matreen
10-17 01:58 AM
Guys,
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
wallpaper pictures miley cyrus 2011 hair
Marphad
03-17 01:17 PM
min contribution required is $25 per month
I support donations but not mandatory donations. Its not a good idea.
More, I want to understand little more about this. Is it $25 only per month minimum subscription to visit donor only forums for every one?
I support donations but not mandatory donations. Its not a good idea.
More, I want to understand little more about this. Is it $25 only per month minimum subscription to visit donor only forums for every one?
HumJumboHathuJumbo
09-10 12:58 PM
I, for one, am happy with this Oct visa bulletin. This is how it should be. First give GCs to all those with < 2003 PD. You guys with 2006 and 2007 pd should be glad you even got to file I-485 and EAD. What are you bitching about?.
I dont care about the red dots. I stand corrected. you guys are being selfish.
I dont care about the red dots. I stand corrected. you guys are being selfish.
2011 Recent forbearers: Miley Cyrus
Blessing&Lifeisbeautiful
08-03 09:08 PM
guys,
any updates on the bridge bill for schedule A Nurses.
Heard that it is proposed and not passed till today. Any future predictions. The healthcare shortage is critical.
any updates on the bridge bill for schedule A Nurses.
any updates on the bridge bill for schedule A Nurses.
Heard that it is proposed and not passed till today. Any future predictions. The healthcare shortage is critical.
any updates on the bridge bill for schedule A Nurses.
more...
ItIsNotFunny
07-06 02:25 PM
Guys,
Please stay away from hard language. Having suggestion for election is a completely acceptable but please lets not accuse anyone. If anyone needs accoutability, I don't IV Core people would have any issues to give you those in person. I know they are really really shy discussing them openly.
Please don't forget end goal, to have a fair GC process. Any suggestions for action items are encouraged like snathan has a nice action item suggested for visa re-stamping. Please support.
You don't need IV core's approval to do something good for community. They are only concerned when you use IV's name.
Please stay away from hard language. Having suggestion for election is a completely acceptable but please lets not accuse anyone. If anyone needs accoutability, I don't IV Core people would have any issues to give you those in person. I know they are really really shy discussing them openly.
Please don't forget end goal, to have a fair GC process. Any suggestions for action items are encouraged like snathan has a nice action item suggested for visa re-stamping. Please support.
You don't need IV core's approval to do something good for community. They are only concerned when you use IV's name.
desi485
11-14 06:09 PM
One of IV members 'lazycis' (he is a knowledgable & senior member) also mentioned this, which exactly matches with what RG said:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=301999&postcount=16
so I am sure there are some provisionsI hope 'lazycis' will provide some more info if he sees this post.
Edit: Chandu - please click this link to read on RG's forums. (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6461)
Chandu, also see this link about cancellation of employment authorisation.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=a3791be48df2a5191102c84123773141&rgn=div8&view=text&node=8:1.0.1.2.54.2.1.3&idno=8
� 274a.14 Termination of employment authorization.
(a) Automatic termination of employment authorization. (1) Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter shall automatically terminate upon the occurrence of one of the following events:
(i) The expiration date specified by the Service on the employment authorization document is reached;
(ii) Exclusion or deportation proceedings are instituted (however, this shall not preclude the authorization of employment pursuant to �274a.12(c) of this part where appropriate); or
(iii) The alien is granted voluntary departure.
(2) Termination of employment authorization pursuant to this paragraph does not require the service of a notice of intent to revoke; employment authorization terminates upon the occurrence of any event enumerated in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
However, automatic revocation under this section does not preclude reapplication for employment authorization under �274.12(c) of this part.
(b) Revocation of employment authorization —(1) Basis for revocation of employment authorization. Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter may be revoked by the district director:
(i) Prior to the expiration date, when it appears that any condition upon which it was granted has not been met or no longer exists, or for good cause shown; or
(ii) Upon a showing that the information contained in the application is not true and correct.
(2) Notice of intent to revoke employment authorization. When a district director determines that employment authorization should be revoked prior to the expiration date specified by the Service, he or she shall serve written notice of intent to revoke the employment authorization. The notice will cite the reasons indicating that revocation is warranted. The alien will be granted a period of fifteen days from the date of service of the notice within which to submit countervailing evidence. The decision by the district director shall be final and no appeal shall lie from the decision to revoke the authorization.
(c) Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987. (1) Temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987, pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(c) (�109.1(b) contained in the 8 CFR edition revised as of January 1, 1987), shall automatically terminate on the date specified by the Service on the document issued to the alien, or on December 31, 1996, whichever is earlier. Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization does not preclude a subsequent application for temporary employment authorization.
(2) A document issued by the Service prior to June 1, 1987, that authorized temporary employment authorization for any period beyond December 31, 1996, is null and void pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of this section. The alien shall be issued a new employment authorization document upon application to the Service if the alien is eligible for temporary employment authorization pursuant to 274A.12(c).
(3) No notice of intent to revoke is necessary for the automatic termination of temporary employment authorization pursuant to this part.
[52 FR 16221, May 1, 1987, as amended at 53 FR 8614, Mar. 16, 1988; 53 FR 20087, June 1, 1988; 61 FR 46537, Sept. 4, 1996]
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=301999&postcount=16
so I am sure there are some provisionsI hope 'lazycis' will provide some more info if he sees this post.
Edit: Chandu - please click this link to read on RG's forums. (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6461)
Chandu, also see this link about cancellation of employment authorisation.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=a3791be48df2a5191102c84123773141&rgn=div8&view=text&node=8:1.0.1.2.54.2.1.3&idno=8
� 274a.14 Termination of employment authorization.
(a) Automatic termination of employment authorization. (1) Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter shall automatically terminate upon the occurrence of one of the following events:
(i) The expiration date specified by the Service on the employment authorization document is reached;
(ii) Exclusion or deportation proceedings are instituted (however, this shall not preclude the authorization of employment pursuant to �274a.12(c) of this part where appropriate); or
(iii) The alien is granted voluntary departure.
(2) Termination of employment authorization pursuant to this paragraph does not require the service of a notice of intent to revoke; employment authorization terminates upon the occurrence of any event enumerated in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
However, automatic revocation under this section does not preclude reapplication for employment authorization under �274.12(c) of this part.
(b) Revocation of employment authorization —(1) Basis for revocation of employment authorization. Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter may be revoked by the district director:
(i) Prior to the expiration date, when it appears that any condition upon which it was granted has not been met or no longer exists, or for good cause shown; or
(ii) Upon a showing that the information contained in the application is not true and correct.
(2) Notice of intent to revoke employment authorization. When a district director determines that employment authorization should be revoked prior to the expiration date specified by the Service, he or she shall serve written notice of intent to revoke the employment authorization. The notice will cite the reasons indicating that revocation is warranted. The alien will be granted a period of fifteen days from the date of service of the notice within which to submit countervailing evidence. The decision by the district director shall be final and no appeal shall lie from the decision to revoke the authorization.
(c) Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987. (1) Temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987, pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(c) (�109.1(b) contained in the 8 CFR edition revised as of January 1, 1987), shall automatically terminate on the date specified by the Service on the document issued to the alien, or on December 31, 1996, whichever is earlier. Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization does not preclude a subsequent application for temporary employment authorization.
(2) A document issued by the Service prior to June 1, 1987, that authorized temporary employment authorization for any period beyond December 31, 1996, is null and void pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of this section. The alien shall be issued a new employment authorization document upon application to the Service if the alien is eligible for temporary employment authorization pursuant to 274A.12(c).
(3) No notice of intent to revoke is necessary for the automatic termination of temporary employment authorization pursuant to this part.
[52 FR 16221, May 1, 1987, as amended at 53 FR 8614, Mar. 16, 1988; 53 FR 20087, June 1, 1988; 61 FR 46537, Sept. 4, 1996]
more...
valuablehurdle
06-21 11:32 AM
Checked with my lawyer. 20 cases pending since January. Atlanta..
My Labor was filed April 15th, 2007. EB2. 'In process'.
My Labor was filed April 15th, 2007. EB2. 'In process'.
2010 miley cyrus hair color red.
ggyro
07-20 06:07 PM
There is another thread on this same topic that presents a discussion on how the ammendment was not rejected per se, but it was more like including the ammendment that was rejected.
From the daily dairy (thomas.loc.gov):
"By 55 yeas to 40 nays..Senate rejected the motion .. with respect to Cornyn Amendment No. 2339 (to Amendment No. 2327), to provide interim relief .... Subsequently, the point of order that the amendment, was not germane, was sustained, and the amendment thus fell."
From the daily dairy (thomas.loc.gov):
"By 55 yeas to 40 nays..Senate rejected the motion .. with respect to Cornyn Amendment No. 2339 (to Amendment No. 2327), to provide interim relief .... Subsequently, the point of order that the amendment, was not germane, was sustained, and the amendment thus fell."
more...
delhirocks
07-28 06:55 PM
Are you sure it was Atlanta and not Chicago?. Your timeline suggests it was applied in Chicago.
My company applied for PERM ALC EB-2 category at Atlanta on 18th June 2007, got it approved on 20th June. Received hard copy on 26th June.
My company applied for PERM ALC EB-2 category at Atlanta on 18th June 2007, got it approved on 20th June. Received hard copy on 26th June.
hair miley cyrus hair colour 2009.
oliTwist
08-12 03:09 PM
Do not generalise all consulting companies...At least people working in these consulting companies sponsored GC and buying house and spending their money here. Most of the fradulent GC process was done by these croocked indian companies. They exploited the EB1C system to the maximum extend. Most of the times, they are not filing the GC and keep the employees as slaves or they exploit the EB1c fo their boot lickers.
Does anyone know such a bootlicker getting EB1c based GC? I wonder what a smart aleck that guy must been. There was a piece on NYT about India's penchant with lines and cutting lines by the uppity mongers..:D
Does anyone know such a bootlicker getting EB1c based GC? I wonder what a smart aleck that guy must been. There was a piece on NYT about India's penchant with lines and cutting lines by the uppity mongers..:D
more...
chanduv23
05-14 12:21 PM
There are plans on IVs agenda to see if we can collectively help ourselves on these issues.
I recommend all members to use every channel you get to fix issues like these.
We are entitled for a fair process and we must make sure every application is treated in a fair manner.
Folks - anyone can face these issues.
If you have any case problems, please contact the Ombudsman, contact your law makers. Let everyone be aware of these issues.
I recommend all members to use every channel you get to fix issues like these.
We are entitled for a fair process and we must make sure every application is treated in a fair manner.
Folks - anyone can face these issues.
If you have any case problems, please contact the Ombudsman, contact your law makers. Let everyone be aware of these issues.
hot Rihanna changes her hair color
JA1HIND
04-01 08:07 PM
Excuse me...What do u wanna ask the USCIS? U wanna put ur hand where it dozn't belong to? Good luck with that!!! I dont mind so many red dots. But I just wanna make my point. Just imagine one thing... U have a family. Someone from the outside doesn't like the way you are treating ur wife and asks u to divorce ur wife. How wud u feel? U r a NOBODY. Dont u get it? U just cant change a foreign land's system. Protest, conduct rallies...thats fine. But u have no rights to dig and delve into how USCIS is functioning. U R A NOBODY.
Dard-E-Disco I have read some of your comments on this thread.. and feel sorry for your state of mind....until you feel better and get back to your normal senses here is the URL you may want to try and this will keep you busy for sometime.. http://edtech.kennesaw.edu/web/alphabet.html
look at your comments that are just useless, second hand and hopeless imagination.....when you get a chance in your free time go and get your brain screws tightened, you may feel better ...good luck:D
Dard-E-Disco I have read some of your comments on this thread.. and feel sorry for your state of mind....until you feel better and get back to your normal senses here is the URL you may want to try and this will keep you busy for sometime.. http://edtech.kennesaw.edu/web/alphabet.html
look at your comments that are just useless, second hand and hopeless imagination.....when you get a chance in your free time go and get your brain screws tightened, you may feel better ...good luck:D
more...
house hair miley cyrus hair colour
americandesi
05-02 11:10 PM
what king meant was that anyone could apply for 485 and get an EAD which has no work restrictions as a H1 and enjoy the same benifits someone with a GC holds..down the line(after years of wait) even if the 485 gets rejected he/she has njoyed all the privilages or work/travel by getting his/her AP/EAD...
well damn you king, issue GCs faster then!
King's statement doesn't make any sense. If you equate the same logic to GC holders, then they had enjoyed all the privileges of work/travel by getting his/her GC, even if their naturalization gets rejected down the line.
well damn you king, issue GCs faster then!
King's statement doesn't make any sense. If you equate the same logic to GC holders, then they had enjoyed all the privileges of work/travel by getting his/her GC, even if their naturalization gets rejected down the line.
tattoo miley cyrus hair color.
digital2k
05-13 02:34 PM
Don't wait any longer
Everyone must call
Thank You for helping Yourslef
Everyone must call
Thank You for helping Yourslef
more...
pictures Miley Cyrus Hair - - Long and
aray
08-14 08:37 PM
I totally agree with you. I have read the original message several times too and I am sure they mean June 2008. Our only hope is if they meant Mexico only, and not al EB categories.
I have read the Original quote several times and dont see how they mean June 2007, To me it is clear that they are talking about June 2008.
Sorry to sound so negative, but I think we are looking at something like Sept 2001 for EB3-I in Oct bulletin.
I have read the Original quote several times and dont see how they mean June 2007, To me it is clear that they are talking about June 2008.
Sorry to sound so negative, but I think we are looking at something like Sept 2001 for EB3-I in Oct bulletin.
dresses Miley+cyrus+red+hair+2010
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...
makeup miley-cyrus-mtv-awards
newbee7
07-05 11:29 PM
Dugg! and posted a comment...
Please also digg comments.
Please also digg comments.
girlfriend miley cyrus hair colour 2009.
u.misc
12-11 11:49 AM
Looks like they are changing the spillover rules again from Horizontal to Vertical this is bad news for EB2 I
Pardon my ignorance.... Can you enlighten me as how Vertical and Horizontal spillover works ? What exactly happens in Vertical spillover and how is it different from horizontal.
Pardon my ignorance.... Can you enlighten me as how Vertical and Horizontal spillover works ? What exactly happens in Vertical spillover and how is it different from horizontal.
hairstyles miley cyrus hair color in
raj_vagc_oct02
01-13 04:13 PM
Hi All,
I'm new to immigration Voice. I've read abt this in immigration portal and understand that a group of people are leading this. I wish them all the best and i extend my full support. Also i heard that this group is collecting funds. Can someone please point me where would i contribute.
Thanks
RAJ
SWA: Virginia
SWA Receipt Date (Priority Date): October 31,2002
EB2 - RIR
Forwarded to Philadelphia Regional DOL on June 22, 2004
BEC Case Number: P-04282-*****
45 Day Letter Received and Replied : Feb 2005
I'm new to immigration Voice. I've read abt this in immigration portal and understand that a group of people are leading this. I wish them all the best and i extend my full support. Also i heard that this group is collecting funds. Can someone please point me where would i contribute.
Thanks
RAJ
SWA: Virginia
SWA Receipt Date (Priority Date): October 31,2002
EB2 - RIR
Forwarded to Philadelphia Regional DOL on June 22, 2004
BEC Case Number: P-04282-*****
45 Day Letter Received and Replied : Feb 2005
avis
09-01 01:38 PM
Priority date December 2002. EB3. Still waiting and waiting....
End is not yet in sight.
End is not yet in sight.
indio0617
03-09 10:09 AM
both amendments J-1 and removal cap for Nurses (India) will pass
No comments:
Post a Comment