ocpmachine
03-05 09:52 PM
My 485 had soft LUD on 2/27/09. Although, my husband's dependent application dint have one.
My PD is May'06 EB2 -I and got a soft lud on 2/27/09 for me/wifey case.
This makes me think that, USCIS is probably pulling all the cases systematically based on PD.
My PD is May'06 EB2 -I and got a soft lud on 2/27/09 for me/wifey case.
This makes me think that, USCIS is probably pulling all the cases systematically based on PD.
wallpaper bollywood-actress-without
komaragiri
08-07 12:20 PM
hi all,
USCIS has edited the reciept update of NEBRASKA EMPLOYMENT BASED I-485 TO 7/1/07.please go thru this link.This means it is still looking after the june end applications for reciepts.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes080307.pdf
vaishu
July 2nd filers can expect their receipts by Friday(8/10) or Monday(8/13). It will take 3 days for them to just process July 2nd receipts.
USCIS has edited the reciept update of NEBRASKA EMPLOYMENT BASED I-485 TO 7/1/07.please go thru this link.This means it is still looking after the june end applications for reciepts.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes080307.pdf
vaishu
July 2nd filers can expect their receipts by Friday(8/10) or Monday(8/13). It will take 3 days for them to just process July 2nd receipts.
Macaca
07-18 08:18 PM
IV has accomplished the current mission in a very american way, of lobbying, on behalf,of a grassroots movement, and based on fairness. Besides acheiving the goals, it also demonstrates that the legal skilled community is ready to integrate into the American society.....
A small contribution for the future goals ... $500 today and more to come....
Thank you IV for your time, effort and support through the emotional roller coaster.
Thank you very very much! :D :D
A small contribution for the future goals ... $500 today and more to come....
Thank you IV for your time, effort and support through the emotional roller coaster.
Thank you very very much! :D :D
2011 kat without makeup
john2255
07-21 07:42 AM
What you should do.
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
more...
rongha_2000
04-30 04:36 PM
What you say is absolutely correct, but I dont see any discussion to that effect happened today. USCIS folks painted a picture of how USCIS is increasing its efficiency and how last years surge is causing problems. There was no conclusion or even an attempt made to say "Yes, if these numbers are captured, the process will be faster." On the contrary to the question of removing the country cap the USCIS captain said "It has a resource implication.."
Hope are dying away faster than the beach sand that slips away from your hand.
Only positive thing that happened today and this is my 100th post and I graduated to senior member. :D
For all those who are upset with the House hearing, please take it easy. Please do not expect the hearing to discuss the details of each and every GC applicant's case. The objective of the hearing was to bring the folks involved in visa bulletins and GC processing, and make them all publically say and agree that Lofgren-Sensenbrenner bill will not flood the country with new people on the borders but at the same time since the federal agencies did not do their job properly, so it would make sense to recapture the visa numbers, and that's it.
I think that this objective was achieved pretty handsomely without much opposition. So everybody was on the same page, other than Ranking member King, whose job in such meetings is to oppose whatever the committee chair is proposing. Rep. King did not have much to say as Rep. Sensenbrenner has co-sponsored the bill. Noticeably, Rep. Gutierrez supported the bill, which means Hispanic Caucus may not oppose it either, hopefully. So it was all good.
Hope are dying away faster than the beach sand that slips away from your hand.
Only positive thing that happened today and this is my 100th post and I graduated to senior member. :D
For all those who are upset with the House hearing, please take it easy. Please do not expect the hearing to discuss the details of each and every GC applicant's case. The objective of the hearing was to bring the folks involved in visa bulletins and GC processing, and make them all publically say and agree that Lofgren-Sensenbrenner bill will not flood the country with new people on the borders but at the same time since the federal agencies did not do their job properly, so it would make sense to recapture the visa numbers, and that's it.
I think that this objective was achieved pretty handsomely without much opposition. So everybody was on the same page, other than Ranking member King, whose job in such meetings is to oppose whatever the committee chair is proposing. Rep. King did not have much to say as Rep. Sensenbrenner has co-sponsored the bill. Noticeably, Rep. Gutierrez supported the bill, which means Hispanic Caucus may not oppose it either, hopefully. So it was all good.
srikondoji
08-11 11:05 AM
Was away on business travel for last 3 days.
Coming to your friend and his call, the information i passed on is what i got from rep.
Looks like there are lot of applications received by USCIS on july 2.
Hopefully we get some direction by next weekend.
Hang in there. We are all on the same boat in still waters.:eek:
A freind of mine called. He did NOT hear such thing from NSC. He even refefrenced this discussion
Coming to your friend and his call, the information i passed on is what i got from rep.
Looks like there are lot of applications received by USCIS on july 2.
Hopefully we get some direction by next weekend.
Hang in there. We are all on the same boat in still waters.:eek:
A freind of mine called. He did NOT hear such thing from NSC. He even refefrenced this discussion
more...
santb1975
06-22 03:13 PM
We are closer to 20K now more than we were before
2010 Hindi Actress Without Makeup
DDLMODES
07-06 08:48 AM
there was a serious security lapse in issuing green cards, FBI Security check was bypassed, the USCIS might have given the visa to even terrorists.
Guys, don't put this spin on the story. Until proven otherwise YOU ARE one of those potential people that can be considered a threat.
Besides, we have no ideea if the security checks were bypassed.
Guys, don't put this spin on the story. Until proven otherwise YOU ARE one of those potential people that can be considered a threat.
Besides, we have no ideea if the security checks were bypassed.
more...
paskal
07-11 11:49 AM
I dont get it for EB3 India. First they said once we get over the APR 01 hump we should be move quicker. Well guess what we DID get over that hump. Why the heck arent the dates moving at all for us?
this is surprising. really the dates should move- at least some. i keep thinking with each bulletin that EB3 will surely move now but it just has not happened. at this moment of course they have simply made it U. i wonder though if the dates will move when the october quota comes in.
this is surprising. really the dates should move- at least some. i keep thinking with each bulletin that EB3 will surely move now but it just has not happened. at this moment of course they have simply made it U. i wonder though if the dates will move when the october quota comes in.
hair Bollywood Actress Without
karan2004m
01-05 08:45 PM
Yes, and you caught the last minute key just because you like to hear that. You just ignored what he said repeatedly for the last 30 mins.. I know Green Card has become very important for certain folks..
But do the people has gone so low like you who are ready to do or hear anything for GC.. Oh man i can just imagin what kind of extent people can goto.
I don't think there are contradictions. I have read his Businessweek articles. He is researching ways for America to remain competetive and believes that skilled immigrants who get permanent residence are the key.
Listen to the last minute of the video and you will see what his message is.
But do the people has gone so low like you who are ready to do or hear anything for GC.. Oh man i can just imagin what kind of extent people can goto.
I don't think there are contradictions. I have read his Businessweek articles. He is researching ways for America to remain competetive and believes that skilled immigrants who get permanent residence are the key.
Listen to the last minute of the video and you will see what his message is.
more...
anilnag
02-23 01:49 PM
We can predict EB2 movement but EB3 is kind of gone case for this year too. Without any CIR, we can just pray that EB2 for all countries become current or at least move until july fiasco date (Aug 2007) so that spillover starts trickling to EB3.
Since EB2 I/C after Aug 2007 PD haven't filed their I-485 yet so the visa numbers if any left out by clearing until Aug 2007 should go to EB3I (the most retrogressed country). I don't see it happening this year but in 2010 it's a possibility.
Since EB2 I/C after Aug 2007 PD haven't filed their I-485 yet so the visa numbers if any left out by clearing until Aug 2007 should go to EB3I (the most retrogressed country). I don't see it happening this year but in 2010 it's a possibility.
hot Esha Deol Without Makeup
onemaveric
07-24 04:23 PM
Hey,
I went to the VA DMV in Sterling yesterday and the person there refused to renew my DL based on my original H1B extension extension RECEIPT Notice, saying there is no 'Date' on this document. :mad: These ppl are too dumb. It says clearly on DMV's website - they will give you a 1 yr extension IF there is no date on that document. Need to take a lawyer and paralegal along next time... :confused:
BTW, how did you manage to do this??
I am travelling on the same boat too. I checked with one of the DMVs in VA and they were not ready to accept the H1 extn. receipt notice. I am planning to convert my application to processing.
Let us know if u have any updates for people like us.
Thanks.
I went to the VA DMV in Sterling yesterday and the person there refused to renew my DL based on my original H1B extension extension RECEIPT Notice, saying there is no 'Date' on this document. :mad: These ppl are too dumb. It says clearly on DMV's website - they will give you a 1 yr extension IF there is no date on that document. Need to take a lawyer and paralegal along next time... :confused:
BTW, how did you manage to do this??
I am travelling on the same boat too. I checked with one of the DMVs in VA and they were not ready to accept the H1 extn. receipt notice. I am planning to convert my application to processing.
Let us know if u have any updates for people like us.
Thanks.
more...
house actress without make up
wandmaker
03-12 11:39 AM
No, it does not even do that. it does not let FOIA donors logon too.
First, the whole concept of donor based organisation is so stupid.
I mean really stupid.
If the donor based thing is ON, the future of IV is not good.
Yeah, IV does good work by talking to people all around, from different stratas of lawmaking and what not.
but get real, look around guys, information is everywhere, not only here. and you are working for the greater good of the community, only donors are not going to be benefitting from this.
Instead of making donor based posts, have a FOIA kinda drive every now and then.
unbelievable, and to top that, even donors cant access the so called 'DONOR posts'.
talk about low life bureaucracy, welcome to IV.
This is how You release code to PROD? no user testing at all?
and the entire paid thing is the beginning of the end. not good.
why didnt we even have a poll on this? crazy crazy idea.
If you are talking about great good of the legal immigration community then you should try to contribute a bare minimum but NO ONE HERE IS FORCING YOU TO CONTRIBUTE, it is just that you will not have access that particular forum. It is America, You don't get free meals everyday.
No offense but IMHO, the real crazy crazy thing would be owning a red dog.
Please fill in your IV profile for the greater good of the community
First, the whole concept of donor based organisation is so stupid.
I mean really stupid.
If the donor based thing is ON, the future of IV is not good.
Yeah, IV does good work by talking to people all around, from different stratas of lawmaking and what not.
but get real, look around guys, information is everywhere, not only here. and you are working for the greater good of the community, only donors are not going to be benefitting from this.
Instead of making donor based posts, have a FOIA kinda drive every now and then.
unbelievable, and to top that, even donors cant access the so called 'DONOR posts'.
talk about low life bureaucracy, welcome to IV.
This is how You release code to PROD? no user testing at all?
and the entire paid thing is the beginning of the end. not good.
why didnt we even have a poll on this? crazy crazy idea.
If you are talking about great good of the legal immigration community then you should try to contribute a bare minimum but NO ONE HERE IS FORCING YOU TO CONTRIBUTE, it is just that you will not have access that particular forum. It is America, You don't get free meals everyday.
No offense but IMHO, the real crazy crazy thing would be owning a red dog.
Please fill in your IV profile for the greater good of the community
tattoo bollywood actress without
GCInThisLife
07-18 03:03 PM
You mean notice date? If your application is physically reached NSC on June 15th your receipt date should be around it. It makes sense for notice date getting delayed. However, your processing would be done based on RD only.
This would suck for older priority dates.
My priority date is March, 2002!! Application was delivered to Nebraska on June 15th but the Receipt date is in mid-July.
So all those filers with priority dates after me (did not come across any with PD older than mine) that got their receipt notices before me would jump ahead in line!! Who knows how many years more...
Hopefully they will change their procedure after this fiasco to go by Priority Dates first and then the receipt dates.
...
This would suck for older priority dates.
My priority date is March, 2002!! Application was delivered to Nebraska on June 15th but the Receipt date is in mid-July.
So all those filers with priority dates after me (did not come across any with PD older than mine) that got their receipt notices before me would jump ahead in line!! Who knows how many years more...
Hopefully they will change their procedure after this fiasco to go by Priority Dates first and then the receipt dates.
...
more...
pictures telugu-actress-without-make-up
gcpath
01-03 10:59 AM
Filed AP on Aug-8-2007. Today received email from CRIS saying that Documents have been mailed. Hope you all will get soon.
dresses hot Deepika Without Makeup
.jpg "Hollywood actress without")
manderson
09-18 09:58 PM
thanks for answering.
i am not married. i have explored the possibility of doing this with friend(s) but decided that would like to do this independently. so i guess i have to figure out this owner/employee dual role problem.
any experience on this?
Easy way out... if you are married then your spouse could be the president (owner) and you could be a SW dev or whast so ever it states in 140/ labor.
you need a bank account for your company, you could run your payroll by buying quicken business and issue check for you as employee... Mind your business is separate from you employment... that you cannot take all the earning as salary, some as salary, some as profits is possible
i am not married. i have explored the possibility of doing this with friend(s) but decided that would like to do this independently. so i guess i have to figure out this owner/employee dual role problem.
any experience on this?
Easy way out... if you are married then your spouse could be the president (owner) and you could be a SW dev or whast so ever it states in 140/ labor.
you need a bank account for your company, you could run your payroll by buying quicken business and issue check for you as employee... Mind your business is separate from you employment... that you cannot take all the earning as salary, some as salary, some as profits is possible
more...
makeup Re: Bollywood Actress Without
uma001
02-24 01:07 PM
Dont assume that people who gone back to India and working a manager are living happily without any issues.
One of my friends whome I used to work in 2005 was promoted to manager in 2007. Now he is in a dilemma whether to continue to go up the ladder or come back doing technical stuff. Salary wise he is not getting that much and he doesnt know how the company will do infuture. It all depends on US economy. If you are looking for 18L above salary, then it is very very tough to get a job in india.
One of my friends whome I used to work in 2005 was promoted to manager in 2007. Now he is in a dilemma whether to continue to go up the ladder or come back doing technical stuff. Salary wise he is not getting that much and he doesnt know how the company will do infuture. It all depends on US economy. If you are looking for 18L above salary, then it is very very tough to get a job in india.
girlfriend caught without makeup
desi485
11-14 06:09 PM
One of IV members 'lazycis' (he is a knowledgable & senior member) also mentioned this, which exactly matches with what RG said:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=301999&postcount=16
so I am sure there are some provisionsI hope 'lazycis' will provide some more info if he sees this post.
Edit: Chandu - please click this link to read on RG's forums. (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6461)
Chandu, also see this link about cancellation of employment authorisation.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=a3791be48df2a5191102c84123773141&rgn=div8&view=text&node=8:1.0.1.2.54.2.1.3&idno=8
� 274a.14 Termination of employment authorization.
(a) Automatic termination of employment authorization. (1) Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter shall automatically terminate upon the occurrence of one of the following events:
(i) The expiration date specified by the Service on the employment authorization document is reached;
(ii) Exclusion or deportation proceedings are instituted (however, this shall not preclude the authorization of employment pursuant to �274a.12(c) of this part where appropriate); or
(iii) The alien is granted voluntary departure.
(2) Termination of employment authorization pursuant to this paragraph does not require the service of a notice of intent to revoke; employment authorization terminates upon the occurrence of any event enumerated in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
However, automatic revocation under this section does not preclude reapplication for employment authorization under �274.12(c) of this part.
(b) Revocation of employment authorization —(1) Basis for revocation of employment authorization. Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter may be revoked by the district director:
(i) Prior to the expiration date, when it appears that any condition upon which it was granted has not been met or no longer exists, or for good cause shown; or
(ii) Upon a showing that the information contained in the application is not true and correct.
(2) Notice of intent to revoke employment authorization. When a district director determines that employment authorization should be revoked prior to the expiration date specified by the Service, he or she shall serve written notice of intent to revoke the employment authorization. The notice will cite the reasons indicating that revocation is warranted. The alien will be granted a period of fifteen days from the date of service of the notice within which to submit countervailing evidence. The decision by the district director shall be final and no appeal shall lie from the decision to revoke the authorization.
(c) Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987. (1) Temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987, pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(c) (�109.1(b) contained in the 8 CFR edition revised as of January 1, 1987), shall automatically terminate on the date specified by the Service on the document issued to the alien, or on December 31, 1996, whichever is earlier. Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization does not preclude a subsequent application for temporary employment authorization.
(2) A document issued by the Service prior to June 1, 1987, that authorized temporary employment authorization for any period beyond December 31, 1996, is null and void pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of this section. The alien shall be issued a new employment authorization document upon application to the Service if the alien is eligible for temporary employment authorization pursuant to 274A.12(c).
(3) No notice of intent to revoke is necessary for the automatic termination of temporary employment authorization pursuant to this part.
[52 FR 16221, May 1, 1987, as amended at 53 FR 8614, Mar. 16, 1988; 53 FR 20087, June 1, 1988; 61 FR 46537, Sept. 4, 1996]
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=301999&postcount=16
so I am sure there are some provisionsI hope 'lazycis' will provide some more info if he sees this post.
Edit: Chandu - please click this link to read on RG's forums. (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6461)
Chandu, also see this link about cancellation of employment authorisation.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=a3791be48df2a5191102c84123773141&rgn=div8&view=text&node=8:1.0.1.2.54.2.1.3&idno=8
� 274a.14 Termination of employment authorization.
(a) Automatic termination of employment authorization. (1) Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter shall automatically terminate upon the occurrence of one of the following events:
(i) The expiration date specified by the Service on the employment authorization document is reached;
(ii) Exclusion or deportation proceedings are instituted (however, this shall not preclude the authorization of employment pursuant to �274a.12(c) of this part where appropriate); or
(iii) The alien is granted voluntary departure.
(2) Termination of employment authorization pursuant to this paragraph does not require the service of a notice of intent to revoke; employment authorization terminates upon the occurrence of any event enumerated in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
However, automatic revocation under this section does not preclude reapplication for employment authorization under �274.12(c) of this part.
(b) Revocation of employment authorization —(1) Basis for revocation of employment authorization. Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter may be revoked by the district director:
(i) Prior to the expiration date, when it appears that any condition upon which it was granted has not been met or no longer exists, or for good cause shown; or
(ii) Upon a showing that the information contained in the application is not true and correct.
(2) Notice of intent to revoke employment authorization. When a district director determines that employment authorization should be revoked prior to the expiration date specified by the Service, he or she shall serve written notice of intent to revoke the employment authorization. The notice will cite the reasons indicating that revocation is warranted. The alien will be granted a period of fifteen days from the date of service of the notice within which to submit countervailing evidence. The decision by the district director shall be final and no appeal shall lie from the decision to revoke the authorization.
(c) Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987. (1) Temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987, pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(c) (�109.1(b) contained in the 8 CFR edition revised as of January 1, 1987), shall automatically terminate on the date specified by the Service on the document issued to the alien, or on December 31, 1996, whichever is earlier. Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization does not preclude a subsequent application for temporary employment authorization.
(2) A document issued by the Service prior to June 1, 1987, that authorized temporary employment authorization for any period beyond December 31, 1996, is null and void pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of this section. The alien shall be issued a new employment authorization document upon application to the Service if the alien is eligible for temporary employment authorization pursuant to 274A.12(c).
(3) No notice of intent to revoke is necessary for the automatic termination of temporary employment authorization pursuant to this part.
[52 FR 16221, May 1, 1987, as amended at 53 FR 8614, Mar. 16, 1988; 53 FR 20087, June 1, 1988; 61 FR 46537, Sept. 4, 1996]
hairstyles from these without makeup?
desi485
11-25 07:21 PM
Sir,
Thank you for your response. Is it normal to see an LUD on the 140 (approved) as well, when the G-28N is sent in?
Thanks,
Sharing what I read on IV - some members reported their 140 status reverted to 'pending' along with a recent LUD when their ex-employer revoked already approved 140. In your case, status is not changed. Keep an eye on status. Hopefully, CIS will not do another wrongful denial, crossing my fingers. Best Luck bro!
Thank you for your response. Is it normal to see an LUD on the 140 (approved) as well, when the G-28N is sent in?
Thanks,
Sharing what I read on IV - some members reported their 140 status reverted to 'pending' along with a recent LUD when their ex-employer revoked already approved 140. In your case, status is not changed. Keep an eye on status. Hopefully, CIS will not do another wrongful denial, crossing my fingers. Best Luck bro!
kate123
08-23 08:21 AM
Does it mean the eligibility criteria/job requirement for EB2 is changed from Bachelors + 5 years of experience to Bachelors + 10 years of experience?
This line is not good:
(ii) Evidence in the form of letter(s) from current or former employer(s) showing that the alien has at least ten years of full-time experience in the occupation for which he or she is being sought;
This line is not good:
(ii) Evidence in the form of letter(s) from current or former employer(s) showing that the alien has at least ten years of full-time experience in the occupation for which he or she is being sought;
desi3933
07-06 05:52 PM
See what I was saying. They are not supposed to grant CP appointments and approvals in July per the regulations. They have decided to bend the rules to approve the currently pending 485s and CPs. They came up with this lame excuse that since the visas were already shipped out to the consular posts ................yada yada. Point is as I said they can't do 18K CP applicatrions in a day at the consulates the way they seem to have done for the 485s. Even this I am not sure.
I doubt whether they have sent out all 60K 485 approvals either, they probably will in the course of the next month or thereabouts.
I'll say it again, they want 485s out but they don't want them in for whatever reason. It is getting clearer.
Incorrect.
The visa number is requested and alloted at the time of scheduling interview for immigrant visa for CP. If the interview results in declining the visa, then visa number is sent back to DoS. This is standard practice.
Typically for all July interviews, visa number is already allocated (in May/June). So these applicants can be still issued immigrant visa (aka green card) if they clear the interview.
_____________________
Not a legal advice.
I doubt whether they have sent out all 60K 485 approvals either, they probably will in the course of the next month or thereabouts.
I'll say it again, they want 485s out but they don't want them in for whatever reason. It is getting clearer.
Incorrect.
The visa number is requested and alloted at the time of scheduling interview for immigrant visa for CP. If the interview results in declining the visa, then visa number is sent back to DoS. This is standard practice.
Typically for all July interviews, visa number is already allocated (in May/June). So these applicants can be still issued immigrant visa (aka green card) if they clear the interview.
_____________________
Not a legal advice.
No comments:
Post a Comment