svam77
10-30 08:41 AM
My wife's finger printing fee was rejected last month, even though we submitted the right fee.
We still submitted the fee again. In the mean while, we got our finger printing notices.
Do u know when we would get our EADs ? Is anyone in a similar situation ?
Thanks
We still submitted the fee again. In the mean while, we got our finger printing notices.
Do u know when we would get our EADs ? Is anyone in a similar situation ?
Thanks
wallpaper The analytical cubism is
ARUNRAMANATHAN
06-18 10:02 AM
So PERM does this have more than one processing center .....
Atlanta and
??????
Now if more than one processing center then do you know the list of states that fall under each processing center .
This is for ALL Guys who planning to Start the GC process ASAP.
Thanks
Atlanta and
??????
Now if more than one processing center then do you know the list of states that fall under each processing center .
This is for ALL Guys who planning to Start the GC process ASAP.
Thanks
H1B2GC
09-30 09:20 PM
You could use AC21 after 180 days of I-485 filing but your I-140 should remain approved. If either your company revokes I-140 because you failed to maintain good relationship with them or USCIS revokes it because they discovered something regarding your company which was not available to them when your case was approved or if they find out that you switched jobs before 180 days, they will deny your I-485. But you could open a motion to reconsider and later appeal in court. If you are still not tired, you'll have your LC priority date which you could use for your future greencard.
If you plan to join a new company before 180 days use H1B otherwise use AC21 and work on EAD. I undertand that you are getting depressed regarding the whole process.
This is a game US is playing against the high skilled to drain out their knowledge. Get up, take your chances and screw them up in a same or similar classification for the time and $ you lost.
If you plan to join a new company before 180 days use H1B otherwise use AC21 and work on EAD. I undertand that you are getting depressed regarding the whole process.
This is a game US is playing against the high skilled to drain out their knowledge. Get up, take your chances and screw them up in a same or similar classification for the time and $ you lost.
2011 The Roots of Analytical Cubism
drirshad
03-13 04:31 PM
03/13/2009: Senate Bill, S. 577 to Punish Immigration Sharks Defrauding and Victimizing Immigrants and Related Parties
Senate Dianne Feinstine from California, cosponsored by Senator Ted Kennedy, introduced this bill in the Senate yesterday. The full text of the bill is as follows:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Immigration Fraud Prevention Act of 2009''.
SEC. 2. SCHEMES TO DEFRAUD ALIENS.
(a) Amendments to Title 18.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Chapter 47 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:``�1041. Schemes to defraud aliens
``(a) In General.--Any person who willfully and knowingly executes a scheme or artifice, in connection with any matter that is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws or any matter the offender willfully and knowingly claims or represents is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws, to--
``(1) defraud any person; or
``(2) obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, promises, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
Here is the background for this bill: The Immigration Fraud Prevention Act would prevent and punish fraud and misrepresentation in the context of immigration proceedings. The act would create a new Federal crime to penalize those who engage in schemes to defraud aliens in connection with Federal immigration laws. Specifically, the act would make it a Federal crime to wilfully and knowingly defraud or obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by false or fraudulent pretences, representations, or promises; and to wilfully, knowingly, and falsely represent that an individual is an attorney or accredited representative in any matter arising under Federal immigration law. Violations of these crimes would result in a fine, imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or both. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security to use task forces currently in existence to detect and investigate individuals who are in violation of the immigration fraud crimes as created by the bill. The act would also work to prevent immigration fraud by requiring that Immigration Judges issue warnings about unauthorized practice of immigration law to immigrants in removal proceedings, similar to the current law that requires notification of pro bono legal services to these immigrants; requiring the Attorney General to provide outreach to the immigrant community to help prevent fraud; providing that any materials used to carry out notification on immigration law fraud is done in the appropriate language for that community; and requiring the distribution of the disciplinary list of individuals not authorized to appear before the immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals, BIA, currently maintained by the Executive Office of Immigration Review, EOIR. Unfortunately, the need for Federal action to prevent and prosecute immigration fraud has escalated in recent years as citizens and non-citizens attempt to navigate the immigration legal system. Thus far, only States have sought to regulate the unauthorized practice of immigration law. Since immigration law is a federal matter, I believe the solution to such misrepresentation and fraud should be addressed by Congress. By enacting this bill, Congress would help prevent more victims like Vincent Smith, a Mexican national who has resided in California since 1975. His wife is an American citizen, and they live with their 6 U.S. citizen children in Palmdale, CA. Mr. Smith would likely have received a green card at least two different times during his stay in California. However, in attempting to get legal counsel, Mr. Smith hired someone whom he thought was an attorney, but was not. As a result, Mr. Smith was charged more than $10,000 for processing his immigration paperwork, which was never filed. Mr. Smith now has no legal status and faces removal proceedings. Another victim of immigration fraud is Raul, a Mexican national, who came to the United States in 2000. He also married a U.S. citizen, Loraina, making him eligible to apply for a green card. Raul and his wife went to Jose for legal help. Jose's business card said he had a ``law office'' and that he was an ``immigration specialist.'' But Jose was not a specialist and charged Raul $4,000 to file a frivolous asylum petition. While Raul thought he was going to receive a green card, he was instead placed into removal proceedings. From California to New York, there are hundreds of stories like these. Many immigrants are preyed on because of their fears--others on their hope of realizing the American dream. They are charged exorbitant fees for the filing of frivolous paperwork that clog our immigration courts and keep families and businesses waiting in limbo for years. Law enforcement officials say that many fraudulent ``immigration specialists'' close their businesses or move on to another part of the state or country before they can be held accountable. They can make $100,000 to $200,000 a year and the few who have been caught rarely serve more than a few months in jail. Often victims of such crimes are deported, sending them back to their home countries without accountability for the perpetrator of the fraud. Most recently, hundreds of immigrants were exploited by Victor M. Espinal, who was arrested for allegedly posing as an immigration attorney. Nearly 125 of Mr. Espinal's clients attended the New York City Bar Association's free clinic to address their legal and immigration options. According to prosecutors, Mr. Espinal falsely claimed on his business cards that he was licensed and admitted to the California bar as well as the bar in the Dominican Republic. Organizations such as the Los Angeles Country Bar Association, National Immigration Forum, American Immigration Lawyers Association, and American Bar Association have been documenting this exploitation for many years.
Senate Dianne Feinstine from California, cosponsored by Senator Ted Kennedy, introduced this bill in the Senate yesterday. The full text of the bill is as follows:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Immigration Fraud Prevention Act of 2009''.
SEC. 2. SCHEMES TO DEFRAUD ALIENS.
(a) Amendments to Title 18.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Chapter 47 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:``�1041. Schemes to defraud aliens
``(a) In General.--Any person who willfully and knowingly executes a scheme or artifice, in connection with any matter that is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws or any matter the offender willfully and knowingly claims or represents is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws, to--
``(1) defraud any person; or
``(2) obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, promises, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
Here is the background for this bill: The Immigration Fraud Prevention Act would prevent and punish fraud and misrepresentation in the context of immigration proceedings. The act would create a new Federal crime to penalize those who engage in schemes to defraud aliens in connection with Federal immigration laws. Specifically, the act would make it a Federal crime to wilfully and knowingly defraud or obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by false or fraudulent pretences, representations, or promises; and to wilfully, knowingly, and falsely represent that an individual is an attorney or accredited representative in any matter arising under Federal immigration law. Violations of these crimes would result in a fine, imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or both. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security to use task forces currently in existence to detect and investigate individuals who are in violation of the immigration fraud crimes as created by the bill. The act would also work to prevent immigration fraud by requiring that Immigration Judges issue warnings about unauthorized practice of immigration law to immigrants in removal proceedings, similar to the current law that requires notification of pro bono legal services to these immigrants; requiring the Attorney General to provide outreach to the immigrant community to help prevent fraud; providing that any materials used to carry out notification on immigration law fraud is done in the appropriate language for that community; and requiring the distribution of the disciplinary list of individuals not authorized to appear before the immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals, BIA, currently maintained by the Executive Office of Immigration Review, EOIR. Unfortunately, the need for Federal action to prevent and prosecute immigration fraud has escalated in recent years as citizens and non-citizens attempt to navigate the immigration legal system. Thus far, only States have sought to regulate the unauthorized practice of immigration law. Since immigration law is a federal matter, I believe the solution to such misrepresentation and fraud should be addressed by Congress. By enacting this bill, Congress would help prevent more victims like Vincent Smith, a Mexican national who has resided in California since 1975. His wife is an American citizen, and they live with their 6 U.S. citizen children in Palmdale, CA. Mr. Smith would likely have received a green card at least two different times during his stay in California. However, in attempting to get legal counsel, Mr. Smith hired someone whom he thought was an attorney, but was not. As a result, Mr. Smith was charged more than $10,000 for processing his immigration paperwork, which was never filed. Mr. Smith now has no legal status and faces removal proceedings. Another victim of immigration fraud is Raul, a Mexican national, who came to the United States in 2000. He also married a U.S. citizen, Loraina, making him eligible to apply for a green card. Raul and his wife went to Jose for legal help. Jose's business card said he had a ``law office'' and that he was an ``immigration specialist.'' But Jose was not a specialist and charged Raul $4,000 to file a frivolous asylum petition. While Raul thought he was going to receive a green card, he was instead placed into removal proceedings. From California to New York, there are hundreds of stories like these. Many immigrants are preyed on because of their fears--others on their hope of realizing the American dream. They are charged exorbitant fees for the filing of frivolous paperwork that clog our immigration courts and keep families and businesses waiting in limbo for years. Law enforcement officials say that many fraudulent ``immigration specialists'' close their businesses or move on to another part of the state or country before they can be held accountable. They can make $100,000 to $200,000 a year and the few who have been caught rarely serve more than a few months in jail. Often victims of such crimes are deported, sending them back to their home countries without accountability for the perpetrator of the fraud. Most recently, hundreds of immigrants were exploited by Victor M. Espinal, who was arrested for allegedly posing as an immigration attorney. Nearly 125 of Mr. Espinal's clients attended the New York City Bar Association's free clinic to address their legal and immigration options. According to prosecutors, Mr. Espinal falsely claimed on his business cards that he was licensed and admitted to the California bar as well as the bar in the Dominican Republic. Organizations such as the Los Angeles Country Bar Association, National Immigration Forum, American Immigration Lawyers Association, and American Bar Association have been documenting this exploitation for many years.
more...
gc_peshwa
03-10 11:07 AM
No problems for me at all. I just logged in and transferred some to my parents back in India.
desijackass
11-12 04:38 PM
Also says no change expected in the coming months.
See bottom of the bulletin.
:(
:mad:
F. VISA AVAILABILITY IN THE COMING MONTHS
Employment-based: At this time it is unlikely that there will be any cut-off dates in the Employment First preference during the coming months. It also appears unlikely that it will be necessary to establish a cut-off date other than those already in effect for the Second preference category. Cut-off dates continue to apply to the China and India Second preference categories due to heavy demand.
Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off date movement each month during the coming months are as follows:
Employment Second:
China: none to two weeks
India: no movement
Employment Third:
Worldwide: three to six weeks
China: one to three weeks
India: none to two week
See bottom of the bulletin.
:(
:mad:
F. VISA AVAILABILITY IN THE COMING MONTHS
Employment-based: At this time it is unlikely that there will be any cut-off dates in the Employment First preference during the coming months. It also appears unlikely that it will be necessary to establish a cut-off date other than those already in effect for the Second preference category. Cut-off dates continue to apply to the China and India Second preference categories due to heavy demand.
Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off date movement each month during the coming months are as follows:
Employment Second:
China: none to two weeks
India: no movement
Employment Third:
Worldwide: three to six weeks
China: one to three weeks
India: none to two week
more...
asanghi
03-23 02:37 PM
I live in South Bay. Please let me know how can I help?
THanks
THanks
2010 Analytical Cubism was
JunRN
07-18 03:55 AM
I have this dilemma. Since schedule A is exempted from LC, the priority date of Schedule A is the filing of I-140.
My question is:
Should I need to file in July to get a "July" priority date to say that I am filing using the "July VB" or can I file in August, in which I will August PD?
If I file in August then will get August PD, shouldn't it be construed that I am using the "August VB" therefore not allowed to do AOS?
My lawyer says otherwise.
My question is:
Should I need to file in July to get a "July" priority date to say that I am filing using the "July VB" or can I file in August, in which I will August PD?
If I file in August then will get August PD, shouldn't it be construed that I am using the "August VB" therefore not allowed to do AOS?
My lawyer says otherwise.
more...
texcan
08-13 11:18 PM
I got LUD on two 140's for 8/12/07.
Based on so many LUDs, my hunch is it might be data check for 485 entry.
or it does't mean anything.
if checks are cashed in a day or two, then it surely is 485
or does USCIS deposits checks first.
LUD on so many cases cant be a coincidence.
my 2 cents
Based on so many LUDs, my hunch is it might be data check for 485 entry.
or it does't mean anything.
if checks are cashed in a day or two, then it surely is 485
or does USCIS deposits checks first.
LUD on so many cases cant be a coincidence.
my 2 cents
hair Before we descend into the
imh1b
05-19 09:37 AM
Good to find Immigration Voice name in this article.
more...
Blog Feeds
03-12 08:40 PM
I've been impressed by Senator Graham's willingness to help move forward immigration reform, but this is really pathetic. Graham reported on his meeting today with President Obama and Senator Schumer. Most of it sounds good until you get to this lovely part:I expressed, in no uncertain terms, my belief that immigration reform could come to a halt for the year if health care reconciliation goes forward. For more than a year, health care has sucked most of the energy out of the room. Using reconciliation to push health care through will make it much harder for Congress to come together...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/03/graham-pass-health-care-and-well-kill-immigration-reform.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/03/graham-pass-health-care-and-well-kill-immigration-reform.html)
hot Picasso+analytical+cubism+
vik123
01-18 08:57 PM
Eb2
more...
house After Picasso moved past the
cooler
07-07 01:43 PM
Bump.
I am in the same situation. Any insight from the original owner or others would be appreciated
I am in the same situation. Any insight from the original owner or others would be appreciated
tattoo known as Analytic Cubism,
mgmanoj
08-20 06:19 PM
Whats the process to do stamping in canada ? My visa has expired since Jan' 2008 - is it same like India ? Do we still get stuck with PMIS or is it okay to go on I-94 and keep the same to re-entry if any issues ?
more...
pictures A work of Analytical Cubism.
nixstor
08-04 12:15 PM
The backlog centers have 10 fed govt employees and 100 guys from Exceed unless I am egregiously mistaken.
Why does any one think that those 100 guys will be left out with out any jobs? Wont the 10 fed guys be moved to Chicago/Atlanta NPC's with huge reloc benefits package? If they dont choose to move because of personal reasons, Do you know what kind of severance packages they get?
100 guys from Exceed will be definitely working for other fed agencies after they are done with this gig. IRS has a huge base in Philly and Exceed is a govt contractor. May be IT consultants need to learn from these folks..
"How NOT to get the work done in 5 years?"
B T W Does these places have any guys who are struck with their labor?
Why does any one think that those 100 guys will be left out with out any jobs? Wont the 10 fed guys be moved to Chicago/Atlanta NPC's with huge reloc benefits package? If they dont choose to move because of personal reasons, Do you know what kind of severance packages they get?
100 guys from Exceed will be definitely working for other fed agencies after they are done with this gig. IRS has a huge base in Philly and Exceed is a govt contractor. May be IT consultants need to learn from these folks..
"How NOT to get the work done in 5 years?"
B T W Does these places have any guys who are struck with their labor?
dresses French Cubism (Picasso
lecter
August 2nd, 2005, 11:43 PM
Mats is on the money for sure. A 350D or a D70s (or D50) with a kit lens will make your millenia.
I bought a 20D as a backup, knock about camera for Africa. It's a good wee beast. But not in your budget range. But it's the obvious next step.
We can hardly wait for the ** which is ##MP and ##fps.
hehe
Rob
I bought a 20D as a backup, knock about camera for Africa. It's a good wee beast. But not in your budget range. But it's the obvious next step.
We can hardly wait for the ** which is ##MP and ##fps.
hehe
Rob
more...
makeup Analytic Cubism:
chanduv23
07-05 04:25 PM
This has been discussed, we can't help.
It takes time for people to come on same page.
Lot of lawyers have conference calls with their clients - discuss what "their clients" must do.
One good thing is a lot of our members under the IV umbrella have the zeal to do something. Looking at the Munnabhai threads etc...
It is a matter of time before we get organized. IV core is working hard on various aspects.
Before anyone does anything under the IV umbrella - please contact sertasheep or pappu or macaca.
It takes time for people to come on same page.
Lot of lawyers have conference calls with their clients - discuss what "their clients" must do.
One good thing is a lot of our members under the IV umbrella have the zeal to do something. Looking at the Munnabhai threads etc...
It is a matter of time before we get organized. IV core is working hard on various aspects.
Before anyone does anything under the IV umbrella - please contact sertasheep or pappu or macaca.
girlfriend Analytic cubism -- the name
new_horizon
10-01 08:43 PM
I don't know why the guy brought up sarah palin when discussing joe biden. is it a must that something should be said about her for every gaffee that joe makes?remember how the congressman was sent packing after the macaca comment. why no outcry on this 7-11 comment? double standard?
hairstyles Picasso#39;s Cubist Period works
axp817
03-28 01:46 PM
If you worked in CA you need to file the same state. You dont have to file the tax for the state where your employer resides.
Not always true, if the employer withholds tax (OP's case) for a certain state, you HAVE to file returns for that state. Even if the withholding was done in error. The only way around this is to get an amended W-2 from the employer without the withholding. I speak from experience.
An easy way to figure this out is as follows
1. You have to file state tax returns in the state of your residence.
2. You have to file state tax returns in state of employment (where your employer is) IF
the employer withheld taxes (for that state) from your paycheck. Technically, they
shouldn't but if they do, for whatever reason, the only way you wouldn't have to file
returns is if they amend the W-2 and give you a new one without the tax withheld.
3. You have to file state tax returns in the state where you perform work on your
employer's behalf (this applies mostly to consulting scenarios where an employee is
deployed on assignments across the country and the only time you don't have to file
taxes in the third situation is when the work performed was for a short period of time
(less than a certain number of months, I am not sure exactly how many, but I think it is
9 or 10 months).
In many cases the state of residence, employment, etc. are all the same, in some cases they are not.
One of the exceptions is states which don't have state income tax, e.g. Texas.
Of course, having to file returns in so many states doesn't mean you pay tax to each state, usually, the total state tax you end up paying is equal to the state with the highest tax rate.
e.g. if you lived in NJ, employer was in NY, and you drove to a client site in PA for all of 2008, you would file returns in NJ and PA, and if the tax rate in NJ was 6% and PA was 6.1%, you would pay 6.1%, the higher of the two. Of course, if your employer accidentally withheld taxes for NY, then you would have to file for NY, and if NY doesn't agree to give you your withheld money back, then the only way to get it back would be to have your employer give you an amended W-2.
That being said, the OP should be okay since he has now filed CA taxes for 2005 and 2006. There will be a small amount of money owed to CA-Dept. of Revenue as penalty, but that should have been calculated during filing, by whoever did the OP's taxes. If the penalty wasn't paid, the OP can expect a 'bill' from CA-DOR asking for that money.
OP, If I were you, I would look into one more thing. If you were on H-1B when you were in CA, did your employer amend the H-1B LCA to state that CA was the work location? Seeing that taxes were withheld for NJ, they might have not amended the LCA. Speak to your employer and see if that could cause any problems or if there is a way to fix that.
Good luck,
Not always true, if the employer withholds tax (OP's case) for a certain state, you HAVE to file returns for that state. Even if the withholding was done in error. The only way around this is to get an amended W-2 from the employer without the withholding. I speak from experience.
An easy way to figure this out is as follows
1. You have to file state tax returns in the state of your residence.
2. You have to file state tax returns in state of employment (where your employer is) IF
the employer withheld taxes (for that state) from your paycheck. Technically, they
shouldn't but if they do, for whatever reason, the only way you wouldn't have to file
returns is if they amend the W-2 and give you a new one without the tax withheld.
3. You have to file state tax returns in the state where you perform work on your
employer's behalf (this applies mostly to consulting scenarios where an employee is
deployed on assignments across the country and the only time you don't have to file
taxes in the third situation is when the work performed was for a short period of time
(less than a certain number of months, I am not sure exactly how many, but I think it is
9 or 10 months).
In many cases the state of residence, employment, etc. are all the same, in some cases they are not.
One of the exceptions is states which don't have state income tax, e.g. Texas.
Of course, having to file returns in so many states doesn't mean you pay tax to each state, usually, the total state tax you end up paying is equal to the state with the highest tax rate.
e.g. if you lived in NJ, employer was in NY, and you drove to a client site in PA for all of 2008, you would file returns in NJ and PA, and if the tax rate in NJ was 6% and PA was 6.1%, you would pay 6.1%, the higher of the two. Of course, if your employer accidentally withheld taxes for NY, then you would have to file for NY, and if NY doesn't agree to give you your withheld money back, then the only way to get it back would be to have your employer give you an amended W-2.
That being said, the OP should be okay since he has now filed CA taxes for 2005 and 2006. There will be a small amount of money owed to CA-Dept. of Revenue as penalty, but that should have been calculated during filing, by whoever did the OP's taxes. If the penalty wasn't paid, the OP can expect a 'bill' from CA-DOR asking for that money.
OP, If I were you, I would look into one more thing. If you were on H-1B when you were in CA, did your employer amend the H-1B LCA to state that CA was the work location? Seeing that taxes were withheld for NJ, they might have not amended the LCA. Speak to your employer and see if that could cause any problems or if there is a way to fix that.
Good luck,
s_prakash33
06-05 07:46 PM
i too got the same number of soft LUDs after nsc recieved the reply to the rfe. .... r we getting gc soon :) .. my pd is April 2004 eb3
fall1998
05-12 04:19 PM
Those users who are pending are not PWMB and they had applied earlier, is that right?i
No comments:
Post a Comment