gemini23
07-27 03:21 PM
thanks for all the answers.
wallpaper JUSTIN BIEBERgt;gt;gt;;0
ash0210
08-16 09:36 AM
US Date format on your AP would create some confusion in Immigration officer at Airport in India while coming back to USA..
On Bombay air port, I struggled for 5 minutes on AP date..US dates are MMDDYY format while India have DDMMYY...Our AP date was 9/7/2005 (Sep 7 2005) & we were travelling back to US on Aug 2, 2005 (India format 2/8/2005)...Immigration officer told us that WE Cant travel because our AP was expirered on Jul 9, 2007..I told him that USA dates are in MMDDYY format but he did not listened..then he called his Supervisor, his boss looked at our AP & he also said WE cant travel....Then I "politely" argued that dates in USA are MMDDYY format & my AP is valid...Somehow, his colleague on next counter was listening our converastion with him (& his Boss) and told our IO that I am right and my AP was valid....some how he was convinced by his colleguae and we were let go...
All of our family were tense...so take care of AP date format...
On Bombay air port, I struggled for 5 minutes on AP date..US dates are MMDDYY format while India have DDMMYY...Our AP date was 9/7/2005 (Sep 7 2005) & we were travelling back to US on Aug 2, 2005 (India format 2/8/2005)...Immigration officer told us that WE Cant travel because our AP was expirered on Jul 9, 2007..I told him that USA dates are in MMDDYY format but he did not listened..then he called his Supervisor, his boss looked at our AP & he also said WE cant travel....Then I "politely" argued that dates in USA are MMDDYY format & my AP is valid...Somehow, his colleague on next counter was listening our converastion with him (& his Boss) and told our IO that I am right and my AP was valid....some how he was convinced by his colleguae and we were let go...
All of our family were tense...so take care of AP date format...
fromnaija
09-26 01:32 PM
Hi All,
My visa will expire (6 yrs completion) in the month of October 2007. What can I do next. Will I get an years extension based on the Green card filing. What is the standard procedure ?
CCC2006
Fiirst, I think you should have started a new thread with your question and not bury it under this discussion. Having said that, to get an extension after the six year H limit, you need to have labor certification application filed at least 365 days prior to your expiry date or alternatively have an immigrant petition approved on your behalf by that date.
My visa will expire (6 yrs completion) in the month of October 2007. What can I do next. Will I get an years extension based on the Green card filing. What is the standard procedure ?
CCC2006
Fiirst, I think you should have started a new thread with your question and not bury it under this discussion. Having said that, to get an extension after the six year H limit, you need to have labor certification application filed at least 365 days prior to your expiry date or alternatively have an immigrant petition approved on your behalf by that date.
2011 justin bieber album artwork.
anilsal
12-01 08:40 PM
via regular mail. There is no tracking available. If it is lost, it is lost. That is what I hate about both the EAD and AP process.:mad:
In my experience, the AP has been received anywhere from 4 days to 7 days after "the document has been mailed" notice.
In my experience, the AP has been received anywhere from 4 days to 7 days after "the document has been mailed" notice.
more...
lostinbeta
10-03 12:18 PM
I replied to that thread :)
kumar26fl
09-22 11:53 PM
"Word-of-Mouth" seems to be the most effective way of campaigning! I had sent mails, and left voice to couple of my friends some time back. They became aware of IV, but not yet registered. Talked to them today, and got both of them registered. (kasas & aksrao).
Requested them to spread the word, "IV". I am sure they will read this thread and campaign for "IV".
Thanks
Requested them to spread the word, "IV". I am sure they will read this thread and campaign for "IV".
Thanks
more...
aranya
07-03 10:26 AM
agree with amsgc regarding H1 "transfer"
AFAIK,
1] One can enter US on a valid visa stamp in the passport based on a previous employer if you have a valid current status with the new employer. It looks like you are not there yet because your new H1 has not been approved yet. A reciept notice is not enough to enter.
2] You are currently working for Employer B and you do not have an employer-employee relationship with A anymore. So it maybe considered "lying" to the USCIS/ICE/Border Patrol if you attempt to enter US claiming that you work for "A".
3] Going out of the US while H1 application is pending automatically invalidates the application.
Talk to a lawyer before you go.
AFAIK,
1] One can enter US on a valid visa stamp in the passport based on a previous employer if you have a valid current status with the new employer. It looks like you are not there yet because your new H1 has not been approved yet. A reciept notice is not enough to enter.
2] You are currently working for Employer B and you do not have an employer-employee relationship with A anymore. So it maybe considered "lying" to the USCIS/ICE/Border Patrol if you attempt to enter US claiming that you work for "A".
3] Going out of the US while H1 application is pending automatically invalidates the application.
Talk to a lawyer before you go.
2010 justin bieber album cover
dollar500
08-02 11:27 PM
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (Title I of Pub. L. 106 - 313 enacted on October 17, 2000) contained several provisions intended to increase the availability of Employment-based numbers. Pub. L. 106-313 recaptured those Employment-based numbers that were available but not used in Fiscal Years 1999 and 2000, creating a �pool� of 130,107 numbers which could be allocated to applicants in the Employment First, Second, and Third preference categories once the annual Employment-based numerical limit has been reached. Approximately 101,000 of these �pool� numbers remain available for use during FY-1005. Pub. L. 106-313 also removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available.
Changes in CIS processing procedures during the past two years created a significant backlog of cases and a consequent reduction in demand for numbers.
During the time that the Employment-based categories have remained �Current� many tens of thousands of applicants have become eligible to file for adjustment of status. Last summer, CIS notified Congress of its intent to eliminate its current backlogs by the end of FY-2006. As a result of the CIS backlog reduction effort, we are now experiencing very heavy visa demand as CIS has begun to process cases to conclusion. Section 201(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that not more than 27 percent of the Employment-based annual limit may be used in each of the first three quarters of a fiscal year. Based on the current rate of demand, the 27 percent level for the first quarter of FY-2005 will be exceeded by the end of December.
It has therefore become necessary to impose an Employment-based Third preference cut-off date for January in order to limit number use during the second quarter. Many of the cases have priority dates that are several years old, and the cut-off date represents the first priority date that cannot be accommodated for final processing. The cut-off date will apply only to the following chargeability areas: China-mainland born, India, and Philippines. Cut-off date movement during the remainder of FY-2005 depends on the extent of future visa demand. No specific predictions are possible at this time.
Changes in CIS processing procedures during the past two years created a significant backlog of cases and a consequent reduction in demand for numbers.
During the time that the Employment-based categories have remained �Current� many tens of thousands of applicants have become eligible to file for adjustment of status. Last summer, CIS notified Congress of its intent to eliminate its current backlogs by the end of FY-2006. As a result of the CIS backlog reduction effort, we are now experiencing very heavy visa demand as CIS has begun to process cases to conclusion. Section 201(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that not more than 27 percent of the Employment-based annual limit may be used in each of the first three quarters of a fiscal year. Based on the current rate of demand, the 27 percent level for the first quarter of FY-2005 will be exceeded by the end of December.
It has therefore become necessary to impose an Employment-based Third preference cut-off date for January in order to limit number use during the second quarter. Many of the cases have priority dates that are several years old, and the cut-off date represents the first priority date that cannot be accommodated for final processing. The cut-off date will apply only to the following chargeability areas: China-mainland born, India, and Philippines. Cut-off date movement during the remainder of FY-2005 depends on the extent of future visa demand. No specific predictions are possible at this time.
more...
ssnd03
03-04 02:57 PM
Finally some sanity on FBI Namecheck from the DHS head honcho Michael Chertoff. He is now saying things which everybody has been screaming for the last three four years. I have highlighted those. But it does take that long for wheels to turn even in the most liberal democracy.
Question: Mr. Secretary, you had, at the very beginning, laid out some great progress that's been made in terms of preventing bad people from getting in. And part of the Homeland Security mission, which is a challenging one, is that while you are responsible for protecting against bad things, you're also responsible for facilitating good things. And be that the flow of people, in this case, USCIS is responsible for that for the department. They've begun a $3.5 billion transformation. And I'm hoping you could speak to that in two ways. What's your concept of success in that, in terms of the national security part of it, the operational excellence part of it, and customer service part of it?
Secretary Chertoff: Three -- two main things. One is, we have to move from a paper-based system to a totally electronically-based system. We still have too much paper, and it's hard to track, it's hard to manage, and it takes a lot of time.
The second piece is, I want to rebuild -- re-engineer the system in a couple of ways. One is, and the most urgent, is to deal with the background check problem. It just takes way too long for the Bureau to complete background checks for a small but a significant number of people. The majority of people -- you know, if the name doesn't pop up on anything in the -- it's pretty quick. But for a small number -- but still significant, and certainly to the individual, significant -- if their name crops up and it's an older case, and it's in a file somewhere, someone has got to hunt it down. And to be perfectly honest, that is not a top priority job for an agent, is to go through an old paper record sitting in a warehouse.
Looking forward as we go electronically, and as the Bureau goes electronically, that problem will diminish. But looking backwards we have to re-engineer the system to be a little tougher. And one of the things we did, for example, with the green cards was we said, for background checks that took longer than six months, we would give you a green card, and then if it turned out the background check later revealed a problem, we would take the green card away.
Now why did we do that -- because I got criticized, �Oh, you're sacrificing national security.� Here's why. First of all, if you haven't been -- if it's going to take longer than six months, it's clear that you're not on a Terrorist Watch List, you haven't been convicted of a crime, you haven't been indicted for a crime. In other words, most of the major things you would worry about -- it's a very easy thing to determine whether you've had a problem or not. What you're not going to get in that six months is the guy whose name came up in a file somewhere. And the vast majority of those are benign mentions.
Secondly, you're here. If you're going to do something bad, you're still here legally. The green card -- it's not like we're bringing you in from overseas. So if you think about it logically, the risk of giving you the green card with the understanding that it can be pulled away if something turns up, it's a minimal risk. It's a minimal, marginal risk. Whereas the customer service value of giving someone the green card is high. That's an example of trying to be more cost-benefit in the system.
See
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=24818
Question: Mr. Secretary, you had, at the very beginning, laid out some great progress that's been made in terms of preventing bad people from getting in. And part of the Homeland Security mission, which is a challenging one, is that while you are responsible for protecting against bad things, you're also responsible for facilitating good things. And be that the flow of people, in this case, USCIS is responsible for that for the department. They've begun a $3.5 billion transformation. And I'm hoping you could speak to that in two ways. What's your concept of success in that, in terms of the national security part of it, the operational excellence part of it, and customer service part of it?
Secretary Chertoff: Three -- two main things. One is, we have to move from a paper-based system to a totally electronically-based system. We still have too much paper, and it's hard to track, it's hard to manage, and it takes a lot of time.
The second piece is, I want to rebuild -- re-engineer the system in a couple of ways. One is, and the most urgent, is to deal with the background check problem. It just takes way too long for the Bureau to complete background checks for a small but a significant number of people. The majority of people -- you know, if the name doesn't pop up on anything in the -- it's pretty quick. But for a small number -- but still significant, and certainly to the individual, significant -- if their name crops up and it's an older case, and it's in a file somewhere, someone has got to hunt it down. And to be perfectly honest, that is not a top priority job for an agent, is to go through an old paper record sitting in a warehouse.
Looking forward as we go electronically, and as the Bureau goes electronically, that problem will diminish. But looking backwards we have to re-engineer the system to be a little tougher. And one of the things we did, for example, with the green cards was we said, for background checks that took longer than six months, we would give you a green card, and then if it turned out the background check later revealed a problem, we would take the green card away.
Now why did we do that -- because I got criticized, �Oh, you're sacrificing national security.� Here's why. First of all, if you haven't been -- if it's going to take longer than six months, it's clear that you're not on a Terrorist Watch List, you haven't been convicted of a crime, you haven't been indicted for a crime. In other words, most of the major things you would worry about -- it's a very easy thing to determine whether you've had a problem or not. What you're not going to get in that six months is the guy whose name came up in a file somewhere. And the vast majority of those are benign mentions.
Secondly, you're here. If you're going to do something bad, you're still here legally. The green card -- it's not like we're bringing you in from overseas. So if you think about it logically, the risk of giving you the green card with the understanding that it can be pulled away if something turns up, it's a minimal risk. It's a minimal, marginal risk. Whereas the customer service value of giving someone the green card is high. That's an example of trying to be more cost-benefit in the system.
See
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=24818
hair very cute justin bieber
ash0210
11-21 10:29 AM
In the context of Premium processing of H1B�s, I-140, EAD�s etc can we press our demands to newly elected Dems to have I-485 premium processing by paying extra $$$ to USCIS?
"Premium GC processing" will work as follows:
Pre-processing Condition/Base Rules:
If your I-140 is approved & you have filed I-485 and your I-485 is pending for more than 575 or 600 days (whats ever USCIS website says of # days..) is mentioned against your case#.....
...THEN pay USCIS e.g. $1000 or $0000 & get your "GC" !!!
USCIS will assign temporary VISA# for such "Premium Paid GC" and when VISA# will be available that VISA# will be assigned to your " Premium Paid GC"..
Premium Paid GC - Few base Rules:
Before issuing " Premium Paid GC ", USCIS will ensure/check their existing GC process along with following additional checks:
1. Pre- adjudicated:
Your case is Pre-adjudicated, I-140 approved, file is complete & case is waiting ONLY for Visa# availability
2. Income Tax & W2�s:
Applicant pays Income Tax, files W2�s for say 3-4 years
3. EAD�s more than 3:
I 485 applicants are repeatedly applying for EAD's for more than 2 to 3 years
4. Check Legal entry in USA:
Copy of I-94 to ensure that I-485 applicant is �Legally� entered in USA
5. Security Threat/Name Check:
Name check is complete & applicant is NO longer a "Threat" to National security, if Name check is NOT done, expedite it to FBI. If Name Check is not completed by FBI, request I-485 applicant to submit �Local� Police station �Clearance records� from all the �Address� where he/she stayed in USA (address specified in Labor). If a person is here for more than say 4-5 years, have clean �Police clearance record� and law abiding �Legal� Tax payer, how he/she can be threat to National Security?
6. FP:
Finger Printing at least once (NOT over by 15 months etc..)
7. Biometric:
I-485 applicants Biometric 2 (or 1,2,3) has been done at least one time
8. H1B/H4 extensions:
I-485 Primary applicant (his/her derivative) are completed their H1B extension more than 6 years and repeatedly extending H1/H4�s (to say enough, he/she is here for more than 6 years legally)
After applying this Basic Thumb Rules, issue " Premium GC" to applicant & assign VISA# later whenever VISA# is available.
Sorry if that title is misleading.
How many people here are positive that USCIS will come up with premium processing feature for I-485 stage?
Don' worry about the available visa numbers. Just express your hunch feeling.
Incrementally the waiting game is being reduced by incorporating premium processing for H1-B, Labor and lately I-140. Why not for I-485?
I am hopefull of this happening next year.
What about you?
"Premium GC processing" will work as follows:
Pre-processing Condition/Base Rules:
If your I-140 is approved & you have filed I-485 and your I-485 is pending for more than 575 or 600 days (whats ever USCIS website says of # days..) is mentioned against your case#.....
...THEN pay USCIS e.g. $1000 or $0000 & get your "GC" !!!
USCIS will assign temporary VISA# for such "Premium Paid GC" and when VISA# will be available that VISA# will be assigned to your " Premium Paid GC"..
Premium Paid GC - Few base Rules:
Before issuing " Premium Paid GC ", USCIS will ensure/check their existing GC process along with following additional checks:
1. Pre- adjudicated:
Your case is Pre-adjudicated, I-140 approved, file is complete & case is waiting ONLY for Visa# availability
2. Income Tax & W2�s:
Applicant pays Income Tax, files W2�s for say 3-4 years
3. EAD�s more than 3:
I 485 applicants are repeatedly applying for EAD's for more than 2 to 3 years
4. Check Legal entry in USA:
Copy of I-94 to ensure that I-485 applicant is �Legally� entered in USA
5. Security Threat/Name Check:
Name check is complete & applicant is NO longer a "Threat" to National security, if Name check is NOT done, expedite it to FBI. If Name Check is not completed by FBI, request I-485 applicant to submit �Local� Police station �Clearance records� from all the �Address� where he/she stayed in USA (address specified in Labor). If a person is here for more than say 4-5 years, have clean �Police clearance record� and law abiding �Legal� Tax payer, how he/she can be threat to National Security?
6. FP:
Finger Printing at least once (NOT over by 15 months etc..)
7. Biometric:
I-485 applicants Biometric 2 (or 1,2,3) has been done at least one time
8. H1B/H4 extensions:
I-485 Primary applicant (his/her derivative) are completed their H1B extension more than 6 years and repeatedly extending H1/H4�s (to say enough, he/she is here for more than 6 years legally)
After applying this Basic Thumb Rules, issue " Premium GC" to applicant & assign VISA# later whenever VISA# is available.
Sorry if that title is misleading.
How many people here are positive that USCIS will come up with premium processing feature for I-485 stage?
Don' worry about the available visa numbers. Just express your hunch feeling.
Incrementally the waiting game is being reduced by incorporating premium processing for H1-B, Labor and lately I-140. Why not for I-485?
I am hopefull of this happening next year.
What about you?
more...
small2006
07-21 10:21 AM
FYI:
I don't know if this is old news but thought of sharing it anyway.
I was in the same boat as many others here i.e, no FP notice even 1yr after filing for 485. With my PD becoming current in Aug 2008, I called my attorney to see if he can do anything to help me out. He told me that due to several complaints from people like us and a law suit threat (or an actual lawsuit, not sure) from AILA, the Texas center has sent has set up an exclusive fax line for such requests. This system came into existence only about 2-3 weeks ago.
He sent a fax on my behalf to that number last Tuesday 7/15/08. My wife and I both received FP notices on Sat 7/19/08! So looks like for a change, something that’s set up for our own good is actually working. Frankly, I hadn’t pinned any hopes on the fax having a positive impact but I was pleasantly surprised. Our appointments are for next week.
Hope this little tip will help others in the same boat if their attorneys are either not aware and/or haven’t told their clients about it.
The fax number is not made available to the general public. Only attorneys have access to it.
BTW: As a result of all this, I haven't seen any LUD changes (soft or hard) on my case status online....I thought that was strange.
I don't know if this is old news but thought of sharing it anyway.
I was in the same boat as many others here i.e, no FP notice even 1yr after filing for 485. With my PD becoming current in Aug 2008, I called my attorney to see if he can do anything to help me out. He told me that due to several complaints from people like us and a law suit threat (or an actual lawsuit, not sure) from AILA, the Texas center has sent has set up an exclusive fax line for such requests. This system came into existence only about 2-3 weeks ago.
He sent a fax on my behalf to that number last Tuesday 7/15/08. My wife and I both received FP notices on Sat 7/19/08! So looks like for a change, something that’s set up for our own good is actually working. Frankly, I hadn’t pinned any hopes on the fax having a positive impact but I was pleasantly surprised. Our appointments are for next week.
Hope this little tip will help others in the same boat if their attorneys are either not aware and/or haven’t told their clients about it.
The fax number is not made available to the general public. Only attorneys have access to it.
BTW: As a result of all this, I haven't seen any LUD changes (soft or hard) on my case status online....I thought that was strange.
hot Justin Bieber did an
PBECVictim
03-12 07:09 PM
Did you get second finger print notice before approval? When did you go for first fingerprint notice?
After a long 5 years I finally received 485 case approved letter for both my case and my spouse's case. However the online status still shows pending. Is this common?. How long would it take for the online case status to be updated.
EB2- PB Dec2003
485 Filed date: 08/02/07
Texas service center
After a long 5 years I finally received 485 case approved letter for both my case and my spouse's case. However the online status still shows pending. Is this common?. How long would it take for the online case status to be updated.
EB2- PB Dec2003
485 Filed date: 08/02/07
Texas service center
more...
house justin bieber ride album
wangwei417
05-18 12:22 PM
Great works, guys. :o
tattoo Justin Bieber Christ.
gccovet
10-20 12:00 PM
Hi
I used AC21 to switch the company. First my new company said I have to use my existing old attorney for my I485 case. So, I asked my old attorney to prepare AC21 documents and mailed to USCIS, which is already done.
But now the attorney from new company is saying that they are again doing AC21 documents and will be sending to USCIS. On top, new attorney is asking me to fill G28 form. Is it necessary to file AC21 document twice or make it too confusing? And this G28 is only for me, not for my wife. I am confused with whole thing. How will this work? with my case transferred to new attorney and my wife's case still with old attorney? I also heard from this new attorney that most of the time G28 and AC21 documents will never reach to USCIS file and in that case, USCIS will communicate with old attorney. On one hand, I have to tell my old attorney that I am changing attorney but on other hand I am not even sure whether USCIS will accept or not. My old attorney has been always helpful and he has all my information and original documents.
Is it advisable to switch attorney when you have I-485 pending? and is this filing of AC21 documents twice necessary or will make more confusion in my case? What is advisable in this situation? What should I say to this new company attorney and what should I say to my old attorney? I am in big dilemma...
Please help. I need your suggestion.
Thanks,
BK
Most of the time people change attorney due to conflit of interest. If your old attorney was hired by your previous employer to do H1 etc stuff, he might have to be loyal to your previous employer.
G28 is a "power of attorney" form. This form will allow your attorney to act/reply on your behalf for legal immigration matters.
GCCovet
I used AC21 to switch the company. First my new company said I have to use my existing old attorney for my I485 case. So, I asked my old attorney to prepare AC21 documents and mailed to USCIS, which is already done.
But now the attorney from new company is saying that they are again doing AC21 documents and will be sending to USCIS. On top, new attorney is asking me to fill G28 form. Is it necessary to file AC21 document twice or make it too confusing? And this G28 is only for me, not for my wife. I am confused with whole thing. How will this work? with my case transferred to new attorney and my wife's case still with old attorney? I also heard from this new attorney that most of the time G28 and AC21 documents will never reach to USCIS file and in that case, USCIS will communicate with old attorney. On one hand, I have to tell my old attorney that I am changing attorney but on other hand I am not even sure whether USCIS will accept or not. My old attorney has been always helpful and he has all my information and original documents.
Is it advisable to switch attorney when you have I-485 pending? and is this filing of AC21 documents twice necessary or will make more confusion in my case? What is advisable in this situation? What should I say to this new company attorney and what should I say to my old attorney? I am in big dilemma...
Please help. I need your suggestion.
Thanks,
BK
Most of the time people change attorney due to conflit of interest. If your old attorney was hired by your previous employer to do H1 etc stuff, he might have to be loyal to your previous employer.
G28 is a "power of attorney" form. This form will allow your attorney to act/reply on your behalf for legal immigration matters.
GCCovet
more...
pictures Justin Bieber album cover
lp2007
11-01 05:31 PM
I think she should not have any problem with her future visits.
My mother visits every year and spends 6 months with us since the last 6 yrs and never had an issue. She extended her stay one time.
One of my friends mother was given a 3 month stamp one yr during b'coz she had extended her previous visit and stayed 3 months already in the same year. So the officer told her she could only stay for 6 months in any given yr, but later she extended and stayed longer and has visited US 2 times after that without any issues.
USCIS takes between 6 weeks to <nn> weeks to process the request.
One important thing you want to take care is, U need to send original i-94 card while requesting extension of stay and when u leave i-94 has to be returned at the airport. If your mom-in-law leaves before the application is approved, you want to be sure to save the extention documnets and mail the i-94 card back. And make sure to carry the extension approvals next time she travels so there is no confusion about unauthorized over stay. This happened with my mom. We received her approval after she had already left. So I mailed her approval to her prior to her next visit and she was fine.
I hope this helps.
My mother visits every year and spends 6 months with us since the last 6 yrs and never had an issue. She extended her stay one time.
One of my friends mother was given a 3 month stamp one yr during b'coz she had extended her previous visit and stayed 3 months already in the same year. So the officer told her she could only stay for 6 months in any given yr, but later she extended and stayed longer and has visited US 2 times after that without any issues.
USCIS takes between 6 weeks to <nn> weeks to process the request.
One important thing you want to take care is, U need to send original i-94 card while requesting extension of stay and when u leave i-94 has to be returned at the airport. If your mom-in-law leaves before the application is approved, you want to be sure to save the extention documnets and mail the i-94 card back. And make sure to carry the extension approvals next time she travels so there is no confusion about unauthorized over stay. This happened with my mom. We received her approval after she had already left. So I mailed her approval to her prior to her next visit and she was fine.
I hope this helps.
dresses Justin Bieber debuted No.
Jaime
02-02 12:47 AM
Guys:
Have you read the most recent update by Shusterman? He links to H.R. 264 "Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2009 (Introduced in House)" Read Title V, Section 501:
TITLE V--LEGALIZATION FOR LONG-TERM RESIDENTS
SEC. 501. EARNED ACCESS TO LEGALIZATION.
(a) In General- Chapter 5 of title II (8 U.S.C. 1255 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 245A the following:
`ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS ON THE BASIS OF EARNED ACCESS TO LEGALIZATION
`Sec. 245B. (a) In General- The Secretary of Homeland Security may adjust the status of an alien to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if the alien--
`(1) was physically present in the United States for a continuous period of not less than 5 years immediately preceding the date on which this provision was enacted and has maintained continuous physical presence since then;
`(2) has at all times been a person of good moral character;
`(3) has never been convicted of a criminal offense in the United States;
`(4) in the case of an alien who is 18 years of age or older, but who is not over the age of 65, has successfully completed a course on reading, writing, and speaking words in ordinary usage in the English language, unless unable to do so on account of physical or developmental disability or mental impairment;
`(5) in the case of an alien 18 years of age or older, has accepted the values and cultural life of the United States; and
`(6) in the case of an alien 18 years of age or older, has performed at least 40 hours of community service.
`(b) Treatment of Brief, Casual, and Innocent Absences- An alien shall not be considered to have failed to maintain a continuous presence in the United States for purposes of subsection (a)(1) by virtue of brief, casual, and innocent absences from the United States.
`(c) Admissible as Immigrant-
`(1) IN GENERAL- The alien shall establish that the alien is admissible to the United States as immigrant, except as otherwise provided in paragraph (2).
`(2) EXCEPTIONS- The provisions of paragraphs (5), (6)(A), (6)(B), (6)(C), (6)(F), (6)(G), (7)(A), (9)(B), and (9)(C)(i)(I) of section 212(a) shall not apply in the determination of an alien's admissibility under this section.
`(d) Security and Law Enforcement Clearances- The alien, if over 15 years of age, shall submit fingerprints in accordance with procedures established by the Secretary of Homeland Security. Such fingerprints shall be submitted to relevant Federal agencies to be checked against existing databases for information relating to criminal, national security, or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a process for challenging the accuracy of matches that result in a finding of ineligibility for adjustment of status.
`(e) Inapplicability of Numerical Limitations- When an alien is granted lawful permanent resident status under this subsection, the number of immigrant visas authorized to be issued under any provision of this Act shall not be reduced. The numerical limitations of sections 201 and 202 shall not apply to adjustment of status under this section.
`(f) Termination of Proceedings- The Secretary of Homeland Security may terminate removal proceedings without prejudice pending the outcome of an alien's application for adjustment of status under this section on the basis of a prima facie showing of eligibility for relief under this section.'.
(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of contents is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 245A the following:
`Sec. 245B. Adjustment of status on the basis of earned access to legalization.'.
ntroduced in the House by Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX)
Link
http://shusterman.com/cgi-bin/ex-link.pl?thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.264.IH:
http://shusterman.com/cgi-bin/ex-link.pl?thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.264.IH:
Gurus, any comments? Wouldn't this be great??
Also, a bill introduced by Harry Reid seems to have legal employment immigration fixes, that is: "Stronger Economy, Stronger Borders Act of 2009" (S.9) introduced in the Senate by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) along with a dozen co- sponsors.
Any thoughts???
Have you read the most recent update by Shusterman? He links to H.R. 264 "Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2009 (Introduced in House)" Read Title V, Section 501:
TITLE V--LEGALIZATION FOR LONG-TERM RESIDENTS
SEC. 501. EARNED ACCESS TO LEGALIZATION.
(a) In General- Chapter 5 of title II (8 U.S.C. 1255 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 245A the following:
`ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS ON THE BASIS OF EARNED ACCESS TO LEGALIZATION
`Sec. 245B. (a) In General- The Secretary of Homeland Security may adjust the status of an alien to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if the alien--
`(1) was physically present in the United States for a continuous period of not less than 5 years immediately preceding the date on which this provision was enacted and has maintained continuous physical presence since then;
`(2) has at all times been a person of good moral character;
`(3) has never been convicted of a criminal offense in the United States;
`(4) in the case of an alien who is 18 years of age or older, but who is not over the age of 65, has successfully completed a course on reading, writing, and speaking words in ordinary usage in the English language, unless unable to do so on account of physical or developmental disability or mental impairment;
`(5) in the case of an alien 18 years of age or older, has accepted the values and cultural life of the United States; and
`(6) in the case of an alien 18 years of age or older, has performed at least 40 hours of community service.
`(b) Treatment of Brief, Casual, and Innocent Absences- An alien shall not be considered to have failed to maintain a continuous presence in the United States for purposes of subsection (a)(1) by virtue of brief, casual, and innocent absences from the United States.
`(c) Admissible as Immigrant-
`(1) IN GENERAL- The alien shall establish that the alien is admissible to the United States as immigrant, except as otherwise provided in paragraph (2).
`(2) EXCEPTIONS- The provisions of paragraphs (5), (6)(A), (6)(B), (6)(C), (6)(F), (6)(G), (7)(A), (9)(B), and (9)(C)(i)(I) of section 212(a) shall not apply in the determination of an alien's admissibility under this section.
`(d) Security and Law Enforcement Clearances- The alien, if over 15 years of age, shall submit fingerprints in accordance with procedures established by the Secretary of Homeland Security. Such fingerprints shall be submitted to relevant Federal agencies to be checked against existing databases for information relating to criminal, national security, or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a process for challenging the accuracy of matches that result in a finding of ineligibility for adjustment of status.
`(e) Inapplicability of Numerical Limitations- When an alien is granted lawful permanent resident status under this subsection, the number of immigrant visas authorized to be issued under any provision of this Act shall not be reduced. The numerical limitations of sections 201 and 202 shall not apply to adjustment of status under this section.
`(f) Termination of Proceedings- The Secretary of Homeland Security may terminate removal proceedings without prejudice pending the outcome of an alien's application for adjustment of status under this section on the basis of a prima facie showing of eligibility for relief under this section.'.
(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of contents is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 245A the following:
`Sec. 245B. Adjustment of status on the basis of earned access to legalization.'.
ntroduced in the House by Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX)
Link
http://shusterman.com/cgi-bin/ex-link.pl?thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.264.IH:
http://shusterman.com/cgi-bin/ex-link.pl?thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.264.IH:
Gurus, any comments? Wouldn't this be great??
Also, a bill introduced by Harry Reid seems to have legal employment immigration fixes, that is: "Stronger Economy, Stronger Borders Act of 2009" (S.9) introduced in the Senate by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) along with a dozen co- sponsors.
Any thoughts???
more...
makeup justin bieber album cover.
Lydia
06-18 11:24 AM
I understand it is law but he is denying... I did offer him money, but he says a big NO.
girlfriend Justin Bieber Album
needhelp!
05-15 06:22 PM
co-sponsor = confirmed support, so thats what we want.
hairstyles Justin Bieber Has Sold 4
ski_dude12
03-22 11:50 AM
What about your previous H4 visa. Is that valid? or did they void that visa when they refused the new one. Or your previous H4 has expired?
If your previous H4 is valid you can try to re-enter using that. You will have to tell the officer at POE about your H4 visa denial, if asked.
Good luck and do not get scared. It is not the end of the world.
If your previous H4 is valid you can try to re-enter using that. You will have to tell the officer at POE about your H4 visa denial, if asked.
Good luck and do not get scared. It is not the end of the world.
vikramy
06-22 10:14 AM
From what i know If chest x-ray is clear you are good. I would suggest to find a different surgeon. good to have a second opinion
Guys,
I have got a RFE for my medical on 9th June 2009. We got our medical done in July 2007 and filed in July 2007.
The RFE is mentioning my medical records cannot be found. we are pretty sure we did file it.
My lawyer says the best way is to get a new medical done and send the new reports. I heard his advise and went to get a new medical exam. The civil surgeon asked me for PPD (TB Test) reports from previous years (1998) as in 2007 (when only the X Rays were done and they were clear), the size of the induration was NOT required but says now we need the size. I am trying to get the reports from the hospital where I got the testing done, but it has been more than 7 days and i am still waiting. The civil surgeon says that if we don't find the records we can do another TB test.
My PCP says that once the TB test is positive, it is always going to be positive (which is true as i got it done twice - 1997 and 1998) and the 2nd time the induration was more than the first time. If i get it 3rd time, is it going to be more induration? Also, are there chances of reaction due to getting it done the 3rd time? I think my PCP mentioned something like this earlier.
The civil surgeon says that if the induration is more than 10 mm, i might have to go through treatment :( I was shocked to hear that and did some reading and found out from another member too that the treatment is recommended and NOT required.
If the TB test results from 1998, don't come in time for me to respond to the RFE, can i not send the copy of my original medical done? I am going to ask the lawyer about it too, but wanted to know some personal experience of the folks who have gone through it.
Guys,
I have got a RFE for my medical on 9th June 2009. We got our medical done in July 2007 and filed in July 2007.
The RFE is mentioning my medical records cannot be found. we are pretty sure we did file it.
My lawyer says the best way is to get a new medical done and send the new reports. I heard his advise and went to get a new medical exam. The civil surgeon asked me for PPD (TB Test) reports from previous years (1998) as in 2007 (when only the X Rays were done and they were clear), the size of the induration was NOT required but says now we need the size. I am trying to get the reports from the hospital where I got the testing done, but it has been more than 7 days and i am still waiting. The civil surgeon says that if we don't find the records we can do another TB test.
My PCP says that once the TB test is positive, it is always going to be positive (which is true as i got it done twice - 1997 and 1998) and the 2nd time the induration was more than the first time. If i get it 3rd time, is it going to be more induration? Also, are there chances of reaction due to getting it done the 3rd time? I think my PCP mentioned something like this earlier.
The civil surgeon says that if the induration is more than 10 mm, i might have to go through treatment :( I was shocked to hear that and did some reading and found out from another member too that the treatment is recommended and NOT required.
If the TB test results from 1998, don't come in time for me to respond to the RFE, can i not send the copy of my original medical done? I am going to ask the lawyer about it too, but wanted to know some personal experience of the folks who have gone through it.
vali
10-23 02:10 PM
Thank you so much, I'm pretty clear now, I wish you good luck with your problems, it feels good to know that there still are nice people around.
Thanks again to you and IV.
Thanks again to you and IV.
No comments:
Post a Comment