5000 a month. US politicians made a classic judgement error in 90's. Now, protectionist measures are being brought in by the very same people who championed globalization for a decade.
The letter puts things in perspective for sen. Durbin. It seems to carry a veiled warning about backlash of these protectionist measures on the US companies doing business in India. Starting from McDonalds,subway,coke (now even Walmart) to Ford, GM, IBM, Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, Abott, J&J, JP Morgan, Bank of America and many more have huge business interests in India. The size of Indian market totals upto atleast 0.8 billion human individuals with need for housing, auto, computers, electronics, healthcare, finance, consumer products etc. Losing an inch of it can make an international co. nervous.
As far as Indian consumers go they now have options- British, German, Japanese, French and now even the Indian companies.
Durbin tried to scare a cat, unfortunately for him it turned out to be a big wild cat- aTiger.
H1-B abuse is a different issue. Sen. Durbin should have looked into rulemaking part of the game than bashing players of the game.
When the US was instrumental in doing WTO negotiations during late 90's (BTW-your's truely grew up during that period witnessing this through newspaper articles - was an exact reversal of roles played by India and US then)they never realized that globalizing markets would lead to globalizing labor market also. Now, IT has become a virtual industry with a pretty much open labor market. Professionals making Rs.50000 ($1200) are competing with those making $5000 a month. US politicians made a classic judgement error in 90's. Now, protectionist measures are being brought in by the very same people who championed globalization for a decade.
The letter puts things in perspective for sen. Durbin. It seems to carry a veiled warning about backlash of these protectionist measures on the US companies doing business in India. Starting from McDonalds,subway,coke (now even Walmart) to Ford, GM, IBM, Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, Abott, J&J, JP Morgan, Bank of America and many more have huge business interests in India. The size of Indian market totals upto atleast 0.8 billion human individuals with need for housing, auto, computers, electronics, healthcare, finance, consumer products etc. Losing an inch of it can make an international co. nervous.
As far as Indian consumers go they now have options- British, German, Japanese, French and now even the Indian companies.
Durbin tried to scare a cat, unfortunately for him it turned out to be a big wild cat- aTiger.
more...
house 2008 Nissan Sentra Sedan 4D
sparky_jones
02-03 02:44 PM
Documentation informing the USCIS of your having utilized AC21 benefits isn't necessary, but is a proactive measure usually taken to have a clean slate on the applicant's part.
It is true that in a majority of the cases the AC21 documentation might never reach the applican't 485 file, but in an unforeseen circumstance such as the denial of one's 485 based on 140 revocation (which, as we know isn't very uncommon) and matters reaching an immigration court, proof that one had taken proactive steps and gone out of one's way to inform the USCIS might make one's case stronger and thus make it easier to have the case reopened.
I was fortunate enough to not have to make that decision -whether to send AC21 documentation or not, the attorneys (Fragomen) representing the new employer recommended sending it making it easy for me.
Just my 2 cents,
I agree...sending the AC21 documentation to satisfy the "burden of proof" in extenuating circumstances, should they arise, is justifiable, as long as the applicant does not assume that the AC21 documentation will indeed be attached to their 485 file, and thus they won't get an employment-related RFE. Send the AC21 (and do it on your own, unless you have spare money to spend on a lawyer), but also keep in mind that sending the AC21 is not a legal requirement, and there is no guarantee that it will prevent USCIS from asking you to prove that you have a job that meets the certified labor at some time in the future.
It is true that in a majority of the cases the AC21 documentation might never reach the applican't 485 file, but in an unforeseen circumstance such as the denial of one's 485 based on 140 revocation (which, as we know isn't very uncommon) and matters reaching an immigration court, proof that one had taken proactive steps and gone out of one's way to inform the USCIS might make one's case stronger and thus make it easier to have the case reopened.
I was fortunate enough to not have to make that decision -whether to send AC21 documentation or not, the attorneys (Fragomen) representing the new employer recommended sending it making it easy for me.
Just my 2 cents,
I agree...sending the AC21 documentation to satisfy the "burden of proof" in extenuating circumstances, should they arise, is justifiable, as long as the applicant does not assume that the AC21 documentation will indeed be attached to their 485 file, and thus they won't get an employment-related RFE. Send the AC21 (and do it on your own, unless you have spare money to spend on a lawyer), but also keep in mind that sending the AC21 is not a legal requirement, and there is no guarantee that it will prevent USCIS from asking you to prove that you have a job that meets the certified labor at some time in the future.
tattoo 2008 Nissan Sentra
fester8542
05-27 09:34 PM
golgi Your ugly arse site was moooooooooooving...
This has to be the strangest battle ever! Leave it to you to come up with an idea like that...
This has to be the strangest battle ever! Leave it to you to come up with an idea like that...
more...
pictures 2008 Nissan Versa Garden Grove
Maverick5
08-26 03:57 PM
I am also in the same boat. I have my Masters in Mechanical Engineering. I had filed for H1B with companies A & B as Mechanical Engineer and have worked with them for 1.5 years each.
Recently I had switched to desi company (C) and had to file my H1B as Software Engineer. I got my H1B without issues. I am crossing my fingers and planning to apply for Labor Certification as Software Engineer in EB2. (MS -Mech Engg + 1 year experience).
Other members pls share your experience if your case is simillar. I know lot of people who did their masters in other fields and changed to Software when they were in OPT. But do not know some one who has worked in H1b as Mechanical engineer and then got another H1 as software engineer. Has anyone with my simillar background, gone past the I140 stage?
Thanks.
Recently I had switched to desi company (C) and had to file my H1B as Software Engineer. I got my H1B without issues. I am crossing my fingers and planning to apply for Labor Certification as Software Engineer in EB2. (MS -Mech Engg + 1 year experience).
Other members pls share your experience if your case is simillar. I know lot of people who did their masters in other fields and changed to Software when they were in OPT. But do not know some one who has worked in H1b as Mechanical engineer and then got another H1 as software engineer. Has anyone with my simillar background, gone past the I140 stage?
Thanks.
dresses 2008 Nissan Sentra 2.0
Ramba
01-23 06:51 PM
Sorry for little confusion.
What I mean was,
- I filed I-485 for me and my wife
- then after 180 days I switched to a new company with H1B transfer.
- So, I am still in H1B status.
- But my wife (secondary applicant) is using EAD based on I-485 and working.
Which means we used AC21 for portability of our I-140 and I-485 cases.
Now, we are planning to travel home to India. My wife need to use AP and I will still be using H1B visa.
So, my question was, whether there will be issue at Port of Entry when primary applicant(which is me) is still in H1B visa with pending I-485 and my wife is using EAD with AP?
Normally if both have independent valid travel document, you are fine. It does not make any difference if primary use H1B and spouse use AP, but it may confuse the IO at POE, if they ask lot of questions, (who is your employer, Are you working for GC sponsering employer etc..)
IO at POE may not know all the rules regarding AC21/485/AP/H1 etc.. If you are entering in H1, the natural tendency that your spose will enter in H4. If you answer properly, you are fine..
What I mean was,
- I filed I-485 for me and my wife
- then after 180 days I switched to a new company with H1B transfer.
- So, I am still in H1B status.
- But my wife (secondary applicant) is using EAD based on I-485 and working.
Which means we used AC21 for portability of our I-140 and I-485 cases.
Now, we are planning to travel home to India. My wife need to use AP and I will still be using H1B visa.
So, my question was, whether there will be issue at Port of Entry when primary applicant(which is me) is still in H1B visa with pending I-485 and my wife is using EAD with AP?
Normally if both have independent valid travel document, you are fine. It does not make any difference if primary use H1B and spouse use AP, but it may confuse the IO at POE, if they ask lot of questions, (who is your employer, Are you working for GC sponsering employer etc..)
IO at POE may not know all the rules regarding AC21/485/AP/H1 etc.. If you are entering in H1, the natural tendency that your spose will enter in H4. If you answer properly, you are fine..
more...
makeup 2009 Nissan Sentra Ardmore, OK
eb3India
04-13 09:43 AM
are u kidd'n me,
Indians who are here with GCs most of them run Bodyshop companies, they get up everyday morning and offer two cocounts and couple of agarabthi to Lou Dobbs, Mits Ramni, USCIS and co for delaying our GCs so that they can sell more labours, keep h1bs for more time
get real dude, no one is bothered about us,
Indians who are here with GCs most of them run Bodyshop companies, they get up everyday morning and offer two cocounts and couple of agarabthi to Lou Dobbs, Mits Ramni, USCIS and co for delaying our GCs so that they can sell more labours, keep h1bs for more time
get real dude, no one is bothered about us,
girlfriend 2008 Nissan Sentra Roseville,
Leo07
09-13 11:18 AM
Let's not fool ourselves with these petty differences.
Cheers!
Cheers!
hairstyles Used Nissan Sentra 2008 for
fromnaija
08-18 04:41 PM
If she is here on H4 and while she was here her H1B got approved then there is no problem. As H1B is not VISA and its intent to hire. Infact if she wanted to to Join work on H1B, she will need to apply status change application for H4 to H1B.
No, not correct. Since she got a new I-94 her status changed to H1 w.e.f October 1, 2008.
However, because she did not work she is currently out of status. She will have to change her status back to H4 either by going out of country and re-entering with H4 visa or filing I-539.
No, not correct. Since she got a new I-94 her status changed to H1 w.e.f October 1, 2008.
However, because she did not work she is currently out of status. She will have to change her status back to H4 either by going out of country and re-entering with H4 visa or filing I-539.
gcpool
08-23 12:02 PM
in EB3, EB2 and EB1
mpadapa
10-09 01:32 PM
IMHO.. Its better to resolve the out-of-status issues before U file for 485. Please consult a good attorney.
If things are cleared out, its a smooth sailing for U since U are from EB2 ROW. Since U are planning to marry, its better to marry and then file for 485. U donno sometimes USCIS goes into an approval frenzy, U might get U'r GC approved soon and thus U'r wife might have to wait for yrs to get GC. If U'r wife comes to US before U'r GC approval, its a different story as explained by glus.
If things are cleared out, its a smooth sailing for U since U are from EB2 ROW. Since U are planning to marry, its better to marry and then file for 485. U donno sometimes USCIS goes into an approval frenzy, U might get U'r GC approved soon and thus U'r wife might have to wait for yrs to get GC. If U'r wife comes to US before U'r GC approval, its a different story as explained by glus.
No comments:
Post a Comment