redelite
08-25 01:08 PM
+1
I totally agree, I'm running out of ideas.. :-/
I totally agree, I'm running out of ideas.. :-/
wallpaper Rani Mukherjee in Jeans ~ Hot
StuckInTheMuck
08-07 10:47 AM
I filed mine, and my wife's, July 2 ('07) without medical, got status alert "RFE notice sent" Aug 4, guessing medical (have doc appointment tomorrow).
mlkedave
03-08 12:40 PM
Dark Child has no votes, someones gotta vote for him, hes got a really good layout.
yeah i thought it was gonna be between him, paddy, and me
yeah i thought it was gonna be between him, paddy, and me
2011 Check Out Rani Mukherjee#39;s Hot
sky7
07-26 10:09 AM
Dear all...
I need some advice here...
Here is my current status:
**LC filed: Sept 2002, EB2, RIR
**I140 EB2 is currently pending, Non-Concurrent (filed June 2006)
** On 7th yr H1B ext - expires March 2007
My questions are:
1) I am considering quiting the current employer and work for a new company. Can i still get H1B extension if the new company files a PERM immediately?
I actually asked the my lawyer the similar question, this was her response:
"There is a CIS memo that allows 7th year extensions even after LC is approved. The problem would be if your company revokes the LC after you leave the company. If they don't revoke you can use the LC and get a 7th year with the company, file your own LC thru the new company. If they revoke, and they may given the fact that they are paying for it, you could then be in trouble. The regs and memos do not cover this situation. My interpretation would be TROUBLE upon revocation"
Can I get a second/or more opinions on this?
2) When someone leaves a company in good terms, the employer doesn't normally go through the hassale to "revoke" his/her labor cert right? (good or bad assumption?). If they don't revoke my LC and I140, then the new company can transfer my H1B over and get an extension?
3)And I assume IF my I140 gets denied (or declassified to be EB3), i am still ok as long the new company has filed a PERM for me, correct?
4) Or would it be SAFER to wait for couple of months (assuming the Nebraska Center is fast!) to get my I140 approved. Then transfer my LC, I140, and H1B to the next company...and have them continue my GC process? And i read somewhere that I can keep my PD that way?
I need to know the possible risks b4 accepting another job offer. all helps are appreciated... :)
Thanks in advance for ur help
Sky
I need some advice here...
Here is my current status:
**LC filed: Sept 2002, EB2, RIR
**I140 EB2 is currently pending, Non-Concurrent (filed June 2006)
** On 7th yr H1B ext - expires March 2007
My questions are:
1) I am considering quiting the current employer and work for a new company. Can i still get H1B extension if the new company files a PERM immediately?
I actually asked the my lawyer the similar question, this was her response:
"There is a CIS memo that allows 7th year extensions even after LC is approved. The problem would be if your company revokes the LC after you leave the company. If they don't revoke you can use the LC and get a 7th year with the company, file your own LC thru the new company. If they revoke, and they may given the fact that they are paying for it, you could then be in trouble. The regs and memos do not cover this situation. My interpretation would be TROUBLE upon revocation"
Can I get a second/or more opinions on this?
2) When someone leaves a company in good terms, the employer doesn't normally go through the hassale to "revoke" his/her labor cert right? (good or bad assumption?). If they don't revoke my LC and I140, then the new company can transfer my H1B over and get an extension?
3)And I assume IF my I140 gets denied (or declassified to be EB3), i am still ok as long the new company has filed a PERM for me, correct?
4) Or would it be SAFER to wait for couple of months (assuming the Nebraska Center is fast!) to get my I140 approved. Then transfer my LC, I140, and H1B to the next company...and have them continue my GC process? And i read somewhere that I can keep my PD that way?
I need to know the possible risks b4 accepting another job offer. all helps are appreciated... :)
Thanks in advance for ur help
Sky
more...
irrational
04-04 03:59 PM
Use the key combo above and try calling and verifying your address with the IO.
They might be able to change it directly on file.
-----
How did you know that your FP notices were sent back ?
They might be able to change it directly on file.
-----
How did you know that your FP notices were sent back ?
kumar1
12-26 01:58 PM
H1/H4/L1/L2... - Non-Permanent Resident Alien
F1/F2 - Non-Permanent Non-resident Alien.
Green Card - Permanent Resident Alien.
Citizen - Naturalized citizen
Resident and Non-resident make a difference in taxation.
Non Permanent Resident Alien - If you are on H-1, they call you non-permanent resident alien. “Non-Permanent” because you are on a temporary visa, resident because IRS treats you just like any other US citizen living in that state.
Non-Permanent Non-Resident alien - Foreign students fall in this category (but it is not limited to them). “Non Permanent” comes from F-1 visa which is a temporary visa and Non Resident because you do not have intentions to live in the US permanently (or at least that is the farce that US embassy wants to listen). If you are on F-1 visa during, that time period you are not supposed to pay social security (6.5%) and Medicare taxes. Thanks to Non-Resident status. This is also applicable during 1 year OPT work permit that comes after F1.
Permanent Resident Alien - Permanent word is there because you have long term visa (yes, green cars is nothing but a long term visa) and resident because IRS will tax you like any other resident citizen.
Let me know if I am wrong anywhere. Thanks
F1/F2 - Non-Permanent Non-resident Alien.
Green Card - Permanent Resident Alien.
Citizen - Naturalized citizen
Resident and Non-resident make a difference in taxation.
Non Permanent Resident Alien - If you are on H-1, they call you non-permanent resident alien. “Non-Permanent” because you are on a temporary visa, resident because IRS treats you just like any other US citizen living in that state.
Non-Permanent Non-Resident alien - Foreign students fall in this category (but it is not limited to them). “Non Permanent” comes from F-1 visa which is a temporary visa and Non Resident because you do not have intentions to live in the US permanently (or at least that is the farce that US embassy wants to listen). If you are on F-1 visa during, that time period you are not supposed to pay social security (6.5%) and Medicare taxes. Thanks to Non-Resident status. This is also applicable during 1 year OPT work permit that comes after F1.
Permanent Resident Alien - Permanent word is there because you have long term visa (yes, green cars is nothing but a long term visa) and resident because IRS will tax you like any other resident citizen.
Let me know if I am wrong anywhere. Thanks
more...
wahab_be
02-07 07:13 PM
UK requires an advance parole while coming back to the US. We recently travelled to India on an expired H1 and H4 visa (I have H1 extention approved but the passport has the old expired visa) via London. We did not had any issues. But while coming back we were re-routed to Frankfurt as we did not had the transit visa.
I recommend going via Frankfurt. You can double check the transit visa requirements with German Embassy as well.
I recommend going via Frankfurt. You can double check the transit visa requirements with German Embassy as well.
2010 Rani Mukherjee Film Actress
RSRao
10-28 03:32 PM
This is regarding my husbands H1b extension. He has been working for a Indian consultancy since 3 years. Now he got a full time offer with a reputed consulting firm (contract to hire) and they are processing his extension and transfer. Its for a different end client but this company does implementation for the client. We received a first RFE a month back requesting for purchase order, manager letter, duties to be performed, organisational chart etc. The company answered with all the relevant documents. But we have received a second RFE now. Not sure what the RFE is for and we are anxiously waiting for it. Please let us know if any of you guys have faced similar situation, incured a second time RFE. how common is to get RFE for the second time.Also do premium petitions get RFE in a fax or email message or do we have to wait for arrival through mail. The attorney said wud take 2 weeks for it to arrive. His 194 has expired and we are really worried now. What are the other options, can we apply for extension through another company when this one is in process?. He already has started working for this company once the receipt number was sent out. Any inputs are highly appreciated. If you have had similar experiences please share.
more...
ImmiLosers
09-25 05:24 PM
...but could be due to unavailability of visa numbers for EB2-I in September. So even though the ported PD of Nov 2004 is current in September, the October visa bulletin has clarified that the EB2-I numbers were actually exhaused in September. See below:
he is still eligible to file.
he is still eligible to file.
hair rani mukherjee hot boobs show
jotv
11-19 01:09 PM
thank you for your reply .
i have another question is i took the dd in hdfc is 4322/- by combinding 4000+322. is this the correct way or should i have to take two different ?iam lokking for first time h1b visa stamping .i already mentioned this.
before going to interview i have to take any other dd like h4 persons will do? if yes how much ? because i read some where 20,000 for blanket petition .
please tell me what documents i have to take to the interview? is there any sample questions list ?
i appriciate your help really.
i have another question is i took the dd in hdfc is 4322/- by combinding 4000+322. is this the correct way or should i have to take two different ?iam lokking for first time h1b visa stamping .i already mentioned this.
before going to interview i have to take any other dd like h4 persons will do? if yes how much ? because i read some where 20,000 for blanket petition .
please tell me what documents i have to take to the interview? is there any sample questions list ?
i appriciate your help really.
more...
go_guy123
08-24 04:52 PM
ILW.COM - immigration news: Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. <em>USCIS</em> Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability (http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0825-mehta.shtm)
Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta
As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).
Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.
In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.
At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�
The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8
Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.
Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10
�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�
Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�
It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta
As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).
Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.
In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.
At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�
The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8
Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.
Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10
�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�
Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�
It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
hot Rani Mukherjee hot in saree a
a1b2c3
12-19 09:26 AM
I asked my friend about this, since he has not had any idea he asked his friend, who suggsted to talk to another friend of his friend who knows little about immigration and he told my friend of friend of friend that "Tell your friend or be assured that you can not talk for your friend in immigration related issues".
Guys, we are entering 2010...
redcard and igcard, why don't you guys just fuck off?
Guys, we are entering 2010...
redcard and igcard, why don't you guys just fuck off?
more...
house rani mukherjee hot rani
yabadaba
06-29 10:07 AM
^^^^
tattoo Rani Mukherjee: Hot Rani
Mount Soche
04-07 05:04 PM
I drove to Canada for H1-visa stamp renewal a few weeks ago and was surprised that Canada Immigration did not ask for my I-94 at point of entry.
I asked the immigration officer if they should take my I-94 but they declined saying it wasn't necessary and that I'd get an I-94 when coming back into the U.S, which is exactly what happened so perhaps this is perfectly normal.
I am not worrying about it at all.
Friends I have a Question. I went to my home country couple of months back, but somehow forgot to surender my I-94 at the port of exit. When I came back, at the POE(Newark)I was not asked any questions, and they issued me a new I-94. Yesterday someone told me that this could potentially affect my I-485 adversely OR whenever I travel to my home country again, they might cause problems during my re-entry. Just wanted to know what should be my action plan.
Should I correct the records with USCIS, by sending them the I-94(Along with proof that I went to my home country).
OR should I just say quiet and forget about this mistake?
Gurus- Please Help
I asked the immigration officer if they should take my I-94 but they declined saying it wasn't necessary and that I'd get an I-94 when coming back into the U.S, which is exactly what happened so perhaps this is perfectly normal.
I am not worrying about it at all.
Friends I have a Question. I went to my home country couple of months back, but somehow forgot to surender my I-94 at the port of exit. When I came back, at the POE(Newark)I was not asked any questions, and they issued me a new I-94. Yesterday someone told me that this could potentially affect my I-485 adversely OR whenever I travel to my home country again, they might cause problems during my re-entry. Just wanted to know what should be my action plan.
Should I correct the records with USCIS, by sending them the I-94(Along with proof that I went to my home country).
OR should I just say quiet and forget about this mistake?
Gurus- Please Help
more...
pictures Rani Mukherjee Hot Bikini Pics
sunny26
06-18 01:33 PM
hi
yes. that what my lawyer says.i have only two months so going in person for renewal.
Does the passport have to be valid for at least 6 months at the time of filing 485?
yes. that what my lawyer says.i have only two months so going in person for renewal.
Does the passport have to be valid for at least 6 months at the time of filing 485?
dresses RANI MUKHERJEE WALLPAPER AND
cecil1558
10-15 03:38 AM
Thank you for posting this enlightning article. I think some of it is very true, give it fifty years and oriental Asia will have become an even greater threat to the US� leadership, if not ended it completely. I�ve never looked into this, so I�m asking: Aren�t there different immigration rules that aren�t as strict when you actually study in America? And when you go study there, do you need immigration permission and does it take you this long to get it or what?
more...
makeup Hot Rani Mukherjee
HumJumboHathuJumbo
10-31 11:02 AM
what address should i mail my I-131?. I did not file with my I485 application.there is a chicago address on form I131.should i mail it there?.
thanks
thanks
girlfriend Hot Rani Mukherjee: rani
prom2
10-30 12:54 PM
Update:
My lawyer just received AP docs.
nviren: usually they go to lawyer address (as per other users).
Good luck.
My lawyer just received AP docs.
nviren: usually they go to lawyer address (as per other users).
Good luck.
hairstyles Rani Mukherji to shoot in
GC_1000Watt
05-25 01:50 AM
Please share if anyone of us has taken care of PIMS thing in any way. I wanted to handle this PIMS thing well in advance in order to avoid any possible hassle or delays later on while I go for stamping in Mumbai consulate.
Thanks in advance.
Thanks in advance.
chanduv23
01-14 03:59 PM
Folks, lets use this thread to post information about how to help the victims of Haitian earthquake.
Posts can be links to organizations where we can donate money or food or clothes.
If you have done something please post on this thread
Lets keep this thread alive and on top
Posts can be links to organizations where we can donate money or food or clothes.
If you have done something please post on this thread
Lets keep this thread alive and on top
franklin
07-11 02:18 PM
Hey guys
The Bay Area members need your help.
We are madly preparing flyers, banners, handouts, prepping attendees and filing permits, but WE NEED EVERYONE'S HELP!
We need volunteers from anywhere in the country to call up Bay Area members to rustle them into action and attend with us. We don't have the man power to do it all ourselves are getting overwhelmed organizing this.
Post here or PM me if you can make a few phone calls for us
Many thanks
The Bay Area members need your help.
We are madly preparing flyers, banners, handouts, prepping attendees and filing permits, but WE NEED EVERYONE'S HELP!
We need volunteers from anywhere in the country to call up Bay Area members to rustle them into action and attend with us. We don't have the man power to do it all ourselves are getting overwhelmed organizing this.
Post here or PM me if you can make a few phone calls for us
Many thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment