clear485
06-08 01:53 PM
I did think about doing it this way, but it didn't feel the "right thing to do"...
I spoke to my lawyer on what to do , but I'm not getting a straight answer.
Do you guys recommend a lawyer that would be able to help?
I checked Murthy.com and she asks for $250/20min of consultation... Is she that good? Should I consider calling her?
I did consult Murthy....she is good and will give you better solution....few of my friends used her law firm and resolved few complex queries....I have heard from my friend she is very good at document preparartion for real complex problems...
My suggestion is, better go to her office if you are in tri-state area....if you use her service then she will waive $250 in legal fee....
I spoke to my lawyer on what to do , but I'm not getting a straight answer.
Do you guys recommend a lawyer that would be able to help?
I checked Murthy.com and she asks for $250/20min of consultation... Is she that good? Should I consider calling her?
I did consult Murthy....she is good and will give you better solution....few of my friends used her law firm and resolved few complex queries....I have heard from my friend she is very good at document preparartion for real complex problems...
My suggestion is, better go to her office if you are in tri-state area....if you use her service then she will waive $250 in legal fee....
wallpaper wallpaper desktop hd 1080. hd
eager_immi
07-18 10:57 AM
Let us all pledge to give atleast a $20, $50 monthly payments.
raysaikat
01-06 03:33 PM
Sincerest thanks for the information. Iam looking at criteria 1 to 10 in the list that you have provided. I believe that I can gather evidence to satisfy 2 criteria�s completely and maybe 1 partially, does that suffice or there is a rule that atleast say 4 / 10 or X / 10 should be satisfied as a minimum. Most of the criteria�s are actually meant for distinguished people in research, whereas my profile is more of an IT application developer / designer.
Please read the text in the USCIS page carefully. You need to clearly satisfy at least 3 criteria. In practice, you try to provide at least some evidence for most criteria.
Note also that you need to provide evidence of sustained fulfillment. E.g., suppose you want to show that
"Evidence that the alien has judged the work of others, either individually or on a panel;"
This is *not* satisfied, e.g., if you graded the papers of your students or did code-reviews! This is likely satisfied if you, e.g., were in an IEEE standards committee (especially if the standard becomes well known, e.g., IEEE 802.11, or Firewire, etc.). Similarly, if you just participated in a panel once, then the reviewer is likely to reject your claim; you really want to show that you regularly (e.g., once a month for last 3-4 years) participate in panels, etc. In my own case, I reviewed literally 100's of conference and journal papers, and was in the TPC of many conferences, and also participated in an NSF panel for reviewing proposals for funding.
The reviewer will want evidence for each criteria. Sometimes you may be able to use the same evidence towards more than one criteria, but generally it is not the case.
Finally remember that you need *very strong* recommendation letters from "well known" people *all over the world". Most people gets some letters from US, some from their home country, some from Europe, other countries, etc. I had about 10-15 letters from US, China, India, Netherlands, etc. The letter writer in each case must be very well known, and must hold a very high position (e.g., one of my letter writer was one of the heads of Philips research).
In any case, it does not matter what I or someone else thinks about your qualifications. What matters is what the reviewer of your petition thinks. What I would suggest is that if you feel that you have a good chance at EB1-A (e.g., in your own mind you believe that you truly satisfy 3 criteria), then hire a good attorney and start working on preparing your dossier. The cost will be about $7000-$10,000 (depending upon what attorney you choose). Attorneys will charge much more for EB1 petitions since they actually have to work on it (rather than get a para-legal fill-in forms, as done in EB2 applications). It usually takes 4-6 months to get all material, etc.
Please read the text in the USCIS page carefully. You need to clearly satisfy at least 3 criteria. In practice, you try to provide at least some evidence for most criteria.
Note also that you need to provide evidence of sustained fulfillment. E.g., suppose you want to show that
"Evidence that the alien has judged the work of others, either individually or on a panel;"
This is *not* satisfied, e.g., if you graded the papers of your students or did code-reviews! This is likely satisfied if you, e.g., were in an IEEE standards committee (especially if the standard becomes well known, e.g., IEEE 802.11, or Firewire, etc.). Similarly, if you just participated in a panel once, then the reviewer is likely to reject your claim; you really want to show that you regularly (e.g., once a month for last 3-4 years) participate in panels, etc. In my own case, I reviewed literally 100's of conference and journal papers, and was in the TPC of many conferences, and also participated in an NSF panel for reviewing proposals for funding.
The reviewer will want evidence for each criteria. Sometimes you may be able to use the same evidence towards more than one criteria, but generally it is not the case.
Finally remember that you need *very strong* recommendation letters from "well known" people *all over the world". Most people gets some letters from US, some from their home country, some from Europe, other countries, etc. I had about 10-15 letters from US, China, India, Netherlands, etc. The letter writer in each case must be very well known, and must hold a very high position (e.g., one of my letter writer was one of the heads of Philips research).
In any case, it does not matter what I or someone else thinks about your qualifications. What matters is what the reviewer of your petition thinks. What I would suggest is that if you feel that you have a good chance at EB1-A (e.g., in your own mind you believe that you truly satisfy 3 criteria), then hire a good attorney and start working on preparing your dossier. The cost will be about $7000-$10,000 (depending upon what attorney you choose). Attorneys will charge much more for EB1 petitions since they actually have to work on it (rather than get a para-legal fill-in forms, as done in EB2 applications). It usually takes 4-6 months to get all material, etc.
2011 hair 1080p widescreen hd
morchu
04-21 01:40 PM
Wrong.
H1B has nothing to do with an AOS. AOS has its own requirements, and having an H1B or even being "employed" at the time, is not a requirement for AOS.
So "brick2006", theoreticaly can file for AOS, even when he is in H4.
-Morchu
....To file AOS once PD is current, it is essential that one be in H1-B status.
H1B has nothing to do with an AOS. AOS has its own requirements, and having an H1B or even being "employed" at the time, is not a requirement for AOS.
So "brick2006", theoreticaly can file for AOS, even when he is in H4.
-Morchu
....To file AOS once PD is current, it is essential that one be in H1-B status.
more...
newuser
08-17 12:10 PM
For renewal they did not even ask me for any documentation. Renewed online, went to DMV and got it for 4 years.
I agree with ashkam. If you renew online, you can get it for 4 years. But if you go in person to DMV, they will issue based in EAD.
I agree with ashkam. If you renew online, you can get it for 4 years. But if you go in person to DMV, they will issue based in EAD.
munnu77
04-06 10:56 PM
If you go toImmigration-law update time clearly says 3PM EST and IV postings are around 9.30PM EST ...so what have to be correct? the one which is posted at 3PM or 9.30 PM. You decide. Before asking same question in different place do some homework.
i agree immiration-law has not updated...
see cnn at 11 30 pm ET...
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/06/immigration.ap/index.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12184299/
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,190770,00.html
they update every half hr
i agree immiration-law has not updated...
see cnn at 11 30 pm ET...
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/06/immigration.ap/index.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12184299/
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,190770,00.html
they update every half hr
more...
pappu
02-11 10:26 AM
..
Legislation is being prepared by U.S. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) that would make it easier to get permanent residency or Green Cards for advance degree graduates. Lofgren, who represents Silicon Valley, has not introduced her proposal, but she is a veteran of immigration issues.
Previous efforts by Lofgren have attempted to make it easier for foreign students who earn advance degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, the so-called STEM degrees, to remain in the U.S. Her latest proposal is broader.
Among the things Lofgren may seek to accomplish in this bill is to create a new Green Card category for advanced degree graduates with STEM degrees, and to enable employers to file immigrant petitions for any of these students, eliminating the need for an H-1B visa for these employers. Out of the 85,000 H-1B visas allowed each year, 20,000 are set aside for STEM graduates.
U.S. Rep Jeff Flake (R-Arizona) introduced something similar last month. But Lofgren's proposal may go further by seeking protections for U.S. workers by barring their displacement by an H-1B worker, a move that may be aimed at firms that primarily deliver offshore services.
Link (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9208961/Top_H_1B_visa_user_of_2010_An_Indian_firm)
Looks like the news is out on this in media.
Immigration Voice has been aware of this and actively working on it for last 3 weeks. This had been also posted on the donor forums. Core members and several key IV volunteers/ donors already have been working on it and analyzing it. We also had been asked for our recommendations and had send our recommendations. We should see this bill introduced soon in a few days.
Legislation is being prepared by U.S. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) that would make it easier to get permanent residency or Green Cards for advance degree graduates. Lofgren, who represents Silicon Valley, has not introduced her proposal, but she is a veteran of immigration issues.
Previous efforts by Lofgren have attempted to make it easier for foreign students who earn advance degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, the so-called STEM degrees, to remain in the U.S. Her latest proposal is broader.
Among the things Lofgren may seek to accomplish in this bill is to create a new Green Card category for advanced degree graduates with STEM degrees, and to enable employers to file immigrant petitions for any of these students, eliminating the need for an H-1B visa for these employers. Out of the 85,000 H-1B visas allowed each year, 20,000 are set aside for STEM graduates.
U.S. Rep Jeff Flake (R-Arizona) introduced something similar last month. But Lofgren's proposal may go further by seeking protections for U.S. workers by barring their displacement by an H-1B worker, a move that may be aimed at firms that primarily deliver offshore services.
Link (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9208961/Top_H_1B_visa_user_of_2010_An_Indian_firm)
Looks like the news is out on this in media.
Immigration Voice has been aware of this and actively working on it for last 3 weeks. This had been also posted on the donor forums. Core members and several key IV volunteers/ donors already have been working on it and analyzing it. We also had been asked for our recommendations and had send our recommendations. We should see this bill introduced soon in a few days.
2010 dead space wallpaper 1080p. hd
trueguy
12-11 01:43 AM
In a testimony to the House Judiciary Committee back in Apr/May 08, the USCIS clearly stated that it had changed its policy regarding which applications would be adjudicated first.
As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.
The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.
Here is how:
Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.
So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.
When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.
The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.
If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.
As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.
Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.
Very good points. I can't agree with you any more.
The question is how do we raise it as an issue so USCIS follow FIFO.
As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.
The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.
Here is how:
Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.
So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.
When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.
The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.
If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.
As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.
Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.
Very good points. I can't agree with you any more.
The question is how do we raise it as an issue so USCIS follow FIFO.
more...
gg_ny
08-21 03:23 PM
You are saying ur PD was Sec 2005? Mine is Dec 2005. Should I also expect it sometime soon :)?
We all can expect and keep expecting ;-) My PD is Nov 2004 (EB2 NIW), RD for 485 is Aug 2005. Who knows, you could be luckier and FBI likes your name... They seemed to be not liking mine though.
We all can expect and keep expecting ;-) My PD is Nov 2004 (EB2 NIW), RD for 485 is Aug 2005. Who knows, you could be luckier and FBI likes your name... They seemed to be not liking mine though.
hair 2010 hd desktop wallpapers
meridiani.planum
02-28 03:46 PM
Can anybody please help in answering below questions on my case? I really appreciate your help. This is urgent for me.
#1: I am working for Company A (current company). My GC processing details (with current company):
1. Labor Approved.
2. I-140 Approved with priority date of Aug 2006 (Category -EB2)
3. I-485 - NOT filed
#2: I am on 6th year of H1-B. My current H1-B is valid till Jan 29, 2011 (less than 365 days from today).
I want to change job and join Company B (new company) for excellent offer and life long stability.
As per my understanding, for continuous H1-B extension & GC approval on existing priority date, I must stay with existing company(A). But attorney of new company(B) is saying he will be able to handle my H1-B extension and may be able to save my priority date also by filing new PERM & I-140. I am not sure whether attorney of new company(B) is correct or not. Can anybody please help in answering below questions?
Ques : If new company(B) transfers H1-B and USCIS will grant H1-B for 3 years based on approved I-140 with current company(A):
A. Can USCIS revokes extended period ( after Jan 29, 2011) if current company(A) revokes their approved I-140 before new company(B) gets approval of new PERM and I-140?
B. Can new company (B) start new PERM application during my extension period (after Jan 29, 2011)?
C. Can new company (B) transfer Priority date even if existing company(A) revokes their I-140?
A. The validity of the extended H1 if the underlying I-140 is revoked is also more or less ok: almost all lawyers say a revoke does not matter (even lawyers from a couple of the top immigration law firms in the country that I had spoken when I was in that same boat a couple of years ago) . Some say because regulations are unclear, the USCIS could in theory decide suddenly that the H1 is not valid, but even they have never heard of this really happening. They say the law leaves a possiblity of this open by being unclear.
B. yes, new company can start another PERM
C. yes, new company can transfer PD even if the I-140 Is revoked. The USCIS has thus far taken a position that PD porting is not possible only if the I-140 was revoked by USCIS because of fraud by the previous employer. 'Normal' revoking has not made a difference.
#1: I am working for Company A (current company). My GC processing details (with current company):
1. Labor Approved.
2. I-140 Approved with priority date of Aug 2006 (Category -EB2)
3. I-485 - NOT filed
#2: I am on 6th year of H1-B. My current H1-B is valid till Jan 29, 2011 (less than 365 days from today).
I want to change job and join Company B (new company) for excellent offer and life long stability.
As per my understanding, for continuous H1-B extension & GC approval on existing priority date, I must stay with existing company(A). But attorney of new company(B) is saying he will be able to handle my H1-B extension and may be able to save my priority date also by filing new PERM & I-140. I am not sure whether attorney of new company(B) is correct or not. Can anybody please help in answering below questions?
Ques : If new company(B) transfers H1-B and USCIS will grant H1-B for 3 years based on approved I-140 with current company(A):
A. Can USCIS revokes extended period ( after Jan 29, 2011) if current company(A) revokes their approved I-140 before new company(B) gets approval of new PERM and I-140?
B. Can new company (B) start new PERM application during my extension period (after Jan 29, 2011)?
C. Can new company (B) transfer Priority date even if existing company(A) revokes their I-140?
A. The validity of the extended H1 if the underlying I-140 is revoked is also more or less ok: almost all lawyers say a revoke does not matter (even lawyers from a couple of the top immigration law firms in the country that I had spoken when I was in that same boat a couple of years ago) . Some say because regulations are unclear, the USCIS could in theory decide suddenly that the H1 is not valid, but even they have never heard of this really happening. They say the law leaves a possiblity of this open by being unclear.
B. yes, new company can start another PERM
C. yes, new company can transfer PD even if the I-140 Is revoked. The USCIS has thus far taken a position that PD porting is not possible only if the I-140 was revoked by USCIS because of fraud by the previous employer. 'Normal' revoking has not made a difference.
more...
m.e.g.
03-31 03:07 PM
That is a good question....because I have tried to save it as PDF and an EPS as well seeing if that would work, but it doesn't even show up as an option to open on the Blend side. Only the .ai file showed up. But I will try to export it with the PDF options.
I will mess around with it a bit...Be back in a sec...
I will mess around with it a bit...Be back in a sec...
hot Download desktop wallpaper
raydhan
06-13 01:49 PM
Hello everyone,
I am on the EB3 category and have a PD of March 19, 2002. Also, I am from a non-retrogressed country (Brazil). Would any of the wise members of this forum be willing to estimate how much longer I'd have to wait until I am concurrent? Thanks in advance.
camberiu,
Let's forget about the visa numbers. My P.D. is Jan'02 (EB3-India :( )and I am not expecting any movement significant movement for the next 4-6 months.
Atleast you can expect some good news in the World Cup on July 9th. Hope to see Cafu lift Brazil's 6th Cup.
You better log off and watch Brazil-Croatia in 10 minutes.
I am on the EB3 category and have a PD of March 19, 2002. Also, I am from a non-retrogressed country (Brazil). Would any of the wise members of this forum be willing to estimate how much longer I'd have to wait until I am concurrent? Thanks in advance.
camberiu,
Let's forget about the visa numbers. My P.D. is Jan'02 (EB3-India :( )and I am not expecting any movement significant movement for the next 4-6 months.
Atleast you can expect some good news in the World Cup on July 9th. Hope to see Cafu lift Brazil's 6th Cup.
You better log off and watch Brazil-Croatia in 10 minutes.
more...
house images wallpaper hd 1080p
sam571
05-08 10:20 AM
Hey jvs_annapurna
Congratulation on your approval .
I have one question for you? Your new Company is direct client company (like Google, yahoo)
or its a consultant?
Because I am on H1 with consultant, but not able to find projects for last 6 months, and have a offer for a full-time position with very small start-up company? Should I put my legs in this transfer process ? or should I wait untill USCIS gets soften?
Please advise Gurus,
Thanks.
Congratulation on your approval .
I have one question for you? Your new Company is direct client company (like Google, yahoo)
or its a consultant?
Because I am on H1 with consultant, but not able to find projects for last 6 months, and have a offer for a full-time position with very small start-up company? Should I put my legs in this transfer process ? or should I wait untill USCIS gets soften?
Please advise Gurus,
Thanks.
tattoo HD Wallpapers 1080p | Desktop
bijualex29
08-14 02:54 PM
This is purley an example of Mailroom confusion.
You may be able to resend it clearly explaining the Mail room error.
It is best to avoid this kind of confusion. This Mail room people are not trained well to calculate or think like you and me are thinking.
You might have seen the cashier at walmart. If you buy worth of 20$ and you give 50$. They need calculator to figure it our how much to return.
You may be able to resend it clearly explaining the Mail room error.
It is best to avoid this kind of confusion. This Mail room people are not trained well to calculate or think like you and me are thinking.
You might have seen the cashier at walmart. If you buy worth of 20$ and you give 50$. They need calculator to figure it our how much to return.
more...
pictures pictures hd desktop wallpapers
anilsal
12-02 11:41 AM
What about the case wherein the GC is for a future employment with the same company? You may be currently on H1B with the company as an engineer, but the company applies GC as a manager because you qualify for EB2.
Only if the company is stable, will it be able to get future employment GCs approved. If it is a consulting/body shopping outfit, then ...........????
Only if the company is stable, will it be able to get future employment GCs approved. If it is a consulting/body shopping outfit, then ...........????
dresses 1080p widescreen hd desktop
_768x432.jpg "Black Ops Hd Desktop Wallpaper")
tikka
06-22 09:42 AM
any responce
If it is positive you will be sent for a chest xray.
If your chest xray comes back normal you are good to go!
If it is positive you will be sent for a chest xray.
If your chest xray comes back normal you are good to go!
more...
makeup hd wallpapers 1080p
pappu
02-11 10:10 AM
E-mail Matthai Chakko Kuruvila at mkuruvila@sfchronicle.com
has anyone sent email to this id? we need several people to write to reporters so that they can cover our issues.
thanks
has anyone sent email to this id? we need several people to write to reporters so that they can cover our issues.
thanks
girlfriend Hd Desktop Wallpapers 1080p.
snalluri
04-13 02:07 PM
I think the bill becomes law immediately after president signs. But in case of states legislatures it has to wait 90 days after governor signs to become law.
hairstyles Hd Wallpapers 1080p Widescreen
eb3retro
02-24 03:49 PM
To whom it may concern, please, help us. Everything we ever learned from the U.S. about truth and justice is suddenly being deprived of any meaning by the U.S. itself. The hardest part for us is believing that everything we�ve based our lives on � the American way, has no merit.
I was deported from the United States of America on February 18, 2005. I lived there nearly 30 years since I was 20 months old, when my mother crossed the Rio Grande into the country with me illegally. I was given an opportunity to become legal under the NACARA law but was to afraid of being deported like Maricela Soza was under the same law and didn�t go through with the entire process. I have both a husband and a son who are U.S. citizens but I am permanently prohibited by Immigration law from immigrating to the United States, while at the same time I am allowed to visit. Due to my drug convictions amounting to possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. It�s Immigration law�s contradicting policies which I find disturbing.
U.S. Immigration is concerned with their citizens� welfare but it is denying my husband�s and my son�s requests to have me back by their side for good. Although Immigration law will value my wish to receive admission into the United States. Needless to say I prefer returning, immigrating and remaining in the country by my family�s side. That�s not taking into account the fact that I am still homesick and continue experiencing culture shock in Nicaragua. What the Department of Homeland Security is doing to my family and I is cruel, inhumane and unpatriotic. No free country�s government has any business deciding how families should be formed or whose personal choice is agreeable or not. Like that of my son�s and husband�s choice to overlook my shortcomings and begin our lives over together again.
The 212(d)(3) Waiver allows a visitor�s visa into the U.S. to be issued to an Alien like me if I show evidence of rehabilitation such as becoming a practicing professional with a U.S. job offer. Sometimes with lone proof of a bank savings account, school registration and satisfactory travel record. On the other hand there isn�t one waiver available for United States Citizens who wish to rebuild their lives with an Alien deported for any drug charge(s) of possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. Not only are Andrew�s(my son) and Thomas�(my husband) needs being ignored but my needs are being placed before their own. An act I dare name TREASON.
How much more is the United States citizens� welfare secured if an Alien with an undesirable drug history enters the United States merely to visit and not to immigrate? Shouldn�t all United States citizens� needs and rights within and from their country � such as my husband�s and my son�s, come before any Alien�s need or right to receive admission into the U.S., including my own? Also, shouldn�t Family-Based Immigration take first place over �Alien travel� for any reason?
I regret to say it�s these types of injustices with devastating consequences to the recipient�s and his/her immediate relatives� personal lives remaining raveled, much more unacknowledged that play a large role in the cause for conflict concerning disloyalty and unpopularity among U.S. citizens and foreign nationals inside and outside of the United States. I trust that once this oversight is brought to DHS�s attention they will not knowingly continue punishing my husband and my son for loving me, an Alien who once stumbled while attempting to survive in the U.S.. I�m afraid to imagine how many individuals involved in cases like my family�s and mine go on thinking that the U.S. is a bad country for having the audacity to pass judgment on them. I�ve had to believe there�s a glitch somewhere in immigration law caused by simple human error. I can�t accept that the U.S. I grew to know as a loving, Christian country with caring values is intentionally causing my loved ones and I grief. It goes without saying that as much as the United States has a duty to protect its citizens it also has a duty to be equally diplomatic toward foreigners and not continue persecuting the one or the other long after any condemning sentence has been exacted and executed. I know the United States of America will do right by my son, my husband, me, and the rest of its citizens and foreign nationals in our predicament.
We want the 212(d)(3) Non-Immigrant Visas Waiver made into an Immigrant Visas Waiver for Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens to make sure United States citizens receive competent protection from the Department of Homeland Security and adequate protection from the United States of America. I believe a Waiver should be available to me for my deportation charge including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana so my husband and son can claim me and I can immigrate to the U.S.. But immigration law only makes such a Waiver available to Foreign Nationals who wish to travel to the U.S.(and who also have the same charge as me: deportation including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana). My husband�s and my son�s Freedom Of Belief civil liberty is being violated because their belief is being discriminated against. I am not able to immigrate to the U.S. because immigration law doesn�t allow me a Waiver enabling my husband or son to claim me successfully. If I had a Waiver available to me they wouldn�t have to be at this crossroads making their case public in the courts, therefore their Right To Privacy is also being violated as a result of their belief being discriminated against. Please, help bring justice to these afflicted, we need your input. How should we proceed?
crap..who are you.???
I was deported from the United States of America on February 18, 2005. I lived there nearly 30 years since I was 20 months old, when my mother crossed the Rio Grande into the country with me illegally. I was given an opportunity to become legal under the NACARA law but was to afraid of being deported like Maricela Soza was under the same law and didn�t go through with the entire process. I have both a husband and a son who are U.S. citizens but I am permanently prohibited by Immigration law from immigrating to the United States, while at the same time I am allowed to visit. Due to my drug convictions amounting to possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. It�s Immigration law�s contradicting policies which I find disturbing.
U.S. Immigration is concerned with their citizens� welfare but it is denying my husband�s and my son�s requests to have me back by their side for good. Although Immigration law will value my wish to receive admission into the United States. Needless to say I prefer returning, immigrating and remaining in the country by my family�s side. That�s not taking into account the fact that I am still homesick and continue experiencing culture shock in Nicaragua. What the Department of Homeland Security is doing to my family and I is cruel, inhumane and unpatriotic. No free country�s government has any business deciding how families should be formed or whose personal choice is agreeable or not. Like that of my son�s and husband�s choice to overlook my shortcomings and begin our lives over together again.
The 212(d)(3) Waiver allows a visitor�s visa into the U.S. to be issued to an Alien like me if I show evidence of rehabilitation such as becoming a practicing professional with a U.S. job offer. Sometimes with lone proof of a bank savings account, school registration and satisfactory travel record. On the other hand there isn�t one waiver available for United States Citizens who wish to rebuild their lives with an Alien deported for any drug charge(s) of possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. Not only are Andrew�s(my son) and Thomas�(my husband) needs being ignored but my needs are being placed before their own. An act I dare name TREASON.
How much more is the United States citizens� welfare secured if an Alien with an undesirable drug history enters the United States merely to visit and not to immigrate? Shouldn�t all United States citizens� needs and rights within and from their country � such as my husband�s and my son�s, come before any Alien�s need or right to receive admission into the U.S., including my own? Also, shouldn�t Family-Based Immigration take first place over �Alien travel� for any reason?
I regret to say it�s these types of injustices with devastating consequences to the recipient�s and his/her immediate relatives� personal lives remaining raveled, much more unacknowledged that play a large role in the cause for conflict concerning disloyalty and unpopularity among U.S. citizens and foreign nationals inside and outside of the United States. I trust that once this oversight is brought to DHS�s attention they will not knowingly continue punishing my husband and my son for loving me, an Alien who once stumbled while attempting to survive in the U.S.. I�m afraid to imagine how many individuals involved in cases like my family�s and mine go on thinking that the U.S. is a bad country for having the audacity to pass judgment on them. I�ve had to believe there�s a glitch somewhere in immigration law caused by simple human error. I can�t accept that the U.S. I grew to know as a loving, Christian country with caring values is intentionally causing my loved ones and I grief. It goes without saying that as much as the United States has a duty to protect its citizens it also has a duty to be equally diplomatic toward foreigners and not continue persecuting the one or the other long after any condemning sentence has been exacted and executed. I know the United States of America will do right by my son, my husband, me, and the rest of its citizens and foreign nationals in our predicament.
We want the 212(d)(3) Non-Immigrant Visas Waiver made into an Immigrant Visas Waiver for Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens to make sure United States citizens receive competent protection from the Department of Homeland Security and adequate protection from the United States of America. I believe a Waiver should be available to me for my deportation charge including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana so my husband and son can claim me and I can immigrate to the U.S.. But immigration law only makes such a Waiver available to Foreign Nationals who wish to travel to the U.S.(and who also have the same charge as me: deportation including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana). My husband�s and my son�s Freedom Of Belief civil liberty is being violated because their belief is being discriminated against. I am not able to immigrate to the U.S. because immigration law doesn�t allow me a Waiver enabling my husband or son to claim me successfully. If I had a Waiver available to me they wouldn�t have to be at this crossroads making their case public in the courts, therefore their Right To Privacy is also being violated as a result of their belief being discriminated against. Please, help bring justice to these afflicted, we need your input. How should we proceed?
crap..who are you.???
nc14
05-14 09:10 PM
Thanks Guys, It is very reassuring to hear from you.
.................................................. ......................
$100 + $20 recurring
.................................................. ......................
$100 + $20 recurring
coolvigo
07-15 04:56 PM
Check this thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20100
Also check this link where couple ppl spoke with their lawyers and they said we can apply for I-485 by attaching photocopy of old I-140 since we have and are applying for PD port.
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/114468227/
PS - I am also in same boat. I have not been able to talk to my lawyer yet since he is busy :rolleyes:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20100
Also check this link where couple ppl spoke with their lawyers and they said we can apply for I-485 by attaching photocopy of old I-140 since we have and are applying for PD port.
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/114468227/
PS - I am also in same boat. I have not been able to talk to my lawyer yet since he is busy :rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment