bijualex29
06-08 03:50 PM
Man I tell you, In India people openly takes bribes and they call it as bribes. He we makes it as an official word called Primium processing, I call it as Sofisicated word for bribe only.
wallpaper 2004 BMW X3 middot; 2006 BMW X3
prinive
03-27 04:15 PM
:o
prince_waiting
08-10 11:13 AM
Emailed my attorney immediately and he said that as long as the checks do not bounce the application is going to be OK.
It does not matter to the USCIS if the checks do not have the same address as on the I485.
It does not matter to the USCIS if the checks do not have the same address as on the I485.
2011 2006 BMW X3
langagadu
12-13 07:48 PM
I am not clear about the problem but it may be possible they messed up the xerox copies they sent you with some one else? I would suggest to check that first.
more...
pappu
05-11 01:09 PM
http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=3
has some other story
NPR Program Stream
link on http://www.npr.org/
plays something else rt now
has some other story
NPR Program Stream
link on http://www.npr.org/
plays something else rt now
newlife2
09-19 12:03 PM
Guys, I was just laid off and have efiled i539 3 days after the termination date for a status change to F2. Now working on the application letter. Do you think I should mention the layoff in the letter?
If I do mention it:
Con: The layoff might quickly catch the eyes of the immigration officer and if he want to check my status, he could find out the 3 days OOS.
Pro: My previous job was well paid. By mentioning it, I give the reason that why I want to stay at home as F2 instead of keeping the well paid job.
If I do mention it:
Con: The layoff might quickly catch the eyes of the immigration officer and if he want to check my status, he could find out the 3 days OOS.
Pro: My previous job was well paid. By mentioning it, I give the reason that why I want to stay at home as F2 instead of keeping the well paid job.
more...
BharatPremi
07-27 12:46 PM
Instead of starting a new thread. I would appreciate if someone answers a few questions regarding Check details that we send out to USCIS.
Went to lawyers office last week and signed all the applications. I made out onc check in the amount of $745 ($395 I-485 + $170 I-131 (AP) + $180 I-765 (EAD)) Payble to U.S Citizenship and Immigration Service. Now when I see the forms online it says the checks should be payable to Department of Homeland Security. Should I ask the lawyer to hold on to the application and send new checks.
Also , should I write three separate checks for $395 $170 $180. Just to make sure if there is an error in say Advanced payroll application, USCIS will keep the two check and send me back the Advanced Parol application.
Making separate checks is highly desirable and one should always follow that path. I am wondering why your lawyer did not advise you on this at the first?I have heard that USCIS accepts the checks drawn on USCIS in stead DHS. But 'DHS' is more accurate choice so If you can get them hold for a while I would recommend you to do that not because those were drawn on USCIS but because it was a single check. And since you can hold, you should write separate checks drawing on DHS.
Note: This is just an opinion. Consult your own lawyer for immigration need and advise.
Adding to this: Per person per application separate check should be drawn.
Went to lawyers office last week and signed all the applications. I made out onc check in the amount of $745 ($395 I-485 + $170 I-131 (AP) + $180 I-765 (EAD)) Payble to U.S Citizenship and Immigration Service. Now when I see the forms online it says the checks should be payable to Department of Homeland Security. Should I ask the lawyer to hold on to the application and send new checks.
Also , should I write three separate checks for $395 $170 $180. Just to make sure if there is an error in say Advanced payroll application, USCIS will keep the two check and send me back the Advanced Parol application.
Making separate checks is highly desirable and one should always follow that path. I am wondering why your lawyer did not advise you on this at the first?I have heard that USCIS accepts the checks drawn on USCIS in stead DHS. But 'DHS' is more accurate choice so If you can get them hold for a while I would recommend you to do that not because those were drawn on USCIS but because it was a single check. And since you can hold, you should write separate checks drawing on DHS.
Note: This is just an opinion. Consult your own lawyer for immigration need and advise.
Adding to this: Per person per application separate check should be drawn.
2010 Used Bmw X3 2006 diesel
gcwait2007
02-17 01:54 PM
Please find enclosed herewith URL:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
which is relevant to your situation.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
which is relevant to your situation.
more...
rampaadh@hotmail.com
05-19 07:31 AM
I sent a detailed mail to Chennai Consulate yesterday for scheduling an appointment and got response in 2 hours! They said Transportation Letter is required for this case and i need to carry required documents to prove that my daughter's case was approved. Fee is around $175. Initially I thought I should apply for Returning resident visa, but they said it is not necessary and Transportation letter is fine.
Transportation Letter - U.S. Consulate General Chennai, India (http://chennai.usconsulate.gov/immigrantstous/lost/stolen-green-card.html)
Transportation Letter - U.S. Consulate General Chennai, India (http://chennai.usconsulate.gov/immigrantstous/lost/stolen-green-card.html)
hair Used Bmw X3 2006
bigtiger
06-30 05:33 PM
Hi All,
By reading the AILF pdf:
http://www.murthy.com/current485/VisaBulletinFAQ6-29-07.pdf
I get this impression that they primarily mean the "Other Worker" category AOS rejections done in June 2007...I don't know what rules govern that category, but rejections did happen despite visa bulletin indicating current status for that category and AILF is considering this lawsuit. Now they are assuming that this might happen for EB2, EB-3 categories also. Plus we have this $4.4 billion CIR failure theory. There is no document date mentioned in this doc. So, I don't know how AILF is so confident that this will happen for EB2, EB-3 categories, for the rejections of applications has not even happened yet.
By reading the AILF pdf:
http://www.murthy.com/current485/VisaBulletinFAQ6-29-07.pdf
I get this impression that they primarily mean the "Other Worker" category AOS rejections done in June 2007...I don't know what rules govern that category, but rejections did happen despite visa bulletin indicating current status for that category and AILF is considering this lawsuit. Now they are assuming that this might happen for EB2, EB-3 categories also. Plus we have this $4.4 billion CIR failure theory. There is no document date mentioned in this doc. So, I don't know how AILF is so confident that this will happen for EB2, EB-3 categories, for the rejections of applications has not even happened yet.
more...
cpolisetti
03-31 03:56 PM
She was also available for Q&A earlier today on Washington Post. I am quoting one question and answer in particular. Probably she can help in more visibilty of our voice?
Here is the link for todays Q&A:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/03/30/DI2006033001345.html
Question from Washington, D.C.: Thank you for your informative article on a topic that needs more attention.
I'm trying to get an sense of the scope of the problem from the perspective of an H-1B visa holder. Just how long does it typically take professionals from India and China/Taiwan to get a green card through their employer these days? What disinsentives are there for employers, other than the risk that the green card may not be approved and their employee will have to return to their home country?
Answer from S. Mitra Kalita: Absent from much of this debate are the voices of H-1B holders themselves and I thank you for your question. I talked to someone who wouldn't allow himself to be quoted by name (so I did not use him in today's story) but this particular individual's story is one I hear often: He has been here for nine years, first on a student visa, then an H-1B. His employer applied for his green card in 2002 and he has been waiting four years because it is tied up in the backlog for labor certification. He said he is giving it six more months and if it doesn't come through, he's heading back to India. This stage is the one that a lot of observers agree where a worker risks being exploited. They are beholden to the employer because of the green card sponsorship (an H-1B visa can travel with a worker from one company to another, however) and cannot get promoted because that is technically a change in job classification -- and would require a new application. On the other hand, a lot of companies say that they know once someone gets a green card, they are out the door because suddenly they can start a company, go work for someone else, get promoted... Anyway, I could go on and on with background on this but instead I will post a story I did last summer on the green card backlog. Hang on.
Todays article:
Most See Visa Program as Severely Flawed
By S. Mitra Kalita
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 31, 2006; D01
Somewhere in the debate over immigration and the future of illegal workers, another, less-publicized fight is being waged over those who toil in air-conditioned offices, earn up to six-figure salaries and spend their days programming and punching code.
They are foreign workers who arrive on H-1B visas, mostly young men from India and China tapped for skilled jobs such as software engineers and systems analysts. Unlike seasonal guest workers who stay for about 10 months, H-1B workers stay as long as six years. By then, they must obtain a green card or go back home.
Yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee heard testimony for and against expanding the H-1B program. This week, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved legislation that would increase the H-1B cap to 115,000 from 65,000 and allow some foreign students to bypass the program altogether and immediately get sponsored for green cards, which allow immigrants to be permanent residents, free to live and work in the United States.
But underlying the arguments is a belief, even among the workers themselves, that the current H-1B program is severely flawed.
Opponents say the highly skilled foreign workers compete with and depress the wages of native-born Americans.
Supporters say foreign workers stimulate the economy, create more opportunities for their U.S. counterparts and prevent jobs from being outsourced overseas. The problem, they say, is the cumbersome process: Immigrants often spend six years as guest workers and then wait for green card sponsorship and approval.
At the House committee hearing yesterday, Stuart Anderson, executive director of the National Foundation for American Policy, a nonprofit research group, spoke in favor of raising the cap. Still, he said in an interview, the H-1B visa is far from ideal. "What you want to have is a system where people can get hired directly on green cards in 30 to 60 days," he said.
Economists seem divided on whether highly skilled immigrants depress wages for U.S. workers. In 2003, a study for the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta found no effect on salaries, with an average income for both H-1B and American computer programmers of $55,000.
Still, the study by Madeline Zavodny, now an economics professor at Agnes Scott College in Decatur, Ga., concluded "that unemployment was higher as a result of these H-1B workers."
In a working paper released this week, Harvard University economist George J. Borjas studied the wages of foreigners and native-born Americans with doctorates, concluding that the foreigners lowered the wages of competing workers by 3 to 4 percent. He said he suspected that his conclusion also measured the effects of H-1B visas.
"If there is a demand for engineers and no foreigners to take those jobs, salaries would shoot through the roof and make that very attractive for Americans," Borjas said.
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-USA says H-1B salaries are lower. "Those who are here on H-1B visas are being worked as indentured servants. They are being paid $13,000 less in the engineering and science worlds," said Ralph W. Wyndrum Jr., president of the advocacy group for technical professionals, which favors green-card-based immigration, but only for exceptional candidates.
Wyndrum said the current system allows foreign skilled workers to "take jobs away from equally good American engineers and scientists." He based his statements about salary disparities on a December report by John Miano, a software engineer, who favors tighter immigration controls. Miano spoke at the House hearing and cited figures from the Occupational Employment Statistics program that show U.S. computer programmers earn an average $65,000 a year, compared with $52,000 for H-1B programmers.
"Is it really a guest-worker program since most people want to stay here? Miano said in an interview. "There is direct displacement of American workers."
Those who recruit and hire retort that a global economy mandates finding the best employees in the world, not just the United States. And because green-card caps are allocated equally among countries (India and China are backlogged, for example), the H-1B becomes the easiest way to hire foreigners.
It is not always easy. Last year, Razorsight Corp., a technology company with offices in Fairfax and Bangalore, India, tried to sponsor more H-1B visas -- but they already were exhausted for the year. Currently, the company has 12 H-1B workers on a U.S. staff of 100, earning $80,000 to $120,000 a year.
Charlie Thomas, Razorsight's chief executive, said the cap should be based on market demand. "It's absolutely essential for us to have access to a global talent," he said. "If your product isn't the best it can be with the best cost structure and development, then someone else will do it. And that someone else may not be a U.S.-based company."
Because H-1B holders can switch employers to sponsor their visas, some workers said they demand salary increases along the way. But once a company sponsors their green cards, workers say they don't expect to be promoted or given a raise.
Now some H-1B holders are watching to see how Congress treats the millions of immigrants who crossed the borders through stealthier means.
Sameer Chandra, 30, who lives in Fairfax and works as a systems analyst on an H-1B visa, said he is concerned that Congress might make it easier for immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally to get a green card than people like him. "What is the point of staying here legally?" he said.
His Houston-based company has sponsored his green card, and Chandra said he hopes it is processed quickly. If it is not, he said, he will return to India. "There's a lot of opportunities there in my country."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/03/30/DI2006033001345.html
Here is the link for todays Q&A:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/03/30/DI2006033001345.html
Question from Washington, D.C.: Thank you for your informative article on a topic that needs more attention.
I'm trying to get an sense of the scope of the problem from the perspective of an H-1B visa holder. Just how long does it typically take professionals from India and China/Taiwan to get a green card through their employer these days? What disinsentives are there for employers, other than the risk that the green card may not be approved and their employee will have to return to their home country?
Answer from S. Mitra Kalita: Absent from much of this debate are the voices of H-1B holders themselves and I thank you for your question. I talked to someone who wouldn't allow himself to be quoted by name (so I did not use him in today's story) but this particular individual's story is one I hear often: He has been here for nine years, first on a student visa, then an H-1B. His employer applied for his green card in 2002 and he has been waiting four years because it is tied up in the backlog for labor certification. He said he is giving it six more months and if it doesn't come through, he's heading back to India. This stage is the one that a lot of observers agree where a worker risks being exploited. They are beholden to the employer because of the green card sponsorship (an H-1B visa can travel with a worker from one company to another, however) and cannot get promoted because that is technically a change in job classification -- and would require a new application. On the other hand, a lot of companies say that they know once someone gets a green card, they are out the door because suddenly they can start a company, go work for someone else, get promoted... Anyway, I could go on and on with background on this but instead I will post a story I did last summer on the green card backlog. Hang on.
Todays article:
Most See Visa Program as Severely Flawed
By S. Mitra Kalita
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 31, 2006; D01
Somewhere in the debate over immigration and the future of illegal workers, another, less-publicized fight is being waged over those who toil in air-conditioned offices, earn up to six-figure salaries and spend their days programming and punching code.
They are foreign workers who arrive on H-1B visas, mostly young men from India and China tapped for skilled jobs such as software engineers and systems analysts. Unlike seasonal guest workers who stay for about 10 months, H-1B workers stay as long as six years. By then, they must obtain a green card or go back home.
Yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee heard testimony for and against expanding the H-1B program. This week, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved legislation that would increase the H-1B cap to 115,000 from 65,000 and allow some foreign students to bypass the program altogether and immediately get sponsored for green cards, which allow immigrants to be permanent residents, free to live and work in the United States.
But underlying the arguments is a belief, even among the workers themselves, that the current H-1B program is severely flawed.
Opponents say the highly skilled foreign workers compete with and depress the wages of native-born Americans.
Supporters say foreign workers stimulate the economy, create more opportunities for their U.S. counterparts and prevent jobs from being outsourced overseas. The problem, they say, is the cumbersome process: Immigrants often spend six years as guest workers and then wait for green card sponsorship and approval.
At the House committee hearing yesterday, Stuart Anderson, executive director of the National Foundation for American Policy, a nonprofit research group, spoke in favor of raising the cap. Still, he said in an interview, the H-1B visa is far from ideal. "What you want to have is a system where people can get hired directly on green cards in 30 to 60 days," he said.
Economists seem divided on whether highly skilled immigrants depress wages for U.S. workers. In 2003, a study for the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta found no effect on salaries, with an average income for both H-1B and American computer programmers of $55,000.
Still, the study by Madeline Zavodny, now an economics professor at Agnes Scott College in Decatur, Ga., concluded "that unemployment was higher as a result of these H-1B workers."
In a working paper released this week, Harvard University economist George J. Borjas studied the wages of foreigners and native-born Americans with doctorates, concluding that the foreigners lowered the wages of competing workers by 3 to 4 percent. He said he suspected that his conclusion also measured the effects of H-1B visas.
"If there is a demand for engineers and no foreigners to take those jobs, salaries would shoot through the roof and make that very attractive for Americans," Borjas said.
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-USA says H-1B salaries are lower. "Those who are here on H-1B visas are being worked as indentured servants. They are being paid $13,000 less in the engineering and science worlds," said Ralph W. Wyndrum Jr., president of the advocacy group for technical professionals, which favors green-card-based immigration, but only for exceptional candidates.
Wyndrum said the current system allows foreign skilled workers to "take jobs away from equally good American engineers and scientists." He based his statements about salary disparities on a December report by John Miano, a software engineer, who favors tighter immigration controls. Miano spoke at the House hearing and cited figures from the Occupational Employment Statistics program that show U.S. computer programmers earn an average $65,000 a year, compared with $52,000 for H-1B programmers.
"Is it really a guest-worker program since most people want to stay here? Miano said in an interview. "There is direct displacement of American workers."
Those who recruit and hire retort that a global economy mandates finding the best employees in the world, not just the United States. And because green-card caps are allocated equally among countries (India and China are backlogged, for example), the H-1B becomes the easiest way to hire foreigners.
It is not always easy. Last year, Razorsight Corp., a technology company with offices in Fairfax and Bangalore, India, tried to sponsor more H-1B visas -- but they already were exhausted for the year. Currently, the company has 12 H-1B workers on a U.S. staff of 100, earning $80,000 to $120,000 a year.
Charlie Thomas, Razorsight's chief executive, said the cap should be based on market demand. "It's absolutely essential for us to have access to a global talent," he said. "If your product isn't the best it can be with the best cost structure and development, then someone else will do it. And that someone else may not be a U.S.-based company."
Because H-1B holders can switch employers to sponsor their visas, some workers said they demand salary increases along the way. But once a company sponsors their green cards, workers say they don't expect to be promoted or given a raise.
Now some H-1B holders are watching to see how Congress treats the millions of immigrants who crossed the borders through stealthier means.
Sameer Chandra, 30, who lives in Fairfax and works as a systems analyst on an H-1B visa, said he is concerned that Congress might make it easier for immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally to get a green card than people like him. "What is the point of staying here legally?" he said.
His Houston-based company has sponsored his green card, and Chandra said he hopes it is processed quickly. If it is not, he said, he will return to India. "There's a lot of opportunities there in my country."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/03/30/DI2006033001345.html
hot 2006 BMW X3
same_old_guy
08-16 03:11 PM
1) The company has to send a letter to USCIS to withdraw the I-129.
2) It can withdraw at any time before or after approval. In fact it wont matter to you if you never work for the company.
3) If USCIS rejects it, as in not selected in lottery, you will get back USCIS fee. If you withdraw it there is no refund. In any case, you dont get back lawyer's fee.
4) Withdraw can be done anytime.
5) No form. The company has to send a letter in letterhead stating the receipt number, asking to revoke the application.
6) I dont think USCIS sends any confirmation if H1 is revoked by employer. In any case of H1, you dont have to worry so much. It's all responsibility of the company. It's perfectly valid to have more than 1 H1 at any time.
2) It can withdraw at any time before or after approval. In fact it wont matter to you if you never work for the company.
3) If USCIS rejects it, as in not selected in lottery, you will get back USCIS fee. If you withdraw it there is no refund. In any case, you dont get back lawyer's fee.
4) Withdraw can be done anytime.
5) No form. The company has to send a letter in letterhead stating the receipt number, asking to revoke the application.
6) I dont think USCIS sends any confirmation if H1 is revoked by employer. In any case of H1, you dont have to worry so much. It's all responsibility of the company. It's perfectly valid to have more than 1 H1 at any time.
more...
house 2006 BMW X3 3.0i Palatka, FL
deecha
02-26 12:28 AM
If you get married to him you shouldn't have any issue. After you get married you should have him file an immigrant petition (I-130) along with the adjustment of status (I-485). You will also have to file a biographic information sheet (G-325) along with an affidavit of support (I-864) and medical examination (I-693). You can also file for employment authorization (EAD), form I-765 if you want to work and Advance parole (I-131) if you need to travel outside the US. Supporting documents such as birth certificates, marriage certificate and photos will be required.
All these forms are available at the USCIS website.
They will ask you to come for fingerprining at a biometric center in a few weeks.
After a few months, you will be called for an interview to determine if your marriage is bonafide. If successful, you will be given what's called a conditional residency. 90 days before the two year anniversary of your conditional residency, you and your husband have to jointly apply for removal of conditions (form I-751), upon which you will be granted full permanent residency. After the third year, if you're still married, you can apply for US Citizenship.
Goodluck with the process !
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and the advice in this post no way constitutes any kind of legal advice and I accept no liability for any of the advice in this post.
All these forms are available at the USCIS website.
They will ask you to come for fingerprining at a biometric center in a few weeks.
After a few months, you will be called for an interview to determine if your marriage is bonafide. If successful, you will be given what's called a conditional residency. 90 days before the two year anniversary of your conditional residency, you and your husband have to jointly apply for removal of conditions (form I-751), upon which you will be granted full permanent residency. After the third year, if you're still married, you can apply for US Citizenship.
Goodluck with the process !
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and the advice in this post no way constitutes any kind of legal advice and I accept no liability for any of the advice in this post.
tattoo Alpine White 2006 BMW X3
pitha
05-22 07:28 PM
I am not sure it says only people who applied for I140 after May 21 retain there priority date. Everybody retains there priority date no matter when they applied for I140.
Since there is a quota, priority date will come into play. That is why the new bill specifies that those who files I-140 after May 21, 2007 and those whose LC are approved or pending will maintain their priority dates. Anyone who files under the new point based system will have their receipt dates as their priority dates.
Since there is a quota, priority date will come into play. That is why the new bill specifies that those who files I-140 after May 21, 2007 and those whose LC are approved or pending will maintain their priority dates. Anyone who files under the new point based system will have their receipt dates as their priority dates.
more...
pictures Used Bmw X3 2006 View more
MDix
09-18 10:05 PM
How do we know that there would be more FB Visa. This allocation is by law and whatever left by FB get distributed in EB.
Does any one on this forum know under what section of law family to emp based spill over happens ? Last year DOS allocated some 10k family visas ( unused) to emp quota but it was distributed.
Just checking if this allocation is by book of law or interpretation of DOS based on some law. There are some chances that this year family based quota could be more and if DOS make them to fall down from Eb1 -- > Eb2 --> Eb3 -- > Eb4 -- > Eb5. then it could make C for all EB2 and those visas can fall down to Eb3 and this way in Oct 2010 atleast EB3 India get some 10-15 k extra visas. but if DOS allocate them across all category from day one then Eb2 row and Eb1 , 4, 5 keep consuming them and during last quarter spill over come down less..
Lets find out if there is any thing in law.
Does any one on this forum know under what section of law family to emp based spill over happens ? Last year DOS allocated some 10k family visas ( unused) to emp quota but it was distributed.
Just checking if this allocation is by book of law or interpretation of DOS based on some law. There are some chances that this year family based quota could be more and if DOS make them to fall down from Eb1 -- > Eb2 --> Eb3 -- > Eb4 -- > Eb5. then it could make C for all EB2 and those visas can fall down to Eb3 and this way in Oct 2010 atleast EB3 India get some 10-15 k extra visas. but if DOS allocate them across all category from day one then Eb2 row and Eb1 , 4, 5 keep consuming them and during last quarter spill over come down less..
Lets find out if there is any thing in law.
dresses Used BMW X3 2006 for sale
thakkarbhav
09-15 12:49 PM
Congrats...Book the ticket and fly to india to give big hug to your wife and son and motherland...
more...
makeup Used Bmw X3 2006 View more
jagan13
02-18 09:58 AM
I am currently waiting for my renewed passport from Washington DC embassy, which I had mailed them on Dec 30th(signed for and received by them on Dec 31st). The passport is due to expire in Oct 2011. My problem is, my drivers license is expiring on Feb 24th as is my stamped visa. My employer has filed for my H1b extension and I currently have the original receipt notice needed for renewing my license. But, I cannot renew it without the original passport. I have been trying to reach them through phone as well as email for over 10 days now. Also, when filling out the form , I have a different permanent Indian address than what I had on the passport as my family back home had moved. The following are my questions:
1) Does this increase the processing time, due to any verification of address in India?
2) Has anybody been in the same situation and if yes, how long did it take for the embassy to renew and mail the passport?
3) Does anybody have a point of contact at the Embassy?
NOTE: I just talked to my bank and confirmed that the cashiers checks I had send along with the application have been cashed on Jan 24th. I dont know where that puts me on the timeline for receving my passport.
I have been looking at other threads on the forum and looks like it is typically taking 40 days for people to receive their passports in the mail. But , my license situation is concerning as I do not know, at what stage of renewal process my passport is in and how much longer I have to wait. Any insight will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Jagan
1) Does this increase the processing time, due to any verification of address in India?
2) Has anybody been in the same situation and if yes, how long did it take for the embassy to renew and mail the passport?
3) Does anybody have a point of contact at the Embassy?
NOTE: I just talked to my bank and confirmed that the cashiers checks I had send along with the application have been cashed on Jan 24th. I dont know where that puts me on the timeline for receving my passport.
I have been looking at other threads on the forum and looks like it is typically taking 40 days for people to receive their passports in the mail. But , my license situation is concerning as I do not know, at what stage of renewal process my passport is in and how much longer I have to wait. Any insight will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Jagan
girlfriend Used BMW X3 2006 for sale
newbee7
07-05 11:56 AM
Ombudsman had correctly predicted this fiasco back in June before the dates were made current:
There will be severe consequences from rapid fluctuations in priority dates. If the priority date became current today, due to delayed USCIS processing and thus underutilization of visa numbers, some have predicted that within a few months as many as 500,000 to 750,000 individuals now residing in the United States under a temporary worker visa could apply for a green card. Additionally, DOL’s recent backlog elimination efforts, scheduled to be completed by September 30, 2007, are predicted to add 70,000 or more approved labor certifications yielding as many as 170,000 additional green card applications. As USCIS begins to complete these applications and request visa numbers from DOS, the 140,000 statutorily authorized visa numbers will be used. DOS then will be required to retrogress priority dates. Consequently, most applicants in this scenario will find themselves trapped where as they anticipated timely receipt of a green card, their wait exceeds seven or more years. In addition, all future employment-based green card applicants effectively would be barred from applying for many years.38
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual%20Report_2007.pdf
Yes, if USCIS makes the dates current again it will be a great help.
But unless we try to get the visa numbers increased we might still have to wait for SEVEN or more years in "same or similar" job.
There will be severe consequences from rapid fluctuations in priority dates. If the priority date became current today, due to delayed USCIS processing and thus underutilization of visa numbers, some have predicted that within a few months as many as 500,000 to 750,000 individuals now residing in the United States under a temporary worker visa could apply for a green card. Additionally, DOL’s recent backlog elimination efforts, scheduled to be completed by September 30, 2007, are predicted to add 70,000 or more approved labor certifications yielding as many as 170,000 additional green card applications. As USCIS begins to complete these applications and request visa numbers from DOS, the 140,000 statutorily authorized visa numbers will be used. DOS then will be required to retrogress priority dates. Consequently, most applicants in this scenario will find themselves trapped where as they anticipated timely receipt of a green card, their wait exceeds seven or more years. In addition, all future employment-based green card applicants effectively would be barred from applying for many years.38
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual%20Report_2007.pdf
Yes, if USCIS makes the dates current again it will be a great help.
But unless we try to get the visa numbers increased we might still have to wait for SEVEN or more years in "same or similar" job.
hairstyles Used Bmw X3 2006 diesel
sobers
02-09 08:58 AM
Discussion about challenges in America�s immigration policies tends to focus on the millions of illegal immigrants. But the more pressing immigration problem facing the US today, writes Intel chairman Craig Barrett, is the dearth of high-skilled immigrants required to keep the US economy competitive. Due to tighter visa policies and a growth in opportunities elsewhere in the world, foreign students majoring in science and engineering at US universities are no longer staying to work after graduation in the large numbers that they once did. With the poor quality of science and math education at the primary and secondary levels in the US, the country cannot afford to lose any highly-skilled immigrants, particularly in key, technology-related disciplines. Along with across-the-board improvements in education, the US needs to find a way to attract enough new workers so that companies like Intel do not have to set up shop elsewhere.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering � the �best and brightest� from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America�s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born � until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap � currently at 65,000 � on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China�s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company � like every other business � will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game � and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities � much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (�11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent �national need�. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering � the �best and brightest� from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America�s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born � until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap � currently at 65,000 � on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China�s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company � like every other business � will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game � and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities � much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (�11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent �national need�. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
vnsriv
03-27 11:02 AM
Hi All,
My gc was filed in Jun 2002 under EB3. I had approved labour and I-140.(in feb 2004).
I had filed my I-485 in June 2005 and got EAD in one month. I got married in Jan.
So is this correct that I can file my wife's case only when priority dates become current?
Now the real question is how do I keep track of this.
Option 1
On US buletin, as of April, http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2847.html
All Chargeability Areas Except Those Listed CHINA INDIA MEXICO PHILIP-PINES
Employment-Based
1st C 01JAN04 01JAN05 C C
2nd C 01JAN03 01JUL02 C C
3rd 01MAY01 01MAY01 01FEB01 08APR01 01MAY01
So I should look at wait till my priorites date become current?(change from 01 Feb to Jun 2002) Is that correct?
Option 2
https://egov.immigration.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=Vermont
I-485 Application to register **** Employement Based adjustments application March 01,2005
Does it mean if I-485 dates move from March 01 to Jun 2005, I can file my spouse's case
Please suggest which is the correct way to keep the track
Thanks a lot
My gc was filed in Jun 2002 under EB3. I had approved labour and I-140.(in feb 2004).
I had filed my I-485 in June 2005 and got EAD in one month. I got married in Jan.
So is this correct that I can file my wife's case only when priority dates become current?
Now the real question is how do I keep track of this.
Option 1
On US buletin, as of April, http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2847.html
All Chargeability Areas Except Those Listed CHINA INDIA MEXICO PHILIP-PINES
Employment-Based
1st C 01JAN04 01JAN05 C C
2nd C 01JAN03 01JUL02 C C
3rd 01MAY01 01MAY01 01FEB01 08APR01 01MAY01
So I should look at wait till my priorites date become current?(change from 01 Feb to Jun 2002) Is that correct?
Option 2
https://egov.immigration.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=Vermont
I-485 Application to register **** Employement Based adjustments application March 01,2005
Does it mean if I-485 dates move from March 01 to Jun 2005, I can file my spouse's case
Please suggest which is the correct way to keep the track
Thanks a lot
santb1975
12-10 08:17 AM
For question 2 - you just have to put a reminder for yourself and make a contribution of 10$ every month to donations at immigrationvoice.org. May be this can be done on par with the rent/ mortgage/ credit card bill/car payment that happens every month
Hello-
1) Is it possible to allow minimum ONE TIME contributions like $10?
2) Is it possible to allow minimum RECURRING contributions like $10?
When I am talking to my friends, we felt that the above things increase the
Contributions. We are also thinking that it is easy to ask friends to contribute if there are no limits on the contributions.
If I am correct there are more than 25,000 Members. If there are 10% of active members and each contribute $10 we get another $25000 that is required for the Bill.
My Contributions:
$50 Recurring Contributions from Nov 07.
Contributed $100 for the DC Rally.
$25 to the local Northern California Chapter in Oct 07.
Contributed to AILF $100 during the July visa bulletin time.
Hello-
1) Is it possible to allow minimum ONE TIME contributions like $10?
2) Is it possible to allow minimum RECURRING contributions like $10?
When I am talking to my friends, we felt that the above things increase the
Contributions. We are also thinking that it is easy to ask friends to contribute if there are no limits on the contributions.
If I am correct there are more than 25,000 Members. If there are 10% of active members and each contribute $10 we get another $25000 that is required for the Bill.
My Contributions:
$50 Recurring Contributions from Nov 07.
Contributed $100 for the DC Rally.
$25 to the local Northern California Chapter in Oct 07.
Contributed to AILF $100 during the July visa bulletin time.
No comments:
Post a Comment