wandmaker
04-04 11:47 AM
The work location in LCA was company headquarter in Houston. H1 petition was submitted with LCA from Houston.
I have worked in Colorado from 2005 onwards. Company obtained LCA for Colorado, but did not file amendment with USCIS. They paid wages as per Colorado LCA, also filed CO state tax, etc. This was the scenario for both 2005 and 2007 h1 petitions.
Violation of visa terms. One can not predict the success rate of h4 stamping, it is upto the consular officer. Getting a H4 just gives you an option to make a lawfull entry and live in the US, does not eliminate the risk of 485 denial because one should have maintained the proper status until the filing of 485.
I have worked in Colorado from 2005 onwards. Company obtained LCA for Colorado, but did not file amendment with USCIS. They paid wages as per Colorado LCA, also filed CO state tax, etc. This was the scenario for both 2005 and 2007 h1 petitions.
Violation of visa terms. One can not predict the success rate of h4 stamping, it is upto the consular officer. Getting a H4 just gives you an option to make a lawfull entry and live in the US, does not eliminate the risk of 485 denial because one should have maintained the proper status until the filing of 485.
neha_garg123
01-07 10:09 PM
I am sorry for "atrocious" english. I guess I am just very nervous. Lemme reprahse:
I never worked on that H1-B application. I just filled the H1-B and left USA (I was working on OPT before that with another company). My biggest mistake in life was filing the H1-B with a shady consultant out of desperation. Good that I never worked with him before leaving states. obviously I got a 221G, but now a big company has recruited me from India. I am again nervous if they can transfer my H1-B(which I never used).
Now do I make some sense?
I never worked on that H1-B application. I just filled the H1-B and left USA (I was working on OPT before that with another company). My biggest mistake in life was filing the H1-B with a shady consultant out of desperation. Good that I never worked with him before leaving states. obviously I got a 221G, but now a big company has recruited me from India. I am again nervous if they can transfer my H1-B(which I never used).
Now do I make some sense?
aries
07-18 10:48 PM
Do you have a sample cover letter that you can share for self filing of EAD/AP and to what address the application should be posted. Thanks for the response..
Here is:
e-file 765(180 $)
Send copy of 485 along with printout of receipt
Wait for FP appointment
Done(got cards 40 days later)
I already did it for wife, son and myself.
Saved about 1500$
Here is:
e-file 765(180 $)
Send copy of 485 along with printout of receipt
Wait for FP appointment
Done(got cards 40 days later)
I already did it for wife, son and myself.
Saved about 1500$
hojo
09-05 09:36 PM
awesome splash dan
more...
Escape_Velocity
09-23 07:57 PM
You can join the new employer either on H1 or EAD, though keep in mind both these options are mutually exclusive...
zCool
04-16 11:37 PM
check expiry date on your passport. Visa date can not extend beyond Passport expiry date.
more...
vallabhu
07-03 03:35 PM
First question
Is your existing H1 still valid and how many days you you have on that.
You have two scenarios here
1) H1 approved while u r in Mexico
2) H1 approved after comming back to US
1)
if your h1 is approved when you are in Mexico, you will have new I94 when returning to the country with the validity date of existing H1 and you have to go out country again and get it stamped or get that document over to you get your passport stammped and then come back
Second is safest bet for you.
Is your existing H1 still valid and how many days you you have on that.
You have two scenarios here
1) H1 approved while u r in Mexico
2) H1 approved after comming back to US
1)
if your h1 is approved when you are in Mexico, you will have new I94 when returning to the country with the validity date of existing H1 and you have to go out country again and get it stamped or get that document over to you get your passport stammped and then come back
Second is safest bet for you.
immig4me
04-14 08:17 AM
Problem is they do not report it on froum or tracker, and leave the forum for ever... because they know there will be a lot of people asking questions or making them miserable by trying to prove them wrong... go figure...
Be + ive...
True Story!!!:cool:
Very true! They will count their blessings and forget the bad taste of long waits.......
I am not sure that gc's without pds happen though
Be + ive...
True Story!!!:cool:
Very true! They will count their blessings and forget the bad taste of long waits.......
I am not sure that gc's without pds happen though
more...
lord_labaku
09-21 10:20 PM
It may be better to rent in the near future until tax rates increase so much (which they will as someone has to pay for all these unimaginable bailouts) that it starts to make sense again to own a house so as to get the interest deducted in taxes.
Eventually there will be a demand supply equilibrium point. People got to live somewhere right?
Eventually there will be a demand supply equilibrium point. People got to live somewhere right?
rahul2699
05-16 08:22 AM
May I know if H1 transfer has any affect on parent�s arrival during the transfer? I sponsored their visa using company A's employment letters and they have a valid visa. Do I need to get a letter from my new employer to avoid issues at POE? At the time of parent�s arrival, I would be working for company A, but by the time they return, I will be switching to company B and moving to a different city. My H1 transfer is already in process.
There should not be any issues with your parents arriving while your transfer is in progress since you'll be working with Company A at the time they enter the country.
There should not be any issues with your parents arriving while your transfer is in progress since you'll be working with Company A at the time they enter the country.
more...
meridiani.planum
07-30 06:24 AM
I have a unique problem with possibly getting a green card too early. Please let me know how I can make this situation better. My priority date in EB2 India is in Jan 2006, which means potentially I could get my green card in 2-3 months.
I plan to get engaged in December 2008 and married in December 2009 to an Indian born Australian citizen. As far as I can see, her chargeability would be from India.
What are my options to make my life easier and to be able to successfully bring my future wife to the US the easiest possible way. So far, I have 2 options:
1. Use the special E3 work visa for Australian citizens.
2. If I dont get my GC within the next few months, do an early court marriage and invoke the following-to-join spouse when she is ready to come to the US.
If you follow #1 while you will have your GC immediately your wife will need to maintain her E3 visa until your PD is current again.
I plan to get engaged in December 2008 and married in December 2009 to an Indian born Australian citizen. As far as I can see, her chargeability would be from India.
What are my options to make my life easier and to be able to successfully bring my future wife to the US the easiest possible way. So far, I have 2 options:
1. Use the special E3 work visa for Australian citizens.
2. If I dont get my GC within the next few months, do an early court marriage and invoke the following-to-join spouse when she is ready to come to the US.
If you follow #1 while you will have your GC immediately your wife will need to maintain her E3 visa until your PD is current again.
good idea
06-02 09:53 AM
Interview Date: Friday May 6, 2011
My Employment Model: E/V/C = employer/vendor/client. Working with the same employer for 5th year now and after initial H1b (3 years) this is my second H1 B renewal)
Visa Officer: A Lady
Visa Officer's comments to me: Everything looks good but we need to do some additional admin review.
Documents requested: The application packet my company gave me. These were returned to me at the conclusion of the interview which lasted for about 3-4 minutes.
Subsequent correspondence: after interview I got a couple of emails (one email per week) asking me to submit the documents (I129, client letter, and any supporting documents)
Current status: last correspondence via email was on May 13th, no response as of yet.
Am I experiencing this because of my employment model? Any comments from anyone?
Did anyone else have similar experience? Anyone from Southeast Asia?
-Yes, this is because of E/V/C model. I have never come across such case (221g) if someone works at employer location, except one, that guy's passport had some issue, and his case got sort out with in a week, in-fact, he did not get 221g. I have not come across case with E/C model too.
-I know at least 7 guys with E/V/C model waiting in India because they got 221g, and still waiting for decision.
My Employment Model: E/V/C = employer/vendor/client. Working with the same employer for 5th year now and after initial H1b (3 years) this is my second H1 B renewal)
Visa Officer: A Lady
Visa Officer's comments to me: Everything looks good but we need to do some additional admin review.
Documents requested: The application packet my company gave me. These were returned to me at the conclusion of the interview which lasted for about 3-4 minutes.
Subsequent correspondence: after interview I got a couple of emails (one email per week) asking me to submit the documents (I129, client letter, and any supporting documents)
Current status: last correspondence via email was on May 13th, no response as of yet.
Am I experiencing this because of my employment model? Any comments from anyone?
Did anyone else have similar experience? Anyone from Southeast Asia?
-Yes, this is because of E/V/C model. I have never come across such case (221g) if someone works at employer location, except one, that guy's passport had some issue, and his case got sort out with in a week, in-fact, he did not get 221g. I have not come across case with E/C model too.
-I know at least 7 guys with E/V/C model waiting in India because they got 221g, and still waiting for decision.
more...
green_world
02-13 08:59 PM
I-485?? save $$ join IV
ayazali17
12-18 01:25 PM
Hello i am new to this forum, i am looking for some answers involving stock trading? My question is: Can i invest in stocks, mutual fund, etc. while having only a EAD(work Permit)? Do i need get permission from IRS? What do i need to do invest legally? I was thinking of investing with Scottrader.
Thanks in advance for all the replies.
Thanks in advance for all the replies.
more...
rockstart
01-08 09:10 AM
I found this article in imminfo.com. I could not understand the below line in legal sense. Does this line means that delayed registration of birth is not acceptable?
The article is absolutely correct. The example would be a person was born in 1974 and at that time his/her birth was not registered for any reason. Then say for making passport or for GC process this birth was registered later in like 1998 which is like 24 years after the event. USCIS might not accept the birth certificate as authentic. Please refer to IV wiki for details on how such cases can be resolved. There are many people who have been thro this and though its not easy to answer this query there are enough documents that can be attached as supplimentry evidence to authenticate your BC.
The article is absolutely correct. The example would be a person was born in 1974 and at that time his/her birth was not registered for any reason. Then say for making passport or for GC process this birth was registered later in like 1998 which is like 24 years after the event. USCIS might not accept the birth certificate as authentic. Please refer to IV wiki for details on how such cases can be resolved. There are many people who have been thro this and though its not easy to answer this query there are enough documents that can be attached as supplimentry evidence to authenticate your BC.
gg_ny
08-21 09:20 AM
Is there a chance to attach SKIL provisions towards higher degree GC retrogressed applicants to this appropriation efforts?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
more...
GCard_Dream
06-18 06:09 PM
Last time I checked EB3 for ROW was "U". Did you somehow get "U" confused with "C" or have you stopped looking at visa bulletins?
But, I'm not sure if EB row would care that much...since their dates are ALWAYS current?
But, I'm not sure if EB row would care that much...since their dates are ALWAYS current?
venky08
07-27 02:52 PM
Related to the questions on this thread.
What happens when:
AOS has been filed and it is more than 180 days AND
dependent has started working on EAD AND
primary applicant loses job
Case 1: primary applicant is also on EAD
Case 2: primary applicant continues on H1 without using EAD
Do the primary applicant and/or spouse become out of status in either of these situations? Can the primary applicant invoke AC21 and look for another job - how much time does he/she have? i.e. does the AOS filing provide primary applicant a cushion in case of job loss?
thanks!
the key is that in any case, if the applicant does not have a H1-B backup and is solely relying on EAD, then he/she needs to make sure that the I-485 should not be denied. because if it does, it automatically makes the applicants out of status forcing them to leave the country. so it is always safe to have H1-B status maintained eventhough you have EAD. my2c
What happens when:
AOS has been filed and it is more than 180 days AND
dependent has started working on EAD AND
primary applicant loses job
Case 1: primary applicant is also on EAD
Case 2: primary applicant continues on H1 without using EAD
Do the primary applicant and/or spouse become out of status in either of these situations? Can the primary applicant invoke AC21 and look for another job - how much time does he/she have? i.e. does the AOS filing provide primary applicant a cushion in case of job loss?
thanks!
the key is that in any case, if the applicant does not have a H1-B backup and is solely relying on EAD, then he/she needs to make sure that the I-485 should not be denied. because if it does, it automatically makes the applicants out of status forcing them to leave the country. so it is always safe to have H1-B status maintained eventhough you have EAD. my2c
Better_Days
10-14 07:30 PM
Yes. It happened in my case as well. My I-140 was denied from NSC after having filed I-485. It was refiled (yes refiled in TSC, not MTR and got a different case number). After the I-140 denial my I-485 was also denied. Upon approval on my new I-140 the I-485 was reopened automatically. The online status had not changed from 'Denied". I was surprised when I got my second round of FP notices in August 09. Now the status says "Case has resumed processing". I would however suggest that you ask your attorney to send a letter to USCIS.
I had an I-485 pending when my first I-140 was denied. The cases ended up with AAO.
I started a new GC process in PERM and the second I-140 was approved. After approval I noticed a LUD on my pending 485. I called the 1-800 number and asked for the I-140 number underlying my I-485. To my surprise, I was given the receipt number for the second I-140. What surprised me was that the my priority date was not current.
I can only assume that when one has more than one I-140 pending with the same employer (remember that a I-140 with MTR or with AAO is considered to be pending), the first one to get approved gets linked with the I-485. CAN ANYONE CONFIRM THIS PLEASE?
The interesting thing is that the AAO woke from it's slumber and issued an RFE last week. As a result of the RFE, both my I-140 have changed their status and now show "Post Decision Activity".
I had an I-485 pending when my first I-140 was denied. The cases ended up with AAO.
I started a new GC process in PERM and the second I-140 was approved. After approval I noticed a LUD on my pending 485. I called the 1-800 number and asked for the I-140 number underlying my I-485. To my surprise, I was given the receipt number for the second I-140. What surprised me was that the my priority date was not current.
I can only assume that when one has more than one I-140 pending with the same employer (remember that a I-140 with MTR or with AAO is considered to be pending), the first one to get approved gets linked with the I-485. CAN ANYONE CONFIRM THIS PLEASE?
The interesting thing is that the AAO woke from it's slumber and issued an RFE last week. As a result of the RFE, both my I-140 have changed their status and now show "Post Decision Activity".
mirage
03-06 01:03 PM
Just a little update, Called up my Senator's office this morning..Started talking about country Cap issue, the guy knew everything about it, he took notes & promised he will pass it on to the Senator. Here's what I suggested him
1) Lift the Country Cap for Temporary period of time, may be just for 2 years.
2) Limit the Maximum waiting time, say if one applicant is waiting for 5 years than country cap should be exempted and he should be given a preference over a person who�s PD is just 1 year old.
He specifically told me 'your second point is very good, I'll certainly share these with the Senator'...
I urge you guys to contact your senators & Congressmen/Congresswomen
We have a group which is focusing on this issue, if you want to join us here's the link
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/yourvoiceiv/
1) Lift the Country Cap for Temporary period of time, may be just for 2 years.
2) Limit the Maximum waiting time, say if one applicant is waiting for 5 years than country cap should be exempted and he should be given a preference over a person who�s PD is just 1 year old.
He specifically told me 'your second point is very good, I'll certainly share these with the Senator'...
I urge you guys to contact your senators & Congressmen/Congresswomen
We have a group which is focusing on this issue, if you want to join us here's the link
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/yourvoiceiv/
tnite
09-26 04:05 PM
Hi All,
NSC received my I765 applications on June 21st. I am still waiting for my EAD. I have seen many people from NSC got their approval for the same time frame. Is there anypone in the same boat. Is this something I should be worried about.
Thanks!
See my signature for NSC timeline for my I485
NSC received my I765 applications on June 21st. I am still waiting for my EAD. I have seen many people from NSC got their approval for the same time frame. Is there anypone in the same boat. Is this something I should be worried about.
Thanks!
See my signature for NSC timeline for my I485
No comments:
Post a Comment