GCStatus
09-03 10:26 PM
My PD is current - Going for consular processing a good idea?
wallpaper Harp Seal Photographs on the
deecha
02-26 02:28 PM
Follow your own advice. You are incorrect here.
Out of Status is forgiven for I-130 Spouse of US Citizen as long as entry into USA was a legal one.
Rules are different if I-485 application is filed based on marriage to US citizen.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Thank you. I was going to reply to Dealsnet and state that, but you beat me to it.
On a side note, i was going to add that out of status itself does not determine the start of the clock, for the 3 and 10 year bans, .. that would be "unlawful stay" determined from the expiration of the date on the I-94 OR an administrative determination of unlawful stay based on when they discovered the out of status situation. However, for the above purposes [GC based on marriage], this point is moot.
Out of Status is forgiven for I-130 Spouse of US Citizen as long as entry into USA was a legal one.
Rules are different if I-485 application is filed based on marriage to US citizen.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Thank you. I was going to reply to Dealsnet and state that, but you beat me to it.
On a side note, i was going to add that out of status itself does not determine the start of the clock, for the 3 and 10 year bans, .. that would be "unlawful stay" determined from the expiration of the date on the I-94 OR an administrative determination of unlawful stay based on when they discovered the out of status situation. However, for the above purposes [GC based on marriage], this point is moot.
Winner
01-22 07:24 PM
I used Clinton Bush Haiti Fund**|**Home (http://www.clintonbushhaitifund.org) to make my small contribution, it took less than 2 minutes, no account creation required, this site accepts paypal too.
https://re.clintonbushhaitifund.org/SSLPage.aspx?pid=3884
https://re.clintonbushhaitifund.org/SSLPage.aspx?pid=3884
2011 Photo: Leopard seal Photo:
vandanaverdia
09-09 03:45 PM
Please spare some time & thought & decide to be in DC at the rally.
more...
Prashanthi
09-04 01:34 PM
HI All,
I currently have 797 approval document from Nov 2009 to Nov 2012 and My current 797 document is valid till Nov 2009.When i was coming back from india last week at POE the immigration officer gave me I 94 dated till Nov 2009.I said to him that as i have 797 till Nov 2012 i should get I 94 till that date.But he insisted saying as the current document is still valid he can only go with that.He cant give me I 94 date on my future 797 starting from Nov 2009.I kept asking him for about 5 min but again dint wanted argue a lot as it was border security immigration.
So what should i do now.Can i stay here after Nov 2009 or i need to go to stamping and come back before Nov 2009.What are my options.I don't have any travel plans at least a year from now.Do let me know is it mandatory for me to leave before Nov 2009.Also my New 797 as I 94 attached do you guys think if it is sufficient for me to stay here without any problems.
The officer can only look at the current I-797, cannot give an i-94 as per the future I-797. The other posters were correct last action rule does apply, however in my interpretation of the last action rule since your I-797 is not effective until November 2009 and your entry was before that, your last action in this case will be the latest I-797 and it will therefore be valid. In my opinion the Officer was correct in informing you that their is no problem for you to use your latest I-797 once the old one expires. Make sure you don't have a gap in the dates between the expiry of the old I-797 and start date of the new one.
I currently have 797 approval document from Nov 2009 to Nov 2012 and My current 797 document is valid till Nov 2009.When i was coming back from india last week at POE the immigration officer gave me I 94 dated till Nov 2009.I said to him that as i have 797 till Nov 2012 i should get I 94 till that date.But he insisted saying as the current document is still valid he can only go with that.He cant give me I 94 date on my future 797 starting from Nov 2009.I kept asking him for about 5 min but again dint wanted argue a lot as it was border security immigration.
So what should i do now.Can i stay here after Nov 2009 or i need to go to stamping and come back before Nov 2009.What are my options.I don't have any travel plans at least a year from now.Do let me know is it mandatory for me to leave before Nov 2009.Also my New 797 as I 94 attached do you guys think if it is sufficient for me to stay here without any problems.
The officer can only look at the current I-797, cannot give an i-94 as per the future I-797. The other posters were correct last action rule does apply, however in my interpretation of the last action rule since your I-797 is not effective until November 2009 and your entry was before that, your last action in this case will be the latest I-797 and it will therefore be valid. In my opinion the Officer was correct in informing you that their is no problem for you to use your latest I-797 once the old one expires. Make sure you don't have a gap in the dates between the expiry of the old I-797 and start date of the new one.
fide_champ
09-08 12:21 PM
My company lawyers have been preparing for the last 5 months to file for my PERM application. After completing the recruitment stage and getting ready to file, they for some reason have come to the conclusion that the high number of resumes received could land the company in trouble for this case plus future applications.
Has anybody seen this before. Is there any precedence that a company that receives large number of resumes for the position might cause issues? Even if they have done the due diligence to review all resumes and interview candidates that they deemed fit? Still not finding anybody worthwhile?
Any comments/ assistance would be most appreciated.
Thanks
Usually companies find a way to get around this situation and file a green card for the employee. They might have feared that they may get scrutinized due to the weak economy if they file PERM. The company lawyer might have advised the company to do so. So i guess get a good immigration attorney if you can make that choice.
Has anybody seen this before. Is there any precedence that a company that receives large number of resumes for the position might cause issues? Even if they have done the due diligence to review all resumes and interview candidates that they deemed fit? Still not finding anybody worthwhile?
Any comments/ assistance would be most appreciated.
Thanks
Usually companies find a way to get around this situation and file a green card for the employee. They might have feared that they may get scrutinized due to the weak economy if they file PERM. The company lawyer might have advised the company to do so. So i guess get a good immigration attorney if you can make that choice.
more...
dsneyog
11-30 10:54 PM
Sorry I have no advise as I am filing my AP tomorrow for the first time. However it scares me that it's been over 3 months that USCIS received your application. I am sending out mine tomorrow and need to get it it by late February. Wondering if I should mention in my covering letter about expediting it. I am also planning to include prepaid envelope.
Hope someone here can answer your question.
Hope someone here can answer your question.
2010 Seal Samuel photo
svm
09-01 10:24 AM
I suggest call the service center (texas or nebraska) where your case is as cases are approved by TSC or NSC not by field offices.
I got the FP notice yesterday. So it seems it is going as was told earlier
I got the FP notice yesterday. So it seems it is going as was told earlier
more...
mpgc
10-19 11:52 AM
Hi,
could you please provide me your attorney's details?
Thank you,
I changed jobs early this year with a 20% pay cut and with different titles and with different client type (private vs public). Got GC last month. No RFEs. I did not inform USCIS.
Before switching jobs, I checked with my attorney and made sure that I am covered, made sure that my previous employer will not revoke my approved I-140 and made sure that my current employer will cooperate with the process. Last month my GC got approved.
Good luck.
could you please provide me your attorney's details?
Thank you,
I changed jobs early this year with a 20% pay cut and with different titles and with different client type (private vs public). Got GC last month. No RFEs. I did not inform USCIS.
Before switching jobs, I checked with my attorney and made sure that I am covered, made sure that my previous employer will not revoke my approved I-140 and made sure that my current employer will cooperate with the process. Last month my GC got approved.
Good luck.
hair Seal
Rajeev
10-10 09:58 PM
It seems that the bill S 1085 (the Reuniting Families Act (RFA) has become active again. I received e-mails from Senator Menedez and Senator Lautenberg talking about the bill. Senator Menendex mentioned the recapture employment-based visas that haven't been used in past years so that they may be used in future years. Among other things, he also mentioned that he will continue to address the concerns of employment-based visas in the context of comprehensive immigration reform. He is the sponsor of the S 1085 bill.
Senetor Lautenberg mentioned "Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The �Reuniting American Families Act� (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total."
It seems that Senator Menendez is doing a lot of work to bring relief to all immigrants including employment based. It may be brought in the lame-duck session in December.
Please call your Senators to co-sponsor/support this bill.
Senetor Lautenberg mentioned "Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The �Reuniting American Families Act� (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total."
It seems that Senator Menendez is doing a lot of work to bring relief to all immigrants including employment based. It may be brought in the lame-duck session in December.
Please call your Senators to co-sponsor/support this bill.
more...
lostinbeta
10-21 01:08 AM
It is much better now :)
Could still use some more around the center, there are a lot of large blank spaces. This is just a suggestion though.
Could still use some more around the center, there are a lot of large blank spaces. This is just a suggestion though.
hot SLEEPY middot; Seals
jagan13
02-25 02:58 PM
I finally got my renewed passport with all the correct details, mailed to me yday. I ended up renewing my license today and got it for 1 yr as I only have the extension notice of action. They never gave me the tracking #, which makes me think they dont normally keep a record of the tracking # in a system for a passport being issued. I think it would be better for anybody trying to apply for a passport through mail, to send a pre paid envelope with a tracking # along with the original application to be used for returing the new passport. But, primarily they are still keeping up with the 40 day turn around as far as passport renewals go.
I appreciate everybody who took time to respond to the thread.
Thanks,
Jagan
I appreciate everybody who took time to respond to the thread.
Thanks,
Jagan
more...
house harp seal in Canada
venetian
07-06 02:29 PM
Thanks saket,
Just a clarification, did you continue to maintain H1 status or started using EAD after you entered using AP.
Yes, I did the same.....even though I had a valid H1B stamped in my passport the POE made me use the AP to enter.....
Just a clarification, did you continue to maintain H1 status or started using EAD after you entered using AP.
Yes, I did the same.....even though I had a valid H1B stamped in my passport the POE made me use the AP to enter.....
tattoo celebrating Seal#39;s
.jpg "CANADIAN SEAL SLAUGHTER- Win")
authrd
08-23 10:59 AM
bumping/hoping for replies
more...
pictures seal and heidi klum children
prinive
04-10 05:38 PM
Any one else...:o
dresses Baby Seal © Nigel Barker
krishna_brc
05-05 08:54 AM
Yes, we don't need original I-485 receipt notice to travel.
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
more...
makeup Protect Harp Seals with
insbaby
07-17 08:02 AM
Hello freinds :
I would appreciate if anyone can guide me through the situation I am in. I have been working for a company for past 4yrs. After the July bulletin was released on June 15, my employer has stopped responding to my emails, voicemails and registered mails by normal post. When I try to reach him on the telephone his voicemail message says that he is travelling and not to leave any voicemail messages but to email him and he will respond when he gets a chance. When I email him I get an out of office response. There are two other people working in the same company. I sent emails to these people and also left voicemail messages but they are also not responding.
This has put me in a very difficult situation as I dont know what is the status of my H1B application which expired recently. They were supposed to extend it. They are also not telling me the status of I140 application. My labor PD is June 2004. I would like to file the I485 application if USCIS reverses their decision.
Has anyone been throught the same or similar situation ?
This is my third employer and third GC attempt in the 11yrs I have been in this country.
Buddy, I am sorry for your situatiuon. It looks like you thought everything is employer's responsibility. They don't move even a small piece for you unless you follow up in time.
You said, your H1B expired recently (!!!!). You must have known that the H1B petition can be filed for extension 180 days before. Also, you must have read that how much time each procession center takes for this extension of H1B (min 6 months). In such case, did you ask the employer to extend the H1B in FEBRUARY? If they have applied, then they should have got an "Recepit Notice", which makes your stay VALID. If they have received something else, they should have let you know, because "IT CREATES BIG PROBLEM FOR THEM TO KEEP SOMEONE with H1B EXPIRED". So, it looks like, your petition went ok and your are now SAFE.
If you have given pressure to your employer the day before the H1B expires, (sorry to say this) it is your problem, not theirs. Their job is not looking at your expiration of H1B, it is your. This often happens in small companies, big companies usually have HRD, who takes care of this issues in time.
On I-140 approval: If I assume your company is fairly small, then you can not avoid interacting with the lawer while filing such things. (Usually there is not anyone doing this job, but you do, sending documents, confirmations to lawer). In such case, CALL THE LAWER for the status or your petition reference number to check online.
It is very uncommon a lawer is instructed by the company not to provide information, it makes the small companies life easy if you deal directly with the lawer.
So there are ways to solve the problem in time without bugging the Employer with no ears. Move fast and file your 485 before end of july !!!!! :cool:
I would appreciate if anyone can guide me through the situation I am in. I have been working for a company for past 4yrs. After the July bulletin was released on June 15, my employer has stopped responding to my emails, voicemails and registered mails by normal post. When I try to reach him on the telephone his voicemail message says that he is travelling and not to leave any voicemail messages but to email him and he will respond when he gets a chance. When I email him I get an out of office response. There are two other people working in the same company. I sent emails to these people and also left voicemail messages but they are also not responding.
This has put me in a very difficult situation as I dont know what is the status of my H1B application which expired recently. They were supposed to extend it. They are also not telling me the status of I140 application. My labor PD is June 2004. I would like to file the I485 application if USCIS reverses their decision.
Has anyone been throught the same or similar situation ?
This is my third employer and third GC attempt in the 11yrs I have been in this country.
Buddy, I am sorry for your situatiuon. It looks like you thought everything is employer's responsibility. They don't move even a small piece for you unless you follow up in time.
You said, your H1B expired recently (!!!!). You must have known that the H1B petition can be filed for extension 180 days before. Also, you must have read that how much time each procession center takes for this extension of H1B (min 6 months). In such case, did you ask the employer to extend the H1B in FEBRUARY? If they have applied, then they should have got an "Recepit Notice", which makes your stay VALID. If they have received something else, they should have let you know, because "IT CREATES BIG PROBLEM FOR THEM TO KEEP SOMEONE with H1B EXPIRED". So, it looks like, your petition went ok and your are now SAFE.
If you have given pressure to your employer the day before the H1B expires, (sorry to say this) it is your problem, not theirs. Their job is not looking at your expiration of H1B, it is your. This often happens in small companies, big companies usually have HRD, who takes care of this issues in time.
On I-140 approval: If I assume your company is fairly small, then you can not avoid interacting with the lawer while filing such things. (Usually there is not anyone doing this job, but you do, sending documents, confirmations to lawer). In such case, CALL THE LAWER for the status or your petition reference number to check online.
It is very uncommon a lawer is instructed by the company not to provide information, it makes the small companies life easy if you deal directly with the lawer.
So there are ways to solve the problem in time without bugging the Employer with no ears. Move fast and file your 485 before end of july !!!!! :cool:
girlfriend CANADIAN SEAL SLAUGHTER- Win
san752000
07-11 10:02 PM
Your wife should NOT have any problems if she is still in her 6 years of her first H1B. My wife had the same case and she got her H1B in 15 days and it was NOT counted against the quota.
hairstyles Widex harp seal widescreen
cin45220
12-07 11:51 AM
I do not understand why Indian news papers tout salaries offered to IIT/IIM graduates in foreign companies in overseas locations. It�s a net loss for the country�
First of all, salaries are not exceptional when compared to overseas salaries (for a similar position in a similar company) and secondly, most of these graduates are taking their skills, earned through subsidized education provided by the generous Indian government in IITs/IIMs, to a foreign country.
-CinBoy
First of all, salaries are not exceptional when compared to overseas salaries (for a similar position in a similar company) and secondly, most of these graduates are taking their skills, earned through subsidized education provided by the generous Indian government in IITs/IIMs, to a foreign country.
-CinBoy
bsbawa10
01-24 05:03 AM
Suggestions.
1 Since the main reason behind the retrogression is the lack of Visa numbers I feel it would be a great idea to process the 485 applications , make a decision on the case and let the applicant know about the decision though the actual card can be mailed when the Visa Numbers become available . This would reduce the anxiety on behalf of the applicants and would also give USCIS ample time to process all the applications.
2. Yearly extension of EAD/AP is getting so expensive especially when one doesn't know how many years we have to keep doing the extensions.
It's a known fact that except for the July 07 bulletin EB3 India PD has hardly touched year 2002 since Dec 2004.
Some of the EB3 I folks with a 2005 PD, that I know have been issued one year extension on their EAD though they applied for the extensions in mid July(2008).
Example of EAD/AP anxiety:
AP document says that it should be used for emergency travel. This rule on AP
was formed at a time when 485 processing would take not more than 6 months.
In the present scenario with 485 processing taking years I think a person using EAD would end up using AP many times . Officers at the POE sometimes remind us the rule that AP should be used only in emergency and some of them give the person hard time if they believe the travel was not for emergency purpose.
I guess we are supposed to have a proof of emergency travel.
Though AC21 lets one change jobs 180 days after filing the 485 application with the I40 approved for more than 180 days when reentering the country some of the officer(s) sometimes ask the person if they are still with the same company that filed their GC.I don't know yet what they would do/say if one had changed their jobs because the people who were asked this question did not change their employer at that time. But the fact that they ask us this question makes us apprehensive about changing jobs.
With so many rules where most of them were formed long back it's making applicant's life increasingly tough as the applicants themselves don't want to do anything that would be construed/fall on the wrong side of the rules.We are forced to watch our steps multiple times even in the case of simple things like job changes,travelout of country etc.
When I repeatedly read about how USICS is inundated with 485 applications due to July 2007 bulletin I keep wondering why USCIS would want to increase it's work load every year with all these EAD/AP renewal applications.
Suggestion
Once upon a time when the 485 processing took like 6 months, EAD/AP had different meaning. In the present scenario when not many of us know how many more yeras it's going to be before (especially EB3 I folks) we get our GreenCard I would think it would be better to use the pending 485 application to change jobs and reenter the country.
This would save money/time for the applicant and lot of time for USICS.
Thank you.
Very nice suggestions. More participants needed please.
1 Since the main reason behind the retrogression is the lack of Visa numbers I feel it would be a great idea to process the 485 applications , make a decision on the case and let the applicant know about the decision though the actual card can be mailed when the Visa Numbers become available . This would reduce the anxiety on behalf of the applicants and would also give USCIS ample time to process all the applications.
2. Yearly extension of EAD/AP is getting so expensive especially when one doesn't know how many years we have to keep doing the extensions.
It's a known fact that except for the July 07 bulletin EB3 India PD has hardly touched year 2002 since Dec 2004.
Some of the EB3 I folks with a 2005 PD, that I know have been issued one year extension on their EAD though they applied for the extensions in mid July(2008).
Example of EAD/AP anxiety:
AP document says that it should be used for emergency travel. This rule on AP
was formed at a time when 485 processing would take not more than 6 months.
In the present scenario with 485 processing taking years I think a person using EAD would end up using AP many times . Officers at the POE sometimes remind us the rule that AP should be used only in emergency and some of them give the person hard time if they believe the travel was not for emergency purpose.
I guess we are supposed to have a proof of emergency travel.
Though AC21 lets one change jobs 180 days after filing the 485 application with the I40 approved for more than 180 days when reentering the country some of the officer(s) sometimes ask the person if they are still with the same company that filed their GC.I don't know yet what they would do/say if one had changed their jobs because the people who were asked this question did not change their employer at that time. But the fact that they ask us this question makes us apprehensive about changing jobs.
With so many rules where most of them were formed long back it's making applicant's life increasingly tough as the applicants themselves don't want to do anything that would be construed/fall on the wrong side of the rules.We are forced to watch our steps multiple times even in the case of simple things like job changes,travelout of country etc.
When I repeatedly read about how USICS is inundated with 485 applications due to July 2007 bulletin I keep wondering why USCIS would want to increase it's work load every year with all these EAD/AP renewal applications.
Suggestion
Once upon a time when the 485 processing took like 6 months, EAD/AP had different meaning. In the present scenario when not many of us know how many more yeras it's going to be before (especially EB3 I folks) we get our GreenCard I would think it would be better to use the pending 485 application to change jobs and reenter the country.
This would save money/time for the applicant and lot of time for USICS.
Thank you.
Very nice suggestions. More participants needed please.
rajpatelemail
11-07 07:05 PM
Another group with help of IV, to suck the blood by sponsoring H1s...
Believe me , at least 80% of this so called enterpreneurs will end up like present H1/desi employers/blood sucking companies
Of course 20% will be real good with clean intentions.
I bet...As i saw so many people in the same manner.
My close friends got GC and now sucking people with H1s , after just registering LLC with state secretary by paying 100$ reg fees and filing few H1s with INS
Believe me , at least 80% of this so called enterpreneurs will end up like present H1/desi employers/blood sucking companies
Of course 20% will be real good with clean intentions.
I bet...As i saw so many people in the same manner.
My close friends got GC and now sucking people with H1s , after just registering LLC with state secretary by paying 100$ reg fees and filing few H1s with INS
No comments:
Post a Comment