Nil
11-09 11:10 AM
^^^^^
wallpaper Funny Pregnancy T-Shirt by
astral1977
07-09 11:21 AM
smartboy75,
I-131 form is used for issuing re-entry permits, refugee travel & advance parole documents.
AOS applicants are issued advance parole document. The biometrics rule is only for those individuals who are issued re-entry & refugee travel documents.
If in doubt kindly read through the text that you pasted in your message.
Thanks.
Source www.immigration-law.com
07/09/2008: USCIS Biometric Changes For Re-Entry Permits and Refugee Travel Documents 07/08/2008
USCIS has issued revised instructions for USCIS Form I-131, Application for Travel Document. The instructions include changes effective March 5, 2008 that require applicants for re-entry permits and refugee travel documents to provide biometrics (e.g., fingerprints and photographs) at a USCIS Application Support Center (ASC) for background and security checks and to meet requirements for secure travel and entry documents containing biometric identifiers.
Q. May an I-131 applicant for a re-entry permit or refugee travel document complete biometrics outside of the United States?
A. Form I-131 instructions provide guidance for certain persons who are abroad at the time of filing to visit a U.S. Embassy or consulate for fingerprinting, although all applicants are urged to file before leaving the United States. Since certain overseas offices have the discretion to accept and adjudicate applications for refugee travel documents, although it is not mandatory that they do so, an applicant for a refugee travel document may complete biometrics outside of the United States, but is encouraged to wait to travel until his or her biometrics have been collected and the document delivered. As discussed earlier, certain overseas USCIS offices may, in their discretion, adjudicate Form I-131 filed for a refugee travel document (but not re-entry permits), where the applicant has failed to apply while in the U.S. (see 8 C.F.R. � 223.2(b)(2)(ii)). However, applicants for refugee travel documents should not count on the overseas offices necessarily agreeing to adjudicate Form I-131 in all cases, particularly where it is evident that the individual could have applied while in the U.S. and attended his or her biometrics appointment. Applicants for reentry permits should attend their biometric appointment at the designated ASC. If the applicant departs the United States before the biometrics are collected, the application may be denied.
Q. Will Form I-131 re-entry permit or refugee travel document be denied if the applicant leaves the U.S. after the application has been filed and receipted but before biometrics are completed?
A. Form I-131 form instructions state, �Departure from the United States before a decision is made on an application for a Re-entry Permit usually does not affect the application. However, where biometric collection is required and the applicant departs the United States before the biometrics are collected, the application may be denied.� Travel is not advisable. If an applicant leaves and comes back, his or her application may be denied while abroad, and he or she may not be able to get back into the country. Even though an overseas USCIS office may, in its discretion, take the biometrics of an applicant for a refugee travel document, there is no guarantee that the office will necessarily exercise its discretion to do so. Therefore, USCIS again urges all I-131 applicants for whom biometrics will be required to file their applications well in advance of their scheduled departure dates. USCIS suggests applicants apply for a travel document at least 60 days prior to the date of travel.
So if we efile EAD and then 2 months down the line efile AP, do we have to go twice for biometrics ???
I-131 form is used for issuing re-entry permits, refugee travel & advance parole documents.
AOS applicants are issued advance parole document. The biometrics rule is only for those individuals who are issued re-entry & refugee travel documents.
If in doubt kindly read through the text that you pasted in your message.
Thanks.
Source www.immigration-law.com
07/09/2008: USCIS Biometric Changes For Re-Entry Permits and Refugee Travel Documents 07/08/2008
USCIS has issued revised instructions for USCIS Form I-131, Application for Travel Document. The instructions include changes effective March 5, 2008 that require applicants for re-entry permits and refugee travel documents to provide biometrics (e.g., fingerprints and photographs) at a USCIS Application Support Center (ASC) for background and security checks and to meet requirements for secure travel and entry documents containing biometric identifiers.
Q. May an I-131 applicant for a re-entry permit or refugee travel document complete biometrics outside of the United States?
A. Form I-131 instructions provide guidance for certain persons who are abroad at the time of filing to visit a U.S. Embassy or consulate for fingerprinting, although all applicants are urged to file before leaving the United States. Since certain overseas offices have the discretion to accept and adjudicate applications for refugee travel documents, although it is not mandatory that they do so, an applicant for a refugee travel document may complete biometrics outside of the United States, but is encouraged to wait to travel until his or her biometrics have been collected and the document delivered. As discussed earlier, certain overseas USCIS offices may, in their discretion, adjudicate Form I-131 filed for a refugee travel document (but not re-entry permits), where the applicant has failed to apply while in the U.S. (see 8 C.F.R. � 223.2(b)(2)(ii)). However, applicants for refugee travel documents should not count on the overseas offices necessarily agreeing to adjudicate Form I-131 in all cases, particularly where it is evident that the individual could have applied while in the U.S. and attended his or her biometrics appointment. Applicants for reentry permits should attend their biometric appointment at the designated ASC. If the applicant departs the United States before the biometrics are collected, the application may be denied.
Q. Will Form I-131 re-entry permit or refugee travel document be denied if the applicant leaves the U.S. after the application has been filed and receipted but before biometrics are completed?
A. Form I-131 form instructions state, �Departure from the United States before a decision is made on an application for a Re-entry Permit usually does not affect the application. However, where biometric collection is required and the applicant departs the United States before the biometrics are collected, the application may be denied.� Travel is not advisable. If an applicant leaves and comes back, his or her application may be denied while abroad, and he or she may not be able to get back into the country. Even though an overseas USCIS office may, in its discretion, take the biometrics of an applicant for a refugee travel document, there is no guarantee that the office will necessarily exercise its discretion to do so. Therefore, USCIS again urges all I-131 applicants for whom biometrics will be required to file their applications well in advance of their scheduled departure dates. USCIS suggests applicants apply for a travel document at least 60 days prior to the date of travel.
So if we efile EAD and then 2 months down the line efile AP, do we have to go twice for biometrics ???
mhathi
10-27 07:12 AM
Exact same letter for me as well!
2011 Make Like A Tree T-Shirt Funny
gcseeker2002
05-13 10:41 AM
Does anyone have access to this article :
http://www.diversityinc.com/members/login.cfm?hpage=21367.cfm&CFID=1754493&CFTOKEN=26728028
It looks like favoring us ....
http://www.diversityinc.com/members/login.cfm?hpage=21367.cfm&CFID=1754493&CFTOKEN=26728028
It looks like favoring us ....
more...
rani77
03-17 07:57 AM
I saw your post completely. It looks like that is a no go but you can try two things open a MTR and file an 140 in EB3 .Also parallely start another new case from scratch . You PD is Aug 2006 which may not seem a big advantage now but in a couple of years of time it will be. This may also cost a bit more so apart from financial aspect it doesnt hurt more to do these do things parallely. You got to take the call. Also make sure that you hire a good /well know attroney , your case typically indicates that the attorney made the wrong decision in filing
Brad
May 23rd, 2005, 01:47 PM
Hey, good job on these photos. I've been down there before and I've noticed that you really have about a 10 minute window just after the sun comes up and before the sun goes down when the light pulls out details and colours out of the rock that you never saw before!
more...
sanju_dba
08-13 01:17 PM
WASHINGTON � President Barack Obama on Friday signed into law a $600 million border security that will put more agents and equipment along the Mexican border.
...
Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100813/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_border_security)
isnt this $600M is comming off of the 2k hike on h1 50-50 rule?
if so, any one who wants think of getting rid of h1s they should also think of loosing this border security measure.
...
Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100813/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_border_security)
isnt this $600M is comming off of the 2k hike on h1 50-50 rule?
if so, any one who wants think of getting rid of h1s they should also think of loosing this border security measure.
2010 Sarcastic and Funny Shirt
roseball
08-07 11:10 AM
if my wife is already in US on H4 do i need to file a I-134 ,I-864 too ??
Also do i need to add my tax return, my I20 and my paystubs with application. She just came into country so she does not have any tax rerurn of her own nor any I20 or any paystubs of her own.. Please suggest.
Thanks
-M
Yes, its good to file I-134 especially when she is on H4. Paystubs and tax returns are not required documents though a lot of people tend to submit them. Just an employment letter from your employer would suffice. You dont need to include your I-20 with your wife's application....However, do include her medicals, though its not part of the initial evidence......
Also do i need to add my tax return, my I20 and my paystubs with application. She just came into country so she does not have any tax rerurn of her own nor any I20 or any paystubs of her own.. Please suggest.
Thanks
-M
Yes, its good to file I-134 especially when she is on H4. Paystubs and tax returns are not required documents though a lot of people tend to submit them. Just an employment letter from your employer would suffice. You dont need to include your I-20 with your wife's application....However, do include her medicals, though its not part of the initial evidence......
more...
manderson
09-19 08:06 AM
If you were to set out to design a story that would inflame populist rage, it might involve immigrants from poor countries, living in the United States without permission to work, hiring powerful Washington lobbyists to press their case. In late April, The Washington Post reported just such a development. The immigrants in question were highly skilled � the programmers and doctors and investment analysts that American business seeks out through so-called H-1B visas, and who are eligible for tens of thousands of "green cards," or permanent work permits, each year. But bureaucracy and an affirmative-action-style system of national-origin quotas have created a mess. India and China account for almost 40 percent of the world's population, yet neither can claim much more than 7 percent of the green cards. Hence a half-million-person backlog and a new political pressure group, which calls itself Immigration Voice.
The group's efforts will be a test of the commonly expressed view that Americans are not opposed to immigration, only to illegal immigration. Immigration Voice represents the kind of immigrants whose economic contributions are obvious. It is not a coincidence that the land of the H-1B is also the land of the iPod. Such immigrants are not "cutting in line" � they're petitioning for pre-job documentation, not for post-job amnesty. And people who have undergone 18 years of schooling to learn how to manipulate advanced technology come pre-Americanized, in a way that agricultural workers may not.
But Immigration Voice could still wind up crying in the wilderness. As the Boston College political scientist Peter Skerry has noted, many of the things that bug people about undocumented workers are also true of documented ones. Legal immigrants, too, increase crowding, compete for jobs and government services and create an atmosphere of transience and disruption. Indeed, it may be harder for foreign-born engineers to win the same grip on the sympathies of native-born Americans that undocumented farm laborers and political refugees have. Skilled immigrants can't be understood through the usual paradigms of victimhood.
The economists Philip Martin, Manolo Abella and Christiane Kuptsch noted in a recent book, "As a general rule, the more difficult it is to migrate from one country to another, the higher the percentage of professionals among the migrants from that country." Often this means that the more "backward" the country, the more "sophisticated" the immigrants it supplies. Sixty percent of the Egyptians, Ghanaians and South Africans in the U.S. � and 75 percent of Indians � have more than 13 years of schooling. Their home countries are not educational powerhouses, yet as individuals, they are more highly educated than a great many of the Americans they live among. (This poses an interesting problem for Immigration Voice, which polices its Web forums for condescending remarks toward manual laborers.)
So how are we supposed to address the special needs of this class of migrant? For the most part, we don't. The differences between skilled and unskilled immigrants are important, but that doesn't mean that they are always readily comprehensible either to politicians or to public opinion. When high-skilled immigrants who are already like us show themselves willing to become even more so, jumping every hoop to join us on a legal footing, it dissolves a lot of resistance. But it doesn't dissolve everything. It doesn't dissolve our sense that people like them are different and potentially even threatening.
If we consider our own internal migration of recent decades, this will not surprise us. You would have expected that big movements of people between states � particularly from the North to the Sun Belt and from Pacific Coast cities to Rocky Mountain towns � would cause increasing uniformity and unanimity. But that didn't happen. Instead, this big migration has coincided with the much harped-on polarization between "red" and "blue" America.
Georgians take up jobs on Wall Street and New Englanders unload their U-Hauls in Texas. The sky doesn't fall � but neither do cultural or political tensions between respective regions of the country. Consider the diatribes that followed the last election, in which "red" America stood accused of everything from ignorance and bloodlust to knee-jerk conformity. Or consider North Carolina. As the state filled up with new arrivals from such liberal states as New York and New Jersey, political pundits predicted the demise of its longtime ultraconservative senator Jesse Helms. But Helms won elections until he retired in 2002, largely because many of those transplants voted for him enthusiastically. The sort of Yankees who moved to North Carolina had little trouble adopting the political outlook of their new neighbors. But you didn't notice North Carolinians begging for more of them.
While Immigration Voice looks like an immigrant movement that Americans can rally behind, its prospects are mixed. A recent measure sponsored by Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania to nearly double the number of H-1B visas was passed through committee, then killed and then revived. The fate of skilled immigrants hinges on public opinion, and that is hard to gauge. Even an employer delighted to sponsor an H-1B immigrant for a green card might have no particular political commitment to defending the program, or to wringing inefficiencies out of it. The arrival of skilled individuals arguably makes America a more American place. But not necessarily a more welcoming one. Christopher Caldwell is a contributing writer for the magazine.
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company. Reprinted from The New York Times Magazine of Sunday, May 6, 2006.
The group's efforts will be a test of the commonly expressed view that Americans are not opposed to immigration, only to illegal immigration. Immigration Voice represents the kind of immigrants whose economic contributions are obvious. It is not a coincidence that the land of the H-1B is also the land of the iPod. Such immigrants are not "cutting in line" � they're petitioning for pre-job documentation, not for post-job amnesty. And people who have undergone 18 years of schooling to learn how to manipulate advanced technology come pre-Americanized, in a way that agricultural workers may not.
But Immigration Voice could still wind up crying in the wilderness. As the Boston College political scientist Peter Skerry has noted, many of the things that bug people about undocumented workers are also true of documented ones. Legal immigrants, too, increase crowding, compete for jobs and government services and create an atmosphere of transience and disruption. Indeed, it may be harder for foreign-born engineers to win the same grip on the sympathies of native-born Americans that undocumented farm laborers and political refugees have. Skilled immigrants can't be understood through the usual paradigms of victimhood.
The economists Philip Martin, Manolo Abella and Christiane Kuptsch noted in a recent book, "As a general rule, the more difficult it is to migrate from one country to another, the higher the percentage of professionals among the migrants from that country." Often this means that the more "backward" the country, the more "sophisticated" the immigrants it supplies. Sixty percent of the Egyptians, Ghanaians and South Africans in the U.S. � and 75 percent of Indians � have more than 13 years of schooling. Their home countries are not educational powerhouses, yet as individuals, they are more highly educated than a great many of the Americans they live among. (This poses an interesting problem for Immigration Voice, which polices its Web forums for condescending remarks toward manual laborers.)
So how are we supposed to address the special needs of this class of migrant? For the most part, we don't. The differences between skilled and unskilled immigrants are important, but that doesn't mean that they are always readily comprehensible either to politicians or to public opinion. When high-skilled immigrants who are already like us show themselves willing to become even more so, jumping every hoop to join us on a legal footing, it dissolves a lot of resistance. But it doesn't dissolve everything. It doesn't dissolve our sense that people like them are different and potentially even threatening.
If we consider our own internal migration of recent decades, this will not surprise us. You would have expected that big movements of people between states � particularly from the North to the Sun Belt and from Pacific Coast cities to Rocky Mountain towns � would cause increasing uniformity and unanimity. But that didn't happen. Instead, this big migration has coincided with the much harped-on polarization between "red" and "blue" America.
Georgians take up jobs on Wall Street and New Englanders unload their U-Hauls in Texas. The sky doesn't fall � but neither do cultural or political tensions between respective regions of the country. Consider the diatribes that followed the last election, in which "red" America stood accused of everything from ignorance and bloodlust to knee-jerk conformity. Or consider North Carolina. As the state filled up with new arrivals from such liberal states as New York and New Jersey, political pundits predicted the demise of its longtime ultraconservative senator Jesse Helms. But Helms won elections until he retired in 2002, largely because many of those transplants voted for him enthusiastically. The sort of Yankees who moved to North Carolina had little trouble adopting the political outlook of their new neighbors. But you didn't notice North Carolinians begging for more of them.
While Immigration Voice looks like an immigrant movement that Americans can rally behind, its prospects are mixed. A recent measure sponsored by Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania to nearly double the number of H-1B visas was passed through committee, then killed and then revived. The fate of skilled immigrants hinges on public opinion, and that is hard to gauge. Even an employer delighted to sponsor an H-1B immigrant for a green card might have no particular political commitment to defending the program, or to wringing inefficiencies out of it. The arrival of skilled individuals arguably makes America a more American place. But not necessarily a more welcoming one. Christopher Caldwell is a contributing writer for the magazine.
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company. Reprinted from The New York Times Magazine of Sunday, May 6, 2006.
hair Hentai T-Shirt Funny T-Shirt
agc2005
11-04 09:38 AM
munnashi:
Actually you don't get copy of I140, the employer and lawyer who gets the Approval notices. There is no rule that they have to give you copy.
Actually you don't get copy of I140, the employer and lawyer who gets the Approval notices. There is no rule that they have to give you copy.
more...
tinuverma
03-17 01:31 PM
gurus....please help.
Hello everyone,
My current project is ending. My client company has offered to take me full time and I am considering H1 transfer or using my EAD. Here is my Q:
The client company is small. Will that be an issue? Is there a minimum requirement on how big the company has to be able to use EAD safely?
Thanks
Hello everyone,
My current project is ending. My client company has offered to take me full time and I am considering H1 transfer or using my EAD. Here is my Q:
The client company is small. Will that be an issue? Is there a minimum requirement on how big the company has to be able to use EAD safely?
Thanks
hot Funny Che Shirt
rsdang1
06-24 03:47 PM
I understand where you are coming from but more awareness and publicity will only help and hopefully drive action...
Go Mayor Go... get us CIR...:D
Go Mayor Go... get us CIR...:D
more...
house Funny
raju123
05-15 10:39 AM
Unless water tank and pipeline become totally empty, there are chances of PD retrogress again anytime. When?? it depends on blessing of DOS official setting PDs. Cross the fingers and hope that it move further so that maximum people file I 485.
It is going to go back that is 100% gaurenteed, when that is the question. I have a pd of august 2005 eb2 will I make it before it retrogresses :confused:
It is going to go back that is 100% gaurenteed, when that is the question. I have a pd of august 2005 eb2 will I make it before it retrogresses :confused:
tattoo Funny Shirts
krish2005
11-09 05:47 PM
hmm.. are you saying that ancient indians specialized in stem cell research? :p
Dr. Balkrishna Matapurkar, a surgeon at New Delhi's Maulana Azad Medical College, has pioneered a stem cell based technique for the regeneration of tissues and organs. He already holds a patent for this innovative technique. Incidentally, he is of view that embryonic stem cell research is one of the lost sciences of ancient India.
But please note that I am not trying to propagate that indian culture is best or better etc. I just wanted to share that stem cell related view of mine.
A couple of the fellow members might be cursing me to have posted this in. I know its nowhere related to immigration, but just a thought share.
Dr. Balkrishna Matapurkar, a surgeon at New Delhi's Maulana Azad Medical College, has pioneered a stem cell based technique for the regeneration of tissues and organs. He already holds a patent for this innovative technique. Incidentally, he is of view that embryonic stem cell research is one of the lost sciences of ancient India.
But please note that I am not trying to propagate that indian culture is best or better etc. I just wanted to share that stem cell related view of mine.
A couple of the fellow members might be cursing me to have posted this in. I know its nowhere related to immigration, but just a thought share.
more...
pictures I#39;m all, “Hey – I#39;m Grayson#39;s
when
02-29 08:42 AM
How can one find his/her receipt date if they dont have copy of their receipt notice, just the receipt notice?
dresses funny t-shirts pick
GCFever007
07-19 10:04 AM
I was in the same shoes once...did some reseach and gather some info hope it will be helpful to resolve your case.
You can file spouse 485 later but not always
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following is my scenario and the advice I received from a Top (at least high fee: $250 for a 20 minute phone session) lawyer.
EB3 PD Nov 2002 I-140 Approved Jan/04 1-485 filed June 04. I got married in Dec 04 and we were back in USA in Jan 05. Unfortunately we were 2 week too late to beat the retrogression.
My lawyer told me to file wife's 485 as she is dependent and PD is not an issue. Absolutely wrong. USCIS returned her application after 5 weeks.
We waited almost 2.5 years to finally file her application in June 07. I got approved on 23 June but we are OK since her application was filed before that
Key:
1. Get married before your GC approval (before/after 140/485 does not matter as long as you are not approved.
2. Bring spouse on H4 (No derivative status with EAD so maintain H1)
3. Keep all the documents ready (Birth certificate/Marriage certificate etc.)
4. Follow visa bulletin as soon as dates are current get medical test completed
5. File her 485 (Make sure USCIS receives it after the dates become current)
(If USCIS receives your application before dates being current they may still accept the package and reject it after couple of weeks. )
6. What if you are married before GC approval but get approved before her 485 is filed
1. Spouse out of USA
No other way but to file 'Follow to join' in home country. Spouse will not be able to entry on any other visa before his/her GC approval.
2. Spouse in USA on his/her own status ( i.e. wither H1/L1/F1 etc.)
File 485 as a derivative no special processing
3. Spouse in USA as your dependent ( i.e. H4 etc.)
he/she will be 'out of status' as soon as your GC is approved. Inspected by an immigration agent at entry point. Not on parole. You can file 485 under [Section 245(K)] within 180 days. No special processing. NO fines.
Please talk to a reputed lawyer before doing any thing.
You can file spouse 485 later but not always
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following is my scenario and the advice I received from a Top (at least high fee: $250 for a 20 minute phone session) lawyer.
EB3 PD Nov 2002 I-140 Approved Jan/04 1-485 filed June 04. I got married in Dec 04 and we were back in USA in Jan 05. Unfortunately we were 2 week too late to beat the retrogression.
My lawyer told me to file wife's 485 as she is dependent and PD is not an issue. Absolutely wrong. USCIS returned her application after 5 weeks.
We waited almost 2.5 years to finally file her application in June 07. I got approved on 23 June but we are OK since her application was filed before that
Key:
1. Get married before your GC approval (before/after 140/485 does not matter as long as you are not approved.
2. Bring spouse on H4 (No derivative status with EAD so maintain H1)
3. Keep all the documents ready (Birth certificate/Marriage certificate etc.)
4. Follow visa bulletin as soon as dates are current get medical test completed
5. File her 485 (Make sure USCIS receives it after the dates become current)
(If USCIS receives your application before dates being current they may still accept the package and reject it after couple of weeks. )
6. What if you are married before GC approval but get approved before her 485 is filed
1. Spouse out of USA
No other way but to file 'Follow to join' in home country. Spouse will not be able to entry on any other visa before his/her GC approval.
2. Spouse in USA on his/her own status ( i.e. wither H1/L1/F1 etc.)
File 485 as a derivative no special processing
3. Spouse in USA as your dependent ( i.e. H4 etc.)
he/she will be 'out of status' as soon as your GC is approved. Inspected by an immigration agent at entry point. Not on parole. You can file 485 under [Section 245(K)] within 180 days. No special processing. NO fines.
Please talk to a reputed lawyer before doing any thing.
more...
makeup Prom Queen Funny Shirt
nozerd
12-04 07:32 AM
Yeah, Id sure be interested in your line of work
$ 92/hr * 40 hrs/wk * 52 wks/yr = $ 191,360.
If you have been working since 5 yrs thats enoughh revenue to get investment based GC :)
Best of luck
$ 92/hr * 40 hrs/wk * 52 wks/yr = $ 191,360.
If you have been working since 5 yrs thats enoughh revenue to get investment based GC :)
Best of luck
girlfriend funny shirt that says quot;i#39;m
pd_recapturing
07-09 10:03 PM
Applied PP on 29th, got RFE on 6th. They asked about 2006 W2. Sent the response and now waiting for approval.
hairstyles Funny maternity shirt to let
enggr
03-17 03:56 AM
Friends,
My I-140 got denied after the RFE response. In response to the RFE in September my lawyer responded to the RFE in November and the result came early this month (march 2008).
In the RFE response in last November my lawyer told USCIS that the category was marked wrong as EB2 where the case should be actually under EB3.
USCIS denied the application saying that application cannot be approved under EB2 and request for EB3 cannot be entertained at this point.
The following are the words from USCIS denial notice.
"The petitioner indicated that it had made an error in marking the petition form and that the petition should be considered one requesting the beneficiary's classification under a different section of law. However, since the petition was filed for second-preference classification and was initially adjudicated on that basis, USCIS will not at this stage consider it for some other classification.
In accordance with a USCIS announcement dated on May 23, 2007, the petitioner may elect to file a new petition on the beneficiary's behalf requesting a different visa classification but supported by the instant labor certification.(A motion making this request would be denied.) If the petitioner elects to persue this option, it should include a cover letter which explains the request, include a copy of this denial notice, and clearly report that the original labor certification is with LIN XXXXXXXXXX housed in AXXXXXXXXX. "
Also mine and my wife's I-485 got denied on the same day. In the denial notice of I-485 USCIS has mentioned that "The regulation does not provide for an appeal to this decision."
We are planning to file a new labor certification by end of this month as the current one is 99% a gone case
As you all know I was trying to save this application to save my wife's EAD.
Please help me with one of the options below.
Regarding my rejected I-140 I have two choices as per USCIS and my lawyer. Either of them should be filed 33 days from first week of march. Doing both of the below options at the same time will result in automatic rejection of both
1) Appealing the decision
Pros: My wife gets a chance to win her EAD back which is a big win for us
Cons: USCIS has indicated in the rejection notice that they are rejecting the I-140 because it does not qualify for EB2. they added that our request for converting it into EB3 cannot be entertained at this moment of time. So chances of winning the appeal is small compared to filing new I-140 as per my lawyer
2) Applying new EB3 I-140
Pros: Chances of getting an approval under this new EB3 I-140 is more compared to appealing the old EB2 application (the old application also includes and the request to convert EB2 into EB3)
Cons: Definite loss of my wife's EAD. Also since the labor is on Aug 2006 they have a common expiration date of Jan 2008. All labors from June 2007 (somewhere around that time) expire 6 months of the approval date and I-140 within that 6 months only will be considered for processing. Since we have passed the Jan 2008 period my lawyer is saying the new I-140 can also get rejected. the only argument we can place is, the processing time taken/length of old I-140 processing and the suggestion given on old I-140 denial notice dated march 1st week.
I am wondering whether we can do an MTR (Motion to re-open on the old application). This option is not mentioned by USCIS or lawyer. I am wondering whether this option will eliminate the appeal/new I-140 application within 33 days previlege
. My answer to my attorney regarding the next course of action depends on your advice(s) very much.
Thanks in advance and I really appreciate who posted replies to my questions earlier.
Enggr:
Labor approved 2006 Aug EB2
I-140 applied 2006 Nov EB2
I-140 RFE 2007 Sep
RFE response 2007 Nov
I-140 denied 2008 Mar
My I-140 got denied after the RFE response. In response to the RFE in September my lawyer responded to the RFE in November and the result came early this month (march 2008).
In the RFE response in last November my lawyer told USCIS that the category was marked wrong as EB2 where the case should be actually under EB3.
USCIS denied the application saying that application cannot be approved under EB2 and request for EB3 cannot be entertained at this point.
The following are the words from USCIS denial notice.
"The petitioner indicated that it had made an error in marking the petition form and that the petition should be considered one requesting the beneficiary's classification under a different section of law. However, since the petition was filed for second-preference classification and was initially adjudicated on that basis, USCIS will not at this stage consider it for some other classification.
In accordance with a USCIS announcement dated on May 23, 2007, the petitioner may elect to file a new petition on the beneficiary's behalf requesting a different visa classification but supported by the instant labor certification.(A motion making this request would be denied.) If the petitioner elects to persue this option, it should include a cover letter which explains the request, include a copy of this denial notice, and clearly report that the original labor certification is with LIN XXXXXXXXXX housed in AXXXXXXXXX. "
Also mine and my wife's I-485 got denied on the same day. In the denial notice of I-485 USCIS has mentioned that "The regulation does not provide for an appeal to this decision."
We are planning to file a new labor certification by end of this month as the current one is 99% a gone case
As you all know I was trying to save this application to save my wife's EAD.
Please help me with one of the options below.
Regarding my rejected I-140 I have two choices as per USCIS and my lawyer. Either of them should be filed 33 days from first week of march. Doing both of the below options at the same time will result in automatic rejection of both
1) Appealing the decision
Pros: My wife gets a chance to win her EAD back which is a big win for us
Cons: USCIS has indicated in the rejection notice that they are rejecting the I-140 because it does not qualify for EB2. they added that our request for converting it into EB3 cannot be entertained at this moment of time. So chances of winning the appeal is small compared to filing new I-140 as per my lawyer
2) Applying new EB3 I-140
Pros: Chances of getting an approval under this new EB3 I-140 is more compared to appealing the old EB2 application (the old application also includes and the request to convert EB2 into EB3)
Cons: Definite loss of my wife's EAD. Also since the labor is on Aug 2006 they have a common expiration date of Jan 2008. All labors from June 2007 (somewhere around that time) expire 6 months of the approval date and I-140 within that 6 months only will be considered for processing. Since we have passed the Jan 2008 period my lawyer is saying the new I-140 can also get rejected. the only argument we can place is, the processing time taken/length of old I-140 processing and the suggestion given on old I-140 denial notice dated march 1st week.
I am wondering whether we can do an MTR (Motion to re-open on the old application). This option is not mentioned by USCIS or lawyer. I am wondering whether this option will eliminate the appeal/new I-140 application within 33 days previlege
. My answer to my attorney regarding the next course of action depends on your advice(s) very much.
Thanks in advance and I really appreciate who posted replies to my questions earlier.
Enggr:
Labor approved 2006 Aug EB2
I-140 applied 2006 Nov EB2
I-140 RFE 2007 Sep
RFE response 2007 Nov
I-140 denied 2008 Mar
abd
03-05 10:18 AM
My I-140 got approved without RFE EB2 on 03/02/07.
RD 07/27/06
LUD 08/16/06
Approval Date 03/02/07.
Now joining endless wait for 485 filing.
RD 07/27/06
LUD 08/16/06
Approval Date 03/02/07.
Now joining endless wait for 485 filing.
53885
05-12 03:35 AM
Sent 300 emails from AILA's website.
No comments:
Post a Comment