dollargc
09-20 09:10 PM
My 140 was received at TSC on 23 APR 2007. I also have an lud 08/05 which is a sunday.
does anybody see a pattern.
I140 filed Apr 19 2007
I140 Approved Apr 23rd 2007
I485 filed ..on July 24th 2007 to TEXAS
LUD on I140 08/05/2007
does anybody see a pattern.
I140 filed Apr 19 2007
I140 Approved Apr 23rd 2007
I485 filed ..on July 24th 2007 to TEXAS
LUD on I140 08/05/2007
ujjvalkoul
01-30 06:04 PM
in short....when they cannot determine ur duration of stay..u get a one year license...interesting...wonder if you still have H1B and 485 pending what will the SAVE system pick for ur status...so unless for all AOS applications we can get EADs for 3 years, we will have to get DLs every year...given they accept EAD as a status/duration of stay proof..which they wont coz they will be looking at SAVE only for verifying appplicant status/duration of stay.....
We are looking at a big mess folks...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Comment: Commenters said that this provision would be unduly
burdensome for many individuals who have lawful status for extended
periods of time, such as F and J visa holders, and specifically
expressed concern that the rule is eliminating a long-standing
provision for J-1 participants, who, under State Department
regulations, are entitled to a thirty-day grace period after completion
of their programs to travel within the United States One of these
commenters suggested that States be allowed to use the end dates listed
on the certificates of eligibility for each of these visa types as the
``ending date'' of status for the purpose of obtaining a driver's
license.
Response: Again, the determination for lawful status in the United
States will be made by the SAVE system, not particular documents. SAVE
takes into account the grace periods to which those in certain F and J
statuses are generally entitled. It should be noted, however, that
since F and J non-immigrants are admitted for ``duration of status,''
which is an indeterminate period, they would normally be issued
licenses valid for one year.
We are looking at a big mess folks...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Comment: Commenters said that this provision would be unduly
burdensome for many individuals who have lawful status for extended
periods of time, such as F and J visa holders, and specifically
expressed concern that the rule is eliminating a long-standing
provision for J-1 participants, who, under State Department
regulations, are entitled to a thirty-day grace period after completion
of their programs to travel within the United States One of these
commenters suggested that States be allowed to use the end dates listed
on the certificates of eligibility for each of these visa types as the
``ending date'' of status for the purpose of obtaining a driver's
license.
Response: Again, the determination for lawful status in the United
States will be made by the SAVE system, not particular documents. SAVE
takes into account the grace periods to which those in certain F and J
statuses are generally entitled. It should be noted, however, that
since F and J non-immigrants are admitted for ``duration of status,''
which is an indeterminate period, they would normally be issued
licenses valid for one year.
uslegals
11-12 08:59 AM
thanks desertfox ! i I did apply before July 30, 2007 (recd. date for 485 is 7/17/07) which means that i do have to pay the fees for AP. I will go ahead and apply online.
Enjoy the weekend!
Enjoy the weekend!
getgc2008
07-30 09:17 AM
direct online filing for I485
more...
Wish_Good
06-30 04:07 PM
My Sincere Thanks to Mr. Ari for responding to my post.
Here Iam posting additional details about my case:
Company A: Labor approved in Dec 2006. Applied I-140 in June 2007 and got RFE regarding my Educational Transcripts Which was responded in time and USCIS received on Dec 5, 2007. Then Got EAD and AP approved. On Apr3 2008 I-140 Denied (I-140 was denied - due to 3yr degree) then I-485 denied on June 26th 2008. So, First applied MTR for I-140 which was denied on Feb, 2009. Then applied one more MTR (Appeal) for I-140 on March 13th, 2009 (check cashed by USCIS... receipt copy not yet received).
Suddenly in the recent past month I see that, My I-485 status updated saying -Transferred and now pending @ Texas service center (got a notice) and now today I saw above mentioned status.
But "When I was on my 7th year of H-1B (valid upto Apr 2009)" jumped (Transferred my H1B) to Company B. And now Iam with Company B.
Thanks a lot in Advance.
Here Iam posting additional details about my case:
Company A: Labor approved in Dec 2006. Applied I-140 in June 2007 and got RFE regarding my Educational Transcripts Which was responded in time and USCIS received on Dec 5, 2007. Then Got EAD and AP approved. On Apr3 2008 I-140 Denied (I-140 was denied - due to 3yr degree) then I-485 denied on June 26th 2008. So, First applied MTR for I-140 which was denied on Feb, 2009. Then applied one more MTR (Appeal) for I-140 on March 13th, 2009 (check cashed by USCIS... receipt copy not yet received).
Suddenly in the recent past month I see that, My I-485 status updated saying -Transferred and now pending @ Texas service center (got a notice) and now today I saw above mentioned status.
But "When I was on my 7th year of H-1B (valid upto Apr 2009)" jumped (Transferred my H1B) to Company B. And now Iam with Company B.
Thanks a lot in Advance.
wandmaker
03-05 02:05 PM
Hi,
I am in need of some advice. I am on first h1b extension with 2.5 hears left. I have an MS but was filed under eb3 with priority date of march 2005 (didn't knew about priority categories at that time). Now I am feeling a bit stagnant in my current job, but have always felt myself constrained thinking about restarting the GC process from zero. Given the current eb3 condition and my priority date what would you suggest I should do? Switch job, get a salary raise, restart under eb2 or continue doing whatever I do hoping eb3 will become current in some reasonable time and i'll be free ?
Thanks for any inputs/thoughts.
eb3retro, As you may have noticed, this was my first post ever. So I am not aware of what rules you guys have been trying to enforce on this forum. However I like to have my privacy and refuse to share any info that is not pertinent or until I feel comfortable enough. so long .....
IV does not collect any identifiable information. The information is being requested is all about petitions that you had filed, which no way affects your privacy in my personal opinion. These information will help IV to slice and dice the data and present it to lawmakers when the need arises.
It is up to you to contribute to these efforts with clean data. I would suggest you to get a paid consultation from an immigration attorney until you become comfortable with IV, people and its forum
I am in need of some advice. I am on first h1b extension with 2.5 hears left. I have an MS but was filed under eb3 with priority date of march 2005 (didn't knew about priority categories at that time). Now I am feeling a bit stagnant in my current job, but have always felt myself constrained thinking about restarting the GC process from zero. Given the current eb3 condition and my priority date what would you suggest I should do? Switch job, get a salary raise, restart under eb2 or continue doing whatever I do hoping eb3 will become current in some reasonable time and i'll be free ?
Thanks for any inputs/thoughts.
eb3retro, As you may have noticed, this was my first post ever. So I am not aware of what rules you guys have been trying to enforce on this forum. However I like to have my privacy and refuse to share any info that is not pertinent or until I feel comfortable enough. so long .....
IV does not collect any identifiable information. The information is being requested is all about petitions that you had filed, which no way affects your privacy in my personal opinion. These information will help IV to slice and dice the data and present it to lawmakers when the need arises.
It is up to you to contribute to these efforts with clean data. I would suggest you to get a paid consultation from an immigration attorney until you become comfortable with IV, people and its forum
more...
PDOCT05
10-29 11:35 AM
Did you get the receipt for your dependent's 485 application or was it rejected before they issued a receipt?
They issued receipt(starting with LIN 08XXXXXXX) and it came with the status as rejected. And infact they returned complete application.They asked me to correct and re-send the application to different P.O.Box after correcting.
They issued receipt(starting with LIN 08XXXXXXX) and it came with the status as rejected. And infact they returned complete application.They asked me to correct and re-send the application to different P.O.Box after correcting.
starving_dog
07-13 01:37 PM
Your bank statement should back-up the deposit values for the five different pay periods. The pay-stubs will fly because the pay period encompasses the time span required.
more...
leo2606
09-15 08:10 PM
Looks like you are lonely and lunatic, targeting the person trying to motivate people like you.
Chandu keeps opening the threads and keeps talking to himself....he is so lonely.
Chandu keeps opening the threads and keeps talking to himself....he is so lonely.
tikka
06-07 04:28 PM
please Contribute.
Iv Needs Funds
Iv Needs Funds
more...
eb3India
09-25 10:19 AM
Here is the mail from AILA,
September 25, 2006
Dear Immigration Advocates-
Your help is STILL needed TODAY! Senate Appropriators will meet late THIS AFTERNOON to decide if enforcement-only bills will be included in the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations package. Urge your Senators to oppose efforts to attach anti-immigration measures to this must-pass bill. Call or email your Senators TODAY - encourage them to weigh-in with Senate Appropriators about this urgent matter.
You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
Email your Senators through Contact Congress on AILA's website. We've already created a sample letter for you to send. All you need to do is enter your zip code, hit send, and your voice will be heard in Congress.
Call your Senators, you can find their telephone numbers in our Congressional Directory and you can use these talking points to help you when you call:
� Congress should stop playing politics with immigration and pass comprehensive immigration reform. These enforcement-only bills will do nothing to enhance border security and will not move us one inch closer to fixing our broken immigration system.
� Attaching these bills to DHS appropriations circumvents the legislative process on an issue of critical national importance; it undermines the intense and unflagging efforts of the Senate to solve this crisis; and it rewards the House for spending the summer attacking the Senate while abdicating its responsibility to the American people.
� Senators should forcefully oppose this effort by the House to nullify the Senate's bi-partison solution. If the Senate acquiesces on these provisions, the House will only be emboldened and will never return to debate comprehensive reform. This will not be "enforcement-first", it will be "enforcement-only."
� For laws to work, they must be realistic and fair. Our current immigration laws are neither: proposals like these that ignore the reality that immigrants come here to work and to be with their families are destined to fail.
� Giving the government unchecked powers to punish immigrants, and making local police chase after immigrants, will only drive undocumented immigrants further underground. It will not fix the problem; it will make matters worse.
We called you to action last week to alert you to an underhanded political strategy from immigration restrictionists to attach three enforcement-only bills to the DHS appropriations bill, a bill that must pass this year. You and your colleagues sent close to 2,000 letters to Congress, but we'll need more letters and phone calls in order to ensure that Senate Appropriators exclude these measures from the bill.
Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are working behind closed doors and using procedural mechanisms to attach enforcement-only provisions contained in three bills (H.R. 6094, H.R. 6095, and H.R. 4830) to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, a piece of legislation that must pass this year. Although House leaders label these bills "border security" legislation, they are in fact harsh enforcement measures lifted from Rep. Sensenbrenner's H.R. 4437 that endanger due process rights and do little to make our borders more secure. You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
If these provisions are attached to the must-pass DHS bill, it will be nearly impossible to defeat them. Our best defense against this backdoor strategy is to put pressure on each U.S. Senator and encourage them to oppose any attempt to attach, or further these three enforcement-only bills. We're working hard in Washington to derail these political machinations, but we can't do it alone. We need your help. Please email or call both of your Senators today.
Over the summer House leadership used dozens of faux hearings to stage public displays of aversion to immigration reform. While they kept the media busy and their restrictionist base roiled, they failed to change the minds of the majority of Americans who support a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Nor did they succeed in backing down the U.S. Senators who supported S. 2611, a strong step towards comprehensive immigration reform. Now that House leaders know that the full Senate won't pass their enforcement-only agenda, they have resorted to closed-door politicking. We must fight to prevent the breach of justice that would result from attaching these enforcement-only bills to must-pass legislation.
Please call and email your Senators today. Now is the time for action.
Sincerely,
Marshall
Marshall Fitz
Director of Advocacy, AILA
Email Marshall
The enforcement-only provisions are:
� Sections 101 and 102 of the Dangerous Alien Detention Act contained in H.R. 6094, which seek to legitimize the practice of indefinite detention of aliens awaiting removal, despite Supreme Court decisions requiring elimination of this practice;
� Section 201 of the Criminal Alien Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would expand the use of expedited removal proceedings to individuals already in the United States - even individuals who have resided here for years - in ways that would significantly increase the risk of deporting innocent people;
� Sections 301-303 of the Alien Gang Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would grant unfettered discretion to the executive branch to designate "criminal street gangs" and then strip members of such gangs of virtually all rights;
� Section 101 of H.R. 6095, which gives state and local police authority to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for civil violations of immigration status;
� Sections 301 and 302 of the Ending Catch and Release Act contained in H.R. 6095, which would limit the power of federal courts to grant injunctive relief in civil immigration proceedings, despite acknowledgement by DOJ that such relief does not interfere with efforts to end the practice of catch-and-release.
September 25, 2006
Dear Immigration Advocates-
Your help is STILL needed TODAY! Senate Appropriators will meet late THIS AFTERNOON to decide if enforcement-only bills will be included in the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations package. Urge your Senators to oppose efforts to attach anti-immigration measures to this must-pass bill. Call or email your Senators TODAY - encourage them to weigh-in with Senate Appropriators about this urgent matter.
You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
Email your Senators through Contact Congress on AILA's website. We've already created a sample letter for you to send. All you need to do is enter your zip code, hit send, and your voice will be heard in Congress.
Call your Senators, you can find their telephone numbers in our Congressional Directory and you can use these talking points to help you when you call:
� Congress should stop playing politics with immigration and pass comprehensive immigration reform. These enforcement-only bills will do nothing to enhance border security and will not move us one inch closer to fixing our broken immigration system.
� Attaching these bills to DHS appropriations circumvents the legislative process on an issue of critical national importance; it undermines the intense and unflagging efforts of the Senate to solve this crisis; and it rewards the House for spending the summer attacking the Senate while abdicating its responsibility to the American people.
� Senators should forcefully oppose this effort by the House to nullify the Senate's bi-partison solution. If the Senate acquiesces on these provisions, the House will only be emboldened and will never return to debate comprehensive reform. This will not be "enforcement-first", it will be "enforcement-only."
� For laws to work, they must be realistic and fair. Our current immigration laws are neither: proposals like these that ignore the reality that immigrants come here to work and to be with their families are destined to fail.
� Giving the government unchecked powers to punish immigrants, and making local police chase after immigrants, will only drive undocumented immigrants further underground. It will not fix the problem; it will make matters worse.
We called you to action last week to alert you to an underhanded political strategy from immigration restrictionists to attach three enforcement-only bills to the DHS appropriations bill, a bill that must pass this year. You and your colleagues sent close to 2,000 letters to Congress, but we'll need more letters and phone calls in order to ensure that Senate Appropriators exclude these measures from the bill.
Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are working behind closed doors and using procedural mechanisms to attach enforcement-only provisions contained in three bills (H.R. 6094, H.R. 6095, and H.R. 4830) to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, a piece of legislation that must pass this year. Although House leaders label these bills "border security" legislation, they are in fact harsh enforcement measures lifted from Rep. Sensenbrenner's H.R. 4437 that endanger due process rights and do little to make our borders more secure. You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
If these provisions are attached to the must-pass DHS bill, it will be nearly impossible to defeat them. Our best defense against this backdoor strategy is to put pressure on each U.S. Senator and encourage them to oppose any attempt to attach, or further these three enforcement-only bills. We're working hard in Washington to derail these political machinations, but we can't do it alone. We need your help. Please email or call both of your Senators today.
Over the summer House leadership used dozens of faux hearings to stage public displays of aversion to immigration reform. While they kept the media busy and their restrictionist base roiled, they failed to change the minds of the majority of Americans who support a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Nor did they succeed in backing down the U.S. Senators who supported S. 2611, a strong step towards comprehensive immigration reform. Now that House leaders know that the full Senate won't pass their enforcement-only agenda, they have resorted to closed-door politicking. We must fight to prevent the breach of justice that would result from attaching these enforcement-only bills to must-pass legislation.
Please call and email your Senators today. Now is the time for action.
Sincerely,
Marshall
Marshall Fitz
Director of Advocacy, AILA
Email Marshall
The enforcement-only provisions are:
� Sections 101 and 102 of the Dangerous Alien Detention Act contained in H.R. 6094, which seek to legitimize the practice of indefinite detention of aliens awaiting removal, despite Supreme Court decisions requiring elimination of this practice;
� Section 201 of the Criminal Alien Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would expand the use of expedited removal proceedings to individuals already in the United States - even individuals who have resided here for years - in ways that would significantly increase the risk of deporting innocent people;
� Sections 301-303 of the Alien Gang Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would grant unfettered discretion to the executive branch to designate "criminal street gangs" and then strip members of such gangs of virtually all rights;
� Section 101 of H.R. 6095, which gives state and local police authority to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for civil violations of immigration status;
� Sections 301 and 302 of the Ending Catch and Release Act contained in H.R. 6095, which would limit the power of federal courts to grant injunctive relief in civil immigration proceedings, despite acknowledgement by DOJ that such relief does not interfere with efforts to end the practice of catch-and-release.
gcnirvana
04-26 08:14 PM
Brownback rescinds immigration bill support
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20070425-110212-8486r.htm
Look at this story. Sen Brownback, who supported last year senate passed CIR, now turning back. Sen. McCain already back off.
"I would not vote for the same bill," Mr. Brownback told reporters yesterday morning, saying that after the bill passed the Senate he had a chance to study its effects and decided it led to too much immigration.
It's a major reversal for a man who is listed as one of seven original sponsors of the bill, along with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, and Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, who spearheaded the bill.
I agree with Logiclife. This is a news article and gcretroiv should have posted it in the News Article Thread. This way forum members can read it and it does not stick out as bad as it is right now.
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20070425-110212-8486r.htm
Look at this story. Sen Brownback, who supported last year senate passed CIR, now turning back. Sen. McCain already back off.
"I would not vote for the same bill," Mr. Brownback told reporters yesterday morning, saying that after the bill passed the Senate he had a chance to study its effects and decided it led to too much immigration.
It's a major reversal for a man who is listed as one of seven original sponsors of the bill, along with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, and Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, who spearheaded the bill.
I agree with Logiclife. This is a news article and gcretroiv should have posted it in the News Article Thread. This way forum members can read it and it does not stick out as bad as it is right now.
more...
sandy_anand
10-21 05:08 PM
sorry folks ... new member here...
my profile should have some info now....
Welcome waitingimmigrant!
my profile should have some info now....
Welcome waitingimmigrant!
aranya
07-03 06:30 PM
So I have to join the new employer only after the new I-140 is approved right..my current I-140 is already approved..
You can move to a new employer and start EB-2 (PERM based LC, I-140 etc.) with them. You can still retain the old PD because your I-140 has been approved.
You can move to a new employer and start EB-2 (PERM based LC, I-140 etc.) with them. You can still retain the old PD because your I-140 has been approved.
more...
yestogc
05-31 05:05 PM
Will Obama fool his foot steps ?
Almond
07-18 09:00 AM
My friend's waiting to hear word on her application which is with the Philadelphia Backlog center. I read on here that they will finish processing these applications within the next 2 months and that will be it and at this point she and I are worried because another friend of ours got a letter asking the employer if he was still interested in sponsoring him (this was about 8 months ago or so) whereas she never did. The lawyer (same dope I go to) tells her to just wait, but the deadline is so close, it's scary. So, should she call, what can she do? By the way, she's been waiting since 2001. Thanks!
more...
jayleno
08-27 03:24 PM
None of the responses can help you unless you state your state. Believe me, I have lived in 7 states till now. I went to the dmv in 4 of them.
I went for Driver licence renewal.I have I797 H1B notice of approval for 2 more years.But I don't have it stamped in passport.So when they see it,they said they won't consider it as visa on passport is not valid and expired.Though I am not using ,I have valid EAD card also.So When I shown it ,they renewd my licence.Now I am thinking,is it ok If I use my EAD card for licence renewal as I am not using EAD status now.I want to be on H1B only.I don't want to use EAD now. can anybody tell me will it be alright to use EAD?Does it effect anywhere in my status?
Please respond.
I went for Driver licence renewal.I have I797 H1B notice of approval for 2 more years.But I don't have it stamped in passport.So when they see it,they said they won't consider it as visa on passport is not valid and expired.Though I am not using ,I have valid EAD card also.So When I shown it ,they renewd my licence.Now I am thinking,is it ok If I use my EAD card for licence renewal as I am not using EAD status now.I want to be on H1B only.I don't want to use EAD now. can anybody tell me will it be alright to use EAD?Does it effect anywhere in my status?
Please respond.
FredG
June 2nd, 2004, 09:14 PM
I can now sort of say I've been published!Way to go!! Congratulations!!