tonyHK12
01-11 09:28 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
wallpaper fat baby mouse. fat baby mouse. Ferret Kills Baby Mouse
Munna Bhai
01-09 03:42 PM
Hello,
Please share your RFEs!! What was the reason and how you handled it. That will be great input.
-M
Please share your RFEs!! What was the reason and how you handled it. That will be great input.
-M
cris
08-30 10:22 AM
many thanks to all you guys answered and clarified my issue .
2011 Fat Baby Mouse
waitforgc1
05-07 11:39 AM
Me and my wife also have LUD on 04/23/2009. And my priority date is Nov 2004
I think based on the information on other threads its usually normal nothing
can be derived of that LUD.
I think based on the information on other threads its usually normal nothing
can be derived of that LUD.
more...
venky08
07-28 05:07 PM
quite interesting find...do you have a reference?
Even though India is by far the country of birth with the most high skilled immigrants to the US, it still takes up less than half of the number of high skilled immigrants. By some discussions going on on this forum, you would think 95% of the high skilled immigrants come from India.
Even though India is by far the country of birth with the most high skilled immigrants to the US, it still takes up less than half of the number of high skilled immigrants. By some discussions going on on this forum, you would think 95% of the high skilled immigrants come from India.
mpadapa
08-15 02:28 PM
give the guy some credit. He might have taken the risk by jumping in the PERM bandwagon early while many like me took safe approach by filing traditional LC:mad:
One of my buddies got his GC approved yesterday and his Priority Date is June 2005, EB2 India. I am here waiting since 2004 March to file for my I485. There are no methods to USCIS Madness.
One of my buddies got his GC approved yesterday and his Priority Date is June 2005, EB2 India. I am here waiting since 2004 March to file for my I485. There are no methods to USCIS Madness.
more...
Apollon
06-30 12:16 AM
The answer is that there are restrictions on using experience gained in the position with the same company. The reason being that you cannot say that the minimum requirement for the position is a BA + 5 when you were hired for the position with less than a BA + 5 experience.
If you use experience gained with the same company the PERM application will be audited. One way to respond to the audit is by showing that you are filing for a different position than the one you gained the experience in and that the position for which you are filing is not substantially comparable to the position where you gained the experience.
My suggestion to you is that you use an experienced immigration attorney that you trust. The laws and procedures involved in filing a PERM application are so complicated and subtle that there are many immigration law attorneys who do not handle PERM cases. I know there are lots of companies that fumble their way through the process without an attorney and are lucky enough not to get audited, but that is just trusting your future to the luck of the draw.
Thank you very much for prompt and precise response. The reason you listed makes perfect sense. However, my situation is a little different and I have a couple of questions, directly related to your answer:
1. As I've mentioned, I do have close to 10 years of accumulated overall experience in my field - only half of it came before I graduated. I was already employed in this field before I started college and during it, and I have experience letters from employers to back that up. The only thing is, since I didn't have a degree, my job title didn't include "engineer" in it, although I was working same field, doing similar jobs. So, it's not that when this sponsor hired me for this position I did not have 5 years of relevant experience in the field - I did, it's just that half of it came before I got the degree and unlike DOL EB2 requirement - my sponsor did not have the restriction for this experience to be post graduate.
My first question is: will this argument work with DOL, saying that when the sponsor hired me I had over 5 years of relevant experience (I can prove it), just not post graduate experience and that is why the sponsor claims this job indeed requires B.Sc. + 5 years experience, although for them it's OK if the experience didnt come after I got the degree?
2. Hypothetically speaking, lets say I found another consulting company, which is willing to apply for my green card through EB2 track, without transferring my H1 visa and before I actually start working for them - will I be able to count these 15 months of experience with current sponsor, when the new company (who I don't work for) will be applying for my green card through EB2?
If you use experience gained with the same company the PERM application will be audited. One way to respond to the audit is by showing that you are filing for a different position than the one you gained the experience in and that the position for which you are filing is not substantially comparable to the position where you gained the experience.
My suggestion to you is that you use an experienced immigration attorney that you trust. The laws and procedures involved in filing a PERM application are so complicated and subtle that there are many immigration law attorneys who do not handle PERM cases. I know there are lots of companies that fumble their way through the process without an attorney and are lucky enough not to get audited, but that is just trusting your future to the luck of the draw.
Thank you very much for prompt and precise response. The reason you listed makes perfect sense. However, my situation is a little different and I have a couple of questions, directly related to your answer:
1. As I've mentioned, I do have close to 10 years of accumulated overall experience in my field - only half of it came before I graduated. I was already employed in this field before I started college and during it, and I have experience letters from employers to back that up. The only thing is, since I didn't have a degree, my job title didn't include "engineer" in it, although I was working same field, doing similar jobs. So, it's not that when this sponsor hired me for this position I did not have 5 years of relevant experience in the field - I did, it's just that half of it came before I got the degree and unlike DOL EB2 requirement - my sponsor did not have the restriction for this experience to be post graduate.
My first question is: will this argument work with DOL, saying that when the sponsor hired me I had over 5 years of relevant experience (I can prove it), just not post graduate experience and that is why the sponsor claims this job indeed requires B.Sc. + 5 years experience, although for them it's OK if the experience didnt come after I got the degree?
2. Hypothetically speaking, lets say I found another consulting company, which is willing to apply for my green card through EB2 track, without transferring my H1 visa and before I actually start working for them - will I be able to count these 15 months of experience with current sponsor, when the new company (who I don't work for) will be applying for my green card through EB2?
2010 fat baby mouse. fat baby mouse. (the fat baby with the open
tikka
08-07 10:24 AM
Could not attend the coffee appt. Hopefully will be able to attend the lunch.
you can make it..
you can make it..
more...
OLDMONK
04-17 02:42 PM
Filed Feb 22/06 got approved on March 7/06
I heard that people who ported their Old Priority date are taking that long a time as yours. Is your a fresh application or did it used Older Priority Date.
Else you may be a victim of IT issues they had initially with perm.
Anyway, There is a long wait now for filing concurrent 140/485..
I heard that people who ported their Old Priority date are taking that long a time as yours. Is your a fresh application or did it used Older Priority Date.
Else you may be a victim of IT issues they had initially with perm.
Anyway, There is a long wait now for filing concurrent 140/485..
hair fat baby mouse. fat baby mouse. Xiao Lei Chinese Fat Baby: At;
senk1s
10-04 05:31 PM
or is it the same question you wanted an answer to?
more...
ivar
03-12 11:36 PM
Received a mail for myself and my wife. welcome to USA. But no email from CRIS.
:):):):):):)
Congratulations. You deserved it after such a long wait. Enjoy your GC. :)
:):):):):):)
Congratulations. You deserved it after such a long wait. Enjoy your GC. :)
hot fat baby mouse. Baby Mouse
pxkuma
06-17 07:20 AM
I am in the same boat too. Only difference is that I have formally accepted the offer and it's in the same corporation (but different legal entity).
My lawyer recommended that I have three options
1) Start over and recapture your PD. She mentioned that this is the cleanest option.
2) Apply for 485 from your old job and then move to the other job after six months
3) Move to the new job but apply for your 485 from your old job.However, you will need to move back to your old job once you get your Green Card.
I believe Option 3 is the best for all of you. Try contacting your old employers to see if they can file for your 485. That said, once your complete your six months after applying for 485, you can technically move. Now I am not sure if this will work, but can we not move into another company at more apparent time before the actual receipt of the Green Card. Also, given the severe retrogression expected, it may be a long wait and this move may potentially not have to happen for a while.
Please note the above is my opinion and you will need to consult your own lawyers.
My lawyer recommended that I have three options
1) Start over and recapture your PD. She mentioned that this is the cleanest option.
2) Apply for 485 from your old job and then move to the other job after six months
3) Move to the new job but apply for your 485 from your old job.However, you will need to move back to your old job once you get your Green Card.
I believe Option 3 is the best for all of you. Try contacting your old employers to see if they can file for your 485. That said, once your complete your six months after applying for 485, you can technically move. Now I am not sure if this will work, but can we not move into another company at more apparent time before the actual receipt of the Green Card. Also, given the severe retrogression expected, it may be a long wait and this move may potentially not have to happen for a while.
Please note the above is my opinion and you will need to consult your own lawyers.
more...
house Baby mice wine is a
sukhyani
10-16 02:01 PM
speaking of SKIL Act, I dont know why I feel pretty optimistic that it might get passed during the lame duck session of Congress. Since December last year (Budget Reconciliation) we have seen House and Senate not agreeing on provisions favorable to us. This time both the chambers have identical bills favoring us. Let's keep our fingures crossed...
tattoo This BABY mouse was starting
HRPRO
03-07 12:32 PM
That is not correct. Even if employer revokes it, the PD is good. The only time you will loss PD is if CIS revokes it due to fraud.
Krish,
I did not mention that the PD will be affected. My first sentence very clearly states that his PD will not be affected. The disruptions I mentioned were with respect to his current petition.
Read carefully before jumping into conclusions.
Krish,
I did not mention that the PD will be affected. My first sentence very clearly states that his PD will not be affected. The disruptions I mentioned were with respect to his current petition.
Read carefully before jumping into conclusions.
more...
pictures Mouse Over Main Image to Zoom
logiclife
04-28 12:43 PM
This was a post I did 16 months ago, when Immigration Voice was 3 weeks old and no one knew anything about CIR of 2006.
As we have learned in 2006 and in last 16 months, it is not going to be possible to separate ourselves from illegal immigration no matter how much we try. Its just not going to happen.
There is some good news today from bloomberg:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=akTlfu6iVMK8&refer=home
As we have learned in 2006 and in last 16 months, it is not going to be possible to separate ourselves from illegal immigration no matter how much we try. Its just not going to happen.
There is some good news today from bloomberg:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=akTlfu6iVMK8&refer=home
dresses chubby aby, aby, fat baby,
Oasis52
05-16 09:06 AM
Thanks you are right on consular processing and you are also right that on transfer receipt one can start working
But I am still confused on entering USA. I read on all the forums, you can enter usa with a Transfer Receipt if your h1 stamp is still valid.
So thats something i am trying to sort out.
But I am still confused on entering USA. I read on all the forums, you can enter usa with a Transfer Receipt if your h1 stamp is still valid.
So thats something i am trying to sort out.
more...
makeup Fat Baby Mouse Pad by Emangl3D
gotgc?
02-04 09:52 AM
My wife was allowed to travel on BA when she went from US to India. But when we were returning to US, the ticketing agent in India would not issue bording pass because Canadian PR can only be used if you are travelling to Canada and NOT to USA. The ticketing manager even called someone in London Airport to get the confirmation and after that they just denied my request even after showing the document that says Canada PR issues after Apr 2005 does not require transit visa.
I would say, get the visa to be on the safeside so that there will not be any troubles in the last minute.
Thanks deba and kk_kk...for sharing your expereince...based on what you guys say, the cheap deal i get with BA is not worth taking this risk. I am giving up on London transit..i will take Lufthansa or pacific route....thanks a lot again....
I would say, get the visa to be on the safeside so that there will not be any troubles in the last minute.
Thanks deba and kk_kk...for sharing your expereince...based on what you guys say, the cheap deal i get with BA is not worth taking this risk. I am giving up on London transit..i will take Lufthansa or pacific route....thanks a lot again....
girlfriend + Lovers :: Fat Baby :: $8
balu_g
01-06 08:07 AM
Hi Mayra75, Yes this is a bad situation for immigrants. Hope it will be resolved in 2006. If you dont have any other option, you can look for a job in a University or a Non-profit organization which does not come under the cap.
hairstyles a really really fat baby.
sundar99
05-03 11:34 AM
Instead of picking holes in the system, all that we need to do is to ensure the reporter gets the message " How legal immigrants are stuck so deeply for following rules" . This will help them put it out in press and debate on it, that way, there will be a larger awareness. You got to look at it from a larger perspective. The more awareness the better are the chances. The time is now to call reporters and highlight the plight of EB Retro folks. That way, they get to seperate legal and illegals (or Mex Citizens) inorder not to confuse the public.
I am of the opinion, it will help the legal immigrants cause by calling, no harm in trying it.
I am of the opinion, it will help the legal immigrants cause by calling, no harm in trying it.
insbaby
07-17 11:01 AM
I recieved reply from consulate stating that I need to get PCC from US consulate as I have not being living in India for a long time therefore there is no use of getting PCC from local police station. Now anybody let me know if I fly to SFO they would give my PCC with in a day or would take time ??/
If you are holdng a Passport issued by other than SF Consulate:
* If applying at the counter in-person, 30 business days or on receipt of clearance from Passport Issuing Authority concerned, whichever is earlier
*If applying by mail, 30 business days, excluding time taken in mail, or on receipt of clearance from Passport Issuing Authority concerned, whichever is earlier.
As it takes around 30 business days to issue PCC, you must submit photocopy of passport at the time of applying. As soon as the clearance is received from the Passport Issuing Authority concerned, you will be called (provided you have mentioned your telephone number in the application) to submit your original passport for stamping of PCC.
If you are holdng a Passport issued by SF Consulate:
Applying in person: Same day or latest by the next working day
Applying by mail: 10 (ten) business days excluding the time taken in mail
http://cgisf.org/misc/miscservices.html
If you are holdng a Passport issued by other than SF Consulate:
* If applying at the counter in-person, 30 business days or on receipt of clearance from Passport Issuing Authority concerned, whichever is earlier
*If applying by mail, 30 business days, excluding time taken in mail, or on receipt of clearance from Passport Issuing Authority concerned, whichever is earlier.
As it takes around 30 business days to issue PCC, you must submit photocopy of passport at the time of applying. As soon as the clearance is received from the Passport Issuing Authority concerned, you will be called (provided you have mentioned your telephone number in the application) to submit your original passport for stamping of PCC.
If you are holdng a Passport issued by SF Consulate:
Applying in person: Same day or latest by the next working day
Applying by mail: 10 (ten) business days excluding the time taken in mail
http://cgisf.org/misc/miscservices.html
gcpool
03-26 01:14 PM
How did you come to this conclusion?
I will go first: 50%
:p
I will go first: 50%
:p
No comments:
Post a Comment