pappu
02-02 02:54 PM
House Immigration Subcommittee Holds Hearing on Naturalization
On January 17, the House Immigration Subcommittee held its first oversight hearing of the year, and the subject was the naturalization processing backlogs. Due to a confluence of factors, including a very significant fee increase that went into effect on July 30, 2007, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) received approximately double the number of naturalization applications in its Fiscal Year 2007 than it had during the previous year. USCIS is saying that, as of now, anyone who applied for naturalization after June 1, 2007, can expect to wait 16 to 18 months to have their application processed.
Remarks by Subcommittee Members
In her opening comment, Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Chair of the Subcommittee, noted that one year ago, the Subcommittee had a hearing on the proposed fee increase, and was told by USCIS that it need the fee increase to increase efficiency. At the time, the processing time for citizenship applications was six months.
Representative Steve King (R-IA), the ranking Republican on the Subcommittee, played the role of immigration historian. In his opening statement (and in his questioning), he focused almost exclusively on the INS� Citizenship USA program of ten years ago�back in the day before computers were standard issue in the immigration agency. In that effort to deal with a naturalization backlog, some applicants were granted citizenship before criminal background checks were completed, and some who received citizenship were found later not to be eligible. (Since then, however, much more stringent processes have been put in place to screen applications for naturalization. And the agency now does have computers.)
USCIS Director Emilio Gonzalez
Emilio Gonzalez, Director of USCIS, gave some background on the development of the backlog and summarized what USCIS was doing about it. During June, July, and August of last year, USCIS received three million immigration benefit applications of all kinds. Their first priority was issuing receipts for those applications. Next, they processed and sent work authorizations, which they are required to do within 90 days.
In the meantime, a large number of naturalization applications piled up. To deal with the extra workload, USCIS is hiring 1,500 new employees (in addition to the extra staff they planned to hire after the new fees went into effect). The agency is also re-hiring former (retired) employees. While waiting for the additional staff to be trained and deployed, the agency will be asking current staff to work overtime, using budgeted overtime early in the Fiscal Year.
Other steps are also being taken. Still, Mr. Gonzalez noted (in his written testimony) that it will take until the third quarter of Fiscal Year 2010 before the agency is back to a six-month processing time.
During the question and answer session, there was a fair amount of discussion about a portion of the backlog that preceded the surge in applications and was caused by a delay in the background checks conducted by the FBI. Some individuals have been in limbo for well over a year waiting for clearance from the FBI, and Mr. Gonzalez noted that last year more than 5,000 lawsuits were filed against the agency�80% on the FBI name check delays. The FBI, he said, has a paper-based system that is only beginning to be addressed. For now, it takes people to handle the files. The FBI has brought on some additional contract personnel and full-time employees to work on this problem.
Rep. Lofgren said that she would ask the FBI to come before the Subcommittee to explain its perspective on the name check delays. [Subsequently, we were told that the full Judiciary Committee will have a hearing with the FBI on a range of issues, including the name check issue.]
Non-Government Witnesses
Also testifying at the hearing were Arturo Vargas, Director of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials and Fred Tsao, Policy Director for the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. Mr. Vargas said that his organization kept USCIS apprised of its efforts to get immigrants to become citizens and the agency should have taken that information, plus experience with past fee increases, into account to take steps to be better prepared for the surge in applications. NALEO is recommending that the agency focus sufficiently on reducing the backlog so that all immigrants who applied for naturalization in Fiscal Year 2007 (which ended September 30, 2007) are sworn in as citizens by July 4, 2008. Otherwise, many immigrants who applied for citizenship last summer will not be able to vote in the elections this November.
Mr. Tsao echoed the point about USCIS having ample information that a surge in applications was coming. He recommended that USCIS (and the FBI) report regularly to the Subcommittee regarding progress being made on reducing the backlog.
In concluding the hearing, Rep. Lofgren suggested that she might also conduct a hearing on the agency�s information technology.
Additional Information
In a subsequent meeting with community-based organizations, Michael Aytes, Associate Director for Domestic Operations of USCIS, gave some additional specifics on the status of the naturalization backlogs. He noted that the total number of new employees being hired will be approximately 3,000�between the additional staff they are hiring to deal with the backlog and the extra staff being paid for by the fee increases. Regarding the FBI name check issue, he noted that, during the House hearing, every member of the Subcommittee�Republican and Democrat�inquired about the name check issue, and that this issue is now being dealt with at high levels both in the Justice Department (in which the FBI is located) and in DHS. He indicated that decisions have been made on the hiring of many of the new adjudicators that are being brought on board, but training and placement are still weeks away, at least.
He also said that the agency is starting Saturday and evening interviews, and applicants should be encouraged to make every effort to show up for their interviews.
On January 17, the House Immigration Subcommittee held its first oversight hearing of the year, and the subject was the naturalization processing backlogs. Due to a confluence of factors, including a very significant fee increase that went into effect on July 30, 2007, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) received approximately double the number of naturalization applications in its Fiscal Year 2007 than it had during the previous year. USCIS is saying that, as of now, anyone who applied for naturalization after June 1, 2007, can expect to wait 16 to 18 months to have their application processed.
Remarks by Subcommittee Members
In her opening comment, Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Chair of the Subcommittee, noted that one year ago, the Subcommittee had a hearing on the proposed fee increase, and was told by USCIS that it need the fee increase to increase efficiency. At the time, the processing time for citizenship applications was six months.
Representative Steve King (R-IA), the ranking Republican on the Subcommittee, played the role of immigration historian. In his opening statement (and in his questioning), he focused almost exclusively on the INS� Citizenship USA program of ten years ago�back in the day before computers were standard issue in the immigration agency. In that effort to deal with a naturalization backlog, some applicants were granted citizenship before criminal background checks were completed, and some who received citizenship were found later not to be eligible. (Since then, however, much more stringent processes have been put in place to screen applications for naturalization. And the agency now does have computers.)
USCIS Director Emilio Gonzalez
Emilio Gonzalez, Director of USCIS, gave some background on the development of the backlog and summarized what USCIS was doing about it. During June, July, and August of last year, USCIS received three million immigration benefit applications of all kinds. Their first priority was issuing receipts for those applications. Next, they processed and sent work authorizations, which they are required to do within 90 days.
In the meantime, a large number of naturalization applications piled up. To deal with the extra workload, USCIS is hiring 1,500 new employees (in addition to the extra staff they planned to hire after the new fees went into effect). The agency is also re-hiring former (retired) employees. While waiting for the additional staff to be trained and deployed, the agency will be asking current staff to work overtime, using budgeted overtime early in the Fiscal Year.
Other steps are also being taken. Still, Mr. Gonzalez noted (in his written testimony) that it will take until the third quarter of Fiscal Year 2010 before the agency is back to a six-month processing time.
During the question and answer session, there was a fair amount of discussion about a portion of the backlog that preceded the surge in applications and was caused by a delay in the background checks conducted by the FBI. Some individuals have been in limbo for well over a year waiting for clearance from the FBI, and Mr. Gonzalez noted that last year more than 5,000 lawsuits were filed against the agency�80% on the FBI name check delays. The FBI, he said, has a paper-based system that is only beginning to be addressed. For now, it takes people to handle the files. The FBI has brought on some additional contract personnel and full-time employees to work on this problem.
Rep. Lofgren said that she would ask the FBI to come before the Subcommittee to explain its perspective on the name check delays. [Subsequently, we were told that the full Judiciary Committee will have a hearing with the FBI on a range of issues, including the name check issue.]
Non-Government Witnesses
Also testifying at the hearing were Arturo Vargas, Director of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials and Fred Tsao, Policy Director for the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. Mr. Vargas said that his organization kept USCIS apprised of its efforts to get immigrants to become citizens and the agency should have taken that information, plus experience with past fee increases, into account to take steps to be better prepared for the surge in applications. NALEO is recommending that the agency focus sufficiently on reducing the backlog so that all immigrants who applied for naturalization in Fiscal Year 2007 (which ended September 30, 2007) are sworn in as citizens by July 4, 2008. Otherwise, many immigrants who applied for citizenship last summer will not be able to vote in the elections this November.
Mr. Tsao echoed the point about USCIS having ample information that a surge in applications was coming. He recommended that USCIS (and the FBI) report regularly to the Subcommittee regarding progress being made on reducing the backlog.
In concluding the hearing, Rep. Lofgren suggested that she might also conduct a hearing on the agency�s information technology.
Additional Information
In a subsequent meeting with community-based organizations, Michael Aytes, Associate Director for Domestic Operations of USCIS, gave some additional specifics on the status of the naturalization backlogs. He noted that the total number of new employees being hired will be approximately 3,000�between the additional staff they are hiring to deal with the backlog and the extra staff being paid for by the fee increases. Regarding the FBI name check issue, he noted that, during the House hearing, every member of the Subcommittee�Republican and Democrat�inquired about the name check issue, and that this issue is now being dealt with at high levels both in the Justice Department (in which the FBI is located) and in DHS. He indicated that decisions have been made on the hiring of many of the new adjudicators that are being brought on board, but training and placement are still weeks away, at least.
He also said that the agency is starting Saturday and evening interviews, and applicants should be encouraged to make every effort to show up for their interviews.
wallpaper 2009 Ford Kuga Interior Photo
bsbawa10
08-30 06:58 PM
I am also in the same boat and would like to know what happened ?
desi3933
05-10 06:12 PM
Does anyone know what is the official term for your legal status if you are on EAD and no longer on H-1? .......
....
Thanks for you help.
Assuming that you have I-485 application pending, the status is applicant to adjust status.
If you have EAD due to L2 visa status, then your status is, of course, L2 status.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
....
Thanks for you help.
Assuming that you have I-485 application pending, the status is applicant to adjust status.
If you have EAD due to L2 visa status, then your status is, of course, L2 status.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
2011 Ford Kuga Titanium 2.0-litre
go_guy123
11-03 04:47 PM
Pls let us know if you would like to tell your story in a media interview?
Sure why not.
I came to us in 1999 did my masters here in US and graduated in 2001.
I worked for some time on OPT and then went back to work in India.
I came back in 2005 , the immigration situation being very bad with retrogression I applied for canada immigration from US ( from india
there is a severe backlog...canada has a per immigration visa post backlog unlike us which has per birth country backlog)
I recently got Canada PR , I joined the MBA here at U of Toronto.
Had I been in my early 20s I would have thought about US imigration.
Nowdays it take 7 to 8 years ....thats more than 10 to 15% of your productive life.
I have talked to my friends ( from IIT delhi ) all of them have same opinion...its a lost cause
now. Now that theyhave invested 5 years they dont want to quit.
Only 1 in know who did MS in US and got GC. Rest were all PhD who got GC through EB1.
EB2 , EB3 is all dead now.
Now it too late I need to settled . How can I marry with the insecurity of moving from place to place in search of contract project, bodyshopper eating avay 30% of your billing rate etc.
I have given up hope. There are challenges in Canada as job market is
not that great but atleast I can sleep at night without having to worry
about the immigration. Ihave one more friend working in Canada he also moved from US.
The salary rate etc is lot lower in fact. On the whole Canada is hard for foreign educated...
one of the reasons I am doing an MBA.
1.5 years it takes for Immigration from US/Canada. Actually
from Canada its faster but there is hope. The uncertainity in the US process
is unbearable.
Sure why not.
I came to us in 1999 did my masters here in US and graduated in 2001.
I worked for some time on OPT and then went back to work in India.
I came back in 2005 , the immigration situation being very bad with retrogression I applied for canada immigration from US ( from india
there is a severe backlog...canada has a per immigration visa post backlog unlike us which has per birth country backlog)
I recently got Canada PR , I joined the MBA here at U of Toronto.
Had I been in my early 20s I would have thought about US imigration.
Nowdays it take 7 to 8 years ....thats more than 10 to 15% of your productive life.
I have talked to my friends ( from IIT delhi ) all of them have same opinion...its a lost cause
now. Now that theyhave invested 5 years they dont want to quit.
Only 1 in know who did MS in US and got GC. Rest were all PhD who got GC through EB1.
EB2 , EB3 is all dead now.
Now it too late I need to settled . How can I marry with the insecurity of moving from place to place in search of contract project, bodyshopper eating avay 30% of your billing rate etc.
I have given up hope. There are challenges in Canada as job market is
not that great but atleast I can sleep at night without having to worry
about the immigration. Ihave one more friend working in Canada he also moved from US.
The salary rate etc is lot lower in fact. On the whole Canada is hard for foreign educated...
one of the reasons I am doing an MBA.
1.5 years it takes for Immigration from US/Canada. Actually
from Canada its faster but there is hope. The uncertainity in the US process
is unbearable.
more...
sbeyyala
06-23 06:11 PM
Hi,
I e-mailed to jay@immigrationvoice.org, I am from Orange county.
I e-mailed to jay@immigrationvoice.org, I am from Orange county.
sayantan76
09-24 11:46 AM
My problem with these hearings is that they play soccer with the interests of immigrants. There are pro and anti immigrant views in discussion.
Enforcement is all about closing the borders and deporting immigrants. But why do we not see hearings to discuss and introduce bills that fine the employers and put them in jail if they hire an undocumented? But nobody, not even the anti-immigrant groups are pushing for such a bill. A lot of undocumented problem will be solved if employers cannot hire undocumented. We call immigrants as illegal, but why can't we use the same standard for employers who illegally hire undocumented?
Secondly when they talk about legalization and path to citizenship, there is no country limits for them. But as soon as we talk about removing country limits in front of the same people, we hear talks about diversity etc.
The same people who favor legals in such discussions, become anti-legal when they have a chance to do something for legals. Why a simple bill like recapture not introduced by these same people till now?
Overall Immigration is more about politics, votes than actually solving a problem. If these folks are serious about fixing a problem, a lot could have been done till now. We need to hear more action than just talk.
Pappu - if you were a politician and were taking some actions to benefit future voters in anticipation of creating a vote bank for coming years - would do something for those future voters who when they become eligible use their rational judgement to vote (and hence could vote either way based on issues relevant at that time) or would you rather do something for a group that will vote as a "block" - and therein lies the rationale
Enforcement is all about closing the borders and deporting immigrants. But why do we not see hearings to discuss and introduce bills that fine the employers and put them in jail if they hire an undocumented? But nobody, not even the anti-immigrant groups are pushing for such a bill. A lot of undocumented problem will be solved if employers cannot hire undocumented. We call immigrants as illegal, but why can't we use the same standard for employers who illegally hire undocumented?
Secondly when they talk about legalization and path to citizenship, there is no country limits for them. But as soon as we talk about removing country limits in front of the same people, we hear talks about diversity etc.
The same people who favor legals in such discussions, become anti-legal when they have a chance to do something for legals. Why a simple bill like recapture not introduced by these same people till now?
Overall Immigration is more about politics, votes than actually solving a problem. If these folks are serious about fixing a problem, a lot could have been done till now. We need to hear more action than just talk.
Pappu - if you were a politician and were taking some actions to benefit future voters in anticipation of creating a vote bank for coming years - would do something for those future voters who when they become eligible use their rational judgement to vote (and hence could vote either way based on issues relevant at that time) or would you rather do something for a group that will vote as a "block" - and therein lies the rationale
more...
cleopatra
02-07 03:28 PM
That is the problem. There is no such thing in the flcdatacenter, but in onet online, there is a
15-1099.11 - Information Technology Project Managers. This is not present in flcdatacenter.
Here is the problem. So by this token, does it mean that IT Project managers either need to be classified as CIS managers or not get classified at all? This is absurd.
The attorney is not giving out any suggestions on what to do as they already filed, got a high PW and appealed which got denied.
The attorney is suggesting to refile, something I don't think is going to change the outcome.
Any suggestions?
15-1099.11 - Information Technology Project Managers. This is not present in flcdatacenter.
Here is the problem. So by this token, does it mean that IT Project managers either need to be classified as CIS managers or not get classified at all? This is absurd.
The attorney is not giving out any suggestions on what to do as they already filed, got a high PW and appealed which got denied.
The attorney is suggesting to refile, something I don't think is going to change the outcome.
Any suggestions?
2010 2008 Ford Kuga Crossover Photo
anai
09-18 10:31 AM
Hi, My wife and I received three emails each regarding 485 approval ("notice mailed welcoming new permanent resident," "CPO ordered," and "approval notice sent") on 9/8. My wife received her "welcome notice" and the card itself within a few days. But I have not received either yet.
1. I know the CPO email says wait 30 days, but given that my wife has already received hers, I suspect that mine was either sent to an incorrect address or there's some other hold up. Anyone else in a similar situation? Any thoughts/ideas/suggestions?
2. I guess I can wait 30 days and then apply for a replacement card with an I-90 (for which the current processing time is 3.5 months). How can I travel internationally in the interim? If anyone is aware, please let me know; I am trying to have a plan in place, in case an emergency arises.
Thanks to the two other posters, for their informative replies.
Here's a follow up. I just called USCIS to discover the following:
About two years ago, we moved and filed AR-11s. The address in their system shows a mix of old and new for me (whereas the address is right for my dear wife). And my card was sent to this incorrect address. What should happen next is that the card will be returned to them and then get mailed out again, but this time with the correct address. What will happen in reality is anybody's guess.
Updating here in case this is helpful to anyone else.
By now I am so used to having a constant 'green card concern' gnawing on a corner of the mind. We've probably grown so fond of each other over the years that even after 485 approval, it lingers on.
1. I know the CPO email says wait 30 days, but given that my wife has already received hers, I suspect that mine was either sent to an incorrect address or there's some other hold up. Anyone else in a similar situation? Any thoughts/ideas/suggestions?
2. I guess I can wait 30 days and then apply for a replacement card with an I-90 (for which the current processing time is 3.5 months). How can I travel internationally in the interim? If anyone is aware, please let me know; I am trying to have a plan in place, in case an emergency arises.
Thanks to the two other posters, for their informative replies.
Here's a follow up. I just called USCIS to discover the following:
About two years ago, we moved and filed AR-11s. The address in their system shows a mix of old and new for me (whereas the address is right for my dear wife). And my card was sent to this incorrect address. What should happen next is that the card will be returned to them and then get mailed out again, but this time with the correct address. What will happen in reality is anybody's guess.
Updating here in case this is helpful to anyone else.
By now I am so used to having a constant 'green card concern' gnawing on a corner of the mind. We've probably grown so fond of each other over the years that even after 485 approval, it lingers on.
more...
iv_only_hope
08-15 12:01 PM
Thanks a lot for reply. I just want to make sure she can go to canada, cause she has a bachelors degree from India. Forgetting the security checks, I was reading that for such ppl they say go back to home country for stamping. Mostly ppl with us degrees are fine. WOuld she be safe cause she had one h1 stamped in india few years back?
hair Ford Kuga - interior
gc_eb2_waiter
07-06 10:27 AM
As part of Class action lawsuit can we ask for recapturing of all unused visa numbers? I believe the number is at least 300K, it covers the green cards for 2003, 2004 and 2005. 2006 can go with 2008 quota. So everyone will be happy.
I believe this is the provision we should fight for instead of CIRcus.
What are your thoughts?
Thanks
Sree
I believe this is the provision we should fight for instead of CIRcus.
What are your thoughts?
Thanks
Sree
more...
archpai
12-16 09:16 PM
There is on Ajay chaudhury in houstan.
hot Nuevo Ford Focus interior
xyzqwer
01-22 11:05 AM
Hello,
Here is my situation.
- I'm under EB2 - RoW category. My I-140 just got approved and I was preparing to file for my I-485 (current)
- I went to the Bahamas last week to get my 3 year H1B renewal stamping but it was denied due to employer issues and I was forced to go back to India.
- Now I cant go back to US to file my 485. My company is still offering to help me on my GC.
I'm still reeling from the shock of my H1B denial. What are my options now?
Is Consular processing the way to go? Will loosing my H1B status have any effect on CP?
Should I start CP immediately or can I wait a few months to try to get back to the US on a new H1B?
Can anyone point me to some online materials detailing CP.
Thanks in advance.
Here is my situation.
- I'm under EB2 - RoW category. My I-140 just got approved and I was preparing to file for my I-485 (current)
- I went to the Bahamas last week to get my 3 year H1B renewal stamping but it was denied due to employer issues and I was forced to go back to India.
- Now I cant go back to US to file my 485. My company is still offering to help me on my GC.
I'm still reeling from the shock of my H1B denial. What are my options now?
Is Consular processing the way to go? Will loosing my H1B status have any effect on CP?
Should I start CP immediately or can I wait a few months to try to get back to the US on a new H1B?
Can anyone point me to some online materials detailing CP.
Thanks in advance.
more...
house 2011 Ford Edge EcoBoost Review
gcForV
07-12 10:57 AM
As other mentioned sending a certified letter to all senators/congress would be a good idea.
sending them all in a 2-3 days span would be good.
sending them all in a 2-3 days span would be good.
tattoo Ford Kuga Interior
kris04
08-18 06:17 PM
:confused:Hi all,
I have a situation,
I joined employer A and substituted labor with 2004 priority date. And it has been approved already, my understanding is labor substitution is nothing but filing I 140 but with some one else labor.
My current situation is, I got a perm job and have approached company attorney and she saying / asking, since this is labor substitution case, so, I need to have letter from employer �A� saying that labor used for me was initially filed for person X and he later left the company. Hence that has been used for me.
This is required to prove that there is no fraud happened while filing my case.
As you all know, in this current situation, I can not go back and ask employer �A� about that letter.
Any suggestions etc please provide.
Just to remember
REQUEST A SET OF COPIES WHEN EVER ATTORNEY FILING / FOLLOW UP ANY RFE etc FOR YOU. IRRESPECTIVE WHETHER YOU PAY OR COMPLANY PAYS GC FEES
Thanks,
Are you trying to port your job and join the potential new employer using EAD or transfer H1B visa?, I am surprised an immigration attorney is asking for such letter, labor substitution is/was always done in good faith in most cases, but there is no way to prove a fraud is involved unless the labor was filed using a non-existent person( if you remember the convicted guy Nick Mandelapa which ultimately lead to closing the abuse of labor substitution).Even if your previous employer is ethical and acted in good faith while doing labor substitution, giving such undertaking is far reaching and not required, for one reason labor certification legally belongs to your employer and not to the underlying employee, so getting such letter is a merely a chance. I guess in your case you've disclosed too many information about you past legal route causing concern for the new employer to hire you. Try to talk to HR and see that you're responsible for maintaining the employment authorization, but if you're taking H1B transfer just confine to H1B transfer, hire your own separate attorney to manage your I 485, as it belongs to you.
Good Luck
HTH
kris
My Profile
----------
GC approved in Aug 2008 without RFE, used AC 21 once, worked for my sponsor for 4 year, including 3 years after filing I 485, notified USCIS promptly when I ported my Job(confident that my new job profile and previous one are the same)
I have a situation,
I joined employer A and substituted labor with 2004 priority date. And it has been approved already, my understanding is labor substitution is nothing but filing I 140 but with some one else labor.
My current situation is, I got a perm job and have approached company attorney and she saying / asking, since this is labor substitution case, so, I need to have letter from employer �A� saying that labor used for me was initially filed for person X and he later left the company. Hence that has been used for me.
This is required to prove that there is no fraud happened while filing my case.
As you all know, in this current situation, I can not go back and ask employer �A� about that letter.
Any suggestions etc please provide.
Just to remember
REQUEST A SET OF COPIES WHEN EVER ATTORNEY FILING / FOLLOW UP ANY RFE etc FOR YOU. IRRESPECTIVE WHETHER YOU PAY OR COMPLANY PAYS GC FEES
Thanks,
Are you trying to port your job and join the potential new employer using EAD or transfer H1B visa?, I am surprised an immigration attorney is asking for such letter, labor substitution is/was always done in good faith in most cases, but there is no way to prove a fraud is involved unless the labor was filed using a non-existent person( if you remember the convicted guy Nick Mandelapa which ultimately lead to closing the abuse of labor substitution).Even if your previous employer is ethical and acted in good faith while doing labor substitution, giving such undertaking is far reaching and not required, for one reason labor certification legally belongs to your employer and not to the underlying employee, so getting such letter is a merely a chance. I guess in your case you've disclosed too many information about you past legal route causing concern for the new employer to hire you. Try to talk to HR and see that you're responsible for maintaining the employment authorization, but if you're taking H1B transfer just confine to H1B transfer, hire your own separate attorney to manage your I 485, as it belongs to you.
Good Luck
HTH
kris
My Profile
----------
GC approved in Aug 2008 without RFE, used AC 21 once, worked for my sponsor for 4 year, including 3 years after filing I 485, notified USCIS promptly when I ported my Job(confident that my new job profile and previous one are the same)
more...
pictures Diesel road test: Ford Kuga
geevikram
05-10 08:00 AM
One sensible post after a long time. I guess people(including me) are desperate that any piece of news gets them excited..
dresses Ford Kuga interior - find out
Matt Peru
08-19 10:13 PM
Hi Guys,
Finally my H1 petition got approved!!! Actually I received EAC number on 17th August and when I checked online with the EAC number it is updated in the USCIS website that they received my application on August 8th, it is in the "Accepted" status. The explanaton says "USCIS is in process of reviewing". On the next day, I mean on August 18th petition has been updated from "Accepted" Status to "Decision" status and in the explanation area they stated that my H1 petition is approved. Hurray :) !!!
Thank you very much guys for your suggestions guys.
-Matt
Finally my H1 petition got approved!!! Actually I received EAC number on 17th August and when I checked online with the EAC number it is updated in the USCIS website that they received my application on August 8th, it is in the "Accepted" status. The explanaton says "USCIS is in process of reviewing". On the next day, I mean on August 18th petition has been updated from "Accepted" Status to "Decision" status and in the explanation area they stated that my H1 petition is approved. Hurray :) !!!
Thank you very much guys for your suggestions guys.
-Matt
more...
makeup Local TV reports Ford Kuga to
uma001
10-16 12:50 PM
Do everything in premium..It is a matter of extra $1000 for each stage (H1 or I140)
girlfriend Ford Kuga Coupe
bigboy007
11-23 09:59 AM
do we need a UK visa even if we have a valid stamped US passport?
nope... but what do you mean by "Stamped US Passport"
nope... but what do you mean by "Stamped US Passport"
hairstyles Paris Show 2006 - Ford iosis X
Carlau
11-17 10:04 AM
I don't think that anyone minds that you discuss this, but for that you should pick this area http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=16 that has a little bit of everything and comments about current events.
lostinbeta
11-18 02:38 AM
Damn that Bob.... if he keeps getting votes he is going to beat me!!!
Oh wait... Bob is beating me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
CRAP!!!!
:beam:
Oh wait... Bob is beating me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
CRAP!!!!
:beam:
ashwin_27
02-25 12:48 PM
Absolutely agree. That is definitely the way the other side will argue against the "dependents exemption" provision. But doesnt mean we shouldn't ask for it :). its another way to reduce the backlog. And while the practical aspect of what you describe is completely true...what we can argue is - is it fair to bring in thousands of workers and their familes for "work" using one criteria (we do not need families to work for industries) and then ask them to pack up because of backlogs created by another criteria? (too many of you came to work now you suffer because we use a different logic to make you permanently settle here)
it is a part of IV provisions and proposals. we ask for 10 things and push hard and might get 1 or 2 through.
H1B is temporary visa.
Green Card is permanent.
On H1B you can even come to USA for 1 day and go back. But on Greencard you are asking to say here permanently with family. You are also asking for family be given all Green Card benefits like ability to work etc. So it makes sense to count dependents. On H1B the employer is only giving you the job and calling you. So you get work permit. Wife and children do not. You are being called only because USA needs your valuable skills and they cannot find Americans. There is no I485 stage on H1B visa. Wife coming on H4 is only to stay with you. This is understood even before she applied for the visa. So there is no reason for wife to complain that she cannot work on H4. On Greencard I485 stage, once the employer has established no American is available to work, you petition USCIS to allow your wife to stay with you as you also will stay permanently. in I485 you ask for the benefits of permanent residency for wife and children.
So it makes sense for counting dependents in the quota. What we should focus on is removing country limits. Country limits are discriminatory. It is morally wrong.
it is a part of IV provisions and proposals. we ask for 10 things and push hard and might get 1 or 2 through.
H1B is temporary visa.
Green Card is permanent.
On H1B you can even come to USA for 1 day and go back. But on Greencard you are asking to say here permanently with family. You are also asking for family be given all Green Card benefits like ability to work etc. So it makes sense to count dependents. On H1B the employer is only giving you the job and calling you. So you get work permit. Wife and children do not. You are being called only because USA needs your valuable skills and they cannot find Americans. There is no I485 stage on H1B visa. Wife coming on H4 is only to stay with you. This is understood even before she applied for the visa. So there is no reason for wife to complain that she cannot work on H4. On Greencard I485 stage, once the employer has established no American is available to work, you petition USCIS to allow your wife to stay with you as you also will stay permanently. in I485 you ask for the benefits of permanent residency for wife and children.
So it makes sense for counting dependents in the quota. What we should focus on is removing country limits. Country limits are discriminatory. It is morally wrong.
0 comments:
Post a Comment