feedfront
10-12 01:33 PM
feedfront
I got an RFE on my 485 on Oct 6th. But I haven't received the letter yet. But, since my TB test turned positive and I had to take an X-ray, I'm wondering if I would get the same RFE on my 485 too. I haven't changed employers nor had any H1B breaks in my 12 year stint here. So, I'm wondering if it would be the same RFE as yours.
In case of an X-Ray missing, couldn't we contact the doctor's office where we did our tests and ask them to mail it again? Or should we do it once again now? I did my tests in 2004, so I'm not even sure if they have copies of my X-rays with them.
Please let me know.
Thanks,
Hi 'akilhere',
You should go for new medical report as last one is too old. For vaccinations, you can use your last report but for TB and other blood test, you should go for recent.
I'm not sure whether RFE would be for medical report. In my case, my civil surgeon was not in USCIS's current list of authorised civil surgeons and somehow, my x-ray report was missing from report also.
It may be EVL. In either case, it is easy work as you have not changed your employer (no AC-21 issue).
I got an RFE on my 485 on Oct 6th. But I haven't received the letter yet. But, since my TB test turned positive and I had to take an X-ray, I'm wondering if I would get the same RFE on my 485 too. I haven't changed employers nor had any H1B breaks in my 12 year stint here. So, I'm wondering if it would be the same RFE as yours.
In case of an X-Ray missing, couldn't we contact the doctor's office where we did our tests and ask them to mail it again? Or should we do it once again now? I did my tests in 2004, so I'm not even sure if they have copies of my X-rays with them.
Please let me know.
Thanks,
Hi 'akilhere',
You should go for new medical report as last one is too old. For vaccinations, you can use your last report but for TB and other blood test, you should go for recent.
I'm not sure whether RFE would be for medical report. In my case, my civil surgeon was not in USCIS's current list of authorised civil surgeons and somehow, my x-ray report was missing from report also.
It may be EVL. In either case, it is easy work as you have not changed your employer (no AC-21 issue).
wallpaper emo lovers holding hands. love
leoindiano
03-17 10:19 AM
EB2 India PD came only up till April 2004 before it retrogressed. There is no way anybody whose PD is between April to Sept 2004 could have applied before July 2007. They might have applied only in July 2007 when USCIS made EB2 PD current by mistake.
Before retrogression started in "October 2005 Bulletin, Nov 2005 effective", there are quite a few people who applied for I-485 and had PD upto sept 2004. Those cases are approved. I know couple of cases myself.
Before retrogression started in "October 2005 Bulletin, Nov 2005 effective", there are quite a few people who applied for I-485 and had PD upto sept 2004. Those cases are approved. I know couple of cases myself.
WillIWin?
07-24 12:24 PM
This is my law firm. Seems like they have submitted many applications (140 + 485 concurrently) WITHOUT the employment offer letter.
Anyone else with this firm ? Also I see that there are people who have already sent in their 485 applications. My 2 cents:
- Dont send in multiple 485s (with the same underlying I-140. Multiple 485s with multiple I-140s is fine). Higher chances of rejection than just a missing employment letter.
- If your lawyer is a relatively reputable firm, then chances are that they have done this in the past and have not had any issues. So chances are they know what they are doing.
Anyone else with this firm ? Also I see that there are people who have already sent in their 485 applications. My 2 cents:
- Dont send in multiple 485s (with the same underlying I-140. Multiple 485s with multiple I-140s is fine). Higher chances of rejection than just a missing employment letter.
- If your lawyer is a relatively reputable firm, then chances are that they have done this in the past and have not had any issues. So chances are they know what they are doing.
2011 Emo Lovers Holding Hands.
quizzer
04-04 04:57 PM
On hindsight i belive this bill would help clean the H1B system currently abused by many bodyshops.
It would pit lot of controls on these numerous small time companies who just file H1B's on the first day..get people on bench and wait to place them in big companies for a huge money.
This leads to lot of people not getting a chance to filre H1B even though they have good offers from fortune 500 companies.
I feel we should give credit to these 2 for coming out with this bill.
Thanks
It would pit lot of controls on these numerous small time companies who just file H1B's on the first day..get people on bench and wait to place them in big companies for a huge money.
This leads to lot of people not getting a chance to filre H1B even though they have good offers from fortune 500 companies.
I feel we should give credit to these 2 for coming out with this bill.
Thanks
more...
lvinaykumar
11-26 10:57 PM
My View
I started doing online MBA, the meterial was great and the course required real effort and i liked the program but i was not able to interact with people or learn from there experiences, we had group work but it was mostly to the point. I thought i can learn this stuff on my own with out paying huge amount of money.
Then after my first semister with online MBA, i did not feel like continuing, so i stated looking for part time programs as i need to continue with my job and applied for MEM (Masters in Engeenring Management) program in Northwestern, it is reasonable priced and covered most of the objectives i had in mind. Most of the professors are shared between Kellogg College and McCormick College which are highly ranked, so the quality of education is really great, I love this program and I really find a huge difference between online and part time.
Final Thought, I would any day do a on camps program either part time/full time but not a online program in Management, For technical stuff, online is a great alternative this is save money and time.
Good luck.
I started doing online MBA, the meterial was great and the course required real effort and i liked the program but i was not able to interact with people or learn from there experiences, we had group work but it was mostly to the point. I thought i can learn this stuff on my own with out paying huge amount of money.
Then after my first semister with online MBA, i did not feel like continuing, so i stated looking for part time programs as i need to continue with my job and applied for MEM (Masters in Engeenring Management) program in Northwestern, it is reasonable priced and covered most of the objectives i had in mind. Most of the professors are shared between Kellogg College and McCormick College which are highly ranked, so the quality of education is really great, I love this program and I really find a huge difference between online and part time.
Final Thought, I would any day do a on camps program either part time/full time but not a online program in Management, For technical stuff, online is a great alternative this is save money and time.
Good luck.
shantanup
11-18 10:11 AM
Receipt number: 2008065217
more...
Abhinaym
07-03 11:16 AM
Taking a benefit of one group, then distribute the pain across the board is not fair to ROW applicants. This is not the solution. You cannot say to us ROW people that we don't understand the fustration of waiting for our GC as well.
I think its ridiculous that some family takes up to 4 GC from the EB GC pool, why don't you make a petition to state that only EB GC goes to EB primary applicant while your family takes up family based GC. Unless your wife and kids are hired to work as the rest of us, them taking EB based GC is unfair to the rest of us who don't have a family.
The point is to not 'distribute pain', it is to reduce the pain of a group.
Again, even though the benefits may go to one 'group', let me tell you that it is not a formal group and just as all ROW applicants are not one group, non-ROW applicants too are individuals and IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ONE INDIVIDUAL HOW MUCH OTHERS GOT BENEFITED.
So your point of saying that one group is benefited is irrelevant, because GCs aren't given to groups and only to individual applicants.
Your other point is absolutely right! Family should not be counted, and I'm in 100% agreement with that!
I think its ridiculous that some family takes up to 4 GC from the EB GC pool, why don't you make a petition to state that only EB GC goes to EB primary applicant while your family takes up family based GC. Unless your wife and kids are hired to work as the rest of us, them taking EB based GC is unfair to the rest of us who don't have a family.
The point is to not 'distribute pain', it is to reduce the pain of a group.
Again, even though the benefits may go to one 'group', let me tell you that it is not a formal group and just as all ROW applicants are not one group, non-ROW applicants too are individuals and IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ONE INDIVIDUAL HOW MUCH OTHERS GOT BENEFITED.
So your point of saying that one group is benefited is irrelevant, because GCs aren't given to groups and only to individual applicants.
Your other point is absolutely right! Family should not be counted, and I'm in 100% agreement with that!
2010 emo lovers holding hands.
makemygc
01-30 08:33 PM
[QUOTE=logiclife]Unpaid bench means you are "Out of Status". Not illegal.
I don't agree at all with this statement. People can go on a unpaid maternity leave and still maintain status.
Out of status is anyway no better than illegal.
I don't agree at all with this statement. People can go on a unpaid maternity leave and still maintain status.
Out of status is anyway no better than illegal.
more...
smuggymba
07-29 08:31 AM
A sure invitation for defamation suit. Good luck.
This is just info, OP is not defaming anyone. He might be wrong about the info, but this info is not causing any harm to those companies.
This is just info, OP is not defaming anyone. He might be wrong about the info, but this info is not causing any harm to those companies.
hair cartoon lovers holding hands.
Ramba
07-14 06:39 PM
Thanks Ramba. I appreciate your positive comments. I guess the only doubt now is to find out a way whether employer had revoked my 140 before 180 days? If they didnt I am 100% safe now.
Yes. If they revoked the 140 before 180 days of 485 pending, USCIS might have directly denied your 485. They normally dont issue RFE. Since, you recived RFE, I guess it is after 180 days. So hang on. Reply correctly to RFE with all details. You will be fine.
Are you sure they are revoking your 140?
Yes. If they revoked the 140 before 180 days of 485 pending, USCIS might have directly denied your 485. They normally dont issue RFE. Since, you recived RFE, I guess it is after 180 days. So hang on. Reply correctly to RFE with all details. You will be fine.
Are you sure they are revoking your 140?
more...
looneytunezez
06-11 12:49 PM
Sent message to my senators (CA).
hot emo lovers holding hands.
thecipher5
10-12 03:22 PM
Hello!
I don't know if anyone is in or has been in a similar situation. But would appreciate sound advise on the next steps...
My wife and mine PD have been current since September 1st (PD: Apr 2006). We'd received a RFE in 2009 and we'd responded to it in June 2009. The status on USCIS states "Response Review" for both of us and that we should hear back within 60 days of receiving the RFE response which dates back to June 2009.
I've opened a SR, contacted a congressman and still no update or specific feedback since 1st week of September.
What should I do in such a situation?? Can I take an Infopass appointment even though 45 days haven't elapsed since opening SR?
What other avenues can I pursue to obtain concrete feedback on our applications?
all the help appreciated!
thecipher5
I don't know if anyone is in or has been in a similar situation. But would appreciate sound advise on the next steps...
My wife and mine PD have been current since September 1st (PD: Apr 2006). We'd received a RFE in 2009 and we'd responded to it in June 2009. The status on USCIS states "Response Review" for both of us and that we should hear back within 60 days of receiving the RFE response which dates back to June 2009.
I've opened a SR, contacted a congressman and still no update or specific feedback since 1st week of September.
What should I do in such a situation?? Can I take an Infopass appointment even though 45 days haven't elapsed since opening SR?
What other avenues can I pursue to obtain concrete feedback on our applications?
all the help appreciated!
thecipher5
more...
house holding hands. emo love
coolmanasip
03-07 10:14 AM
could not agree more!!! you really just get one life.....And you know what, the unhappiness plays on your mind and body and lifestyle........
I resigned this week........they are giving me all sorts of hell about it but I am happy I will go to a new place and pursue all the opportunities I ever wanted to....
I resigned this week........they are giving me all sorts of hell about it but I am happy I will go to a new place and pursue all the opportunities I ever wanted to....
tattoo emo lovers holding hands.
uma001
07-29 05:10 AM
Add Wachovia now acquired by Wells Fargo to the list. They don't even do H1 extensions.
That's too bad.
That's too bad.
more...
pictures holding hands emo love.
PavanV
06-08 06:26 PM
My labour cleared in 2009, i guess i need to wait for 10 yrs more !!!, not good , not good at all :eek:
dresses holding hands emo love. emo love hands. Emo is love; Emo is love
gautamagg
04-23 04:46 PM
I came with 4 other people and NONE are IV members and nor did we approach any - infact the white shirt dude was surprised to know we were not part of IV and offended. As I said passive movements dont make a difference.
technically you are an IV member because you have an ID, that you created on your own. You probably went to the meeting with the IV crowd then branched out..good for you. Wonder why the Stanfords and Harvards are dying to admit you:D
Obviously you seem to be in a very unique situation, and you are taking steps to solve your issues in your own way, nothing wrong with that. good luck, to each his own.
technically you are an IV member because you have an ID, that you created on your own. You probably went to the meeting with the IV crowd then branched out..good for you. Wonder why the Stanfords and Harvards are dying to admit you:D
Obviously you seem to be in a very unique situation, and you are taking steps to solve your issues in your own way, nothing wrong with that. good luck, to each his own.
more...
makeup Emo Love Holding Hands.
willigetgc?
08-10 10:30 PM
i feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that eb3 needs iv's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for eb3, as ins merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
I went to the advocacy days in DC this June, and the biggest push IV was/is making - country cap elimination. The biggest benefactor of this change is EB3 (eb2 will be helped too, but that is how INS preference system works) - again, the biggest benefactor of this legislative change is eb3. IV has been pushing this issue over and over - try reaching out about town hall meetings or any such meetings with lawmakers - and you will figure out how much iv is working on behalf of eb3. Unfortunately, not many eb3 were active until the last 2 vbs. So, please do not say, "nothing much can be done for eb3" or "IV is not working for EB3". Its just that you may not see value in the route that IV is pursuing. It is eb3 members' unwillingness to admit that IV needs grass root help more than ever now.
but, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The ina language says that until eb2 is not current, there will be no spillover to eb3. Agreed. but i would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. that is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all eb2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 eb3.
i am sorry to point this out, but you are looking at this from only your angle. Don't get me wrong, i would probably do the same. Having said that, logically this change will not fly with the uscis - 2 reasons - 1. Your contention that this rule is year to year - flawed contention 2. What does all eb2 satisfied mean? - these arguments will not work. I am not pulling you or the idea down - but simply stating my point of view based on what I know of the law.
is this something iv can point out and fight for? Can eb3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
now a days we are seeing more threads related to spill over allocation interpretation etc, but i have not seen any single post by iv core about this. I am from eb3 community and share the frustration among others.
i remember a time just a few months ago this year, eb2 were complaining about spillover not happening, and iv core disputed it, saying that spillover was happening.
i see a lot of people suggesting to port from eb3 to eb2, instead of wasting time on these discussions. Well, porting is not an option for most of us. It is either because we are working for big companies (who do not want to extra burden) or not able to find a small company which can help us.
just like you are seeing the ground realities of porting from eb3 to eb2, i believe that iv knows the ground reality of proposing new interpretations to the law. I would go a little further in saying that the proposals considered here are changes in the law than changes in the interpretation of the law.
I may be wrong on my thinking, but I do hope you take a suggestion - when reading the INS law, understand it independently first. Then go back to see, if it can be applied on your interpretation. Do not start out with it, everything looks red when wearing red tinted glasses.......
After the advocacy days in DC, I am sold on what IV is offering and its commitment to the EB community. I am EB3 too and I am pretty much in the same boat as many of you here.
I went to the advocacy days in DC this June, and the biggest push IV was/is making - country cap elimination. The biggest benefactor of this change is EB3 (eb2 will be helped too, but that is how INS preference system works) - again, the biggest benefactor of this legislative change is eb3. IV has been pushing this issue over and over - try reaching out about town hall meetings or any such meetings with lawmakers - and you will figure out how much iv is working on behalf of eb3. Unfortunately, not many eb3 were active until the last 2 vbs. So, please do not say, "nothing much can be done for eb3" or "IV is not working for EB3". Its just that you may not see value in the route that IV is pursuing. It is eb3 members' unwillingness to admit that IV needs grass root help more than ever now.
but, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The ina language says that until eb2 is not current, there will be no spillover to eb3. Agreed. but i would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. that is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all eb2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 eb3.
i am sorry to point this out, but you are looking at this from only your angle. Don't get me wrong, i would probably do the same. Having said that, logically this change will not fly with the uscis - 2 reasons - 1. Your contention that this rule is year to year - flawed contention 2. What does all eb2 satisfied mean? - these arguments will not work. I am not pulling you or the idea down - but simply stating my point of view based on what I know of the law.
is this something iv can point out and fight for? Can eb3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
now a days we are seeing more threads related to spill over allocation interpretation etc, but i have not seen any single post by iv core about this. I am from eb3 community and share the frustration among others.
i remember a time just a few months ago this year, eb2 were complaining about spillover not happening, and iv core disputed it, saying that spillover was happening.
i see a lot of people suggesting to port from eb3 to eb2, instead of wasting time on these discussions. Well, porting is not an option for most of us. It is either because we are working for big companies (who do not want to extra burden) or not able to find a small company which can help us.
just like you are seeing the ground realities of porting from eb3 to eb2, i believe that iv knows the ground reality of proposing new interpretations to the law. I would go a little further in saying that the proposals considered here are changes in the law than changes in the interpretation of the law.
I may be wrong on my thinking, but I do hope you take a suggestion - when reading the INS law, understand it independently first. Then go back to see, if it can be applied on your interpretation. Do not start out with it, everything looks red when wearing red tinted glasses.......
After the advocacy days in DC, I am sold on what IV is offering and its commitment to the EB community. I am EB3 too and I am pretty much in the same boat as many of you here.
girlfriend emo couple holding hands
retrohatao
02-13 12:25 PM
I think I am bit surprised to see not even a single posting as a reply. Believe it or not its huge problem than you can even imagine.
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
hairstyles holding hands emo love.
mandeep1975
07-01 09:49 PM
When prominent business houses like Microsoft, Google, Cisco, Oracle and organizations like AILA seem powerless when it comes to influencing senators, lawmakers and government organizations like USCIS and DOS, what can IV team do to change the policies. Sorry I did not mean to criticize, but that's the truth, unfortunately!
vandanaverdia
09-10 03:48 PM
Well... We are eager & all hope to see Andy at the rally....
hebron
08-10 06:13 PM
I feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that EB3 needs IV's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for EB3, as INS merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
Hi gk_2000, May be I am the only one who doesn't understand the idea. If you don't mind could you please explain what you proposed with examples?
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
Hi gk_2000, May be I am the only one who doesn't understand the idea. If you don't mind could you please explain what you proposed with examples?
