Wallpapers De Modelos.
krishnam70
02-19 08:26 AM
1 - It will grant GC to people with > 5 years in US
2 - For EB skilled immigration for people with <5 years in US, it makes LC process more difficult.
Please add your views about this bill, how it might be improved and its chances of becoming a law.
P.S. I previously misread the text somewhere. This bill just eliminate H1B classification for fashion models.
There is already a thread open by DVB on this forum. Can you please check if there is a thread open already before you open a new one. Just a suggestion so the observations of the members are all consolidated in one thread rather than spread over.
cheers
kris
2 - For EB skilled immigration for people with <5 years in US, it makes LC process more difficult.
Please add your views about this bill, how it might be improved and its chances of becoming a law.
P.S. I previously misread the text somewhere. This bill just eliminate H1B classification for fashion models.
There is already a thread open by DVB on this forum. Can you please check if there is a thread open already before you open a new one. Just a suggestion so the observations of the members are all consolidated in one thread rather than spread over.
cheers
kris
wallpaper Wallpapers De Modelos.
wallpapers de modelos.
mrane1
03-15 06:30 PM
C'mon guys, what the hell have you been doing for so long?
I mean look at the archived Visa Bulletins, you observe the following:
1. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2003
2. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2004
3. EB2 was current for India till August 2005
4. After the retrogression in 2005, EB2 India moved up quickly through 2003-2004 to April 2004 by the beginning of 2007
5. Even after the summer 2007 fiasco (EB2 Current fro July, August 2007), the priority date for EB2 India moved to April 2004 and stayed there for 3 months
What more do you wish for?
I don't understand how there any can be anyone from 2004-2005 India still left in the EB2 category.
This is pathetic. What the hell have you been waiting for?
Dude, No one has been waiting on purpose! Do you even have a clue what was going on in 2002/03/04/05... Even though numbers were current the Labor process used to take 3-4 years! If your labor is not clear then having 485 current is not going to do much... The perm process was started in 2005!Just consider yourself lucky that atleast you have an organization like IV working for you and they was instrumental in gettin atleast EAD for you and your spouse!!
I mean look at the archived Visa Bulletins, you observe the following:
1. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2003
2. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2004
3. EB2 was current for India till August 2005
4. After the retrogression in 2005, EB2 India moved up quickly through 2003-2004 to April 2004 by the beginning of 2007
5. Even after the summer 2007 fiasco (EB2 Current fro July, August 2007), the priority date for EB2 India moved to April 2004 and stayed there for 3 months
What more do you wish for?
I don't understand how there any can be anyone from 2004-2005 India still left in the EB2 category.
This is pathetic. What the hell have you been waiting for?
Dude, No one has been waiting on purpose! Do you even have a clue what was going on in 2002/03/04/05... Even though numbers were current the Labor process used to take 3-4 years! If your labor is not clear then having 485 current is not going to do much... The perm process was started in 2005!Just consider yourself lucky that atleast you have an organization like IV working for you and they was instrumental in gettin atleast EAD for you and your spouse!!
BUSCO AGENCIA DE MODELOS -
godspeed
06-11 09:40 AM
and forwarded to 20 of my friends, will follow up with them to send the message
2011 wallpapers de modelos.
Fotos de agencias de modelos
sirinme
10-21 02:45 PM
I just sent mine.
- sirinme
- sirinme
more...
Curso de direção de modelos
SunnySurya
07-28 12:21 PM
No, you won't be banned from IV. You just will be banned from this country.
And by the way, the thing you were trying to do is not protected by "the first amendment"
So I cannot even speak on IV and even little I defended my religion, I will be banned from IV? Freedom Of Speech
And by the way, the thing you were trying to do is not protected by "the first amendment"
So I cannot even speak on IV and even little I defended my religion, I will be banned from IV? Freedom Of Speech
Fotos de Argência de modelos
pitha
06-12 07:53 AM
our chances of getting some relief are better if infact CIR dies. if cir dies there might be a chance for SKIL bill.Even if SKIL is not taken up no bill is better than this CIR authored by ron hira aka kennedy, durbin and kyl.
so what, what does CIR offers for us, legal immigrants who are already here, give me one instance where Bush addresses our issue
he does'nt even know we exist
CIR fooled us twice guys, letz getover with it and try to find another way to have our provisions,
we certainly don't need sweeping legislative chance to reduce retrogression
so what, what does CIR offers for us, legal immigrants who are already here, give me one instance where Bush addresses our issue
he does'nt even know we exist
CIR fooled us twice guys, letz getover with it and try to find another way to have our provisions,
we certainly don't need sweeping legislative chance to reduce retrogression
more...
Fotos de agencia de modelos em
Indirant
01-27 12:20 PM
Hi varsha,
I think sanjay or Rajeev was suppose to work with Ajay in metropark
Sekar
I think sanjay or Rajeev was suppose to work with Ajay in metropark
Sekar
2010 BUSCO AGENCIA DE MODELOS -
Fotos de agensias de modelos
delhiguy
07-04 08:03 PM
Excellent
I agree with you 100 % , I believe having excessive media coverage and lawsuits , would bring the GC number and process in the open , and most americans would oppose the GC as they oppose H1B.
If i was a american i would surely be happy with USCIS/DOS creating so much trouble for the immigrants to my country , who i believe are taking my job.
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
I agree with you 100 % , I believe having excessive media coverage and lawsuits , would bring the GC number and process in the open , and most americans would oppose the GC as they oppose H1B.
If i was a american i would surely be happy with USCIS/DOS creating so much trouble for the immigrants to my country , who i believe are taking my job.
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
more...
Fotos de agencia de modelos
guyfromsg
07-16 09:52 PM
We all know that people on H1 status pay federal,state and social security tax. So I checked IRS site and searched for H1B. They have couple of links that shows H1b should pay tax. My point is everyone knows IRS and they know how much they go after people who are not paying taxes. If we can point to IRS which itself states by way examples that H1B should pay tax then at least the fence sitters will not jump on their side. I doubt if hardcore NumberUSA supporter will believe this anyway but we need turn the fence sitters around which may be the majority.
Here is the first one:
I have an H-1B Visa and my husband has an F-1 Visa. We both lived in the United States all of last year and had income. What kind of form should we file? Do we file separate returns or a joint return?
Assuming both of you had these visas for all of last year, you are a resident alien. Your husband is a nonresident alien if he has not been in the United States as a student for more than 5 years. You and your husband can file a joint tax return on Form 1040, 1040A, or 1040EZ if he makes the choice to be treated as a resident for the entire year. See Nonresident Spouse Treated as a Resident in chapter 1. If your husband does not make this choice, you must file a separate return on Form 1040 or Form 1040A. Your husband must file Form 1040NR or 1040NR-EZ.
Here is an example where they use person on H1b as an example. I'm giving the link as the explanation is long. Just look at example 10
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=129428,00.html
Example 8.
Mr. Gerhard Schwarz was a citizen and resident of Germany just prior to his arrival in the United States. He arrived in the United States on 08-15-99 as a professor of physics on an H-1b visa. He intends to remain in the United States for two academic years, and does not intend to change his immigration status during that period before returning home. Determine his residency starting date.
What kind of federal income tax returns will he file for 1999 and 2000?
Here is the first one:
I have an H-1B Visa and my husband has an F-1 Visa. We both lived in the United States all of last year and had income. What kind of form should we file? Do we file separate returns or a joint return?
Assuming both of you had these visas for all of last year, you are a resident alien. Your husband is a nonresident alien if he has not been in the United States as a student for more than 5 years. You and your husband can file a joint tax return on Form 1040, 1040A, or 1040EZ if he makes the choice to be treated as a resident for the entire year. See Nonresident Spouse Treated as a Resident in chapter 1. If your husband does not make this choice, you must file a separate return on Form 1040 or Form 1040A. Your husband must file Form 1040NR or 1040NR-EZ.
Here is an example where they use person on H1b as an example. I'm giving the link as the explanation is long. Just look at example 10
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=129428,00.html
Example 8.
Mr. Gerhard Schwarz was a citizen and resident of Germany just prior to his arrival in the United States. He arrived in the United States on 08-15-99 as a professor of physics on an H-1b visa. He intends to remain in the United States for two academic years, and does not intend to change his immigration status during that period before returning home. Determine his residency starting date.
What kind of federal income tax returns will he file for 1999 and 2000?
hair Fotos de agencias de modelos
de modelos Plus Size no DF
coloniel60
08-15 04:13 PM
In fact better than expected for EB2
Nothing new. Whoever is eligible to apply in Sep has already applied except for a few unlucky people stuck in BEC.
Nothing new. Whoever is eligible to apply in Sep has already applied except for a few unlucky people stuck in BEC.
more...
April 20, 2011 | In Pop
Jaime
09-13 03:52 AM
Everyone bring U.S. flags if you can!!! (ONLY U.S. Flags - thanks!!!)
hot Curso de direção de modelos
Fotos de Modelos Promotoras
JazzByTheBay
01-16 10:44 PM
Any budding film-makers in the crowd thinking of a documentary?
more...
house Fotos de agencia de modelos -
fotografias de modelos.
ronhira
04-11 06:05 PM
Good point. I appreciate your hard work.
This may be helpful
245(i), Adjustment of Status Permanent Residence, Life Act | V Visa, K Visa (http://www.callyourlawyers.com/245%28i%29revival.html)
GRANDFATHERED DERIVATIVE FAMILY MEMBERS
Grandfathered children and spouses: Accepting Applications for Adjustment of Status Under Section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 06/10/1999 INS memo
Section 245(i) defines the term "beneficiary" to include a spouse or
child "eligible to receive a visa under section 203(d) of the Act." This
applies to spouses or children "accompanying or following to join" the
principal alien.
An alien who is accompanying or following to join an alien who is a
grandfathered alien is thus also the "beneficiary" of the grandfathered
petition or labor certification application and is also grandfathered.
Since an alien's ability to characterize himself or herself as
"accompanying or following to join" the principal alien depends on the
existence of a qualifying relationship at the time of the principal's
adjustment, adjudicators must determine whether the relationship existed
prior to the time the alien adjusted status. Officers should remember
that the burden of proof to establish the qualifying relationship rests
with the applicant.
The spouse or child of a grandfathered alien as of January 14 is also
grandfathered for 245(i) purposes. This means that the spouse or child
is grandfathered irrespective of whether the spouse or child adjusts
with the principal. The pre-January 15 spouse or child also are
grandfathered even after losing the status of spouse or child, such as
by divorce or by becoming 21 years of age, by the petitioner�s
naturalization, through the parents� divorce, or even if the principal
or petitioner dies. Grandfathered eligibility attaches to the person and
not the petition. Many aliens with pending, grandfathered petitions or
labor certification applications will marry or have children after the
qualifying petition or application was filed but before adjustment of
status. These "after-acquired" children and spouses are allowed to
adjust under 245(i) as long as they acquire the status of a spouse or
child before the principal alien ultimately adjusts status.
An alien who becomes the child or spouse of a grandfathered alien
after the alien adjusts status or immigrates cannot adjust status under
section 245(i) unless he or she has an independent basis for
grandfathering.
"Aged-out" children
Often, a principal alien who has filed a visa petition or labor
certification application will have a "child" who reaches the age of 21,
and thus no longer meet the statutory definition of child, before the
petition or application is approved or the principal alien adjusts
status. However, such an "aged-out" beneficiary will remain a
beneficiary for the purpose of determining whether he or she may use
section 245(i) to adjust status.
Eligibility: An alien who is included in the categories of
restricted aliens under 245.1(b) and meets the definition of a
``grandfathered alien'' may apply for adjustment of status under section
245 of the Act if the alien meets the requirements of paragraphs (b)(1)
through (b)(7) of this section:
(1) Is physically present in the United States;
(2) Is eligible for immigrant classification and has an immigrant visa
number immediately available at the time of filing for adjustment of
status;
(3) Is not inadmissible from the United States under any provision of
section 212 of the Act, or all grounds for inadmissibility have been
waived;
(4) Properly files Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent
Residence or Adjust Status on or after October 1, 1994, with the
required fee for that application;
(5) Properly files Supplement A to Form I-485 on or after October 1,
1994;
(6) Pays an additional sum of $1,000, unless payment of the additional
sum is not required under section 245(i) of the Act; and
(7) Will adjust status under section 245 of the Act to that of lawful
permanent resident of the United States on or after October 1, 1994.
hypocrisy as its best...... need another quote from gandhi....
u'r saying its crime for others to file application of their spouse & children...... aren't u waiting for the aos approval for u'r child...... but if other files for their family member..... according to u its a crime....
This may be helpful
245(i), Adjustment of Status Permanent Residence, Life Act | V Visa, K Visa (http://www.callyourlawyers.com/245%28i%29revival.html)
GRANDFATHERED DERIVATIVE FAMILY MEMBERS
Grandfathered children and spouses: Accepting Applications for Adjustment of Status Under Section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 06/10/1999 INS memo
Section 245(i) defines the term "beneficiary" to include a spouse or
child "eligible to receive a visa under section 203(d) of the Act." This
applies to spouses or children "accompanying or following to join" the
principal alien.
An alien who is accompanying or following to join an alien who is a
grandfathered alien is thus also the "beneficiary" of the grandfathered
petition or labor certification application and is also grandfathered.
Since an alien's ability to characterize himself or herself as
"accompanying or following to join" the principal alien depends on the
existence of a qualifying relationship at the time of the principal's
adjustment, adjudicators must determine whether the relationship existed
prior to the time the alien adjusted status. Officers should remember
that the burden of proof to establish the qualifying relationship rests
with the applicant.
The spouse or child of a grandfathered alien as of January 14 is also
grandfathered for 245(i) purposes. This means that the spouse or child
is grandfathered irrespective of whether the spouse or child adjusts
with the principal. The pre-January 15 spouse or child also are
grandfathered even after losing the status of spouse or child, such as
by divorce or by becoming 21 years of age, by the petitioner�s
naturalization, through the parents� divorce, or even if the principal
or petitioner dies. Grandfathered eligibility attaches to the person and
not the petition. Many aliens with pending, grandfathered petitions or
labor certification applications will marry or have children after the
qualifying petition or application was filed but before adjustment of
status. These "after-acquired" children and spouses are allowed to
adjust under 245(i) as long as they acquire the status of a spouse or
child before the principal alien ultimately adjusts status.
An alien who becomes the child or spouse of a grandfathered alien
after the alien adjusts status or immigrates cannot adjust status under
section 245(i) unless he or she has an independent basis for
grandfathering.
"Aged-out" children
Often, a principal alien who has filed a visa petition or labor
certification application will have a "child" who reaches the age of 21,
and thus no longer meet the statutory definition of child, before the
petition or application is approved or the principal alien adjusts
status. However, such an "aged-out" beneficiary will remain a
beneficiary for the purpose of determining whether he or she may use
section 245(i) to adjust status.
Eligibility: An alien who is included in the categories of
restricted aliens under 245.1(b) and meets the definition of a
``grandfathered alien'' may apply for adjustment of status under section
245 of the Act if the alien meets the requirements of paragraphs (b)(1)
through (b)(7) of this section:
(1) Is physically present in the United States;
(2) Is eligible for immigrant classification and has an immigrant visa
number immediately available at the time of filing for adjustment of
status;
(3) Is not inadmissible from the United States under any provision of
section 212 of the Act, or all grounds for inadmissibility have been
waived;
(4) Properly files Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent
Residence or Adjust Status on or after October 1, 1994, with the
required fee for that application;
(5) Properly files Supplement A to Form I-485 on or after October 1,
1994;
(6) Pays an additional sum of $1,000, unless payment of the additional
sum is not required under section 245(i) of the Act; and
(7) Will adjust status under section 245 of the Act to that of lawful
permanent resident of the United States on or after October 1, 1994.
hypocrisy as its best...... need another quote from gandhi....
u'r saying its crime for others to file application of their spouse & children...... aren't u waiting for the aos approval for u'r child...... but if other files for their family member..... according to u its a crime....
tattoo Fotos de Argência de modelos
Fotos de agencia de modelos em
mallu
04-23 08:51 PM
All,
Opened my email this morning to see the card production ordered email (time stamp in my inbox reads 2:15 am PST 4/23/08); the approval date was 4/23/08.
Been in meetings all day so not even a chance to call anyone about it.
Yay!
Good luck to all my fellow sufferers!
Googler
Keep on waiting.
Opened my email this morning to see the card production ordered email (time stamp in my inbox reads 2:15 am PST 4/23/08); the approval date was 4/23/08.
Been in meetings all day so not even a chance to call anyone about it.
Yay!
Good luck to all my fellow sufferers!
Googler
Keep on waiting.
more...
pictures Fotos de agencia de modelos em
Content on this page requires
GCBy3000
01-16 11:55 AM
pls update your profile so that we can confirm.
Update your signature also with your pledge. This will help a lot when others see these kind of signatures. It is all psychological factor to make members feel confident about IV and to make them realize they are not the only one who contributes often.
Every member has the potential to contribute. It is not a million dollar per month. But how to make them to realize the importance and to make them feel comfortable with IV to contribute matters the most. Adding up your pledge in the signature is a most important for this one.
Update your signature also with your pledge. This will help a lot when others see these kind of signatures. It is all psychological factor to make members feel confident about IV and to make them realize they are not the only one who contributes often.
Every member has the potential to contribute. It is not a million dollar per month. But how to make them to realize the importance and to make them feel comfortable with IV to contribute matters the most. Adding up your pledge in the signature is a most important for this one.
dresses Fotos de Modelos Promotoras
de Modelos ou Fotografo
webm
02-27 09:51 PM
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4398
So, those who done their FP in July 2007 or afterwards will have their FP refreshed. So they don't need to go for FP once the previous FP expires. All those who did FP prior to July 2007 will have to go to ASC for FP .
Holy cow!! night mare..again FP process for prior July filers...:(
So, those who done their FP in July 2007 or afterwards will have their FP refreshed. So they don't need to go for FP once the previous FP expires. All those who did FP prior to July 2007 will have to go to ASC for FP .
Holy cow!! night mare..again FP process for prior July filers...:(
more...
makeup Fotos de agencia de modelos
Fotos de agencia de modelos -
chanduv23
09-27 10:12 AM
A common card that can be used for different countries - gives excellent mobility - improves standards - induces competition - this concept looks good and promising.
Please share some more info if available. Lest discuss pros and cons
Please share some more info if available. Lest discuss pros and cons
girlfriend Fotos de agencia de modelos em
Fotos de Agencia de Modelos,
Legal
12-27 09:58 AM
We cannot save for our children's college in college savings plan as every plan needs a GC.
NOT TRUE.
You are considered a permanent resident for tax purposes. :mad:
If you noticed carefully most mutual fund application forms ask "are you a
resident of US? " i.e they are asking you "are you a resident for tax purpsoses". You are not visiting US of r6 months or you are not trying to open an account while living in India. Just say YES;)
NOT TRUE.
You are considered a permanent resident for tax purposes. :mad:
If you noticed carefully most mutual fund application forms ask "are you a
resident of US? " i.e they are asking you "are you a resident for tax purpsoses". You are not visiting US of r6 months or you are not trying to open an account while living in India. Just say YES;)
hairstyles April 20, 2011 | In Pop
Fotos de MODELOS Y ANFITRIONAS
fcres
07-24 04:48 PM
Well according to this FAQ dated 07/23 they will accept application without medical report (Qn# 13) which is also an initial evidence. So i hope EVL is also ok.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
My lawyer agreed to send the EVL separate eventhough he said he does not foresee a rejection on the case on this ground. He said its not advised to send another 485, just sent a cover letter and the EVL.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
My lawyer agreed to send the EVL separate eventhough he said he does not foresee a rejection on the case on this ground. He said its not advised to send another 485, just sent a cover letter and the EVL.
sledge_hammer
02-14 10:51 AM
How is it relevent if I am a Jew, a Christian, a Muslim, a Hindu, or anybody else for that matter? Your question is so absurd, and has absolutely nothing to do with what a human being should feel towards the suffering/struggle of another human. The reason I asked you what you think is because you supported OP's idiotic comparison.
I do not know what you have against conservative Christians or Jews, but you knowing my religion will not prove anything or make your statements any more sensible.
In order to feel pain for a person, how closely do you have to be to that person? What is the definition and boundry? Do you need to be only a parent, child, or a sibling? Can you be just a blood relative? Do you have to speak the same language or come from the same state? Do you have to be of the same caste? Same religion? Same race?
Do I HAVE to be a Jew to sympathize with them?
As humans, there are certain standards associated to the pains people go through. The Jews or the Kashmiri Pandits or Muslims or Christians that are killed, gassed, persecuted, imprisoned have definitely been through more than what we legal immigrants are going through.
You ougth to be such an egotistical and selfish person if you feel that your pain (not getting H-1B) is more than someone else's (being killed) because you're experiencing it! Even if you're simply "comparing"!
So in your case, since you support OP's analogy (our suffering vs. Jews), you would rather be gassed like the Jews were than to wait in line for 10 years in the queue for your GC? Or if you feel that being gassed is equivalent to being denied your H-1B extension in a TARP company, be my guest; to have a first hand experience, go lock yourself in your car garage w/ the engine running and all the doors locked. Come back alive (which I highly doubt you will), and tell us that you felt the same pain in that car as you would have felt if your H-1B was denied, then we'll believe you.
Get over yourself and stop writing nonsense!
Are you a jew or are you asking this because you are a conservative Christan and you believe that jews are special because Christ was jew at the time of birth? Not that there is anything wrong with either, but I just wanted to know.
"What I believe" - What difference does it make? Why do you ask? You see its a matter of perspective. Someone may feel extremely miserable going through the process and its possible that that person may chose to compare this experience with the real victims of ethnic cleansing. Just because there is no violence involved, it doesn't mean that things cannot be comparable. Mental agony and silent torture in even worst when compared with physical violence because one is dying every moment you live. You may argue that we are all dying every moment we live, then isn't life just a torture?
Its not necessary that others MUST believe or experience their life the way you or I do. Everybody lives through a different experience. You may not agree with their version or their perspective, but it is not reasonable to force someone to draw comparison based on what you believe. And this is what I believe.
.
I do not know what you have against conservative Christians or Jews, but you knowing my religion will not prove anything or make your statements any more sensible.
In order to feel pain for a person, how closely do you have to be to that person? What is the definition and boundry? Do you need to be only a parent, child, or a sibling? Can you be just a blood relative? Do you have to speak the same language or come from the same state? Do you have to be of the same caste? Same religion? Same race?
Do I HAVE to be a Jew to sympathize with them?
As humans, there are certain standards associated to the pains people go through. The Jews or the Kashmiri Pandits or Muslims or Christians that are killed, gassed, persecuted, imprisoned have definitely been through more than what we legal immigrants are going through.
You ougth to be such an egotistical and selfish person if you feel that your pain (not getting H-1B) is more than someone else's (being killed) because you're experiencing it! Even if you're simply "comparing"!
So in your case, since you support OP's analogy (our suffering vs. Jews), you would rather be gassed like the Jews were than to wait in line for 10 years in the queue for your GC? Or if you feel that being gassed is equivalent to being denied your H-1B extension in a TARP company, be my guest; to have a first hand experience, go lock yourself in your car garage w/ the engine running and all the doors locked. Come back alive (which I highly doubt you will), and tell us that you felt the same pain in that car as you would have felt if your H-1B was denied, then we'll believe you.
Get over yourself and stop writing nonsense!
Are you a jew or are you asking this because you are a conservative Christan and you believe that jews are special because Christ was jew at the time of birth? Not that there is anything wrong with either, but I just wanted to know.
"What I believe" - What difference does it make? Why do you ask? You see its a matter of perspective. Someone may feel extremely miserable going through the process and its possible that that person may chose to compare this experience with the real victims of ethnic cleansing. Just because there is no violence involved, it doesn't mean that things cannot be comparable. Mental agony and silent torture in even worst when compared with physical violence because one is dying every moment you live. You may argue that we are all dying every moment we live, then isn't life just a torture?
Its not necessary that others MUST believe or experience their life the way you or I do. Everybody lives through a different experience. You may not agree with their version or their perspective, but it is not reasonable to force someone to draw comparison based on what you believe. And this is what I believe.
.
webm
07-11 01:38 PM
again no one can explain the ridiculous date movements by DOS...so there can be no reason for this..Its just that someone saw numbers being wasted...and they randomly applied them to EB2...Now as for getting approvals for all those that are current now...forget it ...since that is USCIS and that is a whole different Animal (a lazy one!!)
It's true..even PD,processing times current scenario also..AOS approval rate was very slow...as it happenend for me 2 months May,June being current EB3-I nothing happened..:(
Crazy CIS and its policies..:mad:
It's true..even PD,processing times current scenario also..AOS approval rate was very slow...as it happenend for me 2 months May,June being current EB3-I nothing happened..:(
Crazy CIS and its policies..:mad:
No comments:
Post a Comment