rajuseattle
04-27 07:55 PM
According to USCIS's interpretation of the backlog the pending applicants from retrogressed countries do not count as the backlog because they can not process those petitions until VISA dates moves further.
I hope once they make this information available on their WEB site or to respond to IV's request to disclose the pending AoS applicants based on country of chargeability and category, we will know how many AoS pending and can judge how long it will take to receive our GCs.
I am glad atleast they r acknowledging the fact that their is backlog and they are serious about clearing the backlogs. I can imagine the July-Aug 2007 concurrent filers are now receiving their I-140 approvals. In this bad economy one need to have I-140 approval to use AC-21 provision in case of layoffs.
No hopes on CIR , that debate will be their for a while until economy starts improving, until then no reform or any releif for legal immigrants....people just talking baout US protectionism and bla bla bla...nobody cares few thousand indians and chinese applicant's petitions rotting in the USCIS service centres for years for no VISA numbers.
I hope once they make this information available on their WEB site or to respond to IV's request to disclose the pending AoS applicants based on country of chargeability and category, we will know how many AoS pending and can judge how long it will take to receive our GCs.
I am glad atleast they r acknowledging the fact that their is backlog and they are serious about clearing the backlogs. I can imagine the July-Aug 2007 concurrent filers are now receiving their I-140 approvals. In this bad economy one need to have I-140 approval to use AC-21 provision in case of layoffs.
No hopes on CIR , that debate will be their for a while until economy starts improving, until then no reform or any releif for legal immigrants....people just talking baout US protectionism and bla bla bla...nobody cares few thousand indians and chinese applicant's petitions rotting in the USCIS service centres for years for no VISA numbers.
wallpaper Lotus 11 Jaguar XK SS
legal_la
07-17 06:24 PM
PLEASE HELP PLEASE
I am going to India on 19th July as my mothe ris very sick... what should i need to do? i am coming back on 4th august
Nothing is more important than visiting her dont even worry about this, and regarding your filing you are still fine you will be able to file after you come back. Just keep all documents ready best you can before you leave and even after you come back you will have 13 days to send the application.
I am going to India on 19th July as my mothe ris very sick... what should i need to do? i am coming back on 4th august
Nothing is more important than visiting her dont even worry about this, and regarding your filing you are still fine you will be able to file after you come back. Just keep all documents ready best you can before you leave and even after you come back you will have 13 days to send the application.
gc_check
09-08 05:06 PM
Yes, A colleague case is similar to yours. Got his "Welcome" mail via USPS, Online status still show as pending, but only difference, his case is EB3, not EB2. I-485 filed during the July rush, both the primary applicant and the spouse got the welcome notice via USPS mail. LUD seems to be in August sometime. The online status is not really reliable. Still shows as case received and pending. PD is July '04. He is not sure, and his consulting his attorney, if any action required on his side. Not sure, this is a exception or more cases like this.
2011 Jaguar XK-SS
sangeethak31
07-15 12:16 PM
As I am going for a H1 Visa renewal, I am not having an attorney.
Could someone please provide me a template.
Thanks,
Sangeetha K
Could someone please provide me a template.
Thanks,
Sangeetha K
more...
Blog Feeds
01-27 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
bergotti
08-23 05:27 PM
Is this category seen as one or is it split into many countries and if so how do you find out about a particular country within ROW?
Thanks
Thanks
more...
fide_champ
06-25 02:28 PM
It looks like my lawyer has already mailed the application to USCIS. The priority dates becomes current only on July 1st.
What are my options here? Does anyone has faced such a situation?
What are my options here? Does anyone has faced such a situation?
2010 AutoArt 1:18 1956 Jaguar XK-SS
frostrated
10-26 01:41 PM
Is there is any way can we see the data.
is this what you are asking for?
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/3rd%20Level%20(Left%20Nav%20Children)/Green%20Card%20-%203rd%20Level/Pending%20Form%20I485%20Reports.pdf
is this what you are asking for?
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/3rd%20Level%20(Left%20Nav%20Children)/Green%20Card%20-%203rd%20Level/Pending%20Form%20I485%20Reports.pdf
more...
Iamthejuggler
03-03 10:16 AM
It says traditional and scanned, or vector, so i assume PS is fine as long it's vector art.
hair Jaguar XKSS Replica 1957
anai
07-19 08:03 AM
If you are sponsoring your spouse, you need to submit an affidavit of support. It is I-134. This forms needs for you to submit bank statements, tax returns etc. with it.
This is incorrect.
The easiest way to address such questions is to take a few minutes to read the instructions to the form I-485 (which is available on the USCIS website at http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485.pdf). An affidavit of support is needed in the EB context, only if the applicant's family owns 5% percent or more of the sponsoring employer.
Sending tax forms, W-2, bank statements, etc. is part of the overdocumentation approach. But note that these are not required.
This question has been asked and answered many times. So please (a) search the forums before opening new threads and (b) read the instructions to the form.
Also, if any of the answers on this thread were useful, consider contributing to IV.
This is incorrect.
The easiest way to address such questions is to take a few minutes to read the instructions to the form I-485 (which is available on the USCIS website at http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485.pdf). An affidavit of support is needed in the EB context, only if the applicant's family owns 5% percent or more of the sponsoring employer.
Sending tax forms, W-2, bank statements, etc. is part of the overdocumentation approach. But note that these are not required.
This question has been asked and answered many times. So please (a) search the forums before opening new threads and (b) read the instructions to the form.
Also, if any of the answers on this thread were useful, consider contributing to IV.
more...
heywhat
08-03 06:23 PM
This is kind of fraud. My previous employer was not ready to give me experience letter so one of my friend recommended same but I did not feel comfortable doing that ( not due to fear of USCIS REF ). Just recently I came to know from one of my friend that INS randomly checks with employers and verifies experience letters. So keep your fingure crossed.
To qualify for EB2, you need detail experience letter if you do not have masters. Also I do not think you need experience letter at LC stage, but usually lawyer asks all these upfornt because they can advertise it as per roles and responsibilities performed by you. You still have time to talk to your lawyer and take that letter back. In meantime talk to your ex-employer or manager to issue letter ...
Administrator, please delete this thread .. we do not want to give more scoring points to our opponent..
To qualify for EB2, you need detail experience letter if you do not have masters. Also I do not think you need experience letter at LC stage, but usually lawyer asks all these upfornt because they can advertise it as per roles and responsibilities performed by you. You still have time to talk to your lawyer and take that letter back. In meantime talk to your ex-employer or manager to issue letter ...
Administrator, please delete this thread .. we do not want to give more scoring points to our opponent..
hot Above: A 1957 Jaguar XKSS
huh
12-08 03:35 PM
Is the 15 months counted from the filing date or the audit reply date?
Mine was filed on Oct. 07' and still stuck in audit. It disgusts me just by thinking about this...
Thanks!
Mine was filed on Oct. 07' and still stuck in audit. It disgusts me just by thinking about this...
Thanks!
more...
house K759 Jaguar XKSS 1957,
BMS1
11-08 12:50 PM
It appears that this 655K includes family based I485 cases too who are in a different queue.
tattoo 1957 Jaguar XK 140 Coupe - 1
fromnaija
07-20 04:34 PM
You will need to file an immigrant petition (Form I-130) for your child and wait for its approval. Your child will have to wait overseas until his/her priority is current. Thereafter, there will be some form of consular processing and the child will obtain an immigrant visa. Thereafter you can bring your child to the USA. It is a long process......
Caveat: I am not an attorney. You may want to confirm this solution with your lawyer.
I and my spouse both have green card. We have a kid who was born in INDIA. He has not visited USA till now. The kid is about 2 years.
We are planning to bring the kid by end of this year to USA.
So what visa should we apply for him we are not sure :confused:
A friend told that he had a baby born to him in india and came to usa with in the 1st 6 month to USA and since both parents were having green card, at port of entry in USA, the kid also got greencard for 5 years this was couple of years back.
But in my case, the kid is 2 years AND also not sure what is the procedure now. Is it still true by default the kids automatically gets the green card at port of entry (Is there any age limit I hope may be till < 13 yrs) if parents posses valid green card. Please help me in this situation.
Thanks in advance, ;)
Caveat: I am not an attorney. You may want to confirm this solution with your lawyer.
I and my spouse both have green card. We have a kid who was born in INDIA. He has not visited USA till now. The kid is about 2 years.
We are planning to bring the kid by end of this year to USA.
So what visa should we apply for him we are not sure :confused:
A friend told that he had a baby born to him in india and came to usa with in the 1st 6 month to USA and since both parents were having green card, at port of entry in USA, the kid also got greencard for 5 years this was couple of years back.
But in my case, the kid is 2 years AND also not sure what is the procedure now. Is it still true by default the kids automatically gets the green card at port of entry (Is there any age limit I hope may be till < 13 yrs) if parents posses valid green card. Please help me in this situation.
Thanks in advance, ;)
more...
pictures xk print trade Xkss+jaguar
w000f
05-19 12:30 PM
Good information but I feel that it doesn't matter anymore. Even if your visa number is up, your application will probably still sit in a warehouse while the acting director or whomever, keeps using the FBI namecheck backlogs to blind everyone of their inefficiency. :( Frustrated to a point of numbness.
dresses 1958 XK SS Sports 2 seater
gccube
03-19 07:11 PM
gccube are you EB3 -I as well?
"
FBI Namecheck -- Cleared (02/01/2008)
FP -- Cleared "
How did you find out the status of your namecheck and FP?
I called up their customer service no and was able to reach an IO at TSC and asked about the FBI name check status. I did speak to an IO 3 to 4 times over a period of 6 months and initially it was pending but later on it got cleared. I did not ask for the exact date it was cleared but it was on feb1st 2008 that I found that it was cleared. But they did tell me the exact date on which the FBI name check was initiated. It was initiated on Aug 1st 2007 where are my 485 RD is June21st 2007.
"
FBI Namecheck -- Cleared (02/01/2008)
FP -- Cleared "
How did you find out the status of your namecheck and FP?
I called up their customer service no and was able to reach an IO at TSC and asked about the FBI name check status. I did speak to an IO 3 to 4 times over a period of 6 months and initially it was pending but later on it got cleared. I did not ask for the exact date it was cleared but it was on feb1st 2008 that I found that it was cleared. But they did tell me the exact date on which the FBI name check was initiated. It was initiated on Aug 1st 2007 where are my 485 RD is June21st 2007.
more...
makeup 1957 Jaguar XKSS
sledge_hammer
04-22 08:44 PM
Admins - Please ban 'Brittanicus'
girlfriend THE 1957 JAGUAR XK-SS
LookingForGC
05-10 10:10 AM
I have been using ICICI for many years as i do have ICICI NRI account. Having indian account and managing here is always fun :)
hairstyles 1957 Jaguar XK 140 Coupe - 1
vallabhu
09-16 02:59 PM
Done
mhathi
10-27 07:12 AM
Exact same letter for me as well!
Rajganesh
11-13 11:14 AM
I concurrently filed 140/485 on July 1st. My case was moved to Texas and the receipt date was changed to August 28th on my 140/485. When can I can invoke the AC21? Is it 180 days from July 1st or 180 days from August 28.
Any response will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Any response will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
No comments:
Post a Comment