waitingnwaiting
05-20 01:32 PM
"We are beneficiaries of an EB3 petition"
Isn't that the biggest issue with several of us! :)
Beneficiary of EB3????? OP is making a cruel joke too aside from starting a game seeking smart guys for a date
Has anyone benefitted from filing in EB3?
Victims of EB3 petition is correct.
Isn't that the biggest issue with several of us! :)
Beneficiary of EB3????? OP is making a cruel joke too aside from starting a game seeking smart guys for a date
Has anyone benefitted from filing in EB3?
Victims of EB3 petition is correct.
wallpaper Disney Cars coloring page
kanshul
02-01 07:46 AM
Please update your profile.
Did you file I485 (AOS) application?
Did you file I485 (AOS) application?
laborchic
09-09 12:49 PM
These references are from the statement made on 24th June 2009. Nothing after that !!!!!!!!!!
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
2011 cute coloring pages for girls
cherupally
09-05 11:37 AM
Does anybody has format for Non-availability of Birth Certificate? If yes, can somebody post the format please..
more...
drirshad
05-06 03:52 PM
Use the letter to modify for our cause, May 14 is the start day for CIR discussion in Senate ......
http://capwiz.com/justiceforimmigrants/issues/alert/?alertid=9714021&queueid=[capwiz:queue_id]
U.S. SENATE TO CONSIDER IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION
CONTACT YOUR SENATORS TODAY
U.S. SENATE TO CONSIDER IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION
Background. Democratic and Republican Senators, along with the Bush Administration, are currently negotiating compromise immigration reform legislation which could be considered on the floor of the U.S. Senate beginning the week of May 14. Should these negotiations falter, the Democratic leadership could choose to bring the STRIVE Act, or a similar bill, to the floor for immediate consideration. It is important that you contact your Senators in the next few days and ask for their support for a just and humane immigration reform bill.
USCCB Position. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and other organizational members of the Justice for Immigrants (JFI) Campaign are working to ensure that any compromise immigration legislation includes the principles set forth by the U.S. bishops. Any legislation which would warrant USCCB support would include:
1. a legalization program for the undocumented which includes family unity and a realistic path to citizenship;
2. a new worker program with worker protections and a path to citizenship; and
3. the preservation of family reunification as a cornerstone of our immigration system and the elimination of family backlogs and waiting times.
To contact your Senators, call 202-224-3121. The sample letter can be accessed via the JFI website at www.justiceforimmigrants.org or can be faxed to the Senators� offices. Use link below to Email the Senators.
http://capwiz.com/justiceforimmigrants/issues/alert/?alertid=9714021&queueid=[capwiz:queue_id]
http://capwiz.com/justiceforimmigrants/issues/alert/?alertid=9714021&queueid=[capwiz:queue_id]
U.S. SENATE TO CONSIDER IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION
CONTACT YOUR SENATORS TODAY
U.S. SENATE TO CONSIDER IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION
Background. Democratic and Republican Senators, along with the Bush Administration, are currently negotiating compromise immigration reform legislation which could be considered on the floor of the U.S. Senate beginning the week of May 14. Should these negotiations falter, the Democratic leadership could choose to bring the STRIVE Act, or a similar bill, to the floor for immediate consideration. It is important that you contact your Senators in the next few days and ask for their support for a just and humane immigration reform bill.
USCCB Position. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and other organizational members of the Justice for Immigrants (JFI) Campaign are working to ensure that any compromise immigration legislation includes the principles set forth by the U.S. bishops. Any legislation which would warrant USCCB support would include:
1. a legalization program for the undocumented which includes family unity and a realistic path to citizenship;
2. a new worker program with worker protections and a path to citizenship; and
3. the preservation of family reunification as a cornerstone of our immigration system and the elimination of family backlogs and waiting times.
To contact your Senators, call 202-224-3121. The sample letter can be accessed via the JFI website at www.justiceforimmigrants.org or can be faxed to the Senators� offices. Use link below to Email the Senators.
http://capwiz.com/justiceforimmigrants/issues/alert/?alertid=9714021&queueid=[capwiz:queue_id]
morchu
07-31 04:28 PM
One thing is that lawyers are really busy till August 17th.
One good reason for this policy is the misuse or over-utilization of lawyer contact previlege. I believe there might be guys who contact lawyers for no reason, and just annoy them. If there are so many such guys in your company, may be all they are trying to avoid is this misuse.
On the other hand Lawyer is representing you and the employer at the same time. So you are entitled to contact lawyer directly. It is just that, if there had been misuse from other employees, there is a possibility that you might not have enough credability, and they may not return your call.
There is no harm in trying to send an email to you HR and ask them to get an answer from lawfirm for any valid query.
But, the problem is, they dont allow us to have a direct correspondence with lawyer. They are saying that its their company policy.
I'm really worried right now. Can I still call our lawyer? Sorry guys.
One good reason for this policy is the misuse or over-utilization of lawyer contact previlege. I believe there might be guys who contact lawyers for no reason, and just annoy them. If there are so many such guys in your company, may be all they are trying to avoid is this misuse.
On the other hand Lawyer is representing you and the employer at the same time. So you are entitled to contact lawyer directly. It is just that, if there had been misuse from other employees, there is a possibility that you might not have enough credability, and they may not return your call.
There is no harm in trying to send an email to you HR and ask them to get an answer from lawfirm for any valid query.
But, the problem is, they dont allow us to have a direct correspondence with lawyer. They are saying that its their company policy.
I'm really worried right now. Can I still call our lawyer? Sorry guys.
more...
sanjaymk
07-18 12:46 PM
Thanks to the CORE team and everyone here who chipped in and made us not feel alone in this fight.
Thanks,
Sanjay.
Thanks,
Sanjay.
2010 free, printable dog coloring
naveenk
07-22 08:34 PM
hi all,
I am EB3 with PD April 06/ I-140 Approved / Applied I-485 and My Employer is shifting the offcice from One state to other state. Does it have any affect on my 485 petition..?? Please respond back with some information
Regards,
Naveen
I am EB3 with PD April 06/ I-140 Approved / Applied I-485 and My Employer is shifting the offcice from One state to other state. Does it have any affect on my 485 petition..?? Please respond back with some information
Regards,
Naveen
more...
Hinglish
03-05 12:39 AM
Dont worry about it ...
appear for the FP ...
I had a major cut on my finger, they tried but could not take a good print and finally asked me to come in 15-20 days using walk in along with the FP notice.
The important thing is DO NOR miss the appointment ... show up there and let them tell you that they cannot take the FP
appear for the FP ...
I had a major cut on my finger, they tried but could not take a good print and finally asked me to come in 15-20 days using walk in along with the FP notice.
The important thing is DO NOR miss the appointment ... show up there and let them tell you that they cannot take the FP
hair disney princess coloring pages
needhelp!
10-02 01:53 PM
we miss you...
more...
bharad
08-11 11:07 AM
We don't have a poll for 2004 dates, true guy has dates before Jan 2004 and you have it starting from Jan 2005
hot Disney Coloring Pages For
sweet_jungle
11-04 04:30 PM
Hi Khris,
Do you also have 2 PDs in same EB2 category?
I have submitted ombudsman case sheet by mail.
My lawyer also sent request through AILA liason. She asked me to wait 6 weeks before enquiring again.
NSC responded to my lawyer's request. They do have the correct older PD in their system and will be adjudicating my case according to that.
Ombudsman response was an error.
Do you also have 2 PDs in same EB2 category?
I have submitted ombudsman case sheet by mail.
My lawyer also sent request through AILA liason. She asked me to wait 6 weeks before enquiring again.
NSC responded to my lawyer's request. They do have the correct older PD in their system and will be adjudicating my case according to that.
Ombudsman response was an error.
more...
house Disney Tinkerbell Clipart
gcformeornot
02-03 02:14 PM
AILA/CBP Liaison Practice Alert : H-1B Admissions at Newark, NJ Airport
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10020237 (posted Feb. 2, 2010)"
AILA CBP Liaison Committee Practice Alert
H-1B Admissions � Newark, New Jersey Airport
(2/2/2010)
The AILA U.S. Customs and Border Protection (�CBP�) Liaison Committee received reports from AILA members that CBP inspectors at the Newark, New Jersey airport port of entry were apparently assisting in an investigation involving certain H-1B nonimmigrants from India and certain H-1B petitioner companies. The inspectors� questions focused on who the individuals worked for, how their pay was computed, who paid their salary, their job duties, and what they were paid. In some cases, the individuals were subjected to expedited removal and visa cancellation.
After inquiring with CBP headquarters (�HQ�) about these incidents, the CBP Liaison Committee was advised by HQ that several of these cases involved companies under investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (�ICE�) and/or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (�USCIS�) for ongoing fraud. CBP HQ noted that they use as much advance information as possible to target specific individuals who warrant additional inspection. HQ also noted that recent enforcement cases reviewed ranged from simple documentary deficiency to visa/petition fraud. Upon an inadmissibility finding, the determination to either allow the applicant to withdraw his or her application for admission or to subject the applicant to expedited removal is based on �the totality of the circumstances and reviewed on a case by case basis.� In the Newark enforcement actions, CBP Newark worked closely with USCIS � Fraud Detection and National Security (�FDNS�) and the Department of Labor � Office of Investigations. CBP HQ stated that those questioned were offered the opportunity to contact their consulate and that CBP officers contacted the petitioner and/or current employer when clarification was needed. CBP HQ confirmed that they screen ALL employment-based visa holders to determine admissibility and ensure compliance with entry requirements.
In addition, on January 27, AILA members attending a CBP meeting in the Newark, New Jersey area were informed that a new policy has been instituted at Newark Airport. This policy involves conducting random checks for returning H-1B, L-1, and other employment-based visa holders. Based upon the initial check, if the person�s admissibility is questionable, then he or she will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview. In some cases, if CBP discovers discrepancies in previously filed petitions, then the applicant may be asked to withdraw his/her application for admission into the United States or be subject to expedited removal.
During that same local CBP meeting, attendees were advised that if CBP discovers that a returning Lawful Permanent Resident has a post-1998 conviction, the Lawful Permanent Resident may be detained. The Newark airport port of entry has adopted a mandatory detention policy for crimes that were committed after 1998. In the event that CBP cannot get a copy of the conviction record in twenty-four hours, the person may be released. The only exceptions are that CBP will release a Lawful Permanent Resident for humanitarian reasons; extenuating circumstances such as if the foreign national is traveling with children and there is no one to pick up the children; or when the person is a sole provider for United States Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident children. Please refer to the CBP Committee advisory as to the detention of returning Lawful Permanent Residents. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09100122).
Individuals with pending I-751 petitions returning to the United States via the Newark airport port of entry, who have a I-751 filing receipt documenting that an I-751 has been properly filed or an ADIT Legal Permanent Resident stamp, will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview to verify the validity of the I-751 Petition. It is unclear if CBP will undertake a substantive review of the I-751 Petition.
In all cases, attorneys should remind their clients to thoroughly prepare for their trip to the United States and their inspection upon application for admission by reviewing all pertinent documents to their petition and to consider carrying evidence to support the assertions made in the petition filed on their behalf by their employer. Similarly, employers must be prepared for telephone inquiries from CBP officers at ports of entry to confirm the assertions made in any nonimmigrant petition and supporting documentation. Finally, employers must be advised that the government may review information in any public venues such as websites and other media for consistency with petition content. Thus, keeping such public information accurate and current is essential.
Note the new fraud related language added to I-797 approval notices �
NOTICE: Although this application/petition has been approved, DHS reserves the right to verify the information submitted in this application, petition, and/or supporting documentation to ensure conformity with applicable laws, rules, regulations, and other authorities. Methods used for verifying information may include, but are not limited to, the review of public information and records, contact by correspondence, the Internet, or telephone, and site inspections of businesses and residences. Information obtained during the course of verification will be used to determine whether revocation, rescission, and/or removal proceedings are appropriate. Applicants, petitioners, and representatives of record will be provided an opportunity to address derogatory information before any formal proceeding is initiated.
Please do not forget to contact the CBP port director to follow up on case problems at a particular port. In addition, as needed, file complaints through the CBP complaint process referenced on InfoNet. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09090364).
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10020237 (posted Feb. 2, 2010)"
AILA CBP Liaison Committee Practice Alert
H-1B Admissions � Newark, New Jersey Airport
(2/2/2010)
The AILA U.S. Customs and Border Protection (�CBP�) Liaison Committee received reports from AILA members that CBP inspectors at the Newark, New Jersey airport port of entry were apparently assisting in an investigation involving certain H-1B nonimmigrants from India and certain H-1B petitioner companies. The inspectors� questions focused on who the individuals worked for, how their pay was computed, who paid their salary, their job duties, and what they were paid. In some cases, the individuals were subjected to expedited removal and visa cancellation.
After inquiring with CBP headquarters (�HQ�) about these incidents, the CBP Liaison Committee was advised by HQ that several of these cases involved companies under investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (�ICE�) and/or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (�USCIS�) for ongoing fraud. CBP HQ noted that they use as much advance information as possible to target specific individuals who warrant additional inspection. HQ also noted that recent enforcement cases reviewed ranged from simple documentary deficiency to visa/petition fraud. Upon an inadmissibility finding, the determination to either allow the applicant to withdraw his or her application for admission or to subject the applicant to expedited removal is based on �the totality of the circumstances and reviewed on a case by case basis.� In the Newark enforcement actions, CBP Newark worked closely with USCIS � Fraud Detection and National Security (�FDNS�) and the Department of Labor � Office of Investigations. CBP HQ stated that those questioned were offered the opportunity to contact their consulate and that CBP officers contacted the petitioner and/or current employer when clarification was needed. CBP HQ confirmed that they screen ALL employment-based visa holders to determine admissibility and ensure compliance with entry requirements.
In addition, on January 27, AILA members attending a CBP meeting in the Newark, New Jersey area were informed that a new policy has been instituted at Newark Airport. This policy involves conducting random checks for returning H-1B, L-1, and other employment-based visa holders. Based upon the initial check, if the person�s admissibility is questionable, then he or she will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview. In some cases, if CBP discovers discrepancies in previously filed petitions, then the applicant may be asked to withdraw his/her application for admission into the United States or be subject to expedited removal.
During that same local CBP meeting, attendees were advised that if CBP discovers that a returning Lawful Permanent Resident has a post-1998 conviction, the Lawful Permanent Resident may be detained. The Newark airport port of entry has adopted a mandatory detention policy for crimes that were committed after 1998. In the event that CBP cannot get a copy of the conviction record in twenty-four hours, the person may be released. The only exceptions are that CBP will release a Lawful Permanent Resident for humanitarian reasons; extenuating circumstances such as if the foreign national is traveling with children and there is no one to pick up the children; or when the person is a sole provider for United States Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident children. Please refer to the CBP Committee advisory as to the detention of returning Lawful Permanent Residents. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09100122).
Individuals with pending I-751 petitions returning to the United States via the Newark airport port of entry, who have a I-751 filing receipt documenting that an I-751 has been properly filed or an ADIT Legal Permanent Resident stamp, will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview to verify the validity of the I-751 Petition. It is unclear if CBP will undertake a substantive review of the I-751 Petition.
In all cases, attorneys should remind their clients to thoroughly prepare for their trip to the United States and their inspection upon application for admission by reviewing all pertinent documents to their petition and to consider carrying evidence to support the assertions made in the petition filed on their behalf by their employer. Similarly, employers must be prepared for telephone inquiries from CBP officers at ports of entry to confirm the assertions made in any nonimmigrant petition and supporting documentation. Finally, employers must be advised that the government may review information in any public venues such as websites and other media for consistency with petition content. Thus, keeping such public information accurate and current is essential.
Note the new fraud related language added to I-797 approval notices �
NOTICE: Although this application/petition has been approved, DHS reserves the right to verify the information submitted in this application, petition, and/or supporting documentation to ensure conformity with applicable laws, rules, regulations, and other authorities. Methods used for verifying information may include, but are not limited to, the review of public information and records, contact by correspondence, the Internet, or telephone, and site inspections of businesses and residences. Information obtained during the course of verification will be used to determine whether revocation, rescission, and/or removal proceedings are appropriate. Applicants, petitioners, and representatives of record will be provided an opportunity to address derogatory information before any formal proceeding is initiated.
Please do not forget to contact the CBP port director to follow up on case problems at a particular port. In addition, as needed, file complaints through the CBP complaint process referenced on InfoNet. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09090364).
tattoo Disney Snow White and The
eborbust
07-01 09:19 AM
To Administrator: Why are you deleting my post. I am just copy pasting a PURE TRUTH i.e. a TEXT OF LEGISLATION. I am not making up things. There are many other threads where people are just discussing unnecessary stuff. I am just saying that legal immigrants who have not yet applied for EB should contact congress to include us in any kind of amnesty - not exclude us. How does this view go against anybody in this forum?? Infact it will benefit everybody. A "blanket" amnesty will give everybdy a GC including those who have and those who havent applied for EB yet.
I am not saying the 2009 or 2010 CIR would definitely exclude legals in US from amnesty but we should contact congress and white house that it should not happen like the it was almost going to happen in 2006.
Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
S.2611
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (Placed on Calendar in Senate)
SEC. 601. ACCESS TO EARNED ADJUSTMENT AND MANDATORY DEPARTURE AND REENTRY.
(a) Short Title- This section may be cited as the `Immigrant Accountability Act of 2006'.
(b) Adjustment of Status-
(1) IN GENERAL- Chapter 5 of title II (8 U.S.C. 1255 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 245A the following:
`SEC. 245B. ACCESS TO EARNED ADJUSTMENT.
`(a) Adjustment of Status-
`(1) PRINCIPAL ALIENS- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including section 244(h) of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall adjust to the status of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, an alien who satisfies the following requirements:
`(A) APPLICATION- The alien shall file an application establishing eligibility for adjustment of status and pay the fine required under subsection (m) and any additional amounts owed under that subsection.
`(B) CONTINUOUS PHYSICAL PRESENCE-
`(i) IN GENERAL- The alien shall establish that the alien--
`(I) was physically present in the United States on or before the date that is 5 years before April 5, 2006;
`(II) was not legally present in the United States on April 5, 2006, under any classification set forth in section 101(a)(15); and
`(III) did not depart from the United States during the 5-year period ending on April 5, 2006, except for brief, casual, and innocent departures.
................
Under any such plan, an Illegal guy living in US for 2 or 3 years will get green card before a legal guy on F1 visa or working on H1B living in US for 2 or 3 years.
We should all contact congress to not to limit any kind of so called "Legalization or Earned path to Green Card" to illegals in US only. Legals should also be included. BUG THE WHITE HOUSE AND SENATORS FOR THIS OTHERWISE YOU'LL BE LEFT OUT. ACT NOW...
I am not saying the 2009 or 2010 CIR would definitely exclude legals in US from amnesty but we should contact congress and white house that it should not happen like the it was almost going to happen in 2006.
Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
S.2611
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (Placed on Calendar in Senate)
SEC. 601. ACCESS TO EARNED ADJUSTMENT AND MANDATORY DEPARTURE AND REENTRY.
(a) Short Title- This section may be cited as the `Immigrant Accountability Act of 2006'.
(b) Adjustment of Status-
(1) IN GENERAL- Chapter 5 of title II (8 U.S.C. 1255 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 245A the following:
`SEC. 245B. ACCESS TO EARNED ADJUSTMENT.
`(a) Adjustment of Status-
`(1) PRINCIPAL ALIENS- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including section 244(h) of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall adjust to the status of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, an alien who satisfies the following requirements:
`(A) APPLICATION- The alien shall file an application establishing eligibility for adjustment of status and pay the fine required under subsection (m) and any additional amounts owed under that subsection.
`(B) CONTINUOUS PHYSICAL PRESENCE-
`(i) IN GENERAL- The alien shall establish that the alien--
`(I) was physically present in the United States on or before the date that is 5 years before April 5, 2006;
`(II) was not legally present in the United States on April 5, 2006, under any classification set forth in section 101(a)(15); and
`(III) did not depart from the United States during the 5-year period ending on April 5, 2006, except for brief, casual, and innocent departures.
................
Under any such plan, an Illegal guy living in US for 2 or 3 years will get green card before a legal guy on F1 visa or working on H1B living in US for 2 or 3 years.
We should all contact congress to not to limit any kind of so called "Legalization or Earned path to Green Card" to illegals in US only. Legals should also be included. BUG THE WHITE HOUSE AND SENATORS FOR THIS OTHERWISE YOU'LL BE LEFT OUT. ACT NOW...
more...
pictures Docstoc.com : Disney Colouring
sgc2007
07-08 06:23 PM
I'm working for a big company in US since 2001. My Lc is filed in 2001 and it is still pending in BEC (phily).
Recently my company offered me LC substitution (PD of 2002). I have taken it and they filed 140. I need to show the previous experience of a skill set in 1999. I have a letter from that company for that. The problem is that company is out of business.
Questions
1)Will USCIS call that employer (employer is in a foreign country) for that experience?If so, the company is closed. What will happen? Will they reject my 140?
2)My original LC is approved (got approved yesterday)? My lawyer is telling that they will file 140 on this one also? How on earth can I habe 2 140's? When my time comes for 485, which 140 should I choose? I'm confused
Recently my company offered me LC substitution (PD of 2002). I have taken it and they filed 140. I need to show the previous experience of a skill set in 1999. I have a letter from that company for that. The problem is that company is out of business.
Questions
1)Will USCIS call that employer (employer is in a foreign country) for that experience?If so, the company is closed. What will happen? Will they reject my 140?
2)My original LC is approved (got approved yesterday)? My lawyer is telling that they will file 140 on this one also? How on earth can I habe 2 140's? When my time comes for 485, which 140 should I choose? I'm confused
dresses disney coloring pages toy
jskumar
09-05 10:33 AM
I received RFEs from my attorney and mine is on BC and my wife's is on Marriage Certificate + marriage photo and USCIS requested me to submit non avialability ceritifcate. I do have a BC with all the details but registered date is oct,2007 (That's when i applied for BC) instead of old date.
Is it a problem ? Do i have to submit anything more
Please advise
Thanks in advance
It needs to with in 1 year. Can we get a non-availability certificate stating there no BC registered with in 1 year of birth date?.
Is it a problem ? Do i have to submit anything more
Please advise
Thanks in advance
It needs to with in 1 year. Can we get a non-availability certificate stating there no BC registered with in 1 year of birth date?.
more...
makeup dresses Free Disney coloring
deecha
08-06 11:22 AM
Hello everyone,new to the forum
Anyway,filed i-485 in 1997 and was interview 1999 and stamp in passport adjustment status pending,b;cos of past immigration issues.Then i did recieve letter that my family petition was accepted then two weeks recieved another letter stated my application was denial due to my past issues so i had to leave the country and reapply. My lawyer said she had to file a motion,did charge alot of money.Did not hear anything till i went there to check my status and the officer told me i was in the process of deportation,so she gave me the date.So i went to my lawyer to check if she knew anything and she said your case is pending,so i ask her if she can call and check whereby she did and find out i was in the processes of deportation,now she told she need more money and if i do not pay that amount she can not go the court with me,so i did offer some amount and she refuse.
So i went to the immigration court and i did win the case,and now she find out that i did win the case so trying to be my attorney.
I do need to file for Ead because my old one was revorke,do i have to file for another i-485 or not?Another thing my lawyer had my file how do i track my old receipt number.Can someone please help me, i do have the original judgement from the immigration court
Get a new competent lawyer ! If you were in deportation proceedings and you won the case, then the IJ should have granted you the adjustment of status right then and there.
Anyway,filed i-485 in 1997 and was interview 1999 and stamp in passport adjustment status pending,b;cos of past immigration issues.Then i did recieve letter that my family petition was accepted then two weeks recieved another letter stated my application was denial due to my past issues so i had to leave the country and reapply. My lawyer said she had to file a motion,did charge alot of money.Did not hear anything till i went there to check my status and the officer told me i was in the process of deportation,so she gave me the date.So i went to my lawyer to check if she knew anything and she said your case is pending,so i ask her if she can call and check whereby she did and find out i was in the processes of deportation,now she told she need more money and if i do not pay that amount she can not go the court with me,so i did offer some amount and she refuse.
So i went to the immigration court and i did win the case,and now she find out that i did win the case so trying to be my attorney.
I do need to file for Ead because my old one was revorke,do i have to file for another i-485 or not?Another thing my lawyer had my file how do i track my old receipt number.Can someone please help me, i do have the original judgement from the immigration court
Get a new competent lawyer ! If you were in deportation proceedings and you won the case, then the IJ should have granted you the adjustment of status right then and there.
girlfriend Bag pack re-colouring car
frostrated
06-25 01:06 PM
Hi, I hope this is the correct forum. I entered the US on an Australian passport with a tourist visa issued in London in Nov 94. After 6 months my lawyer got me a business visa extension for 6 months.
Long story short I overstayed and lost both passport and I 94 and the lawyer who had the copies of the docs no longer has the records. I married a US citizen in 2006 and had a child and would like to adjust my status, however I cannot prove legal entry.
Is there anyway to find records of either my original visa, I-94 or extension so I can file the rest of the paperwork?
Thanks for your help in advance.
you can try to contact the australian consulate to replace your passport. they should be able to pull your information. but in any case, even though you entered legally, you overstayed for more than three years before marrying a citizen. therefore, from the time your visa expired, you are in illegal status, and i am not sure you can adjust your status by staying inside the US. I think your best option might be to return to your country of citizenship and have your spouse apply for a green card.
Long story short I overstayed and lost both passport and I 94 and the lawyer who had the copies of the docs no longer has the records. I married a US citizen in 2006 and had a child and would like to adjust my status, however I cannot prove legal entry.
Is there anyway to find records of either my original visa, I-94 or extension so I can file the rest of the paperwork?
Thanks for your help in advance.
you can try to contact the australian consulate to replace your passport. they should be able to pull your information. but in any case, even though you entered legally, you overstayed for more than three years before marrying a citizen. therefore, from the time your visa expired, you are in illegal status, and i am not sure you can adjust your status by staying inside the US. I think your best option might be to return to your country of citizenship and have your spouse apply for a green card.
hairstyles disney coloring pages for
gc28262
05-30 12:26 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965
Eventually this bill introduced that 7% per country cap
Here is the proof that country cap is racially motivated. I can't believe that Ted Kennedy was behind this.
During debate on the Senate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate) floor, Kennedy, speaking of the effects of the act, said, "First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same.... Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset.... Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia.... In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think.... The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs."[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965#cite_note-1) The act's supporters not only claimed the law would not change America's ethnic makeup, but that such a change was not desirable.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965#cite_note-.2770s_268-0)
Eventually this bill introduced that 7% per country cap
Here is the proof that country cap is racially motivated. I can't believe that Ted Kennedy was behind this.
During debate on the Senate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate) floor, Kennedy, speaking of the effects of the act, said, "First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same.... Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset.... Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia.... In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think.... The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs."[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965#cite_note-1) The act's supporters not only claimed the law would not change America's ethnic makeup, but that such a change was not desirable.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965#cite_note-.2770s_268-0)
nshantha
07-18 02:36 PM
Why you want to mad on him, What is there to become mad on him.
Sorry admin, I got mad at this guy.
Sorry admin, I got mad at this guy.
candylady11
01-26 04:03 PM
I asked about taking money out of a salaried employees pay to cover the cost of payroll over-ride from hourly employees. If Manager doesn�t have a contract, never had one, and nothing in writing to say you will be responsible for hourly employees if payroll goes over employer�s budget, can he take the money from the managers pay to cover this over-ride? Do you think I will be right if I took legal action against this sort of Payroll-Robbery?
