pmmo
10-19 12:36 PM
Sorry that I could not reply sooner. In this case, I went ahead and did an Info Pass appointment. The officer there went ahead and gave a 1-year temporary stamp and said he was ordering card production. This was in July and I am still waiting. My lawyer said "congrats"! No idea how to handle this going forward. What happened to your case?
cantonsale10@gmail.com
05-19 08:52 PM
Hi Friends,
I just contributed 50$ now and i will be doing this again. Good Work !.
Receipt ID: 1271-2377-8225-6547
Thanks
I just contributed 50$ now and i will be doing this again. Good Work !.
Receipt ID: 1271-2377-8225-6547
Thanks
hydguy1
05-13 12:56 AM
Hello everyone,
My brother's marriage has just been settled in India.I need to leave in 3 weeks and just applied for my AP today.I delayed renewing my AP due to financial reasons.Can someone please advise me the best way to expedite my AP as I really want to go the wedding.Thanks!
My brother's marriage has just been settled in India.I need to leave in 3 weeks and just applied for my AP today.I delayed renewing my AP due to financial reasons.Can someone please advise me the best way to expedite my AP as I really want to go the wedding.Thanks!
billu
08-23 10:16 AM
It is hard to compare Canada vs India. India as other problems. If you want finance sector jobs then it is Bombay. It involves long travel
of 2 hours in locals each way. 4 hours travel...there is no personal time left after work. I personally cant take it...it might be different
for others. Power problems, traffic jam etc is there. It about what you consider quality of life, and that is different from person to person.
coming to US/Canada vs india, my friend who went back to india after 6 yrs here on h1b last april, says that he has adjusted back to his life there.......he has power cuts,limited water supply,traffic jams,long commute,sarkari issues like bills etc (hes in delhi)but he has accepted that as a part of life just like the first 25 yrs of his life when he was in india......so its very subjective and a matter of personal choice.......if u are ready to adapt,then u will be fine but if u always keep comparing ur lifestyle here v/s in india in terms of "quality of life" then u'll not b satisfied
of 2 hours in locals each way. 4 hours travel...there is no personal time left after work. I personally cant take it...it might be different
for others. Power problems, traffic jam etc is there. It about what you consider quality of life, and that is different from person to person.
coming to US/Canada vs india, my friend who went back to india after 6 yrs here on h1b last april, says that he has adjusted back to his life there.......he has power cuts,limited water supply,traffic jams,long commute,sarkari issues like bills etc (hes in delhi)but he has accepted that as a part of life just like the first 25 yrs of his life when he was in india......so its very subjective and a matter of personal choice.......if u are ready to adapt,then u will be fine but if u always keep comparing ur lifestyle here v/s in india in terms of "quality of life" then u'll not b satisfied
more...
arnet
06-13 08:42 PM
This is old posting, but might be helpful for I-485 filers. so check this and verify with your attroney and with USCIS before filing I-485.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=41512#post41512
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=41512#post41512
Canadian_Dream
03-20 08:30 PM
This is so confusing. But I-129 does have a section to identifying new vs. continuing employer. Isn't moving to a new employer automatically means that new paycheck MUST come from new employer regardless of whether existing employer has canceled the H1B or not. If you don't intend to work for new employer they MUST cancel the H1-B or you should request them to cancel it ? Otherwise it will bound to generate the confusion that's apparent from the I/O looking at your petition.
I am thinking it can be interpreted either way, but nothing in the laws says one way or the other. It is all up to I/O's interpretation.
IMHO: Right think would have be:
1. Employer-X Files new H1
2. Employer-2 Withdraws existing H1
3. You changed your mind
4. Employer X Withdraws H1
5. Employer 2 Files a NEW H1
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-129.pdf
I am thinking it can be interpreted either way, but nothing in the laws says one way or the other. It is all up to I/O's interpretation.
IMHO: Right think would have be:
1. Employer-X Files new H1
2. Employer-2 Withdraws existing H1
3. You changed your mind
4. Employer X Withdraws H1
5. Employer 2 Files a NEW H1
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-129.pdf
more...
needhelp!
03-06 05:16 PM
Section 6: Time Limits for Agencies to Act on Requests Section 6 of the Open Government Act has two provisions that address time limits for complying with FOIA requests, and the consequences of failing to do so. Significantly, this section does not take effect until one year after the date of enactment and will apply to FOIA requests �filed on or after that effective date.� Accordingly, agencies have until December 31, 2008 to take any necessary steps to prepare for the implementation of this Section.
First, section 6(a) of the Open Government Act amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(A) which gives the statutory time period for processing FOIA requests, and includes criteria for when that time period begins to run and when that time period may be suspended or �tolled.� Specifically, section 6(a) provides that the statutory time period commences �on the date on which the request is first received by the appropriate component of the agency, but in any event not later than ten days after the request is first received by any component of the agency that is designated in the agency�s regulations under this section to receive requests.� This provision addresses the situation where a FOIA request is received by a component of an agency that is designated to receive FOIA requests, but is not the proper component for the request at issue. In such a situation, the component that receives the request in error � provided it is a component of the agency that is designated by the agency�s regulations to receive requests � has ten working days within which to forward the FOIA request to the appropriate agency component for processing. Once the FOIA request has been forwarded and received by the appropriate agency component � which must take place within ten working days � the statutory time period to respond to the request commences.
Section 6(a) further provides for those circumstances when an agency may toll the statutory time period. Specifically, an agency �may make one request to the requester for information and toll� the statutory time period �while it is awaiting such information that it has reasonably requested from the requester.� The agency may also toll the time period �if necessary to clarify with the requester issues regarding fee assessment.� There is no limit given for the number of times an agency may go back to a requester to clarify issues regarding fee assessments � which sometimes may need to be done in stages as the records are being located and processed. In both situations, section 6(a) specifies that the requester�s response to the agency�s request �ends the tolling period.�
Second, section 6(b) addresses compliance with the FOIA�s time limits by amending 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(4)(A), the provision addressing fees. Section 6(b) adds a clause to that provision providing that �[a]n agency shall not assess search fees (or in the case of a [favored] requester [i.e., one who qualifies as an educational or noncommercial scientific institution, or as a representative of the news media] duplication fees) . . . if the agency fails to comply with any time limit under paragraph (6), if no unusual or exceptional circumstances (as those terms are defined for purposes of (6)(B) and (C), respectively) apply to the processing of the request.�
As noted in the language of the new provision, the terms �unusual circumstances� and �exceptional circumstances� are existing terms in the FOIA. �Unusual circumstances� occur when there is a need to search or collect records from field offices, or other establishments; when there is a need to search for and examine a voluminous amount of records; or when there is a need for consultation with another agency or with more than two components within the same agency. Unlike �unusual circumstances,� �exceptional circumstances� are not affirmatively defined in the FOIA, but the FOIA does provide that �exceptional circumstances� cannot include �a delay that results from a predictable agency workload of requests . . . unless the agency demonstrates reasonable progress in reducing its backlog of pending requests.� 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(C)(ii). In addition, the statute provides that the �[r]efusal by a person to reasonably modify the scope of a request, or arrange an alternative time frame for processing the request . . . shall be considered as a factor in determining whether exceptional circumstances exist.� Id. at � 552(a)(6)(C)(iii).
Section 6(b) therefore precludes an agency from assessing search fees (or in the case of �favored� requesters, duplication fees), if the agency fails to comply with the FOIA�s time limits, unless �unusual� or �exceptional� circumstances �apply to the processing of the request.�
Finally, section 6(b) amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(B)(ii), which discusses notification to requesters regarding the time limits and the option of arranging an alternative time frame for processing, by directing agencies �[t]o aid the requester� by making �available its FOIA Public Liaison, who shall assist in the resolution of any disputes between the requester and the agency.� This provision incorporates an existing aspect of Executive Order 13,392.
The Department of Justice will be providing guidance to agencies in the near future on section 6.
First, section 6(a) of the Open Government Act amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(A) which gives the statutory time period for processing FOIA requests, and includes criteria for when that time period begins to run and when that time period may be suspended or �tolled.� Specifically, section 6(a) provides that the statutory time period commences �on the date on which the request is first received by the appropriate component of the agency, but in any event not later than ten days after the request is first received by any component of the agency that is designated in the agency�s regulations under this section to receive requests.� This provision addresses the situation where a FOIA request is received by a component of an agency that is designated to receive FOIA requests, but is not the proper component for the request at issue. In such a situation, the component that receives the request in error � provided it is a component of the agency that is designated by the agency�s regulations to receive requests � has ten working days within which to forward the FOIA request to the appropriate agency component for processing. Once the FOIA request has been forwarded and received by the appropriate agency component � which must take place within ten working days � the statutory time period to respond to the request commences.
Section 6(a) further provides for those circumstances when an agency may toll the statutory time period. Specifically, an agency �may make one request to the requester for information and toll� the statutory time period �while it is awaiting such information that it has reasonably requested from the requester.� The agency may also toll the time period �if necessary to clarify with the requester issues regarding fee assessment.� There is no limit given for the number of times an agency may go back to a requester to clarify issues regarding fee assessments � which sometimes may need to be done in stages as the records are being located and processed. In both situations, section 6(a) specifies that the requester�s response to the agency�s request �ends the tolling period.�
Second, section 6(b) addresses compliance with the FOIA�s time limits by amending 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(4)(A), the provision addressing fees. Section 6(b) adds a clause to that provision providing that �[a]n agency shall not assess search fees (or in the case of a [favored] requester [i.e., one who qualifies as an educational or noncommercial scientific institution, or as a representative of the news media] duplication fees) . . . if the agency fails to comply with any time limit under paragraph (6), if no unusual or exceptional circumstances (as those terms are defined for purposes of (6)(B) and (C), respectively) apply to the processing of the request.�
As noted in the language of the new provision, the terms �unusual circumstances� and �exceptional circumstances� are existing terms in the FOIA. �Unusual circumstances� occur when there is a need to search or collect records from field offices, or other establishments; when there is a need to search for and examine a voluminous amount of records; or when there is a need for consultation with another agency or with more than two components within the same agency. Unlike �unusual circumstances,� �exceptional circumstances� are not affirmatively defined in the FOIA, but the FOIA does provide that �exceptional circumstances� cannot include �a delay that results from a predictable agency workload of requests . . . unless the agency demonstrates reasonable progress in reducing its backlog of pending requests.� 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(C)(ii). In addition, the statute provides that the �[r]efusal by a person to reasonably modify the scope of a request, or arrange an alternative time frame for processing the request . . . shall be considered as a factor in determining whether exceptional circumstances exist.� Id. at � 552(a)(6)(C)(iii).
Section 6(b) therefore precludes an agency from assessing search fees (or in the case of �favored� requesters, duplication fees), if the agency fails to comply with the FOIA�s time limits, unless �unusual� or �exceptional� circumstances �apply to the processing of the request.�
Finally, section 6(b) amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(B)(ii), which discusses notification to requesters regarding the time limits and the option of arranging an alternative time frame for processing, by directing agencies �[t]o aid the requester� by making �available its FOIA Public Liaison, who shall assist in the resolution of any disputes between the requester and the agency.� This provision incorporates an existing aspect of Executive Order 13,392.
The Department of Justice will be providing guidance to agencies in the near future on section 6.
gcandgc
05-21 11:45 AM
Hi Pappu
Like me most of us would have got the reply from the Senetor or the congress man for the email that we sent. But all the replies are generic in nature and focus is on illegal immigration issue. The problems of "Legal immigrants" to my knowledge did not get their attention?. This is my observation.
Regards
GCANDGC
Like me most of us would have got the reply from the Senetor or the congress man for the email that we sent. But all the replies are generic in nature and focus is on illegal immigration issue. The problems of "Legal immigrants" to my knowledge did not get their attention?. This is my observation.
Regards
GCANDGC
more...
anilsal
06-13 10:09 PM
https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=offices.type&OfficeLocator.office_type=CIV
Ramba
05-30 07:43 PM
Now, the bad part ... the achilles heel of every high-skills amendment is the tethered H1B quota tricks. They are exempting everyone who has US masters or a non-US master in STEM from H1 quota, effectively making H1 quota = A LOT MORE.
The exact same radioactive provision for H1 quota is also in Lieberman-Hagel amendment 1242.
This will sink both of them unless either there is some inside deal going on that we dont know, or they strike out the H1 issue from this on the floor of the senate at the last minute and be content with H1 quota of 180,000.
I don't understand the risk you are mentioning. How unlimited H1B is going to cause problem in eliminating retrogression in EB catagories?
The exact same radioactive provision for H1 quota is also in Lieberman-Hagel amendment 1242.
This will sink both of them unless either there is some inside deal going on that we dont know, or they strike out the H1 issue from this on the floor of the senate at the last minute and be content with H1 quota of 180,000.
I don't understand the risk you are mentioning. How unlimited H1B is going to cause problem in eliminating retrogression in EB catagories?
more...
belmontboy
05-29 04:09 PM
They are proving themselves as idiots. Who else has money to fly now a days?
Well, if your travel agent offers a Air France ticket, refuse and tell him the reason why u don't want to fly them.
First of all their tickets are way too pricy. People pay shit load of money and get treated like a dogs?? We have choice no matter where u fly from. Try to avoid these European carriers. Try to fly Asian or Indian carriers.
Air France needs to learn that everybody is a customer, irrespective of their skin color/race. And every customer is entitled to same service as rest of them.
Well, if your travel agent offers a Air France ticket, refuse and tell him the reason why u don't want to fly them.
First of all their tickets are way too pricy. People pay shit load of money and get treated like a dogs?? We have choice no matter where u fly from. Try to avoid these European carriers. Try to fly Asian or Indian carriers.
Air France needs to learn that everybody is a customer, irrespective of their skin color/race. And every customer is entitled to same service as rest of them.
pappu
07-10 04:50 PM
Isn't this old news? has been around for a while???
this is the first time i heard details about this bill even though he has been talking about it after meeting Bush. the news article thread has the analysis i found from an anti immigration group site. AILA has posted it as their news today however they have not yet posted the summary of the bill. The question is which one of the 3 --SKIL bill, CIR or Pence will be really voted and which ones will be put in the backburner for future or silent demise!
this is the first time i heard details about this bill even though he has been talking about it after meeting Bush. the news article thread has the analysis i found from an anti immigration group site. AILA has posted it as their news today however they have not yet posted the summary of the bill. The question is which one of the 3 --SKIL bill, CIR or Pence will be really voted and which ones will be put in the backburner for future or silent demise!
more...
ashkam
06-19 04:12 PM
One change I noticed.
Now people can continue in the old system if the I-140 was approved or pending before the first day of the fiscal year subsequent to the the bill being enacted. So if the bill is passed right away, you need to have filed your I-140 before Oct 1 2007.
Buehler : Thanks for the find. Can you quote it please, if possible?
Now people can continue in the old system if the I-140 was approved or pending before the first day of the fiscal year subsequent to the the bill being enacted. So if the bill is passed right away, you need to have filed your I-140 before Oct 1 2007.
Buehler : Thanks for the find. Can you quote it please, if possible?
Michael chertoff
03-26 11:04 PM
Here I will summarize why we are unable to work with each another
By this and a later post MC is showing openly brazen attitude toward EB3 applicants. Such posts should be first of all, banned from IV and I am going to report all such posts.
You wouldn't show this :( expression if it were YOUR hibernating application. Also see if Mr. Nathan's comment below would apply to you
This is the brazen post I was talking about earlier. Even MC himself acknowledges that this post is "unhelpful", and he is deliberately doing this. This gives a negative impression of how serious this person is. I would urge him to buck up and learn to work with everyone, and quit watching "balance" from his sole viewpoint
This is an "us vs them" argument. Not upto the standard desirable from IV point of view
Understand the realities here: IV is struggling to make even the most legitimate views heard and you are sitting and talking away as if USCIS and lawmakers are your servant. Go for the ONE thing to wish for that will solve all troubles, because you have only one chance.
Good dialogue. Ironic how it applies to so many posts here arguing in the opposite direction
"all the EB3s are against spillover and making comments that it's not happening this year. It feels like EB3s do not want EB2s to get GCs."
are you yourself convinced of this? I highly doubt.
You make no sense man. I am not against EB3. I just said what I think, and I can be wrong too. If you dont like this just ignore or give your view on how it justified to change the line in the middle of the game.
MC
By this and a later post MC is showing openly brazen attitude toward EB3 applicants. Such posts should be first of all, banned from IV and I am going to report all such posts.
You wouldn't show this :( expression if it were YOUR hibernating application. Also see if Mr. Nathan's comment below would apply to you
This is the brazen post I was talking about earlier. Even MC himself acknowledges that this post is "unhelpful", and he is deliberately doing this. This gives a negative impression of how serious this person is. I would urge him to buck up and learn to work with everyone, and quit watching "balance" from his sole viewpoint
This is an "us vs them" argument. Not upto the standard desirable from IV point of view
Understand the realities here: IV is struggling to make even the most legitimate views heard and you are sitting and talking away as if USCIS and lawmakers are your servant. Go for the ONE thing to wish for that will solve all troubles, because you have only one chance.
Good dialogue. Ironic how it applies to so many posts here arguing in the opposite direction
"all the EB3s are against spillover and making comments that it's not happening this year. It feels like EB3s do not want EB2s to get GCs."
are you yourself convinced of this? I highly doubt.
You make no sense man. I am not against EB3. I just said what I think, and I can be wrong too. If you dont like this just ignore or give your view on how it justified to change the line in the middle of the game.
MC
more...
suniel2008
05-19 07:13 PM
keep it coming guys greatwork IVBelow is the response I receieved from senetor, not sure if my email was read becuase I don't see any word about legal immigratnts in the response,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for taking the time to share your views regarding immigration. I would like to take the opportunity to respond to this important issue.
There are currently over 38 million foreign-born individuals living in the United States, which accounts for nearly 13 percent of the total U.S. population. Nearly one-third of this foreign-born population is estimated to consist of undocumented or illegal residents; a clear indication that our immigration system is broken. While a number of bills have been introduced concerning various elements of immigration reform, the issue has yet to come before the full Senate. I am currently evaluating a number of policy options, and will remain mindful of your thoughts on this subject as we proceed in the 111th Congress.
Again, thank you for taking the time to share your concerns with me regarding this issue. It is an honor and privilege to serve the people of the great State of Florida in the United States Senate. I take great pride in being a native Floridian, and I look forward to the tremendous opportunity to better the lives of all Floridians. I assure you I will work hard to represent our state to the best of my ability in the U.S. Senate. If I can be of any further help to you, please do not hesitate to contact me.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for taking the time to share your views regarding immigration. I would like to take the opportunity to respond to this important issue.
There are currently over 38 million foreign-born individuals living in the United States, which accounts for nearly 13 percent of the total U.S. population. Nearly one-third of this foreign-born population is estimated to consist of undocumented or illegal residents; a clear indication that our immigration system is broken. While a number of bills have been introduced concerning various elements of immigration reform, the issue has yet to come before the full Senate. I am currently evaluating a number of policy options, and will remain mindful of your thoughts on this subject as we proceed in the 111th Congress.
Again, thank you for taking the time to share your concerns with me regarding this issue. It is an honor and privilege to serve the people of the great State of Florida in the United States Senate. I take great pride in being a native Floridian, and I look forward to the tremendous opportunity to better the lives of all Floridians. I assure you I will work hard to represent our state to the best of my ability in the U.S. Senate. If I can be of any further help to you, please do not hesitate to contact me.
nrakkati
03-20 10:50 PM
You are in GOOD state with regard to the query you have to reply to....
If I were you I would still have a good lawyer reply to this.........its better to be safe and this should not be more than 500$ work.
All the best wishes to you! :) :) :)
Thanks Piyu7444, for a good suggestion.
If I were you I would still have a good lawyer reply to this.........its better to be safe and this should not be more than 500$ work.
All the best wishes to you! :) :) :)
Thanks Piyu7444, for a good suggestion.
more...
Winner
06-24 12:45 PM
Called and spoke to a very "sweet" lady. She was aware of the bill #'s and suggested that I call my local rep (which I've been doing every week)
ajay
02-01 04:04 PM
It is better you do it online and mention that you have pending 485 in NSC. I don't think Fl has anything to do with your place of sending.
Once you file online you can get a print out of it for your reference after you pay and USCIS will send you a receipt notice stating that they received your AP request. If they need any further evidence they would send a letter to do the same. Till then just sit back and check online.
I filed mine online and they sent me a notice saying that they would require my latest passport size photo, which I sent two weeks back and now I can see that it is in process when I check online.
hth
Once you file online you can get a print out of it for your reference after you pay and USCIS will send you a receipt notice stating that they received your AP request. If they need any further evidence they would send a letter to do the same. Till then just sit back and check online.
I filed mine online and they sent me a notice saying that they would require my latest passport size photo, which I sent two weeks back and now I can see that it is in process when I check online.
hth
manish_jain99
07-18 05:32 PM
People were very happy with the last USCIS announcement but we all forgot about pain of people who are stuck in years of backlog. Though some of those unfortunate may have used harsh or improper language, but they had all the right to express their feelings. We all talk about Gandhian philosophy, but we need to be more tolerant. Before we ask to ban anyone from our forum, please try to put yourself in their shoes.
Our fight is far from over, we should all fight for for in-justice made to people who are trapped in the bureaucracy.
Our fight is far from over, we should all fight for for in-justice made to people who are trapped in the bureaucracy.
H4_losing_hope
02-26 10:56 PM
Hi !!
3 more letters to Bush & IV;)
:)
3 more letters to Bush & IV;)
:)
mannubhai
05-21 02:27 PM
Did that yesterday. Do we need to mention it here in order to get it accounted for?
No comments:
Post a Comment