knnmbd
05-07 04:18 PM
Another warning. We will not tolerate flaming wars or denigrating posts.
Can't we work together civilly for this? The illegal aliens speak in one voice and are more easily heard. While immigrants who are supposed to be "highly educated" like us have to fight within ourselves over every issue.
If you find some bad post, report it to us by clicking on the exclamation mark symbol. Don't retort.
That's exactly what I was talking about. We are not going to have a law that will benefit all of us immediately, but could indirectly and also could take a while to see the effects of it. This does not mean that we try to stall such bills or exclaim that things are not fair as it does not benefit a certain group of people. We need to know that the law makers are at least smarter than all of us here and when they do things they do it with certain reasons and we need to respect that.
All of us also have to remember that though we might me in the top 10% of this countries intellectual communities we are still all foreigners here and we should of course lobby our cause (like IV is currently doing such a great job of) and leave the rest of the burden to the law makers. I am sure they too have people to answer to and what ever law they pass will have to justifiable.
Can't we work together civilly for this? The illegal aliens speak in one voice and are more easily heard. While immigrants who are supposed to be "highly educated" like us have to fight within ourselves over every issue.
If you find some bad post, report it to us by clicking on the exclamation mark symbol. Don't retort.
That's exactly what I was talking about. We are not going to have a law that will benefit all of us immediately, but could indirectly and also could take a while to see the effects of it. This does not mean that we try to stall such bills or exclaim that things are not fair as it does not benefit a certain group of people. We need to know that the law makers are at least smarter than all of us here and when they do things they do it with certain reasons and we need to respect that.
All of us also have to remember that though we might me in the top 10% of this countries intellectual communities we are still all foreigners here and we should of course lobby our cause (like IV is currently doing such a great job of) and leave the rest of the burden to the law makers. I am sure they too have people to answer to and what ever law they pass will have to justifiable.
wallpaper house vicki gunvalson divorce
grupak
08-05 10:51 AM
These guys are not consistent. I should have gotten a 2 year EAD.
Dunno who to take this up with.
Sorry to hear they gave you 1 yr EAD.
I don't know why USCIS just don't make their ( and our) life simpler by just issuing 2yr EADs. Deciding how close to current is close enough for 1 yr EAD is extra effort. If its a funding issue, they can give the customer the option for multi-year EAD and extra fee.
Dunno who to take this up with.
Sorry to hear they gave you 1 yr EAD.
I don't know why USCIS just don't make their ( and our) life simpler by just issuing 2yr EADs. Deciding how close to current is close enough for 1 yr EAD is extra effort. If its a funding issue, they can give the customer the option for multi-year EAD and extra fee.
chi_shark
07-10 11:17 AM
I don't recall
...... You are free to ignore my posts. ;)
.
hmmm... it looks like, we both think alike! :-) how cool is that?
you've taken one sliver of info out of that case and making it seem like thats a primary issue... i dont doubt that what you are purporting is true... but your link pointed to something that was a complete waste of time... i agree that you need to have a permanent full time job and that permanent means indefinite in most cases related to immigration.
...... You are free to ignore my posts. ;)
.
hmmm... it looks like, we both think alike! :-) how cool is that?
you've taken one sliver of info out of that case and making it seem like thats a primary issue... i dont doubt that what you are purporting is true... but your link pointed to something that was a complete waste of time... i agree that you need to have a permanent full time job and that permanent means indefinite in most cases related to immigration.
2011 Vicki gunvalson divorce
royus77
07-06 06:45 PM
Can we have similar protest in DC coinciding with the west coast one ?Any takers ???? This should be done may be next sat/sun before the issues goes back into the hoistory
more...
lrindy
08-09 10:35 AM
Our I-140 was approved by TSC RN 08/16/06 approved 08/24/06 under regular processing, but we sent 485 package to NSC due to where we live. Received 07/05/07. I was told to call after 30 days, which I did yesterday. I was told a new memo had gone out 08/08/07 internally to each service center stating that all customers should be adviced that let 90 days pass before calling service centers to get receipt numbers. The backlog for data entry was so great that it will take that long before it is all cleared. If you have not received a RN by 90 days then please call back and your case will be dealt with then. He also adviced that as the 90 days approaches, if no RN has been sent to us then make appointment at field office for EAD etc. I did mention that there was no such memo on their website and processing dates showed 07/11/07 for 485. No answer to this. So we wait and see what happens. I can only tell you what I have been told. He did comment on countries with high volumes of visas, "they will be waiting for 10 years plus for actual GC's under the system we have in place right now." Things change everyday, so keep the faith!
alterego
10-05 12:11 PM
Firstly let me say that the Dems taking the house is the only hope I see for change near term. If the Republicans take it then they will feel vindicated on their stand and stick to it especially in view of the current unpopularity of Pres. Bush.
Democrats normally sing the tune of organised labour on such issues. Organised labour is clear that they want the immigrants that come not to be exploited. In otherwords, if you let them come then treat them well as they are now part of the labour pool. This idea has some intrinsic merit. If you analyse things, it is usually during the long drawn out protracted green card process that unscrupulous employers take the most advantage.
Indeed the deluge of illegals will be a blight on the processing times, however without visa numbers there is absolutely no hope for EB India in the near term anyway. We have to hope for the lesser of two evils now.
Sen Byron Dorgan is always on Lou Dobbs show. He does not represent the majority view of the democratic party. I think he is making all sorts of noises to fight for his political life.
Democrats normally sing the tune of organised labour on such issues. Organised labour is clear that they want the immigrants that come not to be exploited. In otherwords, if you let them come then treat them well as they are now part of the labour pool. This idea has some intrinsic merit. If you analyse things, it is usually during the long drawn out protracted green card process that unscrupulous employers take the most advantage.
Indeed the deluge of illegals will be a blight on the processing times, however without visa numbers there is absolutely no hope for EB India in the near term anyway. We have to hope for the lesser of two evils now.
Sen Byron Dorgan is always on Lou Dobbs show. He does not represent the majority view of the democratic party. I think he is making all sorts of noises to fight for his political life.
more...
dish
12-10 12:21 PM
Kennedy, McCain, 2 congressmen meet
By Jerry Kammer
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE
December 9, 2006
WASHINGTON � Two of the most liberal members of Congress met with two of their most conservative colleagues this week to revive immigration legislation that passed the Senate but was throttled by House Republican leaders who resisted its attempt to grant citizenship to illegal immigrants.
Sen. Edward Kennedy
�The plan is to bring the bill up in late winter,� said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., a conservative stalwart who attended the meeting in the office of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. The other participants were Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill.
The strategy session Wednesday came amid speculation about how the dynamics of the immigration debate might change, if at all, when Democrats take control of the House and Senate next month.
Flake said that Kennedy, who will be chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee's immigration subcommittee, wants to let the new Congress deal first with issues such as the war in Iraq and proposals to raise the minimum wage.
�Then he'll be ready to go� with a new version of the bill that the Senate approved in April.
Sen. John McCain
Republicans ran the show in both houses of Congress then, and passionate divisions in their ranks over immigration policy became a dominant feature of the debate. Democrats, particularly in the House, were mostly content to sit back and enjoy the stalemate, even as they campaigned against the �do-nothing Republican Congress.�
Now Democrats face the hazards of immigration politics.
Immigration-law changes are conspicuously absent from the legislative agenda laid out by incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Observers here say it will be difficult for Pelosi, D-San Francisco, to honor her campaign-season pledge to work for a new comprehensive immigration law without splitting a caucus that includes freshly elected Democrats who vowed to secure the border and crack down on illegal immigration.
The November midterm elections seemed to send mixed messages.
Rep. Luis Gutierrez
In a cliffhanger contest, Arizona Rep. J.D. Hayworth, a conservative Republican and strident foe of illegal immigration, was defeated by Democrat Harry Mitchell.
Immigration advocates such as Ben Johnson of the Immigration Policy Center say Hayworth's defeat showed that immigration �did not turn out to be the firebrand issue that some people thought it could be.�
But immigration restrictionists point out that Mitchell made getting tough on immigration the centerpiece of his campaign. They also say Mitchell cleverly used the issue against Hayworth, saying his Republican opponent was part of a political regime that wasn't competent enough to stop the hundreds of thousands of immigrants that sweep across Arizona's southern border each year.
While Mitchell said he favored legal status for long-established immigrants, he insisted that immigration policy can be fixed only by �members of Congress who are willing to enforce the law, produce real immigration reform and stop playing politics with the issue.�
Rep. Jeff Flake
That enforcement-heavy approach is fine with immigration advocates as long as it is part of a package that provides permanent legal status to those who are beckoned across the border by agriculture, restaurant, construction, landscaping and janitorial jobs. The number of illegal immigrants in the United States is estimated to be at least 11 million.
Immigrant-rights advocates, along with their allies at the National Chamber of Commerce and other business organizations, also support a proposal to provide hundreds of thousands of low-wage workers every year for employers who demonstrate that they are unable to find Americans to fill the slots.
While McCain and Kennedy describe this as a �temporary-worker program,� the legislation they sponsored would put the workers on a path to citizenship.
At a time of anxiety about the loss of good-paying manufacturing jobs, the McCain-Kennedy bill's efforts to import low-wage labor has drawn the anger of critics across the political spectrum. That is why Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates immigration restrictions, predicts Pelosi will be reluctant to get behind a proposal that could endanger the new Democratic majority.
�Nancy Pelosi knows the Democrats are on probation for the next two years,� Krikorian said.
He predicted that Pelosi would back less ambitious immigration change, such as a plan to provide legal status to undocumented students, rather than take on the explosive issue of mass legalization, which critics condemn as an amnesty that would spawn more illegal immigration.
But Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, which advocates for immigrant rights, argues that next year will be pivotal because of the presidential race that follows.
Advertisement
�I think that once we hit primary (election) season, controversial issues get a lot harder to do,� Sharry said. �Everybody I talk to says 2007 is the window of opportunity.�
Pelosi was noncommittal this week on whether the House would take up immigration legislation. She sought to deflect some of the responsibility to the White House, suggesting that she expects President Bush to offer more specifics than his call to �match willing worker with willing employer.�
�That's up to the president,� Pelosi said. �We want to work closely with him because it has to be comprehensive and bipartisan.�
President Bush's political advisers, meanwhile, have acknowledged that revamping immigration law may be necessary to shore up sagging support for Republicans among Hispanics, the nation's fastest-growing ethnic group. Republicans received just 30 percent of the Hispanic vote this year, down from 44 percent in 2004.
By Jerry Kammer
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE
December 9, 2006
WASHINGTON � Two of the most liberal members of Congress met with two of their most conservative colleagues this week to revive immigration legislation that passed the Senate but was throttled by House Republican leaders who resisted its attempt to grant citizenship to illegal immigrants.
Sen. Edward Kennedy
�The plan is to bring the bill up in late winter,� said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., a conservative stalwart who attended the meeting in the office of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. The other participants were Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill.
The strategy session Wednesday came amid speculation about how the dynamics of the immigration debate might change, if at all, when Democrats take control of the House and Senate next month.
Flake said that Kennedy, who will be chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee's immigration subcommittee, wants to let the new Congress deal first with issues such as the war in Iraq and proposals to raise the minimum wage.
�Then he'll be ready to go� with a new version of the bill that the Senate approved in April.
Sen. John McCain
Republicans ran the show in both houses of Congress then, and passionate divisions in their ranks over immigration policy became a dominant feature of the debate. Democrats, particularly in the House, were mostly content to sit back and enjoy the stalemate, even as they campaigned against the �do-nothing Republican Congress.�
Now Democrats face the hazards of immigration politics.
Immigration-law changes are conspicuously absent from the legislative agenda laid out by incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Observers here say it will be difficult for Pelosi, D-San Francisco, to honor her campaign-season pledge to work for a new comprehensive immigration law without splitting a caucus that includes freshly elected Democrats who vowed to secure the border and crack down on illegal immigration.
The November midterm elections seemed to send mixed messages.
Rep. Luis Gutierrez
In a cliffhanger contest, Arizona Rep. J.D. Hayworth, a conservative Republican and strident foe of illegal immigration, was defeated by Democrat Harry Mitchell.
Immigration advocates such as Ben Johnson of the Immigration Policy Center say Hayworth's defeat showed that immigration �did not turn out to be the firebrand issue that some people thought it could be.�
But immigration restrictionists point out that Mitchell made getting tough on immigration the centerpiece of his campaign. They also say Mitchell cleverly used the issue against Hayworth, saying his Republican opponent was part of a political regime that wasn't competent enough to stop the hundreds of thousands of immigrants that sweep across Arizona's southern border each year.
While Mitchell said he favored legal status for long-established immigrants, he insisted that immigration policy can be fixed only by �members of Congress who are willing to enforce the law, produce real immigration reform and stop playing politics with the issue.�
Rep. Jeff Flake
That enforcement-heavy approach is fine with immigration advocates as long as it is part of a package that provides permanent legal status to those who are beckoned across the border by agriculture, restaurant, construction, landscaping and janitorial jobs. The number of illegal immigrants in the United States is estimated to be at least 11 million.
Immigrant-rights advocates, along with their allies at the National Chamber of Commerce and other business organizations, also support a proposal to provide hundreds of thousands of low-wage workers every year for employers who demonstrate that they are unable to find Americans to fill the slots.
While McCain and Kennedy describe this as a �temporary-worker program,� the legislation they sponsored would put the workers on a path to citizenship.
At a time of anxiety about the loss of good-paying manufacturing jobs, the McCain-Kennedy bill's efforts to import low-wage labor has drawn the anger of critics across the political spectrum. That is why Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates immigration restrictions, predicts Pelosi will be reluctant to get behind a proposal that could endanger the new Democratic majority.
�Nancy Pelosi knows the Democrats are on probation for the next two years,� Krikorian said.
He predicted that Pelosi would back less ambitious immigration change, such as a plan to provide legal status to undocumented students, rather than take on the explosive issue of mass legalization, which critics condemn as an amnesty that would spawn more illegal immigration.
But Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, which advocates for immigrant rights, argues that next year will be pivotal because of the presidential race that follows.
Advertisement
�I think that once we hit primary (election) season, controversial issues get a lot harder to do,� Sharry said. �Everybody I talk to says 2007 is the window of opportunity.�
Pelosi was noncommittal this week on whether the House would take up immigration legislation. She sought to deflect some of the responsibility to the White House, suggesting that she expects President Bush to offer more specifics than his call to �match willing worker with willing employer.�
�That's up to the president,� Pelosi said. �We want to work closely with him because it has to be comprehensive and bipartisan.�
President Bush's political advisers, meanwhile, have acknowledged that revamping immigration law may be necessary to shore up sagging support for Republicans among Hispanics, the nation's fastest-growing ethnic group. Republicans received just 30 percent of the Hispanic vote this year, down from 44 percent in 2004.
2010 Vicki Gunvalson
yetanotherguyinline
11-17 05:55 PM
Done, good luck.
more...
malaGCPahije
03-26 03:50 PM
Thanks. Yes, if EB3 PD is on or before DEC 2003 then it would not be that bad now.
Unfortunately for me, my PD is Nov 2004. So I guess I will have to wait it out till 2010 or later maybe. I hope things move early than late...
Unfortunately for me, my PD is Nov 2004. So I guess I will have to wait it out till 2010 or later maybe. I hope things move early than late...
hair Vicki Gunvalson
lonedesi
05-23 07:32 AM
SORRY Fellas, I cannot send this out unless the provision for H1b nenewal be added to it. I know IVs main concern is reg the backlogged GC cases, however, I would request that future of the H1b should also be addresed. I now feel that even contributing to the IV was a mistake because you are not taking a broader view of this issue. Please try to include the clauses affecting H1bs also in your letters. Particularly simple technical aspects like renewing H1b beyond the 6 years period is a MUST and one of the things that can be MOST easily achieved if asked for.
You seem to be acting more in your interest than larger good of the members of this community. You have been quietly browsing this website all this time and suddenly became a member and started whining and complaining of what IV is doing. You don't need to get hyperactive and start freaking out. Relax and do what IV is requesting you to do at this time. There are a lot of items & issues IV is working on and they have prioritized some of them as very important which affects the larger members of this group. These important ones are what they are concentrating for now. If you do not like what IV is doing, you are more then welcome to move on and do what pleases you. But please stop discouraging & instigating other members with your stupid comments.
You seem to be acting more in your interest than larger good of the members of this community. You have been quietly browsing this website all this time and suddenly became a member and started whining and complaining of what IV is doing. You don't need to get hyperactive and start freaking out. Relax and do what IV is requesting you to do at this time. There are a lot of items & issues IV is working on and they have prioritized some of them as very important which affects the larger members of this group. These important ones are what they are concentrating for now. If you do not like what IV is doing, you are more then welcome to move on and do what pleases you. But please stop discouraging & instigating other members with your stupid comments.
more...
Sri_1975
08-31 01:49 PM
No Recipts yet..:)
hot Vicki Gunvaison has an
485Mbe4001
09-09 07:04 PM
:eek: As expected and as many posters said it would, all of EB3 including ROW is now screwed.. due to the change in visa allocation of over flow, july 07 fiasco and adhoc namecheck 90 provision, nothing against the ones who benefited from this.... ROW might see some progress but EB3 I/C are screwed big time....yes long live USCIS indeed...there is no hope for EB3 as a whole without a recapture provision.
01JUN02 22FEB02 15APR01 01MAY02 01JUN02
01JUN02 22FEB02 15APR01 01MAY02 01JUN02
more...
house Vicki Gunvalson
MeraNaamJoker
08-21 10:48 AM
I think it is around 13 or 14...if they are under that, USCIS only takes a thumb print
I don't think there is a specific age where they will taken finger prints. Read my story.
My 15 yr old was the first to receive the notice. She was not in US at that time. I called the USCIS and informed them about this. They said they will postpone the appointment. But the postponement was only for 2 weeks. With the next notice I went to the local office. The security officer gave me a print out stating that I visited there for this reason. AND ACCORDING TO THAT NOTICE, FINGER PRINTING CAN BE DONE WITHIN 64 DAYS FROM THE ORIGINAL NOTICE. My child came back to US in 60 days and I took her to the local office walk in date. He got finger printed.
The very next week my 9 yr old got the notice. I took another appointment and next day I got a second finer printing notice for my elder one again. I took both of them to the local office and explained the situation. For my second child they did the finger printing and for my elder, they made a stamp on to the latest notice which was not at all clear.
Me and wife was never requested for a second finger printing. We all just got GREENED on August 6th.
I don't think there is a specific age where they will taken finger prints. Read my story.
My 15 yr old was the first to receive the notice. She was not in US at that time. I called the USCIS and informed them about this. They said they will postpone the appointment. But the postponement was only for 2 weeks. With the next notice I went to the local office. The security officer gave me a print out stating that I visited there for this reason. AND ACCORDING TO THAT NOTICE, FINGER PRINTING CAN BE DONE WITHIN 64 DAYS FROM THE ORIGINAL NOTICE. My child came back to US in 60 days and I took her to the local office walk in date. He got finger printed.
The very next week my 9 yr old got the notice. I took another appointment and next day I got a second finer printing notice for my elder one again. I took both of them to the local office and explained the situation. For my second child they did the finger printing and for my elder, they made a stamp on to the latest notice which was not at all clear.
Me and wife was never requested for a second finger printing. We all just got GREENED on August 6th.
tattoo vicki gunvalson divorce
wandmaker
08-14 06:29 PM
Received the Cards - My case details and email sequence updated at - http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20706
more...
pictures Vicki Gunvalson OC Divorce
GC08
09-14 07:34 PM
As of September 14, 2007, USCIS has completed data entry and issued receipt notices for applications and petitions received on or before the dates indicated:
California Service Center
Form Number Date Received
I-130 8/08/2007
N-400 7/26/2007
All Other Forms 9/06/2007
Nebraska Service Center
Form Number Date Received
I-131 7/29/2007
I-140 7/29/2007
I-485 Employment
Based 7/29/2007
I-765 7/29/2007
N-400 7/26/2007
All Other Forms 8/05/2007
Texas Service Center
Form Number Date Received
I-131 7/19/2007
I-140 8/13/2007
I-140 concurrently filed
with I-485 7/19/2007
I-485 Employment
Based 7/19/2007
I-765 7/19/2007
N-400 7/16/2007
All Other Forms 9/11/2007
Vermont Service Center
Form Number Date Received
I-130 7/29/2007
N-400 7/25/2007
All Other Forms 9/4/2007
USCIS Lockbox
Form Number Date Received
I-485 Family Based 8/30/2007
TPS 8/26/2007
TEXAS center is catching up!!!!:D
If these data are true, how come a lot of July filers still have not got their receipts?
California Service Center
Form Number Date Received
I-130 8/08/2007
N-400 7/26/2007
All Other Forms 9/06/2007
Nebraska Service Center
Form Number Date Received
I-131 7/29/2007
I-140 7/29/2007
I-485 Employment
Based 7/29/2007
I-765 7/29/2007
N-400 7/26/2007
All Other Forms 8/05/2007
Texas Service Center
Form Number Date Received
I-131 7/19/2007
I-140 8/13/2007
I-140 concurrently filed
with I-485 7/19/2007
I-485 Employment
Based 7/19/2007
I-765 7/19/2007
N-400 7/16/2007
All Other Forms 9/11/2007
Vermont Service Center
Form Number Date Received
I-130 7/29/2007
N-400 7/25/2007
All Other Forms 9/4/2007
USCIS Lockbox
Form Number Date Received
I-485 Family Based 8/30/2007
TPS 8/26/2007
TEXAS center is catching up!!!!:D
If these data are true, how come a lot of July filers still have not got their receipts?
dresses Vicki Gunvalson has filed
desi3933
07-10 09:08 AM
Section 245
8 CFR PART 245 -- ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cf90b70814c3464912a08093ce96e 83c
8 CFR PART 245 -- ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cf90b70814c3464912a08093ce96e 83c
more...
makeup Vicki Gunvalson renewed vows
miapplicant
10-01 03:56 PM
WAC means CSC?? We applied on July 23rd at NSC and no news yet:(
girlfriend Vicki Gunvalson Reveals Why
anzerraja
07-20 09:52 AM
The thread is growing at an amazing speed.
With the least advertisement there are people joining the thread to do their fair share.
Very impressed !!!
TOGETHER WE CAN GET THIS DONE TODAY
With the least advertisement there are people joining the thread to do their fair share.
Very impressed !!!
TOGETHER WE CAN GET THIS DONE TODAY
hairstyles Vicki also talked about her
FrankZulu
08-25 12:39 PM
Folks
Can anyone advise on what docs to take along for an Infopass appointment?
The result of my SR was a recommendation by them to set up an Infopass. Going there this Friday.
Thanks for any advise and guidance.
Photo ID (Lic. or PP)
Can anyone advise on what docs to take along for an Infopass appointment?
The result of my SR was a recommendation by them to set up an Infopass. Going there this Friday.
Thanks for any advise and guidance.
Photo ID (Lic. or PP)
zeta7
03-23 11:35 AM
First of all, when you land in Canada, do not tell them that you are there for a short while and you will go back to USA may be next day. They dislike it. I wasn't given the best treatment and they did not put a request for PR card in the system. It is their way of penalizing you for having Canada PR as a second option. I came back to USA very next day by road and called CIC Canda, they took my friend's address in Canada and mailed the PR card. She said, Immigration officer should have put a PR card request in the system. Canadian immigration officers very well know that there is 200 mile long GC line in the US and people are using Canada as a backup plan. I guess they dislike being a "backup plan".
Now, let us say that your US VISA is expired on your passport, you can still go to Canada and come back to USA after claiming your PR status in Cananda. Automatic VISA revalidation rule gives you the ability to come back to USA even with an expired VISA but approved I-797 under 2 conditions -
1. You stayed in Canda for less than 30 days.
2. You did not apply for US VISA in Canada and got rejected.
One more thing, when you fly back from Canada to USA, your immigration happens in Canadian airport itself. So you will land in US domestic airport and walk as if you are coming out of a domestic flight. Hope it helps. Good Luck.
Thanks for the reply kumar1. However, I never left the country after changing from F1 to H1b status, so I don't even have an "expired" H1b visa stamp in my passport, just an expired F1 stamp. I don't know if that will complicate AVR, so was planning on using my AP.
Were you in a pending 485 when you returned after landing in Canada? Any issues with US immigration? That is my main concern; I especially don't like the idea of having an RFE attached to my 485 because of this.
Also, can you comment on this plan I've been considering: I'd like to visit India too, so how about if I fly to Canada, get my Canadian landing taken care of, then fly to India from Canada, spend some two weeks in India, then return to the U.S. using my AP. Can you think of additional potential problems there?
Thanks!
Now, let us say that your US VISA is expired on your passport, you can still go to Canada and come back to USA after claiming your PR status in Cananda. Automatic VISA revalidation rule gives you the ability to come back to USA even with an expired VISA but approved I-797 under 2 conditions -
1. You stayed in Canda for less than 30 days.
2. You did not apply for US VISA in Canada and got rejected.
One more thing, when you fly back from Canada to USA, your immigration happens in Canadian airport itself. So you will land in US domestic airport and walk as if you are coming out of a domestic flight. Hope it helps. Good Luck.
Thanks for the reply kumar1. However, I never left the country after changing from F1 to H1b status, so I don't even have an "expired" H1b visa stamp in my passport, just an expired F1 stamp. I don't know if that will complicate AVR, so was planning on using my AP.
Were you in a pending 485 when you returned after landing in Canada? Any issues with US immigration? That is my main concern; I especially don't like the idea of having an RFE attached to my 485 because of this.
Also, can you comment on this plan I've been considering: I'd like to visit India too, so how about if I fly to Canada, get my Canadian landing taken care of, then fly to India from Canada, spend some two weeks in India, then return to the U.S. using my AP. Can you think of additional potential problems there?
Thanks!
kondur_007
08-18 02:48 PM
Everybody has been waiting for his/her green card and congratulations to all those who has got their GC. On the other hand it is really unfair and to some extent unethical on the part of USICS not follow a fair system.
There are several people in 2004, 2005 who have been paitently waiting for their turn only to see that people behind them getting approved.
Several of us have writtent to Ombudsman, Director but of no avail.
Not sure what else can be done? Any Idea? Do we have any liaison with AILA who can take up this matter.
I can understand the frustration here. The problem is, USCIS has been doing this for several years and everyone knows this.
Even Ombudsman mention this in his report! So I dont think we can write much of letters about this...it is a well known and acknowledged fact!
Now what is the solution? The problem is USCIS claims that they do not have enough resouces to implement FIFO. Or may be they do not have a system to utilize available resources to do so.
This is not likely to change in next couple of months. So with all due respect, everyone with current PD but still waiting for GC will just have to wait and hope for the best. I wish my good luck to all. The best we can expect from USCIS at this point is to use all the visa numbers and not to waste any.
On a long run, this does need to change. It will take several months or years to change and it is worthwhile to attempt our efforts in that direction. Or suggest something in that line to include in upcoming CIR next year.
any thoughts?
There are several people in 2004, 2005 who have been paitently waiting for their turn only to see that people behind them getting approved.
Several of us have writtent to Ombudsman, Director but of no avail.
Not sure what else can be done? Any Idea? Do we have any liaison with AILA who can take up this matter.
I can understand the frustration here. The problem is, USCIS has been doing this for several years and everyone knows this.
Even Ombudsman mention this in his report! So I dont think we can write much of letters about this...it is a well known and acknowledged fact!
Now what is the solution? The problem is USCIS claims that they do not have enough resouces to implement FIFO. Or may be they do not have a system to utilize available resources to do so.
This is not likely to change in next couple of months. So with all due respect, everyone with current PD but still waiting for GC will just have to wait and hope for the best. I wish my good luck to all. The best we can expect from USCIS at this point is to use all the visa numbers and not to waste any.
On a long run, this does need to change. It will take several months or years to change and it is worthwhile to attempt our efforts in that direction. Or suggest something in that line to include in upcoming CIR next year.
any thoughts?
No comments:
Post a Comment