bhavscreen
10-22 05:19 PM
All we can do id hope...
wallpaper VAUXHALL ASTRA VAN MK4 G REAR
krishnam70
03-23 07:51 PM
Hi,
We talked to the DOL people. They said that since my wife didnt start working with them on H1 and never really worked with them we dont have a basis for claiming the 1500 dollars in filing fees. Do you think this is correct? If so what else do you think we can do on this case? Thanks for your reply.
Amar
Per law employer states that he/she has a project on hand and its their responsibility to pay for the filing fee of the applicant. So you have every right to sue the employer for the same. Was there a gap between the time your wife got H1 and she subsequently got an EAD? If yes you can claim salary from the day her H1 was approved and you got the 797 in hand.
BTW your lawsuit might end up costing more than the $1500 you paid but if you want to do the right thing go sue the employers a$$
- cheers
kris
We talked to the DOL people. They said that since my wife didnt start working with them on H1 and never really worked with them we dont have a basis for claiming the 1500 dollars in filing fees. Do you think this is correct? If so what else do you think we can do on this case? Thanks for your reply.
Amar
Per law employer states that he/she has a project on hand and its their responsibility to pay for the filing fee of the applicant. So you have every right to sue the employer for the same. Was there a gap between the time your wife got H1 and she subsequently got an EAD? If yes you can claim salary from the day her H1 was approved and you got the 797 in hand.
BTW your lawsuit might end up costing more than the $1500 you paid but if you want to do the right thing go sue the employers a$$
- cheers
kris
vallabhu
01-14 12:22 PM
The source is Immigration-law.com
This bill was introduced by Rep. Shela Jackson-Lee of Texas. Here is the full-text of the bill. It is a shocker, highly prejudiced against the employment-based immigration. Another shocker is a proposal to increaase Diversity Visa from 55,000 to 110,000 when the general opinion in the Congress was even to eliminate the DV program.
SEC. 701. UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
Section 274B (8 U.S.C. 1324b) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(5)--
(A) by amending the paragraph heading to read `Prohibition of Intimidation, Retaliation, or Unlawful Discrimination in Employment';
(B) by moving the text down and to the right 2 ems;
(C) by inserting before such text the following: `(A) IN GENERAL- '; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
`(B) FEDERAL LABOR OR EMPLOYMENT LAWS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer to directly or indirectly threaten any individual with removal or any other adverse consequences pertaining to that individual's immigration status or employment benefits for the purpose of intimidating, pressuring, or coercing any such individual not to exercise any right protected by State or Federal labor or employment law (including section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 157)), or for the purpose of retaliating against any such individual for having exercised or having stated an intention to exercise any such right.
`(C) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON IMMIGRATION STATUS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer, except to the extent specifically authorized or required by law, to discriminate in any term or condition of employment against any individual employed by such employer on the basis of such individual's immigration status.'; and
(2) in subsection (c)(2), by adding at the end the following: `The Special Counsel shall not disclose to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, and shall not cause to be published in a manner that discloses to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, any information obtained by the Special Counsel in any manner concerning the immigration status of any individual who has filed a charge under this section, or the identity of any individual or entity that is a party or witness to a proceedings brought pursuant to such charge. The Secretary of Homeland Security may not rely, in whole or in part, in any enforcement action or removal proceeding, upon any information obtained as a result of the filing or prosecution of an unfair immigration-related employment practice charge. For purposes of this paragraph, the term `Special Counsel' includes individuals formerly appointed to the position of Special Counsel and any current or former employee of the office of the Special Counsel. Whoever knowingly uses, publishes, or permits information to be used in violation of this paragraph shall be fined not more than $10,000.'.
SEC. 702. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TASK FORCE.
The Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall conduct a national study of American workplaces to determine the causes, extent, circumstances, and consequences, of exploitation of undocumented alien workers by their employers. As part of this study, the Secretary of Labor shall create a plan for targeted review of Federal labor law enforcement in industries with a substantial immigrant workforce, for the purpose of identifying, monitoring, and deterring frequent or egregious violators of wage and hour, antidiscrimination, National Labor Relations Act, and workplace safety and health requirements. Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall submit to the Congress a report describing the results of the study and the Secretary's recommendations based on the study.
SEC. 703. RECRUITMENT OF AMERICAN WORKERS.
Section 214 is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (m) (as added by section 105 of Public Law 106-313), (n) (as added by section 107(e) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1513(c) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1102(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act), and (p) (as added by section 1503(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act) as subsections (n), (o), (p), (q), and (r), respectively; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
`(s)(1) No petition to accord employment status under the nonimmigrant classifications described in sections 101(a)(15)(E)(iii) and (H) shall be granted in the absence of an affidavit from the petitioner describing the efforts that were made to recruit an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence or a citizen of the United States before resorting to a petition to obtain a foreign employee. The recruitment efforts must have included substantial attempts to find employees in minority communities. Recruitment efforts in minority communities should include at least one of the following, if appropriate for the employment being advertised:
`(A) Advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker in local newspapers in the labor market that is likely to be patronized by a potential worker for at least 5 consecutive days.
`(B) Undertake efforts to advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker through advertisements in public transportation systems.
`(C) To the extent permitted by local laws and regulations, engage in recruitment activities in secondary schools, recreation centers, community centers, and other places throughout the communities within 50 miles of the job site that serve minorities.
`(2)(A) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a 10 percent surcharge on all fees collected for petitions to accord employment status and shall use these funds to establish an employment training program which will include unemployed workers in the United States who need to be trained or retrained. The purpose of this program shall be to increase the number of lawful permanent residents and citizens of the United States who are available for employment in the occupations that are the subjects of such petitions. At least 50 percent of the funds generated by this provision must be used to train American workers in rural and inner-city areas.
`(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall reserve and make available to the Secretary of Labor a portion of the funds collected under this paragraph. Such funds shall be used by the Secretary of Labor to establish an `Office to Preserve American Jobs' within the Department of Labor. The purpose of this office shall be to establish policies intended to ensure that employers in the United States will hire available workers in the United States before resorting to foreign labor, giving substantial emphasis to hiring minority workers in the United States.'.
This bill was introduced by Rep. Shela Jackson-Lee of Texas. Here is the full-text of the bill. It is a shocker, highly prejudiced against the employment-based immigration. Another shocker is a proposal to increaase Diversity Visa from 55,000 to 110,000 when the general opinion in the Congress was even to eliminate the DV program.
SEC. 701. UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
Section 274B (8 U.S.C. 1324b) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(5)--
(A) by amending the paragraph heading to read `Prohibition of Intimidation, Retaliation, or Unlawful Discrimination in Employment';
(B) by moving the text down and to the right 2 ems;
(C) by inserting before such text the following: `(A) IN GENERAL- '; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
`(B) FEDERAL LABOR OR EMPLOYMENT LAWS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer to directly or indirectly threaten any individual with removal or any other adverse consequences pertaining to that individual's immigration status or employment benefits for the purpose of intimidating, pressuring, or coercing any such individual not to exercise any right protected by State or Federal labor or employment law (including section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 157)), or for the purpose of retaliating against any such individual for having exercised or having stated an intention to exercise any such right.
`(C) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON IMMIGRATION STATUS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer, except to the extent specifically authorized or required by law, to discriminate in any term or condition of employment against any individual employed by such employer on the basis of such individual's immigration status.'; and
(2) in subsection (c)(2), by adding at the end the following: `The Special Counsel shall not disclose to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, and shall not cause to be published in a manner that discloses to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, any information obtained by the Special Counsel in any manner concerning the immigration status of any individual who has filed a charge under this section, or the identity of any individual or entity that is a party or witness to a proceedings brought pursuant to such charge. The Secretary of Homeland Security may not rely, in whole or in part, in any enforcement action or removal proceeding, upon any information obtained as a result of the filing or prosecution of an unfair immigration-related employment practice charge. For purposes of this paragraph, the term `Special Counsel' includes individuals formerly appointed to the position of Special Counsel and any current or former employee of the office of the Special Counsel. Whoever knowingly uses, publishes, or permits information to be used in violation of this paragraph shall be fined not more than $10,000.'.
SEC. 702. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TASK FORCE.
The Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall conduct a national study of American workplaces to determine the causes, extent, circumstances, and consequences, of exploitation of undocumented alien workers by their employers. As part of this study, the Secretary of Labor shall create a plan for targeted review of Federal labor law enforcement in industries with a substantial immigrant workforce, for the purpose of identifying, monitoring, and deterring frequent or egregious violators of wage and hour, antidiscrimination, National Labor Relations Act, and workplace safety and health requirements. Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall submit to the Congress a report describing the results of the study and the Secretary's recommendations based on the study.
SEC. 703. RECRUITMENT OF AMERICAN WORKERS.
Section 214 is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (m) (as added by section 105 of Public Law 106-313), (n) (as added by section 107(e) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1513(c) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1102(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act), and (p) (as added by section 1503(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act) as subsections (n), (o), (p), (q), and (r), respectively; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
`(s)(1) No petition to accord employment status under the nonimmigrant classifications described in sections 101(a)(15)(E)(iii) and (H) shall be granted in the absence of an affidavit from the petitioner describing the efforts that were made to recruit an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence or a citizen of the United States before resorting to a petition to obtain a foreign employee. The recruitment efforts must have included substantial attempts to find employees in minority communities. Recruitment efforts in minority communities should include at least one of the following, if appropriate for the employment being advertised:
`(A) Advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker in local newspapers in the labor market that is likely to be patronized by a potential worker for at least 5 consecutive days.
`(B) Undertake efforts to advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker through advertisements in public transportation systems.
`(C) To the extent permitted by local laws and regulations, engage in recruitment activities in secondary schools, recreation centers, community centers, and other places throughout the communities within 50 miles of the job site that serve minorities.
`(2)(A) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a 10 percent surcharge on all fees collected for petitions to accord employment status and shall use these funds to establish an employment training program which will include unemployed workers in the United States who need to be trained or retrained. The purpose of this program shall be to increase the number of lawful permanent residents and citizens of the United States who are available for employment in the occupations that are the subjects of such petitions. At least 50 percent of the funds generated by this provision must be used to train American workers in rural and inner-city areas.
`(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall reserve and make available to the Secretary of Labor a portion of the funds collected under this paragraph. Such funds shall be used by the Secretary of Labor to establish an `Office to Preserve American Jobs' within the Department of Labor. The purpose of this office shall be to establish policies intended to ensure that employers in the United States will hire available workers in the United States before resorting to foreign labor, giving substantial emphasis to hiring minority workers in the United States.'.
2011 Vauxhall Astra MK5 H Body Kits
hourglass
02-15 10:01 PM
Hi,
I am working on 8th year H1 visa (with approval notice) valid thru september 2009
Theres a expired visa stamped on my passport, which was march 2005. Do you think for my scenerio it is safe to visit Canada for stamping? And what documents did they ask you in your case, appreciate your help.
I went to Ottawa, Canada in January for visa stamping. I got Visa done.
On that day, I had seen most of the people attended for stamping are indians. Everyone was given visa.
Stamping is pretty easy at Ottawa. They dont ask you much questions. If one has all the required documents for visa stamping, its very easy to get stamping at ottawa.
Good Luck for your stamping.
I am working on 8th year H1 visa (with approval notice) valid thru september 2009
Theres a expired visa stamped on my passport, which was march 2005. Do you think for my scenerio it is safe to visit Canada for stamping? And what documents did they ask you in your case, appreciate your help.
I went to Ottawa, Canada in January for visa stamping. I got Visa done.
On that day, I had seen most of the people attended for stamping are indians. Everyone was given visa.
Stamping is pretty easy at Ottawa. They dont ask you much questions. If one has all the required documents for visa stamping, its very easy to get stamping at ottawa.
Good Luck for your stamping.
more...
maheshf
02-20 01:23 PM
I do have copy of approved I-140 from company A and asked for the old priority dates on Old I-140 when applied for new I-140. Not sure if it matters
ashwin_27
02-25 12:48 PM
Absolutely agree. That is definitely the way the other side will argue against the "dependents exemption" provision. But doesnt mean we shouldn't ask for it :). its another way to reduce the backlog. And while the practical aspect of what you describe is completely true...what we can argue is - is it fair to bring in thousands of workers and their familes for "work" using one criteria (we do not need families to work for industries) and then ask them to pack up because of backlogs created by another criteria? (too many of you came to work now you suffer because we use a different logic to make you permanently settle here)
it is a part of IV provisions and proposals. we ask for 10 things and push hard and might get 1 or 2 through.
H1B is temporary visa.
Green Card is permanent.
On H1B you can even come to USA for 1 day and go back. But on Greencard you are asking to say here permanently with family. You are also asking for family be given all Green Card benefits like ability to work etc. So it makes sense to count dependents. On H1B the employer is only giving you the job and calling you. So you get work permit. Wife and children do not. You are being called only because USA needs your valuable skills and they cannot find Americans. There is no I485 stage on H1B visa. Wife coming on H4 is only to stay with you. This is understood even before she applied for the visa. So there is no reason for wife to complain that she cannot work on H4. On Greencard I485 stage, once the employer has established no American is available to work, you petition USCIS to allow your wife to stay with you as you also will stay permanently. in I485 you ask for the benefits of permanent residency for wife and children.
So it makes sense for counting dependents in the quota. What we should focus on is removing country limits. Country limits are discriminatory. It is morally wrong.
it is a part of IV provisions and proposals. we ask for 10 things and push hard and might get 1 or 2 through.
H1B is temporary visa.
Green Card is permanent.
On H1B you can even come to USA for 1 day and go back. But on Greencard you are asking to say here permanently with family. You are also asking for family be given all Green Card benefits like ability to work etc. So it makes sense to count dependents. On H1B the employer is only giving you the job and calling you. So you get work permit. Wife and children do not. You are being called only because USA needs your valuable skills and they cannot find Americans. There is no I485 stage on H1B visa. Wife coming on H4 is only to stay with you. This is understood even before she applied for the visa. So there is no reason for wife to complain that she cannot work on H4. On Greencard I485 stage, once the employer has established no American is available to work, you petition USCIS to allow your wife to stay with you as you also will stay permanently. in I485 you ask for the benefits of permanent residency for wife and children.
So it makes sense for counting dependents in the quota. What we should focus on is removing country limits. Country limits are discriminatory. It is morally wrong.
more...
funnymdguy
11-16 12:36 PM
Take infopass appointment, speak to IO and go from there. at the worst case, you will have to reapply and sit tight for 90 days.
Somehow, the place where I live...Phoenix...USCIS does not offer Infopass appointments...any idea what to do then?
Somehow, the place where I live...Phoenix...USCIS does not offer Infopass appointments...any idea what to do then?
2010 heres my mk4 van but it now
martinvisalaw
07-16 06:06 PM
Lately we have been seeing, USCIS is asking for the proff of continious legal stay and one of the proof's is I-94.
Say, if one has not made copies of the past I-94's, is there a way we get them by writing a letter an agency ?
Thank You.
Is this in RFE connection with an Adjustment of Status filing? if so, you really only need to show that you did not violate status for over 180 days since your last lawful entry (Section 245(k) of the Immigration and Nationality Act).
In any event, proving that you maintained status does not require showing all old I-94s. You need to show that you were approved for or admitted in a certain status, and that you stayed in that status until it was changed or extended. Approval notices, visas, and maybe entry stamps from your passport re usually enough, and just the most recent I-94. If you held F-1 status, you would need to show your I-20s, visa and proof that you maintained a full courseload as required by the I-20.
Say, if one has not made copies of the past I-94's, is there a way we get them by writing a letter an agency ?
Thank You.
Is this in RFE connection with an Adjustment of Status filing? if so, you really only need to show that you did not violate status for over 180 days since your last lawful entry (Section 245(k) of the Immigration and Nationality Act).
In any event, proving that you maintained status does not require showing all old I-94s. You need to show that you were approved for or admitted in a certain status, and that you stayed in that status until it was changed or extended. Approval notices, visas, and maybe entry stamps from your passport re usually enough, and just the most recent I-94. If you held F-1 status, you would need to show your I-20s, visa and proof that you maintained a full courseload as required by the I-20.
more...
nixstor
11-17 03:46 PM
Thank you for information
What if I fall on category EB-3 and not from India and China. Can my employer still file it ? This is because the minimum requirement for this job is a Bachelors Degree even though I do have a masters degree.
Big holler from me! You become EB3 ROW (Rest of the world).
Find another employer who is willing to do an EB2 and you might have EAD in 6-8 months
What if I fall on category EB-3 and not from India and China. Can my employer still file it ? This is because the minimum requirement for this job is a Bachelors Degree even though I do have a masters degree.
Big holler from me! You become EB3 ROW (Rest of the world).
Find another employer who is willing to do an EB2 and you might have EAD in 6-8 months
hair countries) of the Estate
caforum2
08-02 05:53 PM
My experience is that you can't collect your passport same day of your interview. After your interview, your visa will be approved. But your passport will get to VFS hand only after 2 business days. You might have to stay in Chennai for 2 days after your interview to be able to collect the passport from VFS counter in Chennai. I had same issue. I was suppose to be in US day after interview and passport was struck between consulate and VFS. I ended up coming to US 3 days after my initial Plan. Good luck. This is my experience from Nov 2006.
more...
cinqsit
03-27 07:31 PM
i have not applied for a GC as yet.
I want to buy a franchise and start my own business.
later on I want to apply for my GC.
How did you manage to pull this one off ? you got an EAD without applying for GC ?!!
Thats funny :-)
cinqsit
I want to buy a franchise and start my own business.
later on I want to apply for my GC.
How did you manage to pull this one off ? you got an EAD without applying for GC ?!!
Thats funny :-)
cinqsit
hot Vauxhall Astra 1.6 Club Estate
sundevil
03-23 12:19 PM
RIP .....
The report does not say that they were not wearing seat belts.
Folks,
I read in this (http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=170404&catid=3) report that none of the 4 students were wearing seat belts. Please always wear your seat belts.
My prayers are with their families
The report does not say that they were not wearing seat belts.
Folks,
I read in this (http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=170404&catid=3) report that none of the 4 students were wearing seat belts. Please always wear your seat belts.
My prayers are with their families
more...
house Astra Estate with SXi split 5-
a_yaja
07-13 04:49 PM
Done
tattoo VAUXHALL ASTRA ESTATE MK4 02-05 BOSCH WIPER BLADES PAIR
redgreen
01-31 11:53 AM
I saw the same thing in my online status, in october. What I got is a finger print notice which was originally sent to my old address which was on the I-485 application form. They redirected to it to the current address on file.
This is my guess: Since the online status has only few options, and may be the person who is updating it put it as 'document sent' and the one similar to that is the last one with 'Document production ....".
What I heard is, before they mail your GC, you will get a letter saying your I-485 is accepted. I never got that. I called USCIS and 'human robots' didn't have any idea on this, but they said my I-485 is still in the processing stage.
This is my guess: Since the online status has only few options, and may be the person who is updating it put it as 'document sent' and the one similar to that is the last one with 'Document production ....".
What I heard is, before they mail your GC, you will get a letter saying your I-485 is accepted. I never got that. I called USCIS and 'human robots' didn't have any idea on this, but they said my I-485 is still in the processing stage.
more...
pictures FJ41207 - Vauxhall Astra
spicy_guy
08-05 01:54 PM
I think he should consider awarding citizenship to LONG waiting GC applicants. :D
dresses Vauxhall+astra+estate+mk4
reachinus
07-14 12:33 PM
Could be a DV case, could be family based, could be immediate family, could be anything. In fact EB cases are only about 200k out of 1,2 mil GCs issued last year (see immigration-law.com for a recent statistic). Backlogged does not mean unavailable.
I do agree.
I do agree.
more...
makeup Vauxhall astra estate rear
saimrathi
07-24 11:22 AM
I think all it is saying is that you need to submit the approved labor certification application with your i-140/485 concurrent application, as far as i can remember my lawyer sent in my approved labor cert appli with my concurrent filing appli.. although please check with ur lawyer...
This is FAQ from USCIS website:
Q1: Will USCIS reject a concurrently filed EB I-140/I-485 case if it is lacking a required Labor Certification?
A1. USCIS will not accept an I-140 based on a required labor certification application if the approved labor certification application is not submitted in connection with the filing. USCIS will not accept a concurrently filed Form I-485 if the required Form I-140 is rejected for lack of an approved labor certification application.
-----------------------------------------------
Anyone knows what that means? I have filed 140/485 concurrently on July 2nd 2007. However, I never received original LC document and my lawyer said it is okay to file 140 without original LC document, USCIS will collect it from DOL. Do you think this will affect me?
Thanks
This is FAQ from USCIS website:
Q1: Will USCIS reject a concurrently filed EB I-140/I-485 case if it is lacking a required Labor Certification?
A1. USCIS will not accept an I-140 based on a required labor certification application if the approved labor certification application is not submitted in connection with the filing. USCIS will not accept a concurrently filed Form I-485 if the required Form I-140 is rejected for lack of an approved labor certification application.
-----------------------------------------------
Anyone knows what that means? I have filed 140/485 concurrently on July 2nd 2007. However, I never received original LC document and my lawyer said it is okay to file 140 without original LC document, USCIS will collect it from DOL. Do you think this will affect me?
Thanks
girlfriend Vauxhall Astra 1.8i 16v SXi,
superdude
08-02 07:22 PM
Depends on the interivew time.We can collect the passports on the same day provided VFS gets them from the consulate. Any person can collect the passports provided they present their id and authorization letter from the applicants.
Can people share their experience with same day counter passport collection from the vfs courier center at Chennai.
Reason I ask is, I and my wife have a 9AM appointment on 14th August. And Aug 15th being a holiday on account of India's Independence Day. Since we have to be in US on the 16th August to file for I485, getting the visa on the 16th would be too late. Therefore, it's critical that we collect the passport the same day.
Is anyone else in a similar situation? Should I inform the consular of our same night travel plans or is that ill-advised?
thanks
Can people share their experience with same day counter passport collection from the vfs courier center at Chennai.
Reason I ask is, I and my wife have a 9AM appointment on 14th August. And Aug 15th being a holiday on account of India's Independence Day. Since we have to be in US on the 16th August to file for I485, getting the visa on the 16th would be too late. Therefore, it's critical that we collect the passport the same day.
Is anyone else in a similar situation? Should I inform the consular of our same night travel plans or is that ill-advised?
thanks
hairstyles VAUXHALL ASTRA MK4 98gt; ESTATE
arnab221
06-28 12:43 AM
Don't we have a popular Beedi( a type of cigarette ) in India with the image of Lord Ganesh on its cover . It is very very popular beedi brand in Karnataka . Is this allowed , I never saw any backlash against this in India itself . Strange that this kind of backlash happens more in the west than India.
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_YKKiMO0Sv84/R8NFWbO2lGI/AAAAAAAAA8k/7a5qqqodX98/DSC_02700014.JPG
Just some bitter facts , I do not deserve a reds for this :D
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_YKKiMO0Sv84/R8NFWbO2lGI/AAAAAAAAA8k/7a5qqqodX98/DSC_02700014.JPG
Just some bitter facts , I do not deserve a reds for this :D
akkakarla
09-01 04:45 PM
Then, I am unlucky then...Can you check your message please...i got interviewed in 10/2005 in Boston and once again in July 2008. They mentioned it is pending visa number available..
chi_shark
05-07 11:21 PM
Hi Friends,
Recently, my brother's wife got GC-rejection. Though, my brother has already received his GC. The reason is : her status was invalid for a month in US. She got different I-94 expiration date than him during her first visit in 1999, though they landed here together. But, her I-94 expired earlier than my brother and he extended her Visa based on his I-94 expiration date. My brother did not realize it until now.
What are her option now? The attorney is applying for re-consideration based on husband & kids status (US born), but, they said chances of the acceptance are very slim. They are well settled here. Now, they need to go back to India just because of her GC-rejection. And of course she can not come back here again unless she applies for H1-B. This is very devastating for them after living here for more than 10 yrs.
Has anyone faced similar situation earlier. I guess it is a very common mistake and there must be some solution. Please share your thoughts/experience.
Thanks,
hi_mkg
i am thinking that this is a liar's post... i am very surprised that USCIS went to extent of finding H4 inconsistencies and denying a dependent GC... that would take the cake... it makes it sound like USCIS is out to catch people with the smallest slightest mistakes... i do not think that is the case...
Recently, my brother's wife got GC-rejection. Though, my brother has already received his GC. The reason is : her status was invalid for a month in US. She got different I-94 expiration date than him during her first visit in 1999, though they landed here together. But, her I-94 expired earlier than my brother and he extended her Visa based on his I-94 expiration date. My brother did not realize it until now.
What are her option now? The attorney is applying for re-consideration based on husband & kids status (US born), but, they said chances of the acceptance are very slim. They are well settled here. Now, they need to go back to India just because of her GC-rejection. And of course she can not come back here again unless she applies for H1-B. This is very devastating for them after living here for more than 10 yrs.
Has anyone faced similar situation earlier. I guess it is a very common mistake and there must be some solution. Please share your thoughts/experience.
Thanks,
hi_mkg
i am thinking that this is a liar's post... i am very surprised that USCIS went to extent of finding H4 inconsistencies and denying a dependent GC... that would take the cake... it makes it sound like USCIS is out to catch people with the smallest slightest mistakes... i do not think that is the case...
