Catherine
03-09 09:57 AM
I don't have many but I can contribute a few Continental airmiles if this would help? How do I go about it?
Thank you and good luck in DC!
Thank you and good luck in DC!
wallpaper sassy quotes about haters. lil
delax
07-13 10:34 AM
Why didnt the EB2 ROW number trickle to ROW EB3 first?
Think about this for a minute. By doing so EB3-ROW is given precedence over EB2-Retro country after the ROW within EB2 has been satisfied. I cant see how that can make sense - not that anything in the GC sojourn makes sense. The categorization across employment categories is due to a difference in skill, training and experience level. Once the ROW demand within a category has been satisified, the retro country within the same category needs to get a preference over any lower category - sounds very harsh and heirarchical but thats how it is.
Think about this for a minute. By doing so EB3-ROW is given precedence over EB2-Retro country after the ROW within EB2 has been satisfied. I cant see how that can make sense - not that anything in the GC sojourn makes sense. The categorization across employment categories is due to a difference in skill, training and experience level. Once the ROW demand within a category has been satisified, the retro country within the same category needs to get a preference over any lower category - sounds very harsh and heirarchical but thats how it is.
Ramba
07-14 10:02 PM
--
I do not think what you are saying is correct. Ac21 does not allow you to leave before 180 days of your 485 filing.
Have you read the USCIS question? If not, read few times to understand how your interpretation is wrong.
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
The bottom line is if his approved 140 is not revoked with in 180 days of filing the 485, his 485 is still valid even if ported the job with in a month after filing 485.
The RFE is trying to determine whether your former employer holds a bonafide future job open for you or not. If he/she does not then your application is not valid in your circumstances from what I know.
If you get a letter from him/her then that should be adequate, however you will also need to start work with that employer for a reasonable time afterward to be within the law.
If as you say the intent has to be there at the time of filing, then it would be easy for everyone to intend whatever the needed at the time of filing and then change their minds. It does not work that way.
The revocation of the 140 would not have been a problem if it happened after the 180 days, but would be an issue now.
I can see you are in a difficult spot. I would definitely suggest you stay honest, since they have all of your filing records etc. and if you fudge it, your petition can be denied for fraud, which could harm future applications.
Rather than relying on the advise here, you should seek out a good attorney experienced in AC21.
I do not think what you are saying is correct. Ac21 does not allow you to leave before 180 days of your 485 filing.
Have you read the USCIS question? If not, read few times to understand how your interpretation is wrong.
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
The bottom line is if his approved 140 is not revoked with in 180 days of filing the 485, his 485 is still valid even if ported the job with in a month after filing 485.
The RFE is trying to determine whether your former employer holds a bonafide future job open for you or not. If he/she does not then your application is not valid in your circumstances from what I know.
If you get a letter from him/her then that should be adequate, however you will also need to start work with that employer for a reasonable time afterward to be within the law.
If as you say the intent has to be there at the time of filing, then it would be easy for everyone to intend whatever the needed at the time of filing and then change their minds. It does not work that way.
The revocation of the 140 would not have been a problem if it happened after the 180 days, but would be an issue now.
I can see you are in a difficult spot. I would definitely suggest you stay honest, since they have all of your filing records etc. and if you fudge it, your petition can be denied for fraud, which could harm future applications.
Rather than relying on the advise here, you should seek out a good attorney experienced in AC21.
2011 sassy quotes about haters.
immique
07-01 04:22 PM
online petition is a very good idea. it is bound to gain increased attention as we make our views clear. having country quotas/limits in EB system does not make any sense. if not addressed quickly the people from retrogressed countries have to wait 15-20 years before they can ever see their green card while applicants from other countries get their green cards in a few months.
more...
delax
07-13 11:39 AM
I am not saying my lawyer is any better, all these lawyers are nothing but blood suckers just like the employers. I'm just disgusted that people can stoop so low. The objective might be the same, but the intentions are far from it. I hope you understand that my friend and stop being a PR rep for murthy or any lawyer. :)
You have the option to leave the country if you think all employers and lawyers are blood suckers - I cannot comment on anybodys intention - I dont think you and me know the complete facts to pass a value judgement and that includes your comment about me being a PR for murthy or any lawyer. I enjoy a healthy debate on issues not on people and you seem to completely miss that from my postings.:)
You have the option to leave the country if you think all employers and lawyers are blood suckers - I cannot comment on anybodys intention - I dont think you and me know the complete facts to pass a value judgement and that includes your comment about me being a PR for murthy or any lawyer. I enjoy a healthy debate on issues not on people and you seem to completely miss that from my postings.:)
logiclife
02-17 04:47 PM
Immigration Voice is a volunteer organization. It has been assured several times here on this thread that it is a part of "transparency" issue on IV goals as mentioned in the Brochure. Transparency includes everything. Including name-check process.
Its a sub-item and not a main item because it is ONE OF THE SEVERAL administrative issues facing us.
However, if people feel that this issue is not receiving enough attention, then there are few things to do besides posting here in this thread (posting is welcome):
1. Call the phone number and speak to a volunteer. You will be connected to someone who is admin/founder of this organization. The phone number is under "Contact Us" menu.
2. Go to resources menu and find out how to contact your lawmaker. See if you can find an appointment and apprise them of the issue. Although there is no legislative solution to this problem and it remains an enforcement/administrative issue, the basic feature of the government includes the congressional oversight on the executive(DOS, FBI, USCIS etc in this case).
3. Ask your lawyer to file a lawsuit against the FBI for causing you irreparable damage due to mental agony, loss of pay due to missed promotions, job opportunities etc.
4. Call your local media or national media and tell them the our dear FBI takes 36 months to check if a permenant residency applicant is a terrorist/criminal/shop-lifter/DUI/DWI etc or not while that applicant is free to work on provisional work-permit called EAD issued by USCIS. Two things: if there is nothing wrong with the guy, he suffers long wait for his greencard. If he is a criminal, he works and enjoys the American dream on his EAD instead of being deported.
5. Send letters to Department of Justice (top levels) since FBI I think falls under Department of Justice.
--logiclife.
Its a sub-item and not a main item because it is ONE OF THE SEVERAL administrative issues facing us.
However, if people feel that this issue is not receiving enough attention, then there are few things to do besides posting here in this thread (posting is welcome):
1. Call the phone number and speak to a volunteer. You will be connected to someone who is admin/founder of this organization. The phone number is under "Contact Us" menu.
2. Go to resources menu and find out how to contact your lawmaker. See if you can find an appointment and apprise them of the issue. Although there is no legislative solution to this problem and it remains an enforcement/administrative issue, the basic feature of the government includes the congressional oversight on the executive(DOS, FBI, USCIS etc in this case).
3. Ask your lawyer to file a lawsuit against the FBI for causing you irreparable damage due to mental agony, loss of pay due to missed promotions, job opportunities etc.
4. Call your local media or national media and tell them the our dear FBI takes 36 months to check if a permenant residency applicant is a terrorist/criminal/shop-lifter/DUI/DWI etc or not while that applicant is free to work on provisional work-permit called EAD issued by USCIS. Two things: if there is nothing wrong with the guy, he suffers long wait for his greencard. If he is a criminal, he works and enjoys the American dream on his EAD instead of being deported.
5. Send letters to Department of Justice (top levels) since FBI I think falls under Department of Justice.
--logiclife.
more...
gcisadawg
02-13 01:49 PM
Ash, I agree with the message but you need to work on the choice of words. This not ethnic cleansing or lynching or systematic targetting. I'd say America is going into a protectionist mode. When you are in that mode, the first step is to keep aliens at a distance.
2010 sassy quotes about haters.
paskal
12-27 02:40 PM
if i'm travelling TO India and transiting through paris/london
and I have an Indian passport, WHY should I need to show a US Visa to avoid a transit visa? Does this make any sense? I'm not going to the US?????
and I have an Indian passport, WHY should I need to show a US Visa to avoid a transit visa? Does this make any sense? I'm not going to the US?????
more...
Tito_ortiz
02-28 01:04 PM
Unfortunately, Obama is not changing much. The mortgage bailout is just a show. Almost irrelevant.
What a lovely change. Every time Obama and his press Secy opens their mouth, markets dive into red. In this country Main Street and Wall Street are in bed with each other :-)
Obama with his sense-less economic policies, trying to separate Main Street from Wall street. Government needs to seriously lure the investors to the market , cut capital gains and taxes, take off protectionist hats and recover the economy. Then Obama can go with his socialist/populist agenda but certainly this is not the right time.:D
What a lovely change. Every time Obama and his press Secy opens their mouth, markets dive into red. In this country Main Street and Wall Street are in bed with each other :-)
Obama with his sense-less economic policies, trying to separate Main Street from Wall street. Government needs to seriously lure the investors to the market , cut capital gains and taxes, take off protectionist hats and recover the economy. Then Obama can go with his socialist/populist agenda but certainly this is not the right time.:D
hair tattoo quotes about haters.
StarSun
02-17 09:50 AM
IV sent newsletters last year on advocacy efforts to its members. We are doing it this year as well. We are trying to reach out to our members to attend the event.
more...
bkarnik
07-25 06:46 PM
Thanks a lot, please keep us posted about the outcome, even if we have one percent of hope, there is no harm trying that.
Guys,
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Anyways, I sent the following email to my lawyer, the entire chain with names deleted is reproduced here for your reading pleasure. This exchange highlights the apathy with which the legal community (at least my lawyer) view the issue and their knowledge of the law.... enjoy.. :(
From: Attorney
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
I see your point. You should contact the American Immigration Lawyers Association with your question. If the issue has not already been addressed by this organization, I'm sure they will readily champion your cause.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:49 AM
To: attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
Thank you for your time and the quick turnaround. However, the question still remains. If you notice in the link sent by you below, the USCIS refers to the US 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c) According to the USCIS, the CFR is the interpretation made by the agencies of the INA as passed and amended by Congress. The INA itself does not seem to have any clause relating to EAD for employment based categories because I believe the Congress never foresaw a situation where it will take up to 5-6 years for the process to complete.
I know that the USCIS has on many occasions by using the Federal Register or by Memorandums modified the CFR or changed the regulations governing the validity of the EAD, and I am wondering if something similar can be achieved in this case, wherein an appeal is made to the USCIS to change the rules governing eligibility for issuing an EAD.
Thanks once again.
Bkarnik.
-----Original Message-----
From: AttorneySent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
Hello BKarnik,
Your argument is sound, however, U.S. Immigration does indeed adjudicate
I-765 EAD applications based upon eligibility for filing. Please click this
link: http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/i-765.htm. It will take you to the USCIS web site where you can download form I-765. Included with the form is an instruction sheet. In the section entitled "Eligibility Categories", U.S. Immigration spells out the categories for which form I-765 may be filed. For example, under the "Foreign Students" title, you can see that an F-1 OPT student is eligible to obtain EAD work authorization pursuant to subsection (c)(3)(i). Your eligibility for EAD work authorization will fall under the "EAD Applicants Who Have Filed for Adjustment of Status" title under subsection (c)(9). Unfortunately, there is no eligibility category for I-140 IVP applicants or for IVP approval notice holders.
I hope this answers your questions.
Attorney
________________________________
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 2:16 PM
To: Attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
I had a question for you (actually, it is a series of sub questions).
However, this has nothing to with my employer or my GC, so if you feel that replying to this question will take up an inordinate amount of time or of you think that this is something that is worthwhile in pursuing, please let me know what your charges will be and I will let you know if I can afford them :)) With that out of the way, here goes:
The question is about getting an EAD before filing the I-485. I was perusing the INA as posted on the USCIS website. I did not find any applicable law that directs the USCIS when it can issue EADs. It is quite likely that I missed the section as I am not a student of laws as you are.
If so, can you let me know where to find it? As you know, the EAD issue is mentioned in the US 8 CFR sec. 274a. Now, the USCIS website explains that the CFR thus: The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies.
These
regulations apply the law to daily situations. Thus, the CFR is the interpretation of the law by the USCIS for application in daily life.
If
that is the case, what prevents the USCIS from issuing EADs upon the approval of Form I-140? Especially, since as you very well know, the Form I-140 is an application made by the employer to the USCIS to petition for an alien worker to become a permanent resident in the United States.
Therefore,
the form requires the employer to fill in all the pertinent information about the alien and his dependents. An approval of the Form I-140 indicates (at least to me) that the USCIS has agreed with the employee that the labor certification is good and the alien is approvable as a permanent employee.
I guess that is one of the reasons, the USCIS allows concurrent filing of the I-140/I-485.
With the current retrogression concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 is not possible, if the USCIS were to be agreeable to issue EADs to persons with approved I-140 it would make life a lot easier for all while at the same time not impacting the green card process itself. All we are asking is that the EAD be issued after I-140 approval, because it does not make sense to tell an employer that the alien is approved for permanent employment, but at the same time asking the employer to keep the employee in a H1B (i.e.
temporary status) at no fault of the employer/employee. Can you let me know if my argument is flawed? If not, do you think we have a way by which we can ask the USCIS for its interpretation or opinion on the issue? If we can, and you are willing to take the matter, can you let me know your fees?
I know that you are very busy, and may not be able to take on the matter even if you find merit in it. In that case, would know of a competent person willing to take it up?
Thank you for your time and patience,
Sincerely,
Bkarnik
Guys,
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Anyways, I sent the following email to my lawyer, the entire chain with names deleted is reproduced here for your reading pleasure. This exchange highlights the apathy with which the legal community (at least my lawyer) view the issue and their knowledge of the law.... enjoy.. :(
From: Attorney
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
I see your point. You should contact the American Immigration Lawyers Association with your question. If the issue has not already been addressed by this organization, I'm sure they will readily champion your cause.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:49 AM
To: attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
Thank you for your time and the quick turnaround. However, the question still remains. If you notice in the link sent by you below, the USCIS refers to the US 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c) According to the USCIS, the CFR is the interpretation made by the agencies of the INA as passed and amended by Congress. The INA itself does not seem to have any clause relating to EAD for employment based categories because I believe the Congress never foresaw a situation where it will take up to 5-6 years for the process to complete.
I know that the USCIS has on many occasions by using the Federal Register or by Memorandums modified the CFR or changed the regulations governing the validity of the EAD, and I am wondering if something similar can be achieved in this case, wherein an appeal is made to the USCIS to change the rules governing eligibility for issuing an EAD.
Thanks once again.
Bkarnik.
-----Original Message-----
From: AttorneySent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
Hello BKarnik,
Your argument is sound, however, U.S. Immigration does indeed adjudicate
I-765 EAD applications based upon eligibility for filing. Please click this
link: http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/i-765.htm. It will take you to the USCIS web site where you can download form I-765. Included with the form is an instruction sheet. In the section entitled "Eligibility Categories", U.S. Immigration spells out the categories for which form I-765 may be filed. For example, under the "Foreign Students" title, you can see that an F-1 OPT student is eligible to obtain EAD work authorization pursuant to subsection (c)(3)(i). Your eligibility for EAD work authorization will fall under the "EAD Applicants Who Have Filed for Adjustment of Status" title under subsection (c)(9). Unfortunately, there is no eligibility category for I-140 IVP applicants or for IVP approval notice holders.
I hope this answers your questions.
Attorney
________________________________
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 2:16 PM
To: Attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
I had a question for you (actually, it is a series of sub questions).
However, this has nothing to with my employer or my GC, so if you feel that replying to this question will take up an inordinate amount of time or of you think that this is something that is worthwhile in pursuing, please let me know what your charges will be and I will let you know if I can afford them :)) With that out of the way, here goes:
The question is about getting an EAD before filing the I-485. I was perusing the INA as posted on the USCIS website. I did not find any applicable law that directs the USCIS when it can issue EADs. It is quite likely that I missed the section as I am not a student of laws as you are.
If so, can you let me know where to find it? As you know, the EAD issue is mentioned in the US 8 CFR sec. 274a. Now, the USCIS website explains that the CFR thus: The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies.
These
regulations apply the law to daily situations. Thus, the CFR is the interpretation of the law by the USCIS for application in daily life.
If
that is the case, what prevents the USCIS from issuing EADs upon the approval of Form I-140? Especially, since as you very well know, the Form I-140 is an application made by the employer to the USCIS to petition for an alien worker to become a permanent resident in the United States.
Therefore,
the form requires the employer to fill in all the pertinent information about the alien and his dependents. An approval of the Form I-140 indicates (at least to me) that the USCIS has agreed with the employee that the labor certification is good and the alien is approvable as a permanent employee.
I guess that is one of the reasons, the USCIS allows concurrent filing of the I-140/I-485.
With the current retrogression concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 is not possible, if the USCIS were to be agreeable to issue EADs to persons with approved I-140 it would make life a lot easier for all while at the same time not impacting the green card process itself. All we are asking is that the EAD be issued after I-140 approval, because it does not make sense to tell an employer that the alien is approved for permanent employment, but at the same time asking the employer to keep the employee in a H1B (i.e.
temporary status) at no fault of the employer/employee. Can you let me know if my argument is flawed? If not, do you think we have a way by which we can ask the USCIS for its interpretation or opinion on the issue? If we can, and you are willing to take the matter, can you let me know your fees?
I know that you are very busy, and may not be able to take on the matter even if you find merit in it. In that case, would know of a competent person willing to take it up?
Thank you for your time and patience,
Sincerely,
Bkarnik
hot quotes on haters.
abhijitp
08-15 04:07 PM
But the question is.. how long will the dates stay where they are, if not retrogress. As such EB-3 is U so that is bad news for a lot of us, including me, unless my Eb-2/ Eb-3 mess is cleared.
So... let's focus now on the action items. Come on folks, let's stop even looking at VB as it is old stuff... move to C-Sharp;) I mean move to action items... PLEASE!
So... let's focus now on the action items. Come on folks, let's stop even looking at VB as it is old stuff... move to C-Sharp;) I mean move to action items... PLEASE!
more...
house wallpaper sassy quotes about
GCBy3000
07-24 12:01 PM
You signature with "Saved by IVs efforts" looks good. Could you update your signature with contributions also. Thanks.
I see that USCIS release a press release on 7/20 and it says the time complaince for Nebraska Center is 8/1. Does it mean that July 2nd filers will get receipt by 8/1 ( i know i'm expecting too much from USCIS)... When can we expect the receipt notices.. I guess i'm a bit nervous now..
I see that USCIS release a press release on 7/20 and it says the time complaince for Nebraska Center is 8/1. Does it mean that July 2nd filers will get receipt by 8/1 ( i know i'm expecting too much from USCIS)... When can we expect the receipt notices.. I guess i'm a bit nervous now..
tattoo hot quotes about haters. sassy
anurakt
01-17 01:52 PM
Well Said Pappu, if you ask for people to ask IV for updates 20 times a day, we will get thousands of contributions ...but when it comes to money to support the cause .....all these don't show the faces. These people call themselves high skilled , they want everything without contributing a cent .... ... ....:mad: :mad:
more...
pictures 2010 2pac quotes about haters.
concorde
07-23 04:32 PM
Mine reached NSC on July 2 at 9:02 AM. Got Fedex delivery confirmation and no receipt from CIS yet. Will check with my lawyer for advise.
You must be joking :-) about asking the attorney for advise :-). See http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=122613&postcount=39
Unfortunately most of the attorneys don't seem to be on top of the situation
and will only list out the "obvious" possible outcomes which we ourselves can list out.!! So far, at least 2 attorneys I have approaced haven't been able to tell me how 2 485 applications for a single person are handled. Godammit, it is not some rocket science question; it has to be there in some USCIS manual/rule book or a section of the immigration law.
You must be joking :-) about asking the attorney for advise :-). See http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=122613&postcount=39
Unfortunately most of the attorneys don't seem to be on top of the situation
and will only list out the "obvious" possible outcomes which we ourselves can list out.!! So far, at least 2 attorneys I have approaced haven't been able to tell me how 2 485 applications for a single person are handled. Godammit, it is not some rocket science question; it has to be there in some USCIS manual/rule book or a section of the immigration law.
dresses sassy quotes about haters
gc_aspirant_prasad
07-09 04:07 PM
Hatz off to that lady... Lot of us are still thinking to fill law-suit against USCIS/DOS.... We should act fast now and file law-suit rather than just waiting and discussing here. I felt bad some people even asked when will be outcome of that law-suit....That clearly tells you are going to wait till the out come of it and you will file law-suit....
Weird........Weird...Weird
If the class is certified, we may want to join that class rather than have separate lawsuits.
Weird........Weird...Weird
If the class is certified, we may want to join that class rather than have separate lawsuits.
more...
makeup sassy quotes about haters
jcmenon
07-24 02:49 PM
jc menon...have u ever taken a law class? - No
do u have a jd? - No
why are u then so adamant on thinking u "found" the loophole? - I am not saying I found a loophole
we are not stupid morons over here. - You guies are intelligent and more proactive and more intelligent than us, that is why we are trying to find out some solution out here.
Neither is the AILA/millions of lawyers that are associated with immigration law. - Attorneys are here for a purpose, it is their living their bread and butter, they are of no one, If you spend money they can fight loosing battle for ages.
Please for heaven sake dont start now about some conspiracy theory about immigration lawyers having a preference for backlog. - I am not a conspiracy theorist, but you seem to be loosing your cool.
there is no loophole, there is no precedent and by emailing the director with a moronic question will only show that probably that we have morons stuck in retrogression and probably we deserve to be stuck.
No question is moronic, at least we get a reply for a question, if IV do not want to pursue this, that is another story.
do u have a jd? - No
why are u then so adamant on thinking u "found" the loophole? - I am not saying I found a loophole
we are not stupid morons over here. - You guies are intelligent and more proactive and more intelligent than us, that is why we are trying to find out some solution out here.
Neither is the AILA/millions of lawyers that are associated with immigration law. - Attorneys are here for a purpose, it is their living their bread and butter, they are of no one, If you spend money they can fight loosing battle for ages.
Please for heaven sake dont start now about some conspiracy theory about immigration lawyers having a preference for backlog. - I am not a conspiracy theorist, but you seem to be loosing your cool.
there is no loophole, there is no precedent and by emailing the director with a moronic question will only show that probably that we have morons stuck in retrogression and probably we deserve to be stuck.
No question is moronic, at least we get a reply for a question, if IV do not want to pursue this, that is another story.
girlfriend hairstyles sassy quotes about
.soulty
03-02 07:52 AM
nice link blue.. yep learning-maya is a great resource, make sure you also check out the partners on the right on that learning-maya link. ;)
hairstyles sassy quotes about haters.
alterego
07-15 11:03 AM
If your ex-employer already revoked I-140, how can he give employment verification letter now? He is saying that he is no-longer intend to employ you in the revokation , on the other hand he is giving offer letter now. It is contradictory; it will appear to CIS that you & your employer is doing fradulant practice. If the I-140 was already revoked, then there is no use from it, unless if it is revoked after 180 days of your 485 pending. If it is revoked after 180 days, you can use your new employment to port the job based on AC21 to keep the 485 valid. Otherwise forget it.
Speak with a lawyer. Your lawyer may be able to file a response, stating that the job offer stands and that the petition was withdrawn in error. Ac21 does not protect you, so I do not see any other options here. However, as tricky as this situation is, you should not take the advise of any of the posters here. Use these responses only to have an intelligent discussion with a good immigration attorney. The worst outcome of all for you would be a rejection for fraud or willful misrepresentation, in which case your future petitions would be in jeopardy and you would be unable to retain your PD also.
Speak with a lawyer. Your lawyer may be able to file a response, stating that the job offer stands and that the petition was withdrawn in error. Ac21 does not protect you, so I do not see any other options here. However, as tricky as this situation is, you should not take the advise of any of the posters here. Use these responses only to have an intelligent discussion with a good immigration attorney. The worst outcome of all for you would be a rejection for fraud or willful misrepresentation, in which case your future petitions would be in jeopardy and you would be unable to retain your PD also.
rajuseattle
07-14 07:48 PM
One more thing AC-21 is not a formal USCIS form which one can fill in and send it over to USCIS, its just a letter wherein you or your legal representative informs USCIS about the change in employment, be it a job promotion with same employer or u switching the Job using the AC-21 provisions.
As explained earlier in this forum, 180 day rule interpretation is solely USCIS's descretion, if USCIS adjudicator who is working on your case accepts your new EVL and approves your case you are good to go, but for some reason the adjudicator keeps sending more RFE then you will need someone who can answer them in a legal language and thats where attorney services comes in handy.
I am hoping for the best for you that once they see your new EVL, they are satisfied and sends you GC.
As explained earlier in this forum, 180 day rule interpretation is solely USCIS's descretion, if USCIS adjudicator who is working on your case accepts your new EVL and approves your case you are good to go, but for some reason the adjudicator keeps sending more RFE then you will need someone who can answer them in a legal language and thats where attorney services comes in handy.
I am hoping for the best for you that once they see your new EVL, they are satisfied and sends you GC.
shreekarthik
08-02 02:01 PM
you have already filed ur I485 right ? so what do u mean "y am i still waiting ?"
No comments:
Post a Comment