sriramkalyan
01-02 11:19 AM
!!! Canada!!!
wallpaper est nature wallpaper ever
whoever
02-07 01:12 PM
hammer, here is another poll very similar at http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1671
kish006
12-27 09:13 AM
I have H1 upt 2010 with Visa. Its for my wife I am worried. She got her H1 1 year back and she is working from past 4 months. She is has to India as her Grandfather is sick he want see her before.....
Any possible to get sooner. She is stuck here even thought her AP is approved(with wrong picture).
Any possible to get sooner. She is stuck here even thought her AP is approved(with wrong picture).
2011 est friends 4ever
sku
01-09 03:53 PM
Yes, I want to know too, I don't know anybody personally who lost the job.
more...
snathan
02-10 11:52 AM
Hi ,
I need help !!!! I am a Electrical Engineering , but I joined a Indian consultant and my H1b is approved. I am working as system admin for past 2 years. I want to apply my GC in EB2 catogory.. Can some 1 advise me what to do or how to proceed with this. I am very much confused because I am not so comfortable with EB3.
Please advise !!!!!!!!
Thanks
No one is comfortable with Eb3...do you have Master or Bachelor in EE? Any it has to do with the job requirement and not with your or your degree.
I need help !!!! I am a Electrical Engineering , but I joined a Indian consultant and my H1b is approved. I am working as system admin for past 2 years. I want to apply my GC in EB2 catogory.. Can some 1 advise me what to do or how to proceed with this. I am very much confused because I am not so comfortable with EB3.
Please advise !!!!!!!!
Thanks
No one is comfortable with Eb3...do you have Master or Bachelor in EE? Any it has to do with the job requirement and not with your or your degree.
psk79
10-15 01:33 PM
Now my last option is to apply for AP for my wife while she is in India.
Can I apply for AP when she is in India?
I don't think so. While the form allows for someone to apply for anyone outside US, but I think that's only for emergency/temporary travel due to their inability to attend a visa interview.
Can I apply for AP when she is in India?
I don't think so. While the form allows for someone to apply for anyone outside US, but I think that's only for emergency/temporary travel due to their inability to attend a visa interview.
more...
GCNirvana007
04-08 03:05 PM
Trying to reach you guys for a while now.
1. How many active users are there as of today.
2. What are the media we have connection with.
Thanks.
1. How many active users are there as of today.
2. What are the media we have connection with.
Thanks.
2010 sharma est wallpaper ever
optimystic
03-20 01:46 PM
I talk to USCIS CC/IO last week. She told me that it will take approx 90 days to assign my case to AO. So my case is still getting dust on room and not with officer. It's sucks but wait continue...
PD: July 2001 (EB-3 India)
RD: July 2nd 2007
ND: Oct 10th 2007
I have bigger problem to worry about. I am process of lay-off from employer whom I am working last 7 years. :)
Oh..that hurts. I assume you will have to invoke AC21. All the best to you.
90 more days? Which service center is your case located? I assume Texas? Did she explain whats the reason for the delay? Did she tell you about namecheck status? Are you planning on an Infopass? (sorry too many questions, but I think we are both on a similar boat )
Looks like our PDs are very close to each other. Lets hope for the best.
PD: July 2001 (EB-3 India)
RD: July 2nd 2007
ND: Oct 10th 2007
I have bigger problem to worry about. I am process of lay-off from employer whom I am working last 7 years. :)
Oh..that hurts. I assume you will have to invoke AC21. All the best to you.
90 more days? Which service center is your case located? I assume Texas? Did she explain whats the reason for the delay? Did she tell you about namecheck status? Are you planning on an Infopass? (sorry too many questions, but I think we are both on a similar boat )
Looks like our PDs are very close to each other. Lets hope for the best.
more...
jonty_11
05-07 02:04 PM
Please let us/me know ASAP.
no details yet but in the past the regulations that have been related to immigration and have not been clear - Like labor substitution have been prone to abuse.....
I am suspecting they will tighten the AC21 just like they abolished labor substitution.
no details yet but in the past the regulations that have been related to immigration and have not been clear - Like labor substitution have been prone to abuse.....
I am suspecting they will tighten the AC21 just like they abolished labor substitution.
hair est nature wallpaper ever
pappu
12-19 06:46 PM
core member- Ashish Sharma (eager2i) will be attending this call on behalf of the core team.
more...
jliechty
May 23rd, 2005, 08:54 PM
Gary, I'm just thinking of mine which is a circular polarizer. You rotate the polarizer to achieve the desired amount of polarization. So I can rotate it one way and either darken or lighten the sky. All but your last pic looked as if it was darker on the right side which lead me to the assumption it was a circular type. There's a linear type too which I have never used so I'm not sure how it works, but I imagine it doesn't rotate (anyone?).
Linear vs. Circular has mainly to do with whether it works with metering and autofocus sensors in modern cameras. Both polarizers rotate and function similarly (I'm not sure if there is any difference in the effect shown in the image, but I doubt it).
Anyway, an unevenly polarized sky happens not because the polarizer is not rotated properly / enough, but rather because the camera is not quite at a 90 degree angle to the sun; this uneven polarization becomes more noticeable with wide angle lenses (to a point, then as even wider lenses are used, the sky will get dark in the middle and lighter on the edges even right at 90 degrees from the sun).
Linear vs. Circular has mainly to do with whether it works with metering and autofocus sensors in modern cameras. Both polarizers rotate and function similarly (I'm not sure if there is any difference in the effect shown in the image, but I doubt it).
Anyway, an unevenly polarized sky happens not because the polarizer is not rotated properly / enough, but rather because the camera is not quite at a 90 degree angle to the sun; this uneven polarization becomes more noticeable with wide angle lenses (to a point, then as even wider lenses are used, the sky will get dark in the middle and lighter on the edges even right at 90 degrees from the sun).
hot 3D ackgrounds ever.
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
more...
house justin bieber Best Wallpapers
gcformeornot
04-06 02:07 PM
For those who have Labor Sub and used AC21 to port employer....read on...
The Insightful Immigration Blog � Commentaries on Immigration Policy, Cases and Trends (http://cyrusmehta.blogspot.com/)
The Insightful Immigration Blog � Commentaries on Immigration Policy, Cases and Trends (http://cyrusmehta.blogspot.com/)
tattoo justin bieber Best Wallpapers
waitnwatch
05-30 01:36 PM
I understand if someone was stuck in BEC, we all got s****ed with that.
But why given that the H1B is only intended to be for a maximum of 6 years would anyone leave it until the last year to apply.
PERM has been around for a while now, and anyone approaching 6 years should have already filed PERM or be ready to leave after year 6.
I am not talking about applying when one reaches the 5th year. What I am saying is that a person starts applying from the first year itself (under the new merit system) but does not get a number because the quota is oversubscribed. Believe me or not this may happen to an economics or business professor with a Ph.D. from India or China. This person will have to apply every year under the proposed merit system. If this person does not get a number by the 6th year she/he has to leave. So a professor may get tenure but not an extension on H1-B because she/he did not ever get an opportunity to file a I-140.
But why given that the H1B is only intended to be for a maximum of 6 years would anyone leave it until the last year to apply.
PERM has been around for a while now, and anyone approaching 6 years should have already filed PERM or be ready to leave after year 6.
I am not talking about applying when one reaches the 5th year. What I am saying is that a person starts applying from the first year itself (under the new merit system) but does not get a number because the quota is oversubscribed. Believe me or not this may happen to an economics or business professor with a Ph.D. from India or China. This person will have to apply every year under the proposed merit system. If this person does not get a number by the 6th year she/he has to leave. So a professor may get tenure but not an extension on H1-B because she/he did not ever get an opportunity to file a I-140.
more...
pictures 11/est-wallpaper-ever.jpg
gcseeker2002
02-20 03:16 PM
I was looking at the flcdatacenter website for Perm labors filed in 2006, and here are the numbers of total perm filed :
Total : 105960
India : 26636 = 25.2%
China : 8222 = 7.75%
No wonder china is moving faster in the EB categories
Total : 105960
India : 26636 = 25.2%
China : 8222 = 7.75%
No wonder china is moving faster in the EB categories
dresses est wallpaper ever
dhesha
08-21 03:08 PM
It is my turn to receive the "Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident" today. My depenedents are yet to receive this mail. This forum, Immigration-law, Immigration portal by Rajiv Khanna and many other immigration lawyers' websites like Murthy's etc were very useful to understand the immigration laws.
I did everything myself (EB2-NIW - India) - I140, I485, AP and EAD and my PD (I140 RD) and I485 RD are 09-29-2005.
I did make a one time conribution of $100.00 to IV.
Thanks a lot. All the best to all.
You are saying ur PD was Sec 2005? Mine is Dec 2005. Should I also expect it sometime soon :)?
I did everything myself (EB2-NIW - India) - I140, I485, AP and EAD and my PD (I140 RD) and I485 RD are 09-29-2005.
I did make a one time conribution of $100.00 to IV.
Thanks a lot. All the best to all.
You are saying ur PD was Sec 2005? Mine is Dec 2005. Should I also expect it sometime soon :)?
more...
makeup of my est wallpapers EVER
BimmerFAn
05-29 09:34 AM
I am posting this so that others may benefit from my experience and also not repeat the same mistakes that I made.
I originally came to the United States when I was 9 years old in 1996 as a J-2 Dependent. I finished my grammar school, high school and college here. I started working on OPT and tried to figure out a way to get an H1-B visa since I knew that I was subject to Sections 212(e) � 2 year home residency requirement, which prohibited me from obtaining H or L status or pursuing permanent residency.
It was only after I consulted with a top tier immigration attorney that I found out that in certain circumstances J-2 dependents can apply for a waiver separately of the J-1 principal. The waiver for a J-2 dependent falls under the same procedures as an Interested Government Agency (IGA) waiver, except that if selected for a waiver, the Department of State will act as the IGA on your behalf. The attorney told me that the process to obtain a waiver could take anywhere from 3 months to a year, with 6 months being the projected average.
To apply for the waiver I had to send the DOS mine and my family�s visa history, complete photocopy of my passport, translated copy of my birth certificate, a printed copy of the application I had to fill out online through the DOS website, and a statement of reason (SoR). The SoR is the most important document since it gives you a chance to persuade the Waiver Review Board that you should be allowed to remain in the United States. Basically, since I came here when I was very young, I wrote about my academic, charitable and professional contribution to American society over my 14 years here. I mentioned that I had no ties to my former home country and was financially independent from my parents. I also wrote about how my career as a CPA benefits US companies and US economy, and how US financial reporting standards are vastly different that those of my home country etc. Moreover, I submitted other materials supporting my SoR such as my academic transcripts, employment offer letter, paystubs, CPA license, letter supporting my involvement with various charities, and a letter from the J-1 principal explaining their program and my relationship to them.
The Department of State recommended me for a waiver in just 2 business days after they received my documentation. The USCIS approved the waiver a week after receipt. The attorney submitted an H1-B petition for change of status (premium processing) as soon as the DOS sent the Favorable Recommendation to the USCIS. In most cases, to apply for an AOS all you need is a copy of the favorable recommendation the USCIS will adjudicate both simultaneously under premium processing. The USCIS took 14 nerve racking days to process it, but ultimately they approved the petition.
Overall, the process to waive the 2 year HRR and obtain an H1-B visa took me only 1 month and I count myself very lucky. I wish I had acted on it sooner, but before speaking to the attorney�s I had no idea a waiver was even an option and could only think of nightmarish scenarios. I will monitor my post in order to answer any questions you may have. I would want nothing more than for others to learn and benefit from my experience and save themselves the agonizing stress that I went through.
Please find the complete timeline for my process below. From speaking with my attorney I heard that my timeline is rather extraordinary so please do not think that all processing times are exactly the same.
Applied for a Waiver with the DOS: 4/22/10
Received by DOS: 4/30/2010
Response: Favorable Recommendation 05/04/2010
Received by the USCIS @ VSC: 05/07/2010
Waiver Approved by USCIS: 05/15/2010
H1-B Filed under PP with the USCIS: 05/07/10
H1-B Received by the USCIS: 05/11/10
Decision: H1-B Approved 05/25/10
I originally came to the United States when I was 9 years old in 1996 as a J-2 Dependent. I finished my grammar school, high school and college here. I started working on OPT and tried to figure out a way to get an H1-B visa since I knew that I was subject to Sections 212(e) � 2 year home residency requirement, which prohibited me from obtaining H or L status or pursuing permanent residency.
It was only after I consulted with a top tier immigration attorney that I found out that in certain circumstances J-2 dependents can apply for a waiver separately of the J-1 principal. The waiver for a J-2 dependent falls under the same procedures as an Interested Government Agency (IGA) waiver, except that if selected for a waiver, the Department of State will act as the IGA on your behalf. The attorney told me that the process to obtain a waiver could take anywhere from 3 months to a year, with 6 months being the projected average.
To apply for the waiver I had to send the DOS mine and my family�s visa history, complete photocopy of my passport, translated copy of my birth certificate, a printed copy of the application I had to fill out online through the DOS website, and a statement of reason (SoR). The SoR is the most important document since it gives you a chance to persuade the Waiver Review Board that you should be allowed to remain in the United States. Basically, since I came here when I was very young, I wrote about my academic, charitable and professional contribution to American society over my 14 years here. I mentioned that I had no ties to my former home country and was financially independent from my parents. I also wrote about how my career as a CPA benefits US companies and US economy, and how US financial reporting standards are vastly different that those of my home country etc. Moreover, I submitted other materials supporting my SoR such as my academic transcripts, employment offer letter, paystubs, CPA license, letter supporting my involvement with various charities, and a letter from the J-1 principal explaining their program and my relationship to them.
The Department of State recommended me for a waiver in just 2 business days after they received my documentation. The USCIS approved the waiver a week after receipt. The attorney submitted an H1-B petition for change of status (premium processing) as soon as the DOS sent the Favorable Recommendation to the USCIS. In most cases, to apply for an AOS all you need is a copy of the favorable recommendation the USCIS will adjudicate both simultaneously under premium processing. The USCIS took 14 nerve racking days to process it, but ultimately they approved the petition.
Overall, the process to waive the 2 year HRR and obtain an H1-B visa took me only 1 month and I count myself very lucky. I wish I had acted on it sooner, but before speaking to the attorney�s I had no idea a waiver was even an option and could only think of nightmarish scenarios. I will monitor my post in order to answer any questions you may have. I would want nothing more than for others to learn and benefit from my experience and save themselves the agonizing stress that I went through.
Please find the complete timeline for my process below. From speaking with my attorney I heard that my timeline is rather extraordinary so please do not think that all processing times are exactly the same.
Applied for a Waiver with the DOS: 4/22/10
Received by DOS: 4/30/2010
Response: Favorable Recommendation 05/04/2010
Received by the USCIS @ VSC: 05/07/2010
Waiver Approved by USCIS: 05/15/2010
H1-B Filed under PP with the USCIS: 05/07/10
H1-B Received by the USCIS: 05/11/10
Decision: H1-B Approved 05/25/10
girlfriend Ncis iconsest wallpaper
mbartosik
02-17 01:24 AM
Hey, it is welcome, but it is also proof that the people running this system cannot count.
Logically if EB2 India is U currently it means that no visas are left, I know how to count to zero, following the rules they must have found new visas under the carpet or miscounted issued visa, or expecting a lot of spill over from EB1, unless they have changed interpretation of rules for EB2, like EB2 can now take from EB3.
Logically if EB2 India is U currently it means that no visas are left, I know how to count to zero, following the rules they must have found new visas under the carpet or miscounted issued visa, or expecting a lot of spill over from EB1, unless they have changed interpretation of rules for EB2, like EB2 can now take from EB3.
hairstyles of Mobile wallpapers ever
gkaplan
04-21 04:43 PM
Hello
My story is:
I've been on J2 for a while, it expires in May 2011. I have a EAD and currentlt I'm working for a company as a professional.I have a 5 years of Bs degree.
Questions are:
1. Can my employer apply for a Perm Cert for me if they want.
2. After getting the perm cert. can my employer file I 140 under EB3 for me?
3. Will I be eligible for premium processing for I 140 application, in 15 days?
4. Lets say all the above steps are accomplished and I got approved for I 140, all happened prior to May 2011 (this is the actual date my J visa and EAD expires).
a. Then I'll still be working with my current EAD, right?
b. Then what happens after May 2011?
c. DO I need to wait to file I 485 or can I file it right after my I 140 approved?
d. how can I legally work in the USA after my EAD from J visa expires, but if I have approved I 140.
thank you very much
My story is:
I've been on J2 for a while, it expires in May 2011. I have a EAD and currentlt I'm working for a company as a professional.I have a 5 years of Bs degree.
Questions are:
1. Can my employer apply for a Perm Cert for me if they want.
2. After getting the perm cert. can my employer file I 140 under EB3 for me?
3. Will I be eligible for premium processing for I 140 application, in 15 days?
4. Lets say all the above steps are accomplished and I got approved for I 140, all happened prior to May 2011 (this is the actual date my J visa and EAD expires).
a. Then I'll still be working with my current EAD, right?
b. Then what happens after May 2011?
c. DO I need to wait to file I 485 or can I file it right after my I 140 approved?
d. how can I legally work in the USA after my EAD from J visa expires, but if I have approved I 140.
thank you very much
syzygy
07-21 10:41 AM
This is smart idea. Will convey the message to right people.
This idea was floated a few years back, but then we did not have the win of a flower campaign behind us.
We now have a senator to focus our energies on - Dick Durbin.
How about everybody with a US degree send a copy of the diploma in a packet to Sen Durbin with a message - Dont hold us hostage because of a few bad apples..something to that nature?
Alternatively we can send it to Sen Obama asking him to please let the senior senator from illinois, sen Durbin, know we are high skilled immigrants - dont hold us hostage because of a few bad apples.
maybe we can send an apple too :D
sending to sen obama will make sure the issue is played in media because of the presidential coverage.
This idea was floated a few years back, but then we did not have the win of a flower campaign behind us.
We now have a senator to focus our energies on - Dick Durbin.
How about everybody with a US degree send a copy of the diploma in a packet to Sen Durbin with a message - Dont hold us hostage because of a few bad apples..something to that nature?
Alternatively we can send it to Sen Obama asking him to please let the senior senator from illinois, sen Durbin, know we are high skilled immigrants - dont hold us hostage because of a few bad apples.
maybe we can send an apple too :D
sending to sen obama will make sure the issue is played in media because of the presidential coverage.
suresh.emails
01-12 01:55 PM
It was clearly written in the last 2 pages of any Indian passport that, one should not handover passport to any one; unless other wise MOE (Ministry of External Affairs), Indian Court has ordered so.
It is illegal to:
1. Hand over passport to any one
2. Send through courier across borders
3. To Mortgage passport (a set of people will do in some cases; when they owe money)
4. In Possesen of others passport.
The imprisonment for doing so is 6 months to 3 years in jail or fine or may be both (to the best of my knowledge).
So be careful in doing so.
P.S-1: Handing over passport to Consulate/Embassies is a different case and person should be in the same country where the consulate is while applying for visa?.
It is illegal to:
1. Hand over passport to any one
2. Send through courier across borders
3. To Mortgage passport (a set of people will do in some cases; when they owe money)
4. In Possesen of others passport.
The imprisonment for doing so is 6 months to 3 years in jail or fine or may be both (to the best of my knowledge).
So be careful in doing so.
P.S-1: Handing over passport to Consulate/Embassies is a different case and person should be in the same country where the consulate is while applying for visa?.
No comments:
Post a Comment