nethawk119
10-10 02:11 AM
TSC sent back my appplication asking for revised fees last month. I am still waiting for the receipt. My lawyer sent back the application requesting them to accept the application since it was filed on July 2nd and is under the old fees.
wallpaper Eva Longoria Butt Page.
hopelessGC
05-04 11:40 AM
i have first hand experience. don't believe what USPS guys tell you. All CIS mail says 'Address Service'. I guess that means only deliver to that address otherwise return to sender.
i too talked to USPS guys, believed what they said and did mail forwarding and AP was returned back to CIS. learned a costly lesson.
AFAIK, people got RFE's when they moved very far, like coast-to-coast, but none for people moved not so far.
my experience with AR-11 was good. but make sure to complete the second step for pending applications.
What is the second step you are referring to? I thought only an online AR-11 is good enough.
I will be changing my address next month (same zip code and state).
i too talked to USPS guys, believed what they said and did mail forwarding and AP was returned back to CIS. learned a costly lesson.
AFAIK, people got RFE's when they moved very far, like coast-to-coast, but none for people moved not so far.
my experience with AR-11 was good. but make sure to complete the second step for pending applications.
What is the second step you are referring to? I thought only an online AR-11 is good enough.
I will be changing my address next month (same zip code and state).
GooblyWoobly
08-08 04:23 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/FAQ3.pdf
Q33: When filing an EB I-485 using the old fee, what version of the I-485 form do we use?
A33: The current I-485 form version dated “7/30/07 Y” should be used. The form can be found at www.uscis.gov
Q34: To ensure that the correct fee is submitted, may an applicant submit both a check for the old fee and a second check for the new fee?
A34: USCIS requires that all applications and petitions be submitted with the required filing fee or a waiver, if applicable. USCIS urges the public to exercise caution in submitting additional checks in incorrect amounts: extraneous checks may slow down the intake process and may result in an erroneous rejection of an application (as in the case where the check in the correct amount is missed) or in the inadvertent cashing of such checks, since filing fees are normally non-refundable. For additional information, the public is referred to the fee requirements announced in the Federal Register on August 1, 2007 (Temporary Adjustment of the Immigration and Naturalization Benefit Application and Petition Fee Schedule for Certain Adjustment of Status, FR at 41888). This regulation amends the new Fee Rule, and requires that aliens who file an employment-based Form I–485 and any related Forms I–765 and I–131, pursuant to Visa Bulletin No. 107, through August 17, 2007, must include the filing fees in effect prior to July 30, 2007. The new fee schedule becomes effective on July 30, 2007, for all other immigration and naturalization applications and petitions and on August 18, 2007, for Forms I–485 and all subsequent or ‘‘renewal’’ applications for advance parole and employment authorization based on pending Forms I–485 filed pursuant to Visa Bulletin No. 107.
Q35: Will previous USCIS policy still apply in those instances where the original approved labor certification cannot be included in support of an I-140 petition, such as when the original has been lost or previously filed with USCIS, or when a duplicate approval must be requested?
A35: Yes. While an original labor certification must be submitted in support of certain I-140 petitions, USCIS will continue to accept duplicates of previously filed Labor certificates and, as in the instances stated above, in cases where an original labor certificate has been properly filed with USCIS.
1 USCIS may issue future “FAQs” on this topic for the benefit of the public, should additional questions arise. Such FAQs will be dated and numbered for ease of reference. Department of Homeland Security
Q36: Will USCIS accept Schedule A concurrently filed I-140 petitions and adjustment of status applications that are filed on or after August 1, 2007?
A36: As previously stated, USCIS will accept properly filed Forms I-140 filed on behalf of aliens with a priority date on or after August 1, 2007; however, pursuant to August Visa Bulletin No. 108, USCIS will reject any concurrently filed adjustment of status applications filed by aliens with a priority date on or after August 1, 2007.
Q37: Will the new I-765 filing instructions apply to Forms I-765 filed based on employment-based adjustment of status applications filed pursuant to the July Visa Bulletin No. 107, if filed between July 30, 2007 – August 17, 2007?
A37: No. The fee of $180 for Forms I-765 and the fee of $170 for Form I-131 will remain in effect for those aliens eligible to file an employment-based adjustment of status application pursuant to July Visa Bulletin No. 107 until August 17, 2007.
Q38: Where should an employment-based adjustment of status application be filed if the underlying I-140 petition remains pending with USCIS?
A38: Forms I-485 may be filed at either the Nebraska Service Center or the Texas Service Center in accordance with the Direct Filing Update issued June 21, 2007, regardless of where the pending I-140 was filed. Applicants should submit a copy of the I-140 receipt notice or, if the applicant does not have a receipt notice, include a brightly colored sheet of paper on top of the filing with the following notice and information:
TO THE MAILROOM: The enclosed I-485 Adjustment Application(s) should be matched with a pending I-140 Immigrant Petition for which no Receipt Notice has been received. The Immigrant Petition [type, e.g., I-140] was delivered to [Service Center] on [provide date of filing and tracking number]; Petitioner's name; Beneficiary's name; Beneficiary's date of birth; Beneficiary's country of birth.
Q33: When filing an EB I-485 using the old fee, what version of the I-485 form do we use?
A33: The current I-485 form version dated “7/30/07 Y” should be used. The form can be found at www.uscis.gov
Q34: To ensure that the correct fee is submitted, may an applicant submit both a check for the old fee and a second check for the new fee?
A34: USCIS requires that all applications and petitions be submitted with the required filing fee or a waiver, if applicable. USCIS urges the public to exercise caution in submitting additional checks in incorrect amounts: extraneous checks may slow down the intake process and may result in an erroneous rejection of an application (as in the case where the check in the correct amount is missed) or in the inadvertent cashing of such checks, since filing fees are normally non-refundable. For additional information, the public is referred to the fee requirements announced in the Federal Register on August 1, 2007 (Temporary Adjustment of the Immigration and Naturalization Benefit Application and Petition Fee Schedule for Certain Adjustment of Status, FR at 41888). This regulation amends the new Fee Rule, and requires that aliens who file an employment-based Form I–485 and any related Forms I–765 and I–131, pursuant to Visa Bulletin No. 107, through August 17, 2007, must include the filing fees in effect prior to July 30, 2007. The new fee schedule becomes effective on July 30, 2007, for all other immigration and naturalization applications and petitions and on August 18, 2007, for Forms I–485 and all subsequent or ‘‘renewal’’ applications for advance parole and employment authorization based on pending Forms I–485 filed pursuant to Visa Bulletin No. 107.
Q35: Will previous USCIS policy still apply in those instances where the original approved labor certification cannot be included in support of an I-140 petition, such as when the original has been lost or previously filed with USCIS, or when a duplicate approval must be requested?
A35: Yes. While an original labor certification must be submitted in support of certain I-140 petitions, USCIS will continue to accept duplicates of previously filed Labor certificates and, as in the instances stated above, in cases where an original labor certificate has been properly filed with USCIS.
1 USCIS may issue future “FAQs” on this topic for the benefit of the public, should additional questions arise. Such FAQs will be dated and numbered for ease of reference. Department of Homeland Security
Q36: Will USCIS accept Schedule A concurrently filed I-140 petitions and adjustment of status applications that are filed on or after August 1, 2007?
A36: As previously stated, USCIS will accept properly filed Forms I-140 filed on behalf of aliens with a priority date on or after August 1, 2007; however, pursuant to August Visa Bulletin No. 108, USCIS will reject any concurrently filed adjustment of status applications filed by aliens with a priority date on or after August 1, 2007.
Q37: Will the new I-765 filing instructions apply to Forms I-765 filed based on employment-based adjustment of status applications filed pursuant to the July Visa Bulletin No. 107, if filed between July 30, 2007 – August 17, 2007?
A37: No. The fee of $180 for Forms I-765 and the fee of $170 for Form I-131 will remain in effect for those aliens eligible to file an employment-based adjustment of status application pursuant to July Visa Bulletin No. 107 until August 17, 2007.
Q38: Where should an employment-based adjustment of status application be filed if the underlying I-140 petition remains pending with USCIS?
A38: Forms I-485 may be filed at either the Nebraska Service Center or the Texas Service Center in accordance with the Direct Filing Update issued June 21, 2007, regardless of where the pending I-140 was filed. Applicants should submit a copy of the I-140 receipt notice or, if the applicant does not have a receipt notice, include a brightly colored sheet of paper on top of the filing with the following notice and information:
TO THE MAILROOM: The enclosed I-485 Adjustment Application(s) should be matched with a pending I-140 Immigrant Petition for which no Receipt Notice has been received. The Immigrant Petition [type, e.g., I-140] was delivered to [Service Center] on [provide date of filing and tracking number]; Petitioner's name; Beneficiary's name; Beneficiary's date of birth; Beneficiary's country of birth.
2011 wallpaper, OwenButt Bolton
newbee7
07-05 01:05 AM
From 07 report:
Case Problem Processing
1. How to Submit A Case Problem
The Ombudsman�s website, www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman, provides detailed information on how to submit a case problem:
First, please write a letter or use DHS Form 7001, which was accessible on the Ombudsman�s website as of June 6, 2007. If writing a letter, please provide the following information in the order below to assist in identifying your case.
� For the person with the case problem, please provide the person�s: (1) full name; (2) address; (3) date of birth; (4) country of birth; (5) application/petition receipt number; and (6) �A� number;
� The USCIS office at which the application/petition was filed;
� The filing date of the application/petition; and
� A description of the problem.
Finally, please mail your case problem, including your dated and signed letter and copies of documents relevant to your case inquiry, to either of the following addresses:
Via regular mail:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Case Problems
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Via courier service:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Case Problems
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
245 Murray Lane
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Case Problem Processing
1. How to Submit A Case Problem
The Ombudsman�s website, www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman, provides detailed information on how to submit a case problem:
First, please write a letter or use DHS Form 7001, which was accessible on the Ombudsman�s website as of June 6, 2007. If writing a letter, please provide the following information in the order below to assist in identifying your case.
� For the person with the case problem, please provide the person�s: (1) full name; (2) address; (3) date of birth; (4) country of birth; (5) application/petition receipt number; and (6) �A� number;
� The USCIS office at which the application/petition was filed;
� The filing date of the application/petition; and
� A description of the problem.
Finally, please mail your case problem, including your dated and signed letter and copies of documents relevant to your case inquiry, to either of the following addresses:
Via regular mail:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Case Problems
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Via courier service:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Case Problems
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
245 Murray Lane
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
more...
BEC_fog
04-23 10:55 AM
Yes, that means your I-140 is "filed" under EB2...But note that USCIS can always comeback & say it "can" or "can not" be approved under Eb2 based on the job description in Labor.
In rare scenarios, USCIS comes back with a "NO" to Eb2, especially if the JOB description in Labor does not suit an Eb2 requirement. But in 99% of the cases, its fine (because, attorneys normally don't file it under Eb2 if its not one).
All the best!!
I read this on immigration-law.com which says that USCIS lost a lawsuit about its ability to look into the employer's requirement for job.
04/17/2007: Jurisdictions for USCIS and DOL in the Labor Certification Employment-Based Immigration
* In the labor certification based immigration proceedings, there are two federal agencies involved: One is the Department of Labor and the other is Department of Homeland Security USCIS. The immigration statutes give the jurisdiction of the U.S. labor market test government function over to the U.S. Department of Labor and one of the key elements of the labor market test is the description and requirement of jobs and prevailing wage in the intended area of employment. Accordingly, when it comes to the issue of the employer's requirement for job, it has remained the jurisdiction of the USDOL. However, sometimes, the USCIS, in adjudicating I-140 immigrant petitions, tends to overstep into the issues which clearly fall under the jurisdiction of its sister agency, DOL.
* Well, this jurisdictional issue was brought to the U.S. Court of Appeals in the 7th Circuit in Hossier Cares, Inc. v. Chertoff , Case #06-3652 (7th Cir, April 11, 2007) [Click "Opinion" to Download], which ruled that when it comes to the employer's job requirement issues, it is clearly the jurisdiction of the DOL and the USCIS should have no business to mess up with the issue. Isn't it something?!? The court says to the USCIS that you mind your own business with the issue of whether alien beneficiary is qualified for the job and stay out of the business of the employer's needs. Hoorah!
In rare scenarios, USCIS comes back with a "NO" to Eb2, especially if the JOB description in Labor does not suit an Eb2 requirement. But in 99% of the cases, its fine (because, attorneys normally don't file it under Eb2 if its not one).
All the best!!
I read this on immigration-law.com which says that USCIS lost a lawsuit about its ability to look into the employer's requirement for job.
04/17/2007: Jurisdictions for USCIS and DOL in the Labor Certification Employment-Based Immigration
* In the labor certification based immigration proceedings, there are two federal agencies involved: One is the Department of Labor and the other is Department of Homeland Security USCIS. The immigration statutes give the jurisdiction of the U.S. labor market test government function over to the U.S. Department of Labor and one of the key elements of the labor market test is the description and requirement of jobs and prevailing wage in the intended area of employment. Accordingly, when it comes to the issue of the employer's requirement for job, it has remained the jurisdiction of the USDOL. However, sometimes, the USCIS, in adjudicating I-140 immigrant petitions, tends to overstep into the issues which clearly fall under the jurisdiction of its sister agency, DOL.
* Well, this jurisdictional issue was brought to the U.S. Court of Appeals in the 7th Circuit in Hossier Cares, Inc. v. Chertoff , Case #06-3652 (7th Cir, April 11, 2007) [Click "Opinion" to Download], which ruled that when it comes to the employer's job requirement issues, it is clearly the jurisdiction of the DOL and the USCIS should have no business to mess up with the issue. Isn't it something?!? The court says to the USCIS that you mind your own business with the issue of whether alien beneficiary is qualified for the job and stay out of the business of the employer's needs. Hoorah!
hsingh82
02-24 02:41 PM
Yes this is discussion forum but we have Job to get it done through our members. if members doesn't help us financially then we are loosing our edge. Nothing is free here (America), all actions are cost associated with it just calling senator or writing letter is just part of action.we need to convince our fellow member to contribute financially like donating money for good cause.Thanks
I agree with you that IV needs money for the good cause and it has to come from donations. All I am saying is if someone like me who is on H1B and can't fill the profile wants to reply to someone's query then IV should not be charging me for that because I have no dates in my profile. Money has to be generated but not at the cost of popularity of IV and defeating the purpose of IV as a common platform for all legal immigrants.
I agree with you that IV needs money for the good cause and it has to come from donations. All I am saying is if someone like me who is on H1B and can't fill the profile wants to reply to someone's query then IV should not be charging me for that because I have no dates in my profile. Money has to be generated but not at the cost of popularity of IV and defeating the purpose of IV as a common platform for all legal immigrants.
more...
Berkeleybee
04-10 01:49 PM
To Berkeleybee, i have recently noticed that you always ask the people directly or indirectly whether they know more than you. While It may be true that you guys know more than us, because u spend hours upon hours making it your business to know, but that does not mean you would want to curb free speech. We are grateful to each and every IV core member for their extrodinary efforts, but do not admonish us because somebody wishes to express their ideas. Who knows if people propose 100 theories there might be 1 out there that even you guys have not thought about.
Personally if i were a member of the core team, i would not even bother to respond back to the threads where the so called theory holds no water. There are enough people in this forum to speculate for you :-).
CCC,
Wonderful to hear from a contributing member and thanks for the warm words.
IV has no interest in curbing free speech. All we ask is that new members go through forum posts and resource docs to see what IV has said on a given subject, and also realize that we have done our homework. How about asking us if we have considered an issue rather than telling us what to do (without much research) -- which is the tone that some new member posts take.
As for not responding to theories -- well they just take on a life of their own if we don't respond. :) IV has no intention of letting its forums become a chaotic space with misinformation and assorted half-baked theories. :)
best,
Berkeleybee
Personally if i were a member of the core team, i would not even bother to respond back to the threads where the so called theory holds no water. There are enough people in this forum to speculate for you :-).
CCC,
Wonderful to hear from a contributing member and thanks for the warm words.
IV has no interest in curbing free speech. All we ask is that new members go through forum posts and resource docs to see what IV has said on a given subject, and also realize that we have done our homework. How about asking us if we have considered an issue rather than telling us what to do (without much research) -- which is the tone that some new member posts take.
As for not responding to theories -- well they just take on a life of their own if we don't respond. :) IV has no intention of letting its forums become a chaotic space with misinformation and assorted half-baked theories. :)
best,
Berkeleybee
2010 Free utt wallpaper for cell phone on Bongotones
Kodi
09-16 06:26 PM
Yesterday my employer received notice that my co-workers I-140 was denied and when she went home she received denial notice for her I-485 too. She filed EB2 concurrent.
more...
Munna Bhai
08-30 07:53 AM
copy of first and last paystubs of all employers?
:eek: :eek:
I can hardly find any paystub beyond 6 months, in my case. I hope and pray that I dont get an RFE like that. Do people really keep all the paystubs they ever received from employers? that is an outrage.
If this is not unfair that what else is?
WOW.......
I think the best way to handle this is, atleast contact couple of attorneys and sit down with them. Go over every single detail, and dont miss out on any papers. Some of the papers you listed, are standard attachements anyways. I wonder why your lawyer didnt submit those along with original form?
These type of issues will come only if at some stage(H1b or GC) USCIS has a red-flag associated with this case(or company).
:eek: :eek:
I can hardly find any paystub beyond 6 months, in my case. I hope and pray that I dont get an RFE like that. Do people really keep all the paystubs they ever received from employers? that is an outrage.
If this is not unfair that what else is?
WOW.......
I think the best way to handle this is, atleast contact couple of attorneys and sit down with them. Go over every single detail, and dont miss out on any papers. Some of the papers you listed, are standard attachements anyways. I wonder why your lawyer didnt submit those along with original form?
These type of issues will come only if at some stage(H1b or GC) USCIS has a red-flag associated with this case(or company).
hair Nice Ass Red Live Wallpaper
abq_gc
08-22 06:56 PM
This could be a second part of campaign for administative fixes. also, please include some strategy to fight for FIFO processing. This is also very important issue
I don't think the core is even bothered to take up on issues like this where USCIS operations is concerned..
why wait for all these bills to get passed to recapture visas and stuff like that when the ideal solution would be to make USCIS more efficient...
Let's say Hr5882 passes in 2009... and recaptures all the lost visas ..but what will happen in 2012 ?? I assume another recapture bill would have to be passed to recapture the recaptured visas... this is all a joke....
Why cant USCIS be more efficient and transparent from the beginning but I guess the core doesn't think its important enough right now.
I don't think the core is even bothered to take up on issues like this where USCIS operations is concerned..
why wait for all these bills to get passed to recapture visas and stuff like that when the ideal solution would be to make USCIS more efficient...
Let's say Hr5882 passes in 2009... and recaptures all the lost visas ..but what will happen in 2012 ?? I assume another recapture bill would have to be passed to recapture the recaptured visas... this is all a joke....
Why cant USCIS be more efficient and transparent from the beginning but I guess the core doesn't think its important enough right now.
more...
sanju_dba
09-14 02:17 PM
There are less than 1000 replies in the I-485 voting thread and no money is required...how do you plan to sell 20K tickets to only a few "active" members?
Thats the key thing here, a fund drive/ monthly contribution will attract the seasonal participants, but a raffle will attract ALL ( the one who have graduated from IV ).
this way a constant fund raising process can be established.
thats my thinking, please pardon my ignorance if any!
Thats the key thing here, a fund drive/ monthly contribution will attract the seasonal participants, but a raffle will attract ALL ( the one who have graduated from IV ).
this way a constant fund raising process can be established.
thats my thinking, please pardon my ignorance if any!
hot HansJorgButt Desktop Wallpaper
kedrex
01-13 06:04 AM
^
more...
house Vida Guerra wallpaper download
GCNirvana007
10-08 04:14 PM
I got my green card from Company A. During my labor process i renewed my H1B from Company B which expired last month.
Right now who is my employer Company A or B or none of the above?.
Right now who is my employer Company A or B or none of the above?.
tattoo Wallpaper at 1024x768
.jpg "The Hot Wallpaper Blog")
pappu
07-30 10:25 AM
Pappu - I agree with you in totality that it is an opportunity wasted when people focus on the individual issues. But, after listening in on a couple of calls, I find the whole call to be not much of use as they always defer the question with 'we have asked the TSC to find out' or 'that is for the USCIS to answer'.
I appreciate a channel of communication and a watchdog for USCIS activities but when communicating regarding problems with USCIS, I see ombudsman's office as a level of indirection. They seem to identify problems, pass on as a report that gets nowhere or gets partially addressed.
If USCIS took cues and had allowed a conference call with the USCIS leadership directly, or if one of us (could be me but I need some ideas as to how to approach) could do such a thing, we could see far more benefit in gathering more significant problems and getting them answered.
I would rather hear the news from the 'horse's mouth' than listening to someone who barely has an influence. I would gladly stand corrected if history has shown otherwise.
USCIS leaders too have meetings where organizations can take part. But one has to go to DC and take part in them during office hours. IV has met with their leadership a few times for our admin fixes.
Other avenue to meet USCIS is via their state offices. I had passed this information to state chapter leaders many months ago so that they start building relationship with the office in each state assigned the task of interfacing with community groups like IV in each state. I know MI chapter had reported that they established contact but do not know if they pursued it further and if other chapters too succeeded in making progress.
These calls with Ombudsman are important because they are attended by USCS and probably other officials from DHS. It is a time to talk about policy matters, recommendations, response of these recommendations from USCIS, and delays in their implementation. That can help bring positive changes for everyone rather than questions about individual cases. Just my opinion.
I appreciate a channel of communication and a watchdog for USCIS activities but when communicating regarding problems with USCIS, I see ombudsman's office as a level of indirection. They seem to identify problems, pass on as a report that gets nowhere or gets partially addressed.
If USCIS took cues and had allowed a conference call with the USCIS leadership directly, or if one of us (could be me but I need some ideas as to how to approach) could do such a thing, we could see far more benefit in gathering more significant problems and getting them answered.
I would rather hear the news from the 'horse's mouth' than listening to someone who barely has an influence. I would gladly stand corrected if history has shown otherwise.
USCIS leaders too have meetings where organizations can take part. But one has to go to DC and take part in them during office hours. IV has met with their leadership a few times for our admin fixes.
Other avenue to meet USCIS is via their state offices. I had passed this information to state chapter leaders many months ago so that they start building relationship with the office in each state assigned the task of interfacing with community groups like IV in each state. I know MI chapter had reported that they established contact but do not know if they pursued it further and if other chapters too succeeded in making progress.
These calls with Ombudsman are important because they are attended by USCS and probably other officials from DHS. It is a time to talk about policy matters, recommendations, response of these recommendations from USCIS, and delays in their implementation. That can help bring positive changes for everyone rather than questions about individual cases. Just my opinion.
more...
pictures Bubble Butt Live WallPaper
psn1975
11-05 08:06 PM
Hi
I my PD is July 2003 EB3 (India).
My I140 was approved in 2006 and had applied for 485, EAD, A/P in July 2007 like most of you. Yesterday LUD on my approved I140 and 485, EAD, A/P applications in USCIS changed after months. But now my approved I140 status has changed to Case received and pending.
What is even more surprising is that it also says On April XX, 2008, we received this I140 IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER... This is incorrect since i got the approval notice in Nov 2006.
I have NOT done any labor substitution or anything like that.
As usually our corporate lawyer and HR were useless and think this is just some system issue at USCIS. Did anyone else see this before? I was looking for other threads but couldn't find anyone else having similar issues.
Immigration gurus - any suggestions/comments? Is this normal?
Thanks!
I my PD is July 2003 EB3 (India).
My I140 was approved in 2006 and had applied for 485, EAD, A/P in July 2007 like most of you. Yesterday LUD on my approved I140 and 485, EAD, A/P applications in USCIS changed after months. But now my approved I140 status has changed to Case received and pending.
What is even more surprising is that it also says On April XX, 2008, we received this I140 IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER... This is incorrect since i got the approval notice in Nov 2006.
I have NOT done any labor substitution or anything like that.
As usually our corporate lawyer and HR were useless and think this is just some system issue at USCIS. Did anyone else see this before? I was looking for other threads but couldn't find anyone else having similar issues.
Immigration gurus - any suggestions/comments? Is this normal?
Thanks!
dresses Kari Sweets iPhone Wallpaper
vinabath
03-24 03:12 PM
Dear VB,
I have noticed that you are creating new threads just for the heck of it. If you really have an issue that warrants a separate thread and discussion, please go ahead and do it. Please do not abuse the forum. Use your discretion wisely and stop creating threads that depict frustration.
Take it easy and cheer up brother!!
I have noticed that you are creating new threads just for the heck of it. If you really have an issue that warrants a separate thread and discussion, please go ahead and do it. Please do not abuse the forum. Use your discretion wisely and stop creating threads that depict frustration.
Take it easy and cheer up brother!!
more...
makeup Buffalo Butt Licker
venetian
07-06 12:16 PM
Thanks to wandmaker & acecupid for the response.
girlfriend The Hot Wallpaper Blog
gjoe
04-30 09:52 PM
What is the agenda now?
hairstyles utt billboard jpg
mlkedave
03-30 11:58 AM
when is this thing going in completed battles? Just wondering...
BeCoolGuy
04-04 07:34 AM
Ok.. here's the link to save some of your time
http://www.visalaw.com/05may4/2may405.html
Read the section on ADJUSTMENT PORTABILITY .
Goodluck
http://www.visalaw.com/05may4/2may405.html
Read the section on ADJUSTMENT PORTABILITY .
Goodluck
gotgc?
09-16 10:44 PM
I know a friend who faced exact situation you described here. His lawyer also answered the same way your lawyer replied. He is doing fine with the approved I-140 and the original I-485 (based on first I-140(eventually denied)). He was told USCIS automatically "consolidates the cases". His attorney did not send any request for consolidation or something like that. This happened about an year back and he successfully made an overseas trip and returned on AP. This makes me feel you are OK and your lawyer is correct.
Thanks a lot for all your responses...atleast it gives me some confidence with what happened in your friends case...My lawyer told me to wait until the I-140 denial notice details before doing anything...
Meanwhile, I want to check with you guys to see are there any way to verify that my AOS will continue to be active based on my approved I-140?
Would Infopass or calling USCIS Customer service center help?
Please let me know if you know of any other options?
Thanks again...
Thanks a lot for all your responses...atleast it gives me some confidence with what happened in your friends case...My lawyer told me to wait until the I-140 denial notice details before doing anything...
Meanwhile, I want to check with you guys to see are there any way to verify that my AOS will continue to be active based on my approved I-140?
Would Infopass or calling USCIS Customer service center help?
Please let me know if you know of any other options?
Thanks again...
No comments:
Post a Comment