shortchanged
08-28 12:14 PM
Now that I do have receipts- should I go ahead and stop payment on the 2nd set??
I would wait until your money is actually deducted from the bank account to be 100% sure that there is no issue with regards to your checks.Then possibly you could ask for stop payments on your check.
Actually I have read before in UsCIS site that they will try to resubmit the check one more time before rejecting or accepting the forms.So hopefully they will resubmit it again, and since you have reversed your stop payment everything should be OK with your july2 filing. Again it is very reassuring that you have got the Receipts, and that is a sign that it was indeed properly filed, because they reject anything which was improperly filed.
In my case the money is already deducted from the bank account, and I have check cashed images online. so I have asked for stoppayments,yeah it cost me 150 bucks for 5 checks ouch...
I would wait until your money is actually deducted from the bank account to be 100% sure that there is no issue with regards to your checks.Then possibly you could ask for stop payments on your check.
Actually I have read before in UsCIS site that they will try to resubmit the check one more time before rejecting or accepting the forms.So hopefully they will resubmit it again, and since you have reversed your stop payment everything should be OK with your july2 filing. Again it is very reassuring that you have got the Receipts, and that is a sign that it was indeed properly filed, because they reject anything which was improperly filed.
In my case the money is already deducted from the bank account, and I have check cashed images online. so I have asked for stoppayments,yeah it cost me 150 bucks for 5 checks ouch...
wallpaper Last night, Dianna Agron
vrbest
09-09 10:42 AM
Looks like you missed to check it before you went thru hospital. It is always advisable to apply Birth Certificate thru Hospital and apply SSN yourself at the SSN office.. This way you will get your SSN within 2 weeks of you applying SSN. Many times hospital staffs explain this unfortunately you did not get this msg.. You can call SSN office and see if you can get SSN over phone.
Good Luck!
Thanks for your responses. The hospital staff told us it would take 60-90 days to get the SSN. I am stuck until that arrives because only then can I apply for the passport. Any way to get around it?
Good Luck!
Thanks for your responses. The hospital staff told us it would take 60-90 days to get the SSN. I am stuck until that arrives because only then can I apply for the passport. Any way to get around it?
anilsal
12-20 11:47 PM
the question is are jon and stephen interested? if they are and they invite lou or sessions, and they dont accept, chances are they will get the treatment bill o'reilly/dr phil/oprah got from letterman before they showed: every night a constant reference and poking fun at them until they succumbed.
Point taken. Where do we get Jon/Stephen's contact information?
Point taken. Where do we get Jon/Stephen's contact information?
2011 Dianna Agron and Alex Pettyfer
hdos
06-10 05:00 PM
What if my employer does not respond at all.
What are the chances for the extension? there must be some way.
How can I buy some more time so that I can find some other way around?
What are the chances for the extension? there must be some way.
How can I buy some more time so that I can find some other way around?
more...
sayantan76
04-09 07:44 PM
I would answer this:
The best realtor is the one who can give you some money back from his commission...:)
Dont rely on the realtor to determine the home price for you. DO some homework...compare homes in the vicinity and come up with a price thats reasonable and mos importantly AFFORDABLE to you.
Is it legal for a licensed real estate agent to share commission with a non licensed person - like a buyer?
The best realtor is the one who can give you some money back from his commission...:)
Dont rely on the realtor to determine the home price for you. DO some homework...compare homes in the vicinity and come up with a price thats reasonable and mos importantly AFFORDABLE to you.
Is it legal for a licensed real estate agent to share commission with a non licensed person - like a buyer?
jasmin45
07-12 08:46 PM
Lets discuss this after we deal with July Feasco. no offence to you as you are free to keep moving this post of yours... its just my oppinion and of most in this thread as well.. One issue at a time!
more...
reno_john
06-11 12:01 PM
Asked Core Iv A Question And They Deleted The Thread
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I asked IV core on what version of immigration bill they support because I and other people wanted to know since there are so many amendments to the current immigration bill and Now I log in to see , the thread is missing, why, my question was straight forward, again I am asking them on what form of immigration bill they support. I highly doubt In what they are doing looks like they are working for the benefit of them self. Guys please don�t be ignorant and its your right to ask the question don�t be a dumb crowd but ask questions.
I am too in the same GC queue with I140 and I485 filed and pending, so don�t count me as anti � immigrant but also want to see the betterment of others too who are in GC process and will be effected due to the introduction of the new bill.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I asked IV core on what version of immigration bill they support because I and other people wanted to know since there are so many amendments to the current immigration bill and Now I log in to see , the thread is missing, why, my question was straight forward, again I am asking them on what form of immigration bill they support. I highly doubt In what they are doing looks like they are working for the benefit of them self. Guys please don�t be ignorant and its your right to ask the question don�t be a dumb crowd but ask questions.
I am too in the same GC queue with I140 and I485 filed and pending, so don�t count me as anti � immigrant but also want to see the betterment of others too who are in GC process and will be effected due to the introduction of the new bill.
2010 dianna agron and alex pettyfer
EndlessWait
07-09 12:26 PM
I know its hard to get it noticed, but in order to make a real impact, we must strive to put this news on the front page of major media, while its sill hot. Last week CNN had an article on the front page regarding the "plight of hindu widows". I was baffled to see an article like that get the headline space and not a small comment from CNN about the JULY VB fiasco.
more...
madan
01-12 08:22 AM
Thank you very much for the Information...
We need like you people who help others...
i will do this once coming back from india.
Thank you again
We need like you people who help others...
i will do this once coming back from india.
Thank you again
hair Dianna Agron is the February
gcformeornot
12-06 12:24 PM
case transfered from CSC to NSC. See signature for details.
more...
Blog Feeds
10-15 06:30 PM
[Federal Register: October 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 192)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
hot alex pettyfer dianna agron
injrav
07-27 03:02 PM
Hi
What is Unit? can I consider it as CREDIT?
if it is credit, then I believe it will take approximately 11k to complete MS in computer science
Thanks
What is Unit? can I consider it as CREDIT?
if it is credit, then I believe it will take approximately 11k to complete MS in computer science
Thanks
more...
house dianna agron and alex pettyfer kiss. dianna agron and alex pettyfer
eb2dec2005
02-24 03:01 PM
I did not see any updates on my I140 but just the update on my already approved H1b case.
If my employer has decided to revoke my I140, would i be able to find out , incase he doesn't inform me?
If my employer has decided to revoke my I140, would i be able to find out , incase he doesn't inform me?
tattoo Lea Michele and Dianna Agron
TomPlate
07-17 10:35 PM
You should not have a problem. But you will get an RFE and then you need to complete. But good if you can get medical examination completed, because almost everyone would have put that shot in India. Convey your doctor to say yes and complete it.
more...
pictures Dianna Agron and Alex Pettyfer
letstalklc
09-04 04:14 PM
I have applied for extension in June this year and got approved (July itself) for 3 years without any RFE based on I-140 approval.....
dresses dianna agron and alex pettyfer kissing. Aug dianna agron watches in
jungalee43
01-17 02:20 PM
I voted on this. But I did not see any vote for elimination of country qouta in EB immigration system. We need that topic on change.gov and should vote heavily in favour of it.
more...
makeup dianna agron and alex pettyfer kissing. Dianna Agron Alex Pettyfer
indianabacklog
08-06 08:22 AM
oh sorry it was approved on october 2003 not 2002.
In which case you had until October 2004 to apply for permanent residency. i.e. one year from approval of the I140.
In which case you had until October 2004 to apply for permanent residency. i.e. one year from approval of the I140.
girlfriend Dianna Agron and Alex
casinoroyale
01-12 07:55 PM
As per my reading one can re-enter on AP. But do remember that the CBP officer at the port of entry notices that once case is under security check or something he may create issues. But in general i don't think this is the case. One of my friend who was stuck with security check entered using AP. I know him personally so this is for fact happend.
As per several murthy chat items, Sheela Murthy also thinks one can enter on AP if their H1B visa stamp is rejected to getting delayed.
But do remember that, your status will change from H1B to PAROLE once you enter using AP. But hey, you can alwyas change it back to H1B once you get the visa.
One of my personal concerns about this approach (for which i don't have concrete answer), does the consulate consider your visa applicaton abondoned if they find out that the candidate has entered US?
(not proof reading, plz ignore spelling and grammar mistakes)
As per several murthy chat items, Sheela Murthy also thinks one can enter on AP if their H1B visa stamp is rejected to getting delayed.
But do remember that, your status will change from H1B to PAROLE once you enter using AP. But hey, you can alwyas change it back to H1B once you get the visa.
One of my personal concerns about this approach (for which i don't have concrete answer), does the consulate consider your visa applicaton abondoned if they find out that the candidate has entered US?
(not proof reading, plz ignore spelling and grammar mistakes)
hairstyles Are Dianna Agron and Alex
ramidiskr
01-09 04:19 PM
I am in similar situation,
But my wife will not be having a valid visa while returning and she will not have her AP before leaving US.?
I would mail the AP once it is approved and can she come back with AP?
I would be maintaining my H-1 status all the way through......
Please advise!!!
But my wife will not be having a valid visa while returning and she will not have her AP before leaving US.?
I would mail the AP once it is approved and can she come back with AP?
I would be maintaining my H-1 status all the way through......
Please advise!!!
vaishnavilakshmi
07-10 02:54 AM
DOS issued one more bulletine today on 9th July 2007 !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hi Krupa,
Dont just post something for fun here.And don't play with viewers in this forum who participate to seek some suggestions,information etc .Please don't mislead us anymore.
"Either try to help or just control urselves".
Vaishu
Hi Krupa,
Dont just post something for fun here.And don't play with viewers in this forum who participate to seek some suggestions,information etc .Please don't mislead us anymore.
"Either try to help or just control urselves".
Vaishu
kshitijnt
10-08 05:13 PM
In US the nice thing about SSA is unemployment and disability security.
But 10 years is a long time to wait on a temporary visa to get your social security back.. There were some discussions to reduce this to 3 years but that talk is dead now.
In India, the best part is 100% compulsory employer contribution. But
Indian PF sucks with rising inflation and lack of accountability.
And we all know how the employers would "Package" their "contribution".
This latest development will sting Indian origin GC holders and US citizens who go back to work in India and MNC employees working abroad.
What are you talking about? My parents retired with good benefits from GPF and PPF (no stock investment). In the article is was estimated that Indian workers are contributing $1.5 Billion dollars in SSA taxes each year. Not everyone works here for 10 years to get the benefits. Hence its only natural for India to charge US citizens working in India if repatriation of benefits is not allowed.
But 10 years is a long time to wait on a temporary visa to get your social security back.. There were some discussions to reduce this to 3 years but that talk is dead now.
In India, the best part is 100% compulsory employer contribution. But
Indian PF sucks with rising inflation and lack of accountability.
And we all know how the employers would "Package" their "contribution".
This latest development will sting Indian origin GC holders and US citizens who go back to work in India and MNC employees working abroad.
What are you talking about? My parents retired with good benefits from GPF and PPF (no stock investment). In the article is was estimated that Indian workers are contributing $1.5 Billion dollars in SSA taxes each year. Not everyone works here for 10 years to get the benefits. Hence its only natural for India to charge US citizens working in India if repatriation of benefits is not allowed.
No comments:
Post a Comment