arihant
12-28 11:08 AM
All the gurus on this forum,
I have this questions and I have feeling some of you are considering doijng this;;;;
My I-140 and 485 was concurrently filed in Dec2002. I-140 got approved. 485 is pending.
As i decided that this GC process should not hold me captive i went ahead made plans for my MBA education. Now I have an admission from INSEAD france for classes starting 2007.
IF my employer gives me Pesonal Leave of Abscene for one year....without pay
can I take off for studies without impacting the GCprocess?
Since I will be moving out of my residenec should I inform the INS of a new address friends) so that they can send EAD/AP etc..
I would love to connect to anyone who is similar situation......
PLEASE respond
:(
Why is your 485 case pending since 2002? Is it stuck in Name Check or due to retrogression. I thought that 485 cases are progressing relatively fast as long as the case is not affected by retrogression and is not stuck in the black hole called "name check"!
I have this questions and I have feeling some of you are considering doijng this;;;;
My I-140 and 485 was concurrently filed in Dec2002. I-140 got approved. 485 is pending.
As i decided that this GC process should not hold me captive i went ahead made plans for my MBA education. Now I have an admission from INSEAD france for classes starting 2007.
IF my employer gives me Pesonal Leave of Abscene for one year....without pay
can I take off for studies without impacting the GCprocess?
Since I will be moving out of my residenec should I inform the INS of a new address friends) so that they can send EAD/AP etc..
I would love to connect to anyone who is similar situation......
PLEASE respond
:(
Why is your 485 case pending since 2002? Is it stuck in Name Check or due to retrogression. I thought that 485 cases are progressing relatively fast as long as the case is not affected by retrogression and is not stuck in the black hole called "name check"!
wallpaper justin bieber fail pic. Fails Of The Week: Justin; Fails Of The Week: Justin
retropain
09-05 01:47 PM
The CIR includes increases in legal immigration. If the dems take the house, then the house alongwith the already pro-immigrant senate will pass big increases in immigration (family and eb). If i was a republican, i would try to pass CIR after the november elections and before the new congress in January, when he party still has some control. If the dems solve the immigration issue in the next congress when they have the reins, the hispanic vote will heavily tilt democratic for a long time to come.
GCMan007
03-12 09:30 PM
Did you get second finger print notice before approval? When did you go for first fingerprint notice?
I did not get a second finger printing notice (yet?). The 485 approval notice said that a biometric appt may be sent or the card will arrive. Just keeping my fingers crossed.
My first FP was done in Dec 2007
I did not get a second finger printing notice (yet?). The 485 approval notice said that a biometric appt may be sent or the card will arrive. Just keeping my fingers crossed.
My first FP was done in Dec 2007
2011 justin bieber fail pic. justin bieber fail pictures.
varshadas
04-21 03:56 PM
I am not sure which location you went to. I went to the infopass in Newark, NJ and I was able to get status on name check. They could not give any other information, but they were able to tell me that my name check was complete.
As mentioned in an earlier post, you can always leverage your Congressman.
Thanks
Varsha
As mentioned in an earlier post, you can always leverage your Congressman.
Thanks
Varsha
more...
looivy
08-14 12:02 PM
My lawyer sent my I-485 to Vermont instead of Nebraska. I don't know what to do now. I am in lot of stress.
Can I send another application before Aug 17th. I have not got rejection on first one. Will this confuse USCIS?
Gurus, please advice
(BTW I have an approved I-140.)
Can I send another application before Aug 17th. I have not got rejection on first one. Will this confuse USCIS?
Gurus, please advice
(BTW I have an approved I-140.)
chanduv23
03-04 11:36 AM
The answer could be
"I have unrestricted employment authorization that allows me to work for any US employer just like green card holder" [example]
Employment can ask for valid employment authorization, but not for kind of employment authorization.
U.S. Department of Labor - Find It By Topic - Equal Employment Opportunity - Immigration (http://www.savingmatters.dol.gov/dol/topic/discrimination/immdisc.htm)
[From the link]
The Immigration and Nationality Act (http://www.savingmatters.dol.gov/cgi-bin/leave-dol.asp?exiturl=http://uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/INA.htm&exitTitle=Immigration_and_Nationality_Act&fedpage=yes) prohibits employers (when hiring, discharging, or recruiting or referring for a fee) from discriminating because of national origin against U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, and authorized aliens or discriminating because of citizenship status against U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, and the following classes of a aliens with work authorization: permanent residents, temporary residents (that is, individuals who have gone through the legalization program), refugees, and asylees.
________________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Well - we all know this but if the question is "Do you have a Green Card? Yes or No ?" if you give the above answer, you have not provided a specific answer.
If you notice - job sites like dice etc... have drop downs that make you choose your work authorization (GC, EAD, H1b .....) and your work authorization is automatically visible there.
Monster, careerbuilder and some job sites do the right thing by asking "Are you authorized to work for any employer? or do you need sponership" - which makes sense to ask. An employer always has a choice to sponsor or not because additional costs are associated.
"I have unrestricted employment authorization that allows me to work for any US employer just like green card holder" [example]
Employment can ask for valid employment authorization, but not for kind of employment authorization.
U.S. Department of Labor - Find It By Topic - Equal Employment Opportunity - Immigration (http://www.savingmatters.dol.gov/dol/topic/discrimination/immdisc.htm)
[From the link]
The Immigration and Nationality Act (http://www.savingmatters.dol.gov/cgi-bin/leave-dol.asp?exiturl=http://uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/INA.htm&exitTitle=Immigration_and_Nationality_Act&fedpage=yes) prohibits employers (when hiring, discharging, or recruiting or referring for a fee) from discriminating because of national origin against U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, and authorized aliens or discriminating because of citizenship status against U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, and the following classes of a aliens with work authorization: permanent residents, temporary residents (that is, individuals who have gone through the legalization program), refugees, and asylees.
________________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Well - we all know this but if the question is "Do you have a Green Card? Yes or No ?" if you give the above answer, you have not provided a specific answer.
If you notice - job sites like dice etc... have drop downs that make you choose your work authorization (GC, EAD, H1b .....) and your work authorization is automatically visible there.
Monster, careerbuilder and some job sites do the right thing by asking "Are you authorized to work for any employer? or do you need sponership" - which makes sense to ask. An employer always has a choice to sponsor or not because additional costs are associated.
more...
HereIComeGC
03-26 02:07 PM
I wish this date business was like the money market - we could have done some Technical Analysis, drawn some Fibonacci expansions, looked at Bollinger Bands, plotted the MACD and RSI along with the Fast & Slow Stochastics and PSARs with the Pivot Points and trend lines ...
But it is nothing like that... it behaves like every day is a news day - and hence - all analysis fails ... things work on sentiments...
Even NASDAQ could be more predictive than this...
I beg to differ my friend. Stock market now a days is also run pretty much on sentiments without logic. One day up 300 next day down 300...pretty much like USCIS!!
But it is nothing like that... it behaves like every day is a news day - and hence - all analysis fails ... things work on sentiments...
Even NASDAQ could be more predictive than this...
I beg to differ my friend. Stock market now a days is also run pretty much on sentiments without logic. One day up 300 next day down 300...pretty much like USCIS!!
2010 justin bieber fail pic. justin bieber fail blog. justin bieber fail blog.
i-serf
04-20 04:46 PM
I am on H1/valid I-94/ expired visa/ I-140 in progress.
My NJ license is set to expire in about two months.
Given the recent situation with MD state bill HB387 is anybody in the saimilar boat, and what avenues do we have?
My NJ license is set to expire in about two months.
Given the recent situation with MD state bill HB387 is anybody in the saimilar boat, and what avenues do we have?
more...
wandmaker
04-03 06:59 PM
Have had unfortunate turn of events and need your guidance.
I had a valid approved h1 petition and i-94 for 2005 through company A.
Company filed for extension of h1 in 2007 and received approved h1 and i-94 valid till 2010. Did not travel out of the country at that time.
Filed for AOS 485, EAD, AP in 2007. Traveled and entered US using AP in 2008.
USCIS did inquiry and has revoked 2005 h1 because of incorrect LCA filing by the company. They have also said that because of incorrect LCA filing, I am in violation of h1 status. Attorneys have advised that USCIS will retroactive hold me as 'out-of-status' but not unlawful present as I was working in good faith based on an approved petition and unexpired i-94s.
The 2007 h1 was also filed in similar fashion as the 2005 h1.
Although USCIS has not revoked current 2007-2010 h1, there is a possibility of that happening. The 485 might be denied in that case.
The only option is to get on h4 by applying from consulate in India.
Since I will be now answering yes to question 38 (have you violated terms of US visa, or unlawful present..?) I have also shown as intent to immigrate based on my 485 filing.
I want to know my chances of getting an h4 approved.
You need to add more clarity to bold words... For instance, if your work location in LCA was New York and you worked in San Francisco - Man you are in trouble..... Please post what was incorrect on the LCA and also fill in the profile, if you want the folks to consider responding to your query. My 2 cents.
I had a valid approved h1 petition and i-94 for 2005 through company A.
Company filed for extension of h1 in 2007 and received approved h1 and i-94 valid till 2010. Did not travel out of the country at that time.
Filed for AOS 485, EAD, AP in 2007. Traveled and entered US using AP in 2008.
USCIS did inquiry and has revoked 2005 h1 because of incorrect LCA filing by the company. They have also said that because of incorrect LCA filing, I am in violation of h1 status. Attorneys have advised that USCIS will retroactive hold me as 'out-of-status' but not unlawful present as I was working in good faith based on an approved petition and unexpired i-94s.
The 2007 h1 was also filed in similar fashion as the 2005 h1.
Although USCIS has not revoked current 2007-2010 h1, there is a possibility of that happening. The 485 might be denied in that case.
The only option is to get on h4 by applying from consulate in India.
Since I will be now answering yes to question 38 (have you violated terms of US visa, or unlawful present..?) I have also shown as intent to immigrate based on my 485 filing.
I want to know my chances of getting an h4 approved.
You need to add more clarity to bold words... For instance, if your work location in LCA was New York and you worked in San Francisco - Man you are in trouble..... Please post what was incorrect on the LCA and also fill in the profile, if you want the folks to consider responding to your query. My 2 cents.
hair justin bieber fail pic. JUSTIN BIEBER; JUSTIN BIEBER. rumz. Apr 12, 10:34 PM
ca_immigrant
01-14 05:43 PM
Congrats !
and thank you to desi485 for posting the link
Good one and particulary moving was the last point ... -:)
14. And yes, move the family first commitment at the top of your must-do list, now that you have less worry about re-entry, and make that long-delayed trip home to see your old folks one more time. (I am visiting my 83-yr old Dad, who still has more hair than I do, and less gray too, in June.)
I first laughed when I read about the hair..(I too have less and a lot grey at 35 ...LOL and actually had grey hair since 20....donnno y....
but then after a few minutes for some reason I almost had tears rolling down my eyes (reminded me about parents.....) ....well call my an emtional fool....
neways...I always pray to God that whaterver happens please always help me remeber my parents !! and never forget all the great things they have done for us !!!
(They are in India with my elder borther)
oops...sorry for writing something out of context....
but again Congrats !!
and thank you to desi485 for posting the link
Good one and particulary moving was the last point ... -:)
14. And yes, move the family first commitment at the top of your must-do list, now that you have less worry about re-entry, and make that long-delayed trip home to see your old folks one more time. (I am visiting my 83-yr old Dad, who still has more hair than I do, and less gray too, in June.)
I first laughed when I read about the hair..(I too have less and a lot grey at 35 ...LOL and actually had grey hair since 20....donnno y....
but then after a few minutes for some reason I almost had tears rolling down my eyes (reminded me about parents.....) ....well call my an emtional fool....
neways...I always pray to God that whaterver happens please always help me remeber my parents !! and never forget all the great things they have done for us !!!
(They are in India with my elder borther)
oops...sorry for writing something out of context....
but again Congrats !!
more...
lecter
January 4th, 2005, 11:34 PM
nice work. the technique works well. I like to make these moodier.....
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/data//501/7236bw-HL2C9754-med.jpg
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/data//501/7236BW-HL2C9756-med.jpg
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/data//501/7236bw-HL2C9754-med.jpg
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/data//501/7236BW-HL2C9756-med.jpg
hot Justin Bieber fails again ;) by sNx.#39; comment for MORE!
vedicman
01-04 08:34 AM
Ten years ago, George W. Bush came to Washington as the first new president in a generation or more who had deep personal convictions about immigration policy and some plans for where he wanted to go with it. He wasn't alone. Lots of people in lots of places were ready to work on the issue: Republicans, Democrats, Hispanic advocates, business leaders, even the Mexican government.
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
more...
house justin bieber pants falling
bhavana
05-24 07:51 AM
Good job Buddy
tattoo Justin Bieber in tears after
rayoflight
12-21 01:51 PM
Thanks all for your replies.
more...
pictures justin bieber fail pic. 13: Generation fail; 13: Generation fail
krishmunn
04-26 06:01 PM
between the USA: worldwide, except Europe --- 2 pieces of baggage max. 23kg
Lufthansa - Free baggage allowance (http://www.lufthansa.com/online/portal/lh/us/info_and_services/baggage?nodeid=2892236&l=en&cid=1000390&blt_p=US&blt_l=en&blt_t=Info_and_Services&blt_e=Info%20Service%20Sitemap&blt_n=Baggage&blt_z=Free%20baggage%20allowan&blt_c=US%7Cen%7CInfo_and_Services%7CInfo%20Service %20Sitemap%7CBaggage%7CFree%20baggage%20allowan#an cAbT3)
Lufthansa - Free baggage allowance (http://www.lufthansa.com/online/portal/lh/us/info_and_services/baggage?nodeid=2892236&l=en&cid=1000390&blt_p=US&blt_l=en&blt_t=Info_and_Services&blt_e=Info%20Service%20Sitemap&blt_n=Baggage&blt_z=Free%20baggage%20allowan&blt_c=US%7Cen%7CInfo_and_Services%7CInfo%20Service %20Sitemap%7CBaggage%7CFree%20baggage%20allowan#an cAbT3)
dresses justin bieber fail gif. justin
jay75
07-12 10:19 PM
Count me in for this law suit. I'm willing to contribute money for this.
Most people think law suit is a bad thing, but that is not right. In a democratic country law suit is the right way to deal with things. We are legal immigrants, we have all the rights to file a law suit, but with full support of IV.
People have already filed a law suit on the same day the President signed the bill! (yesterday, the wire tapping bill...)
By filing a law suit, all we are trying to do is to fix the laws which are not working. Basically, we are doing the right thing. Not only us, but future Legal immigrants will be benefitted, they don't have to go thru what we had to...
Here are the things that needs to be fixed...
1. Country quota
2. Recapturing visas.
3. 3 year EAD/AP
4. End the endless wait ( Proposing a new law )
5. Remove the same/similar confusion in AC21
What is "End the endless wait" ?
EAD is a very good example, If 90 days have passed after filing EAD, you have the option to go to a local USCIS office and get a temp one. We should have a similar option for all the peper work. For example, each and every stage in green card process should have a a day count for processing. Like name check should be completed in 180 days.
Basically, when we receive any receipt notice, it should have a statement which reads "We have received your application and we will take action within 180 days. If we fail to act by MM-DD-YYYY, Please go to the nearest USCIS for approval.."
Sounds little ambitious ?? well, we are not asking for too much, just a day count. Lets say if the whole Green card process takes 3 years or 10 years based on the day count for each stage, people can decide whether they want to immigrate to USA with a clear idea that it will take x days to become a permanent resident ( like how it works in all other countries except USA)
Even a person jailed gets to know how long he is going to spend his time behind bars, but we do not know when we will be free from this immigration mess!
__________________
Attended the DC Rally
Contribution: $150
Sent letters to President/IV
Status : I-485 pending, PD Feb 2005, EB3 - India
Most people think law suit is a bad thing, but that is not right. In a democratic country law suit is the right way to deal with things. We are legal immigrants, we have all the rights to file a law suit, but with full support of IV.
People have already filed a law suit on the same day the President signed the bill! (yesterday, the wire tapping bill...)
By filing a law suit, all we are trying to do is to fix the laws which are not working. Basically, we are doing the right thing. Not only us, but future Legal immigrants will be benefitted, they don't have to go thru what we had to...
Here are the things that needs to be fixed...
1. Country quota
2. Recapturing visas.
3. 3 year EAD/AP
4. End the endless wait ( Proposing a new law )
5. Remove the same/similar confusion in AC21
What is "End the endless wait" ?
EAD is a very good example, If 90 days have passed after filing EAD, you have the option to go to a local USCIS office and get a temp one. We should have a similar option for all the peper work. For example, each and every stage in green card process should have a a day count for processing. Like name check should be completed in 180 days.
Basically, when we receive any receipt notice, it should have a statement which reads "We have received your application and we will take action within 180 days. If we fail to act by MM-DD-YYYY, Please go to the nearest USCIS for approval.."
Sounds little ambitious ?? well, we are not asking for too much, just a day count. Lets say if the whole Green card process takes 3 years or 10 years based on the day count for each stage, people can decide whether they want to immigrate to USA with a clear idea that it will take x days to become a permanent resident ( like how it works in all other countries except USA)
Even a person jailed gets to know how long he is going to spend his time behind bars, but we do not know when we will be free from this immigration mess!
__________________
Attended the DC Rally
Contribution: $150
Sent letters to President/IV
Status : I-485 pending, PD Feb 2005, EB3 - India
more...
makeup justin bieber fail pic. justin bieber fail. justin bieber fail. BlizzardBomb
raju6855
02-05 08:36 AM
Sorry for delay in responding.
The H4 for my wife was part yearly extension and I think its 7th year extension for which she went for stamping.
My wife has not got the passport back, she calls the Delhi Consulate every other day and they reply its still in admin processing. There is nothing that can be done, just wait wait and wait. My wife tried so much asking Consulate and the VFS agents of what dates of the interview the passports are being returned and they won't tell her, how lame of them!
I called up the National Customer service center and asked for using AP and below is what I was told, not only by them but also by lawyers.
AP has to be filed in before a person leaves the country and if they approval comes when the AP has been approved, that approved AP can be mailed to the applicant out of the country and he/she can use it to enter US.
The H4 for my wife was part yearly extension and I think its 7th year extension for which she went for stamping.
My wife has not got the passport back, she calls the Delhi Consulate every other day and they reply its still in admin processing. There is nothing that can be done, just wait wait and wait. My wife tried so much asking Consulate and the VFS agents of what dates of the interview the passports are being returned and they won't tell her, how lame of them!
I called up the National Customer service center and asked for using AP and below is what I was told, not only by them but also by lawyers.
AP has to be filed in before a person leaves the country and if they approval comes when the AP has been approved, that approved AP can be mailed to the applicant out of the country and he/she can use it to enter US.
girlfriend justin bieber fail gif. justin
willgetgc2005
07-31 10:47 AM
Hi,
My wife is on H4 and I am on H1. We both have EAD. How ever, I have not converted to EAD and intend to be on H1 till i get my GC. Also our H4 and H1 3 year extensions are pending with CSC. My wife has a job offer for which she will need to use her EAD. The question is:
1) Can she change her status to EAD while her H4 extension is pending ?
2) Will her working on EAD jeopardise her H4 extension adjudication ? We want to maintain valid H4 as a backup.
3) What is the process for her to convert from H4 to EAD. Do we have to inform uscis ?
4) Is required, can she change her status form EAD to h4 (if we maiantain valid H4 as well)
Your quick response is appreciated. Thank You.
My wife is on H4 and I am on H1. We both have EAD. How ever, I have not converted to EAD and intend to be on H1 till i get my GC. Also our H4 and H1 3 year extensions are pending with CSC. My wife has a job offer for which she will need to use her EAD. The question is:
1) Can she change her status to EAD while her H4 extension is pending ?
2) Will her working on EAD jeopardise her H4 extension adjudication ? We want to maintain valid H4 as a backup.
3) What is the process for her to convert from H4 to EAD. Do we have to inform uscis ?
4) Is required, can she change her status form EAD to h4 (if we maiantain valid H4 as well)
Your quick response is appreciated. Thank You.
hairstyles justin bieber fail pic. Justin Bieber With His SHIRT
WillIBLucky
12-13 01:38 PM
I agree with your point 1. But there are some companies who still apply H1B here. I am not sure who they are and what field they are in. But I have heard. Anyway your point about spouse is valid.
But again, do you think EB2 will move faster and become current anytime soon? I dont see that possiblity without change in system (law). And once it changes then it will be same for both EB2 and EB3. If your new job will bring in stability and growth then it would really make sense to switch even if converting from EB2 to EB3 in these times.
Prior to October 2005, I would be have been thinking like your are thinking.
I like your thoughts
I would want a faster GC for many things
a) Spouse can work in any field. People can be talented in many other skills but cannot work because of EAD factor.
b) I can go out of country any time. There are lot of checks at embassy and I am with them that they need to check all about me or anyone, but it takes months to get clearance and I cannot leave my job. Nor the job would keep me with 4 month vacation .Many of my friends have gone through this.
my two cents
But again, do you think EB2 will move faster and become current anytime soon? I dont see that possiblity without change in system (law). And once it changes then it will be same for both EB2 and EB3. If your new job will bring in stability and growth then it would really make sense to switch even if converting from EB2 to EB3 in these times.
Prior to October 2005, I would be have been thinking like your are thinking.
I like your thoughts
I would want a faster GC for many things
a) Spouse can work in any field. People can be talented in many other skills but cannot work because of EAD factor.
b) I can go out of country any time. There are lot of checks at embassy and I am with them that they need to check all about me or anyone, but it takes months to get clearance and I cannot leave my job. Nor the job would keep me with 4 month vacation .Many of my friends have gone through this.
my two cents
fide_champ
09-16 04:33 PM
here is an article from murthy about unemployment benefits:
MurthyDotCom : Unemployment Benefits and Impact on U.S. Immigration (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_unembe.html)
MurthyDotCom : Unemployment Benefits and Impact on U.S. Immigration (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_unembe.html)
Texascitypaul
02-23 04:28 PM
Paul,
You and your wife can simultaneously file an I-130 immigrant petition and I-485 application to adjust your status to permanent resident along with an application for employment authorization. To properly assemble and document these filings--including the affidavit of support---can be tricky. My best advice is for you to retain the services of an experienced local immigration lawyer to represent you through the process.
Thank you i was absolutely dreading someone telling me all was lost and i would be deported at the first opportunity.
I will certainly take your advice and try to seek the help of a professional in this area.
Thankyou very much for your help.
Paul
You and your wife can simultaneously file an I-130 immigrant petition and I-485 application to adjust your status to permanent resident along with an application for employment authorization. To properly assemble and document these filings--including the affidavit of support---can be tricky. My best advice is for you to retain the services of an experienced local immigration lawyer to represent you through the process.
Thank you i was absolutely dreading someone telling me all was lost and i would be deported at the first opportunity.
I will certainly take your advice and try to seek the help of a professional in this area.
Thankyou very much for your help.
Paul
Did you know that that you can make dollars by locking selected pages of your blog / website?
ReplyDeleteSimply open an account on Mgcash and use their Content Locking plug-in.