ram006
07-16 10:37 PM
Hi,
My wife's 485 is rejected with the following reason "The application/petition was filed on the outdated version of this form". The rejection notice has a receive date of July 1st 2010 and a LIN number. Now the problem-
My 485 was approved on July 8th, 2010 and I received a "Welcome to USA" notice on July 12th. My H1 has expired on July 14th, 2010 along with wife's H4 and our I-94's. We applied for both the H extensions in may. Now if we resubmit the 485 with the new application will the USCIS honor the July 1st receive date?
My main concern is on her status, any input will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
My wife's 485 is rejected with the following reason "The application/petition was filed on the outdated version of this form". The rejection notice has a receive date of July 1st 2010 and a LIN number. Now the problem-
My 485 was approved on July 8th, 2010 and I received a "Welcome to USA" notice on July 12th. My H1 has expired on July 14th, 2010 along with wife's H4 and our I-94's. We applied for both the H extensions in may. Now if we resubmit the 485 with the new application will the USCIS honor the July 1st receive date?
My main concern is on her status, any input will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
wallpaper selena gomez and demi lovato
dkupadhyay
02-03 10:55 AM
My I-485 application finally got denied on 02/02/10. I just got e-mail update. Don't have any details as of now.
learning01
02-25 05:03 PM
This is the most compelling piece I read about why this country should do more for scientists and engineers who are on temporary work visas. Read it till the end and enjoy.
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
2011 Demi Lovato and Selena Gomez
needhelp!
09-23 02:14 PM
http://www.dfwdiwalimela.com/picturegallery.html
more...
gcseeker2002
04-09 05:35 PM
Good luck, atleast you are in EB2
saravanaraj.sathya
08-03 10:29 AM
Sundar - I understand ur question..I ve seen in many forums that employers can revoke ur I-140 before ur I-485 is approved. When you transfer with ur approved I-140 from ur previous employer and lets say that he has already revoked it..I am not sure what will happen the..just wanted to confirm...
the more important part of my question is...
"using approved 140 from an EX-employer" and using that to a get 3 yr extension when doing a h1b transfer to a new employer (who has not in anyway started a new perm labor)
the more important part of my question is...
"using approved 140 from an EX-employer" and using that to a get 3 yr extension when doing a h1b transfer to a new employer (who has not in anyway started a new perm labor)
more...
CADude
04-07 11:01 PM
My H1B job requirement is similar but not 100% same to GC Labor. Attorney said it can be different.
thnx CADude... did you had to provide job description used in your labor or your last H1? if not then did the new employer used their own description?
thnx CADude... did you had to provide job description used in your labor or your last H1? if not then did the new employer used their own description?
2010 selena gomez and demi lovato
txh1b
04-15 10:40 AM
I think Air India is the best for elderly people.
I second that. The food is certainly tolerable than the European carriers and the familiar desi faces help the elderly not to hesitate and ask for anything they need.
I second that. The food is certainly tolerable than the European carriers and the familiar desi faces help the elderly not to hesitate and ask for anything they need.
more...
dixie
11-07 05:39 PM
The visa officer will quiz you about how long you have been working for your current employer, and what you did before that. If you say you were studying and did not complete the course, expect the officer to get suspicious - ever since 9/11, "students" who dont actually study on an F-1 visa are as a rule viewed with great suspiction. Likewise, at the port of entry when you try to get the I-94 stamped, the officer will look up your SEVIS record and grill you about the reasons for abandoning your course, and whether you were in legal status during the interim.As long as you have all the documents proving everything you say, you should be fine.
What kind of tough questions you think they can ask?? I am very new to all these and do not have much knowlege but only thing i did is try to maintain status legally..is there anything wrong that I did??
What kind of tough questions you think they can ask?? I am very new to all these and do not have much knowlege but only thing i did is try to maintain status legally..is there anything wrong that I did??
hair selena gomez and demi lovato
munnu77
06-11 08:43 AM
Wht do u mean..partially?
more...
rChinna
04-01 12:20 PM
Hi All,
My Wife�s I-94 expired on Jan 15, 2010 and I did not know that I had to apply for her H4 extension while applying for my H1B extension under regular processing on March 1, 2010.My employer also forgot to apply for H4 extension. Now that, it�s been more than 2 months with the I-94 expired, Can you please let me know what options I have to resolve this issue?
1.Can I upgrade my H1 Processing to Premium and add the H4 processing to it, so that both H1 and H4 are processed simultaneously?
2.If adding H4 while upgrading H1 to premium is not possible, Should I just upgrade my H1 to Premium so that I can know the results soon and have ample time (before the 180 days grace period) to apply for H4 extension(I-539).Is it true that H1B premium approval is risky compared to regular processing ?
3.Is it safe to go back to India within 180 days (after I-94 expiration) and get H4 stamping in her home country once I get my H1 Extension?
4.Should I just leave my H1B in regular processing and attach the H4 extension (I-539) to it? If attaching H4 is not possible, Can I file H4 separately and get it approved before 180 days expiration?
5.Once her H4 extension is approved, can she get her H4 VISA re-validated in US? Can she apply under �Nunc-pro-tunc� Category?
6.Does she have an option to attend H4 visa interview in Canada or Mexico as her Visa and I-94 are expired? If yes, is this better option than going to India?
Please reply.
Thanks in advance
Chinna
My Wife�s I-94 expired on Jan 15, 2010 and I did not know that I had to apply for her H4 extension while applying for my H1B extension under regular processing on March 1, 2010.My employer also forgot to apply for H4 extension. Now that, it�s been more than 2 months with the I-94 expired, Can you please let me know what options I have to resolve this issue?
1.Can I upgrade my H1 Processing to Premium and add the H4 processing to it, so that both H1 and H4 are processed simultaneously?
2.If adding H4 while upgrading H1 to premium is not possible, Should I just upgrade my H1 to Premium so that I can know the results soon and have ample time (before the 180 days grace period) to apply for H4 extension(I-539).Is it true that H1B premium approval is risky compared to regular processing ?
3.Is it safe to go back to India within 180 days (after I-94 expiration) and get H4 stamping in her home country once I get my H1 Extension?
4.Should I just leave my H1B in regular processing and attach the H4 extension (I-539) to it? If attaching H4 is not possible, Can I file H4 separately and get it approved before 180 days expiration?
5.Once her H4 extension is approved, can she get her H4 VISA re-validated in US? Can she apply under �Nunc-pro-tunc� Category?
6.Does she have an option to attend H4 visa interview in Canada or Mexico as her Visa and I-94 are expired? If yes, is this better option than going to India?
Please reply.
Thanks in advance
Chinna
hot selena gomez and demi lovato
fake_id
09-05 04:53 PM
Welcome to reality.
more...
house selena gomez and demi
akhilmahajan
08-07 09:20 AM
U mention what u have filed and what u r expecting.
I think almost everyone has filed 485/140/EAD/AP.
I am just curious what exactly you want to know. Do you want to know when you will get your GC or about the receipts.
If you are looking for receipts, there is a thread going on for July filers by the name "July Trackers".
If you want to know when you will get your GC then i am sorry to say, even GOD cannot give you an idea.
I hope this helps.
Meanwhile, please work on some action items and your wait will become more easier.
I think almost everyone has filed 485/140/EAD/AP.
I am just curious what exactly you want to know. Do you want to know when you will get your GC or about the receipts.
If you are looking for receipts, there is a thread going on for July filers by the name "July Trackers".
If you want to know when you will get your GC then i am sorry to say, even GOD cannot give you an idea.
I hope this helps.
Meanwhile, please work on some action items and your wait will become more easier.
tattoo selena gomez and demi lovato
amitkhare77
09-02 10:56 AM
as per IRS - OP is on EAD not on H1B. I-9 form is sent to the Pay-roll company , they report the legal work status to IRS. If you have filled EAD on I-9 your legal work status is EAD and not H1b.
OP does not have a F-1 EAD? clearly says he used AC21 whcih can only be used for employement based EAD.
Our admin dept gets alert from Pay roll company when EAD validity is close to expiration. When I use EAD, USCIS does not know if I am using EAD untill I file a EAD renewal. there is a question in EAD renewal form - current status - H1B or AOS pending.
If you want to remain on H1B- you have to go out of country - enter as h1B and also inform pay-roll about your new status.
you might want to double check this info from valid source :)
This is not correct. The OP's status is not determined by what he files in the I-9 form. The determining factor is the I-94 form, the latest one that is valid. If the OP got an I-94 attached to his I-797 form (usually one does), then s/he is in H1-B from the day printed on the I-94 form regardless how long does the EAD remain valid.
AFAIK, if the OP wishes to remain on F-1 EAD, s/he can go out of the country before the H1-B I-94 starting date (Oct 1?) and reenter US on F-1 visa (i.e., the I-94 given at the port of entry would be for F-1). I do not know if there is any risk involved, or what would happen to the H1-B approval.
---------
I am not a lawyer. Use at your own risk any information given by me.
OP does not have a F-1 EAD? clearly says he used AC21 whcih can only be used for employement based EAD.
Our admin dept gets alert from Pay roll company when EAD validity is close to expiration. When I use EAD, USCIS does not know if I am using EAD untill I file a EAD renewal. there is a question in EAD renewal form - current status - H1B or AOS pending.
If you want to remain on H1B- you have to go out of country - enter as h1B and also inform pay-roll about your new status.
you might want to double check this info from valid source :)
This is not correct. The OP's status is not determined by what he files in the I-9 form. The determining factor is the I-94 form, the latest one that is valid. If the OP got an I-94 attached to his I-797 form (usually one does), then s/he is in H1-B from the day printed on the I-94 form regardless how long does the EAD remain valid.
AFAIK, if the OP wishes to remain on F-1 EAD, s/he can go out of the country before the H1-B I-94 starting date (Oct 1?) and reenter US on F-1 visa (i.e., the I-94 given at the port of entry would be for F-1). I do not know if there is any risk involved, or what would happen to the H1-B approval.
---------
I am not a lawyer. Use at your own risk any information given by me.
more...
pictures Selena Gomez amp; Demi Lovato Not
solaris27
05-18 08:35 AM
I did it myself.
Don't waste money for any lawyers .
its very simple .
Don't waste money for any lawyers .
its very simple .
dresses selena gomez and demi lovato
chehuan
01-18 03:17 PM
do you know the reason for the i140 denial? That could be very critical....its just not about what your title is ..and what you do ..its about the whole 9 yards...let us know the reason for denial
I can surely find out and let you know
Thanks to all for helping out
I am just into the process and I am not so wise with the whole thing
I can surely find out and let you know
Thanks to all for helping out
I am just into the process and I am not so wise with the whole thing
more...
makeup selena gomez and demi lovato
adibhatla
02-15 06:24 PM
Prince - If you ask me it doesn't matter coz ur back to the processing of your I-485. I heard some cases usually take longer to update.
Can you pls furnish specific details such as:
Denial notice Date:
When did you/your lawyer apply the MTR:
Other update dates such as (Soft LUD's, Hard LUD's):
MTR Approval Date:
Sorry for asking more specific details. My I-485 got denied too but for missing G-325A forms on both my wife's and my case.
Can you pls furnish specific details such as:
Denial notice Date:
When did you/your lawyer apply the MTR:
Other update dates such as (Soft LUD's, Hard LUD's):
MTR Approval Date:
Sorry for asking more specific details. My I-485 got denied too but for missing G-325A forms on both my wife's and my case.
girlfriend selena gomez kisses justin
sanprabhu
07-13 05:58 PM
Here is an excerpt from the blogs of one immigration attorneys
I've been thinking about this so-called "permanent solution" and the speculation here and elsewhere and I don't think it will be the acceptance of adjustment applications without a priority date because that simply is not permitted under the Immigration and Nationality Act's Section 245(a):
(a)--Status as Person Admitted for Permanent Residence on Application and Eligibility for Immigrant Status
The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification under subparagraph (A)(iii), (A)(iv), (B)(ii), or (B)(iii) of section 204(a)(1) or may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if (1) the alien makes an application for such adjustment, (2) the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and (3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed.
Congress would have to change the law to allow for adjustments to be filed without a priority date being available. They are actually considering such a change as part of the SKIL Act introduced last year and this is something promoted by my friends Gary Endelman and Dinesh Shenoy in articles on the subject.
But that is not to say that there is not a solution that gets close to the same place. Perhaps offering interim benefits like an employment authorization document and advance parole without having the adjustment application filed might be a possibility. I don't believe there is a statutory bar to this
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/what-i-think-th.html
PS: If this is already discussed the moderators are free to merge it, chuck it
If the USCIS cannot accept I-485 applications if the visa number is not available then how can the DOS make the July VB current. Obiously they know that the number of visa slots are not enough for all the applicants.
I've been thinking about this so-called "permanent solution" and the speculation here and elsewhere and I don't think it will be the acceptance of adjustment applications without a priority date because that simply is not permitted under the Immigration and Nationality Act's Section 245(a):
(a)--Status as Person Admitted for Permanent Residence on Application and Eligibility for Immigrant Status
The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification under subparagraph (A)(iii), (A)(iv), (B)(ii), or (B)(iii) of section 204(a)(1) or may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if (1) the alien makes an application for such adjustment, (2) the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and (3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed.
Congress would have to change the law to allow for adjustments to be filed without a priority date being available. They are actually considering such a change as part of the SKIL Act introduced last year and this is something promoted by my friends Gary Endelman and Dinesh Shenoy in articles on the subject.
But that is not to say that there is not a solution that gets close to the same place. Perhaps offering interim benefits like an employment authorization document and advance parole without having the adjustment application filed might be a possibility. I don't believe there is a statutory bar to this
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/what-i-think-th.html
PS: If this is already discussed the moderators are free to merge it, chuck it
If the USCIS cannot accept I-485 applications if the visa number is not available then how can the DOS make the July VB current. Obiously they know that the number of visa slots are not enough for all the applicants.
hairstyles also kiss demi lovato
thatwillbeit
05-24 08:37 PM
Does EAD & AP have to be sent to the same address if we do efiling
Thanks in advance
Thanks in advance
nixstor
09-10 08:42 AM
What are you guys trying to figure out here? The unanswered Q's have been unanswered for a lot of years now and July VB fiasco resolve was just a lid on the unanswered Q's that were coming out into lime light. While USCIS is not perfect and is culpable for the mishap, our focus should be on getting some relief. There is not a lot any one of us is going to gain by finding the cuplable and reasons behind. We will simply not get any answers in the current situation and hoping that USCIS will provide some thing like a used visas ticker through out their fiscal year, because of the July VB fiasco is nothing but being too naive.
Congress Women Lofgren would not go on witch hunting DOS/USCIS officials after they have honored the original VB. The simple reason being (GC's) visa numbers, though capped per year, allow USCIS to accept more applications than the visa numbers available. There is no one to one match between the available GC numbers and applications. USCIS OB submits an annual report and will report the number of visas used by USCIS in the fiscal year. Hopefully, after all this hooplah, we should see 100% utilization of visa numbers.
Congress Women Lofgren would not go on witch hunting DOS/USCIS officials after they have honored the original VB. The simple reason being (GC's) visa numbers, though capped per year, allow USCIS to accept more applications than the visa numbers available. There is no one to one match between the available GC numbers and applications. USCIS OB submits an annual report and will report the number of visas used by USCIS in the fiscal year. Hopefully, after all this hooplah, we should see 100% utilization of visa numbers.
knowDOL
08-15 11:34 AM
Any PERM case filed before July 25th 2005 was taking long time because of system problems. But this long is a news to me. I wish you good luck and hope that it will get cleared soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment