chanduv23
05-14 02:19 PM
Sorry about the pain. if you haven't noticed, I think aftr your previous employer revoked the I-140, they went ahead and updated that to 'denied' status and apparently the date did not change. so the same day that your 140 was approved now shows as denied. Bring that to their notice and they may see their mistake.
Good luck.
that is not possible. That would mean - someone must modify it at a database level in the backend and I don't think manipulating is possible or permissible. Manipulating such data is a crime and it is seriuos security breach of the system and if the agency is manipulating backend data - it is a serious issue.
I understand that we all start to think cynical when such things happen.
Based on the massive level of AC21 denials when employer revokes 140 - we are not sure what is going on.
Good luck.
that is not possible. That would mean - someone must modify it at a database level in the backend and I don't think manipulating is possible or permissible. Manipulating such data is a crime and it is seriuos security breach of the system and if the agency is manipulating backend data - it is a serious issue.
I understand that we all start to think cynical when such things happen.
Based on the massive level of AC21 denials when employer revokes 140 - we are not sure what is going on.
wallpaper funny clean osama bin laden.
sandiboy
08-10 09:13 PM
I just got mail from lawyer with the Receipt nos for myself & Spouse got online. Receipt notices not yet received.
Hang on there everyone will get it sooner or later
I485 Filed: Jul 2nd 7:55 AM (received by R.Williams)
Revd at : NSC
Transferred to TSC: No
ND: Aug 7th
I-140 approved: Jun 2006 @ TSC
EB3 PD - May 2002
Hang on there everyone will get it sooner or later
I485 Filed: Jul 2nd 7:55 AM (received by R.Williams)
Revd at : NSC
Transferred to TSC: No
ND: Aug 7th
I-140 approved: Jun 2006 @ TSC
EB3 PD - May 2002
speddi
07-06 09:36 AM
http://avatarsofslavery.googlepages.com/home
2011 Smoking Weed Osama Bin Laden
bskrishna
07-11 12:14 PM
Yes there will be dates in Oct. but will that be 2006 Jan.? That is what karanp25 means.
And answer is it probably will not be. We can look back the bulletin on May and June 2007. Are they match Oct. 2007 bulletin ?
07 case is different. we can't infer much from that. I hope DOS has some insight into the no of pending cases when the move dates like this. I am sure there will be language in the actual bulletin that saves them from flak when the move dates back. The primary aim is to utilize the visa nos. But with all the information available to them the movement should be proportional to the nos available from spillover and etc.,
And answer is it probably will not be. We can look back the bulletin on May and June 2007. Are they match Oct. 2007 bulletin ?
07 case is different. we can't infer much from that. I hope DOS has some insight into the no of pending cases when the move dates like this. I am sure there will be language in the actual bulletin that saves them from flak when the move dates back. The primary aim is to utilize the visa nos. But with all the information available to them the movement should be proportional to the nos available from spillover and etc.,
more...
delhiguy
07-06 01:35 PM
Generally they give this update on last week of every month.
for May, 05/24/2007
June, 06/28/2007
For july, 07/06/2007.
I don't know why they updated us so fast with in a week on this.
May be because they are not expecting to enter the July applications in the system (or just uptill July 2)
for May, 05/24/2007
June, 06/28/2007
For july, 07/06/2007.
I don't know why they updated us so fast with in a week on this.
May be because they are not expecting to enter the July applications in the system (or just uptill July 2)
singhsa3
07-20 12:26 PM
Guys,
The calculations below is not to scare anyone but it may very well a reality. Based on the assumptions below, some people may have to wait up to 20 months to get a EAD card: Ouch!
A Total I-485 Applicants: 750000 Applicants
B Each EAD processing time: 5 Minutes
C Total processing hrs: 62500 Hours
(Calculations: AxB/60)
D Daily productive Hours: 5 Hours
(It is a government body!)
E Total Man Days (Business Days): 12500 Man Days
(Calculations: C/D)
F EAD Workforce: 30 People
G Total Business Days: 417 Days
(Calculations: E/F)
H Average Business Days in a month: 21 Days
I Total Clearing Time : 20 Months
(Calculations: G/I)
The calculations below is not to scare anyone but it may very well a reality. Based on the assumptions below, some people may have to wait up to 20 months to get a EAD card: Ouch!
A Total I-485 Applicants: 750000 Applicants
B Each EAD processing time: 5 Minutes
C Total processing hrs: 62500 Hours
(Calculations: AxB/60)
D Daily productive Hours: 5 Hours
(It is a government body!)
E Total Man Days (Business Days): 12500 Man Days
(Calculations: C/D)
F EAD Workforce: 30 People
G Total Business Days: 417 Days
(Calculations: E/F)
H Average Business Days in a month: 21 Days
I Total Clearing Time : 20 Months
(Calculations: G/I)
more...
guy03062
04-25 08:56 AM
It is absolutely make sense. We should push amendment for PD to be considered as date of arrival in USA (first time) or may be date on which one has started working (if employment based immigration). It is ridiculous to have PD based on labor, as there is no certainity when will employer file the labor or how many times in this dynamic environment!!
Also we should ask if one's I-140 is approved and visa is retrogressed, he should allow portability immediately! I mean no need to start GC process all over again if such person change the job.
Does it make sense to request for first arrival date to be considered as the priority date for immigration purposes? Just a thought!!!
Also we should ask if one's I-140 is approved and visa is retrogressed, he should allow portability immediately! I mean no need to start GC process all over again if such person change the job.
Does it make sense to request for first arrival date to be considered as the priority date for immigration purposes? Just a thought!!!
2010 Sexy Osama Bin Laden costume
ind_game
05-15 09:53 AM
Hi ind_game,
For me, 1. I-140 approval in September, 2007 (actually 09/04/2009 as I have the hard copy) has typo. I think your 09/04/2009 should be 2007.
Please correct.
My apologies........Can I correct the thread message now........it looks I cannot.......anyway here is the updated....thanks ak_2006
Here is the scoop.
from US Congresswoman's office, an immigration specialist spoke to their liaison at the Nebraska Service Center.
Liaison confirmed the following:
1. I-140 approval in September, 2007 (actually 09/04/2007 as I have the hard copy)
2. I-140 revocation in Feb, 2009 ( he has not provided the day of the month, but from LUD I have it strongly pointing to 02/03/2009)
I have not told the Congresswoman's office about the I-140 revocation. Just mentioned that it might have happened as I have left the company.
3. Liaison did confirm that even after the I-140 being withdrawn I am eligible for adjustment thru AC21.
4. Liaison did agree that if the I-140 was revoked within the stipulated time given in AC21, Nebraska�s decision to deny the I-485 may have been in error. (which in my case is true)
Immigration specialist at the Congresswoman's office is going to contact the Director of NSC to review this matter with a supervisor
Unanswered questions:
1. If the Liaison can see that my I-140 is approved on 09/04/2007, why is that the adjudicating officer is responding with a denial on 09/04/2007 and subsequent denial of I-485?
2. Are they both not looking at my information with same interface?
Conclusion:
Atleast in my case it looks deliberate and intentional.
For me, 1. I-140 approval in September, 2007 (actually 09/04/2009 as I have the hard copy) has typo. I think your 09/04/2009 should be 2007.
Please correct.
My apologies........Can I correct the thread message now........it looks I cannot.......anyway here is the updated....thanks ak_2006
Here is the scoop.
from US Congresswoman's office, an immigration specialist spoke to their liaison at the Nebraska Service Center.
Liaison confirmed the following:
1. I-140 approval in September, 2007 (actually 09/04/2007 as I have the hard copy)
2. I-140 revocation in Feb, 2009 ( he has not provided the day of the month, but from LUD I have it strongly pointing to 02/03/2009)
I have not told the Congresswoman's office about the I-140 revocation. Just mentioned that it might have happened as I have left the company.
3. Liaison did confirm that even after the I-140 being withdrawn I am eligible for adjustment thru AC21.
4. Liaison did agree that if the I-140 was revoked within the stipulated time given in AC21, Nebraska�s decision to deny the I-485 may have been in error. (which in my case is true)
Immigration specialist at the Congresswoman's office is going to contact the Director of NSC to review this matter with a supervisor
Unanswered questions:
1. If the Liaison can see that my I-140 is approved on 09/04/2007, why is that the adjudicating officer is responding with a denial on 09/04/2007 and subsequent denial of I-485?
2. Are they both not looking at my information with same interface?
Conclusion:
Atleast in my case it looks deliberate and intentional.
more...
sledge_hammer
03-04 11:46 AM
What is your rate and who is your lender?
In my case; I was offered a refinancing rate that was 0.5% more than what I would pay if I were a GC holder. The reasoning is the short term validity of H1. Ironically I wasn't discriminated 3 years ago when I bought my house. At that time; I even didn't have my labor cert cleared. Now 3 years down the line; I have cleared first 2 stages and applied to I-485; bank charges me more :) Weird!!!!
In my case; I was offered a refinancing rate that was 0.5% more than what I would pay if I were a GC holder. The reasoning is the short term validity of H1. Ironically I wasn't discriminated 3 years ago when I bought my house. At that time; I even didn't have my labor cert cleared. Now 3 years down the line; I have cleared first 2 stages and applied to I-485; bank charges me more :) Weird!!!!
hair More Osama bin Laden Jokes
santb1975
05-25 10:08 AM
yes it has been
more...
h1b_professional
07-20 10:19 AM
Should we send emails to our Senators requesting them to vote for SKIL bill
Email campaign may be
Email campaign may be
hot osama bin laden funny
yabadaba
08-08 04:02 PM
please guys just write as many as you can...as i pm'ed pappu...my piece was touchy feely, because i wanted it that way. He suggested some additions to add contributions of immigrants/details of retrogression but I declined cos i felt the touchy feeliness (so to speak) would be diluted.
the more number of op/eds we have, the more they can have an ongoing set of articles that can flow to the news media. Momentum!
the more number of op/eds we have, the more they can have an ongoing set of articles that can flow to the news media. Momentum!
more...
house osama bin laden funny photos.
HawaldarNaik
03-04 03:45 PM
for all ya mumbai brothers out there:
"ron gotcha-rkar" ka kya hai .. uppar wala mu diya ... to bolegayich. uske to naam me bhi gotcha .. aur kaamme bhi gotcha
one more..
Kya hawaldar saab .. toom bhi wo khajoor gotcharkar ke baaton me aa gaye .... chalo mil ke usko kopche me in leke kharcha pani dete hai.
[translation: native mumbai rambling about how ron gotcher has no data to back it up and should be censured for his quotes without source]
Arre Bhai....2 good...bole to...ekdum JHAKAAAS dialogues mara....lekin kya karega....Asha is hope.....abhe bole to market ekdum tight...kharcha paneee kaisa dega...? but 2 good sahebji...
"ron gotcha-rkar" ka kya hai .. uppar wala mu diya ... to bolegayich. uske to naam me bhi gotcha .. aur kaamme bhi gotcha
one more..
Kya hawaldar saab .. toom bhi wo khajoor gotcharkar ke baaton me aa gaye .... chalo mil ke usko kopche me in leke kharcha pani dete hai.
[translation: native mumbai rambling about how ron gotcher has no data to back it up and should be censured for his quotes without source]
Arre Bhai....2 good...bole to...ekdum JHAKAAAS dialogues mara....lekin kya karega....Asha is hope.....abhe bole to market ekdum tight...kharcha paneee kaisa dega...? but 2 good sahebji...
tattoo osama bin laden funny pics.
chanduv23
09-16 08:50 PM
Unable to participate due to prior commitments (travelling in Mid West)
Contributed $200
Google Order # 332995467726386
Appreciate IV's initiative. Thanks a ton.
Thanks - for your contribution
Contributed $200
Google Order # 332995467726386
Appreciate IV's initiative. Thanks a ton.
Thanks - for your contribution
more...
pictures osama bin laden funny pictures
freakin_gc
12-23 06:22 PM
Diptam :This morning my on-line case status has changed to Request for Additional Evidence Sent
My lawyer received it on Dec 16th - they said that they need at least 2 weeks to answer the RFE. They also mentioned that the RFE doesn''t ask for any specific paperwork , its like a Question-Answer Form.
a) Why do you need this guy
b) Can you find an american instead of this guy
c) How you benchmark performance in the company
etc...
My lawyer received it on Dec 16th - they said that they need at least 2 weeks to answer the RFE. They also mentioned that the RFE doesn''t ask for any specific paperwork , its like a Question-Answer Form.
a) Why do you need this guy
b) Can you find an american instead of this guy
c) How you benchmark performance in the company
etc...
dresses Osama Bin Laden
GeetaRam
11-30 03:28 PM
Hi,
I was following this thread and it has good information.
I have EB3 labor and I-140 approved with priority date March 2005. I couldn't file my I-485 in 2007.
Recently thru same employer I filed EB2 labor which got approved in Sept 2010. I have filed my I-140 under regular processing. I asked my attorney and he said as I already have one I-140 approved I should file this one under regular processing. USCIS might reject premium processing. Any advice.
My 6th year of H1-B is getting completed on Sept 2011.
Please suggest should I file my I-140 under premium processing? Should I try to convert it???
9 years and VayuMahesh any inputs... congratulations to u both for successful I-140 approval and porting....
Thanks in advance...
I was following this thread and it has good information.
I have EB3 labor and I-140 approved with priority date March 2005. I couldn't file my I-485 in 2007.
Recently thru same employer I filed EB2 labor which got approved in Sept 2010. I have filed my I-140 under regular processing. I asked my attorney and he said as I already have one I-140 approved I should file this one under regular processing. USCIS might reject premium processing. Any advice.
My 6th year of H1-B is getting completed on Sept 2011.
Please suggest should I file my I-140 under premium processing? Should I try to convert it???
9 years and VayuMahesh any inputs... congratulations to u both for successful I-140 approval and porting....
Thanks in advance...
more...
makeup hairstyles in laden funny
biomd
09-09 09:13 AM
My Contribution of $100 sent in today by Google. Will be attending the 18th Rally.
C U Guys!.
C U Guys!.
girlfriend funny osama bin laden
GeetaRam
11-30 03:28 PM
Hi,
I was following this thread and it has good information.
I have EB3 labor and I-140 approved with priority date March 2005. I couldn't file my I-485 in 2007.
Recently thru same employer I filed EB2 labor which got approved in Sept 2010. I have filed my I-140 under regular processing. I asked my attorney and he said as I already have one I-140 approved I should file this one under regular processing. USCIS might reject premium processing. Any advice.
My 6th year of H1-B is getting completed on Sept 2011.
Please suggest should I file my I-140 under premium processing? Should I try to convert it???
9 years and VayuMahesh any inputs... congratulations to u both for successful I-140 approval and porting....
Thanks in advance...
I was following this thread and it has good information.
I have EB3 labor and I-140 approved with priority date March 2005. I couldn't file my I-485 in 2007.
Recently thru same employer I filed EB2 labor which got approved in Sept 2010. I have filed my I-140 under regular processing. I asked my attorney and he said as I already have one I-140 approved I should file this one under regular processing. USCIS might reject premium processing. Any advice.
My 6th year of H1-B is getting completed on Sept 2011.
Please suggest should I file my I-140 under premium processing? Should I try to convert it???
9 years and VayuMahesh any inputs... congratulations to u both for successful I-140 approval and porting....
Thanks in advance...
hairstyles Osama Bin Laden Funny Picture
bluekayal
08-23 04:54 PM
Rest easy folks:
Mayorkas said he was determined to “get it right and get it fast.” “The community deserves consistency,” he said. “These are our customers, and we are committed to improving customer service.”
The latest example of the changes wrought by Director Mayorkas is an opportunity to allow the public to comment on interim guidance memorandums before they becomes effective in final form. This type of pre-effective-date chance to comment never happened before with the old INS or the pre-Mayorkas USCIS. The early-peek opportunity for comment allows the agency to withdraw with dignity intact from a position that stakeholders may show is contrary to law or legitimate business practices. For example, USCIS is now accepting comments on a guidance memo with a dry title but a topic of great significance to many prospective green-card applicants with high levels of accomplishment: “Evaluation of Evidentiary Criteria in Certain Form I-140 Petitions.”
This particular guidance memo arises from a debunking the agency received from the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115, C.A.9 (Cal.), March 04, 2010 (NO. 07-56774). The Court in Kazarian held that USCIS (in this case the Administrative Appeals Office) may not “unilaterally impose novel substantive or evidentiary requirements” without support in the Immigration and Nationality Act or agency regulations.
While Kazarian dealt with EB-1 (extraordinary ability or achievement) green-card eligibility criteria, the interim agency guidance cited extends this also to the EB-2 immigrant visa category for exceptional ability aliens. In my view, USCIS should have issued a guidance memorandum more broadly. Stakeholder feedback should have been issued on a guidance memorandum (which I’d be happy to craft upon request) entitled “Illegality of Unilaterally Imposing Novel Substantive or Evidentiary Requirements.”
Nation of immigrators - A public policy blog on our dysfunctional immigration system � The Dark Sides of Immigration Fame and Anonymity (http://www.nationofimmigrators.com/?p=349)
Mayorkas said he was determined to “get it right and get it fast.” “The community deserves consistency,” he said. “These are our customers, and we are committed to improving customer service.”
The latest example of the changes wrought by Director Mayorkas is an opportunity to allow the public to comment on interim guidance memorandums before they becomes effective in final form. This type of pre-effective-date chance to comment never happened before with the old INS or the pre-Mayorkas USCIS. The early-peek opportunity for comment allows the agency to withdraw with dignity intact from a position that stakeholders may show is contrary to law or legitimate business practices. For example, USCIS is now accepting comments on a guidance memo with a dry title but a topic of great significance to many prospective green-card applicants with high levels of accomplishment: “Evaluation of Evidentiary Criteria in Certain Form I-140 Petitions.”
This particular guidance memo arises from a debunking the agency received from the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115, C.A.9 (Cal.), March 04, 2010 (NO. 07-56774). The Court in Kazarian held that USCIS (in this case the Administrative Appeals Office) may not “unilaterally impose novel substantive or evidentiary requirements” without support in the Immigration and Nationality Act or agency regulations.
While Kazarian dealt with EB-1 (extraordinary ability or achievement) green-card eligibility criteria, the interim agency guidance cited extends this also to the EB-2 immigrant visa category for exceptional ability aliens. In my view, USCIS should have issued a guidance memorandum more broadly. Stakeholder feedback should have been issued on a guidance memorandum (which I’d be happy to craft upon request) entitled “Illegality of Unilaterally Imposing Novel Substantive or Evidentiary Requirements.”
Nation of immigrators - A public policy blog on our dysfunctional immigration system � The Dark Sides of Immigration Fame and Anonymity (http://www.nationofimmigrators.com/?p=349)
rsayed
09-10 10:38 AM
I don't what how you define "most" but I am EB2 with US masters with PD 2006 and I am still waiting. Many of my friends with US masters are still waiting.
Same here - Masters from US, with PD 2006....Stilllllllllllllllll waiting!!!!!
I was reading an article handed over by my Lawyer sometime back - the whole GC process was designed to be completed in 6 mos. end-to-end.
This goes to show how outdated the process is, plus the resource crunch they may be facing at USCIS.
All in all - it's a black hole...only your 'karma' can get you out of it:)
Same here - Masters from US, with PD 2006....Stilllllllllllllllll waiting!!!!!
I was reading an article handed over by my Lawyer sometime back - the whole GC process was designed to be completed in 6 mos. end-to-end.
This goes to show how outdated the process is, plus the resource crunch they may be facing at USCIS.
All in all - it's a black hole...only your 'karma' can get you out of it:)
ganguteli
03-13 02:49 PM
While we work in different Please find addresses at 15
Telephone (202) 225-3072
Stop Spamming the forum. I will write the letter only if core asks me. Its a waste of postage money and nobody reads email in such offices from junk senders.
Telephone (202) 225-3072
Stop Spamming the forum. I will write the letter only if core asks me. Its a waste of postage money and nobody reads email in such offices from junk senders.
No comments:
Post a Comment