Blog Feeds
09-01 10:00 PM
This is a recent update from the AILA Rome Chapter for the benefit of our readers. The State Department has substantially rewritten the FAM provisions relating to physical or mental disorders as medical grounds of inadmissibility. These significant changes, set forth at 9 FAM 40.11 N11, focus on physical or mental disorders with harmful behavior, and on substance-related disorders, corresponding to INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iii) and (iv), respectively.
The following is a summary of these sweeping revisions.
Introduction
As before, the mere presence of a physical or mental disorder does not by itself render a visa applicant inadmissible to the United States under 212(a)(1)(A)(iii). The trigger to inadmissibility is the presence of associated harmful behavior.
Key Concepts of Mental Health
In this new section, the Department defines the key concepts of physical and mental health disorders:
A "physical disorder" is a clinically diagnosed medical condition where the focus of attention is physical manifestations.
A "mental disorder" is a health condition characterized by alterations in thinking, mood or behavior.
"Harmful behavior" is an action associated with a physical or mental disorder that causes (or has caused) one or more of the following:
1. Serious injury (psychological or physical) to the foreign national or others. An example of harmful behavior to the foreign national is attempted suicide. An example of harmful behavior to others is pedophilia.
2. A serious threat to the health or safety of the foreign national or others. An example of a serious threat to both the foreign national and to others is driving while intoxicated.
3. Major property damage.
NOTE: The Department emphasizes the following principle: Only harmful behavior that is associated with a physical or mental disorder is relevant for the purpose of determining a medical inadmissibility.
A "substance-related disorder" can involve one of the following:
1. Substance dependence - compulsive long-term use of alcohol or other psychoactive substance despite significant problems (physical, social, and others).
2. Substance abuse - a pattern of recurrent use of alcohol or other psychoactive substance despite adverse consequences or impairment.
Remission in the context of mental or substance-related disorders is defined as "a period of at least 12 months during which no substance use or associated harmful behavior have occurred."
Class "A" medical conditions are those which render a visa applicant ineligible for a visa.
Class "B" medical conditions do not render a visa applicant ineligible for a visa, even though the applicant has a disease, disability or abnormality amounting to a substantial departure from well-being.
Alcohol Abuse or Dependence
The FAM changes stress that alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence constitutes a medical condition which can lead to inadmissibility. That said, a panel physician's diagnosis of alcohol abuse or dependence alone does not make an applicant ineligible to receive a visa unless there is evidence of associated harmful behavior which has, or is likely to pose a threat to the property, safety or welfare of the foreign national or others.
Consular officers are instructed to refer nonimmigrant and immigrant visa applicants to panel physicians if the applicant has a single alcohol-related arrest or conviction within the past five years, or if the applicant has two or more such arrests or convictions within the past decade. Officers should also refer applicants to panel physicians if, in the absence of DUI arrests or convictions, there is any other evidence to suggest that the visa applicant has an alcohol problem.
Role of the Panel Physician
Panel physicians have a central role in evaluating the existence of a physical or mental disorder or a substance-related disorder that would render an applicant ineligible for a visa. In performing a medical examination, the panel physician is responsible (inter alia) for identifying and diagnosing physical or mental disorders (including alcohol-related disorders); identifying harmful behavior associated with a disorder; and determining the remission status of any previously diagnosed disorder.
Class "A" or Class "B" Medical Conditions
Panel physicians may make the following diagnoses with regard to applicants referred for examination:
Class "A": The applicant has a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior.
Class "A": The applicant has a disorder characterized by substance abuse or dependence.
Class "B": The applicant has a physical or mental disorder with no associated harmful behavior.
Class "B": The applicant has a history of a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior which is unlikely to recur.
Class "B": The applicant's substance abuse or dependence is in full remission.
Neither "A" nor "B": The applicant has not been diagnosed as having a physical or mental disorder or a substance-related disorder.
Waivers for Immigrant Visa Applicants
An immigrant visa applicant who is determined to have a communicable disease of public health significance may be eligible for a waiver of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(i).
An immigrant visa applicant who objects on religious or moral grounds to receiving required vaccinations against vaccine-preventable diseases may be eligible for a waiver of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(ii).
An immigrant visa applicant who is determined to have a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior may be eligible for a waiver of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iii).
An immigrant visa applicant diagnosed with substance abuse or addiction is NOT eligible for waiver relief of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iv).
Waivers for Nonimmigrant Visa Applicants
Consular officers may recommend waivers per 212(d)(3)(A) for any of the medical-related grounds of inadmissibility set forth in 212(a)(1)(A).
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/09/us_visa_denials_medical_ground.html)
The following is a summary of these sweeping revisions.
Introduction
As before, the mere presence of a physical or mental disorder does not by itself render a visa applicant inadmissible to the United States under 212(a)(1)(A)(iii). The trigger to inadmissibility is the presence of associated harmful behavior.
Key Concepts of Mental Health
In this new section, the Department defines the key concepts of physical and mental health disorders:
A "physical disorder" is a clinically diagnosed medical condition where the focus of attention is physical manifestations.
A "mental disorder" is a health condition characterized by alterations in thinking, mood or behavior.
"Harmful behavior" is an action associated with a physical or mental disorder that causes (or has caused) one or more of the following:
1. Serious injury (psychological or physical) to the foreign national or others. An example of harmful behavior to the foreign national is attempted suicide. An example of harmful behavior to others is pedophilia.
2. A serious threat to the health or safety of the foreign national or others. An example of a serious threat to both the foreign national and to others is driving while intoxicated.
3. Major property damage.
NOTE: The Department emphasizes the following principle: Only harmful behavior that is associated with a physical or mental disorder is relevant for the purpose of determining a medical inadmissibility.
A "substance-related disorder" can involve one of the following:
1. Substance dependence - compulsive long-term use of alcohol or other psychoactive substance despite significant problems (physical, social, and others).
2. Substance abuse - a pattern of recurrent use of alcohol or other psychoactive substance despite adverse consequences or impairment.
Remission in the context of mental or substance-related disorders is defined as "a period of at least 12 months during which no substance use or associated harmful behavior have occurred."
Class "A" medical conditions are those which render a visa applicant ineligible for a visa.
Class "B" medical conditions do not render a visa applicant ineligible for a visa, even though the applicant has a disease, disability or abnormality amounting to a substantial departure from well-being.
Alcohol Abuse or Dependence
The FAM changes stress that alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence constitutes a medical condition which can lead to inadmissibility. That said, a panel physician's diagnosis of alcohol abuse or dependence alone does not make an applicant ineligible to receive a visa unless there is evidence of associated harmful behavior which has, or is likely to pose a threat to the property, safety or welfare of the foreign national or others.
Consular officers are instructed to refer nonimmigrant and immigrant visa applicants to panel physicians if the applicant has a single alcohol-related arrest or conviction within the past five years, or if the applicant has two or more such arrests or convictions within the past decade. Officers should also refer applicants to panel physicians if, in the absence of DUI arrests or convictions, there is any other evidence to suggest that the visa applicant has an alcohol problem.
Role of the Panel Physician
Panel physicians have a central role in evaluating the existence of a physical or mental disorder or a substance-related disorder that would render an applicant ineligible for a visa. In performing a medical examination, the panel physician is responsible (inter alia) for identifying and diagnosing physical or mental disorders (including alcohol-related disorders); identifying harmful behavior associated with a disorder; and determining the remission status of any previously diagnosed disorder.
Class "A" or Class "B" Medical Conditions
Panel physicians may make the following diagnoses with regard to applicants referred for examination:
Class "A": The applicant has a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior.
Class "A": The applicant has a disorder characterized by substance abuse or dependence.
Class "B": The applicant has a physical or mental disorder with no associated harmful behavior.
Class "B": The applicant has a history of a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior which is unlikely to recur.
Class "B": The applicant's substance abuse or dependence is in full remission.
Neither "A" nor "B": The applicant has not been diagnosed as having a physical or mental disorder or a substance-related disorder.
Waivers for Immigrant Visa Applicants
An immigrant visa applicant who is determined to have a communicable disease of public health significance may be eligible for a waiver of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(i).
An immigrant visa applicant who objects on religious or moral grounds to receiving required vaccinations against vaccine-preventable diseases may be eligible for a waiver of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(ii).
An immigrant visa applicant who is determined to have a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior may be eligible for a waiver of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iii).
An immigrant visa applicant diagnosed with substance abuse or addiction is NOT eligible for waiver relief of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iv).
Waivers for Nonimmigrant Visa Applicants
Consular officers may recommend waivers per 212(d)(3)(A) for any of the medical-related grounds of inadmissibility set forth in 212(a)(1)(A).
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/09/us_visa_denials_medical_ground.html)
wallpaper Planet Jupiter
dilbert_cal
07-10 12:17 AM
USCIS do call the company, a friend of mine who already got his GC, USCIS called the company in India to confirm the employment.
Thanks IndianIII - It is always possible that USCIS may check the employment details and in this particular case, since the company is closed, they would want alternate proof that you did work there. They might want an affidavit from your co-worker if possible as well. So, be prepared on those grounds.
Thanks once again IndianIII for contributing to the forums.
Thanks IndianIII - It is always possible that USCIS may check the employment details and in this particular case, since the company is closed, they would want alternate proof that you did work there. They might want an affidavit from your co-worker if possible as well. So, be prepared on those grounds.
Thanks once again IndianIII for contributing to the forums.
theMan
02-26 08:21 AM
Aristotle, I think as a Non Resident, you are not eligible for Standard deduction. Again, OP you questions will be addressed better in the forum mentioned in my previous post.
2011 Download Free Planet Jupiter
Anders �stberg
January 6th, 2004, 12:38 PM
Anders: Great idea....looks fantastic........Now its time you set up yourself in the Photographer's notebook and this shud be your first entry.
Thanks Bob!
Maybe I'll check this in, I'll have to try it on a couple of my previous pictures first, I cringe when I look at them... nice to see some progress though. :)
-Anders
Thanks Bob!
Maybe I'll check this in, I'll have to try it on a couple of my previous pictures first, I cringe when I look at them... nice to see some progress though. :)
-Anders
more...
emmNemm
12-10 06:02 PM
Wow. Leo, you are rude and over-confident. Please refrain from answering question if you do not have the right attitude.
gc007
06-30 09:39 PM
Can someone tell that If USCIS says that 29 June 07 is the last date to receive applications for premium processing for I 140 . Does that mean that they shud receive the application by 29th or application shud be post-marked dated 29th in order to be considered for premium processing.
Thanks
Thanks
more...
s_r_e_e
08-19 03:10 PM
I believe you should send what ever you have with a good cover letter about the unavailability & about the documents submitted originally. That might turn it in to an approval soon, hopefully.
2010 pics of jupiter planet.
admin
01-29 11:50 AM
Earlier many of us were happy that as per AILA's report, the effect of retrogression might be significantly reduced. Now lawyer Mathew Oh has come out with the some analysis as to why this exuberance might be showtlived and why we need to fight for legislative reform with respect to Employment Based Green Cards. So remember "It aint over till its over".
Here is an excerpt of his analysis from http://www.immigration-law.com/
The State Department's new prediction is derived from two changed circumstances. One is the slow-down of I-485 adjudications by the USCIS and the resultant decrease of the EB visa numbers demand on the part of the USCIS. The second factor is the delays in processing of the old labor certification cases in the Backlog Eliminination Centers of the DOL. It is not clear what has caused the decreased visa number demand from the USCIS EB-485 proceedings, but it may have something to do with the on-going reengineering of the USCIS processing and adjudication system. As for the Backlog Elimination Centers, they have yet to complete the ground work of data entry and 45-day letters, before they can focus on adjudication of the backlog applications. Currently, the USCIS is scheduled to complete the reengineering by the end of September 2006 and the DOL is scheduled to complete the ground work of data entries and 45-day letter processing by approximately the end of June 2006. As we reported earlier, a substantial number of these BEC cases are known to be 245(i) cases, meaning that the cases were filed in traditional regular application type of EB-3 in most cases on or before April 30, 2001. A substantial number of these cases have yet to go through the "supervised" recruitment process to complete the labor certification processing and it will take a substantial period of time before these cases will move into the USCIS I-485 processing system.
From the foregoing analysis, one can predict that the big winners of the new prediction may include (1) those old priority date I-485 cases pending before the USCIS including 245(i) cases which may be approved within next several months; (2) those old priority date I-140 cases pending before the USCIS which may at least move into the I-485 phase and getting the benefits of EAD, AP, and AC 21 change of employment eligibility; and (3) those old priority date backlog labor certification cases which can move into the I-140/I-485 concurrent filing phase upon approval of the delayed backlog labor certification processing with the ancillary benefits that come along with the filing of I-485 applications such as EAD, AP, and AC-21 change of employment benefits. It is anticipated that the cases under the foregoing (3) may remain very limited in numbers due to the BEC processing delays.
The real losers may turn out to be those with late priority dates. Once the USCIS reengineering work is completed by the end of this fiscal year and the BECs start processing backlog cases en masse around the end of this fical year, the stream of visa number demand will move into the State Department visal allocation system. The pressure to the allocation system will mount tremendously as time passes, and unless the Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation brings a cure to the current ailing immigrant visa quota system within this year, it is likely that these late priority date cases may experience tremendous difficulties due to the stand-still or further retrogression of the visa numbers and the resultant unavailability of the ancillary benefits of EAD, AP, and AC 21 change of employment opportunities. It is anticipated that the real crisis may be witnessed beginning the end of this calendar year as by that time it is anticipated that the BECs are expected to pump out certifications of backlog cases.
It is thus obvious that the new prediction of the State Department can turn out to be a short-lived relief for a limited number of immigrants and a sign of foreseeable dark cloud and storm moving into the visa number system for most of the immigrants. The only answer to the clogged employment-based immigration system lies with the reform of the employment-based immigrant quota allocation system and related reform, including but not limited to (1) dependants immigration without taking out visa numbers from the employment-based quota system and (2) eligibility of I-485 applications for those who attained the labor certification approvals or I-140 petitions even during the period of visa number unavailability. For these reasons, the immigrant community should not stop its efforts to bring back (1) the legislative proposals which were reflected in the failed Section 8001 and 8002 of S. 1932 and (2) the adjustment of EB-immigrant quota substantially upward as reflected in the McCain-Kennedy bill.
Here is an excerpt of his analysis from http://www.immigration-law.com/
The State Department's new prediction is derived from two changed circumstances. One is the slow-down of I-485 adjudications by the USCIS and the resultant decrease of the EB visa numbers demand on the part of the USCIS. The second factor is the delays in processing of the old labor certification cases in the Backlog Eliminination Centers of the DOL. It is not clear what has caused the decreased visa number demand from the USCIS EB-485 proceedings, but it may have something to do with the on-going reengineering of the USCIS processing and adjudication system. As for the Backlog Elimination Centers, they have yet to complete the ground work of data entry and 45-day letters, before they can focus on adjudication of the backlog applications. Currently, the USCIS is scheduled to complete the reengineering by the end of September 2006 and the DOL is scheduled to complete the ground work of data entries and 45-day letter processing by approximately the end of June 2006. As we reported earlier, a substantial number of these BEC cases are known to be 245(i) cases, meaning that the cases were filed in traditional regular application type of EB-3 in most cases on or before April 30, 2001. A substantial number of these cases have yet to go through the "supervised" recruitment process to complete the labor certification processing and it will take a substantial period of time before these cases will move into the USCIS I-485 processing system.
From the foregoing analysis, one can predict that the big winners of the new prediction may include (1) those old priority date I-485 cases pending before the USCIS including 245(i) cases which may be approved within next several months; (2) those old priority date I-140 cases pending before the USCIS which may at least move into the I-485 phase and getting the benefits of EAD, AP, and AC 21 change of employment eligibility; and (3) those old priority date backlog labor certification cases which can move into the I-140/I-485 concurrent filing phase upon approval of the delayed backlog labor certification processing with the ancillary benefits that come along with the filing of I-485 applications such as EAD, AP, and AC-21 change of employment benefits. It is anticipated that the cases under the foregoing (3) may remain very limited in numbers due to the BEC processing delays.
The real losers may turn out to be those with late priority dates. Once the USCIS reengineering work is completed by the end of this fiscal year and the BECs start processing backlog cases en masse around the end of this fical year, the stream of visa number demand will move into the State Department visal allocation system. The pressure to the allocation system will mount tremendously as time passes, and unless the Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation brings a cure to the current ailing immigrant visa quota system within this year, it is likely that these late priority date cases may experience tremendous difficulties due to the stand-still or further retrogression of the visa numbers and the resultant unavailability of the ancillary benefits of EAD, AP, and AC 21 change of employment opportunities. It is anticipated that the real crisis may be witnessed beginning the end of this calendar year as by that time it is anticipated that the BECs are expected to pump out certifications of backlog cases.
It is thus obvious that the new prediction of the State Department can turn out to be a short-lived relief for a limited number of immigrants and a sign of foreseeable dark cloud and storm moving into the visa number system for most of the immigrants. The only answer to the clogged employment-based immigration system lies with the reform of the employment-based immigrant quota allocation system and related reform, including but not limited to (1) dependants immigration without taking out visa numbers from the employment-based quota system and (2) eligibility of I-485 applications for those who attained the labor certification approvals or I-140 petitions even during the period of visa number unavailability. For these reasons, the immigrant community should not stop its efforts to bring back (1) the legislative proposals which were reflected in the failed Section 8001 and 8002 of S. 1932 and (2) the adjustment of EB-immigrant quota substantially upward as reflected in the McCain-Kennedy bill.
more...
morchu
05-06 01:05 PM
Correct. The question is always about "similar" job and duties. And too much variation in wage is a hint towards that.
Now logically it doesnt make sense, you doing the same duties even after 15 years in GC que. But hei.... leave the logic behind. You either prove that the duties are same/similar, or file another LC/140. (at-least you can keep your priority date).
Now logically it doesnt make sense, you doing the same duties even after 15 years in GC que. But hei.... leave the logic behind. You either prove that the duties are same/similar, or file another LC/140. (at-least you can keep your priority date).
hair in jupiter, nasa, planet
sam_hoosier
11-27 01:34 PM
I have read many threads that discusses the pros and cons of using EAD over H1 and the common benefit that everyone mentions is that the salary is usually better for a person on an EAD. I spoke to several people who've started using their EAD and realized that even though it opened up opportunities with companies that do not have a policy of sponsoring H1, it DID NOT give them a boost in the salary.
My question is how do people intend to leverage on having an EAD for a higher salary?
Thanks!
EAD gives you more negotiation power. Most companies are willing to negotiate on one or two things while making an offer e.g. salary, bonus, vacation, H1B/GC etc. If you take out H1B/GC out of that mix, chances of negotiating on salary are higher.
My question is how do people intend to leverage on having an EAD for a higher salary?
Thanks!
EAD gives you more negotiation power. Most companies are willing to negotiate on one or two things while making an offer e.g. salary, bonus, vacation, H1B/GC etc. If you take out H1B/GC out of that mix, chances of negotiating on salary are higher.
more...
sdrblr
10-11 05:30 PM
Just write to your state DOL and they will take care after that. You might have to provide some proof for them to start investigation. Make sure you have a plan B with regards to work and status if things go south.
hot Along with the planets Jupiter
GCBy3000
07-24 05:05 PM
I agree with portability logic. In that case, a 485 is tied with individual. Why cant a individual have a 485 certified anytime. That is not going to change even if he moves from place to place. In fact, a 485 should be like a degree certificate validating all the credentials. We should be able to carry it wherever we go and show it to our prospective employer and get the GC process moving.
Having said that, there is no need to wait to file 485 due to visa retrogression. Visa numbers are for adjucating the individual 485 and granting the perm residency status. I dont understand why the 485 stage comes as the final one and why the hell it is tied up with VISA numbers.
Example: The applicant gets all medical check up and he is hale and healthy. He filed for 485 and it is pending for 5 years due to retrogression. Every year or once in two year he needs to repeat the medical checkup and declare he is still healthy until he gets the GC. This funny test is not required after he gets GC. Assume in 4th year he gets the deadly VIRUS decease from a US citizen, then he will be denied of GC. The reason is he will spread this contagious disease which he got from US citizen. But he is free to walk and spread if he has GC. Is't funny. I may be wrong........
LC - Verification is related to the sponsored job
140 - Verification is related to the sponsoring company
485 - Verification is related to the sponsored individual
Portability, by definition, applies to individual and not company. Why would your company want you to have portability?
Having said that, there is no need to wait to file 485 due to visa retrogression. Visa numbers are for adjucating the individual 485 and granting the perm residency status. I dont understand why the 485 stage comes as the final one and why the hell it is tied up with VISA numbers.
Example: The applicant gets all medical check up and he is hale and healthy. He filed for 485 and it is pending for 5 years due to retrogression. Every year or once in two year he needs to repeat the medical checkup and declare he is still healthy until he gets the GC. This funny test is not required after he gets GC. Assume in 4th year he gets the deadly VIRUS decease from a US citizen, then he will be denied of GC. The reason is he will spread this contagious disease which he got from US citizen. But he is free to walk and spread if he has GC. Is't funny. I may be wrong........
LC - Verification is related to the sponsored job
140 - Verification is related to the sponsoring company
485 - Verification is related to the sponsored individual
Portability, by definition, applies to individual and not company. Why would your company want you to have portability?
more...
house images of jupiter the planet
joydiptac
05-18 06:44 PM
Guys,
This is a very positive development. Chinese are suing based on EB3 China visas used in 2008 & 2009 which were 2058 and 1077 respectively. Which are far less than 2500 that the law actually allows without spillover. This is awesome. Go Chinese friends!
Pappu sir,
Do we (EB3I) know the number of applicants who were approved green card from EB3 I in the last three years? I suspect that the same would have happened here too. We need to also follow (Law) suit.
This is a very positive development. Chinese are suing based on EB3 China visas used in 2008 & 2009 which were 2058 and 1077 respectively. Which are far less than 2500 that the law actually allows without spillover. This is awesome. Go Chinese friends!
Pappu sir,
Do we (EB3I) know the number of applicants who were approved green card from EB3 I in the last three years? I suspect that the same would have happened here too. We need to also follow (Law) suit.
tattoo Jupiter#39;s equatorial diameter
gc26
02-05 02:09 PM
Does the 45 day limit on being able to use a LC mean that priority dates from an approved LC and I-140 can no longer be ported when the GC process is started again through a new employer ?
more...
pictures atmosphere of this planet
wam4wam
03-06 01:35 PM
i did not use the fax service
i used the link from www.senate.gov
i have always gotten response when i used that link
Sen. Dewine is aware about the issue
thanks
i used the link from www.senate.gov
i have always gotten response when i used that link
Sen. Dewine is aware about the issue
thanks
dresses pics of jupiter planet.
indianabacklog
06-10 01:45 PM
Thanks for encouragement,
It's always scary the first time. : )
Re. Check caching - just FYI, now-a-days, they copy the check, convert it to EFT and destroy the original so getting case number from copy may not work.
Also do I write A# on back of photos or something else? Any idea if there are restrictions for using pen or pencil or such?
thanks again,
NS
I did not get the case number from the hard copy but the electronic copy which I can access from my online account information.
I did write my husbands A# on the back of the photo in pencil if I remember rightly but just so that it did not push through the imprint on the photo itself.
Believe in yourself. I filed both mine and my spouse's adjustment of status packet myself and we have our green cards without any requests for evidence. If you have read the instructions and followed them, filled all the blank spaces in on the form and supplied all the other documents etc that are needed you are doing fine. If the USCIS needs anything else they will ask for it.
It's always scary the first time. : )
Re. Check caching - just FYI, now-a-days, they copy the check, convert it to EFT and destroy the original so getting case number from copy may not work.
Also do I write A# on back of photos or something else? Any idea if there are restrictions for using pen or pencil or such?
thanks again,
NS
I did not get the case number from the hard copy but the electronic copy which I can access from my online account information.
I did write my husbands A# on the back of the photo in pencil if I remember rightly but just so that it did not push through the imprint on the photo itself.
Believe in yourself. I filed both mine and my spouse's adjustment of status packet myself and we have our green cards without any requests for evidence. If you have read the instructions and followed them, filled all the blank spaces in on the form and supplied all the other documents etc that are needed you are doing fine. If the USCIS needs anything else they will ask for it.
more...
makeup planet+jupiter
pappu
12-16 04:18 PM
Can't you get this information unde FOIA (Freedom of Information Act)?
yes and no. It is not easy. USCIS has also been sued for not giving the data by an org we know.
yes and no. It is not easy. USCIS has also been sued for not giving the data by an org we know.
girlfriend Jupiter is co cool.
reno_john
06-07 04:00 PM
With all this amendments going on with the Immigration bill and election round the corner I wish the immigration bill does not pass through since I don't wanna see a compromise kinda of bill, which may or may not screw us.
I don't see anything wrong with the current immigration scenario except delay, if you wanna immigrate then be patience else go back from where we came from, India is not bad.
Just to remind you all who read this message I am pro immigration but will not deal with a compromised bill..................... and I am with my I140 stage.
I don't see anything wrong with the current immigration scenario except delay, if you wanna immigrate then be patience else go back from where we came from, India is not bad.
Just to remind you all who read this message I am pro immigration but will not deal with a compromised bill..................... and I am with my I140 stage.
hairstyles Planet Preschool
purethoughts
01-24 12:00 PM
The cheapest way will be to give some $50-75 to the immigrationpro.com attorney. They will answer your questions through email. At least you have some opinion to verify with. I would also suggest to go through the yellow pages and find immigration lawyers who give you first hour free consultation. Do not rely on people like me for the prefessional opinion. Even though we have good things in mind, we are not prefessional lawyers. Get 4-5 professional opinion and then you will automatically know what is the truth.
Best luck !
Best luck !
mayurcreation
02-25 12:03 PM
I brought toyota camry from a dealer in NY state last year feb/2010 on (toyota) finance, the dealer only asked me for my driver lience and ssn. he took copy of driver licence and ssn. nothing ask or talk about my immigration status etc, etc...
looking at me my friend (working with me) brought brand new toyota camry same month feb/2010 from PA dealer with 0% apr for 5 yrs. he also shown and given photo copy his driver licence and ssn.
myself and my friend both are on h1b visa.
this could be possibly happen because of private financing (toyota finance) not bank...
looking at me my friend (working with me) brought brand new toyota camry same month feb/2010 from PA dealer with 0% apr for 5 yrs. he also shown and given photo copy his driver licence and ssn.
myself and my friend both are on h1b visa.
this could be possibly happen because of private financing (toyota finance) not bank...
perm2gc
12-23 02:53 PM
Hi All,
Could any please provide some insight about the companies "Unemployment Wage report" for the state of California?
This is the only query as stated in the 221(g) form got from Chennai embassy for your reference.
"State Unemployment Wage Reports, showing all wages paid to each employee in the state, for the past two quarters as filed to State of California (This should not be payroll reports, but the actual forms filed to the State authorities listing each employee and wages paid during the quarter.)"
Could you please provide me the exact form name and number to submit through the dropbox. Also some explanation if possible on how the form will look like in order to track it down?
Any help in this regard is greatly appreciated.
Happy Holidays!
All the very best to all of you.
Thanks & Regards,
ChakYour company has to send you the documents.Ask your company.They know what those documents are.
Good Luck !!!
Could any please provide some insight about the companies "Unemployment Wage report" for the state of California?
This is the only query as stated in the 221(g) form got from Chennai embassy for your reference.
"State Unemployment Wage Reports, showing all wages paid to each employee in the state, for the past two quarters as filed to State of California (This should not be payroll reports, but the actual forms filed to the State authorities listing each employee and wages paid during the quarter.)"
Could you please provide me the exact form name and number to submit through the dropbox. Also some explanation if possible on how the form will look like in order to track it down?
Any help in this regard is greatly appreciated.
Happy Holidays!
All the very best to all of you.
Thanks & Regards,
ChakYour company has to send you the documents.Ask your company.They know what those documents are.
Good Luck !!!
No comments:
Post a Comment