mavericks vs thunder game 4

images Mavs vs Thunder - Game 3

Watch Dallas Mavericks vs.

mdforgc

05-19 04:48 AM

I am not a lawyer, just an immigrant who waded thru these, stil pending GC 485 filed. The issue is, if your employer revokes your 140 before it is approved, or worse yet, if it is not filed, I dont know what visa u r on or how much is left on it. In any case, from my experience, you have to be able to know and track ur application once it is filed, as in my experience there is an unholy nexus betwween employers and lawyers, not to mention the inherent delaying nature of these immigration lawyers. Points

1. Be able to track ur application on USCIS website with the receipt number
2. Do sweettalking with the employer till the 140 is filed and approved, then it is safest to stay for 6 months with your employer, then he can do diddly squat to you if u r able to file 485 and get an EAD. I take it that you are not affected by retrogression.

---

wallpaper Watch Dallas Mavericks vs.

Dallas Mavericks Won Game 1 vs

Rockford

07-17 02:47 PM

--
I couldn't help post a reply. I was trying not to add to the buzy server traffic.

Isn't it amazing, thousands of people are waiting with bated breath for the USCIS update news and some idiot opens a new threads to start a baseless rumor. And claims that news comes from Greg. This so called news as it turns out is a comment by some troll "south" on Greg's website.

Our friend here who opened this thread fails to even see the connection between the id handle "south" and his post" going south." Honestly, things like this make you wonder, how can such people call themselves highly skilled.


You are so blind with your belief that some thing positive will come out that you cant see what is happening. I have made it very clear that it was a comment in my post, and can't you see the link.

How stupid are you ? Why can't you just let it go if you don't like it ?

---

Mavs shock Thunder to win Game

Joozz

09-21 08:39 AM

Thanks a lot guys for answers and advices.

Another interesting thing that happened to me. After I got this extension I went to Canada and got a new visa in my passport and it’s also valid for two more years. If my H1B extension was made by mistake it looks like I committed a fraud asking visa in my passport based on documents that are not valid.

I am so confused now. Can anybody please recommend a good layer who can give me a legal advice, preferably from central PA?

---

2011 Dallas Mavericks Won Game 1 vs

Not Heat vs. Mavericks.

Beta_mle

02-20 07:28 AM

^ ^ ^
Bump.
Anyone?

---

more...

Thunder 121-112 in Game

sammyb

03-24 08:37 PM

just listen to the show - wonderful performance - you were crisp and to the point ... your points on this EB mess and the closing comments were great ... the 2nd caller shows the typical American common man mentality towards EB community ...

Thanks ... wil listen to it from home ...

---

Mavs Vs. Thunder - Game 2

gparr

May 22nd, 2005, 08:29 PM

My business travels took me, once again, to Las Vegas. Armed with a polarizer and more time on this trip, I was determined to do a better job of photographing the views in Red Rock Canyon than I did the last time. Was able to shoot in the canyon area at both sunrise and sunset. I'm much happier with the results this time. Here are three of my favorites from the effort. Several more in my gallery. Comments/critiques appreciated.
Gary

http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/rrc06.jpg

http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/rrc03.jpg

http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/rrc04.jpg

---

more...

The Dallas Mavericks (3) vs.

GCBy3000

04-15 06:38 PM

Admins,

Now a days I am seeing lots of questions asked by new members. If you have some mechanisms to show whether they have registered with valid data or fake data would help the other members who spend time in answering those questions.


I would request all the new members to contribute to our cause. Join monthly contribution of $20 and help yourselves. Thanks.

---

2010 Mavs shock Thunder to win Game

Mavs vs Thunder - Game 3

jonty_11

01-31 01:49 PM

I think we need to help ourselves, please contribute to IV and help yourselves.

---

more...

Re: Game 4 Missouri Mavericks

samsanju.corp

01-08 02:10 AM

Interview date 9th dec 2009
Submitted all documents 10th dec 2009 as mentioned below:-

1) Petitioner's Federal Income Tax returns
2) Petitioner's state unemployment wage reports for last 4 quarters.
3) Letter from end client in US on letterhead indicating your services are expected.
4) List of petitioner's employees at your job site including names, titles, salaries, and immigration status.
5) Copy of contract between petitioner and contracting company with detailed job itinerary.

Till date I together with my employer have written 6 emails but there is no response.
I personally visited mumbai Consulate information center but they did't ave me any answer.


Can anyone please tell me how long this whole process will take?

Is there any chance that such case goes into endless loop?

My house and all belongings are in U.S. and I am clueless as what to do

---

hair Not Heat vs. Mavericks.

After all the hoopla in Game 4

rkrishna123

10-17 03:11 PM

Thanks guys for your advice and time.....

---

more...

game 4 of the Mavericks vs

sands_14

06-11 01:20 PM

Please refrain from saying such a thing for President.
He might have made mistakes but he has been a tough one for terrorists.Since Sep11,2001,he has kept the ppl safe.
6 years is a big time.
If he is trying something beneficial for Immigrants,lets support him and ask him to support our cause.
I think we should send faxes/emails to him to show our support and I am sure he will get our amendment passed.

Lets give this a try.I am sure he will make no more mistakes as these are some last things which can give a lot of credibility back to his Presidentship.

---

hot Thunder 121-112 in Game

Heat vs Mavs again,

kingkon_2000

06-08 11:59 AM

I entered the US as a student in Jan '99 and did a couple of trips on my F1 visa and since I got my H1-B approval notice in 2001, I never left until last December '07 and returned with a stamped H1-B visa.

I would be "ok" if they asked for all returns since 2001 as that's when I actually started working and used the H1-B, but why is he asking for returns from 1999, I have no clue...

That's why I mentioned it feels like he wants to deny my applicatoin. Can he deny it if I can't produce the returns for '99 and '00 even though I filed my returns and the IRS can't produce evidence that I did or didn't?

I do have the W-2's from '99 and '00...

Any ideas/help from senior members or someone that had a similar situation?

If you have w-2's you just need to fill 1040NR-EZ and send it back to the requesting officer. I don't understand what is the problem in fill a form and signing it and sending in the copies of it... what difference does it make if it was filled in 1999 or 2008 as it will be the same thing.... if they have a problem ask them to verify it with IRS which I am sure they will not able to do as there is no way so they have to accept what you submit... just my $0.02.. ask your attorney about this...

---

more...

house Game 2: Mavs vs Thunder.

Mavericks vs. Thunder

Templarian

11-25 04:12 PM

@TheCanadian, glos is a cunning one. :look:

Star...wha??? I just thought it looked cool :P
:lol: :fab:

---

tattoo Mavs Vs. Thunder - Game 2

The Oklahoma City Thunder won

jonty_11

01-22 12:01 PM

Thank you JAPS19 - This Helps - Thank you.

I dont have H1B for the new company, just employment letter and pay stubs.

Can you please advise why you were sent to downtown? for what verification?

Which airport was your port of entry?

I dont have a lawyer anymore as I got laid off from the sponsoring company and working on a new company with EAD.

Guys, take it easy, if they deport you from the port of entry the world will not come crashing down....Always keep your head up high and walk upright....we are more educated and learned than most of the folks around the world...so why be afraid....Just be honest and tell the truth...and let time take its course...NO FEAR and HONESTY should be our motto in these times of trial!!!!

---

more...

pictures The Dallas Mavericks (3) vs.

Mavericks vs 2 - Tickets to

chi_shark

03-11 11:06 AM

I worked for an employer in WY 2004 as a physician and since then i resigned and moved onto another job with a new labor and I-140. However last year at the time of July isa bulletin fiasco, I asked my employer from WY in 2004 to file for an I-140 based on the previous approved labor condition in 2004 to retain that priority date under EB -2.
Employer knows I have no intent of joining them after the green card and I have my own practice , so i donot intend to join the practice.

In this scenario, if this considered a misuse of retaining priority date and how do i prove the intent and will the USCIS allow a situation like this?

i think you need to have intent to work for the employer when filing 140... without intent, it is likely that this will be considered fraud. but all this comes up only if you are called for interview or if there are detailed rfe(s)... then, when you go for citizenship, this could come up again... but like someone else said, you are better off with a lawyer's opinion...

---

dresses Heat vs Mavs again,

simple manner for a happy

ryan

04-29 07:45 PM

Nice article here. It also compares the experience on how folks did once they went back. The needle is surely moving away from USA.

America is bleeding competitiveness | VentureBeat (http://venturebeat.com/2011/04/28/brain-drain-or-brain-circulation-america-is-bleeding-competitiveness/)

How is this a "nice" or even a transparent / balanced opinion? It starts off -- "With anti-immigrant sentiment building across the nation, and clouds of nativism.."

Is he referring to Anti-immigrant, or anti-illegal immigration? I believe the latter. There is a difference. As a potential immigrant, who has had the opportunity to live and work in America 10 years and counting, I haven't experienced the least bit of anti-foreigner sentiments from the everyday American folk. All I want to say, is that I have been extended the opportunities, quite felt welcomed and feel truly blessed to have some met some of the nicest folks / friends, from my time living in this country. I grew up in a country where we never got to belong. You could be born, and live there to the day you die -- and you'd never get to belong. It's a whole lot different here in America. I truly hope some people express fair and balanced opinions, as opposed to writing with a hidden agenda.. and that's a shame.

---

more...

makeup Re: Game 4 Missouri Mavericks

Game 2: Mavs vs Thunder.

amsgc

12-11 12:50 AM

In a testimony to the House Judiciary Committee back in Apr/May 08, the USCIS clearly stated that it had changed its policy regarding which applications would be adjudicated first.

As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.

The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.

Here is how:

Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.

So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.

When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.

The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.

If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.

As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.

Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.



I wonder how it is they justify over 70K visas to EB2ROW, keeping it current all year, when EB2 I was so retrogressed and got only 15K. FIFO my foot. This is the most mismanaged, subjective thing I have ever seen. Translated for us, luck of the draw.

---

girlfriend The Oklahoma City Thunder won

Oklahoma City Thunder forward

anilsal

11-08 05:47 PM

is around 1.5million out of which meagerly 140K goes to employment based.

---

hairstyles game 4 of the Mavericks vs

Dallas Mavericks vs Miami Heat

akilaakka

10-05 08:04 AM

Recently a friend of mine hot has GC approved. He is EB2, PD Dec 2005.


Nothing makes sense.

Thanks
Senthil

---

kondur_007

09-17 09:38 PM

I dont want to duplicate, but I think following "cut and paste" from my previous post may be a fair thing to do; just for the information.

I am not a lawyer; but this is what I believe to the best of my knowledge:

1. If you never used AC21 (still working with the employer who sponsored I 140); your obligation at the time of GC approval is to have a "good faith intention to work with the same employer permanently". It is not clear in the law as to how would you prove that intention...most people say that you should work for some duration (6 months or 12 months at least...or something like that) after GC is approved to "show" your good faith intention.

2. If you ported to employer B using AC 21 (before the approval of GC); you have the same obligation to the new employer B and NO obligation to original I 140 sponsoring employer. (this is especially true if you informed USCIS of your porting and also true if you did not inform USCIS but law is less clear in the later scenario)

There is really no law that specifies the duration.

All it says is :"you should have intention to work for the GC sponsoring employer (or AC21 employer if you ported) permanently."

Intention is a state of mind and it can change!! also all these employments are at will, and so it is possible that you may not like that job! Or on the other hand employer may not like you and fire you in a week.

Bottomline: You will be fine under most circumstances. However, if the issue is raised at the time of naturalization, it would be much easier for you to explain/show that you did have intention to work for the employer if you actually work for the sponsoring employer for some duration (6 months, 1 year...all these are arbitrary numbers).

If you never worked for the sponsoring employer, you may not have a lot of grounds to show that entire GC was not a fraud...

Again, there is no clear law on this...

followup post:

I think there is a mix up here between two things:

180 day clock does start on the first day after filing 485, but that is for the purpose of AC21. Once you use AC21, then the next employer assumes the role of "your future permanent employer" and you should have "intent to permanently work for that(new, not the sponsoring) employer" AT the time of GC approval.

If you use change the employers 7 times using AC21 before your GC gets approved; you should have "intent to work permanently for the latest employer".

You are not bonded slaves. The only issue is that the "burden of proof" of proving the intent to work for such and such employer is on the GC beneficiary and not on USCIS. So in future, if USCIS questions (or CBP questions), it is YOU who has to prove that intent.

One scenario where you WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PROVE IT: if you never worked for the sponsoring employer.

One scenario where you WILL NOT HAVE A PROBLEM PROVING IT: if you worked with sponsoring (or latest AC21) employer after GC approval for some duration (60 days?? 90 days?? 6 months?? 1 year??)...no law on this.

This is the whole purpose of Labor Certification process and I140. And it applies to the categories of EB2 (except NIW) and EB3--any category that requires LC.

This is from my discussion in following thread:

http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3305&page=2
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=20403

Hope this helps.

Good Luck.

---

pakrish

06-22 09:29 AM

My laywer has adviced me that the skin test is mandatory

---