augustus
01-31 09:39 PM
Dear all,
I am sorry to post here. I know this is wrong but don't know where to go to. Could someone please help me and tell me how you can diversify your savings as an NRI for a safe secure future?
Thank you for your support.
Again, my apologies.
I am sorry to post here. I know this is wrong but don't know where to go to. Could someone please help me and tell me how you can diversify your savings as an NRI for a safe secure future?
Thank you for your support.
Again, my apologies.
wallpaper BMW 335d 2006
Kevin Sadler
June 16th, 2005, 09:59 AM
this is going to be very subjective. even though there is detail less black in the first one in the nect area i think it "looks" fine. in my opinion there is too much detail less black in the second one, that makes it "look" too dark. also the first one is sooo good there's not much you can do with the second one to bring it to that level. thx, kevin
immi2006
05-24 09:14 AM
If you want to make decisions do it based on career progress not on GC.
I seriously doubt if you can get your GC IMHO, reason being with 7 % of 90000 being a small number for any country. Particularly India / China, DO you know something - there are thousands in line from 2002 onwards waiting to file 485.
Even after 10 years of wait the number will still not be enough to fill the 485 backlog. I do not want to sound as someone not wishing you well. I am touching on ground realities.
I seriously doubt if you can get your GC IMHO, reason being with 7 % of 90000 being a small number for any country. Particularly India / China, DO you know something - there are thousands in line from 2002 onwards waiting to file 485.
Even after 10 years of wait the number will still not be enough to fill the 485 backlog. I do not want to sound as someone not wishing you well. I am touching on ground realities.
2011 2007 BMW 335I Software And
GCHope2011
05-15 11:25 PM
Current Status: H1 (visa stamp expires Sept 2011)
Citizen-India
Current: Company A (Has filed for h1 extention on May 1 under normal processing)
Future: Company B (Has filed for Transfer under Premium Processing as of May 6)
Currently employed with A. Company B lawyer has filed a transfer on May 6 Premium Process.(I believe current status is LCA is under process).
I plan to resign on May 21 with A and travel abroad to Dubai On May 22. Will be back on June3 to usa
>Can i travel abroad even if my tranfer is under process
>When i enter, what documents do I need to show at POE?
> Can i enter with Company A visa stamp
>Any issues if current employer informs USCIS about my resignation?
Its a emergency travel i cannot avoid. What needs to be done to make my trip
Please do confirm with a reliable attorney as some interpretations of the rules indicate that leaving the country while an application is pending for adjudication implies abandonement of the application.
Not sure if it applies in the case of H1 transfer pending case or not... so it is best to check with someone reliable.
Citizen-India
Current: Company A (Has filed for h1 extention on May 1 under normal processing)
Future: Company B (Has filed for Transfer under Premium Processing as of May 6)
Currently employed with A. Company B lawyer has filed a transfer on May 6 Premium Process.(I believe current status is LCA is under process).
I plan to resign on May 21 with A and travel abroad to Dubai On May 22. Will be back on June3 to usa
>Can i travel abroad even if my tranfer is under process
>When i enter, what documents do I need to show at POE?
> Can i enter with Company A visa stamp
>Any issues if current employer informs USCIS about my resignation?
Its a emergency travel i cannot avoid. What needs to be done to make my trip
Please do confirm with a reliable attorney as some interpretations of the rules indicate that leaving the country while an application is pending for adjudication implies abandonement of the application.
Not sure if it applies in the case of H1 transfer pending case or not... so it is best to check with someone reliable.
more...
dask
04-20 07:55 PM
Just got my passport renewed at SF.
Applied in person and opted to get it back in the mail.
Got it in hand exactly in a week from application date...(pretty smooth)....
And i used 2X2 in photo instead of 3.5X3.5 cms....both are ok.
They will adjust it properly in your passport for you...
All the best.
Hi All,
I am scheduled to visit India in July-09 and comeback in August-09 this year, My passport expires on Nov 2009. I will be using AP and also I have H1b stamp valid till may 27 th 2010.Is it necessary to renew the passport now or I can do it after I come back from India, is there any rule that your passport has to be valid for more than 6 months while enetring US?Please advice
Thanks
EB3-I
PD Jan 2002
I-140 cleared in 2006
I-485 received date Aug27 2007
Applied in person and opted to get it back in the mail.
Got it in hand exactly in a week from application date...(pretty smooth)....
And i used 2X2 in photo instead of 3.5X3.5 cms....both are ok.
They will adjust it properly in your passport for you...
All the best.
Hi All,
I am scheduled to visit India in July-09 and comeback in August-09 this year, My passport expires on Nov 2009. I will be using AP and also I have H1b stamp valid till may 27 th 2010.Is it necessary to renew the passport now or I can do it after I come back from India, is there any rule that your passport has to be valid for more than 6 months while enetring US?Please advice
Thanks
EB3-I
PD Jan 2002
I-140 cleared in 2006
I-485 received date Aug27 2007
vedicman
01-04 08:34 AM
Ten years ago, George W. Bush came to Washington as the first new president in a generation or more who had deep personal convictions about immigration policy and some plans for where he wanted to go with it. He wasn't alone. Lots of people in lots of places were ready to work on the issue: Republicans, Democrats, Hispanic advocates, business leaders, even the Mexican government.
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
more...
jsb
01-29 09:55 AM
Man wish it was true, or atleast let them make the damn thing current again so that i can file 485 for my wife.... atleast she gets EAD to start working......... and i can also get stimulus benefit...
If someone has truely heard that retrogression may end, it may mean that PD cutoffs can not move backward (thus making them think and work before cutoff date movement is decided). This makes sense, and should be the case in any sensible system.
If someone has truely heard that retrogression may end, it may mean that PD cutoffs can not move backward (thus making them think and work before cutoff date movement is decided). This makes sense, and should be the case in any sensible system.
2010 2011 BMW 335i series – Photos,
rb_248
07-27 07:13 AM
I tested it. It works great. Admins must consider creating a link for this on the main page of IV. Good job.
more...
vin13
01-06 03:19 PM
The officer retains one of the original AP the first time. The other one that is handed over to you is stamped. So next time, you show the one that is stamped to enter and you will not have to give them any more copies.
hair the 2011 BMW 335is follows
gcwanted101
09-01 03:35 PM
Google G639 (http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/g-639.pdf) form for the pdf version. Here, it's already done. Just click on the link it will take you to the form you need to request the information. Fill it completely in as much details as possible and then get it notarized for your signature at a bank. Once notarized, mail the form out to the address shown on the form.
My personal experience:
I followed the exact procedure as explained above and it took me 3 months to get everything i requested as a pdf document files on a CD instead of paper copies. It depends upon how many requests they have in the pipeline. 3 months is not bad i think. Good luck for your request.
Hey harrydr, Thanks for the information.
I know about G639 form though.
I just wanted clarify that USCIS do provide copy of approved 140 even if there is no 485 application associated with it.
Because what I have hears was “140 is employer petition USCIS never going to provide it to employee”.
But thanks a lot harrydr.
My personal experience:
I followed the exact procedure as explained above and it took me 3 months to get everything i requested as a pdf document files on a CD instead of paper copies. It depends upon how many requests they have in the pipeline. 3 months is not bad i think. Good luck for your request.
Hey harrydr, Thanks for the information.
I know about G639 form though.
I just wanted clarify that USCIS do provide copy of approved 140 even if there is no 485 application associated with it.
Because what I have hears was “140 is employer petition USCIS never going to provide it to employee”.
But thanks a lot harrydr.
more...
Bezzer
09-06 10:51 AM
wow nice spalsh page...:)
So wot can u do with pixel stretching? stretch pixels?
So wot can u do with pixel stretching? stretch pixels?
hot BMW 335i Coupe 2006
return_to_india
01-19 04:42 PM
In this land where honey and milk flows, i always have that anxiety of loosing ( by virtue of lay off ) 'affordable' health care coverage and i haven't fully read what all fine-print stuff BlueCross Prudent Buyer plan have. And i do have a chronic condition. Currently the monthly premium is around $500 for the 3 member family.
more...
house BMW 335i tuning
pappu
01-02 08:34 PM
Many people like us want to do an automatic contribution. Can the website be modified for this. Setting up direct payment from bank account is more cumbersome as suggested by one member
thanks
IV is working on this and we shall be making this live shortly.
thanks
IV is working on this and we shall be making this live shortly.
tattoo New 335 BMW Convertible
lost_in_migration
05-15 12:38 PM
/\/\
more...
pictures mw 335i sedan
leo2606
11-21 05:51 PM
Fee : $305.00
Applied on line, printed the form.
Attached the following and sent them to USCIS
1) 485 - copy.
2) Old APs 2 - Copies.
3) Cover letter explaining that I need to visit my parents as they are old.
4) DL - Copy.
5) Photos : 2 (write A# and name back of them) (I forgot to send the photos with the application)
I forgot to attach the photos and got RFE, sent photos and approved yesterday. Waiting for the physical copy.
Applied on line, printed the form.
Attached the following and sent them to USCIS
1) 485 - copy.
2) Old APs 2 - Copies.
3) Cover letter explaining that I need to visit my parents as they are old.
4) DL - Copy.
5) Photos : 2 (write A# and name back of them) (I forgot to send the photos with the application)
I forgot to attach the photos and got RFE, sent photos and approved yesterday. Waiting for the physical copy.
dresses Tags: cars, BMW 3-Series
ski_dude12
09-26 08:58 PM
You can go for infopass though I am not sure how helpful it will be. In my case I was able to get the same information by talking to level 2 support at USCIS. My 3 infopass appointments were no good really in terms of getting any update.
Thanks for the advice. I appreciate your insight.
I amm zn. ! going all in now.
1. I will call the Customer Service Line tomorrow.
2. I already got the InfoPass for 10/6
3. The letter for my senator is drafted. It will be sent tomorrow.
4. Finally, an email to the Ombudsman has been sent.
Hopefully, there is be some movement.
Thanks for the advice. I appreciate your insight.
I amm zn. ! going all in now.
1. I will call the Customer Service Line tomorrow.
2. I already got the InfoPass for 10/6
3. The letter for my senator is drafted. It will be sent tomorrow.
4. Finally, an email to the Ombudsman has been sent.
Hopefully, there is be some movement.
more...
makeup Back to BMW 335is price
raj3078
04-27 11:08 AM
This looks like a hoax to me. Could you quote a credible news story or a link on a enforcement site where there is any advisory?
Pappu,
This is the hoax and seems like an attempt to discredit India Law system. Please close the thread. We should not be party to such attempts. I get tons of emails like that including the one which talks about getting 10 million of lottery prize money. If I start believeing them then god save me....Please close this immediately.:mad:
Pappu,
This is the hoax and seems like an attempt to discredit India Law system. Please close the thread. We should not be party to such attempts. I get tons of emails like that including the one which talks about getting 10 million of lottery prize money. If I start believeing them then god save me....Please close this immediately.:mad:
girlfriend BMW 335 NYC part5 by ~dejz0r
Mahatma
08-15 03:41 PM
Congrats and enjoy the green!
Thanks for your continued interest.
Have a great independence day!
Thanks for your continued interest.
Have a great independence day!
hairstyles P4476 BMW 335i 40954 1280x1024
satyasaich
07-20 06:43 PM
Can you please provide me a bit more insight for this topic or please point me where i can get some more details, if possible.
I'm on H1B 8th year, stuck with EB3 Retro with a priority date of Nov/03. My wife has a PhD in Molecular Biology, one of the hot subjects all across the globe.
I'll truly appreciate
Also why dont you apply in EB1 Thru your wife in parallel to ur own GC. PhDs dont need an employer to sponsor them.
I'm on H1B 8th year, stuck with EB3 Retro with a priority date of Nov/03. My wife has a PhD in Molecular Biology, one of the hot subjects all across the globe.
I'll truly appreciate
Also why dont you apply in EB1 Thru your wife in parallel to ur own GC. PhDs dont need an employer to sponsor them.
walking_dude
10-25 03:47 PM
Indiana, wake up and smell coffee. Your neighbors in MI wish you good luck.
dingudi
03-07 09:42 AM
Visa stamping interview --> Feb 8th
Was asked to submit technical questionnaire and other documents as per 221g which I did
Received email confirmation that they have "received" the documents and sending it to DOS for further processing and will email me in sometime
After waiting for one month and no sign of the elusive email, I flew in to LAX and used my Advanced Parole successfully. I had not cancelled my pending H1B application.
The POE officer was very polite unlike the officer at the Mumbai consulate. They didn't ask me even "one" question about my pending h1B application or the H1b in general, had to wait in the secondary inspection room while they looked up my information. Was out in 20-25 mins.
When I asked the POE officer what happens to the H1, he said it gets void. But as per earlier INS memos(Cronin Memo) and threads on forums, this is not the case right ? although I didn't start a discussion on this with him, because I didn't want to confuse him. My I-94 has AOS written on it which probably puts me in a Parolee status.
Now my question is:
---------------------------------------
I really would like to get back on the H1 status, so when the email arrives from Mumbai, does anyone know if its possible to withdraw the application .
Then arrange for the h1B visa stamping interview at say Tijuana, Mexico which is 2 hours drive from where I live. Wouldn't I be in the PIMS system now (since I would have received the email from the mum consulate) and make the stamping faster at the regular timelines. I have my multiple entry AP as backup, so I can be back if I need to.
I'd really appreciate if anyone can shed any light on this, I really hate to work on my EAD and would like to continue on the H1 as a backup for my entire family's sake.
What you did was technically , not an appropriate step. It is clearly mentioned on AP that it is not intended to circumvent the visa process and this is exactly what you did. Either you should travel on AP OR apply for visa and wait for the visa. One of my friends did this and POE was not happy with it. So one should use AP very carefully.
Was asked to submit technical questionnaire and other documents as per 221g which I did
Received email confirmation that they have "received" the documents and sending it to DOS for further processing and will email me in sometime
After waiting for one month and no sign of the elusive email, I flew in to LAX and used my Advanced Parole successfully. I had not cancelled my pending H1B application.
The POE officer was very polite unlike the officer at the Mumbai consulate. They didn't ask me even "one" question about my pending h1B application or the H1b in general, had to wait in the secondary inspection room while they looked up my information. Was out in 20-25 mins.
When I asked the POE officer what happens to the H1, he said it gets void. But as per earlier INS memos(Cronin Memo) and threads on forums, this is not the case right ? although I didn't start a discussion on this with him, because I didn't want to confuse him. My I-94 has AOS written on it which probably puts me in a Parolee status.
Now my question is:
---------------------------------------
I really would like to get back on the H1 status, so when the email arrives from Mumbai, does anyone know if its possible to withdraw the application .
Then arrange for the h1B visa stamping interview at say Tijuana, Mexico which is 2 hours drive from where I live. Wouldn't I be in the PIMS system now (since I would have received the email from the mum consulate) and make the stamping faster at the regular timelines. I have my multiple entry AP as backup, so I can be back if I need to.
I'd really appreciate if anyone can shed any light on this, I really hate to work on my EAD and would like to continue on the H1 as a backup for my entire family's sake.
What you did was technically , not an appropriate step. It is clearly mentioned on AP that it is not intended to circumvent the visa process and this is exactly what you did. Either you should travel on AP OR apply for visa and wait for the visa. One of my friends did this and POE was not happy with it. So one should use AP very carefully.
