zeta7
07-21 11:54 PM
Hey guys
My PR card in Canada was not issued; they rejected the photos I submitted with the original application. Now they're asking I submit new ones in PERSON!
I will need to get a Canadian Travel document now to re-enter Canada now. Does anyone know how long it takes to get that issued?
Plus, Since I'm using AP as well the whole re-entering the US with the Canadian Visas in my passport is once again an issue. I'm considering giving up on the PR card, since I've technically already completed my landing; I can re-apply for the PR card if and when I decide to move to Canada permanently. Can you guys advise?
-thanks.
My PR card in Canada was not issued; they rejected the photos I submitted with the original application. Now they're asking I submit new ones in PERSON!
I will need to get a Canadian Travel document now to re-enter Canada now. Does anyone know how long it takes to get that issued?
Plus, Since I'm using AP as well the whole re-entering the US with the Canadian Visas in my passport is once again an issue. I'm considering giving up on the PR card, since I've technically already completed my landing; I can re-apply for the PR card if and when I decide to move to Canada permanently. Can you guys advise?
-thanks.
wallpaper david eckham tattoos
mnq1979
09-23 01:52 PM
Hi mnq1979,
The application was filed with CSC as all nos., which I have seen, are WAC nos. EAD was issued from CSC on (and I am guessing here) 18th, left from KY (40701) on 20th Sept (according to post mark) and reached my house on the 22nd Sept. If it was India and if the post man had delivered this to me, I would definitely have given him something for "mithaai" :D
It was only 3 days ago I had got the transfer notice from CSC saying that they had move our cases to TX.
I got the cards directly as my lawyer had not sent me the application no. yet. There were no notices for EADs.
More than me, my wife is happy that she wouldn't have to sit around feeling like a "dependent" ;).
GOD!!! to be honbest with u my situation is same like urs....like my wife is also too happy that we have received our receipts # for i485 and that we will soon get our ead hopefully....now she has started tellign me that she has jst # of days left of being dependent on me!!!! man it was fun to have 1 dependent as u can rule her...but now is smeeling freedom...anywaz....hope for the best.....thanx
The application was filed with CSC as all nos., which I have seen, are WAC nos. EAD was issued from CSC on (and I am guessing here) 18th, left from KY (40701) on 20th Sept (according to post mark) and reached my house on the 22nd Sept. If it was India and if the post man had delivered this to me, I would definitely have given him something for "mithaai" :D
It was only 3 days ago I had got the transfer notice from CSC saying that they had move our cases to TX.
I got the cards directly as my lawyer had not sent me the application no. yet. There were no notices for EADs.
More than me, my wife is happy that she wouldn't have to sit around feeling like a "dependent" ;).
GOD!!! to be honbest with u my situation is same like urs....like my wife is also too happy that we have received our receipts # for i485 and that we will soon get our ead hopefully....now she has started tellign me that she has jst # of days left of being dependent on me!!!! man it was fun to have 1 dependent as u can rule her...but now is smeeling freedom...anywaz....hope for the best.....thanx
caforum2
06-18 12:19 PM
Mailed to NSC on: 1st June
Mailed From State: IL
Received at NSC on: June 2nd
receipt date: June 4th
140 approved from : NSC
Receipt Date : June 16th
Cashed on June 16th
Receipt recedived on June 18th
Mailed From State: IL
Received at NSC on: June 2nd
receipt date: June 4th
140 approved from : NSC
Receipt Date : June 16th
Cashed on June 16th
Receipt recedived on June 18th
2011 Victoria Beckham: Haircut
syzygy
07-08 04:58 AM
This is one the latest articles which highlights America's racial discrimination policy as regards immigration.
Please read and digg.
http://digg.com/politics/Racial_Discrimination_policy_followed_for_LEGAL_IM MIGRATION_in_USA
Please read and digg.
http://digg.com/politics/Racial_Discrimination_policy_followed_for_LEGAL_IM MIGRATION_in_USA
more...
tonyHK12
02-21 01:27 PM
Donated $50 via paypal)
thanks updated total above.
C'mon guys - Only about 90 have donated to this event out of an estimated 500,000 people in the queue. What is the message you're sending to Americans, including law makers about being able to work together?
thanks updated total above.
C'mon guys - Only about 90 have donated to this event out of an estimated 500,000 people in the queue. What is the message you're sending to Americans, including law makers about being able to work together?
rbharol
10-30 12:00 PM
Guys,
When NumbersUSA would present their case to the lawmakers,
They would present their logic and arguments with facts they may have.
When ImmigrationVoice present their case they would present their logic,
arguments and facts which they have.
Then it is for lawmakers to decide who is more convincing and
what is best for AMERICA and its people
Do not worry. If we have convincing arguments and facts and
backing from the experts, which we have, we shall be heard.
Cool down guys.
I think this thread should be closed as it has lost its direction.
When NumbersUSA would present their case to the lawmakers,
They would present their logic and arguments with facts they may have.
When ImmigrationVoice present their case they would present their logic,
arguments and facts which they have.
Then it is for lawmakers to decide who is more convincing and
what is best for AMERICA and its people
Do not worry. If we have convincing arguments and facts and
backing from the experts, which we have, we shall be heard.
Cool down guys.
I think this thread should be closed as it has lost its direction.
more...
cjain
11-01 05:18 PM
pls try to understand...my statement is valid for beyond the 180 day period....i agree that one should not change before 180 days irrespective of whether the I-140 is approved or not...
the question is after the 180 day period..and my point is aytes memo clearly states that the I-140 need not be approved..
So what? I-140 was "approvable" but now employer revokes it and therefore 485 denial becuase 180 days have not been passed. And that is why one never should even try to use AC21 before 180 days period. Even I-140 is already approved, revocation of it will initiate 485 denial.
the question is after the 180 day period..and my point is aytes memo clearly states that the I-140 need not be approved..
So what? I-140 was "approvable" but now employer revokes it and therefore 485 denial becuase 180 days have not been passed. And that is why one never should even try to use AC21 before 180 days period. Even I-140 is already approved, revocation of it will initiate 485 denial.
2010 Victoria Beckham Short Hair
ganguteli
03-06 05:18 PM
For me country cap was an important issue, so I started a focus group. If you think filing I-1485 is more important than start a focus group, you may find 100s who will support you...you can start a yahoo group
http://groups.yahoo.com/
While it is temptig to start an agenda item and group, I do not think time is right. You may end up too muchg attention in the bad economy and anti-immigrant atmostphere. It is better not to go on offensive and instead work on saving your job.
http://groups.yahoo.com/
While it is temptig to start an agenda item and group, I do not think time is right. You may end up too muchg attention in the bad economy and anti-immigrant atmostphere. It is better not to go on offensive and instead work on saving your job.
more...
anilsal
10-25 11:49 AM
Wonder if dems take the house, will they worry about the 2008 prez elections and not make major decisions?
hair Victoria+eckham+
magicmonkey
09-20 11:18 AM
Sent to Nebraska on 11th July.
My and my wife's all 6 checks got cashed today.
Receipt number starts from LIN.
Notice date: 14 sept
Thanks
My and my wife's all 6 checks got cashed today.
Receipt number starts from LIN.
Notice date: 14 sept
Thanks
more...
desi3933
07-10 02:25 PM
@desi3933:
On the other hand, I-140 is linked to Permanent Labor Certification (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/perm.cfm) (aka GC labor)
"Permanent Labor Certification" does not mean the job has to be "permanent" (you're again *assuming*, no?) It could also mean LC for "permanent" residency!
Looks like you missed this on that link:
The job opportunity must be for a full time, permanent position.
There must be a bona fide job opening available to U.S. workers.
Job requirements must adhere to what is customarily required for the occupation in the U.S. and may not be tailored to the foreign worker's qualifications. The employer must pay at least the prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of intended employment.
On the other hand, I-140 is linked to Permanent Labor Certification (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/perm.cfm) (aka GC labor)
"Permanent Labor Certification" does not mean the job has to be "permanent" (you're again *assuming*, no?) It could also mean LC for "permanent" residency!
Looks like you missed this on that link:
The job opportunity must be for a full time, permanent position.
There must be a bona fide job opening available to U.S. workers.
Job requirements must adhere to what is customarily required for the occupation in the U.S. and may not be tailored to the foreign worker's qualifications. The employer must pay at least the prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of intended employment.
hot victoria beckham hair.
dingudi
02-18 11:07 AM
I am assuming you guys saw this:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/USCISUpdate(biometricchanges)(17Feb08).pdf
USCIS will consolidate FPs for 485 and EADs. So if we don't receive biometrics for 485, hopefully we will get one for EAD renewal which will also serve the purpose for 485 processing.
Note: This only applies to concurrent filers of 485 and EAD.
Apahilaj,
Yes I saw that but mine was not concurrent filing. I applied for EAD couple of months after I-485 filing and have also received the EAD.Still waiting for FP though.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/USCISUpdate(biometricchanges)(17Feb08).pdf
USCIS will consolidate FPs for 485 and EADs. So if we don't receive biometrics for 485, hopefully we will get one for EAD renewal which will also serve the purpose for 485 processing.
Note: This only applies to concurrent filers of 485 and EAD.
Apahilaj,
Yes I saw that but mine was not concurrent filing. I applied for EAD couple of months after I-485 filing and have also received the EAD.Still waiting for FP though.
more...
house Victoria Beckham
anilsal
08-13 05:36 PM
It is a hard fact but I guess I do not want to scare anyone. If you notice some people have got their JuLY 2ND filed cases receipt # and most of them have a Notice date of 08/04/2007 (the guys who got their receipt #). This notice date is the day the Receipt was generated. So today is 08/13/2007. It seems that USCIS is delaying this process of issuing receipts as that will give them a chance to reject applications after 17th. So I guess we should brace ourselves for rejection notices also......
Keep your chin up, guys. You have to understand that there must have been a large number of applications arriving in the USCIS basket. Things will take time - so will the receipts. Do not lose hope.
Why worry about things for which you have no control on? You certainly can control your actions. Maybe contribute to IV in money, time etc PLUS also show up at the rally and sign up a bunch of your friends. Action is the only solution to Worry. :)
Keep your chin up, guys. You have to understand that there must have been a large number of applications arriving in the USCIS basket. Things will take time - so will the receipts. Do not lose hope.
Why worry about things for which you have no control on? You certainly can control your actions. Maybe contribute to IV in money, time etc PLUS also show up at the rally and sign up a bunch of your friends. Action is the only solution to Worry. :)
tattoo Victoria Beckham amp; Her Pink
myvoice23
09-25 05:49 PM
Can you tell us what time it reached NSC on July 3rd. Looks like lot of people July 3rd at 9:03 received by R.William are waiting for receipt. Are you one among them?
yes, it reached at 9.03am and was received by R.William
yes, it reached at 9.03am and was received by R.William
more...
pictures victoria beckham haircut.
manja
02-01 08:56 PM
Contributed $50.
Thanks.
Thanks.
dresses holmes Victoria. shadowbuddy
caeb2rir
08-03 04:52 PM
My checks got cleared at TSC today.
Previously
My 140 was approved at TSC, sent 485 to Nebraska on June 22, they received on June 25. I called to check status yesterday, the lady said to wait. On asking if case will be transferred to TSC and if TSC will generate receipts, she said she doesn't know, but it may take at least 2-3 weeks to process receipts at Nebraska.
Previously
My 140 was approved at TSC, sent 485 to Nebraska on June 22, they received on June 25. I called to check status yesterday, the lady said to wait. On asking if case will be transferred to TSC and if TSC will generate receipts, she said she doesn't know, but it may take at least 2-3 weeks to process receipts at Nebraska.
more...
makeup victoria beckham bob back. ob
rsayed
08-25 02:06 PM
Happened to speak with someone at the TSC center, through the POJ method, re. my EAD.
She mentioned my case (details below) is with an IO and should be processed within the next 30 days.
EB-2-India
I-140 applied and approved - 2006
I-485 applied - Jul/2007
EAD (Renewal) applied - Jul 8th, 2008
Receipt Date - Jul 8th, 2008
Notice Date - Jul 9th, 2008
Elapsed time - 48 days!
She mentioned my case (details below) is with an IO and should be processed within the next 30 days.
EB-2-India
I-140 applied and approved - 2006
I-485 applied - Jul/2007
EAD (Renewal) applied - Jul 8th, 2008
Receipt Date - Jul 8th, 2008
Notice Date - Jul 9th, 2008
Elapsed time - 48 days!
girlfriend 2011 victoria beckham pregnant
kondur_007
07-28 02:08 PM
As I mentioned in my previous post in this thread, I am now posting information that explains why this "horizontal" spill occurred and no amount of campaign will reverse it (other than change in law).
If this is repetition of what has already been discussed elsewhere on the site, I apologize.
First, let me point out when and how the interpretation changed:
Following is from immigration-information.com site (Ron Gotcher):
�Last week, I wrote to Charles Oppenheim of the State Department, asking several specific questions. This morning, I had a long talk with him, when he very graciously called to respond to the questions I e-mailed him earlier. In the course of our discussion, I learned a great deal about the present backlog situation and what is being done about it. First, let me deal with the questions I had asked.
Mr. Oppenheim explained that while the Visa Office initially took the view that visa numbers had to fall down into employment third preference before the could fall across to the individual country quotas, but after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first.�
Direct link to above post:
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5456
Some more information from Ron Gotcher�s site can be found at following link
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5703
Now, let�s look at the actual law on this (above is only the interpretation from Mr Oppenheim, following is the actual text of the law: (my comment is in italics)
8 CFR Sec 202(a)
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph (read as under that EB category: if it is EB1, it goes to EB1 and if it is EB2 it goes to EB2) shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Read the entire Sec 202 (a) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
A glimpse of Sec 203(b) is:
b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): �.
Please read the entire section 203(b) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
So, in nutshell:
1. The law is actually clear on this.
2. Now Mr. Oppenheim has interpreted it correctly as well.
3. It don�t think we can convince anyone to change the interpretation (because interpretation appears to be correct. If it was interpreted differently in past, then that was a mistake).
4. The only way to deal with it is to CHANGE THE LAW.
5. More importantly, push for bills to increase overall numbers (recapture, STEM exemption) etc�
6. The big picture: All these is likely to look completely different once CIR comes in, and we need to include our agenda in CIR that would benefit every category for several years to come (not just my GC or your GC).
If this is repetition of what has already been discussed elsewhere on the site, I apologize.
First, let me point out when and how the interpretation changed:
Following is from immigration-information.com site (Ron Gotcher):
�Last week, I wrote to Charles Oppenheim of the State Department, asking several specific questions. This morning, I had a long talk with him, when he very graciously called to respond to the questions I e-mailed him earlier. In the course of our discussion, I learned a great deal about the present backlog situation and what is being done about it. First, let me deal with the questions I had asked.
Mr. Oppenheim explained that while the Visa Office initially took the view that visa numbers had to fall down into employment third preference before the could fall across to the individual country quotas, but after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first.�
Direct link to above post:
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5456
Some more information from Ron Gotcher�s site can be found at following link
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5703
Now, let�s look at the actual law on this (above is only the interpretation from Mr Oppenheim, following is the actual text of the law: (my comment is in italics)
8 CFR Sec 202(a)
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph (read as under that EB category: if it is EB1, it goes to EB1 and if it is EB2 it goes to EB2) shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Read the entire Sec 202 (a) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
A glimpse of Sec 203(b) is:
b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): �.
Please read the entire section 203(b) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
So, in nutshell:
1. The law is actually clear on this.
2. Now Mr. Oppenheim has interpreted it correctly as well.
3. It don�t think we can convince anyone to change the interpretation (because interpretation appears to be correct. If it was interpreted differently in past, then that was a mistake).
4. The only way to deal with it is to CHANGE THE LAW.
5. More importantly, push for bills to increase overall numbers (recapture, STEM exemption) etc�
6. The big picture: All these is likely to look completely different once CIR comes in, and we need to include our agenda in CIR that would benefit every category for several years to come (not just my GC or your GC).
hairstyles did victoria beckham lose
NKR
04-25 11:16 AM
the point here is not how long its gonna take. Its sure that they r gonna work if not immediately may be in 3-4 months. and once they see all the proofs(i do have proofs) whole company will be audited rock bottom, all the gc filing will be verified and single loophole is just enough to cause irriparable damage to the company. not only the reputation but i heard they will have a high penalty of 100's of thousands dollars. I have contacted one of the top lawfirms.for the matter of $4000 if the company chooses to do it, its their foolishness. also if they genuinely wanted to enforce non compete they wouldn't have used it as a threat agiainst payments they owe me.
Its not that I haven't made any efforts to reconcile with my ex-employer. I have tried and still trying to get them to have a civil conversation and settle this. But the more I try, i beleive, they r thinking the more scared i am and are being arrogant by not replying to any of my emails or phone calls. My reconciling efforts are giving them wrong hints i beleive. I am definetly stressed about this,thats true, but i am not scared because of all the info i gathered, I know even they do file a suit, I will be on the winning side. though i have option to go directly to DOL or USCIS and can show all the proofs i have regarding the deductions they have made, i haven't made till today just because of the kind of relationship we had earlier and also concerned about other h1bs who r with the company right now. I dont want their GC's to be in jeopardy. but if employer doesn't make the effort from his side, and pulls the thread till it breaks, i can't help it.
.
Dude, I do not know who has given you red dot, you certainly deserve more green dots. I too think the same, if the company had to sue you for violating non-compete, they could have done it anytime, why are they threatening you when you ask for your salary. Either they do not have a non-compete agreement that they say you have signed (since you are not sure about it) or the non-compete has become invalid over a period of time or it does not hold water.
Its not that I haven't made any efforts to reconcile with my ex-employer. I have tried and still trying to get them to have a civil conversation and settle this. But the more I try, i beleive, they r thinking the more scared i am and are being arrogant by not replying to any of my emails or phone calls. My reconciling efforts are giving them wrong hints i beleive. I am definetly stressed about this,thats true, but i am not scared because of all the info i gathered, I know even they do file a suit, I will be on the winning side. though i have option to go directly to DOL or USCIS and can show all the proofs i have regarding the deductions they have made, i haven't made till today just because of the kind of relationship we had earlier and also concerned about other h1bs who r with the company right now. I dont want their GC's to be in jeopardy. but if employer doesn't make the effort from his side, and pulls the thread till it breaks, i can't help it.
.
Dude, I do not know who has given you red dot, you certainly deserve more green dots. I too think the same, if the company had to sue you for violating non-compete, they could have done it anytime, why are they threatening you when you ask for your salary. Either they do not have a non-compete agreement that they say you have signed (since you are not sure about it) or the non-compete has become invalid over a period of time or it does not hold water.
immigrant2007
09-10 12:20 AM
IV:
What are plans and strategy for EB3?
We all morons wont still learn, we will still start prediting for next visa bulletin hoping that a reincarnation of god will ome and deliver us visa numbers.
Unless we all make a collective effort no one is going to listen to us. I know the fate of my post we all people are busy to get our post noted or express our opinion that we have lost our fous of what our main problem is. I think we deserve this perhaps I dont think if we continue like this we even deserve GCs.
What are plans and strategy for EB3?
We all morons wont still learn, we will still start prediting for next visa bulletin hoping that a reincarnation of god will ome and deliver us visa numbers.
Unless we all make a collective effort no one is going to listen to us. I know the fate of my post we all people are busy to get our post noted or express our opinion that we have lost our fous of what our main problem is. I think we deserve this perhaps I dont think if we continue like this we even deserve GCs.
Sachin_Stock
09-24 04:28 PM
I refuse to even comment on that analogy. :rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment