raju123
06-01 04:00 PM
This might be useful to you.
Age-Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "Child Status Protection Act"
The "Child Status Protection Act", effective August 6, 2002, addresses the problems of minor children losing their eligibility for certain immigration benefits as a result of INS (now USCIS) processing delays. Prior to the passage of this law, a child's eligibility in Employment-Based Immigration situations to be part of his or her parent's application as a derivative beneficiary was based on the child's age at the time that the child's I-485 was adjudicated. Because of enormous backlogs and processing delays, many children turned 21 before the their I-485 applications were adjudicated. In such cases, the children "age-out" and are no longer considered to be part of the parent's application and lose their eligibility to obtain green cards as a derivative beneficiary.
Children who otherwise would have aged out may successfully adjust their status through the additional interplay of the new Concurrent Filing rule and the "Child Status Protection Act." According to the "Child Status Protection Act," the eligibility of these aging-out children will be determined by their age at the date a visa becomes available to them minus the number of days that the Employment-Based immigration petition was pending. Furthermore, these children must file for permanent resident status within one year of such availability. For a clearer illustration of this rule, please see the different scenarios below.
Example 1
The Labor Certification application that was submitted on John's behalf on January 1, 2000 was later approved on December 31, 2000. Afterwards, his employer submits an I-140 (EB-2) immigration petition on John's behalf on January 1, 2002. At that time, John's son, Junior, is 20 years and 7 months old. John's I-140 petition was pending for six months and was approved on July 1, 2002, one month after Junior turns 21 years of age. The visa number for EB-2 was available for John on July 1, 2002. Under the old law without the Child Status Protection Act, Junior has aged out because he is now 21 years old. However, under the new law, his age is fixed as of the date that a visa number becomes available minus the number of days that the I-140 was pending. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, these six months must be subtracted from Junior's age at the time the visa number became available on July 1, 2002. Subtracting six months from Junior's age of 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, Junior's age is fixed at 20 years and 7 months. Thus, even though he was already 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, he is still considered a "child" for purposes of accompanying his parents in adjusting his status to permanent residence. However, Junior has to file his I-485 within one year from the date of I-140 approval, that is before July 1, 2003. The length of time that is takes the USCIS to adjudicate Junior's case is no longer important in these cases.
According to "Child Status Protection Act", if through the above calculation, the child's age is fixed at 21 or older, the child would be automatically reclassified to an appropriate category and retains the principal beneficiary's original priority date. Please see the next example below.
Example 2
Same facts as above except that Junior is 21 years and seven months old at the time of John's I-140 approval. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, Junior's age will be fixed at 21 years and one month. Even with the Child Status Protection Act, Junior still ages out and may not adjust his status at this time. However, he will automatically be reclassified to an appropriate category, family-based 2B, and retain his father's original priority date, January 1, 2000, which is the date John's employer filed John's Labor Certification application.
Example 3
Richard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. Richard's son, Simon, is 21 years and one month old. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Richard filed his I-485 because the visa number was currently available for Richard at that time. However, Simon cannot file his I-485 with his father because he aged out.
Example 4
Howard's daughter, Rachel, is 20 years and 10 months old. Howard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Howard and Rachel filed their I-485 since the visa number was available for Howard at that time. Thus, according to the "Child Status Protection Act," no matter how much time Howard's I-140 is pending, Rachel will not age out.
Visa numbers are currently available to all EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. Thus, with the new Concurrent Filing rule, any person who is a beneficiary (or applicant) of an I-140 petition that has already been filed or is filing the I-140 at this time is now eligible to file the I-485 application as well. Family members will be eligible to file the I-485 along with the principal alien. However, since the Concurrent Filing rule became effective, visa numbers may become unavailable in the future because more eligible aliens will be filing their I-485. Thus, eligible aliens with aging-out children should file their I-485 as soon as possible. Please see next example.
Example 5
Jenny filed her I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 10, 2002. Jenny has a son, Benny, who is 20 years and eleven months old. However, due to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, many aliens have filed their I-140 and I-485 together and the visa number for EB-2 has been exhausted. However, the visa number will not be current until December 2002 when Benny will be 21 years and three months old. If Jenny's I-140 is pending for six months and will be approved in February 2003, these six months will be reduced from Benny's age in December 2002 when he is 21 years and three months old. Thus, his age is fixed as 20 years nine months. However, if Jenny's I-140 petition is pending for only two months and will be approved in October 2002, Benny's age will be fixed as 21 years and one month. Thus, Benny ages out in this scenario and must wait until his priority date under family-based 2B immigration becomes current.
Example 6
Jason filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on June 30, 2002. Jason has a son, Ken, who is 20 years and ten months old at that time. According to the visa bulletin, an immigration visa number became available for Jason on July 31, 2002. Ken was 20 years and eleven months on July 31, and he is not in the U.S. but in his home country. Because of the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule Jason filed his I-485 on August 10, 2002. If Jason's I-140 is pending for 6 months until December 31, 2002, one month pending period from June 30 to July 31, 2002 should be subtracted from Ken's age on July 31, 2002. Thus, Ken's age is fixed as 20 years and 10 months. Ken may apply for his immigrant visa through Consular Processing at U.S. Consulate in his home country within one year from July 31, 2002.
For more information about "Age Out", please click the following topics:
What is "Age Out"
Child Status Protection Act
If you are a USC, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
If you are an LPR or will be an LPR, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
Age Out Problems in Employment-Based Immigration
Age Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "CSPA"
Child of Asylee and Refugee
Unmarried Sons or Daughters of Naturalized Citizens
Effective Date of the CSPA
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
Age-Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "Child Status Protection Act"
The "Child Status Protection Act", effective August 6, 2002, addresses the problems of minor children losing their eligibility for certain immigration benefits as a result of INS (now USCIS) processing delays. Prior to the passage of this law, a child's eligibility in Employment-Based Immigration situations to be part of his or her parent's application as a derivative beneficiary was based on the child's age at the time that the child's I-485 was adjudicated. Because of enormous backlogs and processing delays, many children turned 21 before the their I-485 applications were adjudicated. In such cases, the children "age-out" and are no longer considered to be part of the parent's application and lose their eligibility to obtain green cards as a derivative beneficiary.
Children who otherwise would have aged out may successfully adjust their status through the additional interplay of the new Concurrent Filing rule and the "Child Status Protection Act." According to the "Child Status Protection Act," the eligibility of these aging-out children will be determined by their age at the date a visa becomes available to them minus the number of days that the Employment-Based immigration petition was pending. Furthermore, these children must file for permanent resident status within one year of such availability. For a clearer illustration of this rule, please see the different scenarios below.
Example 1
The Labor Certification application that was submitted on John's behalf on January 1, 2000 was later approved on December 31, 2000. Afterwards, his employer submits an I-140 (EB-2) immigration petition on John's behalf on January 1, 2002. At that time, John's son, Junior, is 20 years and 7 months old. John's I-140 petition was pending for six months and was approved on July 1, 2002, one month after Junior turns 21 years of age. The visa number for EB-2 was available for John on July 1, 2002. Under the old law without the Child Status Protection Act, Junior has aged out because he is now 21 years old. However, under the new law, his age is fixed as of the date that a visa number becomes available minus the number of days that the I-140 was pending. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, these six months must be subtracted from Junior's age at the time the visa number became available on July 1, 2002. Subtracting six months from Junior's age of 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, Junior's age is fixed at 20 years and 7 months. Thus, even though he was already 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, he is still considered a "child" for purposes of accompanying his parents in adjusting his status to permanent residence. However, Junior has to file his I-485 within one year from the date of I-140 approval, that is before July 1, 2003. The length of time that is takes the USCIS to adjudicate Junior's case is no longer important in these cases.
According to "Child Status Protection Act", if through the above calculation, the child's age is fixed at 21 or older, the child would be automatically reclassified to an appropriate category and retains the principal beneficiary's original priority date. Please see the next example below.
Example 2
Same facts as above except that Junior is 21 years and seven months old at the time of John's I-140 approval. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, Junior's age will be fixed at 21 years and one month. Even with the Child Status Protection Act, Junior still ages out and may not adjust his status at this time. However, he will automatically be reclassified to an appropriate category, family-based 2B, and retain his father's original priority date, January 1, 2000, which is the date John's employer filed John's Labor Certification application.
Example 3
Richard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. Richard's son, Simon, is 21 years and one month old. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Richard filed his I-485 because the visa number was currently available for Richard at that time. However, Simon cannot file his I-485 with his father because he aged out.
Example 4
Howard's daughter, Rachel, is 20 years and 10 months old. Howard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Howard and Rachel filed their I-485 since the visa number was available for Howard at that time. Thus, according to the "Child Status Protection Act," no matter how much time Howard's I-140 is pending, Rachel will not age out.
Visa numbers are currently available to all EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. Thus, with the new Concurrent Filing rule, any person who is a beneficiary (or applicant) of an I-140 petition that has already been filed or is filing the I-140 at this time is now eligible to file the I-485 application as well. Family members will be eligible to file the I-485 along with the principal alien. However, since the Concurrent Filing rule became effective, visa numbers may become unavailable in the future because more eligible aliens will be filing their I-485. Thus, eligible aliens with aging-out children should file their I-485 as soon as possible. Please see next example.
Example 5
Jenny filed her I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 10, 2002. Jenny has a son, Benny, who is 20 years and eleven months old. However, due to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, many aliens have filed their I-140 and I-485 together and the visa number for EB-2 has been exhausted. However, the visa number will not be current until December 2002 when Benny will be 21 years and three months old. If Jenny's I-140 is pending for six months and will be approved in February 2003, these six months will be reduced from Benny's age in December 2002 when he is 21 years and three months old. Thus, his age is fixed as 20 years nine months. However, if Jenny's I-140 petition is pending for only two months and will be approved in October 2002, Benny's age will be fixed as 21 years and one month. Thus, Benny ages out in this scenario and must wait until his priority date under family-based 2B immigration becomes current.
Example 6
Jason filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on June 30, 2002. Jason has a son, Ken, who is 20 years and ten months old at that time. According to the visa bulletin, an immigration visa number became available for Jason on July 31, 2002. Ken was 20 years and eleven months on July 31, and he is not in the U.S. but in his home country. Because of the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule Jason filed his I-485 on August 10, 2002. If Jason's I-140 is pending for 6 months until December 31, 2002, one month pending period from June 30 to July 31, 2002 should be subtracted from Ken's age on July 31, 2002. Thus, Ken's age is fixed as 20 years and 10 months. Ken may apply for his immigrant visa through Consular Processing at U.S. Consulate in his home country within one year from July 31, 2002.
For more information about "Age Out", please click the following topics:
What is "Age Out"
Child Status Protection Act
If you are a USC, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
If you are an LPR or will be an LPR, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
Age Out Problems in Employment-Based Immigration
Age Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "CSPA"
Child of Asylee and Refugee
Unmarried Sons or Daughters of Naturalized Citizens
Effective Date of the CSPA
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
wallpaper Kullan.net Wallpaper hackers
dpp
07-06 12:04 PM
The Visa Bulletin for July 2007 must be read in conjunction with the Update of July Visa Availability.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html
I don't know why they changed it suddenly.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html
I don't know why they changed it suddenly.
jonty_11
07-11 03:18 PM
I must commend the folks who hunt the Mumbai bulletin hrs/day before the Official Bulletin comes out..Kudos to them...
2011 hacker wallpapers. hackers wallpaper.
vinabath
07-20 03:43 PM
Preparing for future is one thing but if you think that this is a valuable thread then go with it and enjoy, i just find it disheartening that people are trying to undermine whatever has been achieved by such threads (Like i said, he might be completely right but is there a need to tell it this way) and what are you going to prepare for the future ;) Do you know it ? (If you do, please keep it to yourself and enjoy or cry about it). Right now, i want to be positive and enjoy the fruits of what IV has done to get some relief, why use negative logic to undermine it and that is what i am saying. Leave us alone, who like IV and who want to have a moment's respite. Chill out dude, no offence meant and this my only response, will not reply if you attack me, so cool off.
Again 'Chill out' dude. This has nothing to do with IV achievements. Please ignore this thread.
Again 'Chill out' dude. This has nothing to do with IV achievements. Please ignore this thread.
more...
hpandey
07-06 10:32 AM
Most leaders are actually volunteers in IV. They have a regular full time job.
What you are saying: "who can take a flight to Washington DC on Monday morning, change the law by noon to issue GC to every EB category, have a lunch at Olive Garden, come back monday evening" :
For this you need to hire full time lobbyist which costs a lot
of money. IV budget is nowhere close to that the Hispanic lobby group:
National council of La Raza whose budget is
$40 million or $1.3 billion including its �affiliates� network.
IV is a tiny organization in front of La Raza. Thats....a BILLION with which they hire full time lobbyist.
I strongly suggest you listen to the audio interview to understand how big the hispanic
lobby is and get some reality check of how things work in US politics.
Raul Yzaguirre on Past and Future of La Raza : NPR (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4229605)
Even with such power also they cant pass CIR. But at least they ensure that no
EB or illegal immigration reform will pass unless there is something for illegals.
I agree with you . In fact I commend the IV leadership for at least giving us a platform. If someone believes that by a budget of 50 K to 100K a year IV can do some miracle then I guess they are deluding themselves.
I don't know much about behind the scenes IV leadership but I respect them for taking time off and doing something for the EB community .
Money talks in this country. Maybe IV people had good ideas or bad ideas but without money I don;t think anyone is going to hear our voice OR we need mass involvement - even that is not there . Although 30,000 people are IV members but when you need them except a couple of hundred you don't see anyone.
How can an organiation work which can't even collect 5K a month from its members . We all are willing to spend hundreds ( sometimes thousands ) of dollars on EAD, AP , H1, labor, I-140, I-485, lawyers etc etc and don't even spend 100$ a year ( yes not month - a year ) .
Most of the people come here to check forums or get free advice.
For this reason alone I cannot fault IV leadership and I respect them .
What you are saying: "who can take a flight to Washington DC on Monday morning, change the law by noon to issue GC to every EB category, have a lunch at Olive Garden, come back monday evening" :
For this you need to hire full time lobbyist which costs a lot
of money. IV budget is nowhere close to that the Hispanic lobby group:
National council of La Raza whose budget is
$40 million or $1.3 billion including its �affiliates� network.
IV is a tiny organization in front of La Raza. Thats....a BILLION with which they hire full time lobbyist.
I strongly suggest you listen to the audio interview to understand how big the hispanic
lobby is and get some reality check of how things work in US politics.
Raul Yzaguirre on Past and Future of La Raza : NPR (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4229605)
Even with such power also they cant pass CIR. But at least they ensure that no
EB or illegal immigration reform will pass unless there is something for illegals.
I agree with you . In fact I commend the IV leadership for at least giving us a platform. If someone believes that by a budget of 50 K to 100K a year IV can do some miracle then I guess they are deluding themselves.
I don't know much about behind the scenes IV leadership but I respect them for taking time off and doing something for the EB community .
Money talks in this country. Maybe IV people had good ideas or bad ideas but without money I don;t think anyone is going to hear our voice OR we need mass involvement - even that is not there . Although 30,000 people are IV members but when you need them except a couple of hundred you don't see anyone.
How can an organiation work which can't even collect 5K a month from its members . We all are willing to spend hundreds ( sometimes thousands ) of dollars on EAD, AP , H1, labor, I-140, I-485, lawyers etc etc and don't even spend 100$ a year ( yes not month - a year ) .
Most of the people come here to check forums or get free advice.
For this reason alone I cannot fault IV leadership and I respect them .
CADude
07-18 04:16 PM
priti8888, What is the USCIS 485 processing date in your senario?
Your Receive Date is a factor but PD is also a big factor, if limited number available.
If two person has submitted their application. One has PD 2001 and RD June 10 2007 and other had PD Jan 2006 with RD May 1 2006.
USCIS 485 Processing Date: June 15th 2007 and Visa Bullitin has "C"
Still PD with 2001 will get the the number first before PD 2006 case.
So
485 RD < USCIS 485 Processing date and PD < Visa Bulletin date
Order by PD desc
hope this help
I am still confused in regards to who whould be eligible for a visa number.
For instance (assumption:all other factors same for both A and B(name check, country etc)
Senario A
EB3
PD 2004
485 receipt date 2005
OR
Senario B
EB3
PD 2003
485 receipt date 2006
So under present circumstances when everything is current, who whould get alloted a visa number first??
Your Receive Date is a factor but PD is also a big factor, if limited number available.
If two person has submitted their application. One has PD 2001 and RD June 10 2007 and other had PD Jan 2006 with RD May 1 2006.
USCIS 485 Processing Date: June 15th 2007 and Visa Bullitin has "C"
Still PD with 2001 will get the the number first before PD 2006 case.
So
485 RD < USCIS 485 Processing date and PD < Visa Bulletin date
Order by PD desc
hope this help
I am still confused in regards to who whould be eligible for a visa number.
For instance (assumption:all other factors same for both A and B(name check, country etc)
Senario A
EB3
PD 2004
485 receipt date 2005
OR
Senario B
EB3
PD 2003
485 receipt date 2006
So under present circumstances when everything is current, who whould get alloted a visa number first??
more...
loudobbs
08-02 05:56 PM
Please take any news/info from thereps with a pinch of salt..
I called and the guy swore that premium processing for I140s was discontinued from May 13 2007..
Another time the guy just read the information which was avlaible online...
third time, I got the number for Premium processing center which of course was incorrect.
These reps are high school grads,, so dont expect too much...:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
I called and the guy swore that premium processing for I140s was discontinued from May 13 2007..
Another time the guy just read the information which was avlaible online...
third time, I got the number for Premium processing center which of course was incorrect.
These reps are high school grads,, so dont expect too much...:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
2010 hairstyles Hack wallpaper 7.
Pallavi79
09-14 10:20 AM
my PD is March 2003. I filed in EB3 because all EB categories are current at that time.
more...
black_logs
04-25 01:14 PM
Guys let me clearify it. We cannot change our agenda at this point . It is not an option. We have done 1000's of hr discussions with QGA and so many meetings with various Senators and Congressmen to get our agenda finalized. Adding something new to our agenda is not an option. But this is a very healthy discussion going on here. Pleople can send personal comments and ideas to the lawmakers. This is surely a very good suggestion.
. I agree. Also, since F1 is not a dual intent visa this will not hold water. Anyways this is a ridiculous demand. We are not the law makers and we should consider ourselves lucky that couple of IV's amendments are in a few of the senator�s bills, though there are no guarantees if they will be included in the final text or let alone be passed. We should only push for what is already include in the 2 bills and not confuse everyone every time one of us comes up with this "brilliant" idea of using H1B entry date as priority date. So what's the next amendment we want� include the day I first envisioned that I will come to America as the priority date. WE NEED ONE VOICE and we have already been heard so let�s stick to what is practical and push those amendments through.
. I agree. Also, since F1 is not a dual intent visa this will not hold water. Anyways this is a ridiculous demand. We are not the law makers and we should consider ourselves lucky that couple of IV's amendments are in a few of the senator�s bills, though there are no guarantees if they will be included in the final text or let alone be passed. We should only push for what is already include in the 2 bills and not confuse everyone every time one of us comes up with this "brilliant" idea of using H1B entry date as priority date. So what's the next amendment we want� include the day I first envisioned that I will come to America as the priority date. WE NEED ONE VOICE and we have already been heard so let�s stick to what is practical and push those amendments through.
hair wallpaper hacker. terça-feira,
makemygc
08-12 01:28 PM
Srikondo man,
I dont care your fight with 'buddyinus' or your friendship with 'frankzulu' and whether you were travelling by air/car/ship - I would like to ask you a SIMPLE question.
You started this thread saying that USCIS has a "deadline" for completing stuffs last Monday or last last Friday.... All of us trusted you that time - Could you please give us a responsible answer or status Update.
I hope you will reply this time.
Thanks,
I guess forum is all about sharing information that we gather from different sources. No body can assert anything not even USCIS. They open up the gate for all July filer, then closed it and then re-open it again when many protested. So, when someone shared the news that USCIS is not going to accept the july filings, everyone mocked him but that came out to be true.
Forum is all about sharing information. It depends on our judgement as how much we want to believe on that. Srikondji shared some information which he learned from the CRs, now it's up to you if you want to blindly follow that or use that information as a way to curb your anxiety.
People started cursing logiclife when he posted about the FAQ4 to be released by friday and it didn't. But it did came after 2-3 days. So someone who shared that info with Core might have just said we are trying our best to come up with FAQ4 and will release it by Friday and core shared that info with everyone. But that doesn't mean that people should take that info as if it doesn't come on Friday, it will be the end of the world and core should loose his credibility. FAQ4 did came after couple of days and all those people who were cursing logiclife were no where to be seen.
If you put up a clause that no-one should share the info, unless you have a word from God, I guess we'll not have more than 2 or 3 threads here.
So guys..bottom line is stop fighting over what someone said or not, concentrate on what you are doing about it.
As someone rightly said, "Listen to all but do what you think is right". There is similar adage in hindi but I'm not using hindi so that everyone can understand it.
Hope you understand.
I dont care your fight with 'buddyinus' or your friendship with 'frankzulu' and whether you were travelling by air/car/ship - I would like to ask you a SIMPLE question.
You started this thread saying that USCIS has a "deadline" for completing stuffs last Monday or last last Friday.... All of us trusted you that time - Could you please give us a responsible answer or status Update.
I hope you will reply this time.
Thanks,
I guess forum is all about sharing information that we gather from different sources. No body can assert anything not even USCIS. They open up the gate for all July filer, then closed it and then re-open it again when many protested. So, when someone shared the news that USCIS is not going to accept the july filings, everyone mocked him but that came out to be true.
Forum is all about sharing information. It depends on our judgement as how much we want to believe on that. Srikondji shared some information which he learned from the CRs, now it's up to you if you want to blindly follow that or use that information as a way to curb your anxiety.
People started cursing logiclife when he posted about the FAQ4 to be released by friday and it didn't. But it did came after 2-3 days. So someone who shared that info with Core might have just said we are trying our best to come up with FAQ4 and will release it by Friday and core shared that info with everyone. But that doesn't mean that people should take that info as if it doesn't come on Friday, it will be the end of the world and core should loose his credibility. FAQ4 did came after couple of days and all those people who were cursing logiclife were no where to be seen.
If you put up a clause that no-one should share the info, unless you have a word from God, I guess we'll not have more than 2 or 3 threads here.
So guys..bottom line is stop fighting over what someone said or not, concentrate on what you are doing about it.
As someone rightly said, "Listen to all but do what you think is right". There is similar adage in hindi but I'm not using hindi so that everyone can understand it.
Hope you understand.
more...
adhantari
07-06 02:56 PM
I checked 2007 return and it has only 100K asset. I am not sure we accumulated 350K since then. I think you got confused with revenue vs. cash on hand / asset.
raised 461K in 2007 and spent 400K on lobbying? Sounds like lot of money....
but looking at revenues does'nt look bad situation either...... raising 461K in one year?....
I see cash at hand 165K. #21......
raised 461K in 2007 and spent 400K on lobbying? Sounds like lot of money....
but looking at revenues does'nt look bad situation either...... raising 461K in one year?....
I see cash at hand 165K. #21......
hot hacker
anilsal
07-15 09:29 PM
to IV PO Box.
more...
house Windows 7 theme Wallpapers
h1b_forever
08-13 01:47 PM
1)I disagree with the bill, why should legal employment immigration pay for policing the border. Why only H1 and L1s? Why not other temporary and permanent immigration visas
Should not they be paying to protect the border first before everything else
2) Having said that, I cannot disagree with making it difficult for companies which have more than 50 employees with more than 50% on h1/L1. It just does not add up that they cannot employ 50% locals/residents. I would go further and make it really difficult for someone to do this unless they can really prove the need (like in case of EB1)
I know my opinion will not be popular, but think about it. I can agree they cannot fill all their jobs with locals, but not even 50%, come on some one will have to show me why they can not do that. The only reason I can think of
1)Their pay will not attract people
2)They wont pay overtime and make them work like dogs
3)They come here for a short duration to help outsource the jobs
Should not they be paying to protect the border first before everything else
2) Having said that, I cannot disagree with making it difficult for companies which have more than 50 employees with more than 50% on h1/L1. It just does not add up that they cannot employ 50% locals/residents. I would go further and make it really difficult for someone to do this unless they can really prove the need (like in case of EB1)
I know my opinion will not be popular, but think about it. I can agree they cannot fill all their jobs with locals, but not even 50%, come on some one will have to show me why they can not do that. The only reason I can think of
1)Their pay will not attract people
2)They wont pay overtime and make them work like dogs
3)They come here for a short duration to help outsource the jobs
tattoo makeup hacker wallpapers.
sam_hoosier
08-26 01:47 PM
I know this is not the Forum to discuss this matter.
But I hope this should answer some questions
1. Home Loans if the Loan is taken from a US Bank/Mortgage lender
then it is Tax deductible because they send out a 1040 at the end of Tax year.
2. But if the Home Loan is taken from a a NON-US Bank, then it is not Tax deductible in the US. As they do not send out a 1040.
I am not sure thats correct.
Per IRS regulation Section 163 (C), as well as Publication 936, interest paid on primary and secondary residences up to an aggregate one million dollars in loan amount is tax deductible. The IRS regulation does not specify that the home must be located in the United States, and thus it seems logical that interest paid on a home loan on property in India is in fact deductible
(please consult your tax advisor for applicability to your specific tax situation).
But I hope this should answer some questions
1. Home Loans if the Loan is taken from a US Bank/Mortgage lender
then it is Tax deductible because they send out a 1040 at the end of Tax year.
2. But if the Home Loan is taken from a a NON-US Bank, then it is not Tax deductible in the US. As they do not send out a 1040.
I am not sure thats correct.
Per IRS regulation Section 163 (C), as well as Publication 936, interest paid on primary and secondary residences up to an aggregate one million dollars in loan amount is tax deductible. The IRS regulation does not specify that the home must be located in the United States, and thus it seems logical that interest paid on a home loan on property in India is in fact deductible
(please consult your tax advisor for applicability to your specific tax situation).
more...
pictures Earlier wallpaper, hacker
lg72
07-25 08:12 PM
Here is a bit of background. BEC's have been using a web site named 'America's Job Bank' (AJB) for posting job listings for cases that have not been converted to RIR. Effective 31st July AJB site is being discontinued and a new site named 'America's Job Exchange' (AJE) will become its successor. BECs have already started using this new site. Here is how to check if your job is posted or not:
1. Go to http://www.americasjobexchange.com/seeker/jobsearch/keyword
2. In the keywords field, enter the first few characters of your ETA case number. If your case is in PBEC and has a ETA case number such as P-xxxxx-xxxxx, then you would enter either Pxx* or xxx*. Do not enter any hyphen character and do not forget the '*' character at the end.
3. Choose 'National' radio button and click 'Search Now' button.
4. You will find a bunch of listings under the company name 'Team Exceed'. This is probably the company to which BEC cases have been outsourced for adjudication.
5. Play around with different combinations of letters of your ETA case number. You may also click on 'Team Exceed' link on the results page to see a complete list of jobs posted by BECs.
Have fun
fb
Thanks so much, fairboy.
I will try your steps...
1. Go to http://www.americasjobexchange.com/seeker/jobsearch/keyword
2. In the keywords field, enter the first few characters of your ETA case number. If your case is in PBEC and has a ETA case number such as P-xxxxx-xxxxx, then you would enter either Pxx* or xxx*. Do not enter any hyphen character and do not forget the '*' character at the end.
3. Choose 'National' radio button and click 'Search Now' button.
4. You will find a bunch of listings under the company name 'Team Exceed'. This is probably the company to which BEC cases have been outsourced for adjudication.
5. Play around with different combinations of letters of your ETA case number. You may also click on 'Team Exceed' link on the results page to see a complete list of jobs posted by BECs.
Have fun
fb
Thanks so much, fairboy.
I will try your steps...
dresses Cheia de hackers e lammers
GoldRod
09-10 03:11 PM
Guys,
Its only Green card and I am not sure why people get upset big deal. Nobody asked us to move here. And if there is a system in place we cannot be saying its bad and this and that. My PD is DEC 04 do I feel bad someone in 2006 gets it. YES. Is the system crappy yes. I have a MS in US. So all this hoopla about US ms are getting it and not us is wrong. The other question is should I be getting it over others who dont have a MS from US. I believe yes we should.
but thats my thoughts on the subject if someone does not like it I respect his thoughts.
*********
Agree with you. Nobody cares about this system, because it does not serve those who vote.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/images/icons/icon10.gif
Its only Green card and I am not sure why people get upset big deal. Nobody asked us to move here. And if there is a system in place we cannot be saying its bad and this and that. My PD is DEC 04 do I feel bad someone in 2006 gets it. YES. Is the system crappy yes. I have a MS in US. So all this hoopla about US ms are getting it and not us is wrong. The other question is should I be getting it over others who dont have a MS from US. I believe yes we should.
but thats my thoughts on the subject if someone does not like it I respect his thoughts.
*********
Agree with you. Nobody cares about this system, because it does not serve those who vote.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/images/icons/icon10.gif
more...
makeup 768 in Hacking WallpaperS
glus
08-12 09:51 AM
I'm asking this question again. Can someone please respond?
Uscis will mark it received on the 3rd. Anyway, what's the difference?
Uscis will mark it received on the 3rd. Anyway, what's the difference?
girlfriend hackers wallpaper.
chanduv23
09-10 10:01 AM
They most of the approvals are of US Master degree and above as it is straight fwd EB2 no need to verify skill set etc..
Not quite true - this is done at 140 not 485
Not quite true - this is done at 140 not 485
hairstyles Heart Hacker Wallpaper - Page
chanduv23
11-21 04:54 PM
You know what, my head is going bananas. What you said makes sense too. May be it finally boils down to what IO thinks who is handling your case and LUCK!
Not really h1b is a different track all together. If 485 is denied and the denial is final - person is still free to work till h1b expires thats why lawyers say h1b is safer
Not really h1b is a different track all together. If 485 is denied and the denial is final - person is still free to work till h1b expires thats why lawyers say h1b is safer
yawl
08-02 05:05 PM
An article confirmed the number (~76K):
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Jan%20Pederson%208-2-07.pdf
"3. The unofficial reports are that the Texas Service Center received approximately 40,000 I-485 applications during the first day or two in July and the Nebraska Service Center received approximately 35,000 I-485 applications during the same period of time. "
Since I was bored at work, I called this number and talked with a rep this morning @10. She told me that they have 76K applications pending for the receipt date as of July 27th. She said this two times thinking me to take on with surprise with this huge number. Yes, of course I am surprised. Is it only 76K apps by July 27th?
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Jan%20Pederson%208-2-07.pdf
"3. The unofficial reports are that the Texas Service Center received approximately 40,000 I-485 applications during the first day or two in July and the Nebraska Service Center received approximately 35,000 I-485 applications during the same period of time. "
Since I was bored at work, I called this number and talked with a rep this morning @10. She told me that they have 76K applications pending for the receipt date as of July 27th. She said this two times thinking me to take on with surprise with this huge number. Yes, of course I am surprised. Is it only 76K apps by July 27th?
pappu
08-12 12:29 PM
The senator is missing it or dodging it - it clearly means one thing -we are invisible as constituents. We are being taken for a ride only because we do not speak up or go meet our lawmakers. They do not see us as ordinary constituents having the same issues as their other constituents. The whole human -angle is missing.
We have to go meet our lawmakers and explain to them our part of the story/ They need to be told and made aware that we live in their constituencies and our grievances are genuine and need to be addressed.
And although this particular bill does not affect people that are here already.. Beware!! the noose is tightening- the next on the chopping block is EB Immigrants.To answer your question: Indian companies in India or Indian politicians complaining will not do much impact. After passing this bill politicians will cosy up and say good things to rebuild relations. The real impact can happen if Indians in New York state who can vote stand up against such laws. Same goes for the Desi companies who have tried to raise the voice against USCIS memo. They lack grassroots advocacy and support. Their Indian US citizen friends are busy organizing Diwali melas and Shahrukh Khan stage shows. Immigration voice can be extremely successful if politicians see us as an immigrant lobby. Just like they see Jewish lobby or Hispanic lobby. This is why participation of IV greencard members and citizen friends is important to advocate for changes that helps the immigrant community. I this case too, IV community should not turn a blind eye to what happens around us. Just because we do not work for such companies or we already have EAD does not mean we do not see beyond the headline of this issue. We spend more time analyzing , over analyzing, predicting and tracking rather than actively understanding the politics of issues that are causing all the problems we are facing. To some extent this law passed because Indians in USA did not care due to their narrow outlook and priorities in politics.
We have to go meet our lawmakers and explain to them our part of the story/ They need to be told and made aware that we live in their constituencies and our grievances are genuine and need to be addressed.
And although this particular bill does not affect people that are here already.. Beware!! the noose is tightening- the next on the chopping block is EB Immigrants.To answer your question: Indian companies in India or Indian politicians complaining will not do much impact. After passing this bill politicians will cosy up and say good things to rebuild relations. The real impact can happen if Indians in New York state who can vote stand up against such laws. Same goes for the Desi companies who have tried to raise the voice against USCIS memo. They lack grassroots advocacy and support. Their Indian US citizen friends are busy organizing Diwali melas and Shahrukh Khan stage shows. Immigration voice can be extremely successful if politicians see us as an immigrant lobby. Just like they see Jewish lobby or Hispanic lobby. This is why participation of IV greencard members and citizen friends is important to advocate for changes that helps the immigrant community. I this case too, IV community should not turn a blind eye to what happens around us. Just because we do not work for such companies or we already have EAD does not mean we do not see beyond the headline of this issue. We spend more time analyzing , over analyzing, predicting and tracking rather than actively understanding the politics of issues that are causing all the problems we are facing. To some extent this law passed because Indians in USA did not care due to their narrow outlook and priorities in politics.
No comments:
Post a Comment