ajaykk
08-26 10:38 PM
No, we have not tried calling yet. Both are on H1, so just have EAD for just peace of mind. Do let us know what you hear from the customer service.
Thanks,
Sina
Even my spouse got card production ordered email. Good Luck to you.
Thanks,
Sina
Even my spouse got card production ordered email. Good Luck to you.
wallpaper Adam Lambert Is a Munster
desi3933
06-26 04:02 PM
" Why don't you sign unless it say until and after 1 year approval. You can leave employment after 6 months of filing I-485 and see what happens at that time, you have nothing to loose " - DSJ
I dont have a problem signing 1 yr agreement because my 140 will take at least another 8 months ( Feb 08) and by the time next years budget opens up for good new Jobs its already Mar 08.
But my concern is if my employer wants me to hang on with them till 485 is approved and then 1 more year
I meant "whole sentence from the employment agreement". All depends on the wordings. If your agreement is linked to I-485 approval date then there is a way out. Every contract must have well defined terms. Since date for I-485 approval is not known, such contracts are difficult to stand in court of law. However, if it says "the employee must work for 2 years or 6-months after I-485 approval date (whichever is earlier) otherwise he/she will pay all GC related expenses" then the contract is more likely to be enforceable.
All depends on the wordings of the contract.
Please consult a good lawyer BEFORE signing any contract.
Not a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Green Card holder since May 2002
desi3933 at gmail.com
I dont have a problem signing 1 yr agreement because my 140 will take at least another 8 months ( Feb 08) and by the time next years budget opens up for good new Jobs its already Mar 08.
But my concern is if my employer wants me to hang on with them till 485 is approved and then 1 more year
I meant "whole sentence from the employment agreement". All depends on the wordings. If your agreement is linked to I-485 approval date then there is a way out. Every contract must have well defined terms. Since date for I-485 approval is not known, such contracts are difficult to stand in court of law. However, if it says "the employee must work for 2 years or 6-months after I-485 approval date (whichever is earlier) otherwise he/she will pay all GC related expenses" then the contract is more likely to be enforceable.
All depends on the wordings of the contract.
Please consult a good lawyer BEFORE signing any contract.
Not a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Green Card holder since May 2002
desi3933 at gmail.com
sparklinks
09-03 11:31 AM
My EAD renewal is pending as well - RD 6/18 - present EAD expiring on 9/25. I requested expediting processing on 8/13 and received a letter yesterday saying they are reviewing my request and will have a decision in 60 days : :rolleyes:
We CANNOT do any thing, when I called USCIS, IO said they can't do either.. wait for 60 days. BS
We CANNOT do any thing, when I called USCIS, IO said they can't do either.. wait for 60 days. BS
2011 Adam Lambert Returns to
snathan
02-17 11:10 AM
I dont see people coming forward untill they see something serious. Like a rally or something.
more...
.jpg "Adam Lambert, singer and")
vij
06-15 07:49 PM
This is what i have been asking since last week.
My attorney told me that apart from employer i would also get a receipt notiece. I want someone to confirm this.
My petition was sent on June 4th and i haven't received anything yet
Is this true?
My attorney told me that apart from employer i would also get a receipt notiece. I want someone to confirm this.
My petition was sent on June 4th and i haven't received anything yet
Is this true?
tikka
05-23 11:52 AM
Thank you, finished emails.
Starting to fax now.
Guys,
E-mails are good, but if you can fax them too:
Fax numbers to key senators in DC offices:
Clinton: 202-228-2082
Schumer: 202-228-3027
Lott: 202-224-2262
Reid: 202-224-7327
Cornyn: 202-228-2856
Hagel: 202-224-5213
Martinez: 202-228-5171
McConnell: 202-224-2499
Kennedy: 202-224-2417
Starting to fax now.
Guys,
E-mails are good, but if you can fax them too:
Fax numbers to key senators in DC offices:
Clinton: 202-228-2082
Schumer: 202-228-3027
Lott: 202-224-2262
Reid: 202-224-7327
Cornyn: 202-228-2856
Hagel: 202-224-5213
Martinez: 202-228-5171
McConnell: 202-224-2499
Kennedy: 202-224-2417
more...
gcformeornot
03-27 07:25 AM
service rep. I tried calling could not find a way to talk to somebody to create SR. Can anybody help? What are sequence of numbers after calling 800 number...
Thanks.
Thanks.
2010 of albums. Adam Lambert
sss9i
08-27 09:04 PM
Bump up
more...
saudoso
12-17 11:17 PM
I've started half fantasizing, half planning a better life outside the states. I think of everything in my life that could change for the better: more vacation, more travel, less of the neurotic american fear based mentality, more sun and summer, more time closer to my home country and relatives.
I plan to stay here for the long haul, since I've been with my american life partner for 8 years (no GC for gay couples, though!), own property here, etc. But it helps with alleviating feelings of depression to remind myself that I actually do have options in life, and that I am not just a victim of an unfair immigration system.
I plan to stay here for the long haul, since I've been with my american life partner for 8 years (no GC for gay couples, though!), own property here, etc. But it helps with alleviating feelings of depression to remind myself that I actually do have options in life, and that I am not just a victim of an unfair immigration system.
hair Adam Lambert Drawing - Jenn
reddymjm
06-13 07:03 PM
Atlast all my checks are cashed today. I am able to get my case number from the checks. Even though INS received my application on June 6th, in my 485 it says that they have received my application only on June 11th. Wonder why?
They fwded the bundle to texax your receipts start with SRC not LIN.
They fwded the bundle to texax your receipts start with SRC not LIN.
more...
atlfp
05-05 11:35 AM
Wonder if you happened to mention the time line question? One section in the "Guest Worker" chapter says it can not be implemented 90s before the study, would that only cover the "Guest Worker" section or the whole bill? The house will try their best to push an enforcement first approach, if they gain more on that, then we might end up with a bill passed but never take effect. That would be the worst situation.
Today I spoke to a Representative who deals with immigration issue at Sen Mike Dewine's (R-OH) office. I spoke to him for 15 minutes to understand what he and his senator think about this CIR.
Here is he and his senator feels about this bill. It is difficult for him to say that when CIR bill will be introduced in senate floor . It depend on Majority and Minority leaders to decide. Majority leader told to the media that he will introduce before the end of the may, he is mostly consistent, but there are several bills where he has committed a timeline and till today it is not on the floor.
However he told that once CIR pass, legal immigration is already taken care of, but if it does not passes there are bills like SKIL which will be put before the floor. But CIR has to fail or pass before you see this SKILL bill on the floor.
Today I spoke to a Representative who deals with immigration issue at Sen Mike Dewine's (R-OH) office. I spoke to him for 15 minutes to understand what he and his senator think about this CIR.
Here is he and his senator feels about this bill. It is difficult for him to say that when CIR bill will be introduced in senate floor . It depend on Majority and Minority leaders to decide. Majority leader told to the media that he will introduce before the end of the may, he is mostly consistent, but there are several bills where he has committed a timeline and till today it is not on the floor.
However he told that once CIR pass, legal immigration is already taken care of, but if it does not passes there are bills like SKIL which will be put before the floor. But CIR has to fail or pass before you see this SKILL bill on the floor.
hot Adam Lambert, singer and
anzerraja
07-20 04:55 PM
Dear Members
For those of you joining us late, here is some info about this thread.
1. This is to do our least part to the core IV Team for their selfless sacrifice, for all of us getting the benefits of legal immigration. Note that , Aman Kapoor , the co-founder of IV has done his part by sacrificing $64,000/- from his own personal funds towards the administrative costs of IV. Yes you read it right , it is $64,000/- We come to know from his co-worker that he has sold his house towards running this show for us.
2. We have not yet figured out a way to reimburse these costs as IV does not yet have administrative costs part of the expenditure allocation, as we understand it. So instead of a wait and watch, we decided to go ahead with collecting the pledge from the members on the amount they are putting forth for reimbursing the amount. Once we come up with a strategy(members we look for your suggestions on how to get this done, please add your comments) we will instruct the members pledged to pay out.
So do not pay it directly to the IV core funds, yet.
Please help us spread the message about this thread in other threads by copy and pasting the following in other threads too.
There is a funding drive in this other thread towards reimbursing Aman and other core IV member's expenses towards the administrative costs of IV.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=10708
Could you please pledge an amount ?
Thanks
Anzer
For those of you joining us late, here is some info about this thread.
1. This is to do our least part to the core IV Team for their selfless sacrifice, for all of us getting the benefits of legal immigration. Note that , Aman Kapoor , the co-founder of IV has done his part by sacrificing $64,000/- from his own personal funds towards the administrative costs of IV. Yes you read it right , it is $64,000/- We come to know from his co-worker that he has sold his house towards running this show for us.
2. We have not yet figured out a way to reimburse these costs as IV does not yet have administrative costs part of the expenditure allocation, as we understand it. So instead of a wait and watch, we decided to go ahead with collecting the pledge from the members on the amount they are putting forth for reimbursing the amount. Once we come up with a strategy(members we look for your suggestions on how to get this done, please add your comments) we will instruct the members pledged to pay out.
So do not pay it directly to the IV core funds, yet.
Please help us spread the message about this thread in other threads by copy and pasting the following in other threads too.
There is a funding drive in this other thread towards reimbursing Aman and other core IV member's expenses towards the administrative costs of IV.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=10708
Could you please pledge an amount ?
Thanks
Anzer
more...
house Here#39;s a shot of Adam Lambert,
coolstonesa
06-22 04:29 PM
Here is the response from lawyer when I pointed him to the filing instructions on I-485 form:
"The statutory requirement for employment-based immigration is that an ongoing employer-employee relationship exist at the time the I-485 is filed,
and for a minimum 6 months thereafter. Any particular document used to verify this relationship is only valid for a relatively short period of time, before it becomes stale (i.e. 3-6 months).
At the time of filing your I-485 adjustment of status petition, we included pay stubs to verify the current employer-employee relationship.
If the I-485 is still in process greater than 8 or 9 months from today, Immigration Services is likely to request additional evidence of the employer-employee relationship, in the form of (1) the 2007 W-2 form,
(2) most recent six months of pay stubs, and also (3) a current job offer
letter.
I proceed with the understanding that it is likely that the I-485 petitions will still be pending 8 months from now, and that therefore it is also likely that USCIS will require additional pay stubs, etc. verifying the employer-employee relationship."
Generally speaking two recent pay stubs are sufficient to verify that you remain with the same employer. It is possible that if your petition is pending for more than 10 or 12 months, either a job offer letter or additional pay stubs will be requested.
"The statutory requirement for employment-based immigration is that an ongoing employer-employee relationship exist at the time the I-485 is filed,
and for a minimum 6 months thereafter. Any particular document used to verify this relationship is only valid for a relatively short period of time, before it becomes stale (i.e. 3-6 months).
At the time of filing your I-485 adjustment of status petition, we included pay stubs to verify the current employer-employee relationship.
If the I-485 is still in process greater than 8 or 9 months from today, Immigration Services is likely to request additional evidence of the employer-employee relationship, in the form of (1) the 2007 W-2 form,
(2) most recent six months of pay stubs, and also (3) a current job offer
letter.
I proceed with the understanding that it is likely that the I-485 petitions will still be pending 8 months from now, and that therefore it is also likely that USCIS will require additional pay stubs, etc. verifying the employer-employee relationship."
Generally speaking two recent pay stubs are sufficient to verify that you remain with the same employer. It is possible that if your petition is pending for more than 10 or 12 months, either a job offer letter or additional pay stubs will be requested.
tattoo Of Lambert#39;s personal
trueguy
05-02 01:10 PM
It sounds like IV should assign PD to people who join and accordingly allow them to comment.......just like USCIS allot GC based on PD.....:)
Why not if 'Who did not even know about IV till Apr 2007 are CONTRIBUTING here'.
Do u think admins should ban people from expressing views if joined after a certain cutoff date???
Why not if 'Who did not even know about IV till Apr 2007 are CONTRIBUTING here'.
Do u think admins should ban people from expressing views if joined after a certain cutoff date???
more...
pictures 1 of 21. See All Adam Lambert
jfredr
08-13 01:56 PM
Mine also reached there at the same time through fedex and brok woltstead signed for it.chacks not cashed yet.waiting for recipts eagerly.let me know who signed for you and when you receive your receipts.best of luck
Signed by R.MICKELS at 9:01 on 2nd JuLY no luck yet
Signed by R.MICKELS at 9:01 on 2nd JuLY no luck yet
dresses Adam Lambert is — oooh!
mk26
11-17 04:20 PM
Sent the email (Florida)
more...
makeup Adam Lambert,
Munna Bhai
07-08 02:25 PM
Found this from Chinese website:
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/Immigration/22918275.html
This small group did wonderful job, convey my thanks. This should be a morale booster for everyone of us.
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/Immigration/22918275.html
This small group did wonderful job, convey my thanks. This should be a morale booster for everyone of us.
girlfriend 1 of 12. Lyricsbird, Adam
desi3933
07-10 07:49 AM
Please post URL of this and others. Thanks!
Sec. 245.1 Eligibility
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb694c827d9948014308614d0f546 dca
Sec. 245.2 Application
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=b6eb96a99e4c335717a65793ed573 a56
Sec. 245.1 Eligibility
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb694c827d9948014308614d0f546 dca
Sec. 245.2 Application
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=b6eb96a99e4c335717a65793ed573 a56
hairstyles The Adam Lambert image is a
Quadrucle
11-17 03:23 PM
Done.
Roger Binny
05-09 07:45 PM
On what basis the law suite will be ? i guess they we are not entitled to get GC's, its a privilege but not a right, i agree this whole GC crap is costing our families in all forms, but still, the idea of law suit doesn't have merit.
Anything to do with EB immigration i mean even if administration is convinced to do some thing +ve, financial market and job market has to continue with +ve development atleast for few months, other wise there will be heck of outcry by the natives.
Mean while, best thing is some one coming out with unused visa numbers math to claim them plus some convincing arguments about encouraging or supporting legal immigration, because all these EB immigrants here are paying taxes atleast half a decade to decade long and living legally as well helping america continue as a leader in technology.
Rally's raising mexican flags costed them a lot by getting plenty of -ve attention even from immigation moderates, than doing any favor. Going squarely against them by using their own law will give a powerful tool to simply crush us in a different way,whichever country we may live in, it is never a right idea.
Any big initiatives during the financial turmoil simply wont yeild any positive result, this may be just a common sense,as well it is also understandable that no sensible politician will be willing to help immigrants(foreigners),by poking their own people in wrong way when the unemployment is close to historic range.
Yes i'm living in this country for almost a decade and waiting in EB3 queue, this retrogession is nothing different than not getting GC when the dates were current, both are same, only difference is we wont hope when it is purely retrogressed, end result is same.
Sorry for my poor english.
Anything to do with EB immigration i mean even if administration is convinced to do some thing +ve, financial market and job market has to continue with +ve development atleast for few months, other wise there will be heck of outcry by the natives.
Mean while, best thing is some one coming out with unused visa numbers math to claim them plus some convincing arguments about encouraging or supporting legal immigration, because all these EB immigrants here are paying taxes atleast half a decade to decade long and living legally as well helping america continue as a leader in technology.
Rally's raising mexican flags costed them a lot by getting plenty of -ve attention even from immigation moderates, than doing any favor. Going squarely against them by using their own law will give a powerful tool to simply crush us in a different way,whichever country we may live in, it is never a right idea.
Any big initiatives during the financial turmoil simply wont yeild any positive result, this may be just a common sense,as well it is also understandable that no sensible politician will be willing to help immigrants(foreigners),by poking their own people in wrong way when the unemployment is close to historic range.
Yes i'm living in this country for almost a decade and waiting in EB3 queue, this retrogession is nothing different than not getting GC when the dates were current, both are same, only difference is we wont hope when it is purely retrogressed, end result is same.
Sorry for my poor english.
dpp
07-28 07:21 AM
Even if USCIS reverts the decision back to use Vertical spill overs, it won't change the EB3-I PD position a dime. As it didn't change with that way in the past. So, there is no use in asking USCIS to change it back to Vertical from Horizontal spill over.
As somebody mentioned earlier, they were all taken by EB3 other workers all these years, it is better to ask USCIS to give preference to EB3-I and EB3-C before giving it to EB3 Other works so that they can get better share to complement for the lost happened all these years. I can understand the EB3-I frustration. We need to analyze who got the major share all these years and ask USCIS to give them to others lost in retrogression (EB3-I, EB3-C, EB2-I, EB2-C).
Otherwise, only way to get a common ground is, recapture and dependent exception bills. We should all work for these two common bills.
It may not directly harm visa recapture or any other official IV campaigns - at least for now! But don't you think if EB3-I campaign to revert to the old way of handling the overflow succeeds at all their will be an immediate follow up, counter campaign to re-revert the decision by EB2s? I don't see an end to this fight and I don't see any winners in the long term.
Again, I'm not saying you shouldn't run your campaign. You have every right to do so. But please accept this for what it is. It will cause a split in IV members and that can not be avoided.
As somebody mentioned earlier, they were all taken by EB3 other workers all these years, it is better to ask USCIS to give preference to EB3-I and EB3-C before giving it to EB3 Other works so that they can get better share to complement for the lost happened all these years. I can understand the EB3-I frustration. We need to analyze who got the major share all these years and ask USCIS to give them to others lost in retrogression (EB3-I, EB3-C, EB2-I, EB2-C).
Otherwise, only way to get a common ground is, recapture and dependent exception bills. We should all work for these two common bills.
It may not directly harm visa recapture or any other official IV campaigns - at least for now! But don't you think if EB3-I campaign to revert to the old way of handling the overflow succeeds at all their will be an immediate follow up, counter campaign to re-revert the decision by EB2s? I don't see an end to this fight and I don't see any winners in the long term.
Again, I'm not saying you shouldn't run your campaign. You have every right to do so. But please accept this for what it is. It will cause a split in IV members and that can not be avoided.
No comments:
Post a Comment