iwantgc
05-08 10:51 AM
Thanks for your opinion.
I would also appreciate if someone could provide me some notes before I call them at 12 noon.
Thank you in advance.
I would also appreciate if someone could provide me some notes before I call them at 12 noon.
Thank you in advance.
wallpaper Jersey Shore has been renewed
Desertfox
10-30 10:04 PM
Lawyer? So, You don't believe what was posted on USIS website?
I find it wise to pay my lawyer to find the correct information for me.... be it from USCIS website or from her professional knowledge base. Believe it or not, I trust a qualified professional more than myself when it comes to a subject outside of my expertise...:D
I find it wise to pay my lawyer to find the correct information for me.... be it from USCIS website or from her professional knowledge base. Believe it or not, I trust a qualified professional more than myself when it comes to a subject outside of my expertise...:D
austingc
08-18 02:31 PM
What do you guys think about Jadoo TV? I heard that it's good and no monthly fees.
Is anyone using it?
Is anyone using it?
2011 jersey shore season 4,
alterego
07-03 02:37 PM
I'm just wondering if there is a sadist there, who just want to see how much these guys can take.
What other reason could there be fore waiting until July2nd before announcing it. Atleast June 29th and they could have said after reviewing the full data for June we changed our mind. This smacks of being pre planned. I won't be surprised if the did this to sneak in a few cases with very recent priority dates, and just put July 1st approval dates on all those.
Why else they pick the slowest processing center NSC for 485 applications. A lot of this is so much crap it makes a cesspit seem clean.
They ought to be ashamed of what they did. Seems intentional to me however.
What other reason could there be fore waiting until July2nd before announcing it. Atleast June 29th and they could have said after reviewing the full data for June we changed our mind. This smacks of being pre planned. I won't be surprised if the did this to sneak in a few cases with very recent priority dates, and just put July 1st approval dates on all those.
Why else they pick the slowest processing center NSC for 485 applications. A lot of this is so much crap it makes a cesspit seem clean.
They ought to be ashamed of what they did. Seems intentional to me however.
more...
gapala
07-10 03:15 PM
Hi Dhundhun,
Thanks for your response.
to your question:
.. It should be OK to take job with Y (assuming that you have I-797 from Y with I-94) and then getting Visa stamped when new passport arrives.
VenuK: I wish its that simple... On I-797 from Y it doesn't have I-94 number on it anywhere. since its through consular processing.
In order to work with Y, i have to get stamped first then only pay stubbs are generated. This was the understanding, when owner of Y ,company Y Attorney and myself were in the conference call discussion.
advices are always appreciated
Pls let me know...
With Thanks,
Venu
What is the result of appeal?
Based on the information provided on above post , I believe X is paying you in view of pending appeal.
Note that there is a risk in going to other countries for stamping due to PIMS related delay. You can search for thread from people who were stuck in Canada for few months but they were Canada landers and stay in canada wasn't an issue for them.
Its safe to go to your home country and get it stamped there. You are atleast safe to stay as long as PIMS takes to validate.
Thanks for your response.
to your question:
.. It should be OK to take job with Y (assuming that you have I-797 from Y with I-94) and then getting Visa stamped when new passport arrives.
VenuK: I wish its that simple... On I-797 from Y it doesn't have I-94 number on it anywhere. since its through consular processing.
In order to work with Y, i have to get stamped first then only pay stubbs are generated. This was the understanding, when owner of Y ,company Y Attorney and myself were in the conference call discussion.
advices are always appreciated
Pls let me know...
With Thanks,
Venu
What is the result of appeal?
Based on the information provided on above post , I believe X is paying you in view of pending appeal.
Note that there is a risk in going to other countries for stamping due to PIMS related delay. You can search for thread from people who were stuck in Canada for few months but they were Canada landers and stay in canada wasn't an issue for them.
Its safe to go to your home country and get it stamped there. You are atleast safe to stay as long as PIMS takes to validate.
pappu
06-07 02:11 PM
Transaction ID: 7WK494028G568634H
Thank you
Thank you
more...
kshitijnt
06-16 03:20 PM
If the I-94 is attached to the new approval notice, you need not go for stamping to home country. If it is not, I advise that you go to home country for getting a new stamp.
The above applies if you do not plan to travel outside USA.
If you plan to travel outside USA, you can get stamp in any nearest USA consulate. Again neighbouring country or home country offers best choice.
The above applies if you do not plan to travel outside USA.
If you plan to travel outside USA, you can get stamp in any nearest USA consulate. Again neighbouring country or home country offers best choice.
2010 Jersey Shore cast touch down
sanjaymk
11-09 07:17 PM
Hello,
I am willing to contribute my time. I have decent writing skills and can create some PPT.
Sanjay.
$150 donation so far.
I am willing to contribute my time. I have decent writing skills and can create some PPT.
Sanjay.
$150 donation so far.
more...
flresident
11-04 09:54 AM
Contact local domestic violence against women groups. they would help you out with legal, accommodation and rest of the process.
hair Jersey Shore cast touch down
Pineapple
04-27 07:56 AM
read this:
Congressional Dems Say No Immigration Bill Anytime Soon - The Gaggle Blog - Newsweek.com (http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2010/04/26/congressional-dems-say-no-immigration-bill-anytime-soon.aspx?hpid=topnews)
Congressional Dems Say No Immigration Bill Anytime Soon - The Gaggle Blog - Newsweek.com (http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2010/04/26/congressional-dems-say-no-immigration-bill-anytime-soon.aspx?hpid=topnews)
more...
humsuplou
11-30 02:48 AM
Hi,
I am trying to apply for an emergency advanced parole to visit my critically illed granma back home.
I have a pending I-131 application with the receipt date of Aug 14th. I understand that I can goto my local USCIS office to apply for emergency AP, is that right?
What document do I need? I have a hospital letter with their letter head. What else do I need? And is there anything specific things that need to be included in the letter?
Also, is there anyone who has suuceed, or failed to get one with medical emergency of family memeber?
Any advice/feedback/sharing will be very much appreciated. I have an appointment with the local USCIS on Tuesday.
I am trying to apply for an emergency advanced parole to visit my critically illed granma back home.
I have a pending I-131 application with the receipt date of Aug 14th. I understand that I can goto my local USCIS office to apply for emergency AP, is that right?
What document do I need? I have a hospital letter with their letter head. What else do I need? And is there anything specific things that need to be included in the letter?
Also, is there anyone who has suuceed, or failed to get one with medical emergency of family memeber?
Any advice/feedback/sharing will be very much appreciated. I have an appointment with the local USCIS on Tuesday.
hot Jersey Shore Ladies Shop and
ghost
08-11 11:54 AM
Alrite, looks like folks need some inspiration to read such a long post!
See this video - think of you as the lil bear and IV leadership as the papa bear :-)
The Bear - Film by Jean-Jacques Annaud (http://www.flixxy.com/bear-animal-nature-film.htm)
See this video - think of you as the lil bear and IV leadership as the papa bear :-)
The Bear - Film by Jean-Jacques Annaud (http://www.flixxy.com/bear-animal-nature-film.htm)
more...
house Jersey Shore Cast Sightsee in
go_guy123
08-24 04:52 PM
ILW.COM - immigration news: Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. <em>USCIS</em> Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability (http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0825-mehta.shtm)
Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta
As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).
Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.
In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.
At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�
The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8
Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.
Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10
�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�
Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�
It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta
As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).
Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.
In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.
At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�
The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8
Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.
Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10
�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�
Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�
It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
tattoo The MTV reality show cast#39;s
smartboy75
11-02 02:14 AM
This news might not be directly related to our cause but its very much relevant. Here also, they can come with similar results saying that out of all the IT jobs in US, x % have been gone to immigrants where x > 50. Opponents of our cause may use this gainst us.
Precisely my point...why are we enabling anti-immigrants with material to lobby against us....And that is why I raised the question of bringing the issue here....
But I appreciate the insight alterego had to share...it was insightfull and very educative...thxs for sharing a different view...
Precisely my point...why are we enabling anti-immigrants with material to lobby against us....And that is why I raised the question of bringing the issue here....
But I appreciate the insight alterego had to share...it was insightfull and very educative...thxs for sharing a different view...
more...
pictures Jersey Shore cast starts
fromnaija
01-23 10:39 AM
I think with PERM in place you have to be on the payroll for the employer to apply for the GC. Pre-PERM you were not required to be on payroll..
Thats the info that I know of (Not from lawyers) from friends.. Please correct me if i am wrong.:confused:
No, you are not required to be on the payroll for employer to file PERM since GC is for future employment.
Thats the info that I know of (Not from lawyers) from friends.. Please correct me if i am wrong.:confused:
No, you are not required to be on the payroll for employer to file PERM since GC is for future employment.
dresses wars kate hudson, Jersey
immi_enthu
08-28 09:34 AM
They might return urs , simple.
what will happen in case of 140/485 concurrent filing ?
what will happen in case of 140/485 concurrent filing ?
more...
makeup Jersey Shore cast to Italy
pncool01
09-16 01:56 PM
Feel free to celebrate as you please, but keep in mind the less fortunate - not the ones who are waiting for a GC in this country but those who are waiting for their next meal. Ask your wife to make donation somewhere in India or put some money to charity.
For me, symbolic act is enough...I am going to keep it simple
- drive to the border; walk over to mexico and walk back into the US
You know how Mahatma Gandhi made salt in Dandi (and I do see the oppressiveness and exploitation employers can sometimes bring in this GC process)
For me, symbolic act is enough...I am going to keep it simple
- drive to the border; walk over to mexico and walk back into the US
You know how Mahatma Gandhi made salt in Dandi (and I do see the oppressiveness and exploitation employers can sometimes bring in this GC process)
girlfriend The Jersey Shore cast have
dollar500
11-19 06:14 PM
That has happened to me too. It's ok. I looked at the reciept notice and the date is the original reciept date not the one mentioned in update. Don't worry. If you are really concerned call your lawyer.
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Case received and pending.
On October 14, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case. Please follow any instructions on this notice. We will notify you by mail when we make a decision or if we need something from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when yours will be done. This case is at our TEXAS SERVICE CENTER location. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
I have a question. Mine was filed on Aug 15th but, the online status says that it was received on 10/14. Is this common or is this in error? Should I call CS?
Thanks in advance.
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Case received and pending.
On October 14, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case. Please follow any instructions on this notice. We will notify you by mail when we make a decision or if we need something from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when yours will be done. This case is at our TEXAS SERVICE CENTER location. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
I have a question. Mine was filed on Aug 15th but, the online status says that it was received on 10/14. Is this common or is this in error? Should I call CS?
Thanks in advance.
hairstyles from Italy: Jersey Shore
sanprabhu
07-26 11:20 AM
I already sent the card to Senator... I urge everybody else to do the same.
vts31
10-15 08:34 PM
my sis watches that
paskal
11-08 10:33 PM
Dear IV members,
The Design and Publicity work group is an active task force dedicated to creating materials to spread IV's message. We are engaged in creating posters, fliers, Cartoons and Videos, and will also be producing web related material, informational handouts and power point presentations. We are looking for active volunteers with specific related skills to work with us on these projects. If you are working in design/media/advertising etc or simply have design/drawing/writing skills and are interested in being a part of this group, please answer to this thread. We are specifically looking for someone with knowledge of the media/advertising and an understanding of web searches especially google search rankings.
We are also looking for volunteers for media contacts and content creation/analysis (needs good writing and analytical skills), work groups.
If you live in the DC area (or even within reasonable driving distance) and would like to participate in lawmaker meetings, please let us know.
Please also see Pappu's request for a volunteer to work as iv-coordinator in a separate thread.
Remember that we cannot accept anonymous members. All these groups will be privy to sensitive information and we must be able to trust our volunteers. So please complete your profiles so that we can contact you.
The Design and Publicity work group is an active task force dedicated to creating materials to spread IV's message. We are engaged in creating posters, fliers, Cartoons and Videos, and will also be producing web related material, informational handouts and power point presentations. We are looking for active volunteers with specific related skills to work with us on these projects. If you are working in design/media/advertising etc or simply have design/drawing/writing skills and are interested in being a part of this group, please answer to this thread. We are specifically looking for someone with knowledge of the media/advertising and an understanding of web searches especially google search rankings.
We are also looking for volunteers for media contacts and content creation/analysis (needs good writing and analytical skills), work groups.
If you live in the DC area (or even within reasonable driving distance) and would like to participate in lawmaker meetings, please let us know.
Please also see Pappu's request for a volunteer to work as iv-coordinator in a separate thread.
Remember that we cannot accept anonymous members. All these groups will be privy to sensitive information and we must be able to trust our volunteers. So please complete your profiles so that we can contact you.