new_horizon
12-03 01:27 PM
hope you are not talking about quixtar/amway or reliv business?
wallpaper Denise Richards normal weight
Achi Goro
11-17 02:54 PM
Hey Guys
I need your help on these issues. My labor certification was filed on October 25th 2006 and had it approved on 5th of November 2006.
Now my employer is ready to file the 1-140 together with 1-1485. My question is, I do not know whether my priority date is current for the filing of these forms.
Looking at the above filing date, can some one brief me on my likely priority date?
The other question is, even though my employer is taking the responsibilty of my filing process, I am paying all the expenses ( be it the Attorney fee as well as other additional fees are being borne by me).
When do you think will be appropriate for me to quit this job after my 1-140 and 1-1485 have been filed? Please advice me on this because my initially promised to pay for all the expenses but denied this after I have taken up the job.
I need your help on these issues. My labor certification was filed on October 25th 2006 and had it approved on 5th of November 2006.
Now my employer is ready to file the 1-140 together with 1-1485. My question is, I do not know whether my priority date is current for the filing of these forms.
Looking at the above filing date, can some one brief me on my likely priority date?
The other question is, even though my employer is taking the responsibilty of my filing process, I am paying all the expenses ( be it the Attorney fee as well as other additional fees are being borne by me).
When do you think will be appropriate for me to quit this job after my 1-140 and 1-1485 have been filed? Please advice me on this because my initially promised to pay for all the expenses but denied this after I have taken up the job.
validIV
02-03 10:40 AM
I have the same A# on my I-140 receipt, I-485 receipt and EAD. But my EAD and I-485 uses my 2nd name as my middle initial whereas it is correct on my I-140.
2011 Denise Richards,
cybergold
04-28 10:25 AM
Hey Pom, where is Senocular's Robot, it was a very nice one.
more...
jatinr
09-23 04:15 PM
i too remember reading postmark doesnt matter it should be received by 17th
I agree,it was clarified in immigration-law that the application should be received by Aug 17th and does not matter when it was sent.
.
I agree,it was clarified in immigration-law that the application should be received by Aug 17th and does not matter when it was sent.
.
Leo07
05-20 01:53 PM
Let's also help...people who did not file for AOS yet!!!
more...
aristotle
07-11 11:40 AM
Please see my other thread "Stop, Think!!" for my thoughts.
2010 Denise Richards, Casper Van
ramus
06-19 08:47 PM
You can take photo any where you want as long as you meet their photo specs.
If you have AAA membership try it... You will get it for free.
will any agent take photos or is there any specified location
thanks
kumar
If you have AAA membership try it... You will get it for free.
will any agent take photos or is there any specified location
thanks
kumar
more...
kothuri
06-10 10:24 AM
My opinion is it is better to get a lawyer to file Nunc Pro tunc.
Read this article on the same. http://www.murthy.com/news/n_nunpro.html
It means if not then now or some thing like that. I guess it is a latin or greek..not sure though.
Read this article on the same. http://www.murthy.com/news/n_nunpro.html
It means if not then now or some thing like that. I guess it is a latin or greek..not sure though.
hair Denise Richards — Starship
nath.exists
11-02 11:41 PM
I thought "we are getting married soon" is implied in my post. Anyways to be more clear ..we are getting married next month i.e. December. I have recently got i 140 cleared . Next month i will have my marriage done and marriage certificate ready. Her country of birth is different that of mine i.e. not India and is current for EB-2. Could you please help me with these doubts.
1.) I have a masters degree from USA and my employer is willing to file under EB-2. my wife is bachelors. Can i apply in EB-2 for both of us and charge it to her quota since it is current for her country.
2.)Would she need to be physically here in USA for filing i 485.
3.) one of my acquaintance was telling me that the GC we get using cross chargeability is a conditonal one and not like regular GC. Is this true.?
4.)Is cross chargeability always possible or does it depend on the will and mercy of uscis.
5.) Is it true that we might have to go through rigorous and sometimes humiliating interview processes to finally get the GC.
6.)Does she also have to do MS to use cross chargeability and file in EB-2
1.) I have a masters degree from USA and my employer is willing to file under EB-2. my wife is bachelors. Can i apply in EB-2 for both of us and charge it to her quota since it is current for her country.
2.)Would she need to be physically here in USA for filing i 485.
3.) one of my acquaintance was telling me that the GC we get using cross chargeability is a conditonal one and not like regular GC. Is this true.?
4.)Is cross chargeability always possible or does it depend on the will and mercy of uscis.
5.) Is it true that we might have to go through rigorous and sometimes humiliating interview processes to finally get the GC.
6.)Does she also have to do MS to use cross chargeability and file in EB-2
more...
dcrtrv27
10-09 01:16 PM
This was big surprize to me. Mine and my spuse had hard LUD on our I485 with the current status as :Notice Returned as Undeliverable. There wer no other updates or status change or approval or denial or soft LUD etc.
The most surpising to me that both of us received the Finger Printing notices on our new address just a month ago.
This is really frustrating.
When I called up the 800 number the lady said just ignore this status as this is some computer glitch.
Dont know what to do just believe her or try to do something else?
Need help ! any one out there in same situation???
The most surpising to me that both of us received the Finger Printing notices on our new address just a month ago.
This is really frustrating.
When I called up the 800 number the lady said just ignore this status as this is some computer glitch.
Dont know what to do just believe her or try to do something else?
Need help ! any one out there in same situation???
hot Denise Richards in a Nutshell
anilsal
08-26 02:40 PM
I-140 Premium and I-1485 filed concurrently at NSC on June 29th. Received July 2nd. No clue if checks are encashed.
PD: Nov 2002.
H1-B 7th year expiring Dec'07;
8th year extension filed.
Any one in the same boat?
Many of the July 17/18th filers at NSC have got their checks cashed. Maybe yours got transferred to a different center.
Please contribute to IV in either time or money or BOTH.
PD: Nov 2002.
H1-B 7th year expiring Dec'07;
8th year extension filed.
Any one in the same boat?
Many of the July 17/18th filers at NSC have got their checks cashed. Maybe yours got transferred to a different center.
Please contribute to IV in either time or money or BOTH.
more...
house Denise Richards – “Denise
voldemar
02-27 05:11 PM
6) The simple logic is, eb1 has higher qualifications than eb2, and eb2 has more qualifications compared to eb3. If you believe they treat everyone the same, then be happy and stick with your belief.That's true. Also EB3 cases are the easiest, EB2 a little more complex and EB1 the most complex. USCIS officers tend to do easiest job more often ;)
tattoo Denise Richards, Starship
leena_k
01-31 07:04 PM
Thanks for the link:)
more...
pictures Denise Richards as Christmas
dravid88
10-17 06:29 AM
Tax Credits (http://www.extramortgages.com/first-time-buyers Tax Credits)
dresses denise richards in starship troopers. denise richards starship.
goel_ar
12-21 10:06 AM
Keerthisagar - sent you a PM. send me your email..
Can IV core send any material prepared for lawmakers?
Can IV core send any material prepared for lawmakers?
more...
makeup Ibanez (Denise Richards).
kirupa
04-22 05:22 PM
sparky - I really like your third one. I haven't seen a lot of green stamps. Anyhoo, add some text like the dolllar/cent value of the stamp and I'll add it up :)
girlfriend Denise Richards,
gc28262
07-16 07:30 AM
Murthy Bulletin
VOL. XVI, no. 29; Jul 2010, week 3
Posted : 16.Jul.2010
MurthyDotCom : MurthyBulletin (http://murthy.com/bulletin.html)
Many MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers have inquired about whatever happened to those H1B workers who encountered problems at the Newark, New Jersey port of entry (POE) in January 2010. The incidents in Newark struck fear in the hearts of many H1B foreign nationals who needed or wanted to travel abroad or return to the United States from abroad. This is the success story of one such traveler, who was denied entry at the Newark POE, and was banned at the POE from returning to the United States for five years under an order of expedited removal. He came to the Murthy Law Firm for help after he had returned to his home country under the order of expedited removal. This client of our firm has generously allowed us to share his success story with MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers. Information about a client or a case is never reported to our readers without consent of the client.
Background of Denial of Entry to the U.S. in January 2010
The problems of this individual were similar to those described in our January 14, 2010 NewsFlash entitled, Note to H1Bs Traveling to the U.S. and Working for Consulting Companies. The airport at issue was Newark International Airport in New Jersey. The traveler was returning to the U.S. and, rather than the routine verification of documents and basic information, he was questioned in detail about his employment. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers questioned him regarding the validity of his H1B employment, the identity of his employer's customers, and whether or not his employer had sufficient work for him. As explained below, the CBP was not satisfied with the information it gathered and, ultimately, exercised its authority to issue an expedited removal order against the foreign national, who became a client of the Murthy Law Firm after he was sent back to India.
Travel Outside of the United States
The foreign national had traveled outside of the United States and returned to his home country to get married. He carried with him a letter from his H1B employer, verifying that he would resume his H1B employment upon his return to the U.S. After his wedding celebration, his wife applied for an H-4 dependent visa through a U.S. consulate in the couple's home country. They presented the employer's letter to the consular office in support of the H-4 visa application. The consulate was satisfied with the evidence presented, and issued the H-4 visa. The gentleman who later became our client then attempted to return to the United States alone, with plans for his wife to follow soon after.
CBP Checks on Returning H1B Workers
When the individual attempted to reenter the United States, his experience at the POE was far from ordinary. The CBP officers placed him into what is known as secondary inspection. This is the procedure for foreign nationals who cannot be quickly and routinely processed through the standard primary inspection. The traveler was questioned about his employer, his work, and the end-client where he was performing his work. He was asked whether or not his employer had enough work to keep him employed throughout the duration of his H1B petition. One CBP officer contacted his employer, using the contact information on the employer's letter. The H1B employer was surprised by the call from CBP and did not firmly state that he had sufficient work to keep this particular H1B worker fully employed for the rest of the duration of the H1B petition.
The CBP officer took this information and determined that the foreign national was not returning to resume valid nonimmigrant work on his H1B visa. The officer instead considered the foreign national to be an intending immigrant seeking admission to the United States without a proper immigrant visa. This is one of the grounds under the law that permits an expedited removal. The officer cancelled the individual's H1B visa stamp in his passport and entered an expedited removal order against him, which carries the penalty of a five-year bar to reentering the U.S. The gentleman was then ordered to depart the U.S. on the next flight back to his home country.
Removed H1B Worker Contacts Murthy to Take Action
The foreign national contacted Murthy Law Firm after this unfortunate incident, and requested our assistance. The case was assigned to our Special Projects department, and we quickly made contact with the CBP officers at the port of entry involved. Our attorneys analyzed the case and found several legal mistakes that were made in the process of cancelling the H1B visa as well as in issuing the expedited removal order. A detailed legal argument was drafted and sent to the lead CBP official for the POE.
New H1B Petition Approval
While the Murthy Law Firm team was working on this case, our client obtained a new job offer from his H1B employer's end-client. The job involved duties identical to his previous position, but as a direct employee of the prior end-client company. The new employer obtained an approval of its H1B petition for consular processing. The only thing standing between our client and a great job was the five-year ban on his return to the United States that was created by the expedited removal order. The attorney assigned to this case contacted a U.S. senator representing the state where the new employer is located and began a series of actions that led to a review of the expedited removal.
Murthy Takes Action to Reverse Earlier CBP Decision
The review and reconsideration of expedited removal orders is not explicitly provided for in the regulations that control the day-to-day operations of the CBP. The Murthy Law Firm team succeeded in showing that the events that transpired for our client were extremely unusual and required review by leaders at CBP. Due to the new employer's need for this individual's skills, the attorney contacted several officers at CBP, filed a second official request with CBP, and worked with the U.S. senator's office to show that there was a serious and urgent need for a decision.
Determined Follow-up Leads to Relief
The persistence of our excellent legal team paid off. After almost ten weeks of communications with the CBP and other government offices, the CBP issued a letter stating that, while there is no appeal of expedited removal orders under the law, CBP was exercising its discretion and overturning its prior expedited removal order. The letter was quickly forwarded to our client, who scheduled his H1B visa interview at the appropriate U.S. consulate in India. He was issued his H1B visa at the conclusion of his consular interview and he then made the arrangements necessary for his wife and himself to return to the United States so that he could commence his new H1B employment.
Conclusion
We at the Murthy Law Firm are proud to share another of our many successful stories with our readers. We would like to extend our deep appreciation for the hard work and cooperation of the CBP officers in reconsidering their prior decision and taking the bold step, even though there was no law or regulation for an appeal or reconsideration of an earlier CBP decision. We also send our thanks the U.S. senator's staff, who worked to resolve the incorrect expedited removal order, which would have resulted in the five-year bar to our client's ability to return to the United States. Finally, our gratitude is offered once again to our client for his permission, allowing us to share his story, thereby providing hope to others.
VOL. XVI, no. 29; Jul 2010, week 3
Posted : 16.Jul.2010
MurthyDotCom : MurthyBulletin (http://murthy.com/bulletin.html)
Many MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers have inquired about whatever happened to those H1B workers who encountered problems at the Newark, New Jersey port of entry (POE) in January 2010. The incidents in Newark struck fear in the hearts of many H1B foreign nationals who needed or wanted to travel abroad or return to the United States from abroad. This is the success story of one such traveler, who was denied entry at the Newark POE, and was banned at the POE from returning to the United States for five years under an order of expedited removal. He came to the Murthy Law Firm for help after he had returned to his home country under the order of expedited removal. This client of our firm has generously allowed us to share his success story with MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers. Information about a client or a case is never reported to our readers without consent of the client.
Background of Denial of Entry to the U.S. in January 2010
The problems of this individual were similar to those described in our January 14, 2010 NewsFlash entitled, Note to H1Bs Traveling to the U.S. and Working for Consulting Companies. The airport at issue was Newark International Airport in New Jersey. The traveler was returning to the U.S. and, rather than the routine verification of documents and basic information, he was questioned in detail about his employment. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers questioned him regarding the validity of his H1B employment, the identity of his employer's customers, and whether or not his employer had sufficient work for him. As explained below, the CBP was not satisfied with the information it gathered and, ultimately, exercised its authority to issue an expedited removal order against the foreign national, who became a client of the Murthy Law Firm after he was sent back to India.
Travel Outside of the United States
The foreign national had traveled outside of the United States and returned to his home country to get married. He carried with him a letter from his H1B employer, verifying that he would resume his H1B employment upon his return to the U.S. After his wedding celebration, his wife applied for an H-4 dependent visa through a U.S. consulate in the couple's home country. They presented the employer's letter to the consular office in support of the H-4 visa application. The consulate was satisfied with the evidence presented, and issued the H-4 visa. The gentleman who later became our client then attempted to return to the United States alone, with plans for his wife to follow soon after.
CBP Checks on Returning H1B Workers
When the individual attempted to reenter the United States, his experience at the POE was far from ordinary. The CBP officers placed him into what is known as secondary inspection. This is the procedure for foreign nationals who cannot be quickly and routinely processed through the standard primary inspection. The traveler was questioned about his employer, his work, and the end-client where he was performing his work. He was asked whether or not his employer had enough work to keep him employed throughout the duration of his H1B petition. One CBP officer contacted his employer, using the contact information on the employer's letter. The H1B employer was surprised by the call from CBP and did not firmly state that he had sufficient work to keep this particular H1B worker fully employed for the rest of the duration of the H1B petition.
The CBP officer took this information and determined that the foreign national was not returning to resume valid nonimmigrant work on his H1B visa. The officer instead considered the foreign national to be an intending immigrant seeking admission to the United States without a proper immigrant visa. This is one of the grounds under the law that permits an expedited removal. The officer cancelled the individual's H1B visa stamp in his passport and entered an expedited removal order against him, which carries the penalty of a five-year bar to reentering the U.S. The gentleman was then ordered to depart the U.S. on the next flight back to his home country.
Removed H1B Worker Contacts Murthy to Take Action
The foreign national contacted Murthy Law Firm after this unfortunate incident, and requested our assistance. The case was assigned to our Special Projects department, and we quickly made contact with the CBP officers at the port of entry involved. Our attorneys analyzed the case and found several legal mistakes that were made in the process of cancelling the H1B visa as well as in issuing the expedited removal order. A detailed legal argument was drafted and sent to the lead CBP official for the POE.
New H1B Petition Approval
While the Murthy Law Firm team was working on this case, our client obtained a new job offer from his H1B employer's end-client. The job involved duties identical to his previous position, but as a direct employee of the prior end-client company. The new employer obtained an approval of its H1B petition for consular processing. The only thing standing between our client and a great job was the five-year ban on his return to the United States that was created by the expedited removal order. The attorney assigned to this case contacted a U.S. senator representing the state where the new employer is located and began a series of actions that led to a review of the expedited removal.
Murthy Takes Action to Reverse Earlier CBP Decision
The review and reconsideration of expedited removal orders is not explicitly provided for in the regulations that control the day-to-day operations of the CBP. The Murthy Law Firm team succeeded in showing that the events that transpired for our client were extremely unusual and required review by leaders at CBP. Due to the new employer's need for this individual's skills, the attorney contacted several officers at CBP, filed a second official request with CBP, and worked with the U.S. senator's office to show that there was a serious and urgent need for a decision.
Determined Follow-up Leads to Relief
The persistence of our excellent legal team paid off. After almost ten weeks of communications with the CBP and other government offices, the CBP issued a letter stating that, while there is no appeal of expedited removal orders under the law, CBP was exercising its discretion and overturning its prior expedited removal order. The letter was quickly forwarded to our client, who scheduled his H1B visa interview at the appropriate U.S. consulate in India. He was issued his H1B visa at the conclusion of his consular interview and he then made the arrangements necessary for his wife and himself to return to the United States so that he could commence his new H1B employment.
Conclusion
We at the Murthy Law Firm are proud to share another of our many successful stories with our readers. We would like to extend our deep appreciation for the hard work and cooperation of the CBP officers in reconsidering their prior decision and taking the bold step, even though there was no law or regulation for an appeal or reconsideration of an earlier CBP decision. We also send our thanks the U.S. senator's staff, who worked to resolve the incorrect expedited removal order, which would have resulted in the five-year bar to our client's ability to return to the United States. Finally, our gratitude is offered once again to our client for his permission, allowing us to share his story, thereby providing hope to others.
hairstyles about Starship Troopers.
bec
11-04 06:36 PM
Hey i was so happy to read that EB3 was current in your post, but got disappointed after i read your msg :(
I dont think we can change the title, the moderators have to change it !!!!
you can change it.
I dont think we can change the title, the moderators have to change it !!!!
you can change it.
up_guy
09-27 01:59 PM
The priority dates cannot be ported during the I-140 stage. This can be done only during 485 filing where in you have two I-140s approved and a request can be made to use the earlier priority date.
Thats not ture. PD can be ported at the time of I-140 filing
Thats not ture. PD can be ported at the time of I-140 filing
pappu
04-09 12:05 PM
Can someone please confirm if "Card Production Ordered" email from USCIS mean my 485 is approved and I have gotten GC ?
I have only got this "Card Production Ordered" email and not an email specifically saying "485 approved". How long does it take after "Card Production Ordered" email to get actual card.
Also if May bulletin is Unavailable it still means that GC;s issued if your date is current in April are valid ? My email came yesterday same day as the new May bulletin ?
Congrats.
You are one of the oldest member. Glad you finally made it before EB3 became unavailable.
I have only got this "Card Production Ordered" email and not an email specifically saying "485 approved". How long does it take after "Card Production Ordered" email to get actual card.
Also if May bulletin is Unavailable it still means that GC;s issued if your date is current in April are valid ? My email came yesterday same day as the new May bulletin ?
Congrats.
You are one of the oldest member. Glad you finally made it before EB3 became unavailable.
