Better_Days
10-19 09:43 PM
I had an I-485 pending when my first I-140 was denied. The cases ended up with AAO.
I started a new GC process in PERM and the second I-140 was approved. After approval I noticed a LUD on my pending 485. I called the 1-800 number and asked for the I-140 number underlying my I-485. To my surprise, I was given the receipt number for the second I-140. What surprised me was that the my priority date was not current.
I can only assume that when one has more than one I-140 pending with the same employer (remember that a I-140 with MTR or with AAO is considered to be pending), the first one to get approved gets linked with the I-485. CAN ANYONE CONFIRM THIS PLEASE?
The interesting thing is that the AAO woke from it's slumber and issued an RFE last week. As a result of the RFE, both my I-140 have changed their status and now show "Post Decision Activity".
The quoted post above describes my situation. I140 and I485 were pending. I140 got denied and ended up with AAO. Second I140 got approved and I485 is linked with this 2nd approved I140 even though the priority date was not current.
Called USCIS twice to get the receipt number of the 140 underlying my 485 and got the receipt number for the second, approved 140 everytime.
The company has received an RFE from the AAO and they simply are in no mood to respond to it. They are going to withdraw the first 140. The lawyer retained by my company is absolutely clueless about how and why the second,approved 140 got linked with the pending 485 without the priority date being current. He is trying to play it safe by covering his own behind by saying statements like "USCIS made a mistake and if they every discovered this mistake in future, I will be regarded as being out of status from the day I used any EAD based on this pending 485", He is suggesting that we file a new 485 when the dates being current ( I am EB3/ROW).
Now I know that there are a lot of people who have had their 485s linked to their second, approved 140 automatically. Did this happen to any of you without the PD being current? Please do respond if you are in this boat.
Also, is there a policy or memo that explicitly refers to it? Can anyone please provide me a reference?
If the first 140 is withdrawn? Will it have ANY impact on the second 140 or the pending 485? The reason I ask this question is that after the AAO issed an RFE, the status on both my 140's changed to "Post Decisioon Activity". This is what worries me the most.
Any comment on any of the above questions will be highly appreciated.
Thanks for you time.
I started a new GC process in PERM and the second I-140 was approved. After approval I noticed a LUD on my pending 485. I called the 1-800 number and asked for the I-140 number underlying my I-485. To my surprise, I was given the receipt number for the second I-140. What surprised me was that the my priority date was not current.
I can only assume that when one has more than one I-140 pending with the same employer (remember that a I-140 with MTR or with AAO is considered to be pending), the first one to get approved gets linked with the I-485. CAN ANYONE CONFIRM THIS PLEASE?
The interesting thing is that the AAO woke from it's slumber and issued an RFE last week. As a result of the RFE, both my I-140 have changed their status and now show "Post Decision Activity".
The quoted post above describes my situation. I140 and I485 were pending. I140 got denied and ended up with AAO. Second I140 got approved and I485 is linked with this 2nd approved I140 even though the priority date was not current.
Called USCIS twice to get the receipt number of the 140 underlying my 485 and got the receipt number for the second, approved 140 everytime.
The company has received an RFE from the AAO and they simply are in no mood to respond to it. They are going to withdraw the first 140. The lawyer retained by my company is absolutely clueless about how and why the second,approved 140 got linked with the pending 485 without the priority date being current. He is trying to play it safe by covering his own behind by saying statements like "USCIS made a mistake and if they every discovered this mistake in future, I will be regarded as being out of status from the day I used any EAD based on this pending 485", He is suggesting that we file a new 485 when the dates being current ( I am EB3/ROW).
Now I know that there are a lot of people who have had their 485s linked to their second, approved 140 automatically. Did this happen to any of you without the PD being current? Please do respond if you are in this boat.
Also, is there a policy or memo that explicitly refers to it? Can anyone please provide me a reference?
If the first 140 is withdrawn? Will it have ANY impact on the second 140 or the pending 485? The reason I ask this question is that after the AAO issed an RFE, the status on both my 140's changed to "Post Decisioon Activity". This is what worries me the most.
Any comment on any of the above questions will be highly appreciated.
Thanks for you time.
wallpaper idp-world-map
hyderabad123
01-11 03:58 PM
Hi,
I-485 was denied, then applied MTR on June 2010. I didnt recieve nay update, we are planning to travel hometown bcz of personel problems. I called to expediate on my petiton, they opened SR, after that i recieve the response saying that, ur petition with IO, once we made the decision will let you know. If you have any exp or any one on it please do share with me. That is more appreciate.
Thanks
I-485 was denied, then applied MTR on June 2010. I didnt recieve nay update, we are planning to travel hometown bcz of personel problems. I called to expediate on my petiton, they opened SR, after that i recieve the response saying that, ur petition with IO, once we made the decision will let you know. If you have any exp or any one on it please do share with me. That is more appreciate.
Thanks
ram_ram
10-01 09:43 AM
The backlogs at DOLS's found a solution..PERM. Similarly premium processing was introduced for I-140's. I think now it's time to move the Departments and courts to find a more efficient Security/Name check process. If not USCIS will continue to loose tons of visa numbers every year. Though USCIS has 26 k cases that has the visa number available,
many of them are struck with FBI. Any movements or actions?
Successfully Challenging USCIS Delays in Federal Court
On September 10, the Los Angeles Times featured an article about how FBI name checks have been slowing down the process of gaining immigration benefits for hundreds of thousands of applicants.
The article revealed that "nearly 320,000 people were waiting for their name checks to be completed as of August 7, including more than 152,000 who had been waiting for more than six months, according to the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. More than 61,000 had been waiting for more than two years."
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed a lawsuit in federal court regarding this issue. The Times article quotes an ACLU attorney who stated that "there is nothing in immigration law that says that a citizenship application should take two, three, four years. That's absurd. People who have not been any sort of threat ... have been caught up in this dragnet."
Applicants for adjustment of status, citizenship, extensions of stay and many other immigration benefits have taken days off work to visit USCIS offices only to be told that the USCIS can do nothing since the name check process is in the hands of the FBI.
Nor do letters and meetings with Senators and Members of Congress yield results. They receive polite letters from the USCIS' Congressional Liaison Unit to the effect that "Sorry, but this is FBI's problem, not ours."
DHS Secretary Chertoff announced that his Department is meeting with the FBI (which is part of the Department of Justice) to work out a more efficient system of processing these name checks, but so far, the number of people waiting for results from the FBI continues to grow and grow.
The problem exists for applicants from a wide variety of countries and affects Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, etc.
Our solution is to sue both the USCIS and the FBI in Federal Court. Most Federal Judges are not reluctant to order the FBI and the USCIS to complete their name checks and application processing by a date certain.
Many applicants have turned to litigation as the one and only method of solving the name check problem. The numbers of such lawsuits have increased from just 680 in 2005 to 2,650 in 2006 to over 4,100 this year. Although there is no guarantee of success, our law firm has yet to lose one of these cases in Federal Court.
The Times article concludes with a quote from me:
"There is only one thing that works, and that is suing them in federal court."
We link to the Times article, "Caught in a Bureaucratic Black Hole" from
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091107P.shtml
We also link to AILF's new practice advisory entitled "Mandamus Jurisdiction over Delayed Applications: Responding to the Government's Motion to Dismiss" from
http://shusterman.com/toc-dpt.html#A1
many of them are struck with FBI. Any movements or actions?
Successfully Challenging USCIS Delays in Federal Court
On September 10, the Los Angeles Times featured an article about how FBI name checks have been slowing down the process of gaining immigration benefits for hundreds of thousands of applicants.
The article revealed that "nearly 320,000 people were waiting for their name checks to be completed as of August 7, including more than 152,000 who had been waiting for more than six months, according to the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. More than 61,000 had been waiting for more than two years."
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed a lawsuit in federal court regarding this issue. The Times article quotes an ACLU attorney who stated that "there is nothing in immigration law that says that a citizenship application should take two, three, four years. That's absurd. People who have not been any sort of threat ... have been caught up in this dragnet."
Applicants for adjustment of status, citizenship, extensions of stay and many other immigration benefits have taken days off work to visit USCIS offices only to be told that the USCIS can do nothing since the name check process is in the hands of the FBI.
Nor do letters and meetings with Senators and Members of Congress yield results. They receive polite letters from the USCIS' Congressional Liaison Unit to the effect that "Sorry, but this is FBI's problem, not ours."
DHS Secretary Chertoff announced that his Department is meeting with the FBI (which is part of the Department of Justice) to work out a more efficient system of processing these name checks, but so far, the number of people waiting for results from the FBI continues to grow and grow.
The problem exists for applicants from a wide variety of countries and affects Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, etc.
Our solution is to sue both the USCIS and the FBI in Federal Court. Most Federal Judges are not reluctant to order the FBI and the USCIS to complete their name checks and application processing by a date certain.
Many applicants have turned to litigation as the one and only method of solving the name check problem. The numbers of such lawsuits have increased from just 680 in 2005 to 2,650 in 2006 to over 4,100 this year. Although there is no guarantee of success, our law firm has yet to lose one of these cases in Federal Court.
The Times article concludes with a quote from me:
"There is only one thing that works, and that is suing them in federal court."
We link to the Times article, "Caught in a Bureaucratic Black Hole" from
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091107P.shtml
We also link to AILF's new practice advisory entitled "Mandamus Jurisdiction over Delayed Applications: Responding to the Government's Motion to Dismiss" from
http://shusterman.com/toc-dpt.html#A1
2011 Saving Wildlife from Mass
saileshdude
09-07 10:49 AM
Yes� It�s me Sreedhar. According to the conversation with my cousin, what ever I posted here is true. I am not sure what IO said is going to be happen or not. My cousin and myself working in the same office. I will keep update what ever happen to his case.
-Sree
Thanks for sharing this. I find it hard to believe what IO said (not you) . I think IO must have meant it will be current for PD 2003/2004 people. And using unused numbers from past is more of legislative thing that I am not sure if USCIS has the power to do it.
-Sree
Thanks for sharing this. I find it hard to believe what IO said (not you) . I think IO must have meant it will be current for PD 2003/2004 people. And using unused numbers from past is more of legislative thing that I am not sure if USCIS has the power to do it.
more...
nashim
04-07 02:55 PM
thanks gcisadawg,
gcdreamer05
07-03 02:01 PM
Please dont take risk travelling while the h1b petition is pending.
I would advice not to travel during this case.
I would advice not to travel during this case.
more...
gconmymind
03-25 03:18 PM
Is this true?
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/86900247/
That seems to be correct. STRIVE had similar provisions when it was introduced last time. HOWEVER, is STRIVE being discussed currently by Congress? Do you have a link to that?
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/86900247/
That seems to be correct. STRIVE had similar provisions when it was introduced last time. HOWEVER, is STRIVE being discussed currently by Congress? Do you have a link to that?
2010 world map (cartography
dixie
09-05 05:47 PM
Not sure what happens technically to the old CIR, but most likely both the senate and house will throw away their respective bills and start from scratch.
I have a hypethetical situation
1. Say in the election Dems get both house and Senate AND
2. No compromise happens in CIR at Lame Duck Session too. Also
no SKILL passes too AND
3. New winners Sworn in and its congress controlled by Dems.
Now what is the status of the CIR that was passed in the senate and
that house bill passed? Does it expire or go annul? Or can these
new members come a compromise on that? What could be the attittude of the congress member towards it? It would be really interesting to know the
legal sides and political attittude of lawmakers to it.
thanks
I have a hypethetical situation
1. Say in the election Dems get both house and Senate AND
2. No compromise happens in CIR at Lame Duck Session too. Also
no SKILL passes too AND
3. New winners Sworn in and its congress controlled by Dems.
Now what is the status of the CIR that was passed in the senate and
that house bill passed? Does it expire or go annul? Or can these
new members come a compromise on that? What could be the attittude of the congress member towards it? It would be really interesting to know the
legal sides and political attittude of lawmakers to it.
thanks
more...
tuhin
07-16 01:36 PM
Thanks deecha.. I will keep the gang in loop... The future role will be of a chief architect. So I believe it is aligned with my current labor application. But can I even move using an EAD (hence dropping my H1) and then file my EB2 in the new company? The reason I am confused is, we used an H1 b visa to file the labor, not sure if a labor can be filed using an EAD.
hair Blue Planet Biomes - World
nat23
03-14 02:19 PM
hello,
My mother has 10 yr multiple entry visa. She is planning to travel from Bangalore India to USA through Lufthansa Airways. She has a stop over at Frankfurt airport for about 3 hrs. Does she need to get a transit visa for that. Any recent experience or suggestion? Thanks.
When is your mother coming over? Whats her port of entry? My wife will be coming from Bangalore on May 20th through Lufthansa.
To answer your question: You DONT need a transit visa if you have a valid US visa.
My mother has 10 yr multiple entry visa. She is planning to travel from Bangalore India to USA through Lufthansa Airways. She has a stop over at Frankfurt airport for about 3 hrs. Does she need to get a transit visa for that. Any recent experience or suggestion? Thanks.
When is your mother coming over? Whats her port of entry? My wife will be coming from Bangalore on May 20th through Lufthansa.
To answer your question: You DONT need a transit visa if you have a valid US visa.
more...
pappu
08-19 01:27 PM
Hi,
My wife's EAD is expiring on 8/3, and the renewal was filed on 5/19 w/ notice date 5/24.
We have just requested expedite request but may not get it in time.
She just entered into USA using AP in July.
485 was filed in Aug 07.
If she continues to work till the EAD is processed, would she be protected under rule 245K? Does she need to stop working immediately?
And what happens if she does not get the EAD by Aug 19 (90 days)? Would the infopass office issue an interim EAD based on the application?
Thanks,
You can ask this in the Attorney conference call today
My wife's EAD is expiring on 8/3, and the renewal was filed on 5/19 w/ notice date 5/24.
We have just requested expedite request but may not get it in time.
She just entered into USA using AP in July.
485 was filed in Aug 07.
If she continues to work till the EAD is processed, would she be protected under rule 245K? Does she need to stop working immediately?
And what happens if she does not get the EAD by Aug 19 (90 days)? Would the infopass office issue an interim EAD based on the application?
Thanks,
You can ask this in the Attorney conference call today
hot Map: Arid Lands of the World
gcdreamer05
07-03 02:01 PM
Please dont take risk travelling while the h1b petition is pending.
I would advice not to travel during this case.
I would advice not to travel during this case.
more...
house books for an open world
shahsahil
04-17 12:31 AM
Hi
I am new to this group. I have a question regarding my PERM case.
MY PERM case is pending in DOL from last 10 months. I find this very
unusual.
Anybody heard about such a long pending case?
Are there any suggestion for following up on my PERM case?
Any advise will be useful.
Thanks
-Sahil.
I am new to this group. I have a question regarding my PERM case.
MY PERM case is pending in DOL from last 10 months. I find this very
unusual.
Anybody heard about such a long pending case?
Are there any suggestion for following up on my PERM case?
Any advise will be useful.
Thanks
-Sahil.
tattoo the deserts in Australia.
gc_on_demand
03-31 01:20 PM
For once, I like what Grassley is doing.
All antis says something good about one program and bad for rest.. they want to kill all program one by one. Today in hearing anti's tone was to reduce total immigration.
this is only way they can reduce is making one group happy while bashing at another, but you never know when is your turn.
I should say if they are really worried about L1 and its fraud why not to scrap L1 and grant GC for all l1holders. why don't they say like that ?
All antis says something good about one program and bad for rest.. they want to kill all program one by one. Today in hearing anti's tone was to reduce total immigration.
this is only way they can reduce is making one group happy while bashing at another, but you never know when is your turn.
I should say if they are really worried about L1 and its fraud why not to scrap L1 and grant GC for all l1holders. why don't they say like that ?
more...
pictures 1 revision, 131 KB
krishmunn
04-26 06:01 PM
between the USA: worldwide, except Europe --- 2 pieces of baggage max. 23kg
Lufthansa - Free baggage allowance (http://www.lufthansa.com/online/portal/lh/us/info_and_services/baggage?nodeid=2892236&l=en&cid=1000390&blt_p=US&blt_l=en&blt_t=Info_and_Services&blt_e=Info%20Service%20Sitemap&blt_n=Baggage&blt_z=Free%20baggage%20allowan&blt_c=US%7Cen%7CInfo_and_Services%7CInfo%20Service %20Sitemap%7CBaggage%7CFree%20baggage%20allowan#an cAbT3)
Lufthansa - Free baggage allowance (http://www.lufthansa.com/online/portal/lh/us/info_and_services/baggage?nodeid=2892236&l=en&cid=1000390&blt_p=US&blt_l=en&blt_t=Info_and_Services&blt_e=Info%20Service%20Sitemap&blt_n=Baggage&blt_z=Free%20baggage%20allowan&blt_c=US%7Cen%7CInfo_and_Services%7CInfo%20Service %20Sitemap%7CBaggage%7CFree%20baggage%20allowan#an cAbT3)
dresses map
learning01
05-03 10:09 AM
They are not going to help resolve issues of backlogs, delays in processing and visa numbers for employment based GCs.
Clearly, these counter-protesters are doing them under the gard of supporting legal immigrants. My advise - ignore them and don't post or start new threads here. Instead write letters to editors clearly drawing their attention to issues facing legal employment based immigrants.
I browsed the link provided and nowhere it is mentioned about specific issues of legal immigrants.
Suggest folks write back personal stories and ask the editor to highlight the need to raise Legal Immigration issues.. the writer has clearly expressed how the legal immigrants needs to be given consideration : Contact Jessie Mangaliman at jmangaliman@mercurynews. com or (408) 920-5794.
They are organising a counter protest against Illegal Immigrants rally :
Amnesty foes respond
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/special_packages/immigration_debate/14488543.htm
Clearly, these counter-protesters are doing them under the gard of supporting legal immigrants. My advise - ignore them and don't post or start new threads here. Instead write letters to editors clearly drawing their attention to issues facing legal employment based immigrants.
I browsed the link provided and nowhere it is mentioned about specific issues of legal immigrants.
Suggest folks write back personal stories and ask the editor to highlight the need to raise Legal Immigration issues.. the writer has clearly expressed how the legal immigrants needs to be given consideration : Contact Jessie Mangaliman at jmangaliman@mercurynews. com or (408) 920-5794.
They are organising a counter protest against Illegal Immigrants rally :
Amnesty foes respond
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/special_packages/immigration_debate/14488543.htm
more...
makeup Deserts of the World Coloring
Munna Bhai
01-09 12:50 PM
which service center? You can ask your employer to ask USCIS as 140 is employer's application.
NSC
NSC
girlfriend A map of the world showing
sgupta33
03-20 05:05 PM
Thank you ZCool for the information.
hairstyles globe image map
anilsal
12-20 12:15 PM
Take a copy of your I140 approval atleast. It is just a sheet of paper when you go for stamping. Sometimes your lawyer can give you a copy of I140 filed papers. This will have information on your company's financials etc.
austingc
04-29 05:42 PM
I have a couple of questions regarding H1B.
My current H1B(10th year) is expiring in a month and I am planning to use EAD. My 140 is approved and 485 is pending for over 2 years with company A. At the same time my second 140 is pending with company B.
The question is, in case if I used my EAD to work and for some reason if my 485 is denied, can I get back to my H1B? I was under the impression that I will have to leave the country and wait for 1 year to reset the clock but I was told by someone that its not necessary to wait for an year and I can file a H1B based on my pending I-140 with company B and will have to do it while outside of the country. ( This process does not require a new quota).
Is this true? any ideas?
My current H1B(10th year) is expiring in a month and I am planning to use EAD. My 140 is approved and 485 is pending for over 2 years with company A. At the same time my second 140 is pending with company B.
The question is, in case if I used my EAD to work and for some reason if my 485 is denied, can I get back to my H1B? I was under the impression that I will have to leave the country and wait for 1 year to reset the clock but I was told by someone that its not necessary to wait for an year and I can file a H1B based on my pending I-140 with company B and will have to do it while outside of the country. ( This process does not require a new quota).
Is this true? any ideas?
mhtanim
12-12 08:48 PM
I didn't read the RFE but the lawyer said they have requested for Audited Financial Statements which my company does not have.
When my I-140 was filed, I was given the option to either provide 1. Audited Financial Statements or; 2) Company Tax Return.
As my employer didn't have audited financial statements, my company submitted the most recent company tax return with the I-140.
When my I-140 was filed, I was given the option to either provide 1. Audited Financial Statements or; 2) Company Tax Return.
As my employer didn't have audited financial statements, my company submitted the most recent company tax return with the I-140.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar