needhelp!
03-12 02:58 PM
reddog, please explain how you have supported IV in the past in non-monetary ways. For lobbying, there is not much you can do other than support monetarily,or make trips to DC yourself.
I am sure IV core will at least consider such non-monetary support on case-by-case basis.
So your definition of support is 'monetary support' only?
I am sure IV core will at least consider such non-monetary support on case-by-case basis.
So your definition of support is 'monetary support' only?
wallpaper Harley Davidson Sportster IRON
addsf345
11-19 01:26 PM
One more update: Found another thread on RG's forum. This one is very specific.
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showpost.php?p=25447&postcount=7
Re: EAD & wrongful denial of 485 due to I-140 revoked by employer after 180 days AC21
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let my try to clarify my answer, since I didn't do that good a job previously.
An EAD remains valid until it expires, unless it is explicitly revoked. Sometimes, but not always, when the CIS denies an I-485, they also revoke the EAD.
For argument's sake, let's assume that an employer has attempted to revoke an approved I-140 in a case where the applicant's I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. Let's further assume that the CIS denies the I-485 on this basis and also revokes the EAD.
In my opinion, since there is no legal authority for such a denial, and the denial violates the law, it is invalid. Now, I want to make it clear that this is a very unusual situation. It is extremely rare that you find a situation where a CIS adjustment of status denial is clearly and unequivocally illegal, but this is one of those situations.
Because a denial of this type is illegal, the revocation of the applicant's employment authorization is also improper. If an applicant, in this highly unusual and extremely limited situation, works without authorization, then in my opinion that falls into the "beyond his control" exception and no penalty can be imposed.
desi, thank you for sharing above. Can some one clarify what RG means by "beyond his control exception"???
is this a standard CIS term? Have anyone heard this term before? If it is a common term used while appeals or MTRs, I would say, RG is correct. However I haven't come across this before.
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showpost.php?p=25447&postcount=7
Re: EAD & wrongful denial of 485 due to I-140 revoked by employer after 180 days AC21
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let my try to clarify my answer, since I didn't do that good a job previously.
An EAD remains valid until it expires, unless it is explicitly revoked. Sometimes, but not always, when the CIS denies an I-485, they also revoke the EAD.
For argument's sake, let's assume that an employer has attempted to revoke an approved I-140 in a case where the applicant's I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. Let's further assume that the CIS denies the I-485 on this basis and also revokes the EAD.
In my opinion, since there is no legal authority for such a denial, and the denial violates the law, it is invalid. Now, I want to make it clear that this is a very unusual situation. It is extremely rare that you find a situation where a CIS adjustment of status denial is clearly and unequivocally illegal, but this is one of those situations.
Because a denial of this type is illegal, the revocation of the applicant's employment authorization is also improper. If an applicant, in this highly unusual and extremely limited situation, works without authorization, then in my opinion that falls into the "beyond his control" exception and no penalty can be imposed.
desi, thank you for sharing above. Can some one clarify what RG means by "beyond his control exception"???
is this a standard CIS term? Have anyone heard this term before? If it is a common term used while appeals or MTRs, I would say, RG is correct. However I haven't come across this before.
EndlessWait
07-23 03:41 PM
Lets hope they process by PD. and stop further nonsense.
2011 2009 Harley-Davidson Sportster
ashutrip
06-19 08:24 AM
NO , Atlanta handles all the traffic for East coast and South , whereas Chicao handles the traffic for the West and the Midwest .
Anybody on forum...whose labor was certified off late!!:confused:
Anybody on forum...whose labor was certified off late!!:confused:
more...
priti8888
07-23 03:12 PM
Guys, We just got the magic e-mail.!!
Card Production ordered
PD AUG 2004
RD DEC 2004
EB3 INDIA :) :) :)
thx everyone for your help and suppport!!
Card Production ordered
PD AUG 2004
RD DEC 2004
EB3 INDIA :) :) :)
thx everyone for your help and suppport!!
bestia
03-18 01:59 PM
--- if you really meant to ask---
Simple answer - More standard deduction with one more dependant as wife
IRS made it mandatory to use SSN because illegal immigrants use ITIN to file taxes. This affected the legal immigrants also where ITIN is used in case of dependants who dont have work visa. If you are not legally eligible to work, you dont get SSN.
The two options left for legal immigrants are -
File separate returns one for self with ssn and another for wife using ITIN and calim one stimulus rebate for 600$
but then you get single standard deduction and your AGI is more that affects your federal and state tax.
If you do the math, its better to file a joint return and forego the stimulus rebate.
There is a catch too, if wife later gets EAD and thus SSN, you can ammend your tax return and claim the stimuls rebate
Yes, I did mean to ask. As far as knew, claiming dependent and filing jointly are not the same thing. But I could be wrong, I'm not an expert here.
But there is another catch. You can file seperately, get stimulus package and then amend your tax return, claim your wife and get more refund.
Simple answer - More standard deduction with one more dependant as wife
IRS made it mandatory to use SSN because illegal immigrants use ITIN to file taxes. This affected the legal immigrants also where ITIN is used in case of dependants who dont have work visa. If you are not legally eligible to work, you dont get SSN.
The two options left for legal immigrants are -
File separate returns one for self with ssn and another for wife using ITIN and calim one stimulus rebate for 600$
but then you get single standard deduction and your AGI is more that affects your federal and state tax.
If you do the math, its better to file a joint return and forego the stimulus rebate.
There is a catch too, if wife later gets EAD and thus SSN, you can ammend your tax return and claim the stimuls rebate
Yes, I did mean to ask. As far as knew, claiming dependent and filing jointly are not the same thing. But I could be wrong, I'm not an expert here.
But there is another catch. You can file seperately, get stimulus package and then amend your tax return, claim your wife and get more refund.
more...
qplearn
12-18 04:09 PM
If we start the fasting and rallying the American people will view it as nothing but "Countries of the East" sending their millions to other countries to show their strength in numbers.
Another thing. There was a suggestion of starting "free coaching classes" for kids as a volunteer service. Excellent Idea IFFF and ONLY IFFF we are doing it With the actual intent of providing education to the under-priviledged. Otherwise, once immigrants' voices are heard, and relief comes through, guess what will happen? These coaching classes will stop dead in their tracks. This will attract NEGATIVE publicity sending a message that the so called "Volunteer Effort" was nothing but a PUBLICITY STUNT.
one way to demonstrate our worth is for our employers to come out and speak loudly. i am trying to get my employer to do exactly this. but we need new ideas.
BTW: sidenote: in all these years of reading about Gandhi, and I am a big fan of history, I have never heard of a mountain called "Gandhigiri." Exactly where is this mountain located? :)
Another thing. There was a suggestion of starting "free coaching classes" for kids as a volunteer service. Excellent Idea IFFF and ONLY IFFF we are doing it With the actual intent of providing education to the under-priviledged. Otherwise, once immigrants' voices are heard, and relief comes through, guess what will happen? These coaching classes will stop dead in their tracks. This will attract NEGATIVE publicity sending a message that the so called "Volunteer Effort" was nothing but a PUBLICITY STUNT.
one way to demonstrate our worth is for our employers to come out and speak loudly. i am trying to get my employer to do exactly this. but we need new ideas.
BTW: sidenote: in all these years of reading about Gandhi, and I am a big fan of history, I have never heard of a mountain called "Gandhigiri." Exactly where is this mountain located? :)
2010 Iron 883 Sportster
chanduv23
10-17 03:25 PM
Under the authority of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the CIS Ombudsman assists individuals and employers who experience specific problems during the USCIS benefits seeking process, largely to identify problems and to formulate recommendations to improve the USCIS service. Please see our website for more information about the CIS Ombudsman (www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman/).
Our office believes that first hand information from individuals like you is the best source for identifying systemic problems in the immigration benefits process. Accordingly, our office will consider the information you provided regarding AC21 as we develop recommendations to improve USCIS� practices and procedures.
This is good. I am sure it is going to encourage a lot of people to keep writing about the issue.
Thank you for taking the time to contact our office, and for giving us the opportunity to serve you.
Sincerely,
CIS Ombudsman
Hope the positive response will help boost confidence and more people will start writing letters
Our office believes that first hand information from individuals like you is the best source for identifying systemic problems in the immigration benefits process. Accordingly, our office will consider the information you provided regarding AC21 as we develop recommendations to improve USCIS� practices and procedures.
This is good. I am sure it is going to encourage a lot of people to keep writing about the issue.
Thank you for taking the time to contact our office, and for giving us the opportunity to serve you.
Sincerely,
CIS Ombudsman
Hope the positive response will help boost confidence and more people will start writing letters
more...
map_boiler
07-05 01:24 PM
I just sent emails to senators Bennett and Hatch in Utah.
hair Harley Sportster Iron
eb3retro
03-04 04:00 PM
see my post here..
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=321797&postcount=44
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=321797&postcount=44
more...
go_guy123
02-25 01:38 PM
It is easy and potentially justifiable to feel some frustration. As it relates to the green card, I am in a similar situation to most who visit and share their views on this board.
I view the Universe and everything that is contained therein to be perfect - there can be no imperfections. I find comfort in that thought and focus my attention on the following:
feeling grateful for all that I have; doing my work to the best of my ability; taking the risks I believe I should take; being resilient; enjoying my life more; being patient; caring more; comparing less
This is merely a statement of my beliefs - this works for me. It is not intended to offend anyone nor is it a solution to anyone's woes.
Good times, health, and happiness to all.
You are relatively at peace because your PD is 2005 and you are in EB2.
Moreover since you are already filed 485 and its more than 6 months you are secure.
For rest the situation is precarious
I view the Universe and everything that is contained therein to be perfect - there can be no imperfections. I find comfort in that thought and focus my attention on the following:
feeling grateful for all that I have; doing my work to the best of my ability; taking the risks I believe I should take; being resilient; enjoying my life more; being patient; caring more; comparing less
This is merely a statement of my beliefs - this works for me. It is not intended to offend anyone nor is it a solution to anyone's woes.
Good times, health, and happiness to all.
You are relatively at peace because your PD is 2005 and you are in EB2.
Moreover since you are already filed 485 and its more than 6 months you are secure.
For rest the situation is precarious
hot New Harley-Davidson Iron 883™
krithi
02-18 06:01 PM
haha nice
more...
house 2011 Sportster®. Iron 883™
dvb123
09-13 06:35 PM
Sec. 42. 53 Priority date of individual applicants.
(a) Preference applicant . The priority date of a preference visa applicant under INA 203 (a) or (b) shall be the filing date of the approved petition that accorded preference status.
(b) Former Western Hemisphere applicant with priority date prior to January 1, 1977 . Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, an alien who, prior to January 1, 1977, was subject to the numerical limitation specified in section 21(e) of the Act of October 3, 1965, and who was registered as a Western Hemisphere immigrant with a priority date prior to January 1, 1977, shall retain that priority date as a preference immigrant upon approval of a petition according status under INA 203 (a) or (b) .
(c) Derivative priority date for spouse or child of principal alien . A spouse or child of a principal alien acquired prior to the principal alien's admission shall be entitled to the priority date of the principal alien, whether or not named in the immigrant visa application of the principal alien. A child born of a marriage which existed at the time of a principal alien's admission to the United States is considered to have been acquired prior to the principal alien's admission. Sec. 42. 53 Priority date of individual applicants.
(a) Preference applicant . The priority date of a preference visa applicant under INA 203 (a) or (b) shall be the filing date of the approved petition that accorded preference status.
(b) Former Western Hemisphere applicant with priority date prior to January 1, 1977 . Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, an alien who, prior to January 1, 1977, was subject to the numerical limitation specified in section 21(e) of the Act of October 3, 1965, and who was registered as a Western Hemisphere immigrant with a priority date prior to January 1, 1977, shall retain that priority date as a preference immigrant upon approval of a petition according status under INA 203 (a) or (b) .
(c) Derivative priority date for spouse or child of principal alien . A spouse or child of a principal alien acquired prior to the principal alien's admission shall be entitled to the priority date of the principal alien, whether or not named in the immigrant visa application of the principal alien. A child born of a marriage which existed at the time of a principal alien's admission to the United States is considered to have been acquired prior to the principal alien's admission.
(a) Preference applicant . The priority date of a preference visa applicant under INA 203 (a) or (b) shall be the filing date of the approved petition that accorded preference status.
(b) Former Western Hemisphere applicant with priority date prior to January 1, 1977 . Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, an alien who, prior to January 1, 1977, was subject to the numerical limitation specified in section 21(e) of the Act of October 3, 1965, and who was registered as a Western Hemisphere immigrant with a priority date prior to January 1, 1977, shall retain that priority date as a preference immigrant upon approval of a petition according status under INA 203 (a) or (b) .
(c) Derivative priority date for spouse or child of principal alien . A spouse or child of a principal alien acquired prior to the principal alien's admission shall be entitled to the priority date of the principal alien, whether or not named in the immigrant visa application of the principal alien. A child born of a marriage which existed at the time of a principal alien's admission to the United States is considered to have been acquired prior to the principal alien's admission. Sec. 42. 53 Priority date of individual applicants.
(a) Preference applicant . The priority date of a preference visa applicant under INA 203 (a) or (b) shall be the filing date of the approved petition that accorded preference status.
(b) Former Western Hemisphere applicant with priority date prior to January 1, 1977 . Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, an alien who, prior to January 1, 1977, was subject to the numerical limitation specified in section 21(e) of the Act of October 3, 1965, and who was registered as a Western Hemisphere immigrant with a priority date prior to January 1, 1977, shall retain that priority date as a preference immigrant upon approval of a petition according status under INA 203 (a) or (b) .
(c) Derivative priority date for spouse or child of principal alien . A spouse or child of a principal alien acquired prior to the principal alien's admission shall be entitled to the priority date of the principal alien, whether or not named in the immigrant visa application of the principal alien. A child born of a marriage which existed at the time of a principal alien's admission to the United States is considered to have been acquired prior to the principal alien's admission.
tattoo 883 Iron.
snhn
05-02 02:42 PM
I read here that King said that everyon on EAD and AP is getting a free ride even thought here green card might get rejected. What does he mean by that. I tahught every process goes thorugha security check. such as I 140, H1b, AP and even EAD.
more...
pictures 2010 Harley Davidson Sportster
gccube
07-18 02:59 PM
Donot they limit to the apps with current PD. So if some one with PD 2001 Jan filed on July 15th 2007, he would not get his visa no until all the other guys filed with much later PDs got their GCs?
dresses My #39;09 Harley Iron 883
wa_Saiprasad
07-20 08:32 PM
I guess the person who created this thread didn't anything else to do on this world. I don't how did he/she come with number. What a waste of time.
more...
makeup Harley-Davidson Sportster 883
vayumahesh
07-20 08:42 AM
Contributed $100. Will do again. Thanks to IV for the job well done.
girlfriend Becks Harley-Davidson amp; Buell
ragz4u
03-08 02:02 PM
what`s happening....
Please be more specific when you ask a question
Please be more specific when you ask a question
hairstyles New Harley-Davidson Iron 883™
ags123
03-07 01:36 AM
http://www.shusterman.com/
news ticker mentions Eb3 ROW and Eb3 phillipines will Retrogress by 1 year to 2004. (He mentions a phone call from Hillary, not too sure whether to believe it)
Could this be futher indication that the spill over from Eb1 and Eb4 and Eb5 will go to Eb2 India and China?
only Monday will tell... This is one nerve wracking weekend.
news ticker mentions Eb3 ROW and Eb3 phillipines will Retrogress by 1 year to 2004. (He mentions a phone call from Hillary, not too sure whether to believe it)
Could this be futher indication that the spill over from Eb1 and Eb4 and Eb5 will go to Eb2 India and China?
only Monday will tell... This is one nerve wracking weekend.
gbof
02-23 12:58 PM
people,
i just returned from an infopass meeting... the guy i talked to said that they recently have a directive from the DHS/USCIS that they want to separate the legal stuff from the illegal stuff and hence they are planning to adjudicate a record number of EB apps in the next quarter or two... does anyone else concur? is this true or were my ears just ringing in that meeting?
--shark
A Lot goes on in the last 2-qtrs, especially in last qtr(july-sept). I won't be surprised if he is right. There are many loop-holes they may want to plug before CIR or any immigration reform takes shape.
i just returned from an infopass meeting... the guy i talked to said that they recently have a directive from the DHS/USCIS that they want to separate the legal stuff from the illegal stuff and hence they are planning to adjudicate a record number of EB apps in the next quarter or two... does anyone else concur? is this true or were my ears just ringing in that meeting?
--shark
A Lot goes on in the last 2-qtrs, especially in last qtr(july-sept). I won't be surprised if he is right. There are many loop-holes they may want to plug before CIR or any immigration reform takes shape.
h1techSlave
10-01 11:11 AM
It is so confusing that I do not know how to explain the whole thing.
Here is a small sample.
In 2002 all the EB visas were issued(174,968). However, there were 31,532 unused family preference visas, so the limit for 2003 was 171,532 (140,000 + 31,532).
Guess what, in 2003 they only approved 82,137 EB visas, so they ended up with 88,482 unused EB visas
Great find, Andy. Based on your explanation, I can say that our real problem is not the lack of visa numbers. There are enough visa numbers, but USCIS is not utilizing them.
This also tells me that an increase in visa numbers to 290,000 (or what ever number that the SKILL bill is asking for) would NOT change the situation a little bit. The end result only will be that the USCIS will end up with more number of unused visas.
Can the IV community do some thing to improve the whole situation?
I am seeing two specific bottlenecks.
1. Delay in USCIS to process applications. This is an area, that we can do something. And I am already seeing a huge improvement from USCIS in terms of fast processing.
2. Delay in FBI namecheck. Again this is an area we can do something. I don't know what, but there should be something that we can do. Many of my friends have been writing to Laura Bush explaining their FBI namecheck bottleneck and a few of them got positive results.
Here is a small sample.
In 2002 all the EB visas were issued(174,968). However, there were 31,532 unused family preference visas, so the limit for 2003 was 171,532 (140,000 + 31,532).
Guess what, in 2003 they only approved 82,137 EB visas, so they ended up with 88,482 unused EB visas
Great find, Andy. Based on your explanation, I can say that our real problem is not the lack of visa numbers. There are enough visa numbers, but USCIS is not utilizing them.
This also tells me that an increase in visa numbers to 290,000 (or what ever number that the SKILL bill is asking for) would NOT change the situation a little bit. The end result only will be that the USCIS will end up with more number of unused visas.
Can the IV community do some thing to improve the whole situation?
I am seeing two specific bottlenecks.
1. Delay in USCIS to process applications. This is an area, that we can do something. And I am already seeing a huge improvement from USCIS in terms of fast processing.
2. Delay in FBI namecheck. Again this is an area we can do something. I don't know what, but there should be something that we can do. Many of my friends have been writing to Laura Bush explaining their FBI namecheck bottleneck and a few of them got positive results.
No comments:
Post a Comment