nrk
10-15 05:42 PM
What number did you called man, If possible please can you give the details of the call.
i want to find my out case is pre adjudicated or not.
2 months back or so when i called the representative told that they don't have access to those details.
I could reach IO yesterday. representative said that me and my wife's cases are preadjudicated. Not sure if I could believe this...
i want to find my out case is pre adjudicated or not.
2 months back or so when i called the representative told that they don't have access to those details.
I could reach IO yesterday. representative said that me and my wife's cases are preadjudicated. Not sure if I could believe this...
wallpaper princess diana death
file485
05-24 06:17 PM
Friends
I have a labor approved in Civil/Contruction job skills with PD Oct 2003 and my date is current now. However I am currently on a IT company H1-to be specific 'Business Analyst'.
will there be a problem being now on a IT company H1 and filing for 485 with the Civil/Contruction approved labor..?
PLEASE LET ME KNOW...
I have a labor approved in Civil/Contruction job skills with PD Oct 2003 and my date is current now. However I am currently on a IT company H1-to be specific 'Business Analyst'.
will there be a problem being now on a IT company H1 and filing for 485 with the Civil/Contruction approved labor..?
PLEASE LET ME KNOW...
reno_john
05-26 06:58 PM
the number in red on your visa, it will be on the right side of the visa page,
2011 house princess diana death
WaldenPond
03-02 05:33 PM
Here is the news that is very important but often overlooked in the immigration spectrum:
"Senate OKs Patriot Act renewal sends to House"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11638713/
Why this is the news is good and relevant from the point of view EB provisions?
Because EB provisions (section 8001) were thrown out of S.1932 because of the differences between key players over the Patriot act. Now that this is out of the picture, at least there is one less thing to worry about.
"Senate OKs Patriot Act renewal sends to House"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11638713/
Why this is the news is good and relevant from the point of view EB provisions?
Because EB provisions (section 8001) were thrown out of S.1932 because of the differences between key players over the Patriot act. Now that this is out of the picture, at least there is one less thing to worry about.
more...
ssa
08-22 11:51 AM
Like others have pointed out, it looks like that the numbers are being allocated in a different way from before. Does any one know of any article or discussion by a real attorney or some expert on what is going on?
But, going back to my original question, what are the legal experts saying? Can any legal entity or any type of action force USCIS to explain what the heck is going on?
http://immigration-information.com/forums/blog.php?b=13
The second paragraph from the link says that the new spill-over policy is not a random, ad hoc decision by USCIS but rather a careful one after consulting congress etc.
But, going back to my original question, what are the legal experts saying? Can any legal entity or any type of action force USCIS to explain what the heck is going on?
http://immigration-information.com/forums/blog.php?b=13
The second paragraph from the link says that the new spill-over policy is not a random, ad hoc decision by USCIS but rather a careful one after consulting congress etc.
singhsa3
08-20 11:15 PM
Good Luck!
By the way read INA about this and let us all know if there are specific provisions regarding this " EB1 -> older of (EB2-I, EB2-C, EB3-I, EB3-C)"
but then the devil is in the details ain't it? The "Except this piece" is what is overwhelmingly providing EB2 the numbers, and that is what will jump start EB3 movement forward.
I think people don't realize that Eb3-ROW is less compared to EB2-I/C and will therefore provide EB3-I numbers sooner than if we wait for EB2-I to get current.
And sorry, I don't support nepotism, everyone should be eligible on their own.
By the way read INA about this and let us all know if there are specific provisions regarding this " EB1 -> older of (EB2-I, EB2-C, EB3-I, EB3-C)"
but then the devil is in the details ain't it? The "Except this piece" is what is overwhelmingly providing EB2 the numbers, and that is what will jump start EB3 movement forward.
I think people don't realize that Eb3-ROW is less compared to EB2-I/C and will therefore provide EB3-I numbers sooner than if we wait for EB2-I to get current.
And sorry, I don't support nepotism, everyone should be eligible on their own.
more...
vikki76
09-18 02:59 PM
I want to move from reliance to airtel or trueroots before deciding on vonage. Can someone tell me as how good is airtel 1c/min offer? hows the quality to india and other countries?
Thanks
I tried airtel and then moved back to Reliance and ReliableCalling. Airtel number wouldn't connect regularly. Reliance call quality is good but expensive. ReliableCalling is almost as good as reliance but 50% less expensive.
And now, proud subscriber of Vonage. Use ReliableCalling for that occasional call from cellphone.
Thanks
I tried airtel and then moved back to Reliance and ReliableCalling. Airtel number wouldn't connect regularly. Reliance call quality is good but expensive. ReliableCalling is almost as good as reliance but 50% less expensive.
And now, proud subscriber of Vonage. Use ReliableCalling for that occasional call from cellphone.
2010 2010 images of princess diana
Canadian_Dream
12-06 05:28 PM
Pappu,
I agree with you on this, there is some truth to this that there could be delays when there are multiple filings. In fact this is the first time when USCIS has to deal with so many multiple filings, a very few lawyers have any direct experience with it. From USCIS Standard Operating Procedure, there is a mention of "second filing" (not duplicate filing) in the following places:
1. Procedural Overview (Page 4)
2. File Review (Page 46)
3. Interview Waiver Criteria (Page 185)
http://www.ilw.com/seminars/august2002_citation2b.pdf
From the link above:
In (1) and (2) above it says second filing should be handled under the normal process. Although if different A# are assigned case goes to CRU (case resolution unit). But if A# assigned are same, you are more or less processed like a normal case. The last part (3) interview waiver criteria, multiple filing is mentioned as one of the deviations from interview waiver criteria but it NOT the interview criteria itself. In the end processing time for multiple filing is very much up to the discretion of adjudicating officer. Also, I didn't find any reason to believe that there could be issues with security check with multiple filings.
I think all of us multiple filers can breathe easy if our cases are filed clearly with full disclosure of information without any intended willful violation.
I am a multiple filer too, my I-485 application filed in early June was approved last week. I hope this gives some reason for optimism for us multiple filers. Good luck to everyone. BTW: I am still a contributing member and will continue to hang out at IV.
After much research on this, I tend to agree with this answer above (not the CP part though). As per my latest information from a lawyer who does multiple filings, the processing delay can be significant due to this. Looking back, wish our community had more information on this and more real examples of people who have done it. It would have helped members who were unsure if they should do multiple filings.
Anyways this thread will be useful for future I485 filers.
I agree with you on this, there is some truth to this that there could be delays when there are multiple filings. In fact this is the first time when USCIS has to deal with so many multiple filings, a very few lawyers have any direct experience with it. From USCIS Standard Operating Procedure, there is a mention of "second filing" (not duplicate filing) in the following places:
1. Procedural Overview (Page 4)
2. File Review (Page 46)
3. Interview Waiver Criteria (Page 185)
http://www.ilw.com/seminars/august2002_citation2b.pdf
From the link above:
In (1) and (2) above it says second filing should be handled under the normal process. Although if different A# are assigned case goes to CRU (case resolution unit). But if A# assigned are same, you are more or less processed like a normal case. The last part (3) interview waiver criteria, multiple filing is mentioned as one of the deviations from interview waiver criteria but it NOT the interview criteria itself. In the end processing time for multiple filing is very much up to the discretion of adjudicating officer. Also, I didn't find any reason to believe that there could be issues with security check with multiple filings.
I think all of us multiple filers can breathe easy if our cases are filed clearly with full disclosure of information without any intended willful violation.
I am a multiple filer too, my I-485 application filed in early June was approved last week. I hope this gives some reason for optimism for us multiple filers. Good luck to everyone. BTW: I am still a contributing member and will continue to hang out at IV.
After much research on this, I tend to agree with this answer above (not the CP part though). As per my latest information from a lawyer who does multiple filings, the processing delay can be significant due to this. Looking back, wish our community had more information on this and more real examples of people who have done it. It would have helped members who were unsure if they should do multiple filings.
Anyways this thread will be useful for future I485 filers.
more...
seekerofpeace
10-02 04:40 PM
Caliguy and GF
I just wrote a letter detailing my frustrations and attached with it the documents. I don't think the call was anything big deal.....it was more a courtesy call an image improving call...we were not told anything that we didn't know already.....USCIS always raised more questions than answering them.......
The address is:
To reach the Secretary
Secretary Janet Napolitano
Department of Homeland Security
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528
Today, I again talked to TSC POJ again the same thing I can issue Biom notice for you too..I asked is it possible that the adjudicating IO is on vacation or (well I didn't ask "dead" or "alive" she 'd cut the phone...she said she can send an email to the IO that I am concerned.....I said plz do....not even sure if she will do that....my faith in USCIS is dwindling since day 1..
SoP
Best,
SoP
I just wrote a letter detailing my frustrations and attached with it the documents. I don't think the call was anything big deal.....it was more a courtesy call an image improving call...we were not told anything that we didn't know already.....USCIS always raised more questions than answering them.......
The address is:
To reach the Secretary
Secretary Janet Napolitano
Department of Homeland Security
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528
Today, I again talked to TSC POJ again the same thing I can issue Biom notice for you too..I asked is it possible that the adjudicating IO is on vacation or (well I didn't ask "dead" or "alive" she 'd cut the phone...she said she can send an email to the IO that I am concerned.....I said plz do....not even sure if she will do that....my faith in USCIS is dwindling since day 1..
SoP
Best,
SoP
hair The death of Diana, Princess
spaceguy
08-25 12:24 PM
I heard some one telling me that there is a max limit of 5000 mts per month which includes local, long distance and international.
Is it true or just a rumor ?
Is it true or just a rumor ?
more...
feedfront
09-24 12:34 PM
Has your I-485 been approved or you have got an RFE?
Well I got RFE then within a week got Card Production ordered email then within 12 hrs got mail undelivered email..
I have not replied to RFE yet.
Contacted USCIS but *** they are telling talk to Post office :eek:
Well I got RFE then within a week got Card Production ordered email then within 12 hrs got mail undelivered email..
I have not replied to RFE yet.
Contacted USCIS but *** they are telling talk to Post office :eek:
hot princess diana death
sanjayb
09-24 02:12 PM
J.BARRET:
sanjayb - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 08/05
Ashres11 - 2nd July/ 10:28/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ NO CC/ NO RN
Sairam - 2nd July/10:28/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No RN - 07/28
InsKrish - 2nd July/10.25/J.Barret/NSC/I-140 approved from TSC/No CC/RN
sudhi - 2nd July/ 10:25/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ NO CC/ NO RN - CHECKS CASHED 09/13
Danu2007 - 2nd July/10:25AM/J. Barret/NSC/140-TSC/NO RN
Triviagal - 2nd July/ 10:25AM/ J. Barret/NSC/140-TSC/NO RN
rkartik78- 2nd july/10:25am/ J.Barret/ I140-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
GCFISH- 2nd july/10:25am/ J.Barret/ I140-TSC/ 485 went to NE/NO RN NOCC
rexjamla- 2ndJuly/10:25am/J.Barret/ I-140-NSC/ NO RN NO CC
kmkanth- 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
BU007- 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
veerufs - 2nd july/10:28am/J. BARRET/I140-TSC/NO RN/NO CC
123456mg - 2nd july/10:25am at NSC/J BARRET/I140-Approved from TSC/NO RN/NO CC
aussie731- 2ndJuly/10:25am/J.Barret/ I-140-NSC/ NO RN NO CC
nkavjs - 2nd July/ 10:25am/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ I-140 TSC lud on I-140 8-5-07/ NO CC/ NO RN
jsb - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 07/27
gc_us - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 07/28
srinitls - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/NO RN NO CC
realraghu - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
vg1778 - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140/No CC/No RN
R Mickels :
giddu- 2nd july/9:01am/R Mickels/ I140-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
mahendra_t - 2nd july/9:01am/R Mickels/ I140-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
Satya- 2nd july/9:01am/R Mickels/ I140-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
pareshtyagi- 2nd july/9:01am/R Mickels/ I140-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
sapking - 2nd july/9:01am/R Mickels/ I140 pending-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
smshen- 2nd July/9:01/Fedex/R Mickels/NSC/140 - TSS/No CC/No RN
gcgoodluck- 2nd July/9:01/Fedex/R Mickels/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN/No data
dudenj - 2nd july/9:03am/R.Mickels/I140-NSC/NO RN/NO CC/NO EAD
F HEINAUER:
cadude- 2nd July/11.11am/F HEINAUER/NSC/1-40 TSC/NO RN NO CC
helpme1234-2nd July/11.14am/F HEINAUER/NSC/1-40 TSC/NO RN NO CC
cowboy-2nd July/12.34 pm/F HEINAUER/NSC/1-40 TSC/NO RN NO CC
R.Williams :
Jignesh - 2nd July/7:55am/ R.Williams /I140 -NCS/ NO RN NO CC, NO DATA IN SYSTEM
doshhar-2nd July/2:02PM/ R.Williams /I140 -TCS/ NO RN NO CC - I-140 LUD 08/05
C UHRMACHER :
Bayboy -2nd July/8.oam/C UHRMACHER/I140-TSC/NO RN NO CC
nk2007-2nd July/8.26am/C UHRMACHER/I140-TSC/NO RN NO CC
Other -
zdong -- 2nd july No check encash/No RN
HNaik-2nd July/10:04am/ Armstrong/I140 -TCS/ NO RN NO CC
mashu - 2nd july/11:34am/Gerkenmeyer/I140 TSC/ No RN No CC
abhis0 -- 2nd july/11:34am/Gerkenmeyer/I140 TSC/ No RN No CC 140 LUD - 08/05
Applications are returned:Incorrect filing fees :
noendinsight- 2nd July/NSC/1-40 Approved NSC/NO RN NO CC
sanjayb - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 08/05
Ashres11 - 2nd July/ 10:28/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ NO CC/ NO RN
Sairam - 2nd July/10:28/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No RN - 07/28
InsKrish - 2nd July/10.25/J.Barret/NSC/I-140 approved from TSC/No CC/RN
sudhi - 2nd July/ 10:25/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ NO CC/ NO RN - CHECKS CASHED 09/13
Danu2007 - 2nd July/10:25AM/J. Barret/NSC/140-TSC/NO RN
Triviagal - 2nd July/ 10:25AM/ J. Barret/NSC/140-TSC/NO RN
rkartik78- 2nd july/10:25am/ J.Barret/ I140-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
GCFISH- 2nd july/10:25am/ J.Barret/ I140-TSC/ 485 went to NE/NO RN NOCC
rexjamla- 2ndJuly/10:25am/J.Barret/ I-140-NSC/ NO RN NO CC
kmkanth- 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
BU007- 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
veerufs - 2nd july/10:28am/J. BARRET/I140-TSC/NO RN/NO CC
123456mg - 2nd july/10:25am at NSC/J BARRET/I140-Approved from TSC/NO RN/NO CC
aussie731- 2ndJuly/10:25am/J.Barret/ I-140-NSC/ NO RN NO CC
nkavjs - 2nd July/ 10:25am/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ I-140 TSC lud on I-140 8-5-07/ NO CC/ NO RN
jsb - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 07/27
gc_us - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 07/28
srinitls - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/NO RN NO CC
realraghu - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
vg1778 - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140/No CC/No RN
R Mickels :
giddu- 2nd july/9:01am/R Mickels/ I140-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
mahendra_t - 2nd july/9:01am/R Mickels/ I140-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
Satya- 2nd july/9:01am/R Mickels/ I140-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
pareshtyagi- 2nd july/9:01am/R Mickels/ I140-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
sapking - 2nd july/9:01am/R Mickels/ I140 pending-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
smshen- 2nd July/9:01/Fedex/R Mickels/NSC/140 - TSS/No CC/No RN
gcgoodluck- 2nd July/9:01/Fedex/R Mickels/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN/No data
dudenj - 2nd july/9:03am/R.Mickels/I140-NSC/NO RN/NO CC/NO EAD
F HEINAUER:
cadude- 2nd July/11.11am/F HEINAUER/NSC/1-40 TSC/NO RN NO CC
helpme1234-2nd July/11.14am/F HEINAUER/NSC/1-40 TSC/NO RN NO CC
cowboy-2nd July/12.34 pm/F HEINAUER/NSC/1-40 TSC/NO RN NO CC
R.Williams :
Jignesh - 2nd July/7:55am/ R.Williams /I140 -NCS/ NO RN NO CC, NO DATA IN SYSTEM
doshhar-2nd July/2:02PM/ R.Williams /I140 -TCS/ NO RN NO CC - I-140 LUD 08/05
C UHRMACHER :
Bayboy -2nd July/8.oam/C UHRMACHER/I140-TSC/NO RN NO CC
nk2007-2nd July/8.26am/C UHRMACHER/I140-TSC/NO RN NO CC
Other -
zdong -- 2nd july No check encash/No RN
HNaik-2nd July/10:04am/ Armstrong/I140 -TCS/ NO RN NO CC
mashu - 2nd july/11:34am/Gerkenmeyer/I140 TSC/ No RN No CC
abhis0 -- 2nd july/11:34am/Gerkenmeyer/I140 TSC/ No RN No CC 140 LUD - 08/05
Applications are returned:Incorrect filing fees :
noendinsight- 2nd July/NSC/1-40 Approved NSC/NO RN NO CC
more...
house princess diana death photos.
willwin
08-08 09:55 AM
Thank you. I am not worried about the three companies I know of , I am worried about other 3000 companies that I don't know of.
I also beleive, it is not the companies that are evil. It is the system that provides the incentive. And I am trying to take away that incentive.
Please wait for few months; let me complete porting my PD to EB2. LOL ....
If you don't realize, this is what is happening in the GC queue system and I will try to explain using an analogy.
There are 3 queues to a single counter that issues work permit.
First queue, for age group 20-30 (EB3) and slowest to get a work permit
Second, age group 31-40 (EB2) faster than EB3
Third, age group 41-50 (EB1), fast lane.
Now, on Jan 1 2000, X who is 21 years old joins the EB3 queue. There are 10 people on EB2 queue on this day. EB3 queue is hardly moving and X remains in the queue for 10 solid years. He is now 31. It is 2010.
The EB2 queue now has 100 people and our 100th person in the queue is SS and 35 years old.
The system allows X to join EB2 as he has turned 31 and also allows him to join behind the 10th person who was there on the EB2 queue as on Jan 1 2000 (if he was still there or be the 1st guy in the queue if the 10th person has already left the EB2 queue) as that was how many people were in the EB2 queue when X came in to this system.
Now SS cannot tolerate this for 2 reasons. One X came from EB3 (an inferior group per him) and next, X is 4 years younger and hence cannot get work permit ahead of him. He does not realize that he did not come in to the system when X came though he was senior and superior.
The system does not see that way. X was in the system for 10 years and he should be given priority in the system valuing the 10 years wait - irrespective of the queue he is in.
In other words, his queue might change but not his association with the system which is 10 years.
Now there could be people who show bogus age certificate and change queues. They have to be punished but not the system.
You don't set your house on fire just to kill few mosquitoes in there.
If you still don't agree, SunnySurya, good luck with your law suit! After all every human being commit mistakes in their life and is your turn now.
I also beleive, it is not the companies that are evil. It is the system that provides the incentive. And I am trying to take away that incentive.
Please wait for few months; let me complete porting my PD to EB2. LOL ....
If you don't realize, this is what is happening in the GC queue system and I will try to explain using an analogy.
There are 3 queues to a single counter that issues work permit.
First queue, for age group 20-30 (EB3) and slowest to get a work permit
Second, age group 31-40 (EB2) faster than EB3
Third, age group 41-50 (EB1), fast lane.
Now, on Jan 1 2000, X who is 21 years old joins the EB3 queue. There are 10 people on EB2 queue on this day. EB3 queue is hardly moving and X remains in the queue for 10 solid years. He is now 31. It is 2010.
The EB2 queue now has 100 people and our 100th person in the queue is SS and 35 years old.
The system allows X to join EB2 as he has turned 31 and also allows him to join behind the 10th person who was there on the EB2 queue as on Jan 1 2000 (if he was still there or be the 1st guy in the queue if the 10th person has already left the EB2 queue) as that was how many people were in the EB2 queue when X came in to this system.
Now SS cannot tolerate this for 2 reasons. One X came from EB3 (an inferior group per him) and next, X is 4 years younger and hence cannot get work permit ahead of him. He does not realize that he did not come in to the system when X came though he was senior and superior.
The system does not see that way. X was in the system for 10 years and he should be given priority in the system valuing the 10 years wait - irrespective of the queue he is in.
In other words, his queue might change but not his association with the system which is 10 years.
Now there could be people who show bogus age certificate and change queues. They have to be punished but not the system.
You don't set your house on fire just to kill few mosquitoes in there.
If you still don't agree, SunnySurya, good luck with your law suit! After all every human being commit mistakes in their life and is your turn now.
tattoo hair princess diana death
CADude
09-14 01:53 PM
mine put salt in pain :)
no nothing... our attorneys are absolutely useless in addition to this situation.
no nothing... our attorneys are absolutely useless in addition to this situation.
more...
pictures princess diana dead body.
JazzByTheBay
09-10 10:43 AM
Still waiting too. :(
Created InfoPass for week after next.
still waiting
Created InfoPass for week after next.
still waiting
dresses princess diana death scene.
laborchic
11-06 06:07 PM
Sending my letters this evening. finished everything moments ago..
friends: This is the time to act. I havent yet used AC21 but god forbid if I have to use it in this economy I dont want to be in this mess.
Sorry for the folks who received denials and hope we come out this together..
friends: This is the time to act. I havent yet used AC21 but god forbid if I have to use it in this economy I dont want to be in this mess.
Sorry for the folks who received denials and hope we come out this together..
more...
makeup princess diana death
ashres11
09-21 01:34 PM
See if you can find the director GERALD HEINAUER @ NSC or any senior executive. I will give a call and demand answers.
www.superpages.com ---> people search
www.superpages.com ---> people search
girlfriend princess diana death photo
sen_raju
07-10 12:42 PM
I just spoke to Victor Manuel Ramos from Orlando Sentinel in detail. He is going to cover it in tomorrow's edition.
You can contact him at 407-420-6186 or by email at VRamos@orlandosentinel.com and give your part of the story.
You can contact him at 407-420-6186 or by email at VRamos@orlandosentinel.com and give your part of the story.
hairstyles hair princess diana death
grupak
03-24 02:29 PM
First of all, they cannot ask you for you work authorization during the interview process. Second, even during hiring time, they can only ask you if you need sponsorship for H1 or not. If at this point you say no, then they have no business asking you for what kind of work authorization you have (unless the job specifically asks for US citizen or security clearence).
That's true actually. They have no business asking you about details of what your work authorization status is. All they need to know is that you are legally allowed to work. Doesn't matter EAD, GC or US citizenship. Sponsoring for H1B might come up during the hiring stage but that doesn't apply here.
Hypothetically in an interview, if directly asked, and if I am planning on using EAD, I would simply tell them that I have authorization from the DHS to work for any employer, and leave it at that. If they persist, I will tell them that I have the required documents for I-9. No need for more details unless some kind of security clearance is required.
That's true actually. They have no business asking you about details of what your work authorization status is. All they need to know is that you are legally allowed to work. Doesn't matter EAD, GC or US citizenship. Sponsoring for H1B might come up during the hiring stage but that doesn't apply here.
Hypothetically in an interview, if directly asked, and if I am planning on using EAD, I would simply tell them that I have authorization from the DHS to work for any employer, and leave it at that. If they persist, I will tell them that I have the required documents for I-9. No need for more details unless some kind of security clearance is required.
wantgc23
09-24 11:21 AM
Bharatpremi,
Thanks for the excellent analysis. One question, your analysis assumes category excess visas goto next category on a per country basis, is this correct ?
Example, EB-1 china number goto EB-2 China ? I thought all EB-1 China numbers are added to the excess pool and then given to most retrogressed EB2 category ?
Thanks for anyone who clarifies this.
No matter how the data is sliced and diced, being EB3-I certainly means a loo...ong wait time ... :)
Thanks for the excellent analysis. One question, your analysis assumes category excess visas goto next category on a per country basis, is this correct ?
Example, EB-1 china number goto EB-2 China ? I thought all EB-1 China numbers are added to the excess pool and then given to most retrogressed EB2 category ?
Thanks for anyone who clarifies this.
No matter how the data is sliced and diced, being EB3-I certainly means a loo...ong wait time ... :)
royus77
06-29 07:45 PM
Allowing to file on July 02 or July 03 depends on visa numbers available which in turn depends usage the preceding month. If all the numbers are used up (meaning Immigration Officers have requested visas from DOS in the process of approving pending I-485) they cannot allow anyone to file on July 02 or July 03 and so on.
I guess currently race is on from USCIS to consume Visa numbers (40,000 or so) from DOS at unprecedented pace. That's why bulletin hasn't changed as yet. USCIS on its part is possibly trying to avoid flood of application at all cost, even if it requires working extra hours (and approving as many cases as possible) if it can save them later. DOS will NOT move the date back until the numbers are used up or near used up. I guess race is on....we will know on Monday. One way to know how true this is will be watching I-485 approvals from now till Monday. We are caught in the tug of war between USCIS and DOS. CIRCus isn't over yesterday....it is back in town again !!!
Can they reject applications that received on 2 july ....logically if the application was received when the Visa date is current it should be accepted. Have to see the timing of the DOS bulletin as they may make it unavailble effective "Now" rather than effective from :" yesterday " if we didnt see any revision to VB today, people whose application received on Monday may be safe ..lets hope
I guess currently race is on from USCIS to consume Visa numbers (40,000 or so) from DOS at unprecedented pace. That's why bulletin hasn't changed as yet. USCIS on its part is possibly trying to avoid flood of application at all cost, even if it requires working extra hours (and approving as many cases as possible) if it can save them later. DOS will NOT move the date back until the numbers are used up or near used up. I guess race is on....we will know on Monday. One way to know how true this is will be watching I-485 approvals from now till Monday. We are caught in the tug of war between USCIS and DOS. CIRCus isn't over yesterday....it is back in town again !!!
Can they reject applications that received on 2 july ....logically if the application was received when the Visa date is current it should be accepted. Have to see the timing of the DOS bulletin as they may make it unavailble effective "Now" rather than effective from :" yesterday " if we didnt see any revision to VB today, people whose application received on Monday may be safe ..lets hope
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar