gc_buddy
09-15 02:13 PM
Will call each and everyone of them.
wallpaper She was rescued.quot; Maggie
eb2_mumbai
09-25 10:24 AM
I agree the numbers seem to include dependents. I mean while looking at EB2 numbers you can see average 1000 - 1500 applications per month which translates to roughly 400 - 700 primary applications (labor) filed each month. That looks reasonable.
suriajay12
03-12 07:53 AM
Looks like this thread is dying.. Is Sarala who created this, still around???
2011 wallpaper Retriever,Mix
Ramba
08-21 12:46 PM
Yes, the same law can be interpreted like this:
EB1-ROW unused visa will go to EB2-ROW
EB2-ROW unused visa will go to EB3-ROW
Same for each country.
But its not happening. What actually is happening that they are giving unused visa from EB1-ROW to EB2-ROW to EB2-I/C. WHY?
So EB3-ROW is retrogressed bcoz it doesn't get any spillover and hence it affect EB3-I.
So where is the correct interpretation? Does any body know?
Don't take me wrong here. I don't favor EB3-ROW or any particular category. I am EB3-I with PD Nov 2002.
This was the law till 2000 (vertical spill over). After 2000, because of AC21, the INA got changed to horizontal spillover. This means each employment catagories are seperatly free from country quota if demand is less than supply in each catagory. If you analyze word by word in the language of the AC21 act, you will understand. Unfortunally (fortunatly for EB3) DOS has not interpreted the law correctly till 2006. Now they are interpreting correctly.
5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) ]for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
EB1-ROW unused visa will go to EB2-ROW
EB2-ROW unused visa will go to EB3-ROW
Same for each country.
But its not happening. What actually is happening that they are giving unused visa from EB1-ROW to EB2-ROW to EB2-I/C. WHY?
So EB3-ROW is retrogressed bcoz it doesn't get any spillover and hence it affect EB3-I.
So where is the correct interpretation? Does any body know?
Don't take me wrong here. I don't favor EB3-ROW or any particular category. I am EB3-I with PD Nov 2002.
This was the law till 2000 (vertical spill over). After 2000, because of AC21, the INA got changed to horizontal spillover. This means each employment catagories are seperatly free from country quota if demand is less than supply in each catagory. If you analyze word by word in the language of the AC21 act, you will understand. Unfortunally (fortunatly for EB3) DOS has not interpreted the law correctly till 2006. Now they are interpreting correctly.
5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) ]for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
more...
asanghi
05-17 07:03 PM
Does one need to be physically present in US in order to file I-485 application? I had already booked my travel to India on May 25th before I came to know that the my Priority Dates had become current. Will I need to be in US till I get the filing receipt? I was curious on how would UCSIS know that I'm out of country on the day of filing?
Thanks
How will USCIS will know? They have all your immigration related documents including I-94. They can track all of your movements.
Thanks
How will USCIS will know? They have all your immigration related documents including I-94. They can track all of your movements.
ski_dude12
09-19 10:33 AM
I received a similar response to the 2nd SR. I was told that my case was under additional review and to allow them 60 days. However, my wife's case had been assigned to an officer for review.
Did you send an email to TSC.Ncscfollowup@dhs.gov (for TSC - another email for NSC). I had no clue where my application was when even 2006 cases were getting approved. I am seeing some movement after emailing them.
Gurus,
I received a SR reply in mail that my case is under additional review . MY pd is sep 05 and i am so frustrated. They also asked to check back after 4 - 9 months. Is there any body in that situation and what else can be done .. please advice..
Thanks
Did you send an email to TSC.Ncscfollowup@dhs.gov (for TSC - another email for NSC). I had no clue where my application was when even 2006 cases were getting approved. I am seeing some movement after emailing them.
Gurus,
I received a SR reply in mail that my case is under additional review . MY pd is sep 05 and i am so frustrated. They also asked to check back after 4 - 9 months. Is there any body in that situation and what else can be done .. please advice..
Thanks
more...
QB_man
02-15 02:12 PM
Can anyone tell me if we have to wait on the DOS number all the way till we hear a voice or can we dial an extn? also is there any other number that my employers can call?
2010 Golden retriever mix puppy
gc4me
05-23 09:11 AM
+ve skin test does not mean anything.
You can be +ve if
1. If you ever had TB
2. If you ever had TB medication
3. If you ever had TB Vaccination
If you are +ve, you need to do chest x-ray to verify whether you have TB or not. Tell your doc for chest x-ray. For me, I knew I will be +ve and so I told my doc for x-ray at the first time and did not have skin test.
I Got Positive Skin Test. What Should I Do Now? Please Inform Me.
Thanks
Chhaya.
You can be +ve if
1. If you ever had TB
2. If you ever had TB medication
3. If you ever had TB Vaccination
If you are +ve, you need to do chest x-ray to verify whether you have TB or not. Tell your doc for chest x-ray. For me, I knew I will be +ve and so I told my doc for x-ray at the first time and did not have skin test.
I Got Positive Skin Test. What Should I Do Now? Please Inform Me.
Thanks
Chhaya.
more...
sayantan76
01-08 11:50 AM
Yes you are correct.
I dont know about the Govt and bureaucrats and political aides - maybe they have big attention spans - but i know for a fact if someone in a corporate structure receives such a long letter as proposed originally- most would not have the patience to read it. Maybe, the handwritten and personalized part should be:
1. I am XYZ - educated at ABC and work in DEF sector. Been in US legally for XX years - no able to buy a house, progress in career, start my company etc for not having visa certainity.
2. While we wait anxiously for comprehensive reform - the following administrative fixes can speed up the processing backlog, specially for some countries like India, China etc
a.
b.
c.
Highly skilled immigrants have been a key stakeholder in keeping America competitive and your leadership in providing relief to this segment through these fixes would ensure that the best and brightest from around the world continue to be attracted to America.
I am also enclosing a detailed write-up on this issue for your further reference and I look forward to your urgent attention in this matter.
Yours truly.....
Encl: as above
Then the standard printed mailer can be an attachment. Keeps the main letter short and sweet.
This may be a trash proposal - but is based on my close observance of senior management (and i am asssuming senior mannagement in corp world is not that different from politicians) - would increase the probability of the main message being read!
I dont know about the Govt and bureaucrats and political aides - maybe they have big attention spans - but i know for a fact if someone in a corporate structure receives such a long letter as proposed originally- most would not have the patience to read it. Maybe, the handwritten and personalized part should be:
1. I am XYZ - educated at ABC and work in DEF sector. Been in US legally for XX years - no able to buy a house, progress in career, start my company etc for not having visa certainity.
2. While we wait anxiously for comprehensive reform - the following administrative fixes can speed up the processing backlog, specially for some countries like India, China etc
a.
b.
c.
Highly skilled immigrants have been a key stakeholder in keeping America competitive and your leadership in providing relief to this segment through these fixes would ensure that the best and brightest from around the world continue to be attracted to America.
I am also enclosing a detailed write-up on this issue for your further reference and I look forward to your urgent attention in this matter.
Yours truly.....
Encl: as above
Then the standard printed mailer can be an attachment. Keeps the main letter short and sweet.
This may be a trash proposal - but is based on my close observance of senior management (and i am asssuming senior mannagement in corp world is not that different from politicians) - would increase the probability of the main message being read!
hair Golden Retriever Sheltie Mix
gimmeacard
09-24 11:25 AM
Congrats ski_dude12. My personal opinion is that this may have delayed your greencard since July. Sometimes people get too anxious once their date is current and want to try everything that is possible to get approval. There is so much information and misinformation on forums.
i would think that you dont need to raise any SR or other action for at least 3-4 weeks from the month your PD is current.
i didnt do anything and the emails came to me by 7th of Sept
maybe in some cases it helps, in some cases i heard- there have been delays
i would think that you dont need to raise any SR or other action for at least 3-4 weeks from the month your PD is current.
i didnt do anything and the emails came to me by 7th of Sept
maybe in some cases it helps, in some cases i heard- there have been delays
more...
JazzByTheBay
07-09 09:00 PM
Nice! So what you're saying is that this creative form of protest is a waste of time, even though Mr. Gonzalez responded to it? And we shouldn't indulge in creatively letting our heart-felt feelings known to a step that can be termed as nothing but injustice, and unfair to all uncocerned.
- Injustice to the hard-working USCIS folks who had to work the weekend before the 4th of July week... (frankly, not the fault of USCIS rank and file, they have our collective sympathies and certainly mine)
- Injustice perhaps to Dept of State and Ms. Condi Rice who had to answer the ridiculous questions when DoS was going about its work as normal, or so it seems
- Injustice to all of us waiting in line of course, for having been given the glimmer of hope of being able to file for an AOS (frankly, a lot of us don't care as much about the eventual approval of I-485 as we do about the ability to file for it when the visa bulletin was announced as current... it's about getting done with the last step, and most importantly being able to get the interim benefits of EADs particularly for our spouses, AP to travel freely, and most importantly the benefits of AC21 portability... ).
Yes, that's an option - suggested by your inaction - do nothing, and take what you get.
Or we can let the world know about this injustice, and hope for a fair hearing on the issue (rather than having it ignored completely), by at least getting a shot at getting the ability to file pursuant to the original July visa bulletin.
Perhaps you were'nt on the same roller coaster ride we were put through these past few weeks since June 13th, or perhaps you don't care enough.
Either way, it doesn't make sense to dissuade the majority from pursuing their creative forms of protest - at least for Mr. M. K. Gandhi's sake and ideals.... :)
Even if we're asked to pay the higher filing fees that would come into effect on June 30th (which is what this was all about anyways, as it seems... ), it will a good solution for a lot of us. USCIS accepting the applications as they've been filed with current filing fees would be golden...
Dude, where's my EAD + AP + AC21 portability? :)
jazz
Hello all
I am a silent visitor of this website.
Just my 2 cents... Don't think USA is like India where you can do something forcefully. Why don't you guys understand the real problem of USCIS.
Do you think that by sending flower to USCIS will force them to make EB2/EB3 current for 2005/2006/2007 guys??
Please try to understand their problem.
Also India is the great. Why don't you guys just think that India is your home country where you are born and brought up. Why you people can't just wait and watch?? If nothing happens to the so called GC, then why don't you think to pack up and go back to India???????
My sincere request, please don't do rally, you might be arrested......you never know what they can do..... Don't you think that, it is better to go back to India rather than being embarrassed here in US???
Isn't it a shame on us to go for Rally to get GC?????:D
Just think that you will get it when time comes, otherwise pack up.
Please don't take much tension as life is very short. I am assuring you all, nothing will happen with law suit and flower campaign.Don't irritate USCIS by doing all this please.
EB2 India
PD-2005-May
I140 approved-Sept 2006
- Injustice to the hard-working USCIS folks who had to work the weekend before the 4th of July week... (frankly, not the fault of USCIS rank and file, they have our collective sympathies and certainly mine)
- Injustice perhaps to Dept of State and Ms. Condi Rice who had to answer the ridiculous questions when DoS was going about its work as normal, or so it seems
- Injustice to all of us waiting in line of course, for having been given the glimmer of hope of being able to file for an AOS (frankly, a lot of us don't care as much about the eventual approval of I-485 as we do about the ability to file for it when the visa bulletin was announced as current... it's about getting done with the last step, and most importantly being able to get the interim benefits of EADs particularly for our spouses, AP to travel freely, and most importantly the benefits of AC21 portability... ).
Yes, that's an option - suggested by your inaction - do nothing, and take what you get.
Or we can let the world know about this injustice, and hope for a fair hearing on the issue (rather than having it ignored completely), by at least getting a shot at getting the ability to file pursuant to the original July visa bulletin.
Perhaps you were'nt on the same roller coaster ride we were put through these past few weeks since June 13th, or perhaps you don't care enough.
Either way, it doesn't make sense to dissuade the majority from pursuing their creative forms of protest - at least for Mr. M. K. Gandhi's sake and ideals.... :)
Even if we're asked to pay the higher filing fees that would come into effect on June 30th (which is what this was all about anyways, as it seems... ), it will a good solution for a lot of us. USCIS accepting the applications as they've been filed with current filing fees would be golden...
Dude, where's my EAD + AP + AC21 portability? :)
jazz
Hello all
I am a silent visitor of this website.
Just my 2 cents... Don't think USA is like India where you can do something forcefully. Why don't you guys understand the real problem of USCIS.
Do you think that by sending flower to USCIS will force them to make EB2/EB3 current for 2005/2006/2007 guys??
Please try to understand their problem.
Also India is the great. Why don't you guys just think that India is your home country where you are born and brought up. Why you people can't just wait and watch?? If nothing happens to the so called GC, then why don't you think to pack up and go back to India???????
My sincere request, please don't do rally, you might be arrested......you never know what they can do..... Don't you think that, it is better to go back to India rather than being embarrassed here in US???
Isn't it a shame on us to go for Rally to get GC?????:D
Just think that you will get it when time comes, otherwise pack up.
Please don't take much tension as life is very short. I am assuring you all, nothing will happen with law suit and flower campaign.Don't irritate USCIS by doing all this please.
EB2 India
PD-2005-May
I140 approved-Sept 2006
hot Golden Retriever mix.
patiently_waiting
09-25 07:01 PM
Click-2-Call allows you to call only "the vonage number" from PC.It makes the vonage number to ring and connect to the destination.
any settings need to be updated in vonage account for making the remote number to ring and connect to the destination ?
Thanks
any settings need to be updated in vonage account for making the remote number to ring and connect to the destination ?
Thanks
more...
house Ben - Chow, Golden Retriever
shouldIwait
05-09 08:55 PM
Calling IV admins to please block Mr. Hunter because he's trying to pick a fight which defeats the purpose of this forum. Moreover this forum isn't for anti-immigrants in any case.
To set the record straight.....Mr. Hunter should first learn English Grammar. It's "I have been" not "I has been". And yeah, don't get lost in statistics, just because laws in US are designed to encourage corporate fraud in variety of forms doesn't mean corruption is any less. The only difference is low grass-roots level corruption which is direct result of differences in population density.
To set the record straight.....Mr. Hunter should first learn English Grammar. It's "I have been" not "I has been". And yeah, don't get lost in statistics, just because laws in US are designed to encourage corporate fraud in variety of forms doesn't mean corruption is any less. The only difference is low grass-roots level corruption which is direct result of differences in population density.
tattoo Shepherd mix.
gccovet
11-16 02:26 PM
bump-make it stay on top
more...
pictures sweet Golden Retriever and
GotGC??
05-17 11:25 AM
Everything coming out of USCIS is a "I-797 Notice of Approval" :) and AP is no exception.
I am far from getting one myself but have seen colleague's approvals - this is printed on the same form like the H1 approval. Whether you subsequently need a stamp on the passport I don't know.
Hey Guys,
Can you please tell me in what form you get your advance parole (AP)? Is it like a Visa stamp on your passport or is it a temperory card like the EAD?
Thanks
Lasantha
I am far from getting one myself but have seen colleague's approvals - this is printed on the same form like the H1 approval. Whether you subsequently need a stamp on the passport I don't know.
Hey Guys,
Can you please tell me in what form you get your advance parole (AP)? Is it like a Visa stamp on your passport or is it a temperory card like the EAD?
Thanks
Lasantha
dresses hair Golden Retriever mix
anotherone
01-29 06:28 PM
Is there some master list of companies that have been filed against ? Do you know of anyone on this list that have done so and won ?
What will that accomplish really ? I dont know if working for this place will be a good idea anyway after filing a suit against them... but OTOH if it helps other people or at least if its out there on the net, so other companies wont get his brilliant idea....
just musing, thankyou for replying to my posts so quickly.
What will that accomplish really ? I dont know if working for this place will be a good idea anyway after filing a suit against them... but OTOH if it helps other people or at least if its out there on the net, so other companies wont get his brilliant idea....
just musing, thankyou for replying to my posts so quickly.
more...
makeup Golden Retriever Mixes Small
jonty_11
06-18 01:26 PM
Does the the passport have to be valid for at least 6 months at the time of applying 485?
girlfriend golden retriever mix. und
zbd
06-26 12:28 AM
I'm not willing to change the employer but what If I stay with current employer and find an other job as part-time (say weekends) after getting my EAD ?
Is it fraud too ?
Is it fraud too ?
hairstyles Golden Retrievers and dogs
jsb
10-13 11:02 AM
As per the conference call discussion, I have sent details to Ombudsman, including Fedex tracking and covering letter, received by USCIS NSC on July 2
DallasBlue
09-27 02:18 PM
http://www.ailf.org/lac/lac_pa_chrono.shtml
http://www.ailf.org/lac/mandamus-jurisdiction9-24-07%20PA.pdf
1. What are the general arguments that the government makes to dismiss a mandamus/APA case for lack of jurisdiction?
The government�s motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction are filed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP). The government generally makes some combination of the following four arguments, all of which center on alleged agency discretion with respect to adjudication of adjustment applications:
� That USCIS does not have a duty to adjudicate an adjustment application and therefore an essential element of the mandamus claim is missing;
� That the pace of adjudication of an adjustment application is discretionary and therefore not subject to mandamus relief;
� That adjudication of adjustment applications is committed to agency discretion by law and not subject to APA relief; and
� That 8 U.S.C. � 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), which limits judicial review over certain discretionary issues in immigration cases, bars review of these mandamus and APA cases.
2. In responding to a motion to dismiss, can I argue that at least some of the issues raised by the government are not jurisdictional?
Yes. An initial response to a government motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is to question whether, in fact, the government has raised a jurisdictional challenge. The Supreme Court has distinguished between jurisdiction � which is the court�s power to hear the case � and the sufficiency of a valid cause of action. See, e.g., Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 89 (1988); see also Ahmed v. DHS, 328 F.3d 383, 386-87 (7th Cir. 2003) (distinguishing between the court�s power to adjudicate the case, which is jurisdictional, and the court�s power to grant relief, which is not jurisdictional).
The failure to state a valid cause of action calls for a judgment on the merits and not for dismissal for want of jurisdiction. Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 682 (1946). The Supreme Court has made clear that:
�jurisdiction � is not defeated � by the possibility that the averments might fail to state a cause of action on which petitioners could actually recover.� Rather, the district court has jurisdiction if �the right of the petitioners to recover under their complaint will be sustained if the [ ] laws of the United States are given one construction and will be defeated if they are given another ��
Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. at 89 (quoting Bell, 327 U.S. at 682, 685). Thus, one court has held that in resolving whether mandamus jurisdiction is present in an immigration case, the allegations of the complaint are taken as true (unless patently frivolous) to avoid �tackling the merits under the ruse of assessing jurisdiction.� Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-387.
Applying these principles, the Seventh Circuit held in Ahmed that the question of whether a statute imposed a �duty� on the government for purposes of mandamus relief was not a jurisdictional question. As the court explained:
[T]he district court has jurisdiction under � 1361 [the mandamus statute] to determine whether the prerequisites for mandamus relief have been satisfied: does the plaintiff have a clear right to the relief sought; does the defendant have a duty to perform the act in question; and is there no other adequate remedy available. � A conclusion that any one of those prerequisites is missing should lead the district court to deny the petition, not [for lack of jurisdiction], but because the plaintiff has not demonstrated an entitlement to this form of extraordinary relief.
Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-87.
Thus, where the government claims that jurisdiction is lacking because a prerequisite to mandamus is missing, the plaintiff can respond by arguing that this is not a jurisdictional question and cannot lead to dismissal under Rule 12(b)(1). Most likely, you also will want to address the substance of the challenge, also, as an alternative way to dispute the government�s motion. See, e.g., � 3, below.
http://www.ailf.org/lac/mandamus-jurisdiction9-24-07%20PA.pdf
1. What are the general arguments that the government makes to dismiss a mandamus/APA case for lack of jurisdiction?
The government�s motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction are filed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP). The government generally makes some combination of the following four arguments, all of which center on alleged agency discretion with respect to adjudication of adjustment applications:
� That USCIS does not have a duty to adjudicate an adjustment application and therefore an essential element of the mandamus claim is missing;
� That the pace of adjudication of an adjustment application is discretionary and therefore not subject to mandamus relief;
� That adjudication of adjustment applications is committed to agency discretion by law and not subject to APA relief; and
� That 8 U.S.C. � 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), which limits judicial review over certain discretionary issues in immigration cases, bars review of these mandamus and APA cases.
2. In responding to a motion to dismiss, can I argue that at least some of the issues raised by the government are not jurisdictional?
Yes. An initial response to a government motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is to question whether, in fact, the government has raised a jurisdictional challenge. The Supreme Court has distinguished between jurisdiction � which is the court�s power to hear the case � and the sufficiency of a valid cause of action. See, e.g., Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 89 (1988); see also Ahmed v. DHS, 328 F.3d 383, 386-87 (7th Cir. 2003) (distinguishing between the court�s power to adjudicate the case, which is jurisdictional, and the court�s power to grant relief, which is not jurisdictional).
The failure to state a valid cause of action calls for a judgment on the merits and not for dismissal for want of jurisdiction. Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 682 (1946). The Supreme Court has made clear that:
�jurisdiction � is not defeated � by the possibility that the averments might fail to state a cause of action on which petitioners could actually recover.� Rather, the district court has jurisdiction if �the right of the petitioners to recover under their complaint will be sustained if the [ ] laws of the United States are given one construction and will be defeated if they are given another ��
Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. at 89 (quoting Bell, 327 U.S. at 682, 685). Thus, one court has held that in resolving whether mandamus jurisdiction is present in an immigration case, the allegations of the complaint are taken as true (unless patently frivolous) to avoid �tackling the merits under the ruse of assessing jurisdiction.� Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-387.
Applying these principles, the Seventh Circuit held in Ahmed that the question of whether a statute imposed a �duty� on the government for purposes of mandamus relief was not a jurisdictional question. As the court explained:
[T]he district court has jurisdiction under � 1361 [the mandamus statute] to determine whether the prerequisites for mandamus relief have been satisfied: does the plaintiff have a clear right to the relief sought; does the defendant have a duty to perform the act in question; and is there no other adequate remedy available. � A conclusion that any one of those prerequisites is missing should lead the district court to deny the petition, not [for lack of jurisdiction], but because the plaintiff has not demonstrated an entitlement to this form of extraordinary relief.
Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-87.
Thus, where the government claims that jurisdiction is lacking because a prerequisite to mandamus is missing, the plaintiff can respond by arguing that this is not a jurisdictional question and cannot lead to dismissal under Rule 12(b)(1). Most likely, you also will want to address the substance of the challenge, also, as an alternative way to dispute the government�s motion. See, e.g., � 3, below.
jainGC
09-10 01:04 AM
Hi All,
Its been astonishing journey, came to US in 2000 June, saw downfall of .coms followed by Housing bubble burst, than 911 , than Economical challenges, Job losses, etc.... the irony list are/were endless. Hope of GC was next to impossible.
Following were the steps to miracle :
- Filed Labor in 2005 Dec, got denied due to lawyers mistake:mad:
- Refiled the same application and Got approved in March 2006:D
- Applied I-140, paid extra for premium but it took more than 4 months to approve.:mad:
- Fight with employer, left company overnite, guess when ?(2 weeks before July Fiasco :mad:)
- Refilled labor in Jan 2008, Got approved in March 2008
- RFE on previously approved I-140
- Convinced lawyers to file application for I-140 , requesting PD recapturing.
- Got I-140 Approval in Aug 2008
- Filed I-485 in Aug 2008
- FP in Oct 2008
- RFE in Aug 2009
- Contacted Congressman, it was helpful as got to know the exact situation.
- Took infopass 2 times
- Not sure if this helped or not but called 1-800 number and spoke with level 2 officer and she hinted that I may not have to wait that long ?
- Approval in Sep 2010
Thanks to IV, it was immensely helpful.
Its been astonishing journey, came to US in 2000 June, saw downfall of .coms followed by Housing bubble burst, than 911 , than Economical challenges, Job losses, etc.... the irony list are/were endless. Hope of GC was next to impossible.
Following were the steps to miracle :
- Filed Labor in 2005 Dec, got denied due to lawyers mistake:mad:
- Refiled the same application and Got approved in March 2006:D
- Applied I-140, paid extra for premium but it took more than 4 months to approve.:mad:
- Fight with employer, left company overnite, guess when ?(2 weeks before July Fiasco :mad:)
- Refilled labor in Jan 2008, Got approved in March 2008
- RFE on previously approved I-140
- Convinced lawyers to file application for I-140 , requesting PD recapturing.
- Got I-140 Approval in Aug 2008
- Filed I-485 in Aug 2008
- FP in Oct 2008
- RFE in Aug 2009
- Contacted Congressman, it was helpful as got to know the exact situation.
- Took infopass 2 times
- Not sure if this helped or not but called 1-800 number and spoke with level 2 officer and she hinted that I may not have to wait that long ?
- Approval in Sep 2010
Thanks to IV, it was immensely helpful.