santb1975
07-15 09:47 PM
Let us see if this campaign gets participation from SoCal members who do not visit IV boards on a day to day basis
wallpaper Abstract - Purple Wallpaper
kaisersose
07-11 11:44 AM
In my opinion, the most likely reason why EB2 India dates have been advanced to June 2006 is to help consular posts. CP filers can get their interviews now.
Libra
09-11 11:52 AM
thanks pankajkakkar and iam_1900 for your contributions.
2011 iPhone wallpapers Purple Space
GCInThisLife
07-18 03:38 PM
What does it say on your I485 receipt notice?
For example.. my app was mailed on 5/31 and RD on receipt notice is 6/4 and Notice date is 6/6 and Online case status says received on 6/5. I assume 6/5 is when USCIS created an entry for my case and 6/6 (my checks were also cashed on 6/6) is when receipt notice is actually generated. Some one correct me if I am wrong.
My application was sent on June, 14th and delivered on June 15th (I have the FedEx tracking info and signature page confirming 6/15).
The case status online based on receipt number (obtained by calling them a few times until I got lucky) says:
"On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case."
Not sure if the online status is referring to the receipt date or the notice date when it says "On July 11, 2007, we received" when, in fact, they received it on June 15th!!
.
For example.. my app was mailed on 5/31 and RD on receipt notice is 6/4 and Notice date is 6/6 and Online case status says received on 6/5. I assume 6/5 is when USCIS created an entry for my case and 6/6 (my checks were also cashed on 6/6) is when receipt notice is actually generated. Some one correct me if I am wrong.
My application was sent on June, 14th and delivered on June 15th (I have the FedEx tracking info and signature page confirming 6/15).
The case status online based on receipt number (obtained by calling them a few times until I got lucky) says:
"On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case."
Not sure if the online status is referring to the receipt date or the notice date when it says "On July 11, 2007, we received" when, in fact, they received it on June 15th!!
.
more...
Caliber
03-12 11:14 AM
Pappu,
I have a suggestion! I don't think forcing monthly $25 contribution to keep donor status alive is a very good idea, especially in current economy. Take an example of myself. It is decided that I am going to loose job on 17th March, may not be able to contribute every month. Rethink!
Dear ItIsNotFunny,
For committed people like you, we can request IV core for some special consideration.
But I support this initiative. Just see the FOIA thread. We could not even pool up 5K and there are at least 5000 members out of which at least 500 active users.
Unless there is some intiative like this, it will be impossible for pushing any lobbying activities. There are many people who wants every thing free.
I support IV
I have a suggestion! I don't think forcing monthly $25 contribution to keep donor status alive is a very good idea, especially in current economy. Take an example of myself. It is decided that I am going to loose job on 17th March, may not be able to contribute every month. Rethink!
Dear ItIsNotFunny,
For committed people like you, we can request IV core for some special consideration.
But I support this initiative. Just see the FOIA thread. We could not even pool up 5K and there are at least 5000 members out of which at least 500 active users.
Unless there is some intiative like this, it will be impossible for pushing any lobbying activities. There are many people who wants every thing free.
I support IV
rameshavula
01-12 03:59 PM
EB3 RIR, Pennsylvania
Sep, 2004
Sep, 2004
more...
bazuka6
09-13 06:26 PM
I want everybody to get their GCs. but now interfiling/porting is hurting out position in the queue.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
Delete this moron's login.. I bet he has a substitute eb2 labor himself - talk about morality
- $ 50 monthly to IV since June 2006
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
Delete this moron's login.. I bet he has a substitute eb2 labor himself - talk about morality
- $ 50 monthly to IV since June 2006
2010 Blackberry Tour Wallpapers
desidude
07-15 10:38 AM
Can anyone shed some light on this... I want to know how to pay thru BOA bill pay option.
Thanks.
Thanks.
more...
smc
07-23 09:45 PM
Am surprised that there is no communication from IV Core on this.
hair PURPLE ABSTRACT BACKGROUND
BlueCard
10-01 12:13 PM
If this news is true, then we can see "wild" approvals before the end of September. Some people with complete cases may overtake others.
Mine was probably such a wild case. With a PD of DEC2004 Eb3 ROW, I-140 approved in 2006, filed I-485 in June (ND: June 27), FP: August 1st, "Notice sent welcoming permanent resident" on September 17th, received my card 4 days later, even before the notices. Less than 3 months total processing time, end to end.
I guess they just picked the low hanging fruit and fast-tracked like crazy to waste as little visa numbers as possible. But still not fast enough...
Mine was probably such a wild case. With a PD of DEC2004 Eb3 ROW, I-140 approved in 2006, filed I-485 in June (ND: June 27), FP: August 1st, "Notice sent welcoming permanent resident" on September 17th, received my card 4 days later, even before the notices. Less than 3 months total processing time, end to end.
I guess they just picked the low hanging fruit and fast-tracked like crazy to waste as little visa numbers as possible. But still not fast enough...
more...
java_jaggu
06-04 01:15 PM
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2007,0604-lee.shtm
Based on this article, it looks like even those 140's and 485's filed after the cut-off date will be fine as long as the GC is approved before Oct 1, 2008, so folks will have some breathing time and flexibility to plan their next move, if the bill passes in the current form.
Based on this article, it looks like even those 140's and 485's filed after the cut-off date will be fine as long as the GC is approved before Oct 1, 2008, so folks will have some breathing time and flexibility to plan their next move, if the bill passes in the current form.
hot stock photo : Purple abstract
gc_on_demand
06-10 11:16 AM
Please call CHC members ASAP.. takes only 10 minutes to call..
more...
house Purple Abstract Flower
Desertfox
04-30 05:30 PM
I sincerely hope that your interpretation is correct!
For all those who are upset with the House hearing, please take it easy. Please do not expect the hearing to discuss the details of each and every GC applicant's case. The objective of the hearing was to bring the folks involved in visa bulletins and GC processing, and make them all publically say and agree that Lofgren-Sensenbrenner bill will not flood the country with new people on the borders but at the same time since the federal agencies did not do their job properly, so it would make sense to recapture the visa numbers, and that's it.
I think that this objective was achieved pretty handsomely without much opposition. So everybody was on the same page, other than Ranking member King, whose job in such meetings is to oppose whatever the committee chair is proposing. Rep. King did not have much to say as Rep. Sensenbrenner has co-sponsored the bill. Noticeably, Rep. Gutierrez supported the bill, which means Hispanic Caucus may not oppose it either, hopefully. So it was all good.
For all those who are upset with the House hearing, please take it easy. Please do not expect the hearing to discuss the details of each and every GC applicant's case. The objective of the hearing was to bring the folks involved in visa bulletins and GC processing, and make them all publically say and agree that Lofgren-Sensenbrenner bill will not flood the country with new people on the borders but at the same time since the federal agencies did not do their job properly, so it would make sense to recapture the visa numbers, and that's it.
I think that this objective was achieved pretty handsomely without much opposition. So everybody was on the same page, other than Ranking member King, whose job in such meetings is to oppose whatever the committee chair is proposing. Rep. King did not have much to say as Rep. Sensenbrenner has co-sponsored the bill. Noticeably, Rep. Gutierrez supported the bill, which means Hispanic Caucus may not oppose it either, hopefully. So it was all good.
tattoo Abstract
lengthylabor
03-04 12:31 PM
related.... my PD is no where near current.... but got an email for RFE on dependent application yesterday.....
gcformeornot,
Is your application with NSC or TSC ?
gcformeornot,
Is your application with NSC or TSC ?
more...
pictures Abstract Cute Backgrounds
jonty_11
05-01 02:31 PM
The meeting really saddens me though. That is the extent of anyone's power to get USCIS moving? Just hinting to King that the congress is displeased?
I mean I'm pretty sure King is gonna just shrug it off. Listen to how deluded the man sounds. He thinks USCIS is doing a great job, what with all that bragging about efficiency. Obviously he doesn't realize he's standing there, in that meeting. because the efficiency he's bragging about is clearly NOT ENOUGH. In fact, it's pretty much shitty.
To make things worse, those people in there are controlling the fates of thousands of waiting applicants. And they don't even seem to know the difference btw H1 and 485.
I don't want to just go on feeding this negative train of thought. I just wish something more effective can be done. Isn't there a better solution?
IV is our best chance...Lets hope the bills Iv is pushing get some floor time. I will again say that as difficult and impossible as it may sound (given election yr n'all) IV is the only entity that we can pin our hopes on.
I mean I'm pretty sure King is gonna just shrug it off. Listen to how deluded the man sounds. He thinks USCIS is doing a great job, what with all that bragging about efficiency. Obviously he doesn't realize he's standing there, in that meeting. because the efficiency he's bragging about is clearly NOT ENOUGH. In fact, it's pretty much shitty.
To make things worse, those people in there are controlling the fates of thousands of waiting applicants. And they don't even seem to know the difference btw H1 and 485.
I don't want to just go on feeding this negative train of thought. I just wish something more effective can be done. Isn't there a better solution?
IV is our best chance...Lets hope the bills Iv is pushing get some floor time. I will again say that as difficult and impossible as it may sound (given election yr n'all) IV is the only entity that we can pin our hopes on.
dresses Purple Abstract
superdesi2100
09-10 11:25 AM
Thanks for all the efforts. Donated 100$ via paypal. Coming to the rally as well.
more...
makeup Abstract Wallpaper Purple
gc28262
06-11 03:30 PM
I keep reading we should fight for out rights and all. I am just curious
where does it say if on is on H1B or F1, he or she has a right to get a GC. GC or citizenship is a privilege, we cant demand it or force someone to give it to us. Its a simple demand and supply situation, there are more visa seekers then there is availability and therefore there is a waiting period. i am not sure why we don't accept the simple fact that there are way too many people from developing country like ours moving to US, and not everyone can be accommodated ASAP. i think US has every right to do what it thinks is best for her, even if we don't agree with that,
And those who say its discrimination, discrimination is when people from Bihar are beaten up on the streets of mumbai cause they are taking jobs away from marathi manus. Had there been so many techies from around the world taking up jobs in India, we would have seen street lynching.
nitinboston,
If you feel you don't deserve a GC, we are fine with that.
However for most of the people on this forum, we deserve it.
Please watch this Aman Kapoor Video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqHz7IGoYWQ
"In order to ask for something, you should feel that you deserve it."
It is that simple !
where does it say if on is on H1B or F1, he or she has a right to get a GC. GC or citizenship is a privilege, we cant demand it or force someone to give it to us. Its a simple demand and supply situation, there are more visa seekers then there is availability and therefore there is a waiting period. i am not sure why we don't accept the simple fact that there are way too many people from developing country like ours moving to US, and not everyone can be accommodated ASAP. i think US has every right to do what it thinks is best for her, even if we don't agree with that,
And those who say its discrimination, discrimination is when people from Bihar are beaten up on the streets of mumbai cause they are taking jobs away from marathi manus. Had there been so many techies from around the world taking up jobs in India, we would have seen street lynching.
nitinboston,
If you feel you don't deserve a GC, we are fine with that.
However for most of the people on this forum, we deserve it.
Please watch this Aman Kapoor Video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqHz7IGoYWQ
"In order to ask for something, you should feel that you deserve it."
It is that simple !
girlfriend Purple wallpaper from M S
susie
07-15 11:19 AM
APPENDIX: REFORM SOLUTIONS
The Need for a Compassionate Visa
Solutions
Subsection (3) should be reworded to clarify its application to derivative beneficiaries as follows
�(3) RETENTION OF PRIORITY DATE- If the age of an alien is determined under paragraph (1) to be 21 years of age or older,
(A) for the purposes of subsections (a)(4), the alien's petition shall automatically be converted to the appropriate category and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the original petition, and
(B) for the purposes of subsections (d), the petition on which the alien was a derivative beneficiary shall automatically be converted to a new petition with the appropriate category once their Parent has permanent resident status and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the alien parent�s original petition. This is without prejudice to a Parent�s right to object to such converted petition. �
This new division into (A) and (B) makes a more appropriate distinction between principal beneficiaries and derivative beneficiaries. (B) also clarifies a Parent who does not want to petition their over 21 unmarried son or daughter, is permitted to oppose the automatic conversion of the application.
In addition, after four and half years since its enactment, the USCIS has still failed to issue implementing rules and a private bill should be introduced requiring the USCIS to perform its statutory duty to provide rules.
If the new points system is implemented, INA, section 203(h), becomes redundant in relation to future applicants. In this case a new provision should be added permitting all derivative beneficiaries to be considered as a child regardless of when they age out and when the petition becomes current. This would be a temporary relief measure for any derivative beneficiary currently subject to the family-based petitions so they do not age out while the remaining petitions are being cleared.
Removal of Child Status Protection Act of 2002 (CSPA), section 8
Section 8 of the CSPA provides provisions preventing the retroactive application of the legislation. As a result many beneficiaries have to wait in excess of 30 years for an immigrant visa. Derivative beneficiaries that were subject to wait times and aged out cannot apply the benefits of the CSPA if their parent�s petition was processed before August 2002. This means they are forced to back of the line; after already having waited up to 20 years, they are forced to wait for another lengthy period up to 20 years in the F2B category.
Therefore, section 8 has to be repealed to enable retroactive applicability. It cannot be right that if these same people had not abided with US immigration laws and entered illegally, they would be able to get status to remain and work in the USA under the proposed Z visa. However, by abiding by the law, they are instead forced to wait outside the USA for over 30 years in total since the start of the original immigrant visa application because they were ejected out of one line due to aging out as a result of the prolonged wait times, only to be forced to the back of a new immigrant visa line.
Dream Act
This is currently incorporated within the STRIVE Act (sections 621 et seq.) and presumably will be brought forward in the upcoming Bill subject to final agreement by the Senators. However, there is ambiguity as to whether children in the USA who enter legally benefit from its provisions. This has to be clarified to ensure it applies not only to children who entered the USA illegally, but also to those who entered legally, such as in derivative status on an E2 visa of their Parent. The ambiguity is made worse because the STRIVE Bill includes the Dream Act in subtitle B of Title VI Legalization of Undocumented Individuals. It is an absurd situation if legal nonimmigrant children are not given at least the same equal treatment as illegal children. The future Bill should incorporate the DREAM Act into a separate Title so does not give the appearance it applies to illegal migrant children only.
E2 Investors and Rep. Heather Wilson�s Proposed E2 Nonimmigrant Investor Adjustment Act of 2007
We strongly reiterate our support for this proposed legislation and urge you to do same. However, we urge you to go further by removing the proposed 3,000 cap or, at the very least, increase the proposed 3,000 annual cap to a more reasonable number such as 20,000 and/or provide annual increases to meet market demand to avoid backlogs and to avoid having to revisit the issue in future. Aside from our own members, E2 investors provide billions of dollars of investment in the US economy and much needed employment. They should be provided with a pathway to permanent residency and citizenship for their dedication and commitment to this country. It is undoubtedly very odd that illegal immigrants are receiving a pathway to permanent residency whereas E2 investors are not. It sends a clear message that entering the USA illegally is preferable because it provides a path to citizenship, whereas entering legally and working hard, investing substantial amounts of capital and employing US citizens for the benefit of the US economy does not (unless you are the extremely rare exception that qualifies under the EB5 investment visa).
The Need for a Compassionate Visa
Solutions
Subsection (3) should be reworded to clarify its application to derivative beneficiaries as follows
�(3) RETENTION OF PRIORITY DATE- If the age of an alien is determined under paragraph (1) to be 21 years of age or older,
(A) for the purposes of subsections (a)(4), the alien's petition shall automatically be converted to the appropriate category and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the original petition, and
(B) for the purposes of subsections (d), the petition on which the alien was a derivative beneficiary shall automatically be converted to a new petition with the appropriate category once their Parent has permanent resident status and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the alien parent�s original petition. This is without prejudice to a Parent�s right to object to such converted petition. �
This new division into (A) and (B) makes a more appropriate distinction between principal beneficiaries and derivative beneficiaries. (B) also clarifies a Parent who does not want to petition their over 21 unmarried son or daughter, is permitted to oppose the automatic conversion of the application.
In addition, after four and half years since its enactment, the USCIS has still failed to issue implementing rules and a private bill should be introduced requiring the USCIS to perform its statutory duty to provide rules.
If the new points system is implemented, INA, section 203(h), becomes redundant in relation to future applicants. In this case a new provision should be added permitting all derivative beneficiaries to be considered as a child regardless of when they age out and when the petition becomes current. This would be a temporary relief measure for any derivative beneficiary currently subject to the family-based petitions so they do not age out while the remaining petitions are being cleared.
Removal of Child Status Protection Act of 2002 (CSPA), section 8
Section 8 of the CSPA provides provisions preventing the retroactive application of the legislation. As a result many beneficiaries have to wait in excess of 30 years for an immigrant visa. Derivative beneficiaries that were subject to wait times and aged out cannot apply the benefits of the CSPA if their parent�s petition was processed before August 2002. This means they are forced to back of the line; after already having waited up to 20 years, they are forced to wait for another lengthy period up to 20 years in the F2B category.
Therefore, section 8 has to be repealed to enable retroactive applicability. It cannot be right that if these same people had not abided with US immigration laws and entered illegally, they would be able to get status to remain and work in the USA under the proposed Z visa. However, by abiding by the law, they are instead forced to wait outside the USA for over 30 years in total since the start of the original immigrant visa application because they were ejected out of one line due to aging out as a result of the prolonged wait times, only to be forced to the back of a new immigrant visa line.
Dream Act
This is currently incorporated within the STRIVE Act (sections 621 et seq.) and presumably will be brought forward in the upcoming Bill subject to final agreement by the Senators. However, there is ambiguity as to whether children in the USA who enter legally benefit from its provisions. This has to be clarified to ensure it applies not only to children who entered the USA illegally, but also to those who entered legally, such as in derivative status on an E2 visa of their Parent. The ambiguity is made worse because the STRIVE Bill includes the Dream Act in subtitle B of Title VI Legalization of Undocumented Individuals. It is an absurd situation if legal nonimmigrant children are not given at least the same equal treatment as illegal children. The future Bill should incorporate the DREAM Act into a separate Title so does not give the appearance it applies to illegal migrant children only.
E2 Investors and Rep. Heather Wilson�s Proposed E2 Nonimmigrant Investor Adjustment Act of 2007
We strongly reiterate our support for this proposed legislation and urge you to do same. However, we urge you to go further by removing the proposed 3,000 cap or, at the very least, increase the proposed 3,000 annual cap to a more reasonable number such as 20,000 and/or provide annual increases to meet market demand to avoid backlogs and to avoid having to revisit the issue in future. Aside from our own members, E2 investors provide billions of dollars of investment in the US economy and much needed employment. They should be provided with a pathway to permanent residency and citizenship for their dedication and commitment to this country. It is undoubtedly very odd that illegal immigrants are receiving a pathway to permanent residency whereas E2 investors are not. It sends a clear message that entering the USA illegally is preferable because it provides a path to citizenship, whereas entering legally and working hard, investing substantial amounts of capital and employing US citizens for the benefit of the US economy does not (unless you are the extremely rare exception that qualifies under the EB5 investment visa).
hairstyles abstract purple
kshitijnt
02-09 09:18 PM
In months of June, Jul and Aug , many EADs & APs are up for renewal due to July07 fiasco. So by moving dates forward, USCIS can cash in lot of reveue as it has to issue only 1 yr EAD in that case. If the dates are not current, they will have to issue 2 yr EAD and although they dont mean to approve many cases, I tend to think they will keep moving dates forward.
amsgc
05-29 10:32 PM
Receipt ID: 0375-0762-4300-7538
Let's keep 'em comming!
Let's keep 'em comming!
radhay
05-15 05:19 PM
bpratap, faced similar issue since they don't understand. Even if they do they are worried it may cause trouble when they sell the loan to some one else.
I have refinanced with Penfed and they don't have this requirement. It helps to put 20% down payment as some banks waive this 3 year rule with that.
Can you post the name of the bank so others don't waste time and money with those banks.
I have refinanced with Penfed and they don't have this requirement. It helps to put 20% down payment as some banks waive this 3 year rule with that.
Can you post the name of the bank so others don't waste time and money with those banks.
No comments:
Post a Comment