rockstart
03-14 11:34 AM
EAD renewal delays will be on of the single issue on which I would defer AC-21 till I can find some one willing for an H1 transfer.
wallpaper Call of Duty 5 Modded Zombie
SK2007
09-27 09:03 AM
While we are trying our best to fix a broken system and brace ourselves, lets take a look at what is happening in other parts of the world.
European Union is introducing a Blue Card that will allow you to work in any of the EU coountries
Euro value is rising against dollar
Opportunities will be on the rise with strengthening the currency.
Lets run this thread for sharing views, opinions, experiences and anything related to the EU
Can you also attach the links on information about this blue card, it is something very new to me.
European Union is introducing a Blue Card that will allow you to work in any of the EU coountries
Euro value is rising against dollar
Opportunities will be on the rise with strengthening the currency.
Lets run this thread for sharing views, opinions, experiences and anything related to the EU
Can you also attach the links on information about this blue card, it is something very new to me.
gk_2000
08-10 08:39 PM
I have no intention of playing spoilsport if you are taking some good faith initiative. In fact, if there is some campaign launched on this - I will probably even contribute (well - if you are doing something in good faith for a community then I have a moral obligation to support it if it is not harmful for the community).
However, this part "I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis" souonds wishful to me based on my understanding of what the immigration law says. I spent some time going over the law a couple of years ago - so its possible that my memory may be failing me. If you can show some place in the Immigration law that actually supports this reinterpretation then I will correct myself.
You are absolutely right in pointing out the need to really see the law. I just dived into it. I will try to study it more thoroughly, as there are possibly multiple places we could explore in the language; not just this one. If I get more ideas I will come back and post them here.
I request all members to participate in the other thread discussing the various provisions of the INA
However, this part "I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis" souonds wishful to me based on my understanding of what the immigration law says. I spent some time going over the law a couple of years ago - so its possible that my memory may be failing me. If you can show some place in the Immigration law that actually supports this reinterpretation then I will correct myself.
You are absolutely right in pointing out the need to really see the law. I just dived into it. I will try to study it more thoroughly, as there are possibly multiple places we could explore in the language; not just this one. If I get more ideas I will come back and post them here.
I request all members to participate in the other thread discussing the various provisions of the INA
2011 cod mw2 prestige icons. cod mw2 prestige icons. cod mw2 prestige icons.
desi3933
02-03 07:15 AM
Here is the text under the attachment section
The record contains a letter from your prospective employer. The letter indicates that you have been employed by XXXXXX company as a Senior Software Engineer. However, the record does not contain any evidence which establishes the salary or compensation package being offered. Therefore you must submit a currently issued letter or other evidence from the prospective permanent employer indicating that the salary or compensation package being offered.
PD Mar 2002
485 RD SEP 2007
Submit job offer letter indicating job title and salary for the GC job. The letter must also mention that this job is permanant.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
The record contains a letter from your prospective employer. The letter indicates that you have been employed by XXXXXX company as a Senior Software Engineer. However, the record does not contain any evidence which establishes the salary or compensation package being offered. Therefore you must submit a currently issued letter or other evidence from the prospective permanent employer indicating that the salary or compensation package being offered.
PD Mar 2002
485 RD SEP 2007
Submit job offer letter indicating job title and salary for the GC job. The letter must also mention that this job is permanant.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
more...
santosh08872
03-17 04:29 PM
Mine is EB3, 17th June 2002
GreenLantern
02-14 09:41 PM
I really think if we are going to do a 3D battle we should stick with a single object. I mean a scene is quite a projec to take on, and with a 3 week deadline? No one is going to finish with anything worth a crap.
more...
ramus
07-02 06:07 PM
Thank you... Every drop in the ocean counts.
There are 1200 members online... Once you contribute please put link of this thread in our main thread..
Thanks a lot.
contributed 100 just now, my drop in the ocean, I will try to add more drops in coming days.
There are 1200 members online... Once you contribute please put link of this thread in our main thread..
Thanks a lot.
contributed 100 just now, my drop in the ocean, I will try to add more drops in coming days.
2010 cod mw2 prestige icons. call
alterego
07-04 08:31 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS’s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
more...
DianaSteve
10-29 05:36 PM
Sept 2001
EB3 India
LC approved April 2007
I-140 Pending
I-485 Pending
EB3 India
LC approved April 2007
I-140 Pending
I-485 Pending
hair house cod mw2 prestige icons.
ramaonline
04-23 02:19 AM
according to a recent news item, the house speaker needs the support of at least 70 republicans to even consider a vote:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has told the White House she could not pass a bill with Democratic votes alone, nor would she seek to enforce party discipline on the issue.
Bush would have to produce at least 70 Republican votes before she would consider a vote on comprehensive immigration legislation. Garnering such support might be very difficult for a president saddled with low approval ratings.
Democratic conservatives, particularly freshmen who seized their seats from Republicans, had to weather a barrage of attacks on the issue before their victories in November and are not eager to relive the experience, party aides and lawmakers say.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has told the White House she could not pass a bill with Democratic votes alone, nor would she seek to enforce party discipline on the issue.
Bush would have to produce at least 70 Republican votes before she would consider a vote on comprehensive immigration legislation. Garnering such support might be very difficult for a president saddled with low approval ratings.
Democratic conservatives, particularly freshmen who seized their seats from Republicans, had to weather a barrage of attacks on the issue before their victories in November and are not eager to relive the experience, party aides and lawmakers say.
more...
deepimpact
09-11 03:12 PM
Check with latest Inventory data - 05/2010
Also - where can i get the demand data you are referring to ??
Demand data:
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
Also - where can i get the demand data you are referring to ??
Demand data:
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
hot Tags: cod mw2 rank icons, mw2
nagio
02-19 12:50 PM
Hi,
Can the donating air miles be international like korean, air india etc?
Thanks,
Naga
Can the donating air miles be international like korean, air india etc?
Thanks,
Naga
more...
house COD : MW2 Prestige Symbols
abracadabra102
07-29 10:16 AM
A lot of people act as if their God / Gods need their protection. My friends think about that before getting upset about these issues. Do the Gods really need your protection? or is it just your ego thats being hurt? Would Ganesha (in this case) be hurt by being on the beer bottle? Does the picture infact resemble him? has anybody seen Ganesha? I mean, this is 21st century and we have to think rationally before becoming sentimental over these issues. So long as you get hurt over these there will be people to insult you. Believe me my friend no human can ever hurt / insult a God (if there is infact one). so why bother? Maintain your personal relationship with Ganesha in your prayer and let him deal with such insults in his way. The only reality you will ever know is your neighbuor. Live and let others live life to the fullest and dont let religion / religious idease dictate your attitude towards this world. next time you see the beer, buy it and drink it if you enjoy alcoholic beverages.
Great post.
Great post.
tattoo Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
meridiani.planum
08-07 02:38 AM
Hi Sachug22,
Some of the data you specified does not add up well. For example 2006 India, EB-total is 17,358 but 3,156+3,720+3,006 adds upto 9882.
Any idea?
Type 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
EB1-All 41,672 34,168 14,453 31,291 64,731 36,960 26,697
EB2-All 42,550 44,316 15,406 32,534 42,597 21,911 44,162
EB3-All 85,847 88,002 46,415 85,969 129,070 89,922 85,030
EB-All 179,195 174,968 82,137 155,330 246,878 159,081 155,889
EB1-I 3,543 2,820 1,266 2,998 6,336 3,156 2,855
EB2-I 21,355 21,310 8,536 16,262 16,687 3,720 6,203
EB3-I 16,339 17,354 10,647 19,889 23,250 3,006 17,795
EB-I 41,720 41,919 20,818 39,496 47,160 17,358 26,853
Thanks
that difference in numbers between total(EB) and total-india-GC for 2006 is because of a special provision of 50k visas made for schedule-A (nurses). Folks from Philippines and India took a big chunk of those visas. There was a lot of discussion of that on IV, because those 50k were recaptured visa numbers, which instead of being put into the general pool, were all given to schedule-A.
Some of the data you specified does not add up well. For example 2006 India, EB-total is 17,358 but 3,156+3,720+3,006 adds upto 9882.
Any idea?
Type 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
EB1-All 41,672 34,168 14,453 31,291 64,731 36,960 26,697
EB2-All 42,550 44,316 15,406 32,534 42,597 21,911 44,162
EB3-All 85,847 88,002 46,415 85,969 129,070 89,922 85,030
EB-All 179,195 174,968 82,137 155,330 246,878 159,081 155,889
EB1-I 3,543 2,820 1,266 2,998 6,336 3,156 2,855
EB2-I 21,355 21,310 8,536 16,262 16,687 3,720 6,203
EB3-I 16,339 17,354 10,647 19,889 23,250 3,006 17,795
EB-I 41,720 41,919 20,818 39,496 47,160 17,358 26,853
Thanks
that difference in numbers between total(EB) and total-india-GC for 2006 is because of a special provision of 50k visas made for schedule-A (nurses). Folks from Philippines and India took a big chunk of those visas. There was a lot of discussion of that on IV, because those 50k were recaptured visa numbers, which instead of being put into the general pool, were all given to schedule-A.
more...
pictures cod mw2 prestige icons. cod
andy garcia
09-10 01:58 PM
This holds true for even your spouse not being eligible for in-state tuition. WHY???? Because you are a legal dependent(spouse/children) immigrant?
But the children/spouses of the illegal aliens are eligible for the same!!!!!
Guys, you have to move to Florida. When my wife and son were on H4 they were paying in-state tuition.
this is copied from the catalog of the school:
The following categories will be considered as Florida residents for tuition purposes:
Active duty members of the armed forces stationed in Florida, or whose home of record is in Florida, and their dependents.
Full-time instructional and administrative personnel employed by a public educational institution and their dependents
Qualified beneficiaries under the Florida Pre-Paid Postsecondary Expense Program.
In addition the following nonimmigrant categories are eligible to establish Florida residency: A, E, G, H-1, H-4, I, K, L, N, 0-1, O-3, R, and NATO I-7.
Others as permitted by state statute or rule
But the children/spouses of the illegal aliens are eligible for the same!!!!!
Guys, you have to move to Florida. When my wife and son were on H4 they were paying in-state tuition.
this is copied from the catalog of the school:
The following categories will be considered as Florida residents for tuition purposes:
Active duty members of the armed forces stationed in Florida, or whose home of record is in Florida, and their dependents.
Full-time instructional and administrative personnel employed by a public educational institution and their dependents
Qualified beneficiaries under the Florida Pre-Paid Postsecondary Expense Program.
In addition the following nonimmigrant categories are eligible to establish Florida residency: A, E, G, H-1, H-4, I, K, L, N, 0-1, O-3, R, and NATO I-7.
Others as permitted by state statute or rule
dresses cod mw2 prestige icons
chintu25
07-09 03:11 PM
Way to Go Azulay Horn & Seiden, LLC
Rock On We are with u :) :cool:
Rock On We are with u :) :cool:
more...
makeup Call of Duty MW2 Prestige
wandmaker
10-10 01:07 PM
Just to avoid all this , You can say I'm a US citizen and move on. They cannot ask for any verification can they?
If verified, you would end up in eating ham burger.
If verified, you would end up in eating ham burger.
girlfriend Call of Duty MW2 Prestige
GCard_Dream
12-13 11:46 AM
I should have known this. The procedure is right on the IV home page. Does anyone know when the next conference call is?
How to submit your questions:
Please read the disclaimer below before submitting your questions via email.Please provide us with the following information, preferably in the following format, and keep it consise and crisp:
Email with Subject Line saying : Seeking Legal Opinion.
Email Address: legal_advise@immigrationvoice.org
Your Info: Please mention your first Name, City and State, so that we can use it to announce your question in the call. That way, your question would be distinguished from similar sounding questions.
Your Country of Citizenship: If your spouse is from a country other than yours, please specify both your countries of citizenship
Your Questions: Provide some clear background. Avoid questions with long and complicated case-specific situations that are like "Can I do X? If yes then is option A or option B better? If option A then can I file this? IF option B then can I file this? If B fails then can I refile A?". Such flow-chart and if-then-else type questions would be taken up only if time is left and attorney is comfortable in answering questions with limited information of your situation.
How to submit your questions:
Please read the disclaimer below before submitting your questions via email.Please provide us with the following information, preferably in the following format, and keep it consise and crisp:
Email with Subject Line saying : Seeking Legal Opinion.
Email Address: legal_advise@immigrationvoice.org
Your Info: Please mention your first Name, City and State, so that we can use it to announce your question in the call. That way, your question would be distinguished from similar sounding questions.
Your Country of Citizenship: If your spouse is from a country other than yours, please specify both your countries of citizenship
Your Questions: Provide some clear background. Avoid questions with long and complicated case-specific situations that are like "Can I do X? If yes then is option A or option B better? If option A then can I file this? IF option B then can I file this? If B fails then can I refile A?". Such flow-chart and if-then-else type questions would be taken up only if time is left and attorney is comfortable in answering questions with limited information of your situation.
hairstyles -Call of Duty 4 10th Prestige
logiclife
01-31 02:07 PM
What if the employer is an NGO or NPO? I believe, it is not counted against the H-1 quota but in that case, can he start working right away?
That depends. I dont know how the H1s that are issued outside of quota for educational and non-profit organizations work. If they have the validity date sooner than 1st Oct 2007, then yes, you can start working based on that date.
Whatever the case, the H1 Approval letter (I - 797 ) will have start-date and end-date on it and that when you can work legally.
That depends. I dont know how the H1s that are issued outside of quota for educational and non-profit organizations work. If they have the validity date sooner than 1st Oct 2007, then yes, you can start working based on that date.
Whatever the case, the H1 Approval letter (I - 797 ) will have start-date and end-date on it and that when you can work legally.
file485
12-22 09:40 AM
lazycis..
yes..the 485 was filed thru ex-employer based on future employment...
so basically we submitted a future empl letter from ex-employer + the current employment letter with the current employer stating that I am working with the current employer with the same skills mentioned in the labor..
the mess up was submitting the current empl.letter alongwith the G325a form which does not mention the current employer(which was prepared in June 07 before i found this job..)
yes..the 485 was filed thru ex-employer based on future employment...
so basically we submitted a future empl letter from ex-employer + the current employment letter with the current employer stating that I am working with the current employer with the same skills mentioned in the labor..
the mess up was submitting the current empl.letter alongwith the G325a form which does not mention the current employer(which was prepared in June 07 before i found this job..)
h1techSlave
02-08 02:44 PM
sts_seeker, We are perfectly happy to wait "before everyone who filed earlier." If you as a Nepali had a PD in 2001 and my PD is in 2002, I have no problems in you getting your GC before me. In this situation, you have filed before me, so it is fair that you should get your GC before me.
But today with the Country quota in place, your PD could be in 2007 and my PD could be in 2002. Guess, who would GC first?
I support country quota otherwise all the greencards will be taken by Indians and Chinese and the people from small countries will not even get a chance. I am sorry but of you are born on one of these countries then you have to wait before everyone who filed earlier.
But today with the Country quota in place, your PD could be in 2007 and my PD could be in 2002. Guess, who would GC first?
I support country quota otherwise all the greencards will be taken by Indians and Chinese and the people from small countries will not even get a chance. I am sorry but of you are born on one of these countries then you have to wait before everyone who filed earlier.
