maddipati1
11-19 11:09 PM
This scenarios is for those who used all 6 years on H1 and got H1 extension due to a pending AOS application. they may have EADs too..
Ron Gocher quotes:
"Again, to be clear, my point is that if your AOS is denied, you immediately lose all eligibility for post sixth year extensions of H status. All time spent in H status counts against the six year limit. If you burn up time in H status while you are waiting for an AOS adjudication, you may well make it impossible to go back into H status if your AOS is denied."
My interpret...
Rule 1 :
> The max limit for H1 is only 6 years.
> You can only extend H1 beyond 6 years if there is a pending AOS
this means if there is no pending AOS, u r not eligible for H1.
On thing is clear, if AOS denial is valid, then thats it, no more H1 (after 6yrs)
but surprisingly Ron doesnt use the same logic for EAD too.
> EAD is also given as a temp relief for those who has pending AOS
so if there is no pending AOS, no more EAD too.
he thinks EAD is valid even after AOS valid Denial.
THe BIG QUESTION is, If AOS is wrongly denied and MTR is open,
What is the status of the dude?
Is the status AOS, coz its been denied already...
But again, if the dude's out of status due to AOS denial,
how come CIS allow to file MTR? Coz they know the guy who is
filing MTR is out-of-status due to AOS denial :-)
Its like a software u tested a lot with all kind of scenarios,
but there is one scenario still not tested.
Like in software, the dudes who initially wrote the code and the dudes who initially spcified requirements, are long gone to a different jobs. and after a few years (5,10 etc), a new set of dudes trying to wonder why this scenarios is missed, coz the whole biz process is already changed totally.
so, the dudes who wrote these rules and regulations are long gone and retired. and there are hell lot of things changed afterwards like AC21 etc etc.
thats is why systems need to be re-evaluated in a regular basis.
can this shit be any more tangled.... :-)
Ron Gocher quotes:
"Again, to be clear, my point is that if your AOS is denied, you immediately lose all eligibility for post sixth year extensions of H status. All time spent in H status counts against the six year limit. If you burn up time in H status while you are waiting for an AOS adjudication, you may well make it impossible to go back into H status if your AOS is denied."
My interpret...
Rule 1 :
> The max limit for H1 is only 6 years.
> You can only extend H1 beyond 6 years if there is a pending AOS
this means if there is no pending AOS, u r not eligible for H1.
On thing is clear, if AOS denial is valid, then thats it, no more H1 (after 6yrs)
but surprisingly Ron doesnt use the same logic for EAD too.
> EAD is also given as a temp relief for those who has pending AOS
so if there is no pending AOS, no more EAD too.
he thinks EAD is valid even after AOS valid Denial.
THe BIG QUESTION is, If AOS is wrongly denied and MTR is open,
What is the status of the dude?
Is the status AOS, coz its been denied already...
But again, if the dude's out of status due to AOS denial,
how come CIS allow to file MTR? Coz they know the guy who is
filing MTR is out-of-status due to AOS denial :-)
Its like a software u tested a lot with all kind of scenarios,
but there is one scenario still not tested.
Like in software, the dudes who initially wrote the code and the dudes who initially spcified requirements, are long gone to a different jobs. and after a few years (5,10 etc), a new set of dudes trying to wonder why this scenarios is missed, coz the whole biz process is already changed totally.
so, the dudes who wrote these rules and regulations are long gone and retired. and there are hell lot of things changed afterwards like AC21 etc etc.
thats is why systems need to be re-evaluated in a regular basis.
can this shit be any more tangled.... :-)
wallpaper kayla ewell and nina dobrev.
peacock
07-18 06:14 PM
hi
Contributed 100 dollars today and will be contributing more in the future.
We should all contribute to strengthen IV .
IV CORE ROCKS
Contributed 100 dollars today and will be contributing more in the future.
We should all contribute to strengthen IV .
IV CORE ROCKS
mrdelhiite
06-21 10:58 AM
no update filed Feb 23rd .. EB3 still pending :(
-M
-M
2011 Kayla Ewell, Nina Dobrev,
conchshell
06-10 10:57 AM
So July visa bulletin is out ... we will see comments with frustation and appeals to fight for the cause ... however, this is a prediction thread, so my prediction is that by next week, all affected people will accept the reality and will move on with their life waiting for August visa bulletin or for the next year quota. My purpose is not to offend anyone, but this is just the observation we all had in the past, so why this time around its going to be any different?
Now as far as those three bills are concerned ... at times I feel that they are just pacifiers to amuse the crying babies. We all can see that immigration related bill (fashion models, regional investors etc) are getting passed, but not the one's that we really want. Therefore hearings in the sub-committie and than in full hearings will go on till August, and afterwards presidential election will be the focus ... immigration reforms will take a back seat. New administration in 2009 will have more immediate priorities to fix the economy, war, etc. Immigration will eventually appear on the radar, but only after some time.
So only movement I can see in near future is EB3 to EB2 conversion. That's OK too. because everyone has a right to straddle the lanes. Out of that stampede, some will get approved, some will get rejected, and will create more mess in the system. But that's inevitable ... and if a mass transition happens, USCIS will have no other option to bring in yet another rule to make their life easy, we all can guess ... what that may be ... I think this is one of the reasons why USCIS does not allow 140 premium processing anymore. Now those who are hopefull for EB2, my message is that USCIS can very easily justify visa wastage this year because of the extra load they got from Citizenship applications. Personally, I do not have much hope of USCIS working efficiently.
I am not trying to spread pessimism, but just giving my predictions. We all need to think hard, as to how can we come out of this mess. Flower campaign worked once, but doesn't mean that its gonna be effective again and again.
Now as far as those three bills are concerned ... at times I feel that they are just pacifiers to amuse the crying babies. We all can see that immigration related bill (fashion models, regional investors etc) are getting passed, but not the one's that we really want. Therefore hearings in the sub-committie and than in full hearings will go on till August, and afterwards presidential election will be the focus ... immigration reforms will take a back seat. New administration in 2009 will have more immediate priorities to fix the economy, war, etc. Immigration will eventually appear on the radar, but only after some time.
So only movement I can see in near future is EB3 to EB2 conversion. That's OK too. because everyone has a right to straddle the lanes. Out of that stampede, some will get approved, some will get rejected, and will create more mess in the system. But that's inevitable ... and if a mass transition happens, USCIS will have no other option to bring in yet another rule to make their life easy, we all can guess ... what that may be ... I think this is one of the reasons why USCIS does not allow 140 premium processing anymore. Now those who are hopefull for EB2, my message is that USCIS can very easily justify visa wastage this year because of the extra load they got from Citizenship applications. Personally, I do not have much hope of USCIS working efficiently.
I am not trying to spread pessimism, but just giving my predictions. We all need to think hard, as to how can we come out of this mess. Flower campaign worked once, but doesn't mean that its gonna be effective again and again.
more...
guy03062
04-25 09:56 AM
Well there is definite gain for people who came here earlier which is more fair system. For example, I came in USA in 12/1997 but my PD is 06/2005. If someone who came to USA in 2003 (after 5 years I came) and is lucky to apply GC...lucky to get his labor+140 approved, he would get PD earlier than me!!
It may not help at all.
Chances are once you make the arrival date as the priority date, USCIS/DOS would set the cut-off dates to reflect the earlier PD's. For example if it is now May 2001, it could retrogress to May 1995. I don't see any gains there.
It may not help at all.
Chances are once you make the arrival date as the priority date, USCIS/DOS would set the cut-off dates to reflect the earlier PD's. For example if it is now May 2001, it could retrogress to May 1995. I don't see any gains there.
gccube
07-18 07:10 PM
Lets say your PD is/was current in March, April, June and July. You decided not to apply in the previous months and you finally submitted at the end of July. On the other hand i had my PD current on July and i applied. After i applied and before you applied there could be 10k(for example) applications. Now when its time to process application which one they should process yours or mine?. Obviously they will process the one that they got first. They not going to look for the PD and pull out your's from the pile of applications. Its your fault that you have not applied early enough even though your PD was current.
what happens when dates retrogress? If my PD is 2000 Jan (assume) and some one else has 2001 Jan (assume) with RDs July/2007 and Mar/2007 respectively and in August 2007 PD cut off date went back to 2000 Feb (assume) then does it mean that 2000 Jan PD is ineligible to get the adjudication before the guy with PD 2001 Jan because the RD is later for this case? Again if the answer to this question is yes then ,when the PD is set at 2000 Feb why are they accepting new AOS apps which satisfy this PD cutoff date because if they process by RD(at all times) they are not likely to consider these for adjudication anyway? Is it just for our benifit that we can get an EAD? If I go down this path I donot understand the purpose of the whole PD in this process.
The thing I am trying to understand is 'if PD is not significant in AOS why is it there at all in the visa bulletin'. If RD overrides the PD at the AOS stage then instead of specifying a PD in the Visa bulletin they can just say that
"We are accepting new AOS applications" and then adjudicate them in the order of the RD.
These are all just my thoughts and am trying to put them together. I may very well be wrong in my basic understanding of this process. Thank you for your previous reply. That was helpful.
what happens when dates retrogress? If my PD is 2000 Jan (assume) and some one else has 2001 Jan (assume) with RDs July/2007 and Mar/2007 respectively and in August 2007 PD cut off date went back to 2000 Feb (assume) then does it mean that 2000 Jan PD is ineligible to get the adjudication before the guy with PD 2001 Jan because the RD is later for this case? Again if the answer to this question is yes then ,when the PD is set at 2000 Feb why are they accepting new AOS apps which satisfy this PD cutoff date because if they process by RD(at all times) they are not likely to consider these for adjudication anyway? Is it just for our benifit that we can get an EAD? If I go down this path I donot understand the purpose of the whole PD in this process.
The thing I am trying to understand is 'if PD is not significant in AOS why is it there at all in the visa bulletin'. If RD overrides the PD at the AOS stage then instead of specifying a PD in the Visa bulletin they can just say that
"We are accepting new AOS applications" and then adjudicate them in the order of the RD.
These are all just my thoughts and am trying to put them together. I may very well be wrong in my basic understanding of this process. Thank you for your previous reply. That was helpful.
more...
Green.Tech
06-10 02:12 PM
These visa bulletins, and EAD renewals, and H-1B extensions are not going to cut it for those who want GC's sooner than later. Please help IV to help you.
1) Make those ever important phone calls, and
2) Contribute financially
Don't let this opportunity pass by. Don't let the same visa bulletin get you 3 years down the line. Only we can help push these reforms, no one else is out there to help us!
1) Make those ever important phone calls, and
2) Contribute financially
Don't let this opportunity pass by. Don't let the same visa bulletin get you 3 years down the line. Only we can help push these reforms, no one else is out there to help us!
2010 Nina Dobrev and Kayla Ewell
eb3stuck
07-15 04:27 PM
Count me in. I live in LA County - San Gabriel Valley
EB3 - RIR - India
PD 4/02, LC 9/05, I140 01/06
I-145/EAD sent 6/28/07???
9th year of H1 B, with 3 year ext. not stamped
Spouse on 9th year H1-B
1 time contribution ($200)
EB3 - RIR - India
PD 4/02, LC 9/05, I140 01/06
I-145/EAD sent 6/28/07???
9th year of H1 B, with 3 year ext. not stamped
Spouse on 9th year H1-B
1 time contribution ($200)
more...
knnmbd
04-25 12:59 PM
Guys what about the type of visa? I mean shud the start date be ur H1B start date or ur F1 entry date? Coz if some people start on an H1 a lot of us also started on an F1. In that case doesnt it make more sense to root for the clause that says the immigrant can apply for his own GC that is employer independant? If i am not mistaken, is that not already a part of the PACE act?
Besides a lot of people are not sure for a while, if they even want to apply for their GCs or not initially. I personally know of atleast 3 such people. By putting the responsibility of application of the GC into the immigrant's hands, and empowering the applicant to apply for himself/herself, the process becomes a lot more transparent and fair. That way the day the immigrant decides to apply and applies is their PD. That way if someone does not start it as soon as he/she can, it is now up to them. Since the applicant Can apply for himself instead of being sponsored for a GC by an employer, it is no longer employer based, so no one can fault the employer saying that, "They didnt file for me for a year".
In my opinion, just pushing ur PD to the date u entered will not really help a lot. Coz say ur current PD is Feb 2002 EB3 but u had entered in 1998. DOL/UCSIS will say, ok lets do that, and the next day they will say, Now the Retrogression goes back to the year 1996. Is that not possible? Currently what we need is the immigrant to be in total control of his/her GC process. That way the GC can take even 10 years, so long as the applicant and dependants can avail of EADs and Travel permits which are longer than just 1 year increments. If we are thinking long term, then shudnt we be looking at this aspect? The GC itself represents nothing more than total freedom in ur career and it's choices. If we can achieve the same thing without the actual GC, isint that our goal?
I agree. Also, since F1 is not a dual intent visa this will not hold water. Anyways this is a ridiculous demand. We are not the law makers and we should consider ourselves lucky that couple of IV's amendments are in a few of the senator’s bills, though there are no guarantees if they will be included in the final text or let alone be passed. We should only push for what is already include in the 2 bills and not confuse everyone every time one of us comes up with this "brilliant" idea of using H1B entry date as priority date. So what's the next amendment we want " include the day I first envisioned that I will come to America as the priority date". WE NEED ONE VOICE and we have already been heard so let’s stick to what is practical and push those amendments through.
Besides a lot of people are not sure for a while, if they even want to apply for their GCs or not initially. I personally know of atleast 3 such people. By putting the responsibility of application of the GC into the immigrant's hands, and empowering the applicant to apply for himself/herself, the process becomes a lot more transparent and fair. That way the day the immigrant decides to apply and applies is their PD. That way if someone does not start it as soon as he/she can, it is now up to them. Since the applicant Can apply for himself instead of being sponsored for a GC by an employer, it is no longer employer based, so no one can fault the employer saying that, "They didnt file for me for a year".
In my opinion, just pushing ur PD to the date u entered will not really help a lot. Coz say ur current PD is Feb 2002 EB3 but u had entered in 1998. DOL/UCSIS will say, ok lets do that, and the next day they will say, Now the Retrogression goes back to the year 1996. Is that not possible? Currently what we need is the immigrant to be in total control of his/her GC process. That way the GC can take even 10 years, so long as the applicant and dependants can avail of EADs and Travel permits which are longer than just 1 year increments. If we are thinking long term, then shudnt we be looking at this aspect? The GC itself represents nothing more than total freedom in ur career and it's choices. If we can achieve the same thing without the actual GC, isint that our goal?
I agree. Also, since F1 is not a dual intent visa this will not hold water. Anyways this is a ridiculous demand. We are not the law makers and we should consider ourselves lucky that couple of IV's amendments are in a few of the senator’s bills, though there are no guarantees if they will be included in the final text or let alone be passed. We should only push for what is already include in the 2 bills and not confuse everyone every time one of us comes up with this "brilliant" idea of using H1B entry date as priority date. So what's the next amendment we want " include the day I first envisioned that I will come to America as the priority date". WE NEED ONE VOICE and we have already been heard so let’s stick to what is practical and push those amendments through.
hair Sara Canning, Kayla Ewell,
ujjwal_p
04-02 03:05 PM
I have not seen one single person getting so many red dots for playing a devils advocate and trying to defend USCIS. :D
All of us are passionate and sometimes this passion overtakes logic. If you are fed up with USCIS, suing them or putting pressure on them through Congress/Legislature/Press are the only options.
Courts and judges are definitely going to punish USCIS for any quantifiable losses suffered by us. If you can find any, sue them.
Actually those are not the only options. Another option is to leave the country. That's an option which has been taken by many people to head back to where they came from or to other countries where their skills are welcome. One needs to only read through some of the old threads of frustrated people moving to India, China, Canada etc.
All of us are passionate and sometimes this passion overtakes logic. If you are fed up with USCIS, suing them or putting pressure on them through Congress/Legislature/Press are the only options.
Courts and judges are definitely going to punish USCIS for any quantifiable losses suffered by us. If you can find any, sue them.
Actually those are not the only options. Another option is to leave the country. That's an option which has been taken by many people to head back to where they came from or to other countries where their skills are welcome. One needs to only read through some of the old threads of frustrated people moving to India, China, Canada etc.
more...
kumhyd2
07-13 03:00 PM
guys! who have those documents/letters being sent can you have a scanned copy of these documents/letters so that others can just download them and attach them with their email instead of cut copy paste and format. May be the administrators can have file/document section some where on the site so that people can grab the documents and send out to whoever they want to
hot Kayla Ewell and Nina Dobrev
chanduv23
05-15 10:03 PM
For that only I am telling we need to teach a lesson. Take them once to court, and if we can get the judement once in our favour it will nail the coffin. If we lose, some one else try again in different court.
Shan - I totally understand your frustration and where you are coming from. I had the same level of aggression when i first started participated in IV activities and I am sure, a lot of people want to pursue things in an aggressive manner.
But lets calm down for a minute.
The OP initially contacted IV after googling up and came across our threads and I spoke to him. He was frustrated with opening two MTRs and was looking into mandamus.
I requested him to do the following - exhaust all adminisrative procedures first. Contact Ombudsman, Senators, Congressman, try all options.
See - these kind of decisions are not easy and not not everyone understands this stuff.
Once you go to court, it may take a couple of hearings and you will also have the other side arguing their cause.
We must always remember that - we are in a civilised nation and people on the other side are willing to listen and try to resolve stuff in the best way possible
- Lobbying, awareness etc.. are basic principles of IV .
we are not here to teach someone a lesson or fight with someone - we are here because we want our issues resolved and we must work in the best possible way.
Nevertheless - one must know how litigation also works in case that is the only option.
I request people to please share their ideas and thoughts on how to tackle such issues.
Let frustration not dictate your views. I understand that we all want issues to be resolved and get really aggressive on these forums - but lets just relax and think and see what is the best possible solution.
Shan - I totally understand your frustration and where you are coming from. I had the same level of aggression when i first started participated in IV activities and I am sure, a lot of people want to pursue things in an aggressive manner.
But lets calm down for a minute.
The OP initially contacted IV after googling up and came across our threads and I spoke to him. He was frustrated with opening two MTRs and was looking into mandamus.
I requested him to do the following - exhaust all adminisrative procedures first. Contact Ombudsman, Senators, Congressman, try all options.
See - these kind of decisions are not easy and not not everyone understands this stuff.
Once you go to court, it may take a couple of hearings and you will also have the other side arguing their cause.
We must always remember that - we are in a civilised nation and people on the other side are willing to listen and try to resolve stuff in the best way possible
- Lobbying, awareness etc.. are basic principles of IV .
we are not here to teach someone a lesson or fight with someone - we are here because we want our issues resolved and we must work in the best possible way.
Nevertheless - one must know how litigation also works in case that is the only option.
I request people to please share their ideas and thoughts on how to tackle such issues.
Let frustration not dictate your views. I understand that we all want issues to be resolved and get really aggressive on these forums - but lets just relax and think and see what is the best possible solution.
more...
house Kayla Ewell, Nina Dobrev,
indio0617
03-09 10:05 AM
senator brownback: amendment on J1 visas
tattoo Kayla Ewell Gallery
Totoro
05-02 10:09 AM
Not everybody on this forum earns 144,000 a year. What world are you living in my friend? Do you not get out that often?
I agree.
Many of the military families affected only earn $25,000. I find it repugnant when
someone shows how little he cares about his fellow human beings.
I agree.
Many of the military families affected only earn $25,000. I find it repugnant when
someone shows how little he cares about his fellow human beings.
more...
pictures Kayla Ewell, Nina Dobrev
JazzByTheBay
11-28 10:53 AM
You make a good point. However, since I have mentioned both EB and FB in the article, I think it is appropriate to include that it can in fact take 20 years to get the GC. The Senate bill does have provisions to ameliorate both EB and FB backlogs, as far as I remember.
Pankaj
Instead, one can say "... could take up to 20 years".
I am afraid, as we all are, that this certainly will be the case down the road with retrogression.
Perhaps it may be a good idea to mention that with economies of countries like India on an accelerated growth path, these highly educated, skilled and experienced professionals that are an asset to America are increasingly preferring to (or seriously thinking about) returning to their home countries.
Another scenario - 20-25 years down the road, America will no longer be a leader any more given the growth of India and China. To sustain the technological and economical leadership of America, it is critical that we act now and fix a broken immigration system, and grant those legally here for a number of years, with approved Green Card petitions the pride of actually becoming permanent residents and eventually citizens as quickly as possibly.
Jazz
Pankaj
Instead, one can say "... could take up to 20 years".
I am afraid, as we all are, that this certainly will be the case down the road with retrogression.
Perhaps it may be a good idea to mention that with economies of countries like India on an accelerated growth path, these highly educated, skilled and experienced professionals that are an asset to America are increasingly preferring to (or seriously thinking about) returning to their home countries.
Another scenario - 20-25 years down the road, America will no longer be a leader any more given the growth of India and China. To sustain the technological and economical leadership of America, it is critical that we act now and fix a broken immigration system, and grant those legally here for a number of years, with approved Green Card petitions the pride of actually becoming permanent residents and eventually citizens as quickly as possibly.
Jazz
dresses Ewell and Nina Dobrev in
ggyro
07-22 11:46 AM
As far as I know the amendment is still a part of the Defense bill.
Sen Cornyn introduced it as an amendment to another bill on 19th (I dont remember the bill) in addition to the Defense bill and strictly speaking the motion to attach the amendment was rejected on the basis that it did not belong in that particular bill and not the amendment.
Texas Members - Would it possible to find out if Sen. Cornyn is planning to introduce the amendment again later this year?
Clearly, he has to work with Sen.Dick Durbin to gain support among the Democrats.
Sen Cornyn introduced it as an amendment to another bill on 19th (I dont remember the bill) in addition to the Defense bill and strictly speaking the motion to attach the amendment was rejected on the basis that it did not belong in that particular bill and not the amendment.
Texas Members - Would it possible to find out if Sen. Cornyn is planning to introduce the amendment again later this year?
Clearly, he has to work with Sen.Dick Durbin to gain support among the Democrats.
more...
makeup Kayla Ewell, Nina Dobrev,
Macaca
01-06 12:28 PM
You have some more in other science related disciplines like TIFR (not sure if they give M.S. degree).
I did not see MS in any discipline.
They had PhD CS also; my friend got PhD from there.
They also had something like a CS diploma (don't remember details). They had 10 (??) theoretically sound courses. Students in most US schools will not be able to handle these courses.
However, course content is not the only strength of US Education (all levels). Something else (which is hard to enumerate and quantify) happens outside the classes. But it does not happen to everyone: some are not receptive and others don't run into it!
I did not see MS in any discipline.
They had PhD CS also; my friend got PhD from there.
They also had something like a CS diploma (don't remember details). They had 10 (??) theoretically sound courses. Students in most US schools will not be able to handle these courses.
However, course content is not the only strength of US Education (all levels). Something else (which is hard to enumerate and quantify) happens outside the classes. But it does not happen to everyone: some are not receptive and others don't run into it!
girlfriend Kayla Ewell and Nina Dobrev
aerady
05-09 05:40 PM
I have been a victim of this rule implemented by DMV. On Texas the rule is like this. If you have Visa validity embedded on your DL, you will get a letter before 'Valid till Date period' on DL to show proof of approved I-797. In TX your approved petition you need to satisfy two conditions (1) When you go to DMV office, your approved I-797 should have atleast 6 months validity (2) The period on your I-797 should be more than one year. If you disqualify on any of these, they will suspend your license until you show a I-797 that satisfies the above two conditions.
So, My case is like this:-
My TX driving license(Valid till 2017) was suspended by DMV when I went(I tried online but it didn't work) for address change on 5/8/2010 saying that I don�t have a H1B visa which is valid for more than 6 months (Valid till 10/26/2010 � approx 5 months and 20 days) at the time of my visit for Address change.
I quit driving after that and my employer applied for Visa extension and they got the visa approval from 10/27/2010 to 9/19/2011. I got the approved petition from USCIS on 2/15/2011.
I went to the DMV office on 2/16/2011 and again DMV denied me license saying that even though the visa is now valid for 8 months, the total period for which the visa I got is less than 1 year(10/27/2010 to 9/19/2011 =11 months)
I am on 6+ years on US and my employer is processing my green card. USCIS will give only 1 year or less increment H1B extension after the 6th year till I get my I-140 approved.
The USCIS processing time is 4 months to 6 months for visa extensions, which puts me in a loop like sometimes when I get the approved extension, I will not have 6 months validity from the time I receive the approved petition from USCIS OR USCIS may not give one full year extension.
I am literally stuck without driving for the last one year. I was driving in US from 2003 to 2010, I don't have any accident history, I pay taxes regularly and always been a good citizen, but see what I get back!
So, My case is like this:-
My TX driving license(Valid till 2017) was suspended by DMV when I went(I tried online but it didn't work) for address change on 5/8/2010 saying that I don�t have a H1B visa which is valid for more than 6 months (Valid till 10/26/2010 � approx 5 months and 20 days) at the time of my visit for Address change.
I quit driving after that and my employer applied for Visa extension and they got the visa approval from 10/27/2010 to 9/19/2011. I got the approved petition from USCIS on 2/15/2011.
I went to the DMV office on 2/16/2011 and again DMV denied me license saying that even though the visa is now valid for 8 months, the total period for which the visa I got is less than 1 year(10/27/2010 to 9/19/2011 =11 months)
I am on 6+ years on US and my employer is processing my green card. USCIS will give only 1 year or less increment H1B extension after the 6th year till I get my I-140 approved.
The USCIS processing time is 4 months to 6 months for visa extensions, which puts me in a loop like sometimes when I get the approved extension, I will not have 6 months validity from the time I receive the approved petition from USCIS OR USCIS may not give one full year extension.
I am literally stuck without driving for the last one year. I was driving in US from 2003 to 2010, I don't have any accident history, I pay taxes regularly and always been a good citizen, but see what I get back!
hairstyles Kayla Ewell and Nina Dobrey
MDix
02-25 02:42 PM
I think dates won't (and should not ) move much. So at the end of year we can see big jump and then may be people like me can file I-1485.
Thank's
MDix
Thank's
MDix
CaliHoneB
09-08 10:29 AM
Came here in july 1997
filed LC in 2003 thinking it would be useful to stay on H1 as long as possible!! and the rest is on my profile..
I wonder if anybody thinks it makes sense to create a law which simply says after 15 (or some X years) of legal presence in the US you will be given a GC no matter the back ground! In that way we know exactly where the deadline is irrespective of some government agency's whim.
filed LC in 2003 thinking it would be useful to stay on H1 as long as possible!! and the rest is on my profile..
I wonder if anybody thinks it makes sense to create a law which simply says after 15 (or some X years) of legal presence in the US you will be given a GC no matter the back ground! In that way we know exactly where the deadline is irrespective of some government agency's whim.
bobzibub
04-01 06:56 PM
I'd look at it a different way. Without USCIS u and I wudn't have made it to the US. When u came to the US, u implicitly agreed upon the rules and regulations of USCIS. When u applied for ur GC, u very well knew what USCIS is and how they function.They have an immigration system which has been going on for several years now and all the immigration aspirants have played by their rules and never questioned how it worked though their cases were delayed for whatever reason. Why shud the USCIS even entertain somebody questioning them now? They'll simply say...Who are u to ask? We have been functioning like this for ages now. If u dont like it, just say good bye...but this is how we function.
That is what every government wishes their citizens would do--just accept like obedient little sheep. I say that one should choose not to give them a free pass. Otherwise they'll continue to walk all over you. Citizen or not, being a sheep is not an option. Besides, we did not move to a dictatorship. We moved to a democracy--or at least it is trumpeted as such. Let them walk the walk.
That is what every government wishes their citizens would do--just accept like obedient little sheep. I say that one should choose not to give them a free pass. Otherwise they'll continue to walk all over you. Citizen or not, being a sheep is not an option. Besides, we did not move to a dictatorship. We moved to a democracy--or at least it is trumpeted as such. Let them walk the walk.
No comments:
Post a Comment