leo2606
09-26 12:48 PM
FBI is going to tell only if your FP results are gone back to USCIS or not.
They do not tell about the Name Check.
Hi
I read that you have called FBI to know about the name check status.Whats thier contact no ?What inputs do they ask to get your case status ?
Let everyone know
Thanks
GCcomesoon
They do not tell about the Name Check.
Hi
I read that you have called FBI to know about the name check status.Whats thier contact no ?What inputs do they ask to get your case status ?
Let everyone know
Thanks
GCcomesoon
wallpaper long side fringe hairstyles.
karthikdurai
02-01 09:11 PM
Thanks MC thats a valid Point.
There are 2 reasons that I thought of for not applying / renewing.
1) I'm not planning on going anywhere after / atleast for a year.
2) My wife's AP filed last year took Six months to get approved and what happens if you fly out while your AP is pending / sent for renewal. I read in this forum, not fly out, while you AP is pending.
Appreciate your time.
Regards
Karthik
There are 2 reasons that I thought of for not applying / renewing.
1) I'm not planning on going anywhere after / atleast for a year.
2) My wife's AP filed last year took Six months to get approved and what happens if you fly out while your AP is pending / sent for renewal. I read in this forum, not fly out, while you AP is pending.
Appreciate your time.
Regards
Karthik
485Mbe4001
09-14 06:48 PM
:D we could hold town hall meetings and discuss this issue, unfortunately we dont have the taxpayers money to blow...
my guess, nothing will happen till november.. they are all posturing for votes at the moment. After november they will all go with the ones who lobby the most :eek:
Who will help us? Dems or Reps?
SKILL is introduced by Reps in both houses. Anybody has any
idea what Dems think about SKILL? Its all confusing to me.
If Dems take congress, I think they may not worry about SKILL
since there is no bipartisan support for the moment. What you guys
think of it?
my guess, nothing will happen till november.. they are all posturing for votes at the moment. After november they will all go with the ones who lobby the most :eek:
Who will help us? Dems or Reps?
SKILL is introduced by Reps in both houses. Anybody has any
idea what Dems think about SKILL? Its all confusing to me.
If Dems take congress, I think they may not worry about SKILL
since there is no bipartisan support for the moment. What you guys
think of it?
2011 long hairstyles with side
wandmaker
10-24 01:07 AM
Your labor wants masters only or bachelors with 5 years is acceptable?
Look bullet no. 2.
The following degree equivalency determinations have been made by the AAO, USCIS, District Court and through regulations:
1. A Bachelor of Medicine & Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) is the foreign equivalent of a US medical degree. (2009)
2. A three year Bachelor�s degree from India is equivalent to a US Bachelor�s degree. (2008)
EB-2 & EB-3 Degree Equivalency | US Immigration Blog (http://blog.messersmithlaw.com/?p=50)
MurthyDotCom : Combination Degrees found by AAO Equal to 4-Year U.S. Degree (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_combdg.html)
YOU NEED GOOD LAWYER. FILE COMPLAINT WITH AAO.
Good find - IF OPs labor has "bachelors +5 years" then s/he can be back in track otherwise the chances are slim to none.
Look bullet no. 2.
The following degree equivalency determinations have been made by the AAO, USCIS, District Court and through regulations:
1. A Bachelor of Medicine & Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) is the foreign equivalent of a US medical degree. (2009)
2. A three year Bachelor�s degree from India is equivalent to a US Bachelor�s degree. (2008)
EB-2 & EB-3 Degree Equivalency | US Immigration Blog (http://blog.messersmithlaw.com/?p=50)
MurthyDotCom : Combination Degrees found by AAO Equal to 4-Year U.S. Degree (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_combdg.html)
YOU NEED GOOD LAWYER. FILE COMPLAINT WITH AAO.
Good find - IF OPs labor has "bachelors +5 years" then s/he can be back in track otherwise the chances are slim to none.
more...
extra_mint
10-12 08:34 PM
The point here is that this is wrong
1. Extra cost for Immigrants, It is expensive 400 Dollars
2. There is no logic for this medicine - It makes immigrants guinea pigs for this vaccination. It is clearly a result of lobbying effforts from Pharma companies.
If We do not appose (or I should say expose) it now then u never know what all they will keep piling on in medical exams and very soon that 5% figure that u talked about will be 100%.
Also IV is for Legal Immigration for all nationals, I am sure more than 5% of IV members are getting effected.
It is highly unethical to make this vaccine mandatory for immigrants (girls in age group 11-26) and not for citizens.
Only the Pharma companies and committe members (as they must have been bribed) are gaining out of this.
It is going to bring an estimated 40 million dollar annually to Merck.
Not to mention the extra paper work for us immigrants and RFE's on medicals for people who has already completed the paper work and are waiting in the lines.
This vaccination is for ladies only and in age group 11 to 26, that really means only 5% of Indians will be effected with the wait times we have been looking at.
1. Extra cost for Immigrants, It is expensive 400 Dollars
2. There is no logic for this medicine - It makes immigrants guinea pigs for this vaccination. It is clearly a result of lobbying effforts from Pharma companies.
If We do not appose (or I should say expose) it now then u never know what all they will keep piling on in medical exams and very soon that 5% figure that u talked about will be 100%.
Also IV is for Legal Immigration for all nationals, I am sure more than 5% of IV members are getting effected.
It is highly unethical to make this vaccine mandatory for immigrants (girls in age group 11-26) and not for citizens.
Only the Pharma companies and committe members (as they must have been bribed) are gaining out of this.
It is going to bring an estimated 40 million dollar annually to Merck.
Not to mention the extra paper work for us immigrants and RFE's on medicals for people who has already completed the paper work and are waiting in the lines.
This vaccination is for ladies only and in age group 11 to 26, that really means only 5% of Indians will be effected with the wait times we have been looking at.
cnag
07-09 10:23 PM
That's true. Priority Mail + Delivery Confirmation.
Can the docs be sent thru Fedex??
Can the docs be sent thru Fedex??
more...
waitforevergc
09-04 04:12 PM
Sadly, RFE's are the norm especially for folks in IT industry.
Also, when they submitted my H1 extension, our lawyer told us not to file under Premium as it might attract undue scrutiny, so we went normal process.
Also, when they submitted my H1 extension, our lawyer told us not to file under Premium as it might attract undue scrutiny, so we went normal process.
2010 Hairstyles with side bangs may
gcformeornot
10-12 02:16 PM
My wife got her H1b in 2007 and she was working for the company for 1 year and then she delivered in Oct 08 and since Oct 2008 she's on maternity leave. She was supposed to join back but because of the downturn her employer asked to extend the maternity leave and its an year almost. During this whole period her employer is ok and he has not removed her job. Is my wife is in status? I read on the web that the maternity leave is mutual as long as the employer and employee exists its ok. But my question is that is there a time limit on that. Also she's not getting paid for the full year when she was on maternity leave. The state remains the same now also. So what are right steps to do.....
Change to H4 till the employer asks to join back and then change to H1?
Please suggest
maternity leave can only be justified for maybe 3-4 months after delivery.... I think she is out of status. If there is no job, change status to H4 or something.....
Change to H4 till the employer asks to join back and then change to H1?
Please suggest
maternity leave can only be justified for maybe 3-4 months after delivery.... I think she is out of status. If there is no job, change status to H4 or something.....
more...
sunny1000
11-12 10:34 PM
The original poster "getrdone" wrongly pressed panic button. There is no change from 2004 thru till now. I went to mexico several times for stamping. I have seen several people who got stamping for H1-H1 & F1-H1 (Safe), H4-H1 & B1-H1 (Lucky guys)...In anycase, taking Mexican Visa (though absolutely not mandatory) is advised
The change of status cases (F1 -> H1, H4 -> H1 etc) are not allowed anymore at Mexico. I think it went into effect last month.
The change of status cases (F1 -> H1, H4 -> H1 etc) are not allowed anymore at Mexico. I think it went into effect last month.
hair long face, hairstyles with
pappu
09-22 01:12 PM
http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20070026637
more...
rpulipati
10-05 03:11 PM
I had similar situation in labor process. The new company attorney mentioned me to do an amendment for labor processing, however I was reluctant and did not continue with it. An year later on pending labor, I received RFE: something like unable to find company. Attorney then sent the company acquisition details. Months later labor got approved.
Talk to your attorney.
Talk to your attorney.
hot long side bangs hairstyles.
ImmiLosers
03-11 08:26 PM
I-94 is proof of your valid presence in US. You should not be having it if you are not in US. You will get one once you come back. Do not leave Airport without getting one;)
more...
house Natural Medium Layered Haircut
nixstor
09-20 05:37 PM
Just wondering how many souls are out there in the country with EB-2 India PD of 2004 and earlier but are not here on IV.
Even with a 1% representation ( assuming that 2004 folks such as us are NOT tired to participate in poll), the total number should be some thing like 8000-9000. 1.5 dependents makes it 20K-25Knumbers.
Also I noticed that a lot of people who voted here has their profile listed as EB-3. Did those guys took the wrong poll or did interfiling?
I feel that OCT EB-2 I & C reversal of DOS was a knee jerk reaction to USCIS's random approvals and we should see a good jump's in next few months.
Even with a 1% representation ( assuming that 2004 folks such as us are NOT tired to participate in poll), the total number should be some thing like 8000-9000. 1.5 dependents makes it 20K-25Knumbers.
Also I noticed that a lot of people who voted here has their profile listed as EB-3. Did those guys took the wrong poll or did interfiling?
I feel that OCT EB-2 I & C reversal of DOS was a knee jerk reaction to USCIS's random approvals and we should see a good jump's in next few months.
tattoo Side Fringe Hairstyles
GCaspirations
09-21 10:39 PM
My case was also transferred to CSC. The transfer notice has a different receipt date than the receipt notice. MY case is now transferred back to NSC.
I would like to know if anybody of you have received finger print notice. I have not received it yet.
I would like to know if anybody of you have received finger print notice. I have not received it yet.
more...
pictures long side fringe hairstyles.
karthkc
03-20 12:04 PM
RoseBall,, here is my query..Please answer
I got RFE on 140 asking
all my expereince letter proir to 2002 ( I came US in 1999) and By the time I worked with two companys.
Now I got one company exp letter and other one closed and I couldn't able to get the letter. as per sources and attorney advice I am submitting coleague affidavit.
and also they asked me all w2's where I worked only few months in 2004 and w2 amount is not that great.
I am still fearing how do USCIS take in to consideration when they finalise the case.
Do you think all these are substantiate my case , or they may come with another RFE or denial..
Please advise me what I want to do, I haven't submitt my case yet.
Thanks
You should be okay on the exp letters, but it will be your 2004 W2 that may turn out to be an issue.
If you have been without pay from longer than 6 months in 2004, then you have a serious status issue and you will need to check with a good attorney to handle that..
My recommendation is to get a good immi attorney who has handled these kinds of cases before and have them do your paperwork....
I got RFE on 140 asking
all my expereince letter proir to 2002 ( I came US in 1999) and By the time I worked with two companys.
Now I got one company exp letter and other one closed and I couldn't able to get the letter. as per sources and attorney advice I am submitting coleague affidavit.
and also they asked me all w2's where I worked only few months in 2004 and w2 amount is not that great.
I am still fearing how do USCIS take in to consideration when they finalise the case.
Do you think all these are substantiate my case , or they may come with another RFE or denial..
Please advise me what I want to do, I haven't submitt my case yet.
Thanks
You should be okay on the exp letters, but it will be your 2004 W2 that may turn out to be an issue.
If you have been without pay from longer than 6 months in 2004, then you have a serious status issue and you will need to check with a good attorney to handle that..
My recommendation is to get a good immi attorney who has handled these kinds of cases before and have them do your paperwork....
dresses side bangs hairstyles.
learning01
02-25 05:03 PM
This is the most compelling piece I read about why this country should do more for scientists and engineers who are on temporary work visas. Read it till the end and enjoy.
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
more...
makeup long haircuts with side bangs
Suva
07-23 12:22 PM
R. Mickels
girlfriend Teenager Haircut With Long
venkatosizolon
03-28 11:46 PM
I was in between projects when they didnt pay but this time they are not paying when I am on project. shoud I make difference when I will complain?
hairstyles hairstyles for side bangs.
cherupally
09-11 10:41 AM
Hi Chirupally,
I had similar RFE where USCIS wanted doctor's original signature.
Doctor's filled out a new form (latest version) with all the information from the old form.No test were done again.But they signed the new form with OLD date.
Did your doctor sign the form with new date?
Also,are you including the old original form that you received in sealed envelope with RFE?I am include the ONLY the new sealed envelope that has latest form as the doctor discarded the old form.
I did not receive old form. I just received the gold color form and the letter stating whats RFE about. I guess since only partial information is missing, they did not send me back the old form. I have not received the new forms from doctor yet. I will get it today. I guess he is going to sign with today's date only. Hope this answers your questions.
I had similar RFE where USCIS wanted doctor's original signature.
Doctor's filled out a new form (latest version) with all the information from the old form.No test were done again.But they signed the new form with OLD date.
Did your doctor sign the form with new date?
Also,are you including the old original form that you received in sealed envelope with RFE?I am include the ONLY the new sealed envelope that has latest form as the doctor discarded the old form.
I did not receive old form. I just received the gold color form and the letter stating whats RFE about. I guess since only partial information is missing, they did not send me back the old form. I have not received the new forms from doctor yet. I will get it today. I guess he is going to sign with today's date only. Hope this answers your questions.
wata
09-30 03:30 PM
This is absolutely no-sense at all.
Texas, take about 2-3 months to approve 140 and 485. While Nebraska take about 4-5 months to approve only 140. This is not included 485 that back up from December 2, 2005.
You compare about 2-3 month processing time from one Center and another 1 year from another service center.
People there don't know how to do the mathematic or what, why keep sending everything to Nebraska still. Why don't transfer from the last person in Nebraska to Texas and have Texas start processing 485 in Queued.
We don't want people get process by Luck! or by paying more money and left other people behind.
What you think?!
Texas, take about 2-3 months to approve 140 and 485. While Nebraska take about 4-5 months to approve only 140. This is not included 485 that back up from December 2, 2005.
You compare about 2-3 month processing time from one Center and another 1 year from another service center.
People there don't know how to do the mathematic or what, why keep sending everything to Nebraska still. Why don't transfer from the last person in Nebraska to Texas and have Texas start processing 485 in Queued.
We don't want people get process by Luck! or by paying more money and left other people behind.
What you think?!
sk.aggarwal
05-04 11:19 AM
What happens, once he moves to the new employer and his present employer withdraws I-140? For any subsequent H1 transfers/extensions will he will need to have an approved I-140, which is not withdrawn ?
Could there be issues, if new employer does a lay off what happens when perm/i-140 is pending or not filled yet
Could there be issues, if new employer does a lay off what happens when perm/i-140 is pending or not filled yet
