WaitingYaar
01-18 08:44 PM
I was under the impression the target is all cases to be cleared within 6 months.
wallpaper Rafael van der Vaart made up
here4gc
02-28 12:44 AM
I opened SR in Jan...took infopass last week...NOTHING..stupid people are saying that my namecheck is going on..i applied 140 and 485 in July...i140 not yet approved...no FP also...blackhole...
a_yaja
07-13 11:25 AM
What will happen if primary case got approved but dependent case is still pending and at the same time, dependent H4 will be expiring soon??
Actually my case got approved yesterday, my wife's not yet. Her H4 expires in September. Thanks.
As long as her application is pending with USCIS, there is nothing to worry. My friend is in a similar situation. His GC was approved just 2 days before retrogression hit the previous time. So unfortunately, his wife's AOS application was not approved at the same time. She is still waiting for her GC to be approved.
Your wife does not need AP if her AOS has been filed and she does not intend to travel outside the country.
Actually my case got approved yesterday, my wife's not yet. Her H4 expires in September. Thanks.
As long as her application is pending with USCIS, there is nothing to worry. My friend is in a similar situation. His GC was approved just 2 days before retrogression hit the previous time. So unfortunately, his wife's AOS application was not approved at the same time. She is still waiting for her GC to be approved.
Your wife does not need AP if her AOS has been filed and she does not intend to travel outside the country.
2011 Attached Thumbnails
chetanjumani
03-14 02:35 PM
And with a new USCIS leader, it might get his attention, when he/she is trying to learn about what all needs to be taken care of.
more...
ajay_hyd
01-22 02:27 PM
i got similar message, but this was for Advance Parole not 485...
Application Type: I131, APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT
Current Status: Document OTHER THAN CARD manufactured and mailed.
On ... we mailed the document we manufactured based on our earlier approval of this case, and mailed it to the address on we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
Application Type: I131, APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT
Current Status: Document OTHER THAN CARD manufactured and mailed.
On ... we mailed the document we manufactured based on our earlier approval of this case, and mailed it to the address on we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
SkilledWorker4GC
07-17 03:31 PM
According to your profile it took you less than a year to get your GC and you call that a Long Wait. :rolleyes: People here stuck for 10 years.
Your question is too confusing otherwise i would have answered as here on IV we are very generous even to the people who doesnt care about us.
Anyways hiring a lawyer and paying some money would be a better place to get a right answer.
My GC was approved last month after a very long wait time. Currently I am working for company B on EAD (not the GC filing employer). The question I had was can I continue to work for company B on a part time basis and join company A (GC filling employer).
Company A has a 9 month probation period I am worried if i quiet company B and company A fire me later then I will be with out job.
So I can work for company A (GC filing employer) full time and at the same time work part time with company B.
So this way if company A does fire me during probation period I continue with company B :confused: on full time basis. Is this ok will it come to haunt me when I file for citizenship?
Your question is too confusing otherwise i would have answered as here on IV we are very generous even to the people who doesnt care about us.
Anyways hiring a lawyer and paying some money would be a better place to get a right answer.
My GC was approved last month after a very long wait time. Currently I am working for company B on EAD (not the GC filing employer). The question I had was can I continue to work for company B on a part time basis and join company A (GC filling employer).
Company A has a 9 month probation period I am worried if i quiet company B and company A fire me later then I will be with out job.
So I can work for company A (GC filing employer) full time and at the same time work part time with company B.
So this way if company A does fire me during probation period I continue with company B :confused: on full time basis. Is this ok will it come to haunt me when I file for citizenship?
more...
GC4US
10-26 06:11 PM
See my signature.
2010 Sylvie Van Der Vaart - Gallery
pdakwala
05-25 08:24 AM
It is important that we make phone calls to our senators. Here is the list of senators with their phone numbers.
Cheers
Cheers
more...
senk1s
09-30 12:23 PM
I'll try and answer your questions
1. AC21 by definition comes into play when 485 is not adjudicated for 180 days
2. because this company has promised a job after getting the GC
3. What is the 1 1/2 yrs you are refering to?
4. I dont think you require LC to invoke AC21
1. AC21 by definition comes into play when 485 is not adjudicated for 180 days
2. because this company has promised a job after getting the GC
3. What is the 1 1/2 yrs you are refering to?
4. I dont think you require LC to invoke AC21
hair 3 - Sylvie Van Der Vaart v
mhkumar
07-22 10:03 AM
If the I-140 has been approved, you are entitled to use the PD on any subsequent I-140 unless it is revoked based on fraud or misrepresentation.
The best document to have is a copy of the I-140 approval notice. You are legally entitled to have a copy of this document, and can obtain it by making a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to USCIS using Form G-639. USCIS provides detailed instructions at: USCIS - Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (FOIA) (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextchannel=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a 1RCRD&vgnextoid=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD )
In my experience, it can take anywhere from 2 months to 18 months for USCIS to act on a FOIA request and provide copies.
Hope this helps.
Thanks for your advice.
Form g-639 has 3 request types
1)Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
2)Privacy Act (PA)
3)Amendment of Record (PA only)
Which option I should choose (I guess (1) but want to confirm)?
Also do I need to answer question 6 and send a copy of my identity along with g-639?
The best document to have is a copy of the I-140 approval notice. You are legally entitled to have a copy of this document, and can obtain it by making a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to USCIS using Form G-639. USCIS provides detailed instructions at: USCIS - Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (FOIA) (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextchannel=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a 1RCRD&vgnextoid=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD )
In my experience, it can take anywhere from 2 months to 18 months for USCIS to act on a FOIA request and provide copies.
Hope this helps.
Thanks for your advice.
Form g-639 has 3 request types
1)Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
2)Privacy Act (PA)
3)Amendment of Record (PA only)
Which option I should choose (I guess (1) but want to confirm)?
Also do I need to answer question 6 and send a copy of my identity along with g-639?
more...
pt326bc
08-03 10:33 AM
I 140 is for a future job.
You certainly could use an approved I 140 from Comapny A while applying for an H1B extension (doesn't matter if it is Company A or B which is sponsering the H1B).
The critical part here is I 140 should be active (meaning shouldn't be revoked).
Of course if you do apply for an extension beyond 6 yrs (and get it for 3 yrs if your PD is not current); AND at that point I 140 is withdrawn (after approval of H1B) then you are in a grey area.
Technically if an H1B is approved then it cannot be revoked by USCIS for the reason that the I 140 on which it was based has been withdrawn. But in the current atmosphere who knows!
Again this is not legal advice, just an opinion as I am not a lawyer!
Regards.
You certainly could use an approved I 140 from Comapny A while applying for an H1B extension (doesn't matter if it is Company A or B which is sponsering the H1B).
The critical part here is I 140 should be active (meaning shouldn't be revoked).
Of course if you do apply for an extension beyond 6 yrs (and get it for 3 yrs if your PD is not current); AND at that point I 140 is withdrawn (after approval of H1B) then you are in a grey area.
Technically if an H1B is approved then it cannot be revoked by USCIS for the reason that the I 140 on which it was based has been withdrawn. But in the current atmosphere who knows!
Again this is not legal advice, just an opinion as I am not a lawyer!
Regards.
hot WAG Sylvie van der Vaart
GCwaitforever
03-07 06:55 PM
Tagging members who paid so far and who has not is a start for the membership drive. Once we cover the registered members and encourage them to contribute, then we can move on to our friends and companies.
more...
house sylvie van der vaart vs ilary
gccovet
04-01 01:25 PM
Please update your profile.
GCCovet
GCCovet
tattoo Some sort of Dutch quot;van der
bayarea07
07-18 02:34 PM
:-)
more...
pictures Sylvie Van der Vaart 9
logiclife
09-25 12:07 PM
Your rights as a participant of a bulletin board or online forum like Immigration Voice forums:
The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)
What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED. Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).
Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.
The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.
The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).
Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.
What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.
SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.
Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.
What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.
The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)
What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED. Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).
Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.
The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.
The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).
Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.
What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.
SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.
Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.
What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.
dresses Sylvie van der Vaart
mwin
12-17 01:05 PM
I am pretty sure $10,000 is limit while coming into USA. While going to India, the limit is much less, about Rs.12,000 or so (check with some Indian websites). I know, you need declare (for Tax purposes) if you carry more than this amount. I don’t know tax liability of this declarion. Also, the amount varies on the purpose and duration of abroad trip.
more...
makeup Sylvie Van der Vaart
RNGC
04-26 08:42 AM
Thanks...This is very helpful!....Feeling a lot better now!
girlfriend Sylvie van der Vaart - EURO
MatsP
July 28th, 2005, 12:33 AM
With your requirements, wihtout knowing more about what type of photography you're actually interested in, I'd say the Canon Rebel XT (EOS 350D) would be a good match with plenty of money to spare on buying some nice lenses. Nikon D70 is another option, in rougly the same price-range.
One step up from the Rebel XT is the 20D. The 20D has the same sensor and other major features, but it's got a bigger buffer and is slightly faster on "multishot", so if you're into shooting fast sequences, that would be the way to go. You're looking at the better part of a grand to buy the 20D house only, so unless you're particularly after this feature, there's little reason to go for the 20D, the XT will do everything else just fine.
When it comes to "Upgrading to professional", I think you'll find that the Canon and Nikon both have a range of lenses, and a few camera bodies. The camera body will be one side of "how professional" the equipment is, and the lenses will be the other side. The general principle here is that you can easily spend 3-4 times more on lenses than you do on the camera body, so lenses are probably going to be your major outlay in the long term, whether you are an amateur, professional or in-between. [I for instance have a few "professional" lenses, but not all of my lenses are that level, and I don't own a pro camera body].
I don't think Canon or Nikon are about to change anything dramatically that would break the backwards compatibility, so whatever you buy today, you should be able to use for a long time. [I've still got some lenses that I bought about 15-20 years ago].
--
Mats
One step up from the Rebel XT is the 20D. The 20D has the same sensor and other major features, but it's got a bigger buffer and is slightly faster on "multishot", so if you're into shooting fast sequences, that would be the way to go. You're looking at the better part of a grand to buy the 20D house only, so unless you're particularly after this feature, there's little reason to go for the 20D, the XT will do everything else just fine.
When it comes to "Upgrading to professional", I think you'll find that the Canon and Nikon both have a range of lenses, and a few camera bodies. The camera body will be one side of "how professional" the equipment is, and the lenses will be the other side. The general principle here is that you can easily spend 3-4 times more on lenses than you do on the camera body, so lenses are probably going to be your major outlay in the long term, whether you are an amateur, professional or in-between. [I for instance have a few "professional" lenses, but not all of my lenses are that level, and I don't own a pro camera body].
I don't think Canon or Nikon are about to change anything dramatically that would break the backwards compatibility, so whatever you buy today, you should be able to use for a long time. [I've still got some lenses that I bought about 15-20 years ago].
--
Mats
hairstyles Sylvie Van Der Vaart,
packersland
08-22 01:09 PM
Hi Guys,
I just wanted to get some input from the veterans here who have started a business in partnership while they have been waiting for the coveted green card.
What kind of legal paperwork does it take to start a business? I would think as long as you don't work for the business it should be ok? If you can own part of a corporation (stocks), you can be a partner in a business?
Ideas?
If you are in H1B status, you can start your business by investing, but not working. You can not work for your business to get paid, but you can get profit sharing. In Wisconsin, when you register, you need a President/CEO who can legally work for your business. You can check with your state and register your business there. Probably, you even can register online in some state. Of cause, later on, you will need help from your accountant, laywer, etc.
If you have Green Card or EAD, that is not a problem to run by yourself.
Good luck.:)
I just wanted to get some input from the veterans here who have started a business in partnership while they have been waiting for the coveted green card.
What kind of legal paperwork does it take to start a business? I would think as long as you don't work for the business it should be ok? If you can own part of a corporation (stocks), you can be a partner in a business?
Ideas?
If you are in H1B status, you can start your business by investing, but not working. You can not work for your business to get paid, but you can get profit sharing. In Wisconsin, when you register, you need a President/CEO who can legally work for your business. You can check with your state and register your business there. Probably, you even can register online in some state. Of cause, later on, you will need help from your accountant, laywer, etc.
If you have Green Card or EAD, that is not a problem to run by yourself.
Good luck.:)
natrajs
05-12 10:09 AM
At last, I received my approval on May 8th 2008. What a relief. I have learned a lot from this fourm. Thanks a lot guys.
Congrats and Best Wishes
Congrats and Best Wishes
garybanz
10-23 06:17 PM
I'll be in a conference in SFO and can't make it to diwali mela myself, but I'll like to sponsor an Immigration Voice TX t-shirt to who ever donates maximum time to the IV booth*.
I'll let Needhelp decide who the winner is.
* Restrictions apply, core team not eligible
I'll let Needhelp decide who the winner is.
* Restrictions apply, core team not eligible
No comments:
Post a Comment