eager_immi
07-18 10:57 AM
Let us all pledge to give atleast a $20, $50 monthly payments.
nhfirefighter13
October 23rd, 2005, 05:53 AM
Adding to what Kevin said about shadows... If you are using strobes or tungsten sources, placing them at the side, down low, of your object will create some nice depth.
Good luck! I'm off to the Islands for a week.
Good luck! I'm off to the Islands for a week.
b2visahelp
06-15 06:22 PM
Hi,
My parents' and 2 brothers' B2 visas got rejected yesterday. The VO didn't state the refusal reason. He didn't stamp anything on their passports. I got my GC through asylum, and will get married in Nov. 2009. I supplied a formal letter from my pastor about the wedding that it's real. And my parents stated that they are not bringing my youngest brother to the US because he has school. During the interview, the VO asked them about me. He knew that I got my GC through asylum. He asked if I work or go to school. My parents answered honestly that I'm currently working to support myself.
My parents didn't show their bank account, certificate of properties and business because the VO didn't ask for it. Should they show them to VO eventhough he didn't ask to see it?
Now, we're preparing to apply B2 visa for a second time. Here are my questions:
1. When do you think they should apply for the visa again?
2. What can we prepare to show proofs that they will definitely go back to their country? Should we prepare a letter stating reasons why they won't immigrate to US?
3. They are taking care of my elderly grandfather, 80 years old. Should they bring a picture of him?
3. Will they have a better chance if they left all my 3 siblings at home to give more reason they will definitely go back?
My parents definitely don't want to immigrate to the US.
Help...help....please...I really want them to attend my wedding.
Thanks a bunch for all of your advise!
My parents' and 2 brothers' B2 visas got rejected yesterday. The VO didn't state the refusal reason. He didn't stamp anything on their passports. I got my GC through asylum, and will get married in Nov. 2009. I supplied a formal letter from my pastor about the wedding that it's real. And my parents stated that they are not bringing my youngest brother to the US because he has school. During the interview, the VO asked them about me. He knew that I got my GC through asylum. He asked if I work or go to school. My parents answered honestly that I'm currently working to support myself.
My parents didn't show their bank account, certificate of properties and business because the VO didn't ask for it. Should they show them to VO eventhough he didn't ask to see it?
Now, we're preparing to apply B2 visa for a second time. Here are my questions:
1. When do you think they should apply for the visa again?
2. What can we prepare to show proofs that they will definitely go back to their country? Should we prepare a letter stating reasons why they won't immigrate to US?
3. They are taking care of my elderly grandfather, 80 years old. Should they bring a picture of him?
3. Will they have a better chance if they left all my 3 siblings at home to give more reason they will definitely go back?
My parents definitely don't want to immigrate to the US.
Help...help....please...I really want them to attend my wedding.
Thanks a bunch for all of your advise!
reddog
04-08 04:19 PM
All i am asking is the media they know and number of users. I dont know what you talking about.
Ok, how do we contact the state representative. Through the county representative, then the city, then street?
We are IV. I believe that is what chandu meant. Core is just a group of people who incidentally reserved the domain name and configured joomla.
Ok, how do we contact the state representative. Through the county representative, then the city, then street?
We are IV. I believe that is what chandu meant. Core is just a group of people who incidentally reserved the domain name and configured joomla.
more...
GCKaMaara
11-26 03:14 PM
there was nothing to be so touchy in those two lines of mine!
He he he. Remember your first year after birth and follow the same practice (you didn't speak during that time :)).
He he he. Remember your first year after birth and follow the same practice (you didn't speak during that time :)).
yabadaba
06-22 09:29 AM
the civil surgeon told me that as per CDC directive all applicants need to have a TB skin test irrespective of the X ray. Good luck with 693
more...
leoindiano
08-03 11:48 AM
Guys,
From what i gathered, It seems these 2 things could effect your processing apart from PD....
Both can be done, if you take a infopass at your local office....
1) I-485 fingerprints
2) A# Mismatch on i-485 receipt, i- 140 approval notice
For me, i didnt get FP notice from USCIS, i had to go to local office and get that done in feb. 2008.
A# also didntnt match, So, i called POJ and they said, they open a ticket to consolidate. If i dont see an LUD in a week, i will have to go to a local office and try again...
In July 2007, when they received 1000's of apps, for most 485 cases, they generated a new A# instead of attaching A# from your I-140 receipt/approval. Your lawyer will say 2 A#'s not a problem. But, this is definitely a problem ACCORDING TO
Others RD, ND, namecheck which we have no control of even though you did everything right.
From what i gathered, It seems these 2 things could effect your processing apart from PD....
Both can be done, if you take a infopass at your local office....
1) I-485 fingerprints
2) A# Mismatch on i-485 receipt, i- 140 approval notice
For me, i didnt get FP notice from USCIS, i had to go to local office and get that done in feb. 2008.
A# also didntnt match, So, i called POJ and they said, they open a ticket to consolidate. If i dont see an LUD in a week, i will have to go to a local office and try again...
In July 2007, when they received 1000's of apps, for most 485 cases, they generated a new A# instead of attaching A# from your I-140 receipt/approval. Your lawyer will say 2 A#'s not a problem. But, this is definitely a problem ACCORDING TO
Others RD, ND, namecheck which we have no control of even though you did everything right.
GCcomesoon
08-25 04:38 PM
Hi
My approval happened on April 24th , 2008 . I got the physical card on 08/03/08.
Here are the case details
Thanks
GCcomesoon
Priority date - 05/2003
140 approved - 10/2006 from TSC
485,131,765 RD-6/04/2007 at TSC, notices received - 06/07/2007
CA, EB2
Wife's case returned due to some error,send it again & received on 06/17/2007 as per Fedex
Wife's case RD- 7/10/2007
my case - I131 - approved - 7/24/07
spouse case - I131- approved- 09/12/07
EAD approved for spouse - 08/20/07
EAD approved - 10/25/2007 - for me
LUD in my case - 485, - 7/11/07, 11/02/2007,11/28/2007,11/29/2007
LUD in 485 case for spouse - 10/04/2007 ( after FP ), LUD - 11/14/2007,11/28/2007,11/29/2007
FP for spouse - 08/08/07 , I rescheduled it.
FP scheduled - 10/03/07 - Done
FP scheduled - 12/12/2007 -
Case approval for me (email ) - 04/24/08
FP( for 485 ) -05/17/08
Physical card- 08/03/08
Wife 's case is still pending & no updates.. ( raised a SR , would follow up next month )
My approval happened on April 24th , 2008 . I got the physical card on 08/03/08.
Here are the case details
Thanks
GCcomesoon
Priority date - 05/2003
140 approved - 10/2006 from TSC
485,131,765 RD-6/04/2007 at TSC, notices received - 06/07/2007
CA, EB2
Wife's case returned due to some error,send it again & received on 06/17/2007 as per Fedex
Wife's case RD- 7/10/2007
my case - I131 - approved - 7/24/07
spouse case - I131- approved- 09/12/07
EAD approved for spouse - 08/20/07
EAD approved - 10/25/2007 - for me
LUD in my case - 485, - 7/11/07, 11/02/2007,11/28/2007,11/29/2007
LUD in 485 case for spouse - 10/04/2007 ( after FP ), LUD - 11/14/2007,11/28/2007,11/29/2007
FP for spouse - 08/08/07 , I rescheduled it.
FP scheduled - 10/03/07 - Done
FP scheduled - 12/12/2007 -
Case approval for me (email ) - 04/24/08
FP( for 485 ) -05/17/08
Physical card- 08/03/08
Wife 's case is still pending & no updates.. ( raised a SR , would follow up next month )
more...
Edison99
02-02 10:31 AM
Congratulation maine_gc!
xgoogle
08-20 01:52 PM
Yes even our received dates are different, mine was Sep 28 and my wife's was Sep 27. Receipt #s are SRC07285**** and SRC07284**** respectively.
For me and my spouse [derivative] only the last 2 digits differ. I got approved from TSC on 8/8/8 and received the card on 8/15/8. My spouses status still says:
Current Status: Case received and pending.
On September 28, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
PD: 3/3/6
For me and my spouse [derivative] only the last 2 digits differ. I got approved from TSC on 8/8/8 and received the card on 8/15/8. My spouses status still says:
Current Status: Case received and pending.
On September 28, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
PD: 3/3/6
more...
Rishi
01-05 11:18 AM
logiclife,
Is this related to IsnAmerica.org? I see many people in both the places. If these two are different then it is really bad that we are not uniting our efforts.
my 2 cents
Rishi
Is this related to IsnAmerica.org? I see many people in both the places. If these two are different then it is really bad that we are not uniting our efforts.
my 2 cents
Rishi
blacktongue
01-26 03:30 PM
Waste of time. How many PhD's are there as compared to the others? There is already EB1/EB2-NIW for them
US needs EB1 and Ph.Ds
Others not contribute as much
US needs EB1 and Ph.Ds
Others not contribute as much
more...
maalelsi
02-22 09:46 PM
I went to web site and it still shows Jan processing dates.
How is it possible?
How is it possible?
vedicman
01-20 01:46 PM
Any EB3 here?
Famous American Immigrants � Immigration Update (http://immigrationupdate.wordpress.com/famous-american-immigrants/)
Even your link does not provide which category these immigrants came from - possibly because employment category did not exist, they came early in childhood with parents......
Besides stop creating the rift between the categories in this forum!
Einstein - Germany
Madeleine Albright: Czechoslovakia
John Muir: Scotland
Joseph Pulitzer Hungary
Felix Frankfurter: Austria
Martina Navratilova: Czechoslovakia
Irving Berlin: Russia
Saint Frances X. Cabrini: Italy
Mary Harris Jones: Ireland
Edward M. Bannister: Canada
Rita M. Rodriguez: Cuba
Ieoh Ming Pei: China
Subranhmanyan Chandrasekhar: India
David Ho: Taiwan
Ang Lee: Taiwan
Hakeem Olajuwon: Nigeria
Famous American Immigrants � Immigration Update (http://immigrationupdate.wordpress.com/famous-american-immigrants/)
Even your link does not provide which category these immigrants came from - possibly because employment category did not exist, they came early in childhood with parents......
Besides stop creating the rift between the categories in this forum!
Einstein - Germany
Madeleine Albright: Czechoslovakia
John Muir: Scotland
Joseph Pulitzer Hungary
Felix Frankfurter: Austria
Martina Navratilova: Czechoslovakia
Irving Berlin: Russia
Saint Frances X. Cabrini: Italy
Mary Harris Jones: Ireland
Edward M. Bannister: Canada
Rita M. Rodriguez: Cuba
Ieoh Ming Pei: China
Subranhmanyan Chandrasekhar: India
David Ho: Taiwan
Ang Lee: Taiwan
Hakeem Olajuwon: Nigeria
more...
trueguy
12-11 01:43 AM
In a testimony to the House Judiciary Committee back in Apr/May 08, the USCIS clearly stated that it had changed its policy regarding which applications would be adjudicated first.
As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.
The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.
Here is how:
Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.
So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.
When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.
The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.
If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.
As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.
Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.
Very good points. I can't agree with you any more.
The question is how do we raise it as an issue so USCIS follow FIFO.
As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.
The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.
Here is how:
Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.
So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.
When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.
The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.
If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.
As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.
Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.
Very good points. I can't agree with you any more.
The question is how do we raise it as an issue so USCIS follow FIFO.
add78
05-19 03:52 PM
Good Morning.
hahahaha too funny.
hahahaha too funny.
more...
inskrish
09-21 01:48 AM
When my labor certification was stuck at backlog elimination center, i was hoping that LC does not stand for "Lost Case" and now for some fre**king reason my early 2004 EB2 case is not being picked up when later cases are being approved, now I hope that GC does not stand for "Gone Case".
I can understand your frustration, NKR, but sure you will get your turn by Feb.09.
I can understand your frustration, NKR, but sure you will get your turn by Feb.09.
eager_immi
05-30 01:42 PM
GC is not for you to apply it is based on the employer. Many employers wait to file in the 5th year so you do not leave the company. Also every time your job changes within the company (which is also not in your hand) your employer will re-file labor. So you could have been here like me for 9 years with a priority date on May 2005 and bc of change in job position it will become Dec 2007 and never get your green card.
I understand if someone was stuck in BEC, we all got s****ed with that.
But why given that the H1B is only intended to be for a maximum of 6 years would anyone leave it until the last year to apply.
PERM has been around for a while now, and anyone approaching 6 years should have already filed PERM or be ready to leave after year 6.
I understand if someone was stuck in BEC, we all got s****ed with that.
But why given that the H1B is only intended to be for a maximum of 6 years would anyone leave it until the last year to apply.
PERM has been around for a while now, and anyone approaching 6 years should have already filed PERM or be ready to leave after year 6.
hebron
01-20 02:42 PM
can name few who became "big" literally (--fat)
LOL...Good one!
LOL...Good one!
Ramba
10-31 11:11 AM
They usually issue the I-94 till the validity of the Petition or expiry of the Passport in some cases. In my case i had a valid stamp from May 2004 till Jan 2006, but I had a new H1 from a new employer in Oct 2004 which was approved till Jan 2007 and when I entered US in may 2005 I was issed a new I-94 till Jan 2007 even though the stamp will expire in Jan 2006.
Hope this helps.
Well. In non-immigrant visa admissions at POE, ICE officers has their own "power" in determining the period of stay. Even if anyone has 10 year visa stamp, they can admit only for 10 days if they want; no one can argue/challange it at POE. Further truth is; even they can deny admission to GC holder if they want or if they found something fishy. Nothing is guarentee at POE as well as in consulate for getting non-immigrant visa. So, the departure date in latest I-94 is the important date to comply with (to leave US or extend on time).
Hope this helps.
Well. In non-immigrant visa admissions at POE, ICE officers has their own "power" in determining the period of stay. Even if anyone has 10 year visa stamp, they can admit only for 10 days if they want; no one can argue/challange it at POE. Further truth is; even they can deny admission to GC holder if they want or if they found something fishy. Nothing is guarentee at POE as well as in consulate for getting non-immigrant visa. So, the departure date in latest I-94 is the important date to comply with (to leave US or extend on time).
new_phd
05-14 01:28 PM
Point taken.
I did look under the visa bulletin section of the forums, I did not see anything on pages 1 and 2 so I posted.
But, point taken.
Mocking me so much shows you in bad taste, my friends.
This is the last thing you will see me posting here.
And it is a "her".
subah ho gayi mamu ..... ae yabadaba chal iske liye chai banaa
translation: ("new_phd is finally up....
yabadaba please make tea for him")
I did look under the visa bulletin section of the forums, I did not see anything on pages 1 and 2 so I posted.
But, point taken.
Mocking me so much shows you in bad taste, my friends.
This is the last thing you will see me posting here.
And it is a "her".
subah ho gayi mamu ..... ae yabadaba chal iske liye chai banaa
translation: ("new_phd is finally up....
yabadaba please make tea for him")
No comments:
Post a Comment