empee99
09-27 12:51 PM
you dont have to do anything. Based on your L2 petition you will get an I-94
valid till 2009. Since your EAD is unexpired, you can continue working once you come back. EAD is authorization to work, completely unrelated to your travel to India and back. What exactly are you worried about?
I am worried bcoz, on my EAD card its written "NOT VALID FOR REENTRY TO U.S."
what does this mean?
Please advise.
Thanks
Mahesh
valid till 2009. Since your EAD is unexpired, you can continue working once you come back. EAD is authorization to work, completely unrelated to your travel to India and back. What exactly are you worried about?
I am worried bcoz, on my EAD card its written "NOT VALID FOR REENTRY TO U.S."
what does this mean?
Please advise.
Thanks
Mahesh
wallpaper Hazel Eyes
pcs
11-10 09:06 PM
Guys..
I have been watching and participating in this drama for a long time....
We must go to court for the correct interpretation and enforcement of UNUSED VISA from ROW / undersubscribed catagories. THERE IS NO CASE FOR EVEN WAITING FOR ONE QUARTER. 20,000 VISA are available unused at a given time, they should ALL be immediately allocated to the guys in the Q.
This will benefit all EB 2 / EB 3
We really should not have any debate about loosing the case etc... Let us try and loose the case... At least , we will have the satisfaction of trying...
If your are with me please respond to this thread
We MUST take the advantage of low VISA usage in this recession and cut the line by tens of thousand
I have been watching and participating in this drama for a long time....
We must go to court for the correct interpretation and enforcement of UNUSED VISA from ROW / undersubscribed catagories. THERE IS NO CASE FOR EVEN WAITING FOR ONE QUARTER. 20,000 VISA are available unused at a given time, they should ALL be immediately allocated to the guys in the Q.
This will benefit all EB 2 / EB 3
We really should not have any debate about loosing the case etc... Let us try and loose the case... At least , we will have the satisfaction of trying...
If your are with me please respond to this thread
We MUST take the advantage of low VISA usage in this recession and cut the line by tens of thousand
MDix
03-10 02:22 PM
If you feel good by giving red then pls do it, but that doesn't change what's coming in your way.
This is turning out to be TRUE.
Past week, I made this comment and some people made fun of it. But, it's turning out to be true. They are now fully focusing on EB3 and I think they will continue to do untill they finish all Eb3. Once they reached last quarter then they will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB. They don't have to make EB3-ROW current to give some spill-over to EB3-I. What ever will be left at the end of quarter will be spilled across EB's.
I am expecting lot of REDs on this one.
Thanks,
MDix
This is turning out to be TRUE.
Past week, I made this comment and some people made fun of it. But, it's turning out to be true. They are now fully focusing on EB3 and I think they will continue to do untill they finish all Eb3. Once they reached last quarter then they will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB. They don't have to make EB3-ROW current to give some spill-over to EB3-I. What ever will be left at the end of quarter will be spilled across EB's.
I am expecting lot of REDs on this one.
Thanks,
MDix
2011 Luke applies eye shadow
kumar1
12-10 01:57 PM
Why are you jumping like s stupid dog? Please explain.
and EB2-India by a month; yaaaaay :)
and EB2-India by a month; yaaaaay :)
more...
jnraajan
03-17 05:00 PM
From the poll results for EB3 priority Dates, I think, I learned something. People waiting for Green Card Pre-PERM are way more than people Waiting POST-PERM. This is an approximate comparision(before Dec 2004 and after Dec 2004, though PERM started in Apr 2005.)
What I am trying to see is, Whether we can very little membership from people who started their GC process after Mar 2005. If that is the case, why those people are not joining IV? Believe it or not, They would also love to have their GC's right now. Something seems to be wrong. We should probably come up with some ways to target those people who are still waiting to file their I-485 or having their Labor Pending.
What do you all say?
What I am trying to see is, Whether we can very little membership from people who started their GC process after Mar 2005. If that is the case, why those people are not joining IV? Believe it or not, They would also love to have their GC's right now. Something seems to be wrong. We should probably come up with some ways to target those people who are still waiting to file their I-485 or having their Labor Pending.
What do you all say?
abhishek101
12-26 04:06 PM
You have pretty much written my hit list. I could not have put it in better words.
Just to add I work for a bank and to open an account within bank I had to go through a long paper process, whereas any outsider (Citizen/GC) can get it in 5 min online.
But as a bank employee I do understand that while we at bank would love to open all accounts online (less cost and all) the US government has restrictions under Know your customer requirement, that prevents us from doing so. So while most of the business understand that they are losing business they are pretty much restricted by the laws of the land.
there are two ways out of it:
1. Support legislative action for getting GC faster, for that support IV.
2. Make the immigrant group a huge economic success that the business has incentive to provide it better services.
Just to add I work for a bank and to open an account within bank I had to go through a long paper process, whereas any outsider (Citizen/GC) can get it in 5 min online.
But as a bank employee I do understand that while we at bank would love to open all accounts online (less cost and all) the US government has restrictions under Know your customer requirement, that prevents us from doing so. So while most of the business understand that they are losing business they are pretty much restricted by the laws of the land.
there are two ways out of it:
1. Support legislative action for getting GC faster, for that support IV.
2. Make the immigrant group a huge economic success that the business has incentive to provide it better services.
more...
mmanurker
10-16 02:03 PM
Count me in EB3 - India PD: 12/2003
140: RD: March'23 2007 and pending......@ NSC
485/EAD/AP(for spouse and myself): RD: Aug'10th 2007 and ND: Oct4th 2007, case pending......@TSC
IV Contribution: $300
140: RD: March'23 2007 and pending......@ NSC
485/EAD/AP(for spouse and myself): RD: Aug'10th 2007 and ND: Oct4th 2007, case pending......@TSC
IV Contribution: $300
2010 Eyeshadow For Blue Eyes Blonde
willgetgc2005
02-15 08:05 PM
Retrohatao,
You are right. This seems more like a luck factor. If Your stars are good, name check is cleared. Else it just stays stuck. It is ridiculous, they should check a persons background at the time of issuing a visa to come into the USA. Not when he/she has been in the US for several years. IV should raise this issue. This is even more farcical than retrogression. At least in case of retrogression they publish cut off dates. Well, in the case of name check you just don�t know where u stand.
You are right. This seems more like a luck factor. If Your stars are good, name check is cleared. Else it just stays stuck. It is ridiculous, they should check a persons background at the time of issuing a visa to come into the USA. Not when he/she has been in the US for several years. IV should raise this issue. This is even more farcical than retrogression. At least in case of retrogression they publish cut off dates. Well, in the case of name check you just don�t know where u stand.
more...
jonty_11
07-11 04:37 PM
>>>>>>>>
hair Eyes: Smoke Signal pigment
pkak
07-09 08:10 PM
I feel that they did not violate any clause. Till June 30 which is end of third quarter, they are authorized to approve (3*27%*140K) 113,400. However they approved only 66,400 till May 31. That yields about 47,000 for June alone(10%+any number not used in previous months). The reamining visas are eligible for Jul 1, which is 13,000. Put together June and July1, it comes 60,000. Therefore they did not violate any law. This makes only 126,000. The remaining number was splitted for Consular processing.
my 2 cents...
They cannot issue more than 37.800 visas for april-may-june quarter (0.27*140,000).
37800+13000 is less than 60,000.
my 2 cents...
They cannot issue more than 37.800 visas for april-may-june quarter (0.27*140,000).
37800+13000 is less than 60,000.
more...
rolrblade
07-24 11:54 AM
I agree with everybody, unfortunately we already mailed my AOS package on 07/02.
Nothing much I can do now.
Simply_GC:
yes there is an option for you. When you get the I-485 receipot, mail in the employment letter along with copy of 485 receipt (just so they can track) and a another letter stating the oversight.
Nothing much I can do now.
Simply_GC:
yes there is an option for you. When you get the I-485 receipot, mail in the employment letter along with copy of 485 receipt (just so they can track) and a another letter stating the oversight.
hot Being a green eyes girl I tend
thesparky007
02-16 08:55 PM
so!!!!!!!
none of them is free???
none of them is free???
more...
house BLUE/GRAY EYES:
abc1125
05-17 09:37 PM
Presume you got your GC last year. I am in the same boat this year - PD is current and expecting an RFE. Did you have to submit anything more than the Employment verification letter?
tattoo Bright lue eyeshadow
pv2715
07-13 10:24 AM
It is not a contradiction to the previous statement.
Cut-off-date = 1 ==> PDs before 1st can file (i.e mar-01 cut-off date mean pds till apr-30 can file)
Cut-off-date = 8 ==> PDs before 8 can file (i.e pds 1 to 7 since they are in one bucket)
Cut-off-date = 15 ==> PDs before 15 can file (specifically pds in bucket 8-14 can file)
etc...
Hope it helps. As others predicted, I really think the numbers will not move back. You will get your GC soon.
Yagw,
I understand this is a mute point of debate for most of us and I am trying to clarify a statement made in the PDF document for the benefit of people whose PDs fall under these days. Under the operational guidelines issued, it appears that any PD that falls under days 1-7 of calendar month falls under the cutoff day 1 and so on.
Cut-off-date = 1 ==> PDs before 1st can file (i.e mar-01 cut-off date mean pds till apr-30 can file)
Cut-off-date = 8 ==> PDs before 8 can file (i.e pds 1 to 7 since they are in one bucket)
Cut-off-date = 15 ==> PDs before 15 can file (specifically pds in bucket 8-14 can file)
etc...
Hope it helps. As others predicted, I really think the numbers will not move back. You will get your GC soon.
Yagw,
I understand this is a mute point of debate for most of us and I am trying to clarify a statement made in the PDF document for the benefit of people whose PDs fall under these days. Under the operational guidelines issued, it appears that any PD that falls under days 1-7 of calendar month falls under the cutoff day 1 and so on.
more...
pictures Blue Purple Eyeshadow
msp1976
07-13 10:12 AM
All,
Discrediting attorney Murthy does not serve our purpose.
If she is doing something good, that is generating more pressure on USCIS, then let's stop criticizing her.
Though she is taking the step a few days late, it is a step in right direction and lets support and thank her...
Everyone has their motives...What matters is the end product...
Discrediting attorney Murthy does not serve our purpose.
If she is doing something good, that is generating more pressure on USCIS, then let's stop criticizing her.
Though she is taking the step a few days late, it is a step in right direction and lets support and thank her...
Everyone has their motives...What matters is the end product...
dresses make-up on eyes blond
walking_dude
10-29 10:22 PM
I'm surprised only 70 members are interested in accurate prediction of future VB movements, and orderly processing of 485 applications instead of the current random lottery!
It would help lot of us make informed decisions if we were to know how many are in the queue and how long we have to wait.We can spend much of the wasted Tracking, VB prediction time with our families. Don't you think it's important? And that your time is too precious to be wasted over such pursuits?
It would help lot of us make informed decisions if we were to know how many are in the queue and how long we have to wait.We can spend much of the wasted Tracking, VB prediction time with our families. Don't you think it's important? And that your time is too precious to be wasted over such pursuits?
more...
makeup Blue Eyes Makeup
ajthakur
07-14 06:34 PM
Paper copy: Today
Email notification: last week
Sorry for asking too many questions. One more thing is when did you get this RFE? I am in similar situation---used AC-21 and applied for EAD back in first week of May 2008, but nothing yet from NSC. I was with my GC sponsoring employer for more than 6 months though and I-140 was approved back in 2005.
Email notification: last week
Sorry for asking too many questions. One more thing is when did you get this RFE? I am in similar situation---used AC-21 and applied for EAD back in first week of May 2008, but nothing yet from NSC. I was with my GC sponsoring employer for more than 6 months though and I-140 was approved back in 2005.
girlfriend in categories Blue Eyes,
ramus
07-03 03:07 PM
bump.
hairstyles bright lue eyeshadow image
drirshad
07-04 09:35 PM
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
ponnuswamyp
09-27 12:57 PM
I am worried bcoz, on my EAD card its written "NOT VALID FOR REENTRY TO U.S."
what does this mean?
Please advise.
Thanks
Mahesh
It means you can not use EAD as a travel document to reenter to U.S. You should have valid Visa for reentry.
what does this mean?
Please advise.
Thanks
Mahesh
It means you can not use EAD as a travel document to reenter to U.S. You should have valid Visa for reentry.
Wendyzhu77
07-24 12:48 PM
I think this post is purposely composed to scare people. As a matter of fact, any 485 "might" be rejected if it is not properly filed, which has always been true for years. If you case is rejected, of course you will need to refile. So, it is absolutely normal that "some" July 2 filers "might" need to file again. Literally, this sentence is correct, but the auther intentionally uses it to imply that "ALL" will be rejected. As a matter of fact, "every day", some 485 filers will need to refile their 485 sometime later.
Continuing on this forum with more generic title
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10383
Per Greg Siskind -- July 2nd filers might have to file again, as all July 2nd application were rejected. Check out the link below as well as the comment section for the blog
Greg Siskind is reporting the following about July2nd rejection here
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/faqs-part-1.html
part of above post --
USCIS did not state how cases filed and rejected on the 2nd are to be handled other than to say that properly filed applications would be accepted. This presumably covers the many cases filed after the second that were held, but it doesn�t explain what will happen to the cases received earlier. We hope USCIS will issue special instructions to issue July 2nd receipt dates to those who are able to document they attempted to file. We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing. Hopefully, again, USCIS will institute a process for such individuals to avoid being penalized.
USCIS has not announced any details yet on how it will determine which cases get 2007 visa numbers that might still be available. We also don�t know yet how cases will be processed that are not in the batch of cases that get green card numbers this year. For those who will have to get numbers in future years, applications should be worked by the order of the priority date. So applicants with labor certifications approved some time back, for example, should go before people in the same category with later priority dates.
For individuals filing cases not requiring a labor certification (such as Schedule A cases and national interest waivers), the priority date is the date of filing. Because there may be hundreds of thousands of applications received between July 2nd and August 17th with many of these cases not requiring a labor certification, the date during this six week period a case is filed could make a big difference in terms of when a case will complete processing. And, again, getting that July 2nd priority date for those who filed early and were rejected could make a big difference in when their cases are ultimately processed through to completion.
Continuing on this forum with more generic title
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10383
Per Greg Siskind -- July 2nd filers might have to file again, as all July 2nd application were rejected. Check out the link below as well as the comment section for the blog
Greg Siskind is reporting the following about July2nd rejection here
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/faqs-part-1.html
part of above post --
USCIS did not state how cases filed and rejected on the 2nd are to be handled other than to say that properly filed applications would be accepted. This presumably covers the many cases filed after the second that were held, but it doesn�t explain what will happen to the cases received earlier. We hope USCIS will issue special instructions to issue July 2nd receipt dates to those who are able to document they attempted to file. We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing. Hopefully, again, USCIS will institute a process for such individuals to avoid being penalized.
USCIS has not announced any details yet on how it will determine which cases get 2007 visa numbers that might still be available. We also don�t know yet how cases will be processed that are not in the batch of cases that get green card numbers this year. For those who will have to get numbers in future years, applications should be worked by the order of the priority date. So applicants with labor certifications approved some time back, for example, should go before people in the same category with later priority dates.
For individuals filing cases not requiring a labor certification (such as Schedule A cases and national interest waivers), the priority date is the date of filing. Because there may be hundreds of thousands of applications received between July 2nd and August 17th with many of these cases not requiring a labor certification, the date during this six week period a case is filed could make a big difference in terms of when a case will complete processing. And, again, getting that July 2nd priority date for those who filed early and were rejected could make a big difference in when their cases are ultimately processed through to completion.
0 comments:
Post a Comment