rbms
04-25 12:41 PM
How about something like,
If a person has stayed in US for 10+ (or 7+years) years and has filed taxes(verified thourgh 1040s), he should be given GC. No questions asked(other than the ones the affect security of USA)
If a person has stayed in US for 10+ (or 7+years) years and has filed taxes(verified thourgh 1040s), he should be given GC. No questions asked(other than the ones the affect security of USA)
wallpaper dodge charger 1969
ss_col
07-06 11:17 AM
Just a thought that there are other anti immigrant groups also visiting our website. We are frustrated and angry but all these comments that we are writing are also read by other people and will be used against us to make things harder. Also the general feeling is that American people dont really care or want to understand about GC. For them especially groups like NumberUSA etc want us out. So please stop feeding ideas into people's head without knowing facts. Assumptions are not facts.
GC_Optimist
09-29 11:59 AM
By not utilizing all the visa numbers USCIS is creating artificial scarcity
leading to huge Backlog. I think this needs to be highligted to the
lawmakers. or Administration.
leading to huge Backlog. I think this needs to be highligted to the
lawmakers. or Administration.
2011 1969 Dodge Charger RT SE
mrdelhiite
06-23 08:33 AM
i saw 2 approvals ( on 06/22) in for people who applied in feb starting ... just a fyi
-M
-M
more...
indyanguy
11-01 09:37 PM
Has anyone done and research on what are the benefits of being LLC- S(single self employed) or to work for your wife's company (after she gets EAD) as compared to being on a regular payroll in a company..
I know you can show up your car/ cellphone/ homephone/ and some misc food expenses as for your business.
Has anyone done any detailed research on what is better?
I have the same question. Any answers?
Thanks
I know you can show up your car/ cellphone/ homephone/ and some misc food expenses as for your business.
Has anyone done any detailed research on what is better?
I have the same question. Any answers?
Thanks
raju123
06-01 04:00 PM
This might be useful to you.
Age-Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "Child Status Protection Act"
The "Child Status Protection Act", effective August 6, 2002, addresses the problems of minor children losing their eligibility for certain immigration benefits as a result of INS (now USCIS) processing delays. Prior to the passage of this law, a child's eligibility in Employment-Based Immigration situations to be part of his or her parent's application as a derivative beneficiary was based on the child's age at the time that the child's I-485 was adjudicated. Because of enormous backlogs and processing delays, many children turned 21 before the their I-485 applications were adjudicated. In such cases, the children "age-out" and are no longer considered to be part of the parent's application and lose their eligibility to obtain green cards as a derivative beneficiary.
Children who otherwise would have aged out may successfully adjust their status through the additional interplay of the new Concurrent Filing rule and the "Child Status Protection Act." According to the "Child Status Protection Act," the eligibility of these aging-out children will be determined by their age at the date a visa becomes available to them minus the number of days that the Employment-Based immigration petition was pending. Furthermore, these children must file for permanent resident status within one year of such availability. For a clearer illustration of this rule, please see the different scenarios below.
Example 1
The Labor Certification application that was submitted on John's behalf on January 1, 2000 was later approved on December 31, 2000. Afterwards, his employer submits an I-140 (EB-2) immigration petition on John's behalf on January 1, 2002. At that time, John's son, Junior, is 20 years and 7 months old. John's I-140 petition was pending for six months and was approved on July 1, 2002, one month after Junior turns 21 years of age. The visa number for EB-2 was available for John on July 1, 2002. Under the old law without the Child Status Protection Act, Junior has aged out because he is now 21 years old. However, under the new law, his age is fixed as of the date that a visa number becomes available minus the number of days that the I-140 was pending. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, these six months must be subtracted from Junior's age at the time the visa number became available on July 1, 2002. Subtracting six months from Junior's age of 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, Junior's age is fixed at 20 years and 7 months. Thus, even though he was already 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, he is still considered a "child" for purposes of accompanying his parents in adjusting his status to permanent residence. However, Junior has to file his I-485 within one year from the date of I-140 approval, that is before July 1, 2003. The length of time that is takes the USCIS to adjudicate Junior's case is no longer important in these cases.
According to "Child Status Protection Act", if through the above calculation, the child's age is fixed at 21 or older, the child would be automatically reclassified to an appropriate category and retains the principal beneficiary's original priority date. Please see the next example below.
Example 2
Same facts as above except that Junior is 21 years and seven months old at the time of John's I-140 approval. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, Junior's age will be fixed at 21 years and one month. Even with the Child Status Protection Act, Junior still ages out and may not adjust his status at this time. However, he will automatically be reclassified to an appropriate category, family-based 2B, and retain his father's original priority date, January 1, 2000, which is the date John's employer filed John's Labor Certification application.
Example 3
Richard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. Richard's son, Simon, is 21 years and one month old. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Richard filed his I-485 because the visa number was currently available for Richard at that time. However, Simon cannot file his I-485 with his father because he aged out.
Example 4
Howard's daughter, Rachel, is 20 years and 10 months old. Howard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Howard and Rachel filed their I-485 since the visa number was available for Howard at that time. Thus, according to the "Child Status Protection Act," no matter how much time Howard's I-140 is pending, Rachel will not age out.
Visa numbers are currently available to all EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. Thus, with the new Concurrent Filing rule, any person who is a beneficiary (or applicant) of an I-140 petition that has already been filed or is filing the I-140 at this time is now eligible to file the I-485 application as well. Family members will be eligible to file the I-485 along with the principal alien. However, since the Concurrent Filing rule became effective, visa numbers may become unavailable in the future because more eligible aliens will be filing their I-485. Thus, eligible aliens with aging-out children should file their I-485 as soon as possible. Please see next example.
Example 5
Jenny filed her I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 10, 2002. Jenny has a son, Benny, who is 20 years and eleven months old. However, due to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, many aliens have filed their I-140 and I-485 together and the visa number for EB-2 has been exhausted. However, the visa number will not be current until December 2002 when Benny will be 21 years and three months old. If Jenny's I-140 is pending for six months and will be approved in February 2003, these six months will be reduced from Benny's age in December 2002 when he is 21 years and three months old. Thus, his age is fixed as 20 years nine months. However, if Jenny's I-140 petition is pending for only two months and will be approved in October 2002, Benny's age will be fixed as 21 years and one month. Thus, Benny ages out in this scenario and must wait until his priority date under family-based 2B immigration becomes current.
Example 6
Jason filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on June 30, 2002. Jason has a son, Ken, who is 20 years and ten months old at that time. According to the visa bulletin, an immigration visa number became available for Jason on July 31, 2002. Ken was 20 years and eleven months on July 31, and he is not in the U.S. but in his home country. Because of the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule Jason filed his I-485 on August 10, 2002. If Jason's I-140 is pending for 6 months until December 31, 2002, one month pending period from June 30 to July 31, 2002 should be subtracted from Ken's age on July 31, 2002. Thus, Ken's age is fixed as 20 years and 10 months. Ken may apply for his immigrant visa through Consular Processing at U.S. Consulate in his home country within one year from July 31, 2002.
For more information about "Age Out", please click the following topics:
What is "Age Out"
Child Status Protection Act
If you are a USC, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
If you are an LPR or will be an LPR, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
Age Out Problems in Employment-Based Immigration
Age Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "CSPA"
Child of Asylee and Refugee
Unmarried Sons or Daughters of Naturalized Citizens
Effective Date of the CSPA
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
Age-Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "Child Status Protection Act"
The "Child Status Protection Act", effective August 6, 2002, addresses the problems of minor children losing their eligibility for certain immigration benefits as a result of INS (now USCIS) processing delays. Prior to the passage of this law, a child's eligibility in Employment-Based Immigration situations to be part of his or her parent's application as a derivative beneficiary was based on the child's age at the time that the child's I-485 was adjudicated. Because of enormous backlogs and processing delays, many children turned 21 before the their I-485 applications were adjudicated. In such cases, the children "age-out" and are no longer considered to be part of the parent's application and lose their eligibility to obtain green cards as a derivative beneficiary.
Children who otherwise would have aged out may successfully adjust their status through the additional interplay of the new Concurrent Filing rule and the "Child Status Protection Act." According to the "Child Status Protection Act," the eligibility of these aging-out children will be determined by their age at the date a visa becomes available to them minus the number of days that the Employment-Based immigration petition was pending. Furthermore, these children must file for permanent resident status within one year of such availability. For a clearer illustration of this rule, please see the different scenarios below.
Example 1
The Labor Certification application that was submitted on John's behalf on January 1, 2000 was later approved on December 31, 2000. Afterwards, his employer submits an I-140 (EB-2) immigration petition on John's behalf on January 1, 2002. At that time, John's son, Junior, is 20 years and 7 months old. John's I-140 petition was pending for six months and was approved on July 1, 2002, one month after Junior turns 21 years of age. The visa number for EB-2 was available for John on July 1, 2002. Under the old law without the Child Status Protection Act, Junior has aged out because he is now 21 years old. However, under the new law, his age is fixed as of the date that a visa number becomes available minus the number of days that the I-140 was pending. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, these six months must be subtracted from Junior's age at the time the visa number became available on July 1, 2002. Subtracting six months from Junior's age of 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, Junior's age is fixed at 20 years and 7 months. Thus, even though he was already 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, he is still considered a "child" for purposes of accompanying his parents in adjusting his status to permanent residence. However, Junior has to file his I-485 within one year from the date of I-140 approval, that is before July 1, 2003. The length of time that is takes the USCIS to adjudicate Junior's case is no longer important in these cases.
According to "Child Status Protection Act", if through the above calculation, the child's age is fixed at 21 or older, the child would be automatically reclassified to an appropriate category and retains the principal beneficiary's original priority date. Please see the next example below.
Example 2
Same facts as above except that Junior is 21 years and seven months old at the time of John's I-140 approval. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, Junior's age will be fixed at 21 years and one month. Even with the Child Status Protection Act, Junior still ages out and may not adjust his status at this time. However, he will automatically be reclassified to an appropriate category, family-based 2B, and retain his father's original priority date, January 1, 2000, which is the date John's employer filed John's Labor Certification application.
Example 3
Richard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. Richard's son, Simon, is 21 years and one month old. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Richard filed his I-485 because the visa number was currently available for Richard at that time. However, Simon cannot file his I-485 with his father because he aged out.
Example 4
Howard's daughter, Rachel, is 20 years and 10 months old. Howard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Howard and Rachel filed their I-485 since the visa number was available for Howard at that time. Thus, according to the "Child Status Protection Act," no matter how much time Howard's I-140 is pending, Rachel will not age out.
Visa numbers are currently available to all EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. Thus, with the new Concurrent Filing rule, any person who is a beneficiary (or applicant) of an I-140 petition that has already been filed or is filing the I-140 at this time is now eligible to file the I-485 application as well. Family members will be eligible to file the I-485 along with the principal alien. However, since the Concurrent Filing rule became effective, visa numbers may become unavailable in the future because more eligible aliens will be filing their I-485. Thus, eligible aliens with aging-out children should file their I-485 as soon as possible. Please see next example.
Example 5
Jenny filed her I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 10, 2002. Jenny has a son, Benny, who is 20 years and eleven months old. However, due to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, many aliens have filed their I-140 and I-485 together and the visa number for EB-2 has been exhausted. However, the visa number will not be current until December 2002 when Benny will be 21 years and three months old. If Jenny's I-140 is pending for six months and will be approved in February 2003, these six months will be reduced from Benny's age in December 2002 when he is 21 years and three months old. Thus, his age is fixed as 20 years nine months. However, if Jenny's I-140 petition is pending for only two months and will be approved in October 2002, Benny's age will be fixed as 21 years and one month. Thus, Benny ages out in this scenario and must wait until his priority date under family-based 2B immigration becomes current.
Example 6
Jason filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on June 30, 2002. Jason has a son, Ken, who is 20 years and ten months old at that time. According to the visa bulletin, an immigration visa number became available for Jason on July 31, 2002. Ken was 20 years and eleven months on July 31, and he is not in the U.S. but in his home country. Because of the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule Jason filed his I-485 on August 10, 2002. If Jason's I-140 is pending for 6 months until December 31, 2002, one month pending period from June 30 to July 31, 2002 should be subtracted from Ken's age on July 31, 2002. Thus, Ken's age is fixed as 20 years and 10 months. Ken may apply for his immigrant visa through Consular Processing at U.S. Consulate in his home country within one year from July 31, 2002.
For more information about "Age Out", please click the following topics:
What is "Age Out"
Child Status Protection Act
If you are a USC, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
If you are an LPR or will be an LPR, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
Age Out Problems in Employment-Based Immigration
Age Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "CSPA"
Child of Asylee and Refugee
Unmarried Sons or Daughters of Naturalized Citizens
Effective Date of the CSPA
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
more...
p_kumar
09-30 04:19 PM
My EB3 PD is Oct 2003. I-140 approved and I-485 ND is July24th.when can i expect to get the green card?. thanks in advance.
2010 Hpi 1969 Dodge Charger Body
pappu
06-04 01:59 PM
One one hand you have folks who are getting labor approvals from BECs just now and have not filed I-140s.
On other hand you have PERM folks who have Labor, I-140 certified in 2 weeks.
Don't you think this provision is a bit harsh on those who've waited 3+ years for labor in BECs ?
Not a bit harsh but very harsh. There are cases of people who have waited for 5 years and are still stuck in BEC. Now if this bill passes, they will have to apply all over again. There are also people who have gone through the PERM process and have not applied I140. Sometimes PERM process can take upto 1 year if the HR and Lawyer is slow in the recruitment process and unresponsive.
On other hand you have PERM folks who have Labor, I-140 certified in 2 weeks.
Don't you think this provision is a bit harsh on those who've waited 3+ years for labor in BECs ?
Not a bit harsh but very harsh. There are cases of people who have waited for 5 years and are still stuck in BEC. Now if this bill passes, they will have to apply all over again. There are also people who have gone through the PERM process and have not applied I140. Sometimes PERM process can take upto 1 year if the HR and Lawyer is slow in the recruitment process and unresponsive.
more...
nik.patelc
02-18 06:04 PM
EB3 to EB2 porting is so huge. I dont think PERM 2005 data really matters. i think a pattern of gradual moving dates ( 1 month or 2 month per bulletin) forward for EB2 India till Spet 2009. Then with OCT, dates will go back to 2002 due to EB3 - EB2 porting.
Somewhere in another thread i saw that roughly total 60000 EB2 India cases are in pending state by Ron gotcher analysis.
if hypothetically, After July 2007 fiasco, thousands of EB3 cases prior to 2004 PD date were converted to Eb2, I assume It will take alteast 2 to 3 years to clear all EB2 cases with PD < DEC 2004 even if there is new cases of Eb3 to EB2 porting going forward from today.
Somewhere in another thread i saw that roughly total 60000 EB2 India cases are in pending state by Ron gotcher analysis.
if hypothetically, After July 2007 fiasco, thousands of EB3 cases prior to 2004 PD date were converted to Eb2, I assume It will take alteast 2 to 3 years to clear all EB2 cases with PD < DEC 2004 even if there is new cases of Eb3 to EB2 porting going forward from today.
hair 1969 dodge charger rt
Milind123
09-13 03:25 PM
Order Details - Sep 13, 2007 12:40 PM GMT-07:00
Google Order #949176417011663
Thank you for transforming me from :( to :D
I will post my contribution shortly.
Google Order #949176417011663
Thank you for transforming me from :( to :D
I will post my contribution shortly.
more...
n2b
09-10 08:50 AM
The greatness of USCIS is unbelievable!!!!!
When the dates move ahead, to say 2006, the 485s that get approved the most are for people whose PDs are in 2006. The 2004-2005 folks just have to keep starring!!! Then all of a sudden dates fall back to 2003...now only god knows who is yet to be approved in EB2-India before April 2003.
So what it seems like is when the dates move ahead drastically all the people who most recently applied will get approved and for the people who are stuck in backlog will see approvals only if the dates stick around their dates for atleast over a year....until then USCIS doesn't even realize that oh these people are still in queue and we need to approve them!!!
Such a BS to deal with all because of USCIS' GRACE!!!!
When the dates move ahead, to say 2006, the 485s that get approved the most are for people whose PDs are in 2006. The 2004-2005 folks just have to keep starring!!! Then all of a sudden dates fall back to 2003...now only god knows who is yet to be approved in EB2-India before April 2003.
So what it seems like is when the dates move ahead drastically all the people who most recently applied will get approved and for the people who are stuck in backlog will see approvals only if the dates stick around their dates for atleast over a year....until then USCIS doesn't even realize that oh these people are still in queue and we need to approve them!!!
Such a BS to deal with all because of USCIS' GRACE!!!!
hot 1969 Dodge Charger RT
ind_game
05-15 11:04 PM
Thanks for the reply. I hope that this time it gets approved. I think the best approach to this is to show the timeline of your petition and I-485, with accompanying evidence for each point in time.
I guess that the supervisor of the IO processing your case did not even bother to review the MTR. As I understand (correct me if wrong), MTRs go to the same IO who denied your case but it has to be reviewed and approved by the Supervisor.
Thanks for your wishes.
I agree with you regarding the timeline and evidence. I have mentioned it to my attorney numerous times. My attorney was insistent that adjudicating officers can see all my info on their computer screens. It is only a matter of looking at the info correctly.
It looks like the first MTR went to the same IO who denied my I-485. I could say it from ID in both the denial letters.
I guess that the supervisor of the IO processing your case did not even bother to review the MTR. As I understand (correct me if wrong), MTRs go to the same IO who denied your case but it has to be reviewed and approved by the Supervisor.
Thanks for your wishes.
I agree with you regarding the timeline and evidence. I have mentioned it to my attorney numerous times. My attorney was insistent that adjudicating officers can see all my info on their computer screens. It is only a matter of looking at the info correctly.
It looks like the first MTR went to the same IO who denied my I-485. I could say it from ID in both the denial letters.
more...
house Dodge Charger 2nd Gen
santb1975
05-29 09:42 PM
^^^
tattoo 1969 Dodge Charger R/T Hemi
skv
06-21 01:21 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCbFEgFajGU
Please can you put this in the headline, so that Immigrationvoice can comment and oppose.
Thx.
Oppose "Cohen & Grisby PERM "(youtube)
Please can you put this in the headline, so that Immigrationvoice can comment and oppose.
Thx.
Oppose "Cohen & Grisby PERM "(youtube)
more...
pictures 1969 Dukes of Hazzard Dodge
Kodi
06-22 11:33 AM
If PD means the date you filed your LC then its May 8th, still not over 90 days.
dresses Dodge Charger 1969.
villamonte6100
03-31 01:43 PM
"This organization is headed by most incompetant people who doesn't have any clue of Management, I guess they should go back to school..."
Very big statement.
There are problem with the USCIS that is affecting everyone in this forum but saying they are incompetent and don't have clue of management is a very big statement.
In this era of IT, USCIS keeps crying about being bombarded suddenly with this application that applications. I wonder such a big agency doesn't have projections etc. When you Adjudicated millions of Green cards lin 2002-2003 than obviously you are going to get bombarded with Application for Citizenship in 2007 you weren't prepared for that ??? This organization is headed by most incompetant people who doesn't have any clue of Management, I guess they should go back to school...
Very big statement.
There are problem with the USCIS that is affecting everyone in this forum but saying they are incompetent and don't have clue of management is a very big statement.
In this era of IT, USCIS keeps crying about being bombarded suddenly with this application that applications. I wonder such a big agency doesn't have projections etc. When you Adjudicated millions of Green cards lin 2002-2003 than obviously you are going to get bombarded with Application for Citizenship in 2007 you weren't prepared for that ??? This organization is headed by most incompetant people who doesn't have any clue of Management, I guess they should go back to school...
more...
makeup 1968 Dodge Charger RT HEMI
she81
08-13 04:44 PM
Till last year EB 3 would get additional visa from the leftovers of ROW, both EB2 and EB 3-I would benefit from the ROW visia, now all the visas are going to EB2, so i agree with you, there is little hope for EB 3.
Why are there no repurcussions if USCIS admits that they were incorrectly allocating the visa earlier. they can suddenly change the rules and everybody keeps quiet....strange.
Thats USCIS - Uncertain Surreptitious and Careless Institution to Select future immigrants.
Why are there no repurcussions if USCIS admits that they were incorrectly allocating the visa earlier. they can suddenly change the rules and everybody keeps quiet....strange.
Thats USCIS - Uncertain Surreptitious and Careless Institution to Select future immigrants.
girlfriend 1969 Dodge Charger
GCFISH
07-18 01:18 PM
Hi,
I made my one time payment yesterday..will do it again soon.
I made my one time payment yesterday..will do it again soon.
hairstyles 1969 Dodge Charger Daytona
paskal
08-13 05:50 PM
now can all the 7.55 am filers breathe easy and work for the rally?
let's go guys- end retrogression forever and ever...never again worry about the time fedex delivered- sounds good? see you in DC 9/18!
let's go guys- end retrogression forever and ever...never again worry about the time fedex delivered- sounds good? see you in DC 9/18!
karthiknv143
08-10 06:10 PM
Any updates from USCIS regarding lockbox & receipting dates?
pandu_hawaldar
07-06 01:46 PM
http://infotech.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2180544.cms
No comments:
Post a Comment