ragz4u
03-09 08:34 AM
They are debating whether the current 2000 border troops should be increased to 2400
wallpaper Natalie Portman and Mila Kunis
gemini23
08-02 03:48 PM
Thanks kondo. its really a good news.
gcnirvana
08-07 12:53 PM
Got it this time...looks like a refresh issue. Thanks!
Hi,
No,it is edited now.go thru the link once again and see.It is edited to 7/1/2007.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes080307.pdf
vaishu
Hi,
No,it is edited now.go thru the link once again and see.It is edited to 7/1/2007.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes080307.pdf
vaishu
2011 the lack swan.
usirit
09-16 04:28 PM
I am an H1B holder.... my wife holds an H4. Her DL expired and it has been impossible to get her a renewal. On our last discussion it was brought to our attention that their could be a discrepancy between DHS data (my wife's birthday) even it shows correct in all documents printed by them and the Indiana's BMV database. Meanwhile she is holding 'Temporarily Driving Permits' (piece of paper) that expires every 30 days....
Any thoughts...
Any thoughts...
more...
sledge_hammer
04-17 02:20 PM
H4+ I-485 pending still is a valid status. Now what rules they have regarding approving the loan to someone who is not working (because of H4 status) is something I am unaware of and not immigration related, I guess.
But if you are going to send them a copy of your I-485 application, that should mean SOMETHING in their eyes.
Do let us know how it goes. It will also be helpful to others in your situation. Good luck!
Thank you Mr. Hammer.
My question was about H4 + 485 pending? Then what is the status? I have earlier given EAD, but they did not accept that. I am submitting 485 receipt with A#. Let me see how it goes.
But if you are going to send them a copy of your I-485 application, that should mean SOMETHING in their eyes.
Do let us know how it goes. It will also be helpful to others in your situation. Good luck!
Thank you Mr. Hammer.
My question was about H4 + 485 pending? Then what is the status? I have earlier given EAD, but they did not accept that. I am submitting 485 receipt with A#. Let me see how it goes.
superdesi2100
09-10 11:25 AM
Thanks for all the efforts. Donated 100$ via paypal. Coming to the rally as well.
more...
ArkBird
03-05 09:28 PM
My PD is March-2003 and I didn't get the labor cleared till Late 2006
I just can't help wondering how did you get your labor in 2004 with the PD of May-2003? How come snake of BEC didn't bite you? :)
My adjustment application is pending for almost five years now. I was not in the habit of tracking LUDs but of late I was tracking and concluded that most of the time it means nothing.
Here is what happened today. My attorney had applied for my travel document on Jan 28. I got three soft LUDs between Feb 8 to 10. Status remaing same "Case received and pending". To my surprise today I received my travel documents from my attorney. The issue date on the document is March 5. My attorney mailed it to me on March 3, I believe as soon as he received it.
The last LUD on my case is still Feb 10 and the status still says "Received and Pending".
I think we should not go too much by the LUDs.
I just can't help wondering how did you get your labor in 2004 with the PD of May-2003? How come snake of BEC didn't bite you? :)
My adjustment application is pending for almost five years now. I was not in the habit of tracking LUDs but of late I was tracking and concluded that most of the time it means nothing.
Here is what happened today. My attorney had applied for my travel document on Jan 28. I got three soft LUDs between Feb 8 to 10. Status remaing same "Case received and pending". To my surprise today I received my travel documents from my attorney. The issue date on the document is March 5. My attorney mailed it to me on March 3, I believe as soon as he received it.
The last LUD on my case is still Feb 10 and the status still says "Received and Pending".
I think we should not go too much by the LUDs.
2010 Natalie-Portman-Black-Swan
ras
10-16 05:47 PM
Added some missing in's and to's, etc. if it appears appropriate, you may keep the changes.
Issue/Background:
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring it to your attention the hardship faced by I 485 applicants because of inappropriate denials by USCIS with out adhering to AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many applicants have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485 applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing a NOID or an RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS the change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees and psychological stress, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are adhered to when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this could be added to the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant could be issued a NOID/RFE instead of out rightly denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Issue/Background:
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring it to your attention the hardship faced by I 485 applicants because of inappropriate denials by USCIS with out adhering to AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many applicants have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485 applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing a NOID or an RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS the change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees and psychological stress, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are adhered to when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this could be added to the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant could be issued a NOID/RFE instead of out rightly denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
more...
senthil
08-08 08:54 PM
just want to see how much time it takes. thanks
hair for new movie Black Swan.
ItIsNotFunny
10-21 11:06 AM
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Guys,
This is one of the most serious issue we are facing in current time. Lay offs are happening left and right and on top of that employers learned that AC21 is giving troubles, they started squeezing more (I myself is partially victim of that).
We need sincere efforts sending emails to ombudsman. This will not take more than 5 minutes as NK2006 put efforts on even giving you the email template.
I sincerely urge everyone to send emails to addresses NK2006 mentioned above and even request your collegues, spouse to do so. We need volume to show our presence.
One more request, please take one more minute and make sure that you post here that you sent emails. This will give us real picture and give others motivation too!
I sent my emails (actually twice ;)).
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Guys,
This is one of the most serious issue we are facing in current time. Lay offs are happening left and right and on top of that employers learned that AC21 is giving troubles, they started squeezing more (I myself is partially victim of that).
We need sincere efforts sending emails to ombudsman. This will not take more than 5 minutes as NK2006 put efforts on even giving you the email template.
I sincerely urge everyone to send emails to addresses NK2006 mentioned above and even request your collegues, spouse to do so. We need volume to show our presence.
One more request, please take one more minute and make sure that you post here that you sent emails. This will give us real picture and give others motivation too!
I sent my emails (actually twice ;)).
more...
ssk1127
08-23 06:16 PM
Also forgot to mention the article says "certain" - See highlighted below the title so I am sure Advacned degree wil lnot come under this based on the definition you find in the above articale
Evaluation of Evidentiary Criteria in Certain Form I-140 Petitions (AFM Update AD 10-41)
Evaluation of Evidentiary Criteria in Certain Form I-140 Petitions (AFM Update AD 10-41)
hot natalie portman diet
saileshdude
07-11 11:51 AM
I am not sure if I should be happy or sad with this news. I was laidoff recently and had applied for I-485 on July 17,2007 i.e. current processing date for TSC. Also with this bulletin I will be current (EB2 2006). I have not found a new job yet and my company has told me that they will be revoking my I-140 after 30 days. My company lawyers are not advising me much citing conflict of interest.
What options do I have? Will sending a new G-28 form at this time raise any issues that I do not have job with original employer as my PD is current and it is quite possible that my case maybe adjudicated. In the meantime if I do not sent new G-28 form I am not sure how much my company attorney will co-operate
What options do I have? Will sending a new G-28 form at this time raise any issues that I do not have job with original employer as my PD is current and it is quite possible that my case maybe adjudicated. In the meantime if I do not sent new G-28 form I am not sure how much my company attorney will co-operate
more...
house Natalie Portman and Mila Kunis
my2cents
04-30 04:51 PM
look here at
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=71f24d6c52c99110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
"Though we still have challenges to overcome, USCIS is currently showing improvements as a result of process improvements. As of April 25, 2008, USCIS had adjudicated over 65 percent of its FY 2008 target for employment-based visas. With five months to go in FY 2008, this is a strong start. We plan to continue implementing process improvements and new reporting mechanisms for managing these important applications. "
It means they have used 90K Visa out of 140-150K ..it means 50K visa left for next 5 month..not sure how much visa dates wlll be moved.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=71f24d6c52c99110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
"Though we still have challenges to overcome, USCIS is currently showing improvements as a result of process improvements. As of April 25, 2008, USCIS had adjudicated over 65 percent of its FY 2008 target for employment-based visas. With five months to go in FY 2008, this is a strong start. We plan to continue implementing process improvements and new reporting mechanisms for managing these important applications. "
It means they have used 90K Visa out of 140-150K ..it means 50K visa left for next 5 month..not sure how much visa dates wlll be moved.
tattoo Natalie Portman#39;s Black Swan
p1234
09-14 05:47 PM
Dost.. tum to bade hi budhu ho.... dawa karao apne dimag ki.... ya ho sakta hai ki tum EB3 ho.
Needless to say.. u are not very intelligent.
I will see how you react when the entire 12 million illegals get chance to file in EB3 and your Eb3 bulletin dates goes to 1968.
Don't put EB3 down, you call yourself a doctorate and yet keep farting around.
Needless to say.. u are not very intelligent.
I will see how you react when the entire 12 million illegals get chance to file in EB3 and your Eb3 bulletin dates goes to 1968.
Don't put EB3 down, you call yourself a doctorate and yet keep farting around.
more...
pictures Natalie Portman In Black Swan.
chanduv23
11-25 04:09 PM
A general question - Is it normal to see LUDs on the 485, approved 140, approved 765/131 a few (3) weeks after sending AC21/G28N documentation in?
I changed employers about a month ago (140 approved, 485 pending more than 180 days), and the new company filed AC21 on Nov 3. I saw a soft LUD on my 765, 131, 485, 140 yesterday (Nov 24) and another soft LUD on just my 485 today (Nov 25). I wonder if these have to do with the AC21 and G-28N updates or if it is a sign of I-140 revocation and I should expect a 485 denial soon?
Any response will be highly appreciated.
Thanks,
g 28 does produce soft LUds so it is normal. Now AC21 documentation - whether it reaches file or not we don't know.
I changed employers about a month ago (140 approved, 485 pending more than 180 days), and the new company filed AC21 on Nov 3. I saw a soft LUD on my 765, 131, 485, 140 yesterday (Nov 24) and another soft LUD on just my 485 today (Nov 25). I wonder if these have to do with the AC21 and G-28N updates or if it is a sign of I-140 revocation and I should expect a 485 denial soon?
Any response will be highly appreciated.
Thanks,
g 28 does produce soft LUds so it is normal. Now AC21 documentation - whether it reaches file or not we don't know.
dresses natalie portman black swan
akilaakka
12-10 03:31 PM
Please see link below
Visa Bulletin for January 2010 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4597.html)
Visa Bulletin for January 2010 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4597.html)
more...
makeup Natalie Portman, who is thin
GOTGC
07-24 03:46 PM
EB5 doesn't need I-140. In fact EB5 does not apply with I-485, EB5 application# is I-526. Either we are missing out some crucial information on LuckyPaji's case or he is having little fun at our expense. They haven't even completed receipting June 29 cases. This guy is just playing with us or his dates are completely wrong.
Since it is absolutely impossible with EB3 Sep 2006 PD I thought he might have applied in a different category..Do not know the specifics of EB5...Incase what you said is true whatever that guy said is just a JOKE!
Since it is absolutely impossible with EB3 Sep 2006 PD I thought he might have applied in a different category..Do not know the specifics of EB5...Incase what you said is true whatever that guy said is just a JOKE!
girlfriend Natalie Portman Black Swan
gondalguru
07-18 05:21 PM
This would suck for older priority dates.
My priority date is March, 2002!! Application was delivered to Nebraska on June 15th but the Receipt date is in mid-July.
So all those filers with priority dates after me (did not come across any with PD older than mine) that got their receipt notices before me would jump ahead in line!! Who knows how many years more...
Hopefully they will change their procedure after this fiasco to go by Priority Dates first and then the receipt dates.
...
You should be happy as you have a very old PD.
As u mentioned that you applied in mid june but the receipt date is mid july. What is your notice date? I thought that receipt date is the date when uscis receives your application. I may be wrong.
My priority date is March, 2002!! Application was delivered to Nebraska on June 15th but the Receipt date is in mid-July.
So all those filers with priority dates after me (did not come across any with PD older than mine) that got their receipt notices before me would jump ahead in line!! Who knows how many years more...
Hopefully they will change their procedure after this fiasco to go by Priority Dates first and then the receipt dates.
...
You should be happy as you have a very old PD.
As u mentioned that you applied in mid june but the receipt date is mid july. What is your notice date? I thought that receipt date is the date when uscis receives your application. I may be wrong.
hairstyles Natalie Portman gives in to
swo
07-20 06:47 PM
thats one way to look at it. The other way to see this is that:
- given enough people making noise its possible to get DOS/USCIS to make changes and fix things. this has now been proven.
-there is a lot more visibility for EB related issues now, so much better chance of recapture or exemption for spouses from VB calculations etc.
- instead of focus being on filing 485 without visa numbers (which is what IV focussed on for a while) everyone will now focus right at the root of the problem. All 500K are now focussed on solving the main issue.
My friend, there is validity in what you say. I think there is a general shortage of visas, period. That is the root of the issue. However, we did know that going in. So when we get stuck in that situation we have to remember to distinguish between calling for change and demanding it.
Also, with all due respect to IV, I think the thing that most likely led to the USCIS turnaround was not our voices, but rather the fact that a law suit would have revealed SERIOUS rule breaking - particularly with regard to issuing of visas to non-security cleared people. I think the USCIS's fear of dealing with a) discovery during court proceedings and b) potentially huge finanicial damages, were the main motivating factors to the turnaround.
There is no doubt though, that the voices of immigrants did make a difference.
By the way, this morning I wrote to both Senators Cornyn (for) and Clinton (against) in response to their amendment votes yesterday. I thanked him from trying to bring relief and urged her to show more bravery in solving the crisis at a future opportunity. I urge you all to do the same.
- given enough people making noise its possible to get DOS/USCIS to make changes and fix things. this has now been proven.
-there is a lot more visibility for EB related issues now, so much better chance of recapture or exemption for spouses from VB calculations etc.
- instead of focus being on filing 485 without visa numbers (which is what IV focussed on for a while) everyone will now focus right at the root of the problem. All 500K are now focussed on solving the main issue.
My friend, there is validity in what you say. I think there is a general shortage of visas, period. That is the root of the issue. However, we did know that going in. So when we get stuck in that situation we have to remember to distinguish between calling for change and demanding it.
Also, with all due respect to IV, I think the thing that most likely led to the USCIS turnaround was not our voices, but rather the fact that a law suit would have revealed SERIOUS rule breaking - particularly with regard to issuing of visas to non-security cleared people. I think the USCIS's fear of dealing with a) discovery during court proceedings and b) potentially huge finanicial damages, were the main motivating factors to the turnaround.
There is no doubt though, that the voices of immigrants did make a difference.
By the way, this morning I wrote to both Senators Cornyn (for) and Clinton (against) in response to their amendment votes yesterday. I thanked him from trying to bring relief and urged her to show more bravery in solving the crisis at a future opportunity. I urge you all to do the same.
vayumahesh
10-28 03:28 PM
Thanks 9Years for sharing the info. My I-140 was filed on Oct 20th under premium processing and still waiting for approval.
As next step, are you planning to do interfiling or wait and see if I-485 will be approved automatically ?
As next step, are you planning to do interfiling or wait and see if I-485 will be approved automatically ?
r_mistry
01-08 02:00 PM
Please share you experiences!!!
Thanks,
Thanks,
No comments:
Post a Comment