dicarol18
08-13 02:48 PM
Mine is Eb 3..was sent to Nebraska, got there July 2, signed by R. Michaels at 9 am...Transfered to Texas,Received July 6...They sent me the Notice of Action for my 140 but I don't know anything else and I also sent at the same time 485-765 for my whole family...
wallpaper After analyzing Tiger#39;s swing
eb3retro
07-19 07:24 PM
the above poster summarized it very good. here are some of my thoughts..
1) we can come up with a formal letter (standard one) which is well written and can be faxed to USCIS director or emailed.
2) we can also fax/email the same letter to ombudsman so that they are aware of this issue.
in my gut feeling ombudsman is as close as we can get to uscis if we need visibility to this. optionally we can use the same letter to send it to the senators/congressman.
The letter should be short, precise, upto the point, without any spelling mistakes, well written. if u look at this post itself, you could very well decide that i am not suitable for that job. can someone in eb3-I who has a good writing skill come up with such a letter and so that we can try what ever we can from our end. its every dog's battle here. and if sanyahari is fighting, its his / her right to do so. so what do u say folks?
1) we can come up with a formal letter (standard one) which is well written and can be faxed to USCIS director or emailed.
2) we can also fax/email the same letter to ombudsman so that they are aware of this issue.
in my gut feeling ombudsman is as close as we can get to uscis if we need visibility to this. optionally we can use the same letter to send it to the senators/congressman.
The letter should be short, precise, upto the point, without any spelling mistakes, well written. if u look at this post itself, you could very well decide that i am not suitable for that job. can someone in eb3-I who has a good writing skill come up with such a letter and so that we can try what ever we can from our end. its every dog's battle here. and if sanyahari is fighting, its his / her right to do so. so what do u say folks?
tikka
06-07 01:08 PM
please Contribute $$
Iv Needs Funds For Lobbying Efforts
Iv Needs Funds For Lobbying Efforts
2011 April 30, 2009 - 11:23AM. Band
delhiguy79
07-25 02:56 PM
but if we take rental, dont they ask why u brought rental?
I took my car.Once you get landed immigrant status in canada, everything needs to be transferred with you. They asked me either transfer my car or take it back to USA right away.As I have my family with me, So I argued for a while but no success. So i went to the customs and let them fill up the paper work to get the car transferred.Also they dont let your personal car to list in the things to follow paperwork, if you are driving the same car.I came back to USA after two weeks. But the transfer procedure still require you to get clearance from the USA for which you have to give the 72 hour notice to some agency and then take the car.Also you need Manufacturing clearance recall letter(which can be done both in USA & Canada).
I did not pay canadian customs a fee which is 209 + tax, as I want to bring the car back to usa. You have 45 days to get all this things done , other wise You have to export the car back to USA. They told me to send the payment or they will send a reminder notice after 10 days, which to date i have not received yet.You have to buy insurance and change the odometer into Km and also headlights should remain on when you start your car. I dont know what gonna happen, but I will sell the car if I have to, and send them the sale receipt.By the way i entered from detriot, and everything went smoothly.
I took my car.Once you get landed immigrant status in canada, everything needs to be transferred with you. They asked me either transfer my car or take it back to USA right away.As I have my family with me, So I argued for a while but no success. So i went to the customs and let them fill up the paper work to get the car transferred.Also they dont let your personal car to list in the things to follow paperwork, if you are driving the same car.I came back to USA after two weeks. But the transfer procedure still require you to get clearance from the USA for which you have to give the 72 hour notice to some agency and then take the car.Also you need Manufacturing clearance recall letter(which can be done both in USA & Canada).
I did not pay canadian customs a fee which is 209 + tax, as I want to bring the car back to usa. You have 45 days to get all this things done , other wise You have to export the car back to USA. They told me to send the payment or they will send a reminder notice after 10 days, which to date i have not received yet.You have to buy insurance and change the odometer into Km and also headlights should remain on when you start your car. I dont know what gonna happen, but I will sell the car if I have to, and send them the sale receipt.By the way i entered from detriot, and everything went smoothly.
more...
dtekkedil
07-10 05:33 PM
Now that we have generated interest and made more people aware of IV. The next thing is to do is to gather support for rallies.
For the next few days we need to spread the word about this campaign and get more people to join us. Spread the word around about the San Jose rally!
We have to make sure that this flower drive is especially talked about in and around San Jose.
For the next few days we need to spread the word about this campaign and get more people to join us. Spread the word around about the San Jose rally!
We have to make sure that this flower drive is especially talked about in and around San Jose.
Sakthisagar
08-09 01:30 PM
Why fight among EB2 and EB3? EB1 should be also a part of this, that's what we are good at...right?
Is it fair that a EB1 from 2010 has a GC wheras an EB2 from 2005 is still waiting?
EB-1 will never become part of us because of simple reason they are always Cuirrent!
Who said it is Fair? nothing is fair... this is the policy of Divide and Rule
Never want to hurt anyone.
Is it fair that a EB1 from 2010 has a GC wheras an EB2 from 2005 is still waiting?
EB-1 will never become part of us because of simple reason they are always Cuirrent!
Who said it is Fair? nothing is fair... this is the policy of Divide and Rule
Never want to hurt anyone.
more...
SunnySurya
08-18 02:45 PM
You got that right!, so you are going to help out here or what?
He is looking for people with good english skills to write letters on his behalf :) He is admitting that, so no issues there!
He is looking for people with good english skills to write letters on his behalf :) He is admitting that, so no issues there!
2010 been Tiger Woods#39; swing
somegchuh
12-18 04:53 PM
2,
I completely understand your pain. I have been here since 1998 and have a EB2 PD of 2002. And the dates are back to 2000. It seems like I can never get the ducks in a row. First my case gets stuck in PBEC. It take me 4+ years to get out of it. Then the RD at NSC is not current. When the RD turns current the PD retrogresses. Off course not to mention that I am waiting for name check to clear. The process is not linear. Some ppl are able to get thru it all in a very short time and some are stuck for years and years.
I have gone thru some of the depression that you talk about. The only way out for me to realize was that either I take it or leave it. That's how I view the whole process. If I am going to take it then I need to have a plan for what I am going to do with my GC. I know one thing for sure, I am going to take a long vacation as soon as I get it :) Just getting too old and tired for the same old same old.
Been in the US since 1998, have an EB-2 PD of 2001, have played by the rules all along. Still no GC... And, the dates are going back to 2000 from the new year.. I've lost hopes...
I'm pretty close to getting clinical depression because of this game played by USCIS, Labor Dept, FBI and my own bad luck.
SKILL bill, OMNIBUS, etc. comes and goes. IV does seem to be doing things to lobby for the community, but let's face one reality. Like a news article said, no one in congress or senate wants to touch immigration even with a long pole until 2009.
The US has been very good to me (other than the GC part), more than my home country (India) which is why I'm still here.
Have invested too much of time in this country to just pack up and go. Just curious if any of you feel this way? How do you handle such depressing feelings?
I completely understand your pain. I have been here since 1998 and have a EB2 PD of 2002. And the dates are back to 2000. It seems like I can never get the ducks in a row. First my case gets stuck in PBEC. It take me 4+ years to get out of it. Then the RD at NSC is not current. When the RD turns current the PD retrogresses. Off course not to mention that I am waiting for name check to clear. The process is not linear. Some ppl are able to get thru it all in a very short time and some are stuck for years and years.
I have gone thru some of the depression that you talk about. The only way out for me to realize was that either I take it or leave it. That's how I view the whole process. If I am going to take it then I need to have a plan for what I am going to do with my GC. I know one thing for sure, I am going to take a long vacation as soon as I get it :) Just getting too old and tired for the same old same old.
Been in the US since 1998, have an EB-2 PD of 2001, have played by the rules all along. Still no GC... And, the dates are going back to 2000 from the new year.. I've lost hopes...
I'm pretty close to getting clinical depression because of this game played by USCIS, Labor Dept, FBI and my own bad luck.
SKILL bill, OMNIBUS, etc. comes and goes. IV does seem to be doing things to lobby for the community, but let's face one reality. Like a news article said, no one in congress or senate wants to touch immigration even with a long pole until 2009.
The US has been very good to me (other than the GC part), more than my home country (India) which is why I'm still here.
Have invested too much of time in this country to just pack up and go. Just curious if any of you feel this way? How do you handle such depressing feelings?
more...
mirage
07-08 12:21 PM
Previous years Oct Visa Bulletins doesn't look encouraging at all, EB-3 India moved by a week and other categories move by a month or 2. With USCIS taking huge no. of applications in june'07 the future of oct'07 seems to be pretty bleak, It is quiet depressing. We surely need this legislation of ability to file 485 even if visa dates not current.
hair Tiger Woods - U.S. Open
jsb
11-26 03:17 PM
I have copy of that letter but it mentions the title and salary no job desc.
Possibly, that's what you need. If you can get a similar letter (same title with same, or a bit more, salary) from your new employer it should work.
Did you ever get (or ask for) your I-140 filing? It should have a copy of the LC application, and job description.
Possibly, that's what you need. If you can get a similar letter (same title with same, or a bit more, salary) from your new employer it should work.
Did you ever get (or ask for) your I-140 filing? It should have a copy of the LC application, and job description.
more...
StarSun
02-09 08:24 AM
Pappu
The link on your message to donate seems to be broken. can you check into it, or can I just donate to IV through Paypal.
Yes, you can use paypal. All one time donations go towards DC advocacy efforts.
Thanks.
The link on your message to donate seems to be broken. can you check into it, or can I just donate to IV through Paypal.
Yes, you can use paypal. All one time donations go towards DC advocacy efforts.
Thanks.
hot Maybe Tiger Woods is to big of
ilikekilo
04-30 01:09 PM
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=53
I guess it might be as well for eb3 ROW.. EB3I...well I would be happy if it moves fwd 6 months..
I guess it might be as well for eb3 ROW.. EB3I...well I would be happy if it moves fwd 6 months..
more...
house Tiger Woods golf swing in slow
panky72
09-17 05:42 PM
applied july 12 NSC, called IO today and got receipt no LIN-07259XXXXX eneterd into system on sept 13th. Checks not cashed yet!!!
tattoo Tiger Woods frame by frame
Macaca
04-06 01:36 PM
With deafening member response to financial contribution, contacting legislator and contacting media, we will be here very soon. Please contact reporter for professional help.
Some paras from Criteria for Depression Are Too Broad, Researchers Say Guidelines May Encompass Many Who Are Just Sad (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/02/AR2007040201693.html), By Shankar Vedantam (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/shankar+vedantam/), Washington Post Staff Writer, Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Up to 25 percent of people in whom psychiatrists would currently diagnose depression may only be reacting normally to stressful events such as a divorce or losing a job, according to a new analysis that reexamined how the standard diagnostic criteria are used.
The study also suggested that drug treatment may often be inappropriate for people who are experiencing painful -- but normal -- responses to life's stresses. Supportive therapy, on the other hand, may be useful -- and may keep someone who has been through a divorce or has lost a job from going on to develop full-blown depression.
The cost of not looking at context is you think anyone who comes under this diagnosis has a biological disorder, so should more or less automatically get antidepressant medication, and everything else is superfluous," said lead author Jerome Wakefield, a New York University researcher who studies the conceptual foundations of psychiatry. "There is a trend to treat people in this somewhat mechanized way."
Said First: "One issue this would play out at is at the level of medication. If someone has a normal grief reaction, you wouldn't give that person an antidepressant, you would favor counseling. If someone has major depression you would be more likely to medicate. So this could influence how clinicians think about medications or psychotherapy."
Some paras from Criteria for Depression Are Too Broad, Researchers Say Guidelines May Encompass Many Who Are Just Sad (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/02/AR2007040201693.html), By Shankar Vedantam (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/shankar+vedantam/), Washington Post Staff Writer, Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Up to 25 percent of people in whom psychiatrists would currently diagnose depression may only be reacting normally to stressful events such as a divorce or losing a job, according to a new analysis that reexamined how the standard diagnostic criteria are used.
The study also suggested that drug treatment may often be inappropriate for people who are experiencing painful -- but normal -- responses to life's stresses. Supportive therapy, on the other hand, may be useful -- and may keep someone who has been through a divorce or has lost a job from going on to develop full-blown depression.
The cost of not looking at context is you think anyone who comes under this diagnosis has a biological disorder, so should more or less automatically get antidepressant medication, and everything else is superfluous," said lead author Jerome Wakefield, a New York University researcher who studies the conceptual foundations of psychiatry. "There is a trend to treat people in this somewhat mechanized way."
Said First: "One issue this would play out at is at the level of medication. If someone has a normal grief reaction, you wouldn't give that person an antidepressant, you would favor counseling. If someone has major depression you would be more likely to medicate. So this could influence how clinicians think about medications or psychotherapy."
more...
pictures Tiger Woods snarling swing
sunny1000
07-08 08:08 PM
The case should not have been accepted if the lady does not have constitutional rights. Lets see if they reject the case on this basis after listening to Tancredo.
The following link may throw some light on what non-citizens are entitled under the U.S constitution.
http://www.slate.com/id/1008367/
------------------------------------------------------
explainer: Answers to your questions about the news.
Do Noncitizens Have Constitutional Rights?
Chris Suellentrop
Posted Thursday, Sept. 27, 2001, at 5:47 PM ET
Attorney General John Ashcroft wants the power to lock up immigrants suspected of terrorism and hold them indefinitely. Wouldn't this violate the Constitution?
Not necessarily. True, the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, even illegal immigrants. So an immigrant, legal or illegal, prosecuted under the criminal code has the right to due process, a speedy and public trial, and other rights protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. This fact sheet from the National Lawyers Guild outlines a host of rights afforded to immigrants and citizens alike. (There are a few rights reserved for citizens. Among them are the right to vote, the right to hold most federal jobs, and the right to run for political office.)
But immigration proceedings are matters of administrative law, not criminal law. (As a result, the consequence of violating your immigration status is not jail but deportation.) And Congress has nearly full authority to regulate immigration without interference from the courts. Because immigration is considered a matter of national security and foreign policy, the Supreme Court has long held that immigration law is largely immune from judicial review. Congress can make rules for immigrants that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens.
In 1952's Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, the Supreme Court upheld the right of Congress to expel noncitizens who were former Communists. "In recognizing this power and this responsibility of Congress, one does not in the remotest degree align oneself with fears unworthy of the American spirit or with hostility to the bracing air of the free spirit," Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote in his concurrence. "One merely recognizes that the place to resist unwise or cruel legislation touching aliens is the Congress, not this Court."
Still, immigrants facing deportation do have some rights. Most are entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge, representation by a lawyer (but not one that's paid for by the government), and interpretation for non-English-speakers. The government must provide "clear and convincing" evidence to deport someone (a lower standard than "beyond a reasonable doubt").
On the other hand, some immigrants who are suspected terrorists may not be allowed to confront the evidence against them. In 1996, Congress established the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, a secret tribunal that can examine classified evidence. (Interestingly, Congress mandated in the same law that an immigrant tried by the terrorist court would have the right to counsel at government expense.) But the Alien Terrorist Removal Court has never been used, and a Department of Justice spokesman said he isn't aware of any plans to use the terrorist court any time soon.
Next question?
Explainer thanks Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association; immigration lawyer David Leopold; Russ Bergeron of the Immigration and Naturalization Service; this American Civil Liberties Union report; and Dan Nelson of the Department of Justice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The following link may throw some light on what non-citizens are entitled under the U.S constitution.
http://www.slate.com/id/1008367/
------------------------------------------------------
explainer: Answers to your questions about the news.
Do Noncitizens Have Constitutional Rights?
Chris Suellentrop
Posted Thursday, Sept. 27, 2001, at 5:47 PM ET
Attorney General John Ashcroft wants the power to lock up immigrants suspected of terrorism and hold them indefinitely. Wouldn't this violate the Constitution?
Not necessarily. True, the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, even illegal immigrants. So an immigrant, legal or illegal, prosecuted under the criminal code has the right to due process, a speedy and public trial, and other rights protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. This fact sheet from the National Lawyers Guild outlines a host of rights afforded to immigrants and citizens alike. (There are a few rights reserved for citizens. Among them are the right to vote, the right to hold most federal jobs, and the right to run for political office.)
But immigration proceedings are matters of administrative law, not criminal law. (As a result, the consequence of violating your immigration status is not jail but deportation.) And Congress has nearly full authority to regulate immigration without interference from the courts. Because immigration is considered a matter of national security and foreign policy, the Supreme Court has long held that immigration law is largely immune from judicial review. Congress can make rules for immigrants that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens.
In 1952's Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, the Supreme Court upheld the right of Congress to expel noncitizens who were former Communists. "In recognizing this power and this responsibility of Congress, one does not in the remotest degree align oneself with fears unworthy of the American spirit or with hostility to the bracing air of the free spirit," Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote in his concurrence. "One merely recognizes that the place to resist unwise or cruel legislation touching aliens is the Congress, not this Court."
Still, immigrants facing deportation do have some rights. Most are entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge, representation by a lawyer (but not one that's paid for by the government), and interpretation for non-English-speakers. The government must provide "clear and convincing" evidence to deport someone (a lower standard than "beyond a reasonable doubt").
On the other hand, some immigrants who are suspected terrorists may not be allowed to confront the evidence against them. In 1996, Congress established the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, a secret tribunal that can examine classified evidence. (Interestingly, Congress mandated in the same law that an immigrant tried by the terrorist court would have the right to counsel at government expense.) But the Alien Terrorist Removal Court has never been used, and a Department of Justice spokesman said he isn't aware of any plans to use the terrorist court any time soon.
Next question?
Explainer thanks Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association; immigration lawyer David Leopold; Russ Bergeron of the Immigration and Naturalization Service; this American Civil Liberties Union report; and Dan Nelson of the Department of Justice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
dresses tiger woods top of golf swing
eb2_mumbai
08-09 10:22 AM
I think guys writing to individual congressmen will do nothing other than you getting a standard response that they empathize with your case. Here are some practical cases. Any eligible Eb3 person who can upconvert to eb2 should do it immediately. Second we need to educate USCIS about misuse of EB1 category where Project Managers are being included. Third is misuse of work experience in EB2 category where people have used fake experience letters to jack up their resume. USCIS should ask a sealed letter from some reputable background investigation company to validate the years and quality of experience that people claim they have same should be done to their degrees and certificates.
If we clean up the process the honest people will benefit from this. I am sure I will get lots of red for this but that will point to # of cheats on the forum who want to shut my voice
If we clean up the process the honest people will benefit from this. I am sure I will get lots of red for this but that will point to # of cheats on the forum who want to shut my voice
more...
makeup By Tiger Woods with Pete
glen
05-23 11:13 AM
Emails sent to FL Senators and the Senators on the list.
girlfriend Woods has classic posture.
gc_dream07
07-19 09:37 PM
I agree with move. I will participate. Please add EB1 also in the list. EB1 also should get the GC based on priority as the title of the thread says. Also remove the country quota. That will make it purely first come first serve basis. Everybody is treated equally irrespective of country or background.
hairstyles Tiger Woods Swing Sequence vs.
chmur
07-28 12:33 AM
No one can realistically claim a moral high ground here - neither EB2 nor EB3. and that includes me too! Each one of us here are looking for self interest, period. No amount of calls to empathy/sympathy/solidarity will change that.
For example, I'll get behind the whole "restore the old overflow logic for EB3" campaign in a heartbeat if we can have a consensus that EB3 will share the resulting overflow with EB3 other workers category too. EB3 other workers category is typically in worse shape than EB3-I so all the arguments presented here for EB3 (length of wait and frustration, unfairness of it all etc.) apply equally or more to the EB3 other workers. Any takers for this proposal?
So please see all this for what it is and stop the endless debate. You can not realistically expect EB2s to support any campaign that directly harm their interests. EB3s of course have every right to run whatever campaign they wish but also accept that it *will* split active IV membership (rare as it is) along those lines vertically. That's why the calls to stick to "common minimum program" of visa re-capture. Only those campaigns that don't have conflict of interests will be able to draw whole IV membership behind them. It's human nature - plain and simple.
Agreed. The resource(Visa numbers) is fixed and scarce. so it is natural that everyone will fight with whatever they can to access them , unless the resource is expanded (Recapture)
EB3-I will be foolish to expect EB2-I's to help them out .
IMO, IV has sensed this and maintained a dignified silence . They really cannot take a position on this and still function as objective forum .
I think none of us should force them either ...IV has larger objective of increasing the pie and we should all support it.
Where i disagree is why should EB3-I lobbying should split IV . I see no reason in that.
For example, I'll get behind the whole "restore the old overflow logic for EB3" campaign in a heartbeat if we can have a consensus that EB3 will share the resulting overflow with EB3 other workers category too. EB3 other workers category is typically in worse shape than EB3-I so all the arguments presented here for EB3 (length of wait and frustration, unfairness of it all etc.) apply equally or more to the EB3 other workers. Any takers for this proposal?
So please see all this for what it is and stop the endless debate. You can not realistically expect EB2s to support any campaign that directly harm their interests. EB3s of course have every right to run whatever campaign they wish but also accept that it *will* split active IV membership (rare as it is) along those lines vertically. That's why the calls to stick to "common minimum program" of visa re-capture. Only those campaigns that don't have conflict of interests will be able to draw whole IV membership behind them. It's human nature - plain and simple.
Agreed. The resource(Visa numbers) is fixed and scarce. so it is natural that everyone will fight with whatever they can to access them , unless the resource is expanded (Recapture)
EB3-I will be foolish to expect EB2-I's to help them out .
IMO, IV has sensed this and maintained a dignified silence . They really cannot take a position on this and still function as objective forum .
I think none of us should force them either ...IV has larger objective of increasing the pie and we should all support it.
Where i disagree is why should EB3-I lobbying should split IV . I see no reason in that.
EndlessWait
10-08 12:32 PM
Action item for IV, besides visa recapturing etc. Its one of the items they
should add to there agenda.
should add to there agenda.
chi_shark
07-09 02:55 PM
I have not heard of any rejection. But, the fact that you're receving 1099-MISC means that you're not full time. In fact, you're not even an employee for the company. If you receive an RFE, I assume you'll need to produce paystubs (which the OP don't have). In addition, you won't even get 1099-MISC until the year end. In short, no proof to overturn RFE.
IF the company can produce such a letter, technically it is a fraud since the OP is NOT a full-time employee. Replying to RFE with no proof and fraud intend won't fly.
Fittan
payslips are not "required" only thing needed is a proof that you have been offered a job that meets all those conditions we all know about. technically, you dont even need to be working when you get RFE... ac21 memo allows self employment very clearly and distinctly. however, it also allows for two things: 1) it allows the IO to ask whatever questions they want to ensure that the job is legitimate and not a fraud. 2) it allows the IO to investigate if there was truly an intention between the beneficiary and the petitioner who applied for I-140 at the time of filing for I-140 AND at the time of filing I-485 (if not con-current). Fortunately, the IO is limited to investigating all this only by means of RFE (i.e. he cannot send the FBI or CIA behind you).
the problem for you and for me is that all this shit has not been proven in court... will you be the first person to take this risk? if you respond to RFE and then they deny your 485 and then you fight a case to overturn that denial, then it will set a precedent in case law that can be applied to all of us... so, please do it and let us know! :-)
i incorporated last year but did not do any business... instead i took a full time job with a well known company... I am shutting down my inc this year... i have already responded to an RFE with an EVL from my employer... i wish they could clarify on this policy... as per AC21 memo, they dont have any problem with self employment...
IF the company can produce such a letter, technically it is a fraud since the OP is NOT a full-time employee. Replying to RFE with no proof and fraud intend won't fly.
Fittan
payslips are not "required" only thing needed is a proof that you have been offered a job that meets all those conditions we all know about. technically, you dont even need to be working when you get RFE... ac21 memo allows self employment very clearly and distinctly. however, it also allows for two things: 1) it allows the IO to ask whatever questions they want to ensure that the job is legitimate and not a fraud. 2) it allows the IO to investigate if there was truly an intention between the beneficiary and the petitioner who applied for I-140 at the time of filing for I-140 AND at the time of filing I-485 (if not con-current). Fortunately, the IO is limited to investigating all this only by means of RFE (i.e. he cannot send the FBI or CIA behind you).
the problem for you and for me is that all this shit has not been proven in court... will you be the first person to take this risk? if you respond to RFE and then they deny your 485 and then you fight a case to overturn that denial, then it will set a precedent in case law that can be applied to all of us... so, please do it and let us know! :-)
i incorporated last year but did not do any business... instead i took a full time job with a well known company... I am shutting down my inc this year... i have already responded to an RFE with an EVL from my employer... i wish they could clarify on this policy... as per AC21 memo, they dont have any problem with self employment...
No comments:
Post a Comment