WeldonSprings
10-14 12:30 PM
I have a few questions on using AP-
1. I have a valid AP till Jan. 04, 2009. I have applied for a new AP in Sept. last week. Can I travel on my current AP which is valid till Jan. 04, 2009 or will I have any problems with I-485, since I cannot travel on current AP, because I have applied for a new one.
2. Next, suppose I travel on my valid AP (the one till Jan. 04, 2009) in November first week and return on Dec. 10, 2008, what date will I get I-84 till? Will I get it till Dec. 09, 2009 or till Jan. 04, 2008. Ofcourse, the officer will stamp 'Parolee' on I-94, but till what date?
3. Have anyone had any bad experience, when boarding airlines at Indian airports, particularly Mumbai- Do they understand what AP documentation is, in lieu of the normal visa on passport?
Please let me know. Thanks in advance.
Renew you AP before Feb 25, 2009. You are usually paroled upto an year from the date of entry.
Yes you can file for AP your self, its as easy as filling out the form.
The stamps having nothing to do with the renewal.
1. I have a valid AP till Jan. 04, 2009. I have applied for a new AP in Sept. last week. Can I travel on my current AP which is valid till Jan. 04, 2009 or will I have any problems with I-485, since I cannot travel on current AP, because I have applied for a new one.
2. Next, suppose I travel on my valid AP (the one till Jan. 04, 2009) in November first week and return on Dec. 10, 2008, what date will I get I-84 till? Will I get it till Dec. 09, 2009 or till Jan. 04, 2008. Ofcourse, the officer will stamp 'Parolee' on I-94, but till what date?
3. Have anyone had any bad experience, when boarding airlines at Indian airports, particularly Mumbai- Do they understand what AP documentation is, in lieu of the normal visa on passport?
Please let me know. Thanks in advance.
Renew you AP before Feb 25, 2009. You are usually paroled upto an year from the date of entry.
Yes you can file for AP your self, its as easy as filling out the form.
The stamps having nothing to do with the renewal.
sunny26
02-14 05:51 PM
Because u r in Chennai You can contact Belview travels. I always use to book ticket thr them. They give good rates. They accept check or u can transfer to belview ICICI account. Very proffessional. If u need details send PM. I can give u phone number and gmail id so u can chat with them
chanduv23
10-13 08:49 AM
guess we are the only two on this thread .. isn't there anyone else in LI ... :confused:
We have people. Looks like there is a communication gap here, many people do not visit IV site that often.
Mobilizing upstate and Long Island is my next priorities.
New Jersey is picking up. It went down completely few months back but is now jumping back
Connecticut is also reviving - We have some very dedicated members in this area working extremely hard to mobilize this chapter
We have people. Looks like there is a communication gap here, many people do not visit IV site that often.
Mobilizing upstate and Long Island is my next priorities.
New Jersey is picking up. It went down completely few months back but is now jumping back
Connecticut is also reviving - We have some very dedicated members in this area working extremely hard to mobilize this chapter
prdgl
02-12 10:27 PM
Thanks a lot.
The reason is I cannot show my 2.5 yrs of experience which i have with my current employer who is filing my LC. I am desperately trying to show MS+x yrs of experience so that its easy to get through
Thanks
The reason is I cannot show my 2.5 yrs of experience which i have with my current employer who is filing my LC. I am desperately trying to show MS+x yrs of experience so that its easy to get through
Thanks
more...
wellwishergc
03-01 04:15 PM
Logiclife,
That makes perfect sense.
My question is - Is it possible that all clauses related to illegal immigration will be striked off, while legal will go through? To my understanding, the main objective of this bill is to solve the issue of illegal immigration. Legal immigration is just an additional section.. My fear again is - will the whole bill be discarded just because of the contentious illegal immigration aspects in the bill?.. Is there a way to pass the legal immigration relief measures without a bill?.. something like an amendment to the existing law?
Thanks for taking the interest and posting the comment.
What you mean is change the content of the webfax,not the format.
Anyways, the current draft of Specter bill would lead to numbers flowing downward(unused numbers due to 7% or 10% per country limit). When they flow downwards from EB2, EB3 and EB4, they go to EB5 where there is no mention of per country limit(by omission).
You know what this means? After all the gains, the country limit on India and China will cause the overflow of all visa numbers to EB5(Unskilled labor, gardeners, cooks, maids) WHERE THERE IS NOT COUNTRY LIMIT and unlimited demand. And over there, in absence of no country limit, immigrants from Mexico will consume all EB5 unskilled numbers and there wont be anything like "UNUSED" numbers.(read the thread posted by STUCKLABOR for that analysis and legalese. : http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=241 )
Coming back to proposals of Specter, the idea that there is so much relief that we dont need to worry about this or that...here is the thing...Current markup is a proposal. Not even a final version of Judiciary committee markup. From there you lose some things when it goes to the full floor of senate and then A LOT OF THINGS when the hawks from the HOUSE of REPS like Tancredos and Smiths slither their tentacles on the Senate version in the CONFERENCE COMMITTEE. That's the reason we dont want to lose one thing even if we are gaining 10 things because those 10 things might be reduced to 2 by the time its negotiated in the conference committee between the house and the senate.
However, if you want to provide more input on this issue, you are most welcome to email Sandeep who is leading the content-prep team that writes these webfaxes and letters. His email is sandeep@immigrationvoice.org
Thanks for taking interesting and sharing your view.
--logiclife.
That makes perfect sense.
My question is - Is it possible that all clauses related to illegal immigration will be striked off, while legal will go through? To my understanding, the main objective of this bill is to solve the issue of illegal immigration. Legal immigration is just an additional section.. My fear again is - will the whole bill be discarded just because of the contentious illegal immigration aspects in the bill?.. Is there a way to pass the legal immigration relief measures without a bill?.. something like an amendment to the existing law?
Thanks for taking the interest and posting the comment.
What you mean is change the content of the webfax,not the format.
Anyways, the current draft of Specter bill would lead to numbers flowing downward(unused numbers due to 7% or 10% per country limit). When they flow downwards from EB2, EB3 and EB4, they go to EB5 where there is no mention of per country limit(by omission).
You know what this means? After all the gains, the country limit on India and China will cause the overflow of all visa numbers to EB5(Unskilled labor, gardeners, cooks, maids) WHERE THERE IS NOT COUNTRY LIMIT and unlimited demand. And over there, in absence of no country limit, immigrants from Mexico will consume all EB5 unskilled numbers and there wont be anything like "UNUSED" numbers.(read the thread posted by STUCKLABOR for that analysis and legalese. : http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=241 )
Coming back to proposals of Specter, the idea that there is so much relief that we dont need to worry about this or that...here is the thing...Current markup is a proposal. Not even a final version of Judiciary committee markup. From there you lose some things when it goes to the full floor of senate and then A LOT OF THINGS when the hawks from the HOUSE of REPS like Tancredos and Smiths slither their tentacles on the Senate version in the CONFERENCE COMMITTEE. That's the reason we dont want to lose one thing even if we are gaining 10 things because those 10 things might be reduced to 2 by the time its negotiated in the conference committee between the house and the senate.
However, if you want to provide more input on this issue, you are most welcome to email Sandeep who is leading the content-prep team that writes these webfaxes and letters. His email is sandeep@immigrationvoice.org
Thanks for taking interesting and sharing your view.
--logiclife.
agt
05-23 08:12 PM
Thanks for your reply.
more...
redds777
08-25 10:28 AM
Anyone?
when he contacted senator and inturn they contacted USCIS, Senator got same reply as urs . his is also 2005 EB2 I PD. He is just waiting too.
i wonder what that extensed security review means. looks like never ending. hope no one gets stuck in it.
when he contacted senator and inturn they contacted USCIS, Senator got same reply as urs . his is also 2005 EB2 I PD. He is just waiting too.
i wonder what that extensed security review means. looks like never ending. hope no one gets stuck in it.
eb3_nepa
03-16 12:30 PM
Eb3_nepa, read my post closely; read the report as well, and then post again.
I said frivolous filing of I485, nothing to do with priority date not being current. If the priority date is not current then you are not going to get EAD. Let me give you an example. You could make up a job description that got through labor cert, but for which you don't have the qualifications for. You can concurrent file I140/I485 and get EAD even though your application has no chance of passing. If your lawyer is OK with it - after all, why do they care as long as they get the fee - you have just wasted USCIS' time.
I am confused stucklabor. I thought that labor decided ur job qualifications etc. I mean when i applied for my I-140 (i did not file concurrently btw). I was asked more info regarding my company and all of the company documents. I wasnt being sarcastic or anything i am just trying to understand what is going on.
I said frivolous filing of I485, nothing to do with priority date not being current. If the priority date is not current then you are not going to get EAD. Let me give you an example. You could make up a job description that got through labor cert, but for which you don't have the qualifications for. You can concurrent file I140/I485 and get EAD even though your application has no chance of passing. If your lawyer is OK with it - after all, why do they care as long as they get the fee - you have just wasted USCIS' time.
I am confused stucklabor. I thought that labor decided ur job qualifications etc. I mean when i applied for my I-140 (i did not file concurrently btw). I was asked more info regarding my company and all of the company documents. I wasnt being sarcastic or anything i am just trying to understand what is going on.
more...
willigetgc?
08-04 08:31 AM
I would think writing back to the Senator's office regarding your email and the unrelated response you got from the office has frustrated you, as the Senators does not seem to understand the problems, and therefore you are asking for an appointment to meet with the senator and explaining it personally.
You may not get the appointment to meet with the Senator, but you will let them know how badly they are screwing up constituents complaints. By following up and actually meeting with an immigration staff members in the Senator's office will be good.
You may not get the appointment to meet with the Senator, but you will let them know how badly they are screwing up constituents complaints. By following up and actually meeting with an immigration staff members in the Senator's office will be good.
spicy_guy
04-23 02:25 PM
Good news finally?
Obama presses for immigration reform - latimes.com (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-dc-obama-immigration,0,6471381.story)
Obama presses for immigration reform - latimes.com (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-dc-obama-immigration,0,6471381.story)
more...
seetheavatar
09-03 01:29 PM
Thanks, yes our last names were different.
I told the postman.
Its been more than 2 weeks and I didnt get any response from USCIS after updating the address.It still shows initial review.
Does anyone know how long it would take for the USCIS to resend the card?
Hi,
I think you should write your spouse name on the mailbox alongwith yours especially if she still maintained her maiden name which would be different from your last name.
Also do talk to your postmaster and update the situation.
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
Rayoflight
I told the postman.
Its been more than 2 weeks and I didnt get any response from USCIS after updating the address.It still shows initial review.
Does anyone know how long it would take for the USCIS to resend the card?
Hi,
I think you should write your spouse name on the mailbox alongwith yours especially if she still maintained her maiden name which would be different from your last name.
Also do talk to your postmaster and update the situation.
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
Rayoflight
sunnymit
05-10 01:55 PM
where is the delay? It usually comes out around 12th (give or take a day or two) of every month..
more...
rick_rajvanshi
08-19 09:39 PM
Thanks everyone for replies.
RFE LUD came as email on Friday. A week before, I spoke with customer service and they said my case will be forwarded to IO.
The RFE letter came to my company lawyer today. He sent me the copy. He is also basically suggesting the same. Gather whatever available and write some explanation. He will refine and send it.
Will keep posted on this forum.
--------------------
EB-2/ India/
PD 06/2004
Did you send "affidavit of non availability" or "certificate of non availability" from municipal location of your birth along with signed parents affidavits ?
RFE LUD came as email on Friday. A week before, I spoke with customer service and they said my case will be forwarded to IO.
The RFE letter came to my company lawyer today. He sent me the copy. He is also basically suggesting the same. Gather whatever available and write some explanation. He will refine and send it.
Will keep posted on this forum.
--------------------
EB-2/ India/
PD 06/2004
Did you send "affidavit of non availability" or "certificate of non availability" from municipal location of your birth along with signed parents affidavits ?
casinoroyale
01-31 02:18 PM
Ok, this is a tough'ie.
You might be ok, but let me explain. There 2 rules that play-in in this scenario. One is " last action ", the other is " effectve date of your new I-797 ". If the start/effective date of your new I-797 is later than your last action i.e your entry in the USA, then technically your new I-94 which you got from your new I-797 will kick-in from its effective date making your stay in USA legal till its end. Now, if the start/effective date of your new I-797 started before you entered USA using your OLD I-797 (concequently got short I-94 validity) that will control your legal stay period ( as per last action rule ).
That being said, this is very tricky situation, though arguably valid as per different memo's of USCIS. So it is in your best interest, either to go with this interpretation and do nothing if the first case that i explained above is true or play safe and go out of country and enter back US using your new I-797.
Consult a lawyer before you take any step.
Thanks.
You might be ok, but let me explain. There 2 rules that play-in in this scenario. One is " last action ", the other is " effectve date of your new I-797 ". If the start/effective date of your new I-797 is later than your last action i.e your entry in the USA, then technically your new I-94 which you got from your new I-797 will kick-in from its effective date making your stay in USA legal till its end. Now, if the start/effective date of your new I-797 started before you entered USA using your OLD I-797 (concequently got short I-94 validity) that will control your legal stay period ( as per last action rule ).
That being said, this is very tricky situation, though arguably valid as per different memo's of USCIS. So it is in your best interest, either to go with this interpretation and do nothing if the first case that i explained above is true or play safe and go out of country and enter back US using your new I-797.
Consult a lawyer before you take any step.
Thanks.
more...
bluez25
07-22 06:03 PM
Tinku,
How can you be so sure that I should be ok even when the dates move back? any links for me to read on information...
How can you be so sure that I should be ok even when the dates move back? any links for me to read on information...
logiclife
02-27 08:11 PM
Thanks for taking the interest and posting the comment.
What you mean is change the content of the webfax,not the format.
Anyways, the current draft of Specter bill would lead to numbers flowing downward(unused numbers due to 7% or 10% per country limit). When they flow downwards from EB2, EB3 and EB4, they go to EB5 where there is no mention of per country limit(by omission).
You know what this means? After all the gains, the country limit on India and China will cause the overflow of all visa numbers to EB5(Unskilled labor, gardeners, cooks, maids) WHERE THERE IS NOT COUNTRY LIMIT and unlimited demand. And over there, in absence of no country limit, immigrants from Mexico will consume all EB5 unskilled numbers and there wont be anything like "UNUSED" numbers.(read the thread posted by STUCKLABOR for that analysis and legalese. : http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=241 )
Coming back to proposals of Specter, the idea that there is so much relief that we dont need to worry about this or that...here is the thing...Current markup is a proposal. Not even a final version of Judiciary committee markup. From there you lose some things when it goes to the full floor of senate and then A LOT OF THINGS when the hawks from the HOUSE of REPS like Tancredos and Smiths slither their tentacles on the Senate version in the CONFERENCE COMMITTEE. That's the reason we dont want to lose one thing even if we are gaining 10 things because those 10 things might be reduced to 2 by the time its negotiated in the conference committee between the house and the senate.
However, if you want to provide more input on this issue, you are most welcome to email Sandeep who is leading the content-prep team that writes these webfaxes and letters. His email is sandeep@immigrationvoice.org
Thanks for taking interesting and sharing your view.
--logiclife.
What you mean is change the content of the webfax,not the format.
Anyways, the current draft of Specter bill would lead to numbers flowing downward(unused numbers due to 7% or 10% per country limit). When they flow downwards from EB2, EB3 and EB4, they go to EB5 where there is no mention of per country limit(by omission).
You know what this means? After all the gains, the country limit on India and China will cause the overflow of all visa numbers to EB5(Unskilled labor, gardeners, cooks, maids) WHERE THERE IS NOT COUNTRY LIMIT and unlimited demand. And over there, in absence of no country limit, immigrants from Mexico will consume all EB5 unskilled numbers and there wont be anything like "UNUSED" numbers.(read the thread posted by STUCKLABOR for that analysis and legalese. : http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=241 )
Coming back to proposals of Specter, the idea that there is so much relief that we dont need to worry about this or that...here is the thing...Current markup is a proposal. Not even a final version of Judiciary committee markup. From there you lose some things when it goes to the full floor of senate and then A LOT OF THINGS when the hawks from the HOUSE of REPS like Tancredos and Smiths slither their tentacles on the Senate version in the CONFERENCE COMMITTEE. That's the reason we dont want to lose one thing even if we are gaining 10 things because those 10 things might be reduced to 2 by the time its negotiated in the conference committee between the house and the senate.
However, if you want to provide more input on this issue, you are most welcome to email Sandeep who is leading the content-prep team that writes these webfaxes and letters. His email is sandeep@immigrationvoice.org
Thanks for taking interesting and sharing your view.
--logiclife.
more...
Libra
09-15 10:21 PM
bumping
GCBy3000
11-29 11:37 AM
Always play safe. Not all the immigration lawyers have the same answers. You might be right on several occasions, but the company will always go with the advice from the company lawyers. I have faced several idiotic decisions from my company lawyers which screwed me up big time in my GC process. But I have always played safe because I need the support from my company. When you take an offer from the new employer you do not know how good/bad are those company attorneys are. So play safe as it will cost you heavily.
NOTE: Having waited for several years with patience, develop the patience to wait for 6-8 months after 485 filing to be on safer side. Also invoking AC21 exactly after 6months does not create a good impression on you from your current employer as well as from the potential future employer. Always have a valid reason for invoking AC21 and do not invoke just because you can invoke. My 2 cents.
How do you prove to USCIS that your notice date is Aug 3 bcos I suppose in yr receipt notice, the date mentioned is of august.
Thanks
NOTE: Having waited for several years with patience, develop the patience to wait for 6-8 months after 485 filing to be on safer side. Also invoking AC21 exactly after 6months does not create a good impression on you from your current employer as well as from the potential future employer. Always have a valid reason for invoking AC21 and do not invoke just because you can invoke. My 2 cents.
How do you prove to USCIS that your notice date is Aug 3 bcos I suppose in yr receipt notice, the date mentioned is of august.
Thanks
inskrish
04-11 10:51 PM
I lost my job.My 140 is approved and I 485 is over 180 days.I have 2 yr EAD .I was laid off on 6 th April and I see LUD on I-485 on 9 april.I am so much worried that I may get RFE.
What are my option if I get RFE on Employment before getting new job.How can I get my RFE from company lawyer becase Lawyer address is on my 485 Receipt.
Hello,
I am 99.99 % confident that the soft LUD has nothing to do with your job loss. Had USCIS been that efficient to update our cases with in a couple of days of change request, we wouldn't have this messy immigration system. Lately, USCIS has been working aggresively to reduce the backlog of pending 485 applications applied during the July.2007 fiasco, by processing those applications. The "processing" means validating the application and the documentary evidences. If everything is fine with the application and the applicant's PD is also current, USCIS approves the I-485. If the PD is not current, USCIS preadjudicates the application and the application is kept pending until the PD becomes current. This triggers a soft update in LUD in I-485; besides, there are also several other scenarios that might trigger soft LUD in I-485.
Regards,
InsKrish
What are my option if I get RFE on Employment before getting new job.How can I get my RFE from company lawyer becase Lawyer address is on my 485 Receipt.
Hello,
I am 99.99 % confident that the soft LUD has nothing to do with your job loss. Had USCIS been that efficient to update our cases with in a couple of days of change request, we wouldn't have this messy immigration system. Lately, USCIS has been working aggresively to reduce the backlog of pending 485 applications applied during the July.2007 fiasco, by processing those applications. The "processing" means validating the application and the documentary evidences. If everything is fine with the application and the applicant's PD is also current, USCIS approves the I-485. If the PD is not current, USCIS preadjudicates the application and the application is kept pending until the PD becomes current. This triggers a soft update in LUD in I-485; besides, there are also several other scenarios that might trigger soft LUD in I-485.
Regards,
InsKrish
mattresscoil
11-05 02:42 PM
They might not necessarily ask you, but its always safe to have the below documents.
In our case, they asked us once and the other time, they did not care.
1. Copies of Passport of both the parents (page with picture and name details)
2. A letter authorizing your in-laws to accompany your daughter.
Get it notarized if you can. If not, send the signed copies.
If you need a format for the letter(nothing fancy, was drafted by myself), let me know, I can dig out the one I used.
dipmay2002, never_giveup:
Thanks for the information. I drafted a letter with itinerary, our details, child details, accompanying passenger details, our passport pages, birth certificate. We will get the letter notarized at the bank close by.
Thank you all for the inputs. It feels great to belong to this forum where people respond not only to immigration related queries but general issues that prospective immigrants face. Thanks to those who voice their opinions too ;-)
In our case, they asked us once and the other time, they did not care.
1. Copies of Passport of both the parents (page with picture and name details)
2. A letter authorizing your in-laws to accompany your daughter.
Get it notarized if you can. If not, send the signed copies.
If you need a format for the letter(nothing fancy, was drafted by myself), let me know, I can dig out the one I used.
dipmay2002, never_giveup:
Thanks for the information. I drafted a letter with itinerary, our details, child details, accompanying passenger details, our passport pages, birth certificate. We will get the letter notarized at the bank close by.
Thank you all for the inputs. It feels great to belong to this forum where people respond not only to immigration related queries but general issues that prospective immigrants face. Thanks to those who voice their opinions too ;-)
reddymjm
06-13 05:43 AM
for the case mentioned in this thread, will the priority date be the date of filing of Labor cert or the 140 approval date after the candidate moves to a new employer after 140 approval? could someone please clarify this for me. will greatly appreciate it.
PD is always LC filing date. He will still be able to use the old employer filed LC date as PD even if the employer cancels LC/I140. There might be a little risk if the old one he got was a sunstitued one.
PD is always LC filing date. He will still be able to use the old employer filed LC date as PD even if the employer cancels LC/I140. There might be a little risk if the old one he got was a sunstitued one.
No comments:
Post a Comment