jsb
11-08 01:22 PM
Good suggestion for bringing this to Ombudsman. BUt anyway informing USCIS would be the wise step in a sense you will not invite unforseen problems may be associated with not informing.
Reason for not informing could be the vagueness and subjective element of what is same/similar job. If you are close to getting your GC, and you don't expect any RFE, you might want to avoid that potential issue. Of course, if there is long time interval between I-485 filing and the USCIS decision making time, USCIS might like to reconfirm if original job offer is still there. In that case it is better to inform USCIS about the job change, before they issue an RFE.
Anyway, it is better to get a clarification from Ombudsman
Reason for not informing could be the vagueness and subjective element of what is same/similar job. If you are close to getting your GC, and you don't expect any RFE, you might want to avoid that potential issue. Of course, if there is long time interval between I-485 filing and the USCIS decision making time, USCIS might like to reconfirm if original job offer is still there. In that case it is better to inform USCIS about the job change, before they issue an RFE.
Anyway, it is better to get a clarification from Ombudsman
wallpaper North of Kabul City
gcsomeday
07-20 10:46 AM
What are the tax implications for Aman or other recieving this. We dont want uncle sam to take a cut from something like this. Is there any CPA who can throw some light on this?
Maybe this money can be used to create an expense account which can reimburse Aman and others for their expenses. We got to convince the Core to let democracy in IV work one time to create this account.
Maybe this money can be used to create an expense account which can reimburse Aman and others for their expenses. We got to convince the Core to let democracy in IV work one time to create this account.
Winner
02-09 08:32 PM
Did you all see Donald Trumps answer to Piers Morgans question in Piers Morgan tonight program on CNN? that was not a yotal surprise, but after his talk about China and India, that was a little bit surprising.
2011 In this image of Kabul
SGP
11-18 01:56 PM
"There is no harm in trying. Leave no stone unturned."
This may sound optimistic and promising, but in essence sending random rhetoric using off message statements like "Erase Backlog Now" conflicts with our targeted messaging. To the observer on the Hill (i.e. in Congress) it all sounds more like a noise without a coherent message.
I'm sure you would agree that "no harm in trying" and "Leave no stone unturned" doesn't mean diluting our effort or sending incoherent message. That is why we need to have a single voice sending the same targeted message each time, otherwise we will just sound like awkward noise.
Can't agree less. We all have one goal. We are all one voice. In my personal opinion, I always try and stay optimistic.
This may sound optimistic and promising, but in essence sending random rhetoric using off message statements like "Erase Backlog Now" conflicts with our targeted messaging. To the observer on the Hill (i.e. in Congress) it all sounds more like a noise without a coherent message.
I'm sure you would agree that "no harm in trying" and "Leave no stone unturned" doesn't mean diluting our effort or sending incoherent message. That is why we need to have a single voice sending the same targeted message each time, otherwise we will just sound like awkward noise.
Can't agree less. We all have one goal. We are all one voice. In my personal opinion, I always try and stay optimistic.
more...
desi3933
07-10 02:25 PM
@desi3933:
On the other hand, I-140 is linked to Permanent Labor Certification (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/perm.cfm) (aka GC labor)
"Permanent Labor Certification" does not mean the job has to be "permanent" (you're again *assuming*, no?) It could also mean LC for "permanent" residency!
Looks like you missed this on that link:
The job opportunity must be for a full time, permanent position.
There must be a bona fide job opening available to U.S. workers.
Job requirements must adhere to what is customarily required for the occupation in the U.S. and may not be tailored to the foreign worker's qualifications. The employer must pay at least the prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of intended employment.
On the other hand, I-140 is linked to Permanent Labor Certification (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/perm.cfm) (aka GC labor)
"Permanent Labor Certification" does not mean the job has to be "permanent" (you're again *assuming*, no?) It could also mean LC for "permanent" residency!
Looks like you missed this on that link:
The job opportunity must be for a full time, permanent position.
There must be a bona fide job opening available to U.S. workers.
Job requirements must adhere to what is customarily required for the occupation in the U.S. and may not be tailored to the foreign worker's qualifications. The employer must pay at least the prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of intended employment.
insbaby
09-23 04:03 PM
* is expected to move very slightly forward
* are expected to move slowly
* is expected to move very slowly
* is expected to remain unchanged
* to move very slowly forward
I love english. You can say the same thing in 10 different ways without hurting others.
-- He could have done it with just two words as "Forget it" and closed the meeting.
* are expected to move slowly
* is expected to move very slowly
* is expected to remain unchanged
* to move very slowly forward
I love english. You can say the same thing in 10 different ways without hurting others.
-- He could have done it with just two words as "Forget it" and closed the meeting.
more...
TheOmbudsman
10-30 11:53 AM
Honorable Senior members:
Why my posts appear with a red dot ? Can I respectfully request the removal of such red dot ? Instead please assign me a green dot like all other members.
Thanks,
The Ombudsman
Why my posts appear with a red dot ? Can I respectfully request the removal of such red dot ? Instead please assign me a green dot like all other members.
Thanks,
The Ombudsman
2010 eenkabul has maps and many peoplekabul international airport kbl
sam2006
07-19 07:58 PM
Could you please let us know hwo to do it ?
I think Admin Can do it
Making it sticky the post always shows up in the top
I think Admin Can do it
Making it sticky the post always shows up in the top
more...
reddymjm
06-08 06:07 PM
My case was received by NSC on JUN 1st. They issued the recipt numbers on JUN 5th. I am still waiting on my wifes. They could clear on Monday.. Looks like NSC is also trying to speed up things. They are just one day slower than TSC in issuing recepts.
hair city afghanistan adam curtis time difference between oklahoma city kabul
simple1
05-02 03:12 PM
thanks IVcore for looking into the request.
I would like to know your response. Could you please post it in this thread ? possibly with references you received from the attorney ?
I think IV core has some concerns regarding the correctness of the legal advise that you received from your attorney. Let us wait for them to clarify.
I would like to know your response. Could you please post it in this thread ? possibly with references you received from the attorney ?
I think IV core has some concerns regarding the correctness of the legal advise that you received from your attorney. Let us wait for them to clarify.
more...
gc28262
02-10 10:23 AM
DCU bill payer needs phone number for IV.
Can someone post tel# for IV ?
Can someone post tel# for IV ?
hot dresses city, Kabul
vij
06-14 04:35 PM
My I-485 was mailed on June 1'st. Attorney haven't received receipts yet.
But my checks to USCIS got cashed yesterday. There are two numbers starting with SRC......but I dont know why there are two numbers instead of one.
Which service center approved your I-140 - Nebraska or Texas?
But my checks to USCIS got cashed yesterday. There are two numbers starting with SRC......but I dont know why there are two numbers instead of one.
Which service center approved your I-140 - Nebraska or Texas?
more...
house new york city map pdf. new
vkrishn
08-24 11:12 AM
Any approvals this week? Seems to be slow.. Wait continues!
tattoo Ofkabul city iswhy not add
petepatel
07-30 07:25 AM
Priority Date is Nov 2004
Havent had any LUDS since July 3, I hope your thinking is the way it goes :rolleyes:
Havent had any LUDS since July 3, I hope your thinking is the way it goes :rolleyes:
more...
pictures kabul city
gk_2000
08-09 01:13 PM
Hilarious.... Hilarious.....
1) EB2 with PD like 2007 and 2008 will certainly oppose. It is understandable. But why many EB3 folks themselves oppose it? Because they are with "looser mentality". EB3 folks, listen! No body cares about you. Then why do you care about other categories. Don't be a looser. Take care of your problem first.
2) The lawyer was suggesting us to convert to EB2. You bet. Dont you know why?
Most of the EB2 got their GC. The only loosers are EB3. With IV's reach it can easily help EB3. I told this many times before. But IV core is saying it will be very hard to even do a simplest releif measure. I simply do not understand. I hope and pray IV core will listen this time.
I suggest you drop out of EB2, and learn some English spellings before coming here and chiding people. Get lost!
1) EB2 with PD like 2007 and 2008 will certainly oppose. It is understandable. But why many EB3 folks themselves oppose it? Because they are with "looser mentality". EB3 folks, listen! No body cares about you. Then why do you care about other categories. Don't be a looser. Take care of your problem first.
2) The lawyer was suggesting us to convert to EB2. You bet. Dont you know why?
Most of the EB2 got their GC. The only loosers are EB3. With IV's reach it can easily help EB3. I told this many times before. But IV core is saying it will be very hard to even do a simplest releif measure. I simply do not understand. I hope and pray IV core will listen this time.
I suggest you drop out of EB2, and learn some English spellings before coming here and chiding people. Get lost!
dresses Camp and Kabul City Ruins.
ChampU2008
11-18 10:30 AM
Thank you for your letter regarding the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act of 2009 (S. 729). As always, I value your input on this and other issues, and strive to keep you updated on the important issues facing us today.
On March 26, 2009, the DREAM Act was introduced by Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL). This bill would authorize the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to cancel the removal of, and give conditional permanent resident status to, an alien who entered the U.S. prior to his or her 16th birthday and has lived in the U.S. for a period of 5 years. Such a resident must also meet other requirements, such as be judged to be of good moral character, not inadmissible or deportable under the Immigration and Nationality Act, be admitted to a higher education institution or have completed high school or the equivalent, never been under a final order of deportation, and be under 35 years of age at the time of this Act�s enactment.
Furthermore, the DREAM Act sets parameters for conditional permanent resident status, and the process by which one transitions from conditional to permanent residency status. Under S. 729, an undocumented alien would also be authorized to petition the Secretary for conditional permanent residency if that individual has satisfied all of the above requirements prior to the enactment of the Act. Currently, S. 729 is before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary where it awaits further consideration. While I am not a member of this committee, I will certainly monitor the progress of this bill.
As you may know, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced on September 14, 2010, that he would offer the DREAM Act as an amendment to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 Defense Authorization bill (S. 3454) as well as not allow a fair and open debate on the bill. I was disappointed that he chose to play politics with necessary support for our troops and national defense by trying to tack on the DREAM Act, which is unrelated to the daily operations of the Department of Defense. I remain committed to reforming our legal immigration system and streamlining the legal process; however, I have consistently opposed proposals that extend taxpayer benefits to those here illegally or give incentives for illegal immigration. On September 21, 2010, the Senate voted 56 to 43, where 60 affirmative votes were needed, not to move forward with debate on the Defense Authorization bill. I joined colleagues from both sides of the aisle to oppose this vote.
Again, thank you for sharing your views with me. As the legislative process moves forward, I will keep your thoughts in mind. If I can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact me or visit my website at www.scottbrown.senate.gov.
Sincerely,
Scott P. Brown
United States Senator
Huh? Not a word about our plea for Legal immigrants??
On March 26, 2009, the DREAM Act was introduced by Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL). This bill would authorize the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to cancel the removal of, and give conditional permanent resident status to, an alien who entered the U.S. prior to his or her 16th birthday and has lived in the U.S. for a period of 5 years. Such a resident must also meet other requirements, such as be judged to be of good moral character, not inadmissible or deportable under the Immigration and Nationality Act, be admitted to a higher education institution or have completed high school or the equivalent, never been under a final order of deportation, and be under 35 years of age at the time of this Act�s enactment.
Furthermore, the DREAM Act sets parameters for conditional permanent resident status, and the process by which one transitions from conditional to permanent residency status. Under S. 729, an undocumented alien would also be authorized to petition the Secretary for conditional permanent residency if that individual has satisfied all of the above requirements prior to the enactment of the Act. Currently, S. 729 is before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary where it awaits further consideration. While I am not a member of this committee, I will certainly monitor the progress of this bill.
As you may know, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced on September 14, 2010, that he would offer the DREAM Act as an amendment to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 Defense Authorization bill (S. 3454) as well as not allow a fair and open debate on the bill. I was disappointed that he chose to play politics with necessary support for our troops and national defense by trying to tack on the DREAM Act, which is unrelated to the daily operations of the Department of Defense. I remain committed to reforming our legal immigration system and streamlining the legal process; however, I have consistently opposed proposals that extend taxpayer benefits to those here illegally or give incentives for illegal immigration. On September 21, 2010, the Senate voted 56 to 43, where 60 affirmative votes were needed, not to move forward with debate on the Defense Authorization bill. I joined colleagues from both sides of the aisle to oppose this vote.
Again, thank you for sharing your views with me. As the legislative process moves forward, I will keep your thoughts in mind. If I can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact me or visit my website at www.scottbrown.senate.gov.
Sincerely,
Scott P. Brown
United States Senator
Huh? Not a word about our plea for Legal immigrants??
more...
makeup center of Kabul city
grupak
08-05 10:51 AM
These guys are not consistent. I should have gotten a 2 year EAD.
Dunno who to take this up with.
Sorry to hear they gave you 1 yr EAD.
I don't know why USCIS just don't make their ( and our) life simpler by just issuing 2yr EADs. Deciding how close to current is close enough for 1 yr EAD is extra effort. If its a funding issue, they can give the customer the option for multi-year EAD and extra fee.
Dunno who to take this up with.
Sorry to hear they gave you 1 yr EAD.
I don't know why USCIS just don't make their ( and our) life simpler by just issuing 2yr EADs. Deciding how close to current is close enough for 1 yr EAD is extra effort. If its a funding issue, they can give the customer the option for multi-year EAD and extra fee.
girlfriend house kabul city restaurant. 2010 kabul city ruins.jpg kabul city pics. the
nefrateedi
08-01 06:52 PM
My I140 was approved at California center and my 485 is sent to Nebraska on june 22. Is that a problem?
You are fine. The direct filing update is only as of July 30.
You are fine. The direct filing update is only as of July 30.
hairstyles and Kabul City Ruins),
rsharma
09-24 07:51 AM
Careful my friend. Porting rules will be as tough as the rules for applying in Eb2. If you make porting difficult, you will set a higher standard for the approval of your application in Eb2 ending up with the possible rejection of yours and other Eb2 applications.
Why would you want to stop someone eligible to apply in Eb2? If someone has met all the criteria, the same criteria you had to fulfill when applying in Eb2, then what is the problem?
Consider the scenario:
Two guys (A and B) come to US in 2005, both do not have MS and experience less than 5 years. Therefore both not elligible for EB2 on 2005. They are from a retrogressed country.
A does MS and joins job in 2007, becomes eligible for EB2 and files GC on 2007.
B joins a job on 2005 that do not need MS and experience and files for EB3.
Till 2010 both of them did not get GC. But B crossed 5 years of experience and from EB3 to EB2. Now B's priority date is 2005, although he was not elligible for EB2 at that time.
Although A was elligible for EB2 in 2007 earlier than B (2010), A is pushed behind B.
SHould it be acceptable to people like A? And there is not one or two pleale like B, thousands arer doing that?
If you see my priority date you will understand I am not saying this for myself. I have a bro and friends who are facing this isssue.
Therefore EB2s who are from mid 2006 onwards will really get pushed back..
I see this porting simillar to the labor substitition.. Till it was in place it was legal although thousands bought labors and that is one main reason EB2 had retrogressed back to 2000. I predict simillar thing is happending again, people are paying money to the desi employers to file perm in EB2 again pretty soon same tertrogression will happen to EB2 I if any urgent action is not taken.
I hace passed this stage.. now its for you all to decide..
Why would you want to stop someone eligible to apply in Eb2? If someone has met all the criteria, the same criteria you had to fulfill when applying in Eb2, then what is the problem?
Consider the scenario:
Two guys (A and B) come to US in 2005, both do not have MS and experience less than 5 years. Therefore both not elligible for EB2 on 2005. They are from a retrogressed country.
A does MS and joins job in 2007, becomes eligible for EB2 and files GC on 2007.
B joins a job on 2005 that do not need MS and experience and files for EB3.
Till 2010 both of them did not get GC. But B crossed 5 years of experience and from EB3 to EB2. Now B's priority date is 2005, although he was not elligible for EB2 at that time.
Although A was elligible for EB2 in 2007 earlier than B (2010), A is pushed behind B.
SHould it be acceptable to people like A? And there is not one or two pleale like B, thousands arer doing that?
If you see my priority date you will understand I am not saying this for myself. I have a bro and friends who are facing this isssue.
Therefore EB2s who are from mid 2006 onwards will really get pushed back..
I see this porting simillar to the labor substitition.. Till it was in place it was legal although thousands bought labors and that is one main reason EB2 had retrogressed back to 2000. I predict simillar thing is happending again, people are paying money to the desi employers to file perm in EB2 again pretty soon same tertrogression will happen to EB2 I if any urgent action is not taken.
I hace passed this stage.. now its for you all to decide..
satish_hello
09-08 02:08 PM
I Just checked all my checks are encashed for me and my wife.
It shows my check WAC. i don't know what service center this is from.everyone will get it soon.It is on the way
Regards
-satish
----------------------------------------------
EB2/PD-Sept'2004/I-140 approved @NSC
I-485 - Delivered july6th at NSC
CheckCashed-?
RD - ?
ND-?
AD -?
Edit/Delete Message
It shows my check WAC. i don't know what service center this is from.everyone will get it soon.It is on the way
Regards
-satish
----------------------------------------------
EB2/PD-Sept'2004/I-140 approved @NSC
I-485 - Delivered july6th at NSC
CheckCashed-?
RD - ?
ND-?
AD -?
Edit/Delete Message
bindoke
08-23 02:45 PM
Hi team,
Just wondering usually how long does it take to get approval notice of I -485 once PD become current ? Any idea or any comments will be really helpful.
Thank you.
no one can predict that. It could be days or months.
Just wondering usually how long does it take to get approval notice of I -485 once PD become current ? Any idea or any comments will be really helpful.
Thank you.
no one can predict that. It could be days or months.
No comments:
Post a Comment