MCQ
05-01 03:14 PM
I have long been of the opinion - told to me by an immigration lawyer, that when you file your I-485 when the PD is current, and your dependents file also that only the Primary counts towards the quota, dependent GC's do not count towards the employment based visa quota - so this may be a moot point as to whether or not they should be in the family or employment based lists.
Much like when you file for an H1B, the H4 for your dependants does not count agains the overall H quota.
Much like when you file for an H1B, the H4 for your dependants does not count agains the overall H quota.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
neverbefore
08-30 02:52 PM
My wife and i got emails from USCIS and we checked our status online and it is now CPO. The approval is based on my wife's applicatiion ( EB2 India, Dec 2005). I had two applications one as her dependent and another my own that is EB3 I, Jan 2004.
Great news. Congratulations
Great news. Congratulations
JazzByTheBay
09-28 04:36 PM
Given the number of questions and concerns IV members have about AC21 in general and "what after EAD/AP", it makes sense to coordinate with USCIS (and lawmakers if required) on this and get some favorable responses that allay everyone's concerns.
If EAD+AP are like a "provisional GC", USCIS should perhaps not delve too much into the job description of work done after the 180 days past AOS filing, imo. Just as in the case of GCs, the bar of intent to be employed in that job is met by working for that employer for 90-180 days (the latter to be on the safe side). The only reason this is such a huge issue is because of the unreasonable waiting time induced on the GC process due to retrogression.
As a result, folks from retrogression-affected countries suffer from these anxities, whereas those from unaffected countries get their GCs, and are free birds after the 90-180 day period.
It's unreasonable to expect folks from retrogressed countries to be employed in the same position, or to otherwise limit their options by imposing restrictions of new job being the same job description as the one on the approved labor cert.
jazz
First there is not enough AC21 cases to give feed back how their 485s were handled (approved/detail of RFE/denied) due to job change. Becase, almost all guys who used ac21 still in waiting game due to retrogression.
The main thing what I see here is, USCIS has not yet published the final regulation to interpret AC21 act, even after 7 years of passing AC21 act. They are issuing internal field office memo. These memos are non-binding. In other words, one cannot firmly relay on memos or challange the USCIS decision on AC21 portability according to these memos.
However, sofar, these memos are very favorable to workers, including allowing self-employment, one can port even before 140 approval ect...However, USCIS were cautioning in each memos, that the final regulation may be restrictive than memos. If they took restrictive position in final regulation, it will be a huge problem for most peoples, as they might have violated the final regulation.
Another issue is, definition of "same or similar occupational classification". This is going to be very subjective based on how uscis adjudicator going to compare old and new jobs. The memo says by comparing job duties both old and new jobs and based on SOC or ONET code of old and new job they have to decide both jobs are same or similar. As there is no clear regulation it is big issue to go howmuch level of similarity between jobs. For example one guy may think "database administrator" and "network administrator" are similar job to port. The USCIS may think it may not. It is not quantified.
I feel IV should advocate on liberal/quantifyable defintion for similar jobs in AC21 interpretation. For example, all computer professional jobs should be considered as similar jobs as well as all engineering jobs should be considered similar to port. For example mining engineer can port to chemical engineer job etc...
Also, if any one port to self employment in similar job, there is no much information available wheter one should open a company in his/her name or not (by just working in 1099 etc.. for multiple positions). This needs to have a flexible option for workers, like one can work in 1099 w/o opening a bussiness.
Also, IV should advocate on not to have any restrictive interpretation in final regulation.
If EAD+AP are like a "provisional GC", USCIS should perhaps not delve too much into the job description of work done after the 180 days past AOS filing, imo. Just as in the case of GCs, the bar of intent to be employed in that job is met by working for that employer for 90-180 days (the latter to be on the safe side). The only reason this is such a huge issue is because of the unreasonable waiting time induced on the GC process due to retrogression.
As a result, folks from retrogression-affected countries suffer from these anxities, whereas those from unaffected countries get their GCs, and are free birds after the 90-180 day period.
It's unreasonable to expect folks from retrogressed countries to be employed in the same position, or to otherwise limit their options by imposing restrictions of new job being the same job description as the one on the approved labor cert.
jazz
First there is not enough AC21 cases to give feed back how their 485s were handled (approved/detail of RFE/denied) due to job change. Becase, almost all guys who used ac21 still in waiting game due to retrogression.
The main thing what I see here is, USCIS has not yet published the final regulation to interpret AC21 act, even after 7 years of passing AC21 act. They are issuing internal field office memo. These memos are non-binding. In other words, one cannot firmly relay on memos or challange the USCIS decision on AC21 portability according to these memos.
However, sofar, these memos are very favorable to workers, including allowing self-employment, one can port even before 140 approval ect...However, USCIS were cautioning in each memos, that the final regulation may be restrictive than memos. If they took restrictive position in final regulation, it will be a huge problem for most peoples, as they might have violated the final regulation.
Another issue is, definition of "same or similar occupational classification". This is going to be very subjective based on how uscis adjudicator going to compare old and new jobs. The memo says by comparing job duties both old and new jobs and based on SOC or ONET code of old and new job they have to decide both jobs are same or similar. As there is no clear regulation it is big issue to go howmuch level of similarity between jobs. For example one guy may think "database administrator" and "network administrator" are similar job to port. The USCIS may think it may not. It is not quantified.
I feel IV should advocate on liberal/quantifyable defintion for similar jobs in AC21 interpretation. For example, all computer professional jobs should be considered as similar jobs as well as all engineering jobs should be considered similar to port. For example mining engineer can port to chemical engineer job etc...
Also, if any one port to self employment in similar job, there is no much information available wheter one should open a company in his/her name or not (by just working in 1099 etc.. for multiple positions). This needs to have a flexible option for workers, like one can work in 1099 w/o opening a bussiness.
Also, IV should advocate on not to have any restrictive interpretation in final regulation.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
greenkard
03-15 02:29 PM
already did that. Is calling the only thing at the moment? Why don't you let EB3 guys talk a little?
My friend suggested this forum. Looks to be very good site and seems to be active. I am EB# from India.
Can you tell me why EB3 is lagging so much
My friend suggested this forum. Looks to be very good site and seems to be active. I am EB# from India.
Can you tell me why EB3 is lagging so much
more...
viswanadh73
11-18 02:19 PM
I am wondering none of these senators who responded as of now understand our request for adding the provision of recapturing unused visas. Please read below response from IOWA senator and not even one word about our request.
I appreciate you taking the time to share with me your views regarding S. 729, the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act. The views of my fellow Iowans are an essential component of my decision making process as a Member of Congress.
As you may know, Senator Richard Durbin introduced S. 729 on March 26, 2009. This legislation would allow unlawful immigrants who entered the U.S. as minors to gain eligibility for higher education benefits based on state residence, unless a U.S. citizen is eligible for the same benefits. S. 729 has been referred to the Senate Committee on Judiciary. You will be interested to know that Congressman Howard Berman introduced H.R. 1751, the American Dream Act, on March 26, 2009, which would create a similar law. H.R. 1751 has been referred to the House Committee on Judiciary and the House Committee on Education and Labor. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind should the full House consider this issue during the 111th Congress.
Our nation faces many challenges, and economic recovery is vital if we are to meet them. As a senior member of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, I will continue building upon the job creation opportunities that I have delivered to the 3rd District in order to expand commerce, spur business development, and provide economic opportunity to all. I periodically provide electronic updates on issues I think my constituents might be interested in. If you would like to receive the E-newsletter, please sign up at my Web Site at Congressman Leonard Boswell : Home (http://boswell.house.gov). As always, please feel free to contact me or my office if ever you think we may be of assistance.
Sincerely,
Leonard L. Boswell
Member of Congress
I appreciate you taking the time to share with me your views regarding S. 729, the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act. The views of my fellow Iowans are an essential component of my decision making process as a Member of Congress.
As you may know, Senator Richard Durbin introduced S. 729 on March 26, 2009. This legislation would allow unlawful immigrants who entered the U.S. as minors to gain eligibility for higher education benefits based on state residence, unless a U.S. citizen is eligible for the same benefits. S. 729 has been referred to the Senate Committee on Judiciary. You will be interested to know that Congressman Howard Berman introduced H.R. 1751, the American Dream Act, on March 26, 2009, which would create a similar law. H.R. 1751 has been referred to the House Committee on Judiciary and the House Committee on Education and Labor. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind should the full House consider this issue during the 111th Congress.
Our nation faces many challenges, and economic recovery is vital if we are to meet them. As a senior member of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, I will continue building upon the job creation opportunities that I have delivered to the 3rd District in order to expand commerce, spur business development, and provide economic opportunity to all. I periodically provide electronic updates on issues I think my constituents might be interested in. If you would like to receive the E-newsletter, please sign up at my Web Site at Congressman Leonard Boswell : Home (http://boswell.house.gov). As always, please feel free to contact me or my office if ever you think we may be of assistance.
Sincerely,
Leonard L. Boswell
Member of Congress
raghav235
08-15 11:11 AM
EAD Paper Filed (EB3-India, PD Nov 2006 : For Me and My spouse)
Documents Mailed: July 01, 2008
Receipt Notice: July 03, 2008
LUD: July 08, 2008
Current Status: My case was approved and card production ordered on August 14, 2008 (got the email from CRIS) and still waiting for my spouse's EAD approval.
Thanks
Raghav235
Documents Mailed: July 01, 2008
Receipt Notice: July 03, 2008
LUD: July 08, 2008
Current Status: My case was approved and card production ordered on August 14, 2008 (got the email from CRIS) and still waiting for my spouse's EAD approval.
Thanks
Raghav235
more...
a2k2
11-17 04:54 PM
Done!!
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
rock945
06-11 10:52 PM
I mailed mine on May 25 and up to now I haven't gotten anything yet. My lawyer mailed it to NSC and since my I-140 is pending with the TSC, my lawyer said they will just forward it there. It's taking too long. Anybody in the same boat as I am?
I was under the impression that you cannot file before June 1st..
I was under the impression that you cannot file before June 1st..
more...
JAYASURESH
05-05 04:46 PM
what is prediction on eb3 PD: 2nd Feb 08?
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
aj1234567
10-04 06:16 PM
Hi
Any body got finger print appointment letter who filed on Aug3.
Thanks
AJ
Any body got finger print appointment letter who filed on Aug3.
Thanks
AJ
more...
b_boy
02-22 06:01 PM
well, really I dont have words to express what frustration means, so be it. my PD is Nov 2003 (original Labor) and filed 485 in June 2004 and have 7 EAD cards thus far.
Started to work on EAD since 2005.
This is my 11th year in this country, never tried to do labor substitution always was and is a legal and law abiding since I came to this country on H1, despite changing jobs been as a developer since then - till now.
This GC process got me grey very soon, unsure if I become bald. This is the state of legal immigration in this country, God bless.
Started to work on EAD since 2005.
This is my 11th year in this country, never tried to do labor substitution always was and is a legal and law abiding since I came to this country on H1, despite changing jobs been as a developer since then - till now.
This GC process got me grey very soon, unsure if I become bald. This is the state of legal immigration in this country, God bless.
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
bkarnik
05-10 08:21 PM
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.2691:
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
cnag
02-25 11:35 AM
Over the past 4 years, I have contributed to IV several times. I was also a monthly subscriber of $20 for over a year until my credit card expired and the payments stopped.
What pains me is that inspite of several requests, i have not been granted access to donor forms. Perhaps there is a waiting list for donor access or my priority date is not current for the same.:confused:
I will try my best to make it to DC events, but please accept my small contribution in case i am unable to make the trip.
Transaction ID # 44Y412702G964994U date 2/25/2011 $25. monthly contribution for 6 months.
What pains me is that inspite of several requests, i have not been granted access to donor forms. Perhaps there is a waiting list for donor access or my priority date is not current for the same.:confused:
I will try my best to make it to DC events, but please accept my small contribution in case i am unable to make the trip.
Transaction ID # 44Y412702G964994U date 2/25/2011 $25. monthly contribution for 6 months.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
ns007
05-23 01:19 PM
Done
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
rdehar
10-08 02:48 PM
This should be #1 priority of IV.
People have been waiting for their GCs since 2001, 2002 or 2003. My PD is 2004, and I absolutely want everyone with PD before me to get GC before me.
People who are opposing this idea are used to cutting lines -- most of them look like '06 and '07 wannabes ...
People have been waiting for their GCs since 2001, 2002 or 2003. My PD is 2004, and I absolutely want everyone with PD before me to get GC before me.
People who are opposing this idea are used to cutting lines -- most of them look like '06 and '07 wannabes ...
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
akhilmahajan
04-08 12:12 PM
I did my landing this weekend.
Every thing went smooth both on US and Canadian side.
I was not asked any questions.
Just wanted to let everyone know.
Every thing went smooth both on US and Canadian side.
I was not asked any questions.
Just wanted to let everyone know.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
Rohan99
09-17 04:13 PM
Hello, Anyone on July 3rd R.William 9:00am NSC has not received receipt...please let me know.
Now I am worried, I called today(17th sep) but no news on my record.
PD:May 2006
140: Aug 2006
i-485 : @ NSC july 3rd waiting for receipt
July 3rd R.William 9:00am NSC
Now I am worried, I called today(17th sep) but no news on my record.
PD:May 2006
140: Aug 2006
i-485 : @ NSC july 3rd waiting for receipt
July 3rd R.William 9:00am NSC
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
Lasantha
02-05 01:17 PM
I think it depends on who the primary applicant is in your Canadian PR application. If you are the primary applicant (and used your spouce's qualifications to get the extra points), you should be able to do the landing alone. But if you are the secondary applicant and your wife is the primary then I don't think you can land without her.
I think the rule is that the secondary applicants cannot land until the primary applicant has landed. (So the secondary applicants (spouce, kids) have to land either with the primary applicant or after him.
Last week i received a letter from my canadian lawyer to send my passport to buffalo for stamping. The last date mentioned is March,08
Regarding me, I got through canadian immigration with mine and my wife's points. My wife is a Permanent resident for last 3 years 10 months in US. I am in EB3 category. PD Oct 06.
When checked the rules for maintaining PR in US for my wife, She cannot apply for PR in any other country till the time she is a PR in this country. As per the lawyers she will have a difficulty in applying for citizenship.
Now, I cannot myself apply for canadian immigration. because its a joint filing. What should i do?
I think the rule is that the secondary applicants cannot land until the primary applicant has landed. (So the secondary applicants (spouce, kids) have to land either with the primary applicant or after him.
Last week i received a letter from my canadian lawyer to send my passport to buffalo for stamping. The last date mentioned is March,08
Regarding me, I got through canadian immigration with mine and my wife's points. My wife is a Permanent resident for last 3 years 10 months in US. I am in EB3 category. PD Oct 06.
When checked the rules for maintaining PR in US for my wife, She cannot apply for PR in any other country till the time she is a PR in this country. As per the lawyers she will have a difficulty in applying for citizenship.
Now, I cannot myself apply for canadian immigration. because its a joint filing. What should i do?
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
desidas
01-24 07:06 PM
In this thread there are lot of folks who changed employers using AC21 after 180 days I-485 is pending.
Did they ever travel to thier home country using AP after switching employers from the orginal GC sponsoring employer?
Where they being harassed at Port of Entry by Immigration Officers why siwtched employers and travel on AP?
Please share any experiences
Did they ever travel to thier home country using AP after switching employers from the orginal GC sponsoring employer?
Where they being harassed at Port of Entry by Immigration Officers why siwtched employers and travel on AP?
Please share any experiences
spicy_guy
08-09 10:25 AM
I agree with you 100%.
If you or any one else is planning to move forward with some plans for helping EB3 folks, expect some serious opposition to your efforts. Many EB3 folks themselves do not see any need for EB3 only actions.
A bunch of us talked to a lawyer regarding the INA and the initial reaction was not very encouraging. The lawyer was suggesting us to convert to EB2.
Lawyers would always suggest you to port to EB2, even in case EB3 I is going to be current tomorrow. Simple truth, they need money! So don't listen to lawyers on THIS!
If you or any one else is planning to move forward with some plans for helping EB3 folks, expect some serious opposition to your efforts. Many EB3 folks themselves do not see any need for EB3 only actions.
A bunch of us talked to a lawyer regarding the INA and the initial reaction was not very encouraging. The lawyer was suggesting us to convert to EB2.
Lawyers would always suggest you to port to EB2, even in case EB3 I is going to be current tomorrow. Simple truth, they need money! So don't listen to lawyers on THIS!
jjava100
11-19 02:04 PM
and sent to six of my friends......
No comments:
Post a Comment