texcan
08-25 01:49 PM
PD Aug 2004, EB-2 India
I-140/I-485 applied - August 2007 at TSC (non-concurrent)
I-140 approval - March 2008
Spouse 485/AP/EAD applied - August 2008 (received receipt notices)
Self EAD applied - August 2008 (received receipt notices)
Till date I have not received my FP notice. I applied for my EAD (even though I am not planning on using it) hoping to jump start my pending 485 and get the things rolling for FP and processing of 485. Surprisingly, I got my EAD approval email on Aug 17th and I received my EAD card in the mail yesterday. It is valid for 2 years. It says finger prints not available. No change in the pending 485 status.
I am totally perplexed about receiving the EAD without FP and so is my attorney. Can someone give me an idea of what is going on? Any input is appreciated! Thanks much!
Congrats on EAD renewal. Enjoy and relax; please donot get in habbit of worry for anything and everything.
Anyways, paper based ead renewal donot require finger prints. Search the forum, this has been stated many time.
chill
I-140/I-485 applied - August 2007 at TSC (non-concurrent)
I-140 approval - March 2008
Spouse 485/AP/EAD applied - August 2008 (received receipt notices)
Self EAD applied - August 2008 (received receipt notices)
Till date I have not received my FP notice. I applied for my EAD (even though I am not planning on using it) hoping to jump start my pending 485 and get the things rolling for FP and processing of 485. Surprisingly, I got my EAD approval email on Aug 17th and I received my EAD card in the mail yesterday. It is valid for 2 years. It says finger prints not available. No change in the pending 485 status.
I am totally perplexed about receiving the EAD without FP and so is my attorney. Can someone give me an idea of what is going on? Any input is appreciated! Thanks much!
Congrats on EAD renewal. Enjoy and relax; please donot get in habbit of worry for anything and everything.
Anyways, paper based ead renewal donot require finger prints. Search the forum, this has been stated many time.
chill
wallpaper love quotes sad. sad love
pitha
07-08 11:08 AM
no it will not be voilation of the law at all. consider this scenario thats been going on for the last 30+ years. For example July 2006 visa bulletin for EB2 india was jan 2003 and the August 2006 visa bulletin for EB2 india was unavailable. EB2 india visa numbers might have already been used up when the August 2006 visa bulletin was released but they still accepted the AOS petitions filed until the end of July 2006, they did not issue an updated visa bulletin or a revised visa bulletin saying eb2 india numbers are used up and they will not accept eb2 india aos applications, they continued accpeting AOS applications until the end of july 2006.
If you have the patience you can go through the visa bulletin archieves and find many such examples. The point is for the last 30+ years USCIS\DOS accepted applications according to the visa bulletin even when visa numbers were used up, they could have just followed the same precedent that they themselves set for the last 30+ years and accepted the applications this time as well without issuing a revised visa bulletin. I am no legal expert but that is how i see it.
It gets interesting. Doesn't it? Even if the court agrees that this is a fiasco and would like to compensate the beneficiaries by allowing us to file for 485, it would be in direct violation of the law that " there must be a number available on the day of filing ".We don't have any numbers. Do we? My point is, will a judicial system go out of the box and allow us to file when there are no visa numbers available? The only way is get numbers and make every one file and the only way for that is to undo what the USCIS has done in the last 2 weeks of June. Just my thoughts. I am ready to take anything positive out of this because I have least hopes pegged on the law suit.
If you have the patience you can go through the visa bulletin archieves and find many such examples. The point is for the last 30+ years USCIS\DOS accepted applications according to the visa bulletin even when visa numbers were used up, they could have just followed the same precedent that they themselves set for the last 30+ years and accepted the applications this time as well without issuing a revised visa bulletin. I am no legal expert but that is how i see it.
It gets interesting. Doesn't it? Even if the court agrees that this is a fiasco and would like to compensate the beneficiaries by allowing us to file for 485, it would be in direct violation of the law that " there must be a number available on the day of filing ".We don't have any numbers. Do we? My point is, will a judicial system go out of the box and allow us to file when there are no visa numbers available? The only way is get numbers and make every one file and the only way for that is to undo what the USCIS has done in the last 2 weeks of June. Just my thoughts. I am ready to take anything positive out of this because I have least hopes pegged on the law suit.
Rohan99
10-10 09:33 PM
I got some good news. I called uscis just now and got two receipt numbers, one for 485 and one for EAD. Checks not cashed yet. I don't have the receipt number for AP yet. So it seems that our box is not lost and they're processing them, though so slowly. My application arrived on 7/3 at NSC, received by R. William at 9:03am.
Hope every one of us will receive our receipts, EAD and AP asap.
Congrats bluesky1!!!
Can you tell us more about your application like RN on receipt? TSC or NSC?
Hope every one of us will receive our receipts, EAD and AP asap.
Congrats bluesky1!!!
Can you tell us more about your application like RN on receipt? TSC or NSC?
2011 sad love quotes wallpapers.
dicarol18
08-13 03:06 PM
Did you file I-140/I-485 concurrently. Where is employer's office location? and your residency?
I have filed I-140/I-485 concurrently on July 25th at Nebraska, my employer and my residence come under Texas Service centre according to new direct filing instructions.
I am in NJ and my employer too, and yes 140-485-765 concurrently..and I just checked the 140 file and it was updated 8-12-07...Do you guys think this is related to notices of action??? :confused:
I have filed I-140/I-485 concurrently on July 25th at Nebraska, my employer and my residence come under Texas Service centre according to new direct filing instructions.
I am in NJ and my employer too, and yes 140-485-765 concurrently..and I just checked the 140 file and it was updated 8-12-07...Do you guys think this is related to notices of action??? :confused:
more...
mhtanim
04-29 01:35 AM
No. Tried to call NSC a few times and got diffferent stories on why my fp notice is being dealyed. I gave up trying after my last call 2 weeks ago wherein an IO told me to wait until middle of May.
Mine is like your's - NSC - CSC - NSC. My I-485 receipt number starts with WAC. No FP notice yet. Who knows what they are doing.
Mine is like your's - NSC - CSC - NSC. My I-485 receipt number starts with WAC. No FP notice yet. Who knows what they are doing.
USofA
09-01 03:10 PM
Two SLUDs on just primary applicant 485...Gurus can guess what can be expected?
8/10 - Opened SR and no response to that yet
8/31 - This morning (9/1) saw a SLUD dated 8/31 which wasn't there until 10EST yesterday.
9/1 - Again another SLUD dated 9/1 this afternoon.
8/10 - Opened SR and no response to that yet
8/31 - This morning (9/1) saw a SLUD dated 8/31 which wasn't there until 10EST yesterday.
9/1 - Again another SLUD dated 9/1 this afternoon.
more...
iptel
05-24 07:22 PM
Immigration Voice strongly opposes the bill S 1348 in its current form and requests congress to amend this bill and treat the legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants, future guest-workers and pending family-based applicants.
Are we sure that we are refering to right bill S 1348 by Harry Reid seems to be pro-High skilled immigrant
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s.01348:
The text of part of legistlation is as follows
(b) Employment-Based Immigrants- Section 201(d) (8 U.S.C. 1151(d)) is amended to read as follows:
`(d) Worldwide Level of Employment-Based Immigrants-
`(1) IN GENERAL- Subject to paragraph (2), the worldwide level of employment-based immigrants under this subsection for a fiscal year is equal to the sum of--
`(A)(i) 450,000, for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2017; or
`(ii) 290,000, for fiscal year 2018 and each subsequent fiscal year;
`(B) the difference between the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during the previous fiscal year and the number of visas issued during the previous fiscal year; and
`(C) the difference between--
`(i) the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during fiscal years 2001 through 2005 and the number of visa numbers issued under this subsection during those fiscal years; and
`(ii) the number of visas calculated under clause (i) that were issued after fiscal year 2005
Are we sure that we are refering to right bill S 1348 by Harry Reid seems to be pro-High skilled immigrant
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s.01348:
The text of part of legistlation is as follows
(b) Employment-Based Immigrants- Section 201(d) (8 U.S.C. 1151(d)) is amended to read as follows:
`(d) Worldwide Level of Employment-Based Immigrants-
`(1) IN GENERAL- Subject to paragraph (2), the worldwide level of employment-based immigrants under this subsection for a fiscal year is equal to the sum of--
`(A)(i) 450,000, for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2017; or
`(ii) 290,000, for fiscal year 2018 and each subsequent fiscal year;
`(B) the difference between the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during the previous fiscal year and the number of visas issued during the previous fiscal year; and
`(C) the difference between--
`(i) the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during fiscal years 2001 through 2005 and the number of visa numbers issued under this subsection during those fiscal years; and
`(ii) the number of visas calculated under clause (i) that were issued after fiscal year 2005
2010 sad love quotes with images.
rayoflight
05-19 04:30 PM
Called 3/14 the first time and was told that FP would be scheduled. Never heard so called again on 5/9 and this time was told to callback after 60 days from the initial call.
I spoke with one rep who said that they are processing "June 29th" applications so you have to wait for your "Biometrics Appointment". I am kinda lost on this one.
What is the best number to reach the right Customer Service department alongwith the options to reach a live person to speak with who can actually schedule the Biometrics Appointment.
Am a July 2nd Filer - Actual Application filed on Sep 10th.
Cheers,
I spoke with one rep who said that they are processing "June 29th" applications so you have to wait for your "Biometrics Appointment". I am kinda lost on this one.
What is the best number to reach the right Customer Service department alongwith the options to reach a live person to speak with who can actually schedule the Biometrics Appointment.
Am a July 2nd Filer - Actual Application filed on Sep 10th.
Cheers,
more...
KiranKashi
11-18 10:54 AM
Done.
Please contact members of congress by clicking on the action alert below.
It will only take less than a minute for you. We are requesting adding amendments in the DREAM Act coming up. This campaign will help the DC advocacy work we are doing on this bill.
ImmigrationVoice.org - Advocacy -- DREAM Act: Help the Legal Immigrants (http://immigrationvoice.capwiz.com/immigrationvoice/issues/alert/?alertid=19787501)
Please spread the word everywhere for more participation
Please post on this thread once you have sent the email. Keep this thread up for the next few days.
Please contact members of congress by clicking on the action alert below.
It will only take less than a minute for you. We are requesting adding amendments in the DREAM Act coming up. This campaign will help the DC advocacy work we are doing on this bill.
ImmigrationVoice.org - Advocacy -- DREAM Act: Help the Legal Immigrants (http://immigrationvoice.capwiz.com/immigrationvoice/issues/alert/?alertid=19787501)
Please spread the word everywhere for more participation
Please post on this thread once you have sent the email. Keep this thread up for the next few days.
hair Love Quotes #15
saileshdude
09-24 12:11 PM
Surabhi,
Actually that is the more reasonable thing to do but USCIS has again disconnected these two things and left a loophole which makes it eligible to port an earlier priority date irrespective of whether it is EB2 or EB3. That is a flaw in the system in the same way it was in labor substitution. I don't mind people porting to Eb2 as long as they go back in the queue where they were really qualified to be in EB2. Say if you had experience BS+5 before filing in EB3 and for some reason because of employer or attorney you filed in EB3 but now want to go back to earlier date that is fair enough. What is not fair is someone who filed in EB3 because they were in BS+2 in say 2003, become eligible for Eb2 in 2006 but now decide to port in 2010 and are given the priority date of 2003. The fair thing would be to give the PD to that person of 2006 and not 2003 just because they have an approved I-140 of EB-3 from 2003.
That being said, I also believe that the spillover be distributed properly and not just given to EB2. That is also unfair. These are some loopholes that are left when these laws are made. Some category get benefited and some are left out. So if EB3 people start porting we should not be complaining because they have also suffered because of inappropriate spillover rules and is justified if they want to take advantage of this loophole.
I have no problem with porting, but the priority date should be starting from when they acquired required qualifications for the job.
Example, if someone with B.S and 2 years experience had applied in EB3 in 2005 and tries to port now I think it is fair to have the ported PD not in 2005, but 2008 when the person acquired B.S + 5 years experience.
This would automatically address all those folks who deserved to be in EB2 but couldnt either becuase lawyer screwed up or issues with sponsoring company.
Actually that is the more reasonable thing to do but USCIS has again disconnected these two things and left a loophole which makes it eligible to port an earlier priority date irrespective of whether it is EB2 or EB3. That is a flaw in the system in the same way it was in labor substitution. I don't mind people porting to Eb2 as long as they go back in the queue where they were really qualified to be in EB2. Say if you had experience BS+5 before filing in EB3 and for some reason because of employer or attorney you filed in EB3 but now want to go back to earlier date that is fair enough. What is not fair is someone who filed in EB3 because they were in BS+2 in say 2003, become eligible for Eb2 in 2006 but now decide to port in 2010 and are given the priority date of 2003. The fair thing would be to give the PD to that person of 2006 and not 2003 just because they have an approved I-140 of EB-3 from 2003.
That being said, I also believe that the spillover be distributed properly and not just given to EB2. That is also unfair. These are some loopholes that are left when these laws are made. Some category get benefited and some are left out. So if EB3 people start porting we should not be complaining because they have also suffered because of inappropriate spillover rules and is justified if they want to take advantage of this loophole.
I have no problem with porting, but the priority date should be starting from when they acquired required qualifications for the job.
Example, if someone with B.S and 2 years experience had applied in EB3 in 2005 and tries to port now I think it is fair to have the ported PD not in 2005, but 2008 when the person acquired B.S + 5 years experience.
This would automatically address all those folks who deserved to be in EB2 but couldnt either becuase lawyer screwed up or issues with sponsoring company.
more...
surabhi
04-23 05:18 PM
There is moral obligation too. Whenever you hire H-1s make sure most of them have dreams to get GC and settle down. Dont take risks in such a ways their dreams get shattered because of poor business practices. just to hire people dont run in your businesses on losses and in turn force yourself to shut down the business.
I think there is difference of opinion here. Since there is chance here that the thread is frequented by current and would-be employers I will try to articulate once again.
1. H1B is a legitimate business expense. It should be factored in as such by the employers.
2. Same is case with GC. But given the fact tht after I-140 it becomes portable, it is perfectly ethical in my opinon to ask employee to put up the expense.
3. H1B or not, employment is at will in US. USICS granting 3 year H1B does not imply employee is bound for 3 years either in letter or spirit of law.
4. Unless the business produces IPR or the employee is in position to lure away exisitng clientele, non-compete doesnt hold water. Employers should refrain from using non-compete as scare tactic.
5. As a corollary to point #3, having term around employment in lieu of h1b processing is illegal. The point of lost business because of employee left doesnt hold good. Employers can only claim non-compete or non-solicitation if the case is geniune. Lost business because employee left will never be upheld.
6. Unless doing revenue sharing (80-20 etc), it is illegal to withold , not pay wages.
7. If employee requests running payroll while not on project in revenue sharing mode ( see #6 above) it should be on cost to employee including employer contribution of taxes. this is indeed a favor to employee.
8. If business needs to let go an employee and employee wants to continue for immigration reasons, it should be on cost to employee including employer contribution of taxes. this is indeed a favor to employee.
I think there is difference of opinion here. Since there is chance here that the thread is frequented by current and would-be employers I will try to articulate once again.
1. H1B is a legitimate business expense. It should be factored in as such by the employers.
2. Same is case with GC. But given the fact tht after I-140 it becomes portable, it is perfectly ethical in my opinon to ask employee to put up the expense.
3. H1B or not, employment is at will in US. USICS granting 3 year H1B does not imply employee is bound for 3 years either in letter or spirit of law.
4. Unless the business produces IPR or the employee is in position to lure away exisitng clientele, non-compete doesnt hold water. Employers should refrain from using non-compete as scare tactic.
5. As a corollary to point #3, having term around employment in lieu of h1b processing is illegal. The point of lost business because of employee left doesnt hold good. Employers can only claim non-compete or non-solicitation if the case is geniune. Lost business because employee left will never be upheld.
6. Unless doing revenue sharing (80-20 etc), it is illegal to withold , not pay wages.
7. If employee requests running payroll while not on project in revenue sharing mode ( see #6 above) it should be on cost to employee including employer contribution of taxes. this is indeed a favor to employee.
8. If business needs to let go an employee and employee wants to continue for immigration reasons, it should be on cost to employee including employer contribution of taxes. this is indeed a favor to employee.
hot quotes. sad love quotes
prashanthg
09-17 02:01 PM
Folks
Friends - I have self respect and i wasn't born chanting Green Card. I AM going to face them, confront them, demand them to provide justice, if not I want them to REFUND every penny i have paid so far. If this "I AM" becomes "WE", half the battle won. TOGETHER WE STAND, VICTORY/JUSTICE FOR ALL. If you are still hesitant, you made a bad choice of choosing option 2. Please go back to option 1.
ITS ABOUT TIME.
As an employee, Except for the 485 filing, you are not supposed to pay for anything for the GC. The company that sponsers you pays for all that.
It is illigal for an employee to pay for the GC process.
I am not sure what you are trying to get. Are you going to write a letter to USCIS that you commited an illigal act? And you want to involve bunch of people along with you?
I am utterly confused here.
Friends - I have self respect and i wasn't born chanting Green Card. I AM going to face them, confront them, demand them to provide justice, if not I want them to REFUND every penny i have paid so far. If this "I AM" becomes "WE", half the battle won. TOGETHER WE STAND, VICTORY/JUSTICE FOR ALL. If you are still hesitant, you made a bad choice of choosing option 2. Please go back to option 1.
ITS ABOUT TIME.
As an employee, Except for the 485 filing, you are not supposed to pay for anything for the GC. The company that sponsers you pays for all that.
It is illigal for an employee to pay for the GC process.
I am not sure what you are trying to get. Are you going to write a letter to USCIS that you commited an illigal act? And you want to involve bunch of people along with you?
I am utterly confused here.
more...
house quotes about love tagalog sad
obviously
03-08 08:53 AM
and reduce your depression!
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...?t=3361&page=2
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...?t=3361&page=2
tattoo Short Sad Love Quotes For Her.
sanjaymk
07-20 10:18 AM
please count me in for $50 for this and another $50 for the core. Let me know the address for the aman kapoor reimbursement fund.
Sanjay.
Sanjay.
more...
pictures sad love quotes in punjabi.
franklin
07-10 06:16 PM
I am in the bay area and can help organize this. I have sent an request to add myself on the yahoo group.
PM me, I can send you conference call details
PM me, I can send you conference call details
dresses sad love quotes wallpapers.
sabbygirl99
03-28 02:38 PM
I have mulled over different options in my head for a long time. Here are some things I came up with:
- switch to a part time H1 (and do something else in your free time that you might find a little more fulfilling, i.e enrolling in PT grad program, starting a business (which you CAN do on an H1!!!), travel!!). I know there is the money factor but most of us are IT people and hopefully taking a cut will be worth the improved life.
- begin your Canadian PR process. This takes a lot less time and honestly, I think Canadians are more cultured anyway. Leave these people to their Paris and Nicoles :)
OK - I guess I didn;t come up with as many options as I had thought.... :)
- switch to a part time H1 (and do something else in your free time that you might find a little more fulfilling, i.e enrolling in PT grad program, starting a business (which you CAN do on an H1!!!), travel!!). I know there is the money factor but most of us are IT people and hopefully taking a cut will be worth the improved life.
- begin your Canadian PR process. This takes a lot less time and honestly, I think Canadians are more cultured anyway. Leave these people to their Paris and Nicoles :)
OK - I guess I didn;t come up with as many options as I had thought.... :)
more...
makeup breaking up sad love quotes
psk79
09-05 08:49 AM
Hey GUYS!! My checks got cashed today!!! All six of them!!! Don't have the receipts but got the SRCs from the back of the checks. Mine is NSC delivered Jul2, 1025AM J BARREETT..Finally very happy to get tehse. I hope everyone will ge tthem very soon...Thanks.
:) My Checks got cashed today, I can see SRC receipt number on the back. More details in my signature.
:) My Checks got cashed today, I can see SRC receipt number on the back. More details in my signature.
girlfriend sad quotes about love and
miapplicant
10-01 03:56 PM
WAC means CSC?? We applied on July 23rd at NSC and no news yet:(
hairstyles love quotes sad. sad quotes on
EB3_SEP04
08-15 11:55 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
Raghav, congrats and thanks for the update.
Is July 08, 2008 also the Notice Date on your receipt notice? I'm wondering if generally there is one more LUD after the notice date and before the approval, when they pull the file off the shelf and start working on the case.
for me no LUD after notice date.
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
Raghav, congrats and thanks for the update.
Is July 08, 2008 also the Notice Date on your receipt notice? I'm wondering if generally there is one more LUD after the notice date and before the approval, when they pull the file off the shelf and start working on the case.
for me no LUD after notice date.
H1B-GC
07-24 09:10 AM
Paper filed on June 19, 2008 (Renewal)
Service center: TSC
Approved : July 18th '08
Card Received : July 23rd
2 year EAD Approved :)
Start date :Sept 2008 - Sep 2010
Service center: TSC
Approved : July 18th '08
Card Received : July 23rd
2 year EAD Approved :)
Start date :Sept 2008 - Sep 2010
NKR
04-25 11:16 AM
the point here is not how long its gonna take. Its sure that they r gonna work if not immediately may be in 3-4 months. and once they see all the proofs(i do have proofs) whole company will be audited rock bottom, all the gc filing will be verified and single loophole is just enough to cause irriparable damage to the company. not only the reputation but i heard they will have a high penalty of 100's of thousands dollars. I have contacted one of the top lawfirms.for the matter of $4000 if the company chooses to do it, its their foolishness. also if they genuinely wanted to enforce non compete they wouldn't have used it as a threat agiainst payments they owe me.
Its not that I haven't made any efforts to reconcile with my ex-employer. I have tried and still trying to get them to have a civil conversation and settle this. But the more I try, i beleive, they r thinking the more scared i am and are being arrogant by not replying to any of my emails or phone calls. My reconciling efforts are giving them wrong hints i beleive. I am definetly stressed about this,thats true, but i am not scared because of all the info i gathered, I know even they do file a suit, I will be on the winning side. though i have option to go directly to DOL or USCIS and can show all the proofs i have regarding the deductions they have made, i haven't made till today just because of the kind of relationship we had earlier and also concerned about other h1bs who r with the company right now. I dont want their GC's to be in jeopardy. but if employer doesn't make the effort from his side, and pulls the thread till it breaks, i can't help it.
.
Dude, I do not know who has given you red dot, you certainly deserve more green dots. I too think the same, if the company had to sue you for violating non-compete, they could have done it anytime, why are they threatening you when you ask for your salary. Either they do not have a non-compete agreement that they say you have signed (since you are not sure about it) or the non-compete has become invalid over a period of time or it does not hold water.
Its not that I haven't made any efforts to reconcile with my ex-employer. I have tried and still trying to get them to have a civil conversation and settle this. But the more I try, i beleive, they r thinking the more scared i am and are being arrogant by not replying to any of my emails or phone calls. My reconciling efforts are giving them wrong hints i beleive. I am definetly stressed about this,thats true, but i am not scared because of all the info i gathered, I know even they do file a suit, I will be on the winning side. though i have option to go directly to DOL or USCIS and can show all the proofs i have regarding the deductions they have made, i haven't made till today just because of the kind of relationship we had earlier and also concerned about other h1bs who r with the company right now. I dont want their GC's to be in jeopardy. but if employer doesn't make the effort from his side, and pulls the thread till it breaks, i can't help it.
.
Dude, I do not know who has given you red dot, you certainly deserve more green dots. I too think the same, if the company had to sue you for violating non-compete, they could have done it anytime, why are they threatening you when you ask for your salary. Either they do not have a non-compete agreement that they say you have signed (since you are not sure about it) or the non-compete has become invalid over a period of time or it does not hold water.
No comments:
Post a Comment