feedfront
10-05 03:17 PM
I was trying to open a brokerage account with Bank Of America (Merrill Lynch) which was denied as it does not recognize EAD.
The web site clearly says that you should be a citizen or a green card to open an account
Did anyone opened it recently.
Drop by to local branch and you should not have any issue. Most of institutions have GC or citizens only for opening a/c ONLINE (even CitiBank NRI used to have issue, I'm not sure of it now). It works if you drop by to the local office. I'd also had issue w/ eTrade and Scottrade's online but it worked when I walked-in to local office.
The web site clearly says that you should be a citizen or a green card to open an account
Did anyone opened it recently.
Drop by to local branch and you should not have any issue. Most of institutions have GC or citizens only for opening a/c ONLINE (even CitiBank NRI used to have issue, I'm not sure of it now). It works if you drop by to the local office. I'd also had issue w/ eTrade and Scottrade's online but it worked when I walked-in to local office.
wallpaper Cristiano Ronaldo is set to
SAPGURU
07-11 03:12 PM
Gurus,
Here is my situation.
Labor filed with company A in April 2006 and I-140 EB2 approved in May 2007. Could not file I-485 last year due to personal reasons.
Changed the Job to company B in Sep 2007.Company B filed PERM EB2 in Feb 2008 and got approved in Aril 2008. I-140 filed in June 2008 with priority date recapture request and still pending.
My 6th year of H1B is expiring in March 2009.
My question is, can I file my I-485 based on my previously approved EB2 I140.
What should be best approach for me? Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Here is my situation.
Labor filed with company A in April 2006 and I-140 EB2 approved in May 2007. Could not file I-485 last year due to personal reasons.
Changed the Job to company B in Sep 2007.Company B filed PERM EB2 in Feb 2008 and got approved in Aril 2008. I-140 filed in June 2008 with priority date recapture request and still pending.
My 6th year of H1B is expiring in March 2009.
My question is, can I file my I-485 based on my previously approved EB2 I140.
What should be best approach for me? Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Green.Tech
08-05 05:02 PM
Guys n Girls,
I would like to listen to your views or experience in this matter. As we know, the employer is now required to pay for all fees associated with filing a labor certification (first step in the GC application). Is it legit for the employer to engage the employee in a contract that requires the employee to reimburse all immigration related fees (including the labor cert fee) to the employer if the employee quits the company when the GC petition is pending?
I guess DOL wants the employer to pay for the labor cert fee. Is it ok for the employer to get it back, say a year later, when the employee quits the company, which in sense would mean that the employee ended up paying for the labor cert.
Comments please.
Thanks!
I would like to listen to your views or experience in this matter. As we know, the employer is now required to pay for all fees associated with filing a labor certification (first step in the GC application). Is it legit for the employer to engage the employee in a contract that requires the employee to reimburse all immigration related fees (including the labor cert fee) to the employer if the employee quits the company when the GC petition is pending?
I guess DOL wants the employer to pay for the labor cert fee. Is it ok for the employer to get it back, say a year later, when the employee quits the company, which in sense would mean that the employee ended up paying for the labor cert.
Comments please.
Thanks!
2011 The Number 9 of Real Madrid is
shikra1
11-10 03:33 PM
Remember, USCIS only tells us "total" I-485 receipts. They don't break it down to what many of us are interested to know, which is, how many are family based and how many are employment based. There is no way to know how many of the 150K receipts issued in Sept for I-485 were EB.
FB and EB combined annual limit is 366,000 immigrant visas (226K FB + 140K EB)
Again quoting from the monthly visa bulletin:
"Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320."
FB and EB combined annual limit is 366,000 immigrant visas (226K FB + 140K EB)
Again quoting from the monthly visa bulletin:
"Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320."
more...
rongha_2000
10-02 11:23 AM
Thanks for the response and I have recd the same kind of response from my lawyer too. What I find confusing is everyone cautions me saying "As a backup, maintain your H1." Is there a real need to maintain a backup? Meaning if I need to maintain my H1 why should I apply for EAD for myself? Or is it so that I can continue on H1 right now with my same company and If I get laid off I can use EAD to get another job (not everyone hires H1-Bs) and in later case my daughter will be covered because our AOS is pending? In that case if I leave the country I can reenter using our receipts and APs, is that right?
Yes it will be Pending Adjustment for all of you if you use EAD .
But as backup and if not required just be on H1B visa and do job for same company again if possible .
or if you are changing company file H1B extension as backup.
Yes it will be Pending Adjustment for all of you if you use EAD .
But as backup and if not required just be on H1B visa and do job for same company again if possible .
or if you are changing company file H1B extension as backup.
maxy
10-16 11:48 AM
i think ability 2 pay is fair question under AC21. what future employer will hate to do is put words like petition, labor, immigration, sponsorship, EB preference etc ...
they would just like to issue regular EVL which they are providing to other regular employees. may be salary, role, start date, and permanent nature of job thats it. is that enough for USCIS. thats the question. (they can always look up company papers, tax returns etc.)
they would just like to issue regular EVL which they are providing to other regular employees. may be salary, role, start date, and permanent nature of job thats it. is that enough for USCIS. thats the question. (they can always look up company papers, tax returns etc.)
more...
anilsal
08-21 02:04 PM
not only that you got GC but also you made a one time contribution to IV.
2010 cristiano ronaldo real madrid.
coopheal
12-06 11:03 PM
bump
more...
hello
11-29 01:52 PM
Source The OH law firm
The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)
10/14/2010: USCIS Pre-Registration Requirement Rule-Making Agenda in Nonimmigrant and Immigrant Proceedings - How Soon?
The USCIS has been pushing proposals to change procedures of filing of nonimmigrant petitions as well as I-485 applications for sometime. The agency placed these proposals on its agenda this year and surely enough, it has initiated the first part of its agenda in its rule-making vault. The agency drafted and has been seeking the OMB approval for proposed regulation to require pre-registration of the H-1B petitions, apparently as part of its business transformation transition program. It appears that the proposed pre-registration requirement in the H-1B petition process may not bring a drastic impact on the H-1B petitioning employers and the alien beneficiaries. However, its agenda for requiring I-485 applicants to pre-register their intents to file I-485 applications regardless of the visa number availability in the Visa Bulletin will have a significant impact on the immigrants because the proposed rule would discontinue the concurrent filing process for employment-based adjustment of status applicants and would require that an alien seeking to immigrate based upon a classification that is subject to numerical limitations must be the beneficiary of an approved immigrant petition prior to proceeding through a revised adjustment of status process. In plain language, it means that it would terminate the current I-140 and I-485 concurrent filing procedure. The agency justification was to streamline the overall I-485 process and to mitigate visa retrogression through improved estimation of immigrant visa availability. This proposal is still in the vault of the USCIS rule-making agenda with the initial estimation of the proposed rule initiation action in October 2010. We have no information as to whether or not the agency will keep this schedule or will rather turn it over to FY 2011. Whether it initiates sooner or later, it will not have an immediate impact on the foreign workers seeking a green card as the rule-making process will drag into months to come in year 2011. But this is something one has to keep an eye on the development of the USCIS schedules of changes in application procedures. For the reasons, this site will closely monitor the agency's movement from here on. Please stay tuned to this web site for the development of this news.
Any news on this?Will they give EAD?
The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)
10/14/2010: USCIS Pre-Registration Requirement Rule-Making Agenda in Nonimmigrant and Immigrant Proceedings - How Soon?
The USCIS has been pushing proposals to change procedures of filing of nonimmigrant petitions as well as I-485 applications for sometime. The agency placed these proposals on its agenda this year and surely enough, it has initiated the first part of its agenda in its rule-making vault. The agency drafted and has been seeking the OMB approval for proposed regulation to require pre-registration of the H-1B petitions, apparently as part of its business transformation transition program. It appears that the proposed pre-registration requirement in the H-1B petition process may not bring a drastic impact on the H-1B petitioning employers and the alien beneficiaries. However, its agenda for requiring I-485 applicants to pre-register their intents to file I-485 applications regardless of the visa number availability in the Visa Bulletin will have a significant impact on the immigrants because the proposed rule would discontinue the concurrent filing process for employment-based adjustment of status applicants and would require that an alien seeking to immigrate based upon a classification that is subject to numerical limitations must be the beneficiary of an approved immigrant petition prior to proceeding through a revised adjustment of status process. In plain language, it means that it would terminate the current I-140 and I-485 concurrent filing procedure. The agency justification was to streamline the overall I-485 process and to mitigate visa retrogression through improved estimation of immigrant visa availability. This proposal is still in the vault of the USCIS rule-making agenda with the initial estimation of the proposed rule initiation action in October 2010. We have no information as to whether or not the agency will keep this schedule or will rather turn it over to FY 2011. Whether it initiates sooner or later, it will not have an immediate impact on the foreign workers seeking a green card as the rule-making process will drag into months to come in year 2011. But this is something one has to keep an eye on the development of the USCIS schedules of changes in application procedures. For the reasons, this site will closely monitor the agency's movement from here on. Please stay tuned to this web site for the development of this news.
Any news on this?Will they give EAD?
hair ronaldo cristiano real madrid
eb3retro
05-14 10:46 PM
I already contributed after hearing the news that my pd is current.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=63110#post63110
Will continue to contribute in future.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=63110#post63110
Will continue to contribute in future.
more...
FinalGC
12-02 01:21 PM
If your company is paying for GC, then go ahead and apply for GC and hope 140 will be approved, so that u can apply for H1.
Yes you have run out of time, since you have already crossed the 365 day limit before 6 year ends, before which u needed to apply for GC. Otherwise you could have applied for H1 renewal based on GC application. Now u have only 3 options.
1. Go back to India after 6year expires
2. Hope 140 gets approved before sept 30, 09 and apply for premium processing h1 if you want h1 to be done quickly
3. Convert to F1...you can send the papers for F1 to your college and you can have that available without affecting your H1, until u begin using F1 status
hope that helps
Yes you have run out of time, since you have already crossed the 365 day limit before 6 year ends, before which u needed to apply for GC. Otherwise you could have applied for H1 renewal based on GC application. Now u have only 3 options.
1. Go back to India after 6year expires
2. Hope 140 gets approved before sept 30, 09 and apply for premium processing h1 if you want h1 to be done quickly
3. Convert to F1...you can send the papers for F1 to your college and you can have that available without affecting your H1, until u begin using F1 status
hope that helps
hot ronaldo cristiano real madrid. ronaldo cristiano real madrid.
pinoyInDC
06-25 03:12 PM
The reason for rushing the application is that it could retrogress midway during the month of July. It may seem unlikely but you never know. That's one reason to file it as early as possible.
But i did not know the attorney would like to file it in June for me. I just wanted to find out if anyone's sent it early and received receipt.
It doesn't matter if it retrogress midway during the month of July, USCIS must accept ALL otherwise eligible I485s filed by July 31. While Priority Dates could retrogress say in August, USCIS will adjudicate I-485 applications that were filed prior to retrogression only if the individual�s Priority Date is current at the time they review it. For example, if your Priority Date is EB-3 06/01/2006 and the August 2007 Visa Bulletin retrogresses that category�s date to 04/02/2006, USCIS will continue to hold your pending I-485 but will not process it until your 06/01/2006 Priority Date becomes current again. Therefore, one�s Priority Date (the date the Labor Certification Application was filed) will likely again supercede the filing date of the I-485. While it is important to file the I-485 by July 31, it is probable that no advantage will be gained on the basis of one having been filed earlier than another.
But i did not know the attorney would like to file it in June for me. I just wanted to find out if anyone's sent it early and received receipt.
It doesn't matter if it retrogress midway during the month of July, USCIS must accept ALL otherwise eligible I485s filed by July 31. While Priority Dates could retrogress say in August, USCIS will adjudicate I-485 applications that were filed prior to retrogression only if the individual�s Priority Date is current at the time they review it. For example, if your Priority Date is EB-3 06/01/2006 and the August 2007 Visa Bulletin retrogresses that category�s date to 04/02/2006, USCIS will continue to hold your pending I-485 but will not process it until your 06/01/2006 Priority Date becomes current again. Therefore, one�s Priority Date (the date the Labor Certification Application was filed) will likely again supercede the filing date of the I-485. While it is important to file the I-485 by July 31, it is probable that no advantage will be gained on the basis of one having been filed earlier than another.
more...
house ronaldo cristiano real madrid
freeskier89
03-02 10:17 AM
Just out of curiousity, does traditional painting qualify?
tattoo ronaldo cristiano real madrid. ronaldo cristiano real madrid.
amsgc
01-22 10:08 PM
You shouldn't confuse porting I-140 using AC21 and H-1B - these are two different things.
You can start working for a new employer - using EAD or H-1B, while your I-485 is pending.
When people say that they have used AC21, they usually mean that they are using the provisions in AC21 (clarified by the Yate's memo), to port their I-140 to a new employer after 180 days of applying for I-485.
What do yo mean by siwtching employer using AC-21 and again H1B status? Do you mean that you have a H1B with the new company? In that case isnt that just a H1B transfer? noa Ac021 switch?
You can start working for a new employer - using EAD or H-1B, while your I-485 is pending.
When people say that they have used AC21, they usually mean that they are using the provisions in AC21 (clarified by the Yate's memo), to port their I-140 to a new employer after 180 days of applying for I-485.
What do yo mean by siwtching employer using AC-21 and again H1B status? Do you mean that you have a H1B with the new company? In that case isnt that just a H1B transfer? noa Ac021 switch?
more...
pictures Foto: Cristiano Ronaldo Real
camarasa
07-09 01:45 PM
Buddy,
Why you are so angry??. I know more than you about immigration and all the rules. you try to understand the English properly and the meaning. I hope you are from a very remote place in India. So for you to understand better, Here is the meanign fo my message.
GUYS, YOUR PRIORITY DATE IS 2006 and why you are asking for the premium processing when many of your friends are still waiting to file their I 140 or I 485.
Don't try to put harsh words in public forums. You will get them back as a Boomerang...... Understand?:mad:
Dude - that doesn't make any sense. Just because there are people who have been waiting since 1998 (for whatever reason) doesn't mean that others should make their process as slow as possible so they can also wait 9 years with their "friends". Why would anyone want to do that?
Why you are so angry??. I know more than you about immigration and all the rules. you try to understand the English properly and the meaning. I hope you are from a very remote place in India. So for you to understand better, Here is the meanign fo my message.
GUYS, YOUR PRIORITY DATE IS 2006 and why you are asking for the premium processing when many of your friends are still waiting to file their I 140 or I 485.
Don't try to put harsh words in public forums. You will get them back as a Boomerang...... Understand?:mad:
Dude - that doesn't make any sense. Just because there are people who have been waiting since 1998 (for whatever reason) doesn't mean that others should make their process as slow as possible so they can also wait 9 years with their "friends". Why would anyone want to do that?
dresses ronaldo cristiano real madrid wallpaper. ronaldo cristiano real madrid
learning01
04-06 10:11 PM
There is no serious effort by the republicans. They are fractured, divided, into groups. They have no motivation to get this comprehensive bill passed. I have been observing the tactics and attitudes of these republican senators and democratic senators. I am more shocked by the game of one-upmanship on the part of Frist, Kyl, Cornyn, Craig. I don't see rhyme or reason in their sppeches. The bill has no life for the next 3 weeks.
i am sorry..i couldnt follow todays proceedings..whn i cam to iv site in the evening..everyone says bill is dead
whn i went to immigration-law.com, they say the following
cud someone tell me which one is true??????????
We reported earlier the Senate Republican Members Agreement last night. Today, the Democratic Minority Leader and other Democractic leaders agreed to the proposal, turning the Republican agreement into the Bi-Partisan Agreement. This dramatic break-through opens a door to the possibility of passing the Senate version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, S. 2454, as amended before this week is over and before the Congress goes into the recess next two weeks.
The development is accompanied by three other developments:
President released statement supporting the bi-partisan agreement;
Senate rejected the Democrat's motion to cloture for the Specter amendments to S.2454;
Senate also relected the Republican Kyl' motion for his amendments.
Now we see the light at the end of the tunnel!!
i am sorry..i couldnt follow todays proceedings..whn i cam to iv site in the evening..everyone says bill is dead
whn i went to immigration-law.com, they say the following
cud someone tell me which one is true??????????
We reported earlier the Senate Republican Members Agreement last night. Today, the Democratic Minority Leader and other Democractic leaders agreed to the proposal, turning the Republican agreement into the Bi-Partisan Agreement. This dramatic break-through opens a door to the possibility of passing the Senate version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, S. 2454, as amended before this week is over and before the Congress goes into the recess next two weeks.
The development is accompanied by three other developments:
President released statement supporting the bi-partisan agreement;
Senate rejected the Democrat's motion to cloture for the Specter amendments to S.2454;
Senate also relected the Republican Kyl' motion for his amendments.
Now we see the light at the end of the tunnel!!
more...
makeup Cristiano Ronaldo Real Madrid
rimzhim
06-01 01:38 PM
"Masters and PhDs would be exempt from the cap on H-1Bs and green cards," said Hoffman.
Are you sure of this? I, of course, hope you are right. It would be great!
Are you sure of this? I, of course, hope you are right. It would be great!
girlfriend Cristiano Ronaldo has been
looneytunezez
04-08 04:17 PM
Employment-based: At this time the amount of demand being received in the Employment First preference is extremely low compared with that of recent years. Absent an immediate and dramatic increase in demand, this category will remain “Current” for all countries. It also appears unlikely that a Second preference cut-off date will be imposed for any countries other than China and India, where demand is extremely high. Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off date movement each month during the coming months are as follows:
Employment Second: Demand by applicants who are “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is very high, but the exact amount is not known. Such “upgrades” are in addition to the known demand already reported, and make it very difficult to predict ultimate demand based on forward movement of the China and India cut-off dates. While thousands of “otherwise unused” numbers will be available for potential use without regard to the China and India Employment Second preference per-country annual limits, it is not known how the “upgrades” will ultimately impact the cut-offs for those two countries. (The allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers is discussed below.)
China: none to three weeks expected through July. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
India: One or more weeks, possibly followed by additional movement if demand remains stable. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
Employment Third:
Worldwide: three to six weeks
China: one to three weeks
India: none to two weeks
Mexico: although continued forward movement is expected, no specific projections are possible at this time.
Philippines: three to six weeks
Please be advised that the above ranges are estimates based upon the current demand patterns, and are subject to fluctuations during the coming months. The cut-off dates for upcoming months cannot be guaranteed, and no assumptions should be made until the formal dates are announced.
Allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers in accordance with Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 202(a)(5)
INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand in a calendar quarter will be insufficient to use all available numbers in an Employment preference, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. Based on current levels of demand, there will be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment First and Second preferences. Such numbers may be allocated without regard to per-country limits, once a country has reached its preference annual limit. Since under INA Section 203(e) such numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability, greater number use by one country would indicate greater demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates. Based on amount and priority dates of pending demand and year-to-date number use, a different cut-off date could be applied to each oversubscribed country, for the purpose of assuring that the maximum amount of available numbers will be used. Note that a cut-off date imposed to control the use of “otherwise unused” numbers could be earlier than the cut-off date established to control number use under a quarterly or per-country annual limit. For example, at present the India Employment Second preference cut-off date governs the use of numbers under Section 202(a)(5), India having reached its Employment Second annual limit; the China Employment Second preference cut-off date governs number use under the quarterly limit, since China has not yet reached its Employment Second annual limit.
The rate of number use under Section 202(a)(5) is continually monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for the oversubscribed countries. This helps assure that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while insuring that numbers also remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
As mentioned earlier, the number of applicants who may be “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is unknown. As a result, the cut-off date which governs use of Section 202(a)(5) numbers has been advanced more rapidly than normal, in an attempt to ascertain the amount of “upgrade” demand in the pipeline while at the same time administering use of the available numbers. This action risks a surge in demand that could adversely impact the cut-off date later in the fiscal year. However, it also limits the possibility that potential demand would not materialize and the annual limit would not be reached due to lack of cut-off date movement.
Employment Second: Demand by applicants who are “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is very high, but the exact amount is not known. Such “upgrades” are in addition to the known demand already reported, and make it very difficult to predict ultimate demand based on forward movement of the China and India cut-off dates. While thousands of “otherwise unused” numbers will be available for potential use without regard to the China and India Employment Second preference per-country annual limits, it is not known how the “upgrades” will ultimately impact the cut-offs for those two countries. (The allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers is discussed below.)
China: none to three weeks expected through July. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
India: One or more weeks, possibly followed by additional movement if demand remains stable. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
Employment Third:
Worldwide: three to six weeks
China: one to three weeks
India: none to two weeks
Mexico: although continued forward movement is expected, no specific projections are possible at this time.
Philippines: three to six weeks
Please be advised that the above ranges are estimates based upon the current demand patterns, and are subject to fluctuations during the coming months. The cut-off dates for upcoming months cannot be guaranteed, and no assumptions should be made until the formal dates are announced.
Allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers in accordance with Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 202(a)(5)
INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand in a calendar quarter will be insufficient to use all available numbers in an Employment preference, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. Based on current levels of demand, there will be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment First and Second preferences. Such numbers may be allocated without regard to per-country limits, once a country has reached its preference annual limit. Since under INA Section 203(e) such numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability, greater number use by one country would indicate greater demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates. Based on amount and priority dates of pending demand and year-to-date number use, a different cut-off date could be applied to each oversubscribed country, for the purpose of assuring that the maximum amount of available numbers will be used. Note that a cut-off date imposed to control the use of “otherwise unused” numbers could be earlier than the cut-off date established to control number use under a quarterly or per-country annual limit. For example, at present the India Employment Second preference cut-off date governs the use of numbers under Section 202(a)(5), India having reached its Employment Second annual limit; the China Employment Second preference cut-off date governs number use under the quarterly limit, since China has not yet reached its Employment Second annual limit.
The rate of number use under Section 202(a)(5) is continually monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for the oversubscribed countries. This helps assure that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while insuring that numbers also remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
As mentioned earlier, the number of applicants who may be “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is unknown. As a result, the cut-off date which governs use of Section 202(a)(5) numbers has been advanced more rapidly than normal, in an attempt to ascertain the amount of “upgrade” demand in the pipeline while at the same time administering use of the available numbers. This action risks a surge in demand that could adversely impact the cut-off date later in the fiscal year. However, it also limits the possibility that potential demand would not materialize and the annual limit would not be reached due to lack of cut-off date movement.
hairstyles Real Madrid#39;s Cristiano
aj2000
01-09 03:51 PM
and so are 26 other consultants in her department. All of them are being replaced by permanent employees by client from other departments.. Basically, tough times like these., consultants are the first to be kicked out. I am awaiting my turn :(
brintonwhite
06-07 06:14 PM
nice stamps
kprgroup
08-10 09:02 AM
Good Morning,
I went to the uscis local office. The officer told my case SRC-****7236 (765) Renewal was denied on 06/25/2010. He didn’t have the denial details. He told he will send an email to Texas USCIS asking the details. He also told my 485 motion approved and my recent travel document approved but strange that they denied EAD.
Unfortunately we (Myself & Lawyer) never received a denial notice.
My EAD is expiring sep 3rd. I know mostly they denied by without seeing my 485 motion approval.I am requesting denial notice by opening SR
Help me and suggest to overcome this SITUATION (Another wrong denial by USCIS.)
Thanks
KPR
-----------------
Background OF Myself
----------------------
1)Worked for Company A from 2003 to 2008.
2)Company A applied I-140 and approved April 2006. AOS 485 filed on July 2007. Got EAD but never used it
3)September 2008 I have Joined employer “B” by transferring H1B (Valid until Aug 2010).
4)Employer A revoked 140 which triggered 485 denials in October 2008.
5)Applied MTR and it was approved in NOVEMBER 2008 and 485 reopened.
I went to the uscis local office. The officer told my case SRC-****7236 (765) Renewal was denied on 06/25/2010. He didn’t have the denial details. He told he will send an email to Texas USCIS asking the details. He also told my 485 motion approved and my recent travel document approved but strange that they denied EAD.
Unfortunately we (Myself & Lawyer) never received a denial notice.
My EAD is expiring sep 3rd. I know mostly they denied by without seeing my 485 motion approval.I am requesting denial notice by opening SR
Help me and suggest to overcome this SITUATION (Another wrong denial by USCIS.)
Thanks
KPR
-----------------
Background OF Myself
----------------------
1)Worked for Company A from 2003 to 2008.
2)Company A applied I-140 and approved April 2006. AOS 485 filed on July 2007. Got EAD but never used it
3)September 2008 I have Joined employer “B” by transferring H1B (Valid until Aug 2010).
4)Employer A revoked 140 which triggered 485 denials in October 2008.
5)Applied MTR and it was approved in NOVEMBER 2008 and 485 reopened.
No comments:
Post a Comment