indyanguy
10-22 11:43 AM
My Labour was For EB-3 and my I-140 was filled in EB2
One of my Colleague also had same case but he got query on his
I-140 and mine got denied
I have a question
Now I will have to file new labour and I-140 can
Will I loose my old priority dates
How can the labor be filed under EB3 and the 140 under EB2? Is this possible only if Labor mentioned BS + 5 (or MS) as the requirement even though it was filed under EB3?
Anyone care to throw some light on this?
One of my Colleague also had same case but he got query on his
I-140 and mine got denied
I have a question
Now I will have to file new labour and I-140 can
Will I loose my old priority dates
How can the labor be filed under EB3 and the 140 under EB2? Is this possible only if Labor mentioned BS + 5 (or MS) as the requirement even though it was filed under EB3?
Anyone care to throw some light on this?
wallpaper funny quotes on life and love.
Tshelar
09-09 07:56 AM
I am not sure if any reputed lawyer is going to be able help. The fact that you agreed that you worked in a gas station when you were not suppose to causes a problem for a lawyer make a case. I am hoping one of the lawyers on this forum would be able to guide you on this.
Good luck
Good luck
santb1975
05-15 02:46 PM
//
Total $$ so far: 16256
Recurring Contributions: 10
Members Contributed so far: 167
Members listed below helped us reach our first 10K:
gconmymind-51, snathan-50, smanikandan-100, ahasan-100, MunnaBhai-100, vineet-100, rameshk75-50, mariusp-35, gcfordesi-50, belmontboy-100, Houstonguy-200, vikasw-50, kshitijnt-100, pune_guy-100, walking_dude-100, prasha98-100, ivvm-50, manojp4-100, Pineapple-200, sammyb-50, ca_gc-100, santb1975-100, nav_saini-100, gcpadmavyuh-100, pcs-100, akbose-100, eastwest-50, ubetman-100, pmurgai-100, deba-100, 5-Jun-100, wa_Saiprasad-100, chaukas-100, arunmohan-50, jimytomy-100, aspiration-50, prshah102-100, czar_the_king-100, maverick6993-100, eb3_nepa-100, kumar_77-50, Alien-100, nagio-100, vin13-100, manja-100, loti_GC-50, sonaliak-100, mdmd10-100, surabhi-100, m306m-100, malaGCPahije-100, patbose-50, clif-100, goel_ar-50, dba9ioracle-100,djit71-100, Jitamitra-100, rajtp-100, espoir-50, rp0lol-100, kicca-50, rajmalhotra-100, anuraj1234-100, yetanotherguyinline-100, MI member 1-100, MI member 2-100, NolaIndian32-50, poreddyp-100, Karthikthiru-100, pshah-100, tapukakababa-100, h1techSlave-100, uffyegc-100, rameshk75-50, Nagireddi-100, srinivas_o-100, nc14-50, aa2aa-100, add78-100, jbr-100, jayleno-100, naidu2543-50, vansvenkat-100, amit_sp-100, gova123-100, psvk-100, xlr8r-100, 65B4GC-100, asanghi-100, GCneeded-100, tampa2006-100, gnlbigte-50, newuser-100, deafTunes123-25, gandhig-100, srmeka-100, akred-100, gc_maine2-100, gconmymind-50, gc78-100, sirinme-100, lalithkx-100, aspiration-50, reedandbamboo-100, GreenMe-100, GreenMe-50, jnayar2006-100, wizpal-100, aubGC-100, raminmd-100, mpadapa-50, nightowl76-100, NolaIndian32-100, birbal-100
Members listed below are helping us reach our second 10K:
axp817-50, ngodisha-100, preethamsp-50, pappusheth-50, niklshah-50, coopheal-100, espoir-50, JacK41-50, velan-50, sk298-100, ak_2006-100, snowshoe-50, m306m-50,new_horizon-100,ho_gaya_kya-50,sundar-1000,continuedprogress-100,rongha_2000-100,cmdline-100,imv77-100,justwait-50,kvrr-50,conchshell-100,npperi-100,for_gc-100,sam2006-100,pyar555-100,tcsonly-100,axp817-50,GTGC-100,arbhaat-100,GC4All-100,dagu1234-50,ramaonline-50,mohmd1-100,wantgc23-100,mohan_ada-100,psam-100,nil-100,askbz1-100,hsshah-50,everwaiting-100,swamy-100,reddymjm-50,abqguy-25,ca_immigrant-50,elaiyam-100,waiting4gc-100,vdlrao-100,tampa2006-100,vasu-100,ashkam-100,skk2004-100,mpadapa-100,msaheb-100,gconmymind-50,pnagar-100,grupak-100,rameshk75-50,minimallist-100,Green.Tech-100,srkamath-100,
Members listed below signed up for recurring contributions in this drive:
snathan-50,gcfordesi-50,sammyb-50,eastwest-50,loti_gc-50,naidu2543-50,mpadapa-50,firhill-50,dslamba-50,manojp4-50
Total $$ so far: 16256
Recurring Contributions: 10
Members Contributed so far: 167
Members listed below helped us reach our first 10K:
gconmymind-51, snathan-50, smanikandan-100, ahasan-100, MunnaBhai-100, vineet-100, rameshk75-50, mariusp-35, gcfordesi-50, belmontboy-100, Houstonguy-200, vikasw-50, kshitijnt-100, pune_guy-100, walking_dude-100, prasha98-100, ivvm-50, manojp4-100, Pineapple-200, sammyb-50, ca_gc-100, santb1975-100, nav_saini-100, gcpadmavyuh-100, pcs-100, akbose-100, eastwest-50, ubetman-100, pmurgai-100, deba-100, 5-Jun-100, wa_Saiprasad-100, chaukas-100, arunmohan-50, jimytomy-100, aspiration-50, prshah102-100, czar_the_king-100, maverick6993-100, eb3_nepa-100, kumar_77-50, Alien-100, nagio-100, vin13-100, manja-100, loti_GC-50, sonaliak-100, mdmd10-100, surabhi-100, m306m-100, malaGCPahije-100, patbose-50, clif-100, goel_ar-50, dba9ioracle-100,djit71-100, Jitamitra-100, rajtp-100, espoir-50, rp0lol-100, kicca-50, rajmalhotra-100, anuraj1234-100, yetanotherguyinline-100, MI member 1-100, MI member 2-100, NolaIndian32-50, poreddyp-100, Karthikthiru-100, pshah-100, tapukakababa-100, h1techSlave-100, uffyegc-100, rameshk75-50, Nagireddi-100, srinivas_o-100, nc14-50, aa2aa-100, add78-100, jbr-100, jayleno-100, naidu2543-50, vansvenkat-100, amit_sp-100, gova123-100, psvk-100, xlr8r-100, 65B4GC-100, asanghi-100, GCneeded-100, tampa2006-100, gnlbigte-50, newuser-100, deafTunes123-25, gandhig-100, srmeka-100, akred-100, gc_maine2-100, gconmymind-50, gc78-100, sirinme-100, lalithkx-100, aspiration-50, reedandbamboo-100, GreenMe-100, GreenMe-50, jnayar2006-100, wizpal-100, aubGC-100, raminmd-100, mpadapa-50, nightowl76-100, NolaIndian32-100, birbal-100
Members listed below are helping us reach our second 10K:
axp817-50, ngodisha-100, preethamsp-50, pappusheth-50, niklshah-50, coopheal-100, espoir-50, JacK41-50, velan-50, sk298-100, ak_2006-100, snowshoe-50, m306m-50,new_horizon-100,ho_gaya_kya-50,sundar-1000,continuedprogress-100,rongha_2000-100,cmdline-100,imv77-100,justwait-50,kvrr-50,conchshell-100,npperi-100,for_gc-100,sam2006-100,pyar555-100,tcsonly-100,axp817-50,GTGC-100,arbhaat-100,GC4All-100,dagu1234-50,ramaonline-50,mohmd1-100,wantgc23-100,mohan_ada-100,psam-100,nil-100,askbz1-100,hsshah-50,everwaiting-100,swamy-100,reddymjm-50,abqguy-25,ca_immigrant-50,elaiyam-100,waiting4gc-100,vdlrao-100,tampa2006-100,vasu-100,ashkam-100,skk2004-100,mpadapa-100,msaheb-100,gconmymind-50,pnagar-100,grupak-100,rameshk75-50,minimallist-100,Green.Tech-100,srkamath-100,
Members listed below signed up for recurring contributions in this drive:
snathan-50,gcfordesi-50,sammyb-50,eastwest-50,loti_gc-50,naidu2543-50,mpadapa-50,firhill-50,dslamba-50,manojp4-50
2011 funny sweet love quotes
satishku_2000
11-29 04:01 PM
Hello Gurus,
I got an RFE email yesterday for "additional evidence and/or information" for my pending I-485 (filed Jan 05 for Jun03PD, approved I-140). Hope to get the RFE letter by next week. I am hoping that the RFE is for the usual EVL/pay-stubs/tax-returns/ question.
Meanwhile I have travel plans starting Dec 13th. So want to get the answers/requested documents to the attorney before I leave. Since my status is still AOS(pending I-485) and I have a valid AP, I am assuming there should be a problem at the POE ? what you guys think?
thanks.
did you use AC21 and inform USCIS?
I got an RFE email yesterday for "additional evidence and/or information" for my pending I-485 (filed Jan 05 for Jun03PD, approved I-140). Hope to get the RFE letter by next week. I am hoping that the RFE is for the usual EVL/pay-stubs/tax-returns/ question.
Meanwhile I have travel plans starting Dec 13th. So want to get the answers/requested documents to the attorney before I leave. Since my status is still AOS(pending I-485) and I have a valid AP, I am assuming there should be a problem at the POE ? what you guys think?
thanks.
did you use AC21 and inform USCIS?
more...
add78
07-15 03:03 PM
I have used AC21 to change jobs
I have a closing statement from my previous employer mentioning the exercisable options.
Here it goes:
Exercisable Options
Price $30
grant date 1/10/2007
Shares exercisable 400
total price =12000
Last date to exercise
7/20/2008
However the market share value for the company now is 26.00
now my question is if I were to exercise before the last date will I be getting the total amount of $12000 or 26 x 400 = $10400 or the difference between the share values which is infact negative or nothing?
I find it difficult understand this financial terms. I dont understand clearly the term 'Exercisable options' Is there a hidden treasure am going to get?????
$30 per option price seems very high at the time they were offered unless they were trading around or higher than 30 at that time. Usually ESOP (Employee Stock Options) are offered at a lower end of the annual stock price fluctuations - e.g. if a company is already public with stock trading for the year highs at 50 at year low was say 20 at any point during that year then employees get it at 20. something like this. If a company is pre-IPO, the options are offered at a much cheaper price of a 1c to 10c per option.
You should be able to place a call to your HR and they would be able to explain any questions you have. If the value is negative, no point exercising options now.
I have a closing statement from my previous employer mentioning the exercisable options.
Here it goes:
Exercisable Options
Price $30
grant date 1/10/2007
Shares exercisable 400
total price =12000
Last date to exercise
7/20/2008
However the market share value for the company now is 26.00
now my question is if I were to exercise before the last date will I be getting the total amount of $12000 or 26 x 400 = $10400 or the difference between the share values which is infact negative or nothing?
I find it difficult understand this financial terms. I dont understand clearly the term 'Exercisable options' Is there a hidden treasure am going to get?????
$30 per option price seems very high at the time they were offered unless they were trading around or higher than 30 at that time. Usually ESOP (Employee Stock Options) are offered at a lower end of the annual stock price fluctuations - e.g. if a company is already public with stock trading for the year highs at 50 at year low was say 20 at any point during that year then employees get it at 20. something like this. If a company is pre-IPO, the options are offered at a much cheaper price of a 1c to 10c per option.
You should be able to place a call to your HR and they would be able to explain any questions you have. If the value is negative, no point exercising options now.
gc_on_demand
08-05 04:34 PM
If you start now and if get ur labor in 2-3 months chances are good for Eb2 that dates will be close to current by end of next year. So u can have EAD.
If congress passes HR 5882 then Eb3 should be current. Depends on company I 140 is not taking more than 1 year average for non concurrent filling.
Assuming some relief to EB community Eb2 will take 2-2.5 years and Eb3 may take upto 4 years. Everything is based on assumption here.
To get GC you need to be in line sooner or later then why not now..
If congress passes HR 5882 then Eb3 should be current. Depends on company I 140 is not taking more than 1 year average for non concurrent filling.
Assuming some relief to EB community Eb2 will take 2-2.5 years and Eb3 may take upto 4 years. Everything is based on assumption here.
To get GC you need to be in line sooner or later then why not now..
more...
check_rd
11-06 06:05 PM
Let me check back on the date i had applied and let u know.
2010 funny quotes on life and love. famous quotes about life and love. good
arnet
09-15 06:17 PM
start your GC process soon. atleast it will take another 5yrs to get it in EB2 category. good luck!!!!!:)
more...
glus
01-02 10:05 AM
Hi All,
Here is my case , when i went to f1 - h1-b stamping in mexico, they issued me 221-g & asked me to got to india for stamping..( but they allowed me to enter usa)..later i applied for AP & EAD, got both ( recently i got i-140 query)
(RFE due date Mar10)
Here are my doubts:
1. can i go to india & comeback with AP in hand
2. Do i need to wait for my i-140 approval
3. my question is what if my i -140 rejects ??
Appreciate your feedback..
Thanks!!!!!
I would say the safest way would be to get I140 approved first. If I140 is denied, your I485 is in most cases denied at the same time, and then you become illegal if you are in the U.S. after entering on AP.
Here is my case , when i went to f1 - h1-b stamping in mexico, they issued me 221-g & asked me to got to india for stamping..( but they allowed me to enter usa)..later i applied for AP & EAD, got both ( recently i got i-140 query)
(RFE due date Mar10)
Here are my doubts:
1. can i go to india & comeback with AP in hand
2. Do i need to wait for my i-140 approval
3. my question is what if my i -140 rejects ??
Appreciate your feedback..
Thanks!!!!!
I would say the safest way would be to get I140 approved first. If I140 is denied, your I485 is in most cases denied at the same time, and then you become illegal if you are in the U.S. after entering on AP.
hair Life quotes. I have found that
Law Loving Alien
10-25 12:00 PM
Gurus,
USCIS is suppose to give decision in 15 business after filling I140 in premium processing ( or converting existing I140 application to premium processing).
I have seen several person mentioning that they not only got their I140 decision but they got their I-485 expedited too after converting I140 to premium processing ? Is this true...... My I140/I485 was filled at NSC in June 2006...and I have not recieved any decision for my I140 yet....Is it worthwhile to convert my I140 to premium processing ... I am sure I will get my I140 decision in 15 business days but will it expediete my I485 case too after position decision of I140.... Please provide your thoughts...
USCIS is suppose to give decision in 15 business after filling I140 in premium processing ( or converting existing I140 application to premium processing).
I have seen several person mentioning that they not only got their I140 decision but they got their I-485 expedited too after converting I140 to premium processing ? Is this true...... My I140/I485 was filled at NSC in June 2006...and I have not recieved any decision for my I140 yet....Is it worthwhile to convert my I140 to premium processing ... I am sure I will get my I140 decision in 15 business days but will it expediete my I485 case too after position decision of I140.... Please provide your thoughts...
more...
gcpain
07-24 04:32 PM
^^^^
hot funny quotes on life and love.
eblues
09-05 11:51 AM
Hi everyone,
I'm quite new here. I hope I'm not doing anything inappropriate by posting in this board, I've tried to use the search function to no avail.
I'm currently in the US as a J-1 exchange visitor (research scholar) to perform research at a university in Missouri. Last year I started training a sport pilot in my country and I would like to keep doing that (or rather restarting from scratch) here in the US. I'm aware of the TSA clearance required for aliens wishing to start flight training and I'm the process of obtaining it; however I've been told by the international office of my university that enrolling in a flight school could be a violation of my immigration status. They are not sure, the TSA refers me to USCIS and they (as contacted by the flight school staff) refer me back to the TSA. I'd like to shed some light on this issue.
I'd also like to make clear that the reason for my being here is completely unrelated to airplanes, flight or flight training -- I'm a computer engineer. Flying is and will continue to be just a hobby, something to do on Saturday afternoons for at most 3-4 hours a week, probably less if I won't have so much money to spend on it. I'm also already quite good at it (~25 hours under my belt) but formally I'll have to start from scratch because previous experience in the category I trained for in my country is not recognized here in the US. I'll also focus on single engine light sport aircraft, exclusively for recreational purposes (no passengers, no nothing). Obviously no matter how the flight training thing will end I'll keep working full-time during weekdays (and some more...) at the university.
Am I trying to do anything illegal or that might make me fall out of status?
Thank you everyone,
Pierluigi
I'm quite new here. I hope I'm not doing anything inappropriate by posting in this board, I've tried to use the search function to no avail.
I'm currently in the US as a J-1 exchange visitor (research scholar) to perform research at a university in Missouri. Last year I started training a sport pilot in my country and I would like to keep doing that (or rather restarting from scratch) here in the US. I'm aware of the TSA clearance required for aliens wishing to start flight training and I'm the process of obtaining it; however I've been told by the international office of my university that enrolling in a flight school could be a violation of my immigration status. They are not sure, the TSA refers me to USCIS and they (as contacted by the flight school staff) refer me back to the TSA. I'd like to shed some light on this issue.
I'd also like to make clear that the reason for my being here is completely unrelated to airplanes, flight or flight training -- I'm a computer engineer. Flying is and will continue to be just a hobby, something to do on Saturday afternoons for at most 3-4 hours a week, probably less if I won't have so much money to spend on it. I'm also already quite good at it (~25 hours under my belt) but formally I'll have to start from scratch because previous experience in the category I trained for in my country is not recognized here in the US. I'll also focus on single engine light sport aircraft, exclusively for recreational purposes (no passengers, no nothing). Obviously no matter how the flight training thing will end I'll keep working full-time during weekdays (and some more...) at the university.
Am I trying to do anything illegal or that might make me fall out of status?
Thank you everyone,
Pierluigi
more...
house funny quotes on life and love.
kaisersose
07-27 02:48 PM
Thanks. I will ask my employer if they can provide me one.
The Labor is of no use to you, except to feel secure that they indeed applied for your Labor. But since you have already applied for your 485 and have an RD, it is obvious there was a labor and that is all you really need.
Since you have already applied for 485, a 140 copy would be pretty much useless too. I would not sweat it out.
For AC21, it is better to have a 485 receipt copy. Make sure you get that. You will also need it if you travel outside the US before your AP arrives.
The Labor is of no use to you, except to feel secure that they indeed applied for your Labor. But since you have already applied for your 485 and have an RD, it is obvious there was a labor and that is all you really need.
Since you have already applied for 485, a 140 copy would be pretty much useless too. I would not sweat it out.
For AC21, it is better to have a 485 receipt copy. Make sure you get that. You will also need it if you travel outside the US before your AP arrives.
tattoo funny quotes on life and love.
immigrationmatters30
01-16 08:23 AM
Nothing in this bill talks about the increasing EB VISA numbers but they have clause for the family based VISA numbers to about 1Million.I know Mr.Obama would bring "change" but it is not going to be good for us. Anytime he talked about legal immigration, he only made references to family based immigration backlogs. Never have I heard him talk about EB VISA backlogs.I think we are in for a change which not going be so good after all.
more...
pictures funny quotes about life and
hebron
06-23 08:25 AM
Mine is the same company that applied for EB2 in the first place
Thanks Jamesingham, Did you get your PERM approval? When you applied for EB2 with the same employer that filed your EB3, were your job descriptions atleast 50% different?
Thanks.
Thanks Jamesingham, Did you get your PERM approval? When you applied for EB2 with the same employer that filed your EB3, were your job descriptions atleast 50% different?
Thanks.
dresses funny quotes on life and love
bindas74
01-17 06:15 PM
I see that Dream Act folks are trying to get > 60000 points, to showcase their support. We need to match for the posts like Legal Immigration in there. Currently the top posts for "legal immigration" are around 2000 points. Not many ppl are not taking interest.
Please vote up on our causes! Easy job..but please act!
I think anti-immigrant groups are voting down on pro-immigrant policies. So, one should vote down on all anti-immigrant policies as well. Just voting up on pro-immigrantion policies wont help I guess
Please vote up on our causes! Easy job..but please act!
I think anti-immigrant groups are voting down on pro-immigrant policies. So, one should vote down on all anti-immigrant policies as well. Just voting up on pro-immigrantion policies wont help I guess
more...
makeup funny quotes about friends and
Blog Feeds
10-15 06:30 PM
[Federal Register: October 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 192)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
girlfriend emotional quotes on life and
leo2606
01-09 11:44 PM
Probably you are right for EB3 ROW but I don't think that is true for EB2 ROW.
I would have said 2020 but as you are not part of India or china may be 2015.
I would have said 2020 but as you are not part of India or china may be 2015.
hairstyles funny quotes on life images.
Beemar
10-01 11:47 PM
... If you are one of those Indians who has an innate desire to look at everything with a shade of pink glasses you should reconsider living here. Airlines don’t fly one way from India to US. You can always take the flight back home. 16-hour workdays, a fantastic work life balance, and all basic amenities await you in the land of kamadhenu (the sacred mythological cow that gave the Hindu Gods everything they needed for a happy life)
Now now, you don't have to be so sarcastic, do you? Our career in America is a purely economic venture. It is beneficial to both us and USA. We get good money working here and US gets skilled labor for its labor starved hi-tech industry. After all US does invite us to work here by giving us work visa, isn't it. Do you think US will be churning out work visas if they can find sufficient US citizens tech workers? So pal, its all business, nothing personal. You don't have to make snide remarks on your motherland in order to justify your stay in US.
Now now, you don't have to be so sarcastic, do you? Our career in America is a purely economic venture. It is beneficial to both us and USA. We get good money working here and US gets skilled labor for its labor starved hi-tech industry. After all US does invite us to work here by giving us work visa, isn't it. Do you think US will be churning out work visas if they can find sufficient US citizens tech workers? So pal, its all business, nothing personal. You don't have to make snide remarks on your motherland in order to justify your stay in US.
Libra
07-15 04:10 PM
Its very simple, they are anti-immigrant channels, dont you know lou dobbs, o'rielly anti-immigrant shows have more ratings, so there is no way they want their viewer change their mind on immigration system. they are surviving on anti-immigrant programs.
All we can do is exposing their lies, and make atleast few of them know most trusted new channels are not so trustable.
I have the same question. If somebody knows please let us know
All we can do is exposing their lies, and make atleast few of them know most trusted new channels are not so trustable.
I have the same question. If somebody knows please let us know
GCSeeker123
03-24 12:07 PM
Yes you can Port your PD if your EB3 I-140 is Approved.
Once the I-140 gets Approved the PD is locked.
You can file a Labor under EB2 Using your MBA degree, once this Labor gets
Approved attach your OLD EB3 I-140 Copy and Port to your NEW EB2 Case.
Once the I-140 gets Approved the PD is locked.
You can file a Labor under EB2 Using your MBA degree, once this Labor gets
Approved attach your OLD EB3 I-140 Copy and Port to your NEW EB2 Case.
No comments:
Post a Comment