panky72
06-26 11:16 PM
Hi,
Looks like TSC is working fast approving EAD renewals. How about NSC? Did any one get EAD renewal approved from NSC?
Thanks
When I applied for EAD in NSC (paper file) it took 45 days to approve. Now I applied EAD for spouse on June 10th, no update so far.
Looks like TSC is working fast approving EAD renewals. How about NSC? Did any one get EAD renewal approved from NSC?
Thanks
When I applied for EAD in NSC (paper file) it took 45 days to approve. Now I applied EAD for spouse on June 10th, no update so far.
wallpaper Valentine Coloring Page | A
m306m
05-28 06:19 PM
Please IM me when we hit $10K, I will donate another $100 to the cause.
Donated $200 so far to this cause..
Donated $200 so far to this cause..
bluekayal
03-17 10:57 AM
SEC. 406. VISAS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH ADVANCED DEGREES.
(a) Aliens With Certain Advanced Degrees Not Subject to Numerical Limitations on Employment Based Immigrants-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 201(b)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(F) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math and have been working in a related field in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 3-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).
`(G) Aliens described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 203(b)(1)(A) or who have received a national interest waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B).
`(H) The spouse and minor children of an alien who is admitted as an employment-based immigrant under section 203(b).'.
(2) APPLICABILITY- The amendment made by paragraph (1) shall apply to any visa application--
(A) pending on the date of the enactment of this Act; or
(B) filed on or after such date of enactment.
(b) Labor Certification- Section 212(a)(5)(A)(ii) (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(5)(A)(ii)) is amended--
(1) in subclause (I), by striking `or' at the end;
(2) in subclause (II), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; or'; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
`(III) has an advanced degree in the sciences, technology, engineering, or mathematics from an accredited university in the United States and is employed in a field related to such degree.'.
(c) Temporary Workers- Section 214(g) (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking `(beginning with fiscal year 1992)'; and
(B) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) in clause (vii), by striking `each succeeding fiscal year; or' and inserting `each of fiscal years 2004, 2005, and 2006;'; and
(ii) by adding after clause (vii) the following:
`(viii) 115,000 in the first fiscal year beginning after the date of the enactment of this clause; and
`(ix) the number calculated under paragraph (9) in each fiscal year after the year described in clause (viii); or';
(2) in paragraph (5)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking `or' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; or'; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
`(D) has earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math.';
(3) by redesignating paragraphs (9), (10), and (11) as paragraphs (10), (11), and (12), respectively; and
(4) by inserting after paragraph (8) the following:
`(9) If the numerical limitation in paragraph (1)(A)--
`(A) is reached during a given fiscal year, the numerical limitation under paragraph (1)(A)(ix) for the subsequent fiscal year shall be equal to 120 percent of the numerical limitation of the given fiscal year; or
`(B) is not reached during a given fiscal year, the numerical limitation under paragraph (1)(A)(ix) for the subsequent fiscal year shall be equal to the numerical limitation of the given fiscal year.'.
(d) Applicability- The amendment made by subsection (c)(2) shall apply to any visa application--
(1) pending on the date of the enactment of this Act; or
(2) filed on or after such date of enactment.
(a) Aliens With Certain Advanced Degrees Not Subject to Numerical Limitations on Employment Based Immigrants-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 201(b)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(F) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math and have been working in a related field in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 3-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).
`(G) Aliens described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 203(b)(1)(A) or who have received a national interest waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B).
`(H) The spouse and minor children of an alien who is admitted as an employment-based immigrant under section 203(b).'.
(2) APPLICABILITY- The amendment made by paragraph (1) shall apply to any visa application--
(A) pending on the date of the enactment of this Act; or
(B) filed on or after such date of enactment.
(b) Labor Certification- Section 212(a)(5)(A)(ii) (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(5)(A)(ii)) is amended--
(1) in subclause (I), by striking `or' at the end;
(2) in subclause (II), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; or'; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
`(III) has an advanced degree in the sciences, technology, engineering, or mathematics from an accredited university in the United States and is employed in a field related to such degree.'.
(c) Temporary Workers- Section 214(g) (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking `(beginning with fiscal year 1992)'; and
(B) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) in clause (vii), by striking `each succeeding fiscal year; or' and inserting `each of fiscal years 2004, 2005, and 2006;'; and
(ii) by adding after clause (vii) the following:
`(viii) 115,000 in the first fiscal year beginning after the date of the enactment of this clause; and
`(ix) the number calculated under paragraph (9) in each fiscal year after the year described in clause (viii); or';
(2) in paragraph (5)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking `or' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; or'; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
`(D) has earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math.';
(3) by redesignating paragraphs (9), (10), and (11) as paragraphs (10), (11), and (12), respectively; and
(4) by inserting after paragraph (8) the following:
`(9) If the numerical limitation in paragraph (1)(A)--
`(A) is reached during a given fiscal year, the numerical limitation under paragraph (1)(A)(ix) for the subsequent fiscal year shall be equal to 120 percent of the numerical limitation of the given fiscal year; or
`(B) is not reached during a given fiscal year, the numerical limitation under paragraph (1)(A)(ix) for the subsequent fiscal year shall be equal to the numerical limitation of the given fiscal year.'.
(d) Applicability- The amendment made by subsection (c)(2) shall apply to any visa application--
(1) pending on the date of the enactment of this Act; or
(2) filed on or after such date of enactment.
2011 St valentine coloring pages
logiclife
09-25 12:04 PM
Your rights as a participant of a bulletin board or online forum like Immigration Voice forums:
The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)
What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED.
Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.
Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).
The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.
The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).
Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.
What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.
SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.
Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.
What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.
The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)
What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED.
Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.
Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).
The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.
The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).
Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.
What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.
SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.
Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.
What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.
more...
lskreddy
06-26 12:08 PM
Lets do the best we can. If it does not work, we are no worse than where we already are.
A group of us just went to Lamar Smith's Austin District Office and detailed his liason about the bills, benefits and information about IV. She said she will have them Fedex'd today to their Washington office and keep us informed about congressman's stand.
A group of us just went to Lamar Smith's Austin District Office and detailed his liason about the bills, benefits and information about IV. She said she will have them Fedex'd today to their Washington office and keep us informed about congressman's stand.
nrk
05-20 11:33 AM
letters sent
more...
bluekayal
03-17 10:54 AM
SEC. 405. STUDENT VISAS.
(a) In General- Section 101(a)(15)(F) (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F)) is amended--
(1) in clause (i)--
(A) by striking `he has no intention of abandoning, who is' and inserting the following: `except in the case of an alien described in clause (iv), the alien has no intention of abandoning, who is--
`(I)';
(B) by striking `consistent with section 214(l)' and inserting `(except for a graduate program described in clause (iv)) consistent with section 214(m)';
(C) by striking the comma at the end and inserting the following: `; or
`(II) engaged in temporary employment for optional practical training related to the alien's area of study, which practical training shall be authorized for a period or periods of up to 24 months;';
(2) in clause (ii)--
(A) by inserting `or (iv)' after `clause (i)'; and
(B) by striking `, and' and inserting a semicolon;
(3) in clause (iii), by adding `and' at the end; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
`(iv) an alien described in clause (i) who has been accepted and plans to attend an accredited graduate program in mathematics, engineering, technology, or the sciences in the United States for the purpose of obtaining an advanced degree.'.
(b) Admission of Nonimmigrants- Section 214(b) (8 U.S.C. 1184(b)) is amended by striking `subparagraph (L) or (V)' and inserting `subparagraph (F)(iv), (L), or (V)'.
(c) Requirements for F-4 Visa- Section 214(m) (8 U.S.C. 1184(m)) is amended--
(1) by inserting before paragraph (1) the following:
`(m) Nonimmigrant Elementary, Secondary, and Post-Secondary School Students- '; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
`(3) A visa issued to an alien under section 101(a)(15)(F)(iv) shall be valid--
`(A) during the intended period of study in a graduate program described in such section;
`(B) for an additional period, not to exceed 1 year after the completion of the graduate program, if the alien is actively pursuing an offer of employment related to the knowledge and skills obtained through the graduate program; and
`(C) for the additional period necessary for the adjudication of any application for labor certification, employment-based immigrant petition, and application under section 245(a)(2) to adjust such alien's status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, if such application for labor certification or employment-based immigrant petition has been filed not later than 1 year after the completion of the graduate program.'.
(d) Off Campus Work Authorization for Foreign Students-
(1) IN GENERAL- Aliens admitted as nonimmigrant students described in section 101(a)(15)(F) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F)) may be employed in an off-campus position unrelated to the alien's field of study if--
(A) the alien has enrolled full time at the educational institution and is maintaining good academic standing;
(B) the employer provides the educational institution and the Secretary of Labor with an attestation that the employer--
(i) has spent at least 21 days recruiting United States citizens to fill the position; and
(ii) will pay the alien and other similarly situated workers at a rate equal to not less than the greater of--
(I) the actual wage level for the occupation at the place of employment; or
(II) the prevailing wage level for the occupation in the area of employment; and
(C) the alien will not be employed more than--
(i) 20 hours per week during the academic term; or
(ii) 40 hours per week during vacation periods and between academic terms.
(2) DISQUALIFICATION- If the Secretary of Labor determines that an employer has provided an attestation under paragraph (1)(B) that is materially false or has failed to pay wages in accordance with the attestation, the employer, after notice and opportunity for a hearing, shall be disqualified from employing an alien student under paragraph (1).
(e) Adjustment of Status- Section 245(a) (8 U.S.C. 1255(a)) is amended to read as follows:
`(a) Authorization-
`(1) IN GENERAL- The status of an alien, who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States, or who has an approved petition for classification under subparagraph (A)(iii), (A)(iv), (B)(ii), or (B)(iii) of section 204(a)(1), may be adjusted by the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General, under such regulations as the Secretary or the Attorney General may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if--
`(A) the alien makes an application for such adjustment;
`(B) the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa;
`(C) the alien is admissible to the United States for permanent residence; and
`(D) an immigrant visa is immediately available to the alien at the time the application is filed.
`(2) STUDENT VISAS- Notwithstanding the requirement under paragraph (1)(C), an alien may file an application for adjustment of status under this section if--
`(A) the alien has been issued a visa or otherwise provided nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15)(F)(iv), or would have qualified for such nonimmigrant status if section 101(a)(15)(F)(iv) had been enacted before such alien's graduation;
`(B) the alien has earned an advanced degree in the sciences, technology, engineering, or mathematics;
`(C) the alien is the beneficiary of a petition filed under subparagraph (E) or (F) of section 204(a)(1); and
`(D) a fee of $1,000 is remitted to the Secretary on behalf of the alien.
`(3) LIMITATION- An application for adjustment of status filed under this section may not be approved until an immigrant visa number becomes available.'.
(f) Use of Fees-
(1) JOB TRAINING; SCHOLARSHIPS- Section 286(s)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1356(s)(1)) is amended by inserting `and 80 percent of the fees collected under section 245(a)(2)(D)' before the period at the end.
(2) FRAUD PREVENTION AND DETECTION- Section 286(v)(1) (8 U.S.C.
1356(v)(1)) is amended by inserting `and 20 percent of the fees collected under section 245(a)(2)(D)' before the period at the end.
(a) In General- Section 101(a)(15)(F) (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F)) is amended--
(1) in clause (i)--
(A) by striking `he has no intention of abandoning, who is' and inserting the following: `except in the case of an alien described in clause (iv), the alien has no intention of abandoning, who is--
`(I)';
(B) by striking `consistent with section 214(l)' and inserting `(except for a graduate program described in clause (iv)) consistent with section 214(m)';
(C) by striking the comma at the end and inserting the following: `; or
`(II) engaged in temporary employment for optional practical training related to the alien's area of study, which practical training shall be authorized for a period or periods of up to 24 months;';
(2) in clause (ii)--
(A) by inserting `or (iv)' after `clause (i)'; and
(B) by striking `, and' and inserting a semicolon;
(3) in clause (iii), by adding `and' at the end; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
`(iv) an alien described in clause (i) who has been accepted and plans to attend an accredited graduate program in mathematics, engineering, technology, or the sciences in the United States for the purpose of obtaining an advanced degree.'.
(b) Admission of Nonimmigrants- Section 214(b) (8 U.S.C. 1184(b)) is amended by striking `subparagraph (L) or (V)' and inserting `subparagraph (F)(iv), (L), or (V)'.
(c) Requirements for F-4 Visa- Section 214(m) (8 U.S.C. 1184(m)) is amended--
(1) by inserting before paragraph (1) the following:
`(m) Nonimmigrant Elementary, Secondary, and Post-Secondary School Students- '; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
`(3) A visa issued to an alien under section 101(a)(15)(F)(iv) shall be valid--
`(A) during the intended period of study in a graduate program described in such section;
`(B) for an additional period, not to exceed 1 year after the completion of the graduate program, if the alien is actively pursuing an offer of employment related to the knowledge and skills obtained through the graduate program; and
`(C) for the additional period necessary for the adjudication of any application for labor certification, employment-based immigrant petition, and application under section 245(a)(2) to adjust such alien's status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, if such application for labor certification or employment-based immigrant petition has been filed not later than 1 year after the completion of the graduate program.'.
(d) Off Campus Work Authorization for Foreign Students-
(1) IN GENERAL- Aliens admitted as nonimmigrant students described in section 101(a)(15)(F) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F)) may be employed in an off-campus position unrelated to the alien's field of study if--
(A) the alien has enrolled full time at the educational institution and is maintaining good academic standing;
(B) the employer provides the educational institution and the Secretary of Labor with an attestation that the employer--
(i) has spent at least 21 days recruiting United States citizens to fill the position; and
(ii) will pay the alien and other similarly situated workers at a rate equal to not less than the greater of--
(I) the actual wage level for the occupation at the place of employment; or
(II) the prevailing wage level for the occupation in the area of employment; and
(C) the alien will not be employed more than--
(i) 20 hours per week during the academic term; or
(ii) 40 hours per week during vacation periods and between academic terms.
(2) DISQUALIFICATION- If the Secretary of Labor determines that an employer has provided an attestation under paragraph (1)(B) that is materially false or has failed to pay wages in accordance with the attestation, the employer, after notice and opportunity for a hearing, shall be disqualified from employing an alien student under paragraph (1).
(e) Adjustment of Status- Section 245(a) (8 U.S.C. 1255(a)) is amended to read as follows:
`(a) Authorization-
`(1) IN GENERAL- The status of an alien, who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States, or who has an approved petition for classification under subparagraph (A)(iii), (A)(iv), (B)(ii), or (B)(iii) of section 204(a)(1), may be adjusted by the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General, under such regulations as the Secretary or the Attorney General may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if--
`(A) the alien makes an application for such adjustment;
`(B) the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa;
`(C) the alien is admissible to the United States for permanent residence; and
`(D) an immigrant visa is immediately available to the alien at the time the application is filed.
`(2) STUDENT VISAS- Notwithstanding the requirement under paragraph (1)(C), an alien may file an application for adjustment of status under this section if--
`(A) the alien has been issued a visa or otherwise provided nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15)(F)(iv), or would have qualified for such nonimmigrant status if section 101(a)(15)(F)(iv) had been enacted before such alien's graduation;
`(B) the alien has earned an advanced degree in the sciences, technology, engineering, or mathematics;
`(C) the alien is the beneficiary of a petition filed under subparagraph (E) or (F) of section 204(a)(1); and
`(D) a fee of $1,000 is remitted to the Secretary on behalf of the alien.
`(3) LIMITATION- An application for adjustment of status filed under this section may not be approved until an immigrant visa number becomes available.'.
(f) Use of Fees-
(1) JOB TRAINING; SCHOLARSHIPS- Section 286(s)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1356(s)(1)) is amended by inserting `and 80 percent of the fees collected under section 245(a)(2)(D)' before the period at the end.
(2) FRAUD PREVENTION AND DETECTION- Section 286(v)(1) (8 U.S.C.
1356(v)(1)) is amended by inserting `and 20 percent of the fees collected under section 245(a)(2)(D)' before the period at the end.
2010 Valentine#39;s Day Coloring Pages
av2004
05-19 11:04 AM
I sent the messages to my senators yesterday and also asked a few of my friends and colleagues to do the same.. Hoping for something positive!!
more...
nk2
06-13 07:24 PM
Still waiting for my Labor, But I am excited and happy for others who can apply now.
Hearty Congratulations!!
Hearty Congratulations!!
hair Coloring Pages |; Valentine#39;s
browncow
05-30 11:57 AM
I don't like getting my ass kicked. Hence, I refuse to fly Air India.
Last time I flew that Airline (Boston - Heathrow - Mumbai):
1. The crew disembarked at Heathrow. The transit passengers were not allowed to disembark.
2. The crew shut off the heat/power and opened the Aircraft doors (yes, it was winter).
3. They sent the cleaning staff in to clean/vaccum the plane with a lot of passengers seated.
4. At Mumbai, the airhostess was in some sort of a hurry shoving the passengers so that she could disembark first.
I've never had such experiences with AF. They are not racist. Airlines are not allowed to issue transit visas and anyone who has lived in France can tell you how insensitive and lazy their bureaucracy is.
Bad flying experiences do not equate to racism. It is strong word to use and I do not think it applies to this case. Yes, I have seen French show racism towards Africans, but this is not one such case.
There is a reason why Indians are required to take a transit visa. Coz, in the past there have been Indians (at EU airports) who have claimed that they have lost their memory, do not remember who they are, don't have any ID and hence qualify for asylum on medical grounds. Now these gov'ts are requiring ALL Indians to have a transit visa so that if anyone pulls such antics, they have all the information that they need to identify the individual and deport. Some bad apples have f&^%ed it up for all of us.
BR
I agree on your points of AF following the process.
But the burden here lies on the Airline Carrier, regardless of whether Indians have suddenly lost their passports or their memories, you simply cannot categorize everyone.
And this exact attitude is why we dont respect each other.
Oh, he is acting of being ill, or he is acting that he lost his passport. OR that indian is just lying that he never got his transit visa.
Even if this was true, it is the airport authorities at CDG or AF staff that should be managing that. Bcos of some history, every indian was treated like a dog?
And it is shitty that you are siding the AF guys, when your countrymen were illtreated. The attitude should be, I will first take care of my own brother and believe what he says, rather than going into the righteousness, which can be bent.
I will bring an incident from the Clinton administration.
There was this american arrested in Singapore for eating and spitting chewing gum on the streets of the city.
The president personally called the PM of singapore and got this person out, who was just an ordinary cirtizen, who actually had broken the law of another country.
So, I will believe whatever the Indian is saying over what the AF guys is saying. period.
Last time I flew that Airline (Boston - Heathrow - Mumbai):
1. The crew disembarked at Heathrow. The transit passengers were not allowed to disembark.
2. The crew shut off the heat/power and opened the Aircraft doors (yes, it was winter).
3. They sent the cleaning staff in to clean/vaccum the plane with a lot of passengers seated.
4. At Mumbai, the airhostess was in some sort of a hurry shoving the passengers so that she could disembark first.
I've never had such experiences with AF. They are not racist. Airlines are not allowed to issue transit visas and anyone who has lived in France can tell you how insensitive and lazy their bureaucracy is.
Bad flying experiences do not equate to racism. It is strong word to use and I do not think it applies to this case. Yes, I have seen French show racism towards Africans, but this is not one such case.
There is a reason why Indians are required to take a transit visa. Coz, in the past there have been Indians (at EU airports) who have claimed that they have lost their memory, do not remember who they are, don't have any ID and hence qualify for asylum on medical grounds. Now these gov'ts are requiring ALL Indians to have a transit visa so that if anyone pulls such antics, they have all the information that they need to identify the individual and deport. Some bad apples have f&^%ed it up for all of us.
BR
I agree on your points of AF following the process.
But the burden here lies on the Airline Carrier, regardless of whether Indians have suddenly lost their passports or their memories, you simply cannot categorize everyone.
And this exact attitude is why we dont respect each other.
Oh, he is acting of being ill, or he is acting that he lost his passport. OR that indian is just lying that he never got his transit visa.
Even if this was true, it is the airport authorities at CDG or AF staff that should be managing that. Bcos of some history, every indian was treated like a dog?
And it is shitty that you are siding the AF guys, when your countrymen were illtreated. The attitude should be, I will first take care of my own brother and believe what he says, rather than going into the righteousness, which can be bent.
I will bring an incident from the Clinton administration.
There was this american arrested in Singapore for eating and spitting chewing gum on the streets of the city.
The president personally called the PM of singapore and got this person out, who was just an ordinary cirtizen, who actually had broken the law of another country.
So, I will believe whatever the Indian is saying over what the AF guys is saying. period.
more...
gk_2000
03-27 10:21 AM
You came here 6 years ago and applied for your GC only in 2010. Didnt you find an employer who would file one for you. And you also know if your GC gets screwed for some reason, then you are out of the US also.
Looks like something is missing, Dear.
6 years ago, in 2004 (2010 minus 6 years), there was no retrogression. And you didnt apply though you had an option. Very very funny.
Tell me, what are the facts.
This is merely a sampling of how people think when there is no unnatural pressure. If dates are retrogressed, you feel you better apply, whether you are interested or not --just in case. If dates are OK, you feel "let me wait and see if I like it here or not". Just a case of group thinking IMO
Looks like something is missing, Dear.
6 years ago, in 2004 (2010 minus 6 years), there was no retrogression. And you didnt apply though you had an option. Very very funny.
Tell me, what are the facts.
This is merely a sampling of how people think when there is no unnatural pressure. If dates are retrogressed, you feel you better apply, whether you are interested or not --just in case. If dates are OK, you feel "let me wait and see if I like it here or not". Just a case of group thinking IMO
hot Coloring page Valentine hearts
dreamworld
06-14 02:58 AM
Sure, though I am not back from a party... IT IS INDEED PARTY TIME FOR MANY :D
My question was more specific, with dates being current, can you apply for 485 on any day of next month July.
I suppose the next bulletin for Aug (that may probably be released 10 or 11 July) will be only effective since Aug 1st.
Please confirm.
Yes. If your visa is current in July. Then you have whole July to apply. Even if you deliver on Sundays. but i have no idea whether they accept application on Sunday's..
My question was more specific, with dates being current, can you apply for 485 on any day of next month July.
I suppose the next bulletin for Aug (that may probably be released 10 or 11 July) will be only effective since Aug 1st.
Please confirm.
Yes. If your visa is current in July. Then you have whole July to apply. Even if you deliver on Sundays. but i have no idea whether they accept application on Sunday's..
more...
house All Holiday Coloring Pages
sr123
02-12 11:40 PM
posted a reply.
tattoo Valentine Cupid Coloring Page
pansworld
12-10 01:31 PM
Thanks. I plan to go on a recruitment drive. Just have not put a plan together yet. Please share as many experiences as you can.
IV is more than a website. We are trying to build a grassroots organization. Things are taking place offline as well.
It takes time to build the base. Strengthening the state chapters is one of the best thing we can do. Our first chapter meeting was very small as well but we will build from there. More members are forthcoming to meet lawmakers now.
pansworld: I might be able to help reach out to more people in NM
IV is more than a website. We are trying to build a grassroots organization. Things are taking place offline as well.
It takes time to build the base. Strengthening the state chapters is one of the best thing we can do. Our first chapter meeting was very small as well but we will build from there. More members are forthcoming to meet lawmakers now.
pansworld: I might be able to help reach out to more people in NM
more...
pictures valentines coloring pages 2
njboy
06-29 09:43 PM
God bless him
dresses Valentine Coloring Pages
Abhinaym
01-13 02:48 PM
my friend.. thanx for your kind words
u and ur non-retrogressed friend have my support for an expedited process since u got US advanced degree that make u better suited for this market.. u should be talking STEM.. i am talking about the disparity in available opportunities to come here back in our homelands. Individual examples aside, I trust statistics, you'll find that each year a handful of giant offshoring companies grab more than half the H1 quota.. is it my streotyping imagination that infosys, wipro and satyam don't hold job fairs in Romania and they only make these opportunities available in retrogressed countries?
Hello! Infosys, Wipro and all those companies are NOT the main sponsors of green cards, which is the reason we're in this forum, no? Most of the sponsors are US based small and medium sized companies.
I don't care how many visas they get, the fact is that it doesn't affect me! I neither have a job with them nor I benefited from them grabbing a bulk of visas. End of the day I'm held back because of where I was born.
Look, this may be hard for you to understand, but just because those companies are in my country didn't and doesn't help me one iota. Everyone's on their own here.
Thanks for understanding that I have an advanced degree.
and don't give me the condescending excuse that if these companies only hire in retrogressed companies then talented, educated people must only exist in the retrogressed countries.
Anyway, i had this discussion many times here .. radical issue where people hardly change their minds..
peace..
That is ridiculous. I never said that nor I will. The reason is because those companies MORE people exist in those countries, and THEY'RE CHEAPER and poorer, that's something I do expect you to understand.
Did stereotyping help you in your discussions earlier?
u and ur non-retrogressed friend have my support for an expedited process since u got US advanced degree that make u better suited for this market.. u should be talking STEM.. i am talking about the disparity in available opportunities to come here back in our homelands. Individual examples aside, I trust statistics, you'll find that each year a handful of giant offshoring companies grab more than half the H1 quota.. is it my streotyping imagination that infosys, wipro and satyam don't hold job fairs in Romania and they only make these opportunities available in retrogressed countries?
Hello! Infosys, Wipro and all those companies are NOT the main sponsors of green cards, which is the reason we're in this forum, no? Most of the sponsors are US based small and medium sized companies.
I don't care how many visas they get, the fact is that it doesn't affect me! I neither have a job with them nor I benefited from them grabbing a bulk of visas. End of the day I'm held back because of where I was born.
Look, this may be hard for you to understand, but just because those companies are in my country didn't and doesn't help me one iota. Everyone's on their own here.
Thanks for understanding that I have an advanced degree.
and don't give me the condescending excuse that if these companies only hire in retrogressed companies then talented, educated people must only exist in the retrogressed countries.
Anyway, i had this discussion many times here .. radical issue where people hardly change their minds..
peace..
That is ridiculous. I never said that nor I will. The reason is because those companies MORE people exist in those countries, and THEY'RE CHEAPER and poorer, that's something I do expect you to understand.
Did stereotyping help you in your discussions earlier?
more...
makeup Printable Coloring Pages
gccovet
06-26 10:40 AM
Wow - Mine also went on the same day. No sign of EAD yet. I wish they handle it next week so that I get 2 years :)
I sent my AP on same date too and I have soft LUD today. Not sure what it means
same here.
(paper filed, TSC)
GCCOvet
I sent my AP on same date too and I have soft LUD today. Not sure what it means
same here.
(paper filed, TSC)
GCCOvet
girlfriend coloring pages of hearts and
venetian
07-15 05:34 PM
I too have question on similar lines, probably it may have been already answered, i did not get a chance to see it.
Which one is correct?
Receipt date = Processing Date
Notice Date = Processing Date
can somebody explain the meaning of "processing date for I-485"? For example, the Texas service center has July 17 2007 processing date for I-485 petitions.
How to interpret that?
Thanks.
Which one is correct?
Receipt date = Processing Date
Notice Date = Processing Date
can somebody explain the meaning of "processing date for I-485"? For example, the Texas service center has July 17 2007 processing date for I-485 petitions.
How to interpret that?
Thanks.
hairstyles Valentine Day coloring pages
neamoni
08-03 02:51 PM
My experience is that whether an attorney is good or bad depends on the size of the sponsoring company. My boyfriend was working for a big company and got a really great service with Ogletree Deakins who have offices all over the US. When I was experiencing problems with my attorney, he highly recommended Ogletree and my employer contacted them, and our experience was really bad - they promised a lot of things, then realized it was a small company and was not so interested anymore.
That's why after LC got approved, we decided to file everything pro-se. We have had 3 different attorneys. My case started in 2001 and got stuck in BEC and a PERM case was filed to try to capture my PD from 01, and by looking at my signature you can guess what happened. So, lots of experience with attorneys, not one that could recommend.
That's why after LC got approved, we decided to file everything pro-se. We have had 3 different attorneys. My case started in 2001 and got stuck in BEC and a PERM case was filed to try to capture my PD from 01, and by looking at my signature you can guess what happened. So, lots of experience with attorneys, not one that could recommend.
BharatPremi
12-10 05:04 PM
Shifting from the internet model would be failure in terms of the numbers which we really are looking for.
State boards are kind of semi internet usgae only (Though not forum...). But those also do not make passive ones come ahead. So real issue is not the type of meet, the first real issue is feeling that you are in trouble..and 2nd is to stand up for fighting against that. And 3rd.. yes through IV we will be able to do this and so become active.
State boards are kind of semi internet usgae only (Though not forum...). But those also do not make passive ones come ahead. So real issue is not the type of meet, the first real issue is feeling that you are in trouble..and 2nd is to stand up for fighting against that. And 3rd.. yes through IV we will be able to do this and so become active.
addsf345
01-12 06:26 PM
Hi All,
I got a notice from uscis on sept 24th stating that my 485 has been withdrawn as my previous employer withdrew my 140. I filed in july 2007 , and ported to a new job in April 2008. I filed an MTR on 24th Sept, but the status of the MTR is still received and pending. Its going to be 180 days since my 485 has been withdrawn on march 9th. And my lawyer is saying that i have to leave this country if we dont get the MTR accepted before 180 days.
Gurus could you please suggest some ideas on all possible steps that can be taken..
Thanks
As per my knowledge, your lawyer waited too long and he/she may not be very well versed in immigration matters. When MTR is pending and If you do not receive anything within 60 to 90 days, you should immediately file an appeal in court. This is what I read on some forums, but I am not a lawyer, consult a good attorney soon. You need a seasoned professional immigration lawyer for this. Wish you very best of luck!
I got a notice from uscis on sept 24th stating that my 485 has been withdrawn as my previous employer withdrew my 140. I filed in july 2007 , and ported to a new job in April 2008. I filed an MTR on 24th Sept, but the status of the MTR is still received and pending. Its going to be 180 days since my 485 has been withdrawn on march 9th. And my lawyer is saying that i have to leave this country if we dont get the MTR accepted before 180 days.
Gurus could you please suggest some ideas on all possible steps that can be taken..
Thanks
As per my knowledge, your lawyer waited too long and he/she may not be very well versed in immigration matters. When MTR is pending and If you do not receive anything within 60 to 90 days, you should immediately file an appeal in court. This is what I read on some forums, but I am not a lawyer, consult a good attorney soon. You need a seasoned professional immigration lawyer for this. Wish you very best of luck!
No comments:
Post a Comment