buehler
06-18 08:32 AM
If you're worried, the easiest thing to do is to have the name changed in the passport. The Consulate doesn't ask for any questions and issues the new passport within a day. For my friend, the first name and the last name were interchanged and getting the new passport was a breeze.
wallpaper Springsteen#39;s 1978 album,
theMan
12-18 09:05 PM
Second round of contribution sent in. Hope all members follow suit. We should not let the lack on funds come in the way of getting the job done. Appreciate all the hard work put in by the members.
pappu
06-07 01:44 PM
Advocacy day is going well. There are about 300 meetings being planed between today and tomorrow. Its very hectic in the situation room.
This afternoon USCIS Ombudsman came to meet us in the situation room and spoke with the members. More details and pictures will be posted soon. Stay tuned.
This afternoon USCIS Ombudsman came to meet us in the situation room and spoke with the members. More details and pictures will be posted soon. Stay tuned.
2011 /artist/ruce-springsteen/5738
coopheal
03-09 05:42 PM
Sent $100
Transaction ID: 6ww******
Transaction ID: 6ww******
more...
pappu
12-18 07:11 PM
pappu, pls let me know, if u received the fund. Also, one small suggestion, we can just maintain a small excel sheet, to just see who (just the user id and not the actual name) contributed and how much money they contributed just in this campaign. Cos, I hate to say this, I just dont want to be around those who want to have a free ride from all the hard work that IV group is putting in. Please everyone please donate. If you are reading this post, if you have not contributed earlier, please contribute. Dont you want IV to become strong financially when fighting this tough case. They need all the help they can get. So, please anyone who is going through this forum and not contributed earlier, please do contribute. This will help us go a long way. Thank you and god bless IV.
Thanks. It is tough to keep a sheet. but if people just post a note on the forum that they paid it will help keep a tab on #of contributions. It can be verified and we will know who has contributed.
Thanks. It is tough to keep a sheet. but if people just post a note on the forum that they paid it will help keep a tab on #of contributions. It can be verified and we will know who has contributed.
amits
03-06 11:53 AM
Thanks for your kind words and many thanks for the initiative!
Amit, You are really a great asset to community. Thanks for all your support. This will be a good motivation for others.
Guys, we are going really well. We need to make this happen. Yes, we can!
Amit, You are really a great asset to community. Thanks for all your support. This will be a good motivation for others.
Guys, we are going really well. We need to make this happen. Yes, we can!
more...
downthedrain
03-06 07:29 PM
I am in $25
2010 Bruce Springsteen News:
santb1975
11-29 02:27 PM
We need committed Members like you
Signed up for $50 monthly recurring contributions.
Together, we can do it! Go IV!
Signed up for $50 monthly recurring contributions.
Together, we can do it! Go IV!
more...
unitednations
02-04 11:53 PM
I came to the conclusion just based on section INA 202 (a) (5) (A). Nothing more nothing less. You came to funny conclusion of "quaterly basis".
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
You are critizising H1B indians and their employer screwing the system which is not relevent to what we are talking here. If you feel so, then attack who ever spoiling the system and regulate those. Instead you are trying to justify your interperataion is right and what DOS is doing is right. I will be the happiest person if they ban labor subsitution and ban desi consulting companies or H1B dependent employer participating in GC sponsering. Then this mess might have not happened.
Because this discussion has happened so much. That is this exact discussion when everyone was trying to determine whether they should go for eb2 or eb3; the common prevailing attitude was horiziontal rather then vertical.
What made everyone shut up including me was what was written in november 2005 visa bulletin. It was there for everyone to see how it was going to be interpreted. Anothe law firm had reported chines usage year to date and it was concluded that they may fall short of the 11,000 visas (ie., 7% cap). With all this available; not one lawyer has decided to sue department of state or uscis over this. Why is that? Maybe what they are saying is correct and you are reading into it what you want to read into it.
Any time someone gets around to explaining the system; they are automatically branded anti-indian. Funny but everyone I know through immigration is Indian. Therefore, whenever someone brands me anti indian or even comes close to it; I get a very good chuckle out of it and so do the people who know me that frequent these boards and immigration.com
How the visas are being allocated actually is pretty relevant because it helps everyone to understand how it all works and comes together. I had been on the record that maybe people shouldn't get too worked up about this. The louder one becomes the more scrutiny starts happening. Once the scrutiny gets wratched up a few notches; are you ready to counter it.
What is this scrutiny that you may ask?
Newspaper in Maine did very thorough investigation of companies who sponsored labors through Maine. It was very hard hitting whcih asked for comments from Department of labor and USCIS. Both are investigating it. Essentially it said that companies rented out a cube and filed 60 labors and 100 h-1b's when their real offices were in other states that were taking a long time to get labors approved.
Backlog reduction centers are challenging companies to prove that their headquarters were where they said they were? They are questioning whether there is a permanent job. Companies are not responding and letting the labors go. Don't you think department of labor will start going into the approved labors and start scrutinizing them.
California service center denied many cases for two companies that I know of who had revenues of over $20 million. Reason for denial was that they are temp. agency and no permanent job. No permanent job; no I-140 approval. Companies have gotten a good dose of H-1b RFE's from california service center regarding this. Many have gotten the h-1b's denied because they can't even substantitate they have a job for the person. If they don't have a temp. job then how can they have a permanent job. Chennai consulate is giving very difficult time to staffing/consulates. It has gotten so bad that back in early december; consulates in india said if you are good in english you can go to ther consulaes in india. Guess what? Chennai it only takes two days to get an interview now because everyone refuses to go there. Just a matter of time before new delhi and mumbai catch up. if consulates are refusing visa stamping for temp. jobs what do you think will happen when they start ratcheting it up a notch to the permanent jobs.
Main reason they haven't gotten into the permanent jobs yet is because nurses which are really in demand also get greencards through staffing companies and are outsourced. Since, nurses are needed; uscis doesn't want to give a hard time to the staffing agencies; therefore, they don't want to be accused of double standards. We will see how this will change if at all as retrogression and increasing visas and studies are performed how people are getting greencards come to light.
btw; I have been on record that as long as country cap of 7% is maintained; it would have disasterous consequences for India/China to allow 485 filing without priority date. Since the 7% cap applies then that means someone who enters usa today from ROW and files an eb2 labor will get priority over you. Anyone can file a 485 as long as they have a labor, 140 and they are in non immigrant status. I know of three people through other forum who were from ROW; came on visitor visa found someone to file perm labor get approved in a couple of weeks and then go straight to 140/485. Since they can file 485 right away they get precedence over india/china. Anyone on visitor visa would be eligible. This would number in the millions. It would be quite possible that there would be never ending retrogression for India and China.
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
You are critizising H1B indians and their employer screwing the system which is not relevent to what we are talking here. If you feel so, then attack who ever spoiling the system and regulate those. Instead you are trying to justify your interperataion is right and what DOS is doing is right. I will be the happiest person if they ban labor subsitution and ban desi consulting companies or H1B dependent employer participating in GC sponsering. Then this mess might have not happened.
Because this discussion has happened so much. That is this exact discussion when everyone was trying to determine whether they should go for eb2 or eb3; the common prevailing attitude was horiziontal rather then vertical.
What made everyone shut up including me was what was written in november 2005 visa bulletin. It was there for everyone to see how it was going to be interpreted. Anothe law firm had reported chines usage year to date and it was concluded that they may fall short of the 11,000 visas (ie., 7% cap). With all this available; not one lawyer has decided to sue department of state or uscis over this. Why is that? Maybe what they are saying is correct and you are reading into it what you want to read into it.
Any time someone gets around to explaining the system; they are automatically branded anti-indian. Funny but everyone I know through immigration is Indian. Therefore, whenever someone brands me anti indian or even comes close to it; I get a very good chuckle out of it and so do the people who know me that frequent these boards and immigration.com
How the visas are being allocated actually is pretty relevant because it helps everyone to understand how it all works and comes together. I had been on the record that maybe people shouldn't get too worked up about this. The louder one becomes the more scrutiny starts happening. Once the scrutiny gets wratched up a few notches; are you ready to counter it.
What is this scrutiny that you may ask?
Newspaper in Maine did very thorough investigation of companies who sponsored labors through Maine. It was very hard hitting whcih asked for comments from Department of labor and USCIS. Both are investigating it. Essentially it said that companies rented out a cube and filed 60 labors and 100 h-1b's when their real offices were in other states that were taking a long time to get labors approved.
Backlog reduction centers are challenging companies to prove that their headquarters were where they said they were? They are questioning whether there is a permanent job. Companies are not responding and letting the labors go. Don't you think department of labor will start going into the approved labors and start scrutinizing them.
California service center denied many cases for two companies that I know of who had revenues of over $20 million. Reason for denial was that they are temp. agency and no permanent job. No permanent job; no I-140 approval. Companies have gotten a good dose of H-1b RFE's from california service center regarding this. Many have gotten the h-1b's denied because they can't even substantitate they have a job for the person. If they don't have a temp. job then how can they have a permanent job. Chennai consulate is giving very difficult time to staffing/consulates. It has gotten so bad that back in early december; consulates in india said if you are good in english you can go to ther consulaes in india. Guess what? Chennai it only takes two days to get an interview now because everyone refuses to go there. Just a matter of time before new delhi and mumbai catch up. if consulates are refusing visa stamping for temp. jobs what do you think will happen when they start ratcheting it up a notch to the permanent jobs.
Main reason they haven't gotten into the permanent jobs yet is because nurses which are really in demand also get greencards through staffing companies and are outsourced. Since, nurses are needed; uscis doesn't want to give a hard time to the staffing agencies; therefore, they don't want to be accused of double standards. We will see how this will change if at all as retrogression and increasing visas and studies are performed how people are getting greencards come to light.
btw; I have been on record that as long as country cap of 7% is maintained; it would have disasterous consequences for India/China to allow 485 filing without priority date. Since the 7% cap applies then that means someone who enters usa today from ROW and files an eb2 labor will get priority over you. Anyone can file a 485 as long as they have a labor, 140 and they are in non immigrant status. I know of three people through other forum who were from ROW; came on visitor visa found someone to file perm labor get approved in a couple of weeks and then go straight to 140/485. Since they can file 485 right away they get precedence over india/china. Anyone on visitor visa would be eligible. This would number in the millions. It would be quite possible that there would be never ending retrogression for India and China.
hair Promise.The.Making.of.
kosars
08-14 01:15 PM
This is in reply to sam2006 above. I had an LUD on my I140 on 7/28/07 but my application was mailed to TSC directly.
more...
ThinkTwice
03-06 12:53 PM
I pledge $50 for this effort but I would also like to state that we should think before we move ahead, some items to consider are
- Some one mentioned that we should try to leverage the press to get coverage for the response.
- We should forward the response from USCIS to the president, first lady, ombudsman, Secretary of State etc
- Get an exact understanding of what information would benefit us most and make sure we ask specifically for that
- Try to negotiate a better rate with USCIC ;)
Peace
- Some one mentioned that we should try to leverage the press to get coverage for the response.
- We should forward the response from USCIS to the president, first lady, ombudsman, Secretary of State etc
- Get an exact understanding of what information would benefit us most and make sure we ask specifically for that
- Try to negotiate a better rate with USCIC ;)
Peace
hot pictures quot;The Promise: The Making album bruce springsteen the promise.
santb1975
11-16 07:09 PM
That's ok..Let's keep this thread active
more...
house “Bruce Springsteen and the
ireddy
03-10 10:18 AM
(Unique Transaction ID #79T902699R5105627
tattoo The album reached #4 in the
paskal
07-10 07:52 PM
it goes deeper than that. first let me point out that this is philosophical- you argument is not about law, it's about a point of view.
so if i ask you why EB2 filers should spend extra years getting educated and never getting this all important magic "PD" and then get in line behind someone who got a job the day they entered the country- and got a PD soon enough- what would you say?
ask me. it took me 11 years to get a PD. why? for 7 of those years i was getting my advanced education. so why should i suffer behind the 3 year Indian degree person (against my 7 years there as well) who came in 5 years after me and filed right away?
there are reasons why the EB priorities were set up. by simply extending your logic EB1 should also wait for a turn and not have priority. what's good for the goose....
having said that, it is absolutely insane to ask people to wait indefinitely and we must do something about it.
today the EB3 folks (and I have nothing against them, their waits are insane- and it's absolutely not right) are porting to EB2 with those bachelors degrees and 5 years experience. and just because they could APPLY for a GC earlier and all their years get counted in the PD, they keep lining up ahead of me. why do all my years count for NOTHING?
please spare us "fortunate" EB2s a thought too. think of when in life our careers are finally freed from waiting for a GC.
and now please concentrate on ways to end retrogression and stop the EB2 vs EB3 crap. we all have our problems.
Sorry but I don't agree with your point that if EB2 benefits today EB3 would benefit tomorrow. It looks plain and simple but it's not so in reality. Unless all EB2 categories become current and EB3 ROW get the overflow and become current, EB3 I (or China or Mexico) is not going to be benefitted from EB2 getting a VISA! You are basically saying to EB3 filers to wait for another 10 years so that the EB2 queue may reduce so that EB3 queue would start moving. That's not a practical solution.
I think once there is an overflow (from EB1), then it should:
1. go to the category that's retrogressed more or
2. split the overflow among retrogressed categories and
3. go to EB2 if both EB2 and EB3 have the same cut off date.
Does US need more EB2 (than EB3) or need them sooner (than EB3)? If they need more EB2, then EB2 can get more numbers (but the restriction should happen at H1/L1 level). If they need them sooner, then they can be on a fast track. But by approving a EB3 or EB2 I140, the Govt. is saying that they need that particular applicant. A vast difference between these two categories at the last queue (485) does not make sense.
It is insane to ask a EB3 I 2001 filer to wait forever just because he filed under EB3 and grant a VISA to EB2 2004 filer! It is not different from granting a VISA to a EB3 2007 ROW filer and making EB3 I 2001 wait. EB2 is taking all the overflow which, in my view, is not correct. EB2 is benefitting at the cost of EB3 I (China and Mexico). EB3 ROW is benefitting at the cost of EB3 I (China and Mexico). Just my opinion.
so if i ask you why EB2 filers should spend extra years getting educated and never getting this all important magic "PD" and then get in line behind someone who got a job the day they entered the country- and got a PD soon enough- what would you say?
ask me. it took me 11 years to get a PD. why? for 7 of those years i was getting my advanced education. so why should i suffer behind the 3 year Indian degree person (against my 7 years there as well) who came in 5 years after me and filed right away?
there are reasons why the EB priorities were set up. by simply extending your logic EB1 should also wait for a turn and not have priority. what's good for the goose....
having said that, it is absolutely insane to ask people to wait indefinitely and we must do something about it.
today the EB3 folks (and I have nothing against them, their waits are insane- and it's absolutely not right) are porting to EB2 with those bachelors degrees and 5 years experience. and just because they could APPLY for a GC earlier and all their years get counted in the PD, they keep lining up ahead of me. why do all my years count for NOTHING?
please spare us "fortunate" EB2s a thought too. think of when in life our careers are finally freed from waiting for a GC.
and now please concentrate on ways to end retrogression and stop the EB2 vs EB3 crap. we all have our problems.
Sorry but I don't agree with your point that if EB2 benefits today EB3 would benefit tomorrow. It looks plain and simple but it's not so in reality. Unless all EB2 categories become current and EB3 ROW get the overflow and become current, EB3 I (or China or Mexico) is not going to be benefitted from EB2 getting a VISA! You are basically saying to EB3 filers to wait for another 10 years so that the EB2 queue may reduce so that EB3 queue would start moving. That's not a practical solution.
I think once there is an overflow (from EB1), then it should:
1. go to the category that's retrogressed more or
2. split the overflow among retrogressed categories and
3. go to EB2 if both EB2 and EB3 have the same cut off date.
Does US need more EB2 (than EB3) or need them sooner (than EB3)? If they need more EB2, then EB2 can get more numbers (but the restriction should happen at H1/L1 level). If they need them sooner, then they can be on a fast track. But by approving a EB3 or EB2 I140, the Govt. is saying that they need that particular applicant. A vast difference between these two categories at the last queue (485) does not make sense.
It is insane to ask a EB3 I 2001 filer to wait forever just because he filed under EB3 and grant a VISA to EB2 2004 filer! It is not different from granting a VISA to a EB3 2007 ROW filer and making EB3 I 2001 wait. EB2 is taking all the overflow which, in my view, is not correct. EB2 is benefitting at the cost of EB3 I (China and Mexico). EB3 ROW is benefitting at the cost of EB3 I (China and Mexico). Just my opinion.
more...
pictures The album is also available as
paskal
12-18 09:05 PM
sorry for the slight diversion...sw32 i see you are in mn
please do confirm if you are by posting on the mn members thread or in the mn chapter thread under the chapters forum
Thanks much for contributing!
please do confirm if you are by posting on the mn members thread or in the mn chapter thread under the chapters forum
Thanks much for contributing!
dresses the Springsteen CD
afialam
10-12 08:18 PM
After getting the form notarized (from a UPS store that has a public notary available), I made a second trip to the consulate and was able to submit the documents! (btw, I was in the queue for 1.5 hours!,,,Those of you going to the NY consulate, make sure u get there when doors open!)
Something new had to pop out.. So, after submission I was told the process could take four weeks because they need some sort of clearance from the consulate that issued the original passport. What sort of clearance.. I have no idea. My passport was issued in Doha. But I have heard from some of my friends who had passports issued in India also facing the same issue.
So those of you planning to travel in the near future and need to go to the consulate for passport reissue, go as early as possible and rid urself of some stress! :rolleyes:
I was recently (Sep 2009) at the Indian Consulate in New York for renewing my Passport.
My complete name <A B> is written in the passport on the surname line. The given name field is blank! So it is in the passport as:
surname: <A B>
given name:
I would like my new passport to have it correctly as
surname <B>
given name <A>
But the consulate has refused to do it without a notarized affidavit.
I did take the affidavit to my bank for notarization, but they were obviously clueless about the affidavit form and refused to notarize it.
Here's the link to the form:
http://indiacgny.org/appl_forms/Form15.pdf
1. Where and How do I get such a form notarized?
2. Does anybody have any experience in filling this form. I'm quite confused as to where do I have to sign on this form?
3. If anybody has done this before in the US and got a form notarized for a name split, can you please share how you got it done. Thanks!
Anyhelp in this regard will be really helpful. Thanks!
Something new had to pop out.. So, after submission I was told the process could take four weeks because they need some sort of clearance from the consulate that issued the original passport. What sort of clearance.. I have no idea. My passport was issued in Doha. But I have heard from some of my friends who had passports issued in India also facing the same issue.
So those of you planning to travel in the near future and need to go to the consulate for passport reissue, go as early as possible and rid urself of some stress! :rolleyes:
I was recently (Sep 2009) at the Indian Consulate in New York for renewing my Passport.
My complete name <A B> is written in the passport on the surname line. The given name field is blank! So it is in the passport as:
surname: <A B>
given name:
I would like my new passport to have it correctly as
surname <B>
given name <A>
But the consulate has refused to do it without a notarized affidavit.
I did take the affidavit to my bank for notarization, but they were obviously clueless about the affidavit form and refused to notarize it.
Here's the link to the form:
http://indiacgny.org/appl_forms/Form15.pdf
1. Where and How do I get such a form notarized?
2. Does anybody have any experience in filling this form. I'm quite confused as to where do I have to sign on this form?
3. If anybody has done this before in the US and got a form notarized for a name split, can you please share how you got it done. Thanks!
Anyhelp in this regard will be really helpful. Thanks!
more...
makeup Bruce Springsteen and Patti
Sherman_tribiani
09-08 05:38 PM
No need to shout here...I know this is an educated community and I am trying to hold a logical debate. But very few posts have any logical responses. So far no convincing argument has been put forward explaining why they deserve the coveted work permits (aka Green Cards). This shows the immigration system need to be fixed to filter out such nuances.
To support my point, please see my additional posts: 101, 105,110 and 117. All responses I got were just BS, with no logic. These people know only how to talk with no action. America is a country of actions with razor sharp focus.
So my friend ,a personal advice to you: I have been following yours and others posts closely. You are wasting your time arranging all those buses and all other BS. The rally will not succeed. Just take a look how many people you have so far? Admit it you just don’t have the numbers to succeed.
Moderators/IV leadership please note that I would want to complete my series of replies and there are 10 more replies remaining. I feel that those posts are worth being replied to. I will appreciate if you will let me put my points. Thereafter, I really don't care. If you want to discuss this on phone, send me an e-mail first on sherman_tribiani@yahoo.com and we can set up some time.
You really are getting on my nerves now.
You are no future predictor... How can you say Strive Act is doomed?...
You as well as I know that we need just handful (probably four) of votes to pass this bill.
The rally is being done to lobby for the support. And if those undecided lawmakers come into our camp then we will win and you will LOSE!
To support my point, please see my additional posts: 101, 105,110 and 117. All responses I got were just BS, with no logic. These people know only how to talk with no action. America is a country of actions with razor sharp focus.
So my friend ,a personal advice to you: I have been following yours and others posts closely. You are wasting your time arranging all those buses and all other BS. The rally will not succeed. Just take a look how many people you have so far? Admit it you just don’t have the numbers to succeed.
Moderators/IV leadership please note that I would want to complete my series of replies and there are 10 more replies remaining. I feel that those posts are worth being replied to. I will appreciate if you will let me put my points. Thereafter, I really don't care. If you want to discuss this on phone, send me an e-mail first on sherman_tribiani@yahoo.com and we can set up some time.
You really are getting on my nerves now.
You are no future predictor... How can you say Strive Act is doomed?...
You as well as I know that we need just handful (probably four) of votes to pass this bill.
The rally is being done to lobby for the support. And if those undecided lawmakers come into our camp then we will win and you will LOSE!
girlfriend The world is still
english_august
07-06 10:36 PM
The Times of India article that is on their website has also been published in Delhi and Mumbai print editions of Saturday. You can check out their epaper.
hairstyles BRUCE SPRINGSTEENThe
dontcareanymore
08-25 03:13 PM
It is really SAD to see you go through all that. One can only imagine the elation one gets when she was ready to stamp and the depression when she can't get a visa number.
Looks like the numbers for EB2 I have dried up.
I guess My interview didn't go as expected.
1) I reached the office an hour early.
2) After waiting,they did security check and let us in
3) Then the lady who was assigned my case, came and took us into her room
4) Oath, etc
5) She then started asking for Birth cert, Marriage Cert, kids birth certi, 140 approval copy.
6) Then she pulled a file (which was labelled DOS Visa bulletins) and spent around 15 mins on Oct 2007 bulletin.
7) Then asked us who filed your 485..you did your self or your employer did..we said employer.
8) Then she said, something is not right..per Oct 2007 bulleting Visa's are unavailable so yours was not filed properly.
9) Then I said, ours was filed in Aug 8th 2007. She insisted the receipt date is oct 2007..then we showed her our 485 reciept.
10) Then she thanked us and started looking at Aug 2007 visa bulletin. and said, even then in Aug 2007 EB2 was U, so yours was not properly filed.
11) I told her, There was an interim Memo released by USCIS that they will accept application until Aug-17 2007 based on July 2007 visa bulletin
12) She said she will look at DOS bulletins
13) After 10 mins she said, she cant find any such memo..and said, since there is no evidence with her, she has to deny our case based on "Improper filing when PD was not current"
14) Then I said, if PD was not current, wouldn't TSC return the application denying on the spot? Why would they accept the application?
15) She said, you would think so..but they accept many times..so we are told to verify all the time
16) THen said, she believes us but for process, she needs evidence and said she will look into further and then make a judgment.
17) We had no choice and we were over the interview. we were little disappointed though
18) After coming home, I realized she took all I-94s and we got panicked..because if 485 is getting denied and I-94s are gone, how do we prove our legal status, so we thought of going back..then I thought, if have to go anyway, then I should take a print out of Interim Memo
19) I went back an hour later with the print out
20) I told security that, we had finished our interview and officer forgot to return our I-94..they insisted that we shud take infopass and they wont allow anyone to go back..I had to really argue with them (I decided I have nothing to loose..anyway 485 is screwed and so stood there asking them to let me in)
21) After consistent nagging, the security guy took our passports, interview response letter(After interview if your app doesn't get appproved they willgive a kind of reciept saying u attended the interview..blahblah) and went in
22) Came back and told me to go in since the officer wants more details from you (I thought this was a miracle)
23) I went inside, and after a while officer came back. We apologized and told her that we came back for I-94s..she said they will retain and wont return..We told her that we are not using EAD and we are still on H1B..she said she will give back..
then she asked, I am sure you didnt come back for I-94 alone, did you get any document?
24) We showed her the memo.
25) She read that and said I am glad you came back..this clears everything out..I will run this by my supervisor and will see if we can adjust status today
26) We waited for 2 hrs and then she took us inside.
27) Asked our passports (to stamp...really)
28) Then she looked into the computer to get the visa #.
29) The we noticed a changed in her face and then she quickly turned into a folder of current VISA bulletin..we said..oh..no..not again.
30) The officer said, per visa bulletin u r current and ur PD is dec 2005..there is no reason for system not to allocated a visa #..
31)She tried for 10-15 mins and finally gave up..said she cant stamp in the passport without allotting the visa number..said sorry..I cant do anything..I will follow up with DOS ppl and will let you know in a week or so.
32) The reason she gave is, when she tried to allot the visa, she got a message, "cut off date not established". I have no idea what this means.
hmmm....still keeping fingers crossed..this is nothing short of a car race.
:confused:
Looks like the numbers for EB2 I have dried up.
I guess My interview didn't go as expected.
1) I reached the office an hour early.
2) After waiting,they did security check and let us in
3) Then the lady who was assigned my case, came and took us into her room
4) Oath, etc
5) She then started asking for Birth cert, Marriage Cert, kids birth certi, 140 approval copy.
6) Then she pulled a file (which was labelled DOS Visa bulletins) and spent around 15 mins on Oct 2007 bulletin.
7) Then asked us who filed your 485..you did your self or your employer did..we said employer.
8) Then she said, something is not right..per Oct 2007 bulleting Visa's are unavailable so yours was not filed properly.
9) Then I said, ours was filed in Aug 8th 2007. She insisted the receipt date is oct 2007..then we showed her our 485 reciept.
10) Then she thanked us and started looking at Aug 2007 visa bulletin. and said, even then in Aug 2007 EB2 was U, so yours was not properly filed.
11) I told her, There was an interim Memo released by USCIS that they will accept application until Aug-17 2007 based on July 2007 visa bulletin
12) She said she will look at DOS bulletins
13) After 10 mins she said, she cant find any such memo..and said, since there is no evidence with her, she has to deny our case based on "Improper filing when PD was not current"
14) Then I said, if PD was not current, wouldn't TSC return the application denying on the spot? Why would they accept the application?
15) She said, you would think so..but they accept many times..so we are told to verify all the time
16) THen said, she believes us but for process, she needs evidence and said she will look into further and then make a judgment.
17) We had no choice and we were over the interview. we were little disappointed though
18) After coming home, I realized she took all I-94s and we got panicked..because if 485 is getting denied and I-94s are gone, how do we prove our legal status, so we thought of going back..then I thought, if have to go anyway, then I should take a print out of Interim Memo
19) I went back an hour later with the print out
20) I told security that, we had finished our interview and officer forgot to return our I-94..they insisted that we shud take infopass and they wont allow anyone to go back..I had to really argue with them (I decided I have nothing to loose..anyway 485 is screwed and so stood there asking them to let me in)
21) After consistent nagging, the security guy took our passports, interview response letter(After interview if your app doesn't get appproved they willgive a kind of reciept saying u attended the interview..blahblah) and went in
22) Came back and told me to go in since the officer wants more details from you (I thought this was a miracle)
23) I went inside, and after a while officer came back. We apologized and told her that we came back for I-94s..she said they will retain and wont return..We told her that we are not using EAD and we are still on H1B..she said she will give back..
then she asked, I am sure you didnt come back for I-94 alone, did you get any document?
24) We showed her the memo.
25) She read that and said I am glad you came back..this clears everything out..I will run this by my supervisor and will see if we can adjust status today
26) We waited for 2 hrs and then she took us inside.
27) Asked our passports (to stamp...really)
28) Then she looked into the computer to get the visa #.
29) The we noticed a changed in her face and then she quickly turned into a folder of current VISA bulletin..we said..oh..no..not again.
30) The officer said, per visa bulletin u r current and ur PD is dec 2005..there is no reason for system not to allocated a visa #..
31)She tried for 10-15 mins and finally gave up..said she cant stamp in the passport without allotting the visa number..said sorry..I cant do anything..I will follow up with DOS ppl and will let you know in a week or so.
32) The reason she gave is, when she tried to allot the visa, she got a message, "cut off date not established". I have no idea what this means.
hmmm....still keeping fingers crossed..this is nothing short of a car race.
:confused:
smc
09-08 02:31 PM
Sherman;
Loser is spelt L-O-S-E-R (not looser).
Its a pity your grandparents or whoever came here on the Mayflower did not teach you proper English.
(Not that they taught you much of anything else either).
See you in DC.
Loser is spelt L-O-S-E-R (not looser).
Its a pity your grandparents or whoever came here on the Mayflower did not teach you proper English.
(Not that they taught you much of anything else either).
See you in DC.
srkamath
08-21 08:26 PM
What the first post might mean is this.
DOS has already allocated the available visa numbers for this fiscal to qualifying pending cases. There are are no more visas left to allocate.
It is still completely possible that there are ~ 14,000 pending cases with visas already allocated - simply awaiting approval by USCIS.
NO NEED TO PANIC
The original post means nothing - IT IS NOT NEWS
Sorry for all the color - just trying to allay fears.
DOS has already allocated the available visa numbers for this fiscal to qualifying pending cases. There are are no more visas left to allocate.
It is still completely possible that there are ~ 14,000 pending cases with visas already allocated - simply awaiting approval by USCIS.
NO NEED TO PANIC
The original post means nothing - IT IS NOT NEWS
Sorry for all the color - just trying to allay fears.
No comments:
Post a Comment