Joybose
08-14 02:58 PM
Just now my lawyer called to tell that she got all my receipts , filed on july 2nd but my wifes application was rejected for "insufficient filing fees", I had put in a single check for $745 , how can this be, it was both in the same fedex packet, she says it is some "mailroom error", so she sent back the application with a letter and my receipt copy to accept. My app also had a $745 check and that was receipted,
Has this happned to anyone, please respond , i am wondering if what my lawyer did was correct, pls share your experiences.
Hey, which service center, Texas or Nebraska.
Has this happned to anyone, please respond , i am wondering if what my lawyer did was correct, pls share your experiences.
Hey, which service center, Texas or Nebraska.
SU1979
10-09 01:46 PM
To make you more clear:
The owner of company B was also a partner of company A. He had some problems with his another partner for which he created another company. I did not know anything about it as I always had contact with the owner of company B before coming to the USA. I only came to know when I entered into my first project. I am not sure whether he has generated any fake paystub from company A to transfer my H1B. If it is so, then why my H1B with company B is still pending ? I cannot also ask him as my relation is very bad with him now a days. I am not sure whether he has received or replied any RFE as the online receipt number doesn't indicate anything.
Any more comments ?
Thanks
The owner of company B was also a partner of company A. He had some problems with his another partner for which he created another company. I did not know anything about it as I always had contact with the owner of company B before coming to the USA. I only came to know when I entered into my first project. I am not sure whether he has generated any fake paystub from company A to transfer my H1B. If it is so, then why my H1B with company B is still pending ? I cannot also ask him as my relation is very bad with him now a days. I am not sure whether he has received or replied any RFE as the online receipt number doesn't indicate anything.
Any more comments ?
Thanks
ocpmachine
06-10 03:08 PM
Help!
Took TST last week, positive (16mm), X-ray negative, civil surgeon marked "Class B, Latent TB Infection" on I-693, and gave me a notes saying that since May 2008, TST>10 will be marked with LTBI, and advised me to go to Health Department.
Same as many of you guys, had taken vaccines when young. Have been in US for 11 years. Pretty sure I don't have TB. What should I do? Does LTBI affect 485 approval? How about AP/EAD? Will USCIS ask for evidence of TB treatment?
Thank you very much!
We just got our medical envelope for me and my wife from the doctor, we both had TST reaction of 10mm and 18mm, chest x-ray came out normal...doctor marked both of us Latent Class TB(LTB1)...i would not worry about this, Latent TB is not infectous and recommended(not required) to undergo treatment. I am going to sit tight, not taking any medication as i heard the medication is a strong antibiotic which has more side effects(esp in women) and does more damage(to liver) than cure. If on medication, you are also required to take a test every 2 months to check if your liver can take medications for following months. Ofcourse, even after taking medication for 9 months, you cannot guarantee future TST test will result -ve due to BCG vaccine history.
If i get an RFE at a later time, i will goto my PCP, start medication(which i will discard) and get a letter saying in am on medication just for paper work sake, i refuse to take the medicine when x-ray is clear.
Read here:
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/civil_tb_ti_2008.htm
Here is the snippet from CDC.gov for TB:
16. What is Class B�Latent TB Infection Needing Evaluation for Treatment (LTBI)?
A TST reaction of 10 mm or more of induration, and a history of recent arrival (within the last 5 years) in the United States from a high-prevalence country.
And
No evidence of active TB disease.
17. Should Part 3 of Form I-693 be completed when the civil surgeon is referring the applicant for evaluation for treatment of Latent TB Infection (LTBI)?
The 2008 TB TIs recommend that civil surgeons refer applicants with �Class B�Latent TB Infection Needing Evaluation for Treatment (LTBI)� to the TB Control Program of the local health department. The referral for evaluation for treatment of LTBI is recommended, not required. Part 3 of Form I-693 should be used only for required referrals, therefore the civil surgeon should not complete Part 3 of Form I-693 when making this referral. It follows that the health department is not required to complete Part 4 of Form I-693 after evaluation for treatment of LTBI is completed or after treatment for LTBI is completed. Please see question 18 for related information.
21. Can the civil surgeon medically clear the applicant for TB even if the applicant is going to receive treatment for latent TB Infection (LTBI)?
Yes. Referral for treatment and/or completion of treatment for LTBI is not required for the civil surgeon to sign the I-693 form. As regards TB, the signature indicates the applicant is free of Class A pulmonary TB disease.
Disclaimer: I am not a doctor or an attorney, Please consult doctor or an attorney for expert advice.
Took TST last week, positive (16mm), X-ray negative, civil surgeon marked "Class B, Latent TB Infection" on I-693, and gave me a notes saying that since May 2008, TST>10 will be marked with LTBI, and advised me to go to Health Department.
Same as many of you guys, had taken vaccines when young. Have been in US for 11 years. Pretty sure I don't have TB. What should I do? Does LTBI affect 485 approval? How about AP/EAD? Will USCIS ask for evidence of TB treatment?
Thank you very much!
We just got our medical envelope for me and my wife from the doctor, we both had TST reaction of 10mm and 18mm, chest x-ray came out normal...doctor marked both of us Latent Class TB(LTB1)...i would not worry about this, Latent TB is not infectous and recommended(not required) to undergo treatment. I am going to sit tight, not taking any medication as i heard the medication is a strong antibiotic which has more side effects(esp in women) and does more damage(to liver) than cure. If on medication, you are also required to take a test every 2 months to check if your liver can take medications for following months. Ofcourse, even after taking medication for 9 months, you cannot guarantee future TST test will result -ve due to BCG vaccine history.
If i get an RFE at a later time, i will goto my PCP, start medication(which i will discard) and get a letter saying in am on medication just for paper work sake, i refuse to take the medicine when x-ray is clear.
Read here:
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/civil_tb_ti_2008.htm
Here is the snippet from CDC.gov for TB:
16. What is Class B�Latent TB Infection Needing Evaluation for Treatment (LTBI)?
A TST reaction of 10 mm or more of induration, and a history of recent arrival (within the last 5 years) in the United States from a high-prevalence country.
And
No evidence of active TB disease.
17. Should Part 3 of Form I-693 be completed when the civil surgeon is referring the applicant for evaluation for treatment of Latent TB Infection (LTBI)?
The 2008 TB TIs recommend that civil surgeons refer applicants with �Class B�Latent TB Infection Needing Evaluation for Treatment (LTBI)� to the TB Control Program of the local health department. The referral for evaluation for treatment of LTBI is recommended, not required. Part 3 of Form I-693 should be used only for required referrals, therefore the civil surgeon should not complete Part 3 of Form I-693 when making this referral. It follows that the health department is not required to complete Part 4 of Form I-693 after evaluation for treatment of LTBI is completed or after treatment for LTBI is completed. Please see question 18 for related information.
21. Can the civil surgeon medically clear the applicant for TB even if the applicant is going to receive treatment for latent TB Infection (LTBI)?
Yes. Referral for treatment and/or completion of treatment for LTBI is not required for the civil surgeon to sign the I-693 form. As regards TB, the signature indicates the applicant is free of Class A pulmonary TB disease.
Disclaimer: I am not a doctor or an attorney, Please consult doctor or an attorney for expert advice.
arihant
04-12 05:00 PM
I whole heartedly agree that labor substitution elimination makes sense. However, the 45 day proposal built into this rule can be disasterous. I just posted my experience with the 45 day letter from BEC in another thread.
Basically, BEC sent the 45 day letter on March 7th, and my lawyer received it on March 14th. However, it was not brought to the attention of my HR until Apr 10th. A delay of almost a month. When we only have a month and a half to deal with it, such a delay may be disasterous. Granted, that the fault lies entirely with my lawyer, but it just goes to prove that 45 days is too short for something so important! Any number of reasons can create a delay of a few weeks.
If they want to put a limit on it, why don't they set to it to a more reasonable period such as 6 months, or a year. It will be really bad if, after waiting for years for Labor to clear, people are denied GC because they did not apply for the next step within 45 days!
Basically, BEC sent the 45 day letter on March 7th, and my lawyer received it on March 14th. However, it was not brought to the attention of my HR until Apr 10th. A delay of almost a month. When we only have a month and a half to deal with it, such a delay may be disasterous. Granted, that the fault lies entirely with my lawyer, but it just goes to prove that 45 days is too short for something so important! Any number of reasons can create a delay of a few weeks.
If they want to put a limit on it, why don't they set to it to a more reasonable period such as 6 months, or a year. It will be really bad if, after waiting for years for Labor to clear, people are denied GC because they did not apply for the next step within 45 days!
more...
keerthi
05-14 01:20 AM
Thank you very much for all the answers. I will post here when my employer takes a decision on the L1-A/L1-B/H1-B.
jgh_res
05-17 10:01 AM
Here is the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
more...
arrarrgee
07-13 11:59 AM
Dont know why...i was LOL after reading this post....
"we are highly skilled people. so we should wear business suit , it will give impact"
we are highly skilled people. so we should wear business suit , it will give impact.
"we are highly skilled people. so we should wear business suit , it will give impact"
we are highly skilled people. so we should wear business suit , it will give impact.
greencard_fever
08-04 04:38 PM
call USCIS and ask them about the problem. If you get a good IO, they will open a ticket to consolidate. Try until, you get someone who sounds knowledgeable. Then take a infopass at your local office after a week to see if that helps any. I did that and took a infopass for this friday to check at local office. My PD is nov 2004. I will keep you posted.
Thank you for the update and can you provide me the details how to take the infoPass.
Thank you for the update and can you provide me the details how to take the infoPass.
more...
vinnysuru
04-01 10:10 AM
Hello Everyone -
I am trying to understand importance of PD after one files 485. I filed my 485 in Jul 2007 and got FP in Sep 07. Then I got a notice for in person interview with USCIS officer. At the end of interview the USCIS officer indicated that the case is approved but will have to wait for Visa # to get the GC. The interview had happened in the month of Feb when visa for EB2 was Unavailable. My PD is Nov 06 and I am just trying to understand how this process will work.
Will my GC be processed when the dates on visa bulletin will be show have nov 06 or it will just get processed as there is no reason to hold the adjudication? Background check or any other
Hi Piyu, Wow you are lucky. I am from India EB2 (Jan 2006 PD). Non Concurrent with approved 140 Filed 485 on 25th July 07. FP in Sep 07. Haven't heard a word since then. I called NSC last week and they said my name check is pending. Derivative cleared. They have moved processing dates back to June 8th, so they don't expect my case to assigned to an officer for review at least for 2-3 months.
Would you mind sharing specifics of your case?
1. What was your exact PD (Day?)
2. Which service center did you file with?
3. What day did you file in July? Are you in any special category with EB2 like NIW?
4. What is your country of chargeability? Are you cross chargeable to any other country?
Good luck! Yes, now you would just have to wait for PD to become current and you will get approval. Check . Lots of approvals in last 2 weeks for people in similar situations! More in come this month as PD's move forward today.
I am Happy for you! Gives all of us hope.
I am trying to understand importance of PD after one files 485. I filed my 485 in Jul 2007 and got FP in Sep 07. Then I got a notice for in person interview with USCIS officer. At the end of interview the USCIS officer indicated that the case is approved but will have to wait for Visa # to get the GC. The interview had happened in the month of Feb when visa for EB2 was Unavailable. My PD is Nov 06 and I am just trying to understand how this process will work.
Will my GC be processed when the dates on visa bulletin will be show have nov 06 or it will just get processed as there is no reason to hold the adjudication? Background check or any other
Hi Piyu, Wow you are lucky. I am from India EB2 (Jan 2006 PD). Non Concurrent with approved 140 Filed 485 on 25th July 07. FP in Sep 07. Haven't heard a word since then. I called NSC last week and they said my name check is pending. Derivative cleared. They have moved processing dates back to June 8th, so they don't expect my case to assigned to an officer for review at least for 2-3 months.
Would you mind sharing specifics of your case?
1. What was your exact PD (Day?)
2. Which service center did you file with?
3. What day did you file in July? Are you in any special category with EB2 like NIW?
4. What is your country of chargeability? Are you cross chargeable to any other country?
Good luck! Yes, now you would just have to wait for PD to become current and you will get approval. Check . Lots of approvals in last 2 weeks for people in similar situations! More in come this month as PD's move forward today.
I am Happy for you! Gives all of us hope.
nixstor
08-23 11:01 AM
pani_6,
While I am with you on the outburst, I want to underscore that GC is not a panacea for all problems in life. C mon, There is more to life than GC. Yes, your Masters Degree will pay you in the long run. No need to worry about it. Keep the GC thing on the back burner and see what you can do meanwhile (PMP,GMAT etc..)
While I am with you on the outburst, I want to underscore that GC is not a panacea for all problems in life. C mon, There is more to life than GC. Yes, your Masters Degree will pay you in the long run. No need to worry about it. Keep the GC thing on the back burner and see what you can do meanwhile (PMP,GMAT etc..)
more...
![wallpaper tips. [more]. Get Originative With](http://www.comicbookszone.com/wp-content/uploads/12_3_featured_orig.jpg "[more]. Get Originative With")
mambarg
08-05 06:13 PM
With 700K predicted applications pending From July ,
Was just wondering what will be long term effects.
Imagine they process a very conservation 200K apps for EAD/AP/485 in say 6 months and issue EAD for 1 year.
Now coming July which is 6 months prior to expiry of 1st EAD.
There will be 200K applications again in june/july/aug for EAD renewal/AP renewal ?
It is like any surge in electric voltage generally blows away the device.
I am expecting something this surge will blow away their fingerprint/fbi name check/INS staff , everyone.
I think now INS wants to put these into queues of FBI/DOS and put the blame squarely on them.
Over the period of next 1 year or so, everyone who is in EB3 will migrate to EB2 as he can switch job in EAD and then process another Labor/140 without getting affected ??
What if all the background adjudication of 485 is done in 1 year and then we change from EB3 to EB2, its not going to affect the current 485 ? It will just put the file in a better category ?
Was just wondering what will be long term effects.
Imagine they process a very conservation 200K apps for EAD/AP/485 in say 6 months and issue EAD for 1 year.
Now coming July which is 6 months prior to expiry of 1st EAD.
There will be 200K applications again in june/july/aug for EAD renewal/AP renewal ?
It is like any surge in electric voltage generally blows away the device.
I am expecting something this surge will blow away their fingerprint/fbi name check/INS staff , everyone.
I think now INS wants to put these into queues of FBI/DOS and put the blame squarely on them.
Over the period of next 1 year or so, everyone who is in EB3 will migrate to EB2 as he can switch job in EAD and then process another Labor/140 without getting affected ??
What if all the background adjudication of 485 is done in 1 year and then we change from EB3 to EB2, its not going to affect the current 485 ? It will just put the file in a better category ?
seahawks
06-29 11:30 PM
Thank you for your input, do you know where I should call, if there is a number and so on? There is absolutely no information on any place on fixing 485 form.
more...
edaltsis
09-18 04:18 PM
If you use EAD it means you are abandoning your H1B. You have to be employed full-time (should be drawing salary on a regular basis to be in H1B/EAD status) but cant "just" work part-time.
GCwaitforever
11-06 11:58 AM
I would suggest you to switch jobs and complain to USCIS right away instead of waiting for company A to take some action against you. This will keep the company under scrutiny of USCIS and they can unearth more mud on this company. Never put up with injustice as this encourages company A to do more of this to other employees.
more...
se_vnt3
02-24 03:41 PM
To whom it may concern, please, help us. Everything we ever learned from the U.S. about truth and justice is suddenly being deprived of any meaning by the U.S. itself. The hardest part for us is believing that everything we�ve based our lives on � the American way, has no merit.
I was deported from the United States of America on February 18, 2005. I lived there nearly 30 years since I was 20 months old, when my mother crossed the Rio Grande into the country with me illegally. I was given an opportunity to become legal under the NACARA law but was to afraid of being deported like Maricela Soza was under the same law and didn�t go through with the entire process. I have both a husband and a son who are U.S. citizens but I am permanently prohibited by Immigration law from immigrating to the United States, while at the same time I am allowed to visit. Due to my drug convictions amounting to possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. It�s Immigration law�s contradicting policies which I find disturbing.
U.S. Immigration is concerned with their citizens� welfare but it is denying my husband�s and my son�s requests to have me back by their side for good. Although Immigration law will value my wish to receive admission into the United States. Needless to say I prefer returning, immigrating and remaining in the country by my family�s side. That�s not taking into account the fact that I am still homesick and continue experiencing culture shock in Nicaragua. What the Department of Homeland Security is doing to my family and I is cruel, inhumane and unpatriotic. No free country�s government has any business deciding how families should be formed or whose personal choice is agreeable or not. Like that of my son�s and husband�s choice to overlook my shortcomings and begin our lives over together again.
The 212(d)(3) Waiver allows a visitor�s visa into the U.S. to be issued to an Alien like me if I show evidence of rehabilitation such as becoming a practicing professional with a U.S. job offer. Sometimes with lone proof of a bank savings account, school registration and satisfactory travel record. On the other hand there isn�t one waiver available for United States Citizens who wish to rebuild their lives with an Alien deported for any drug charge(s) of possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. Not only are Andrew�s(my son) and Thomas�(my husband) needs being ignored but my needs are being placed before their own. An act I dare name TREASON.
How much more is the United States citizens� welfare secured if an Alien with an undesirable drug history enters the United States merely to visit and not to immigrate? Shouldn�t all United States citizens� needs and rights within and from their country � such as my husband�s and my son�s, come before any Alien�s need or right to receive admission into the U.S., including my own? Also, shouldn�t Family-Based Immigration take first place over �Alien travel� for any reason?
I regret to say it�s these types of injustices with devastating consequences to the recipient�s and his/her immediate relatives� personal lives remaining raveled, much more unacknowledged that play a large role in the cause for conflict concerning disloyalty and unpopularity among U.S. citizens and foreign nationals inside and outside of the United States. I trust that once this oversight is brought to DHS�s attention they will not knowingly continue punishing my husband and my son for loving me, an Alien who once stumbled while attempting to survive in the U.S.. I�m afraid to imagine how many individuals involved in cases like my family�s and mine go on thinking that the U.S. is a bad country for having the audacity to pass judgment on them. I�ve had to believe there�s a glitch somewhere in immigration law caused by simple human error. I can�t accept that the U.S. I grew to know as a loving, Christian country with caring values is intentionally causing my loved ones and I grief. It goes without saying that as much as the United States has a duty to protect its citizens it also has a duty to be equally diplomatic toward foreigners and not continue persecuting the one or the other long after any condemning sentence has been exacted and executed. I know the United States of America will do right by my son, my husband, me, and the rest of its citizens and foreign nationals in our predicament.
We want the 212(d)(3) Non-Immigrant Visas Waiver made into an Immigrant Visas Waiver for Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens to make sure United States citizens receive competent protection from the Department of Homeland Security and adequate protection from the United States of America. I believe a Waiver should be available to me for my deportation charge including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana so my husband and son can claim me and I can immigrate to the U.S.. But immigration law only makes such a Waiver available to Foreign Nationals who wish to travel to the U.S.(and who also have the same charge as me: deportation including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana). My husband�s and my son�s Freedom Of Belief civil liberty is being violated because their belief is being discriminated against. I am not able to immigrate to the U.S. because immigration law doesn�t allow me a Waiver enabling my husband or son to claim me successfully. If I had a Waiver available to me they wouldn�t have to be at this crossroads making their case public in the courts, therefore their Right To Privacy is also being violated as a result of their belief being discriminated against. Please, help bring justice to these afflicted, we need your input. How should we proceed?
I was deported from the United States of America on February 18, 2005. I lived there nearly 30 years since I was 20 months old, when my mother crossed the Rio Grande into the country with me illegally. I was given an opportunity to become legal under the NACARA law but was to afraid of being deported like Maricela Soza was under the same law and didn�t go through with the entire process. I have both a husband and a son who are U.S. citizens but I am permanently prohibited by Immigration law from immigrating to the United States, while at the same time I am allowed to visit. Due to my drug convictions amounting to possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. It�s Immigration law�s contradicting policies which I find disturbing.
U.S. Immigration is concerned with their citizens� welfare but it is denying my husband�s and my son�s requests to have me back by their side for good. Although Immigration law will value my wish to receive admission into the United States. Needless to say I prefer returning, immigrating and remaining in the country by my family�s side. That�s not taking into account the fact that I am still homesick and continue experiencing culture shock in Nicaragua. What the Department of Homeland Security is doing to my family and I is cruel, inhumane and unpatriotic. No free country�s government has any business deciding how families should be formed or whose personal choice is agreeable or not. Like that of my son�s and husband�s choice to overlook my shortcomings and begin our lives over together again.
The 212(d)(3) Waiver allows a visitor�s visa into the U.S. to be issued to an Alien like me if I show evidence of rehabilitation such as becoming a practicing professional with a U.S. job offer. Sometimes with lone proof of a bank savings account, school registration and satisfactory travel record. On the other hand there isn�t one waiver available for United States Citizens who wish to rebuild their lives with an Alien deported for any drug charge(s) of possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. Not only are Andrew�s(my son) and Thomas�(my husband) needs being ignored but my needs are being placed before their own. An act I dare name TREASON.
How much more is the United States citizens� welfare secured if an Alien with an undesirable drug history enters the United States merely to visit and not to immigrate? Shouldn�t all United States citizens� needs and rights within and from their country � such as my husband�s and my son�s, come before any Alien�s need or right to receive admission into the U.S., including my own? Also, shouldn�t Family-Based Immigration take first place over �Alien travel� for any reason?
I regret to say it�s these types of injustices with devastating consequences to the recipient�s and his/her immediate relatives� personal lives remaining raveled, much more unacknowledged that play a large role in the cause for conflict concerning disloyalty and unpopularity among U.S. citizens and foreign nationals inside and outside of the United States. I trust that once this oversight is brought to DHS�s attention they will not knowingly continue punishing my husband and my son for loving me, an Alien who once stumbled while attempting to survive in the U.S.. I�m afraid to imagine how many individuals involved in cases like my family�s and mine go on thinking that the U.S. is a bad country for having the audacity to pass judgment on them. I�ve had to believe there�s a glitch somewhere in immigration law caused by simple human error. I can�t accept that the U.S. I grew to know as a loving, Christian country with caring values is intentionally causing my loved ones and I grief. It goes without saying that as much as the United States has a duty to protect its citizens it also has a duty to be equally diplomatic toward foreigners and not continue persecuting the one or the other long after any condemning sentence has been exacted and executed. I know the United States of America will do right by my son, my husband, me, and the rest of its citizens and foreign nationals in our predicament.
We want the 212(d)(3) Non-Immigrant Visas Waiver made into an Immigrant Visas Waiver for Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens to make sure United States citizens receive competent protection from the Department of Homeland Security and adequate protection from the United States of America. I believe a Waiver should be available to me for my deportation charge including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana so my husband and son can claim me and I can immigrate to the U.S.. But immigration law only makes such a Waiver available to Foreign Nationals who wish to travel to the U.S.(and who also have the same charge as me: deportation including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana). My husband�s and my son�s Freedom Of Belief civil liberty is being violated because their belief is being discriminated against. I am not able to immigrate to the U.S. because immigration law doesn�t allow me a Waiver enabling my husband or son to claim me successfully. If I had a Waiver available to me they wouldn�t have to be at this crossroads making their case public in the courts, therefore their Right To Privacy is also being violated as a result of their belief being discriminated against. Please, help bring justice to these afflicted, we need your input. How should we proceed?
stxvr
07-20 12:12 PM
From the website http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html we can see that there are only 140000 GCs are given for employment. Also as per the current prediction on the same page shows that there will be 750000 new applications will be added in to system because of this recent events. Now follwing are some facts what I can see from these details:
1. As only 140000 visas can be givens per year. USCIS OR DOS can not cross this limit.
2. There is also per country limit. (I don't know what is the exact % for per country - think 10 -20 %)
3. If you count 20 % then for India the figure per year is 28000.
4 Now imagine how many years it will take to cover up the number like 750000.
My analysis:
-Based on these details you can predict that there is going to be more than 10 years to clear this thing. (except some new law passes).
- Some may get GC after 10 years of filing A485.
- For atleast 10 years PD remains Unavailable.
What do you say on this?
1. As only 140000 visas can be givens per year. USCIS OR DOS can not cross this limit.
2. There is also per country limit. (I don't know what is the exact % for per country - think 10 -20 %)
3. If you count 20 % then for India the figure per year is 28000.
4 Now imagine how many years it will take to cover up the number like 750000.
My analysis:
-Based on these details you can predict that there is going to be more than 10 years to clear this thing. (except some new law passes).
- Some may get GC after 10 years of filing A485.
- For atleast 10 years PD remains Unavailable.
What do you say on this?
more...
eager_immi
07-18 11:01 AM
Common guys!!!
walking_dude
11-27 09:25 PM
Let us do E-mail all our friends. We need all the support we can gather.
sumansk
07-16 06:49 PM
AILA/AILF please do some good work other than chiding for spreading rumours.I beleive IV and their internal contacts..and totally beleive this infor from LOGICBHAI...
I suggest AILA does some really good work for the legal guys....
I suggest AILA does some really good work for the legal guys....
h1-b forever
04-22 08:33 AM
small correction:
president is not a member of the congress and neither are the judges (separation of powers)
you are right we may sue congress but to win that is much much tough as even the judge is been appointed by the president which i guess is a member of congress :) but one can certainly try.
president is not a member of the congress and neither are the judges (separation of powers)
you are right we may sue congress but to win that is much much tough as even the judge is been appointed by the president which i guess is a member of congress :) but one can certainly try.
bekugc
03-18 12:41 PM
while we use Ead to chg to a different company during ac21, is it possible to first chg the company using ead and then later apply for h1 transfer ?
No comments:
Post a Comment