gsc999
11-14 08:54 PM
This is the time to channelize all your frustration into positive energy. Yes, we can collective work towards ending retrogression.
Join your State Chapter today
Follow the link
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=72&Itemid=52
Come on folks, this is time for action.
Start working towards IVs goals and you will be glad that you are doing it.
----
Absolutely, join the state chapters and join hands to act. If not than be prepared to wait for a rreally long time for your GCs.
Join your State Chapter today
Follow the link
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=72&Itemid=52
Come on folks, this is time for action.
Start working towards IVs goals and you will be glad that you are doing it.
----
Absolutely, join the state chapters and join hands to act. If not than be prepared to wait for a rreally long time for your GCs.
wallpaper funny quotes about sisters.
GotGC??
01-13 12:04 AM
You know bro, I know my share of swear words, and definitely know how to pick a fight. But this is NOT the time.
I'd be the happiest person if we can achieve the goal of blanket I-485 filing. I just hope we can pull it through. The options I mentioned are backup options, in case it wasn't palatable to some. With my PD, a blanket I-485 is my only chance. I should have put this disclosure (for the benefit of those who are generous in using the "selfish" word).
I was just testing the waters, but looks like the mood is "nothing short of a I-485 filing". I wish us luck and will keep my fingers crossed. This will be my last post on this.
Let's come back after 2/15 and check how you feel then. "Cheerful? Joyful? or Zealous? or Joyless, depressed?"
Probably,all this criterias already matching to your case, right ?
If you're on H1 on 4 years, have been suffering from not able file 485, and if the legislation says "6 years on H1" or whatever year on 140, how would you feel? Cheerful? Joyful? or Zealous? or Joyless, depressed?
You're just a selfish guy to cover your asz, right?
Are you planning to get some benefit from your brother's delayed cases?
It's time to comply, time to be unite.
Be simple and support what we have. We don't have that much luxurious to discuss your fantasies even though here is a free platform, yet it's NOT the TIME.
Thanks for your understanding...
Zbd
I'd be the happiest person if we can achieve the goal of blanket I-485 filing. I just hope we can pull it through. The options I mentioned are backup options, in case it wasn't palatable to some. With my PD, a blanket I-485 is my only chance. I should have put this disclosure (for the benefit of those who are generous in using the "selfish" word).
I was just testing the waters, but looks like the mood is "nothing short of a I-485 filing". I wish us luck and will keep my fingers crossed. This will be my last post on this.
Let's come back after 2/15 and check how you feel then. "Cheerful? Joyful? or Zealous? or Joyless, depressed?"
Probably,all this criterias already matching to your case, right ?
If you're on H1 on 4 years, have been suffering from not able file 485, and if the legislation says "6 years on H1" or whatever year on 140, how would you feel? Cheerful? Joyful? or Zealous? or Joyless, depressed?
You're just a selfish guy to cover your asz, right?
Are you planning to get some benefit from your brother's delayed cases?
It's time to comply, time to be unite.
Be simple and support what we have. We don't have that much luxurious to discuss your fantasies even though here is a free platform, yet it's NOT the TIME.
Thanks for your understanding...
Zbd
vxg
09-10 03:46 PM
I'm in the same boat. Got my CPO mail 2 hrs after filing an SR last week, but still waiting for my better half to get the approval. I had filed a separate SR for her and it returned with a standard "will get back in 60 days" response. Oh well, after waiting many years I can wait a few more days...
On a brighter side since your wife is derivative on your case even without GC she can work on EAD and can work any job no AC21 or what is written as job responsibilities in labor cert hassle. Though it is still some financial pain to renew EAD and AP. Good luck.
On a brighter side since your wife is derivative on your case even without GC she can work on EAD and can work any job no AC21 or what is written as job responsibilities in labor cert hassle. Though it is still some financial pain to renew EAD and AP. Good luck.
2011 wishes quotes for sister
Ramba
05-04 05:37 PM
If you are confident that the denial is purly the mistake of USCIS, then contact the Omdusman about this and explain to him that, it is a pure mistake of USCIS and the fee to MTR is not justifyable. Perhaps, Omdusman office will help you.
(I assume that you have submitted all the required documents as per RFE, and those documents meets the eligiblity for your approval)
(I assume that you have submitted all the required documents as per RFE, and those documents meets the eligiblity for your approval)
more...
go_guy123
08-24 04:52 PM
ILW.COM - immigration news: Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. <em>USCIS</em> Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability (http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0825-mehta.shtm)
Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta
As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).
Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.
In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.
At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�
The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8
Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.
Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10
�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�
Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�
It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta
As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).
Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.
In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.
At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�
The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8
Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.
Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10
�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�
Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�
It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
cfan666666
06-22 03:45 PM
Thank you for the information,
according to this link:
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=b0f860a07706d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=52a46c854523d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1 RCRD
There are many mailing addresses for TSC
USCIS TSC
P.O. Box 851983
Mesquite, TX 75185-1983
USCIS TSC
P.O. Box 850965
Mesquite, TX 751185-0965
USCIS TSC
PO Box 850919
Mesquite, TX 75185-0919
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851182
Mesquite, TX 75185-1182
USCIS TSC
PO Box 852685
Mesquite, TX 75185-2685
USCIS TSC
PO Box 852135
Mesquite, TX 75185-2135
USCIS TSC
PO Box 852135
Mesquite, TX 75185-2135
USCIS TSC
PO Box 279030
Dallas, TX 75227-9030
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851804
Mesquite, TX 75185-1804
Any idea for filing 485?
thank you and have a nice weekend.
according to this link:
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=b0f860a07706d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=52a46c854523d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1 RCRD
There are many mailing addresses for TSC
USCIS TSC
P.O. Box 851983
Mesquite, TX 75185-1983
USCIS TSC
P.O. Box 850965
Mesquite, TX 751185-0965
USCIS TSC
PO Box 850919
Mesquite, TX 75185-0919
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851182
Mesquite, TX 75185-1182
USCIS TSC
PO Box 852685
Mesquite, TX 75185-2685
USCIS TSC
PO Box 852135
Mesquite, TX 75185-2135
USCIS TSC
PO Box 852135
Mesquite, TX 75185-2135
USCIS TSC
PO Box 279030
Dallas, TX 75227-9030
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851804
Mesquite, TX 75185-1804
Any idea for filing 485?
thank you and have a nice weekend.
more...
immuser
10-22 03:23 PM
I got receipts on Oct 20 for my application sent on Jul 18 and received by USCIS on 19th. I sent it to NSC and get receipts from TSC.
however, the receipt date is Aug 17th. Can others share their receipt dates? is it close to the date received by USCIS ?
I am afraid this might affect the overall processing time badly.
however, the receipt date is Aug 17th. Can others share their receipt dates? is it close to the date received by USCIS ?
I am afraid this might affect the overall processing time badly.
2010 dresses quotes about sisters
GCard_Dream
01-14 09:30 PM
No they can't. Congress needs to pass a law. This topic has been covered here in detail before. Try doing a search, if interested.
does anyone know if uscis need a law to pass in the congress to change the law on the i-485, or thy can decide to change it?
does anyone know if uscis need a law to pass in the congress to change the law on the i-485, or thy can decide to change it?
more...
WeShallOvercome
07-23 06:16 PM
I dont think any July 2nd filer got receipt notices as of yet. Atleast I havent seen anyone in any of the forums.
I know, I was asking because my employer will not give the receipt notices to employees after they come, and also haven't let us apply for EAD/AP.
I know, I was asking because my employer will not give the receipt notices to employees after they come, and also haven't let us apply for EAD/AP.
hair nice quotes about sisters. funny sister quotes. sister
gconmymind
08-27 05:21 PM
I think you will not be able to apply for Visa renewal. You will be applying for H1 stamp for the first time hence it is a new visa applicaiton. this is per my understanding, please check with your lawyer. You can also send an email to the consulate (email address on VFS website). They will answer withing 3 business days...Goodluck
VFS website for booking H1B stamping appointments in India seems to have added a new question when booking a H1B appointment.
The question is "Are you applying for same visa class that expired in the last 12 months?*" and they have defined the Visa renewal criteria (which I have pasted below) in order to answer this question. Yes- means you are seeking a appointment for visa renewal and No - means your appt is NOT for visa renewal.
Can somebody advice if me and my wife would fall under the visa renewal category. The last US visa on my passport is F1. My H1b status started in May 2004 and I am now in my 4rth year of H1B. In between I changed employer and my H1 is now valid upto October 2008. But I have NOT travelled outside the country after my H1B status began in May 2004. Hence I am going to get my H1B stamped for the first time. In my wife's case also her last stamp is F1 and she went from F1 to H4 this year so she is also going to get her H4 stamped for the first time. Do we answer YES (appt for visa renewal) or NO(appt not for visa renewal). We are booking a appointment at the Mumbai consulate.
The below is the visa renewal criteria as defined on the website:
Visa renewal appointments are available to visa applicants who:
have a U.S. visa that has expired less than 12 months ago.
wish to apply for the same category visa (work, business, tourist, etc.)
are Indian nationals (hold Indian passports)
are resident in the New Delhi, Chennai, or Mumbai consular districts (this category is not available to Kolkata based applicants).
The following applicants do NOT qualify for appointments in the visa renewal category:
Applicants who have never had a US visa.
Applicants who have a U.S. visa that expired more than 12 months ago.
Applicants applying for a different category visa (e.g. had a student visa, now applying for a work visa).
Non Indian passport holders
Applicants applying at the U.S. Consulate in Kolkata.
First time H4 or L2 applicants under 18 years of age. (If you have recently married a H1b or L1 visa holder but have never had a visa interview for a visa in the H/L category, you may not schedule in the renewal category.)
Applicants applying for more than one visa at the same time (e.g. F and B1/B2).
Applicants applying for entertainment/performance visas(P3 category).
Applicants applying for unskilled worker visas (H2b category).
All visa renewal applicants should bring the following documents to the Embassy/Consulate Consular Section on the day of their appointment:
Current, valid passport
Passports containing previously issued U.S. visas
As applicable, I-797 (H and L), I-20 (F & M students), DS-2019 (J visa applicants)
VFS website for booking H1B stamping appointments in India seems to have added a new question when booking a H1B appointment.
The question is "Are you applying for same visa class that expired in the last 12 months?*" and they have defined the Visa renewal criteria (which I have pasted below) in order to answer this question. Yes- means you are seeking a appointment for visa renewal and No - means your appt is NOT for visa renewal.
Can somebody advice if me and my wife would fall under the visa renewal category. The last US visa on my passport is F1. My H1b status started in May 2004 and I am now in my 4rth year of H1B. In between I changed employer and my H1 is now valid upto October 2008. But I have NOT travelled outside the country after my H1B status began in May 2004. Hence I am going to get my H1B stamped for the first time. In my wife's case also her last stamp is F1 and she went from F1 to H4 this year so she is also going to get her H4 stamped for the first time. Do we answer YES (appt for visa renewal) or NO(appt not for visa renewal). We are booking a appointment at the Mumbai consulate.
The below is the visa renewal criteria as defined on the website:
Visa renewal appointments are available to visa applicants who:
have a U.S. visa that has expired less than 12 months ago.
wish to apply for the same category visa (work, business, tourist, etc.)
are Indian nationals (hold Indian passports)
are resident in the New Delhi, Chennai, or Mumbai consular districts (this category is not available to Kolkata based applicants).
The following applicants do NOT qualify for appointments in the visa renewal category:
Applicants who have never had a US visa.
Applicants who have a U.S. visa that expired more than 12 months ago.
Applicants applying for a different category visa (e.g. had a student visa, now applying for a work visa).
Non Indian passport holders
Applicants applying at the U.S. Consulate in Kolkata.
First time H4 or L2 applicants under 18 years of age. (If you have recently married a H1b or L1 visa holder but have never had a visa interview for a visa in the H/L category, you may not schedule in the renewal category.)
Applicants applying for more than one visa at the same time (e.g. F and B1/B2).
Applicants applying for entertainment/performance visas(P3 category).
Applicants applying for unskilled worker visas (H2b category).
All visa renewal applicants should bring the following documents to the Embassy/Consulate Consular Section on the day of their appointment:
Current, valid passport
Passports containing previously issued U.S. visas
As applicable, I-797 (H and L), I-20 (F & M students), DS-2019 (J visa applicants)
more...
gc_rip
07-05 09:20 AM
Hi,
I am frustrated because been in US for more than 10 years, but still don't have GC. With my current PD (Feb 05, EB3-India) expected to the GC by Oct 2023.
My GC sponsor company also holds my H1B, and applied for 10th year extension just now.
I have an offer from a Company but for India operations. The position is in India, and salary will be paid in Indian Rupees. Is there a way I can continue my GC process?
I am not sure if I can travel every year to renew my Advanced Parole (I131). Can I transfer my H1B to the parent US company, and join as an employee for Indian subsidiary? And for the business reasons only travel using the H1B stamp for the US company?
Please let me know all the possible solutions. It's very hard to abandon the GC process after a decade of wait. At the same time it is impossible for me to keep waiting for another 12 years for the GC while the kids are growing fast, and already resisting the idea of going to India. I want to avoid the forceful exit from USA in future.
Appreciate all your helpful ideas.
Thanks,
I am frustrated because been in US for more than 10 years, but still don't have GC. With my current PD (Feb 05, EB3-India) expected to the GC by Oct 2023.
My GC sponsor company also holds my H1B, and applied for 10th year extension just now.
I have an offer from a Company but for India operations. The position is in India, and salary will be paid in Indian Rupees. Is there a way I can continue my GC process?
I am not sure if I can travel every year to renew my Advanced Parole (I131). Can I transfer my H1B to the parent US company, and join as an employee for Indian subsidiary? And for the business reasons only travel using the H1B stamp for the US company?
Please let me know all the possible solutions. It's very hard to abandon the GC process after a decade of wait. At the same time it is impossible for me to keep waiting for another 12 years for the GC while the kids are growing fast, and already resisting the idea of going to India. I want to avoid the forceful exit from USA in future.
Appreciate all your helpful ideas.
Thanks,
hot funny quotes for sisters
gopi246
03-23 06:49 PM
At last I am able to get to the root of the issue. I went to Logan airport and spoke to Immigartion dept people. They have seperate cell called differed inspection for these kind of clarifications.
When I explained the situation they found that the i-94 number in their system is not matching with that of mine. So when SSA is searching the database they were not getting any details. They have issued a new i-94 card to me and asked me to re-submit the request to SSA. Hopefully they will be able to get it this time.
If any one faces similar problems, they may contact immigation dept of Logan at #617-568-1810 option 0 and ask for differed inspections.
Thanks for all your suggestions, have wonderful time:)
When I explained the situation they found that the i-94 number in their system is not matching with that of mine. So when SSA is searching the database they were not getting any details. They have issued a new i-94 card to me and asked me to re-submit the request to SSA. Hopefully they will be able to get it this time.
If any one faces similar problems, they may contact immigation dept of Logan at #617-568-1810 option 0 and ask for differed inspections.
Thanks for all your suggestions, have wonderful time:)
more...
house quotes about sisters funny.
lostinbeta
10-21 02:15 AM
Haha, not with my luck though :(
Dead shows??????
:::asks as this thread gets completely off topic:::
Dead shows??????
:::asks as this thread gets completely off topic:::
tattoo funny quotes for sisters
baburob2
12-04 06:46 PM
basically you have to maintain GC and then also abide by citizenship requirements. regarding the stay if you want to apply for citizenship after 5 years of getting GC you should physically be in US for 30 months (ie half of the 5 years) and no single travel outside of US should span more than 6 months (though under some circumstances you could counter travels between 6 months to 1 year).
more...
pictures cute quotes for sisters. funny
pappu
08-15 04:07 PM
Pappu,
Their site does not list "Retrogression" as an issue faced by Indians in EB catagory.
I was urging members to contact any of the indian organizations listed as links to get support for our cause. These organizations are either formed by groups of professionals in a occupation or by regional groups from india. We have already got support from Indian Physician association and it helped us a lot when we went to meet lawmakers or spoke with the media. Likewise if other members could make individual efforts, it will be greatly appreciated.
Their site does not list "Retrogression" as an issue faced by Indians in EB catagory.
I was urging members to contact any of the indian organizations listed as links to get support for our cause. These organizations are either formed by groups of professionals in a occupation or by regional groups from india. We have already got support from Indian Physician association and it helped us a lot when we went to meet lawmakers or spoke with the media. Likewise if other members could make individual efforts, it will be greatly appreciated.
dresses funny quotes for sisters.
casinoroyale
08-19 09:32 PM
Friends,
I don't create new threads without doing homework, so please bear with me here. After going through existing threads on this issue, I thought we need a dedicated thread for (only) H1-B stamping process (only) in Canada. The aim of this thread is to cover the following topics
1) nvars.com appointments for H1-B visa
2) Canada visitor visa application process & docs
3) Land or Air travel - issues & procedures
4) Entry into Canada & Return Entry into US experiences
5) Interview with Visa Officers
6) PIMS issues at consulates in Canada
7) 221(g) & Delays
8) AP (vs) H1-B Dilemma.
Here is another similar thread but covers H1, H4 at consulates all over the world (mostly Mexico, India, Canada).
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4192
I don't create new threads without doing homework, so please bear with me here. After going through existing threads on this issue, I thought we need a dedicated thread for (only) H1-B stamping process (only) in Canada. The aim of this thread is to cover the following topics
1) nvars.com appointments for H1-B visa
2) Canada visitor visa application process & docs
3) Land or Air travel - issues & procedures
4) Entry into Canada & Return Entry into US experiences
5) Interview with Visa Officers
6) PIMS issues at consulates in Canada
7) 221(g) & Delays
8) AP (vs) H1-B Dilemma.
Here is another similar thread but covers H1, H4 at consulates all over the world (mostly Mexico, India, Canada).
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4192
more...
makeup nice quotes about sisters. for sisters. funny quotes
pappu
05-11 01:16 PM
thanks, it worked.
girlfriend quotes about sisters funny
madsat1234
06-01 01:04 PM
Received Appointment Letter today..
Asked for Medicals, Tax returns(Last 3 years), birth Certificate, and Affidavit of Support I834(mine is not Family based GC) why did they ask me. Is there anyone else in the same situation
I am the primary Applicant, PD Jul 2003, EB3
There are no visa numbers available for this category. Why Interview call..
Even if they selected my application randomly there are no visa numbers available..
Please help..
Asked for Medicals, Tax returns(Last 3 years), birth Certificate, and Affidavit of Support I834(mine is not Family based GC) why did they ask me. Is there anyone else in the same situation
I am the primary Applicant, PD Jul 2003, EB3
There are no visa numbers available for this category. Why Interview call..
Even if they selected my application randomly there are no visa numbers available..
Please help..
hairstyles like sisters. quotes about
tnite
10-31 10:26 AM
4 months from now, there will be another rush for applications for EADs and people will be spending money for it. Everyone will be back on the forums talking about notices and late processing for these applications. Lot of people will have heartburns and their jobs can be in trouble if their EADs do not arrive on time.
We do not seem to look at the bleak picture ahead in future and are worrying about EADS, AP and notices now. The real problem is retrogression and not if TSC is slower than NSC or vice versa or receipt notices. (You will be surprised that people write to us telling us to focus lobbying efforts on making TSC faster than NSC since that is a big problem faced by millions of people)
The end result of this constant renewals of EAD and AP is heartache, frustration and loss of money for us. We ultimately lose if we do not wake up now and do something.
Unless this community is ready to raise its voice, nothing WILL be done for us in the near future.
You're right pappu, most folks only care about a short term solution to this problem. Even without this mess folks who had applied for EAD or AP sometimes got their documents late and they ended up taking unpaid leave from work to make sure they are not working illegally.
With so many apps in the pipeline, I just cant imagine the delays.Not that I am pessimistic but trying to be prepared for the worst.
And add to that the financial burden of applying ever year (approx $700) for applicant and derivative.That's something you could have saved, spent on your family instead ended up renewing the EAD/AP.
Just my 2 cents
We do not seem to look at the bleak picture ahead in future and are worrying about EADS, AP and notices now. The real problem is retrogression and not if TSC is slower than NSC or vice versa or receipt notices. (You will be surprised that people write to us telling us to focus lobbying efforts on making TSC faster than NSC since that is a big problem faced by millions of people)
The end result of this constant renewals of EAD and AP is heartache, frustration and loss of money for us. We ultimately lose if we do not wake up now and do something.
Unless this community is ready to raise its voice, nothing WILL be done for us in the near future.
You're right pappu, most folks only care about a short term solution to this problem. Even without this mess folks who had applied for EAD or AP sometimes got their documents late and they ended up taking unpaid leave from work to make sure they are not working illegally.
With so many apps in the pipeline, I just cant imagine the delays.Not that I am pessimistic but trying to be prepared for the worst.
And add to that the financial burden of applying ever year (approx $700) for applicant and derivative.That's something you could have saved, spent on your family instead ended up renewing the EAD/AP.
Just my 2 cents
sathyaraj
12-12 12:40 PM
Do not worry too much about your role change, because when you are using AC21 you need to be in same or similar job as specified in ONET job codes.
If you are a systems analyst, then you can potential work as a business analyst also. As the job duties for systems analyst includes some of the activities performed by BA. It is the job duties which have more waitage.
http://www.onetcodeconnector.org/ccreport/15-1051.00
If you refer the link above, all software jobs (except Management) starts with 15.XXXX as job code. So long as you stay with that you are fine.
If you are a systems analyst, then you can potential work as a business analyst also. As the job duties for systems analyst includes some of the activities performed by BA. It is the job duties which have more waitage.
http://www.onetcodeconnector.org/ccreport/15-1051.00
If you refer the link above, all software jobs (except Management) starts with 15.XXXX as job code. So long as you stay with that you are fine.
black_logs
01-30 09:48 AM
It's too late for that. We have so much of paperwork allready done!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment