gc_on_demand
07-14 10:04 AM
I have my I 140 approved and No I 485 has been filled yet. My brother became US citizen so I would like to file for I 130.
As there is no guarantee in Employment based immigration journey ( layoff , denial etc.. ) I strongly prefer to have I 130 filled. Is there any risk of filling both ?
As there is no guarantee in Employment based immigration journey ( layoff , denial etc.. ) I strongly prefer to have I 130 filled. Is there any risk of filling both ?
wallpaper cristiano ronaldo real madrid
JunRN
12-18 02:49 PM
Chumki, although it is not required by law, there is a risk of not filing a memo. That is why I am saying it's your decision. Are you taking the risk or not?
You don't "have to", right! But are you willing to take the risk?
In your case, there is no problem even if you join the new company BEFORE 180 days as long as your I-140 is not revoked or should there be an RFE for I-140, the original petitioner will respond to it even though you resigned already.
USCIS does not care if you join the new company before or after 180 days. AC21 rule said that the I-485 is pending for more than 180 days. As long as your I-485 is pending for more than 180 days, it doesn't matter if you worked or not for the original petitioner, you can invoke AC21. USCIS will also not look if you're working for the new employer. ALL USCIS need is an employment offer which is similar to the original LC. "Offer" means you have work AFTER getting the GC.
You don't "have to", right! But are you willing to take the risk?
In your case, there is no problem even if you join the new company BEFORE 180 days as long as your I-140 is not revoked or should there be an RFE for I-140, the original petitioner will respond to it even though you resigned already.
USCIS does not care if you join the new company before or after 180 days. AC21 rule said that the I-485 is pending for more than 180 days. As long as your I-485 is pending for more than 180 days, it doesn't matter if you worked or not for the original petitioner, you can invoke AC21. USCIS will also not look if you're working for the new employer. ALL USCIS need is an employment offer which is similar to the original LC. "Offer" means you have work AFTER getting the GC.
computerClerk
06-11 05:26 PM
Kris,
This is a similar advice (complaining to DOL) that you gave me about my employer's non payment for 4 months.
Would you kindly elaborate on what kind of protection an employee has, once he complains to DOL about employer and the employer retaliates by firing employee and revoking his petition.
Thanks
Gaurav.
1. Send an email to the employer
2. Send a letter with a proof of delivery and signature stating your case and that you need to be paid and reminding him/her of their legal obligation and give them 7-10 days to comply failing which you will report to DOL.
3. If you have not received your dues, complain to your DOL immediately
I assume that your legal status is not compromised by doing the above and you have a backup for maintaining your legal status in case the employer comes back at you by canceling your H1 etc.
- cheers
kris
This is a similar advice (complaining to DOL) that you gave me about my employer's non payment for 4 months.
Would you kindly elaborate on what kind of protection an employee has, once he complains to DOL about employer and the employer retaliates by firing employee and revoking his petition.
Thanks
Gaurav.
1. Send an email to the employer
2. Send a letter with a proof of delivery and signature stating your case and that you need to be paid and reminding him/her of their legal obligation and give them 7-10 days to comply failing which you will report to DOL.
3. If you have not received your dues, complain to your DOL immediately
I assume that your legal status is not compromised by doing the above and you have a backup for maintaining your legal status in case the employer comes back at you by canceling your H1 etc.
- cheers
kris
2011 real madrid fc wallpapers 2011
gk_2000
05-20 05:26 PM
One who must not be Paid attention to
more...
jsb
05-17 11:14 AM
thanks for the response. But is it normal, anyone else in similar situation?
Yes, I know a couple of people who got GC and but their spouses are still waiting after more than a year. It could be due to lack of information they check from various agencies, such as home address (particulary if spouse is not working)
Yes, I know a couple of people who got GC and but their spouses are still waiting after more than a year. It could be due to lack of information they check from various agencies, such as home address (particulary if spouse is not working)
justAnotherFile
07-17 01:12 AM
great news.
new important points:
1."Also under discussion is whether green cards that have gone unused in previous years could be used this year. As a result, one possible scenario is that the number of high-skilled workers who gain permanent residency in the U.S. this year could swell to more than twice the historical level. "They've got to do something," says one congressional staffer close to the discussions. "
2."Perhaps the most acute pressure on the Bush Administration is coming from Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.),...the last thing the Administration wants is for the details of the "bureaucratic, nightmarish snafu" to become public"
Just hoping that by some miracle tomorrows news is even better than expected.
BTW its the title of the article which says its all "The Gandhi Protests Pay Off". Please note its not something like "Govt yields under threat of law suits and immigrants protests"
new important points:
1."Also under discussion is whether green cards that have gone unused in previous years could be used this year. As a result, one possible scenario is that the number of high-skilled workers who gain permanent residency in the U.S. this year could swell to more than twice the historical level. "They've got to do something," says one congressional staffer close to the discussions. "
2."Perhaps the most acute pressure on the Bush Administration is coming from Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.),...the last thing the Administration wants is for the details of the "bureaucratic, nightmarish snafu" to become public"
Just hoping that by some miracle tomorrows news is even better than expected.
BTW its the title of the article which says its all "The Gandhi Protests Pay Off". Please note its not something like "Govt yields under threat of law suits and immigrants protests"
more...
sobers
03-27 11:20 AM
Talks about skilled immigration...
Kudos to IV for all their efforts!!
The Other Immigrants
March 27, 2006; Page A16
Lost in the heated debate about the future of millions of illegal laborers in the U.S. is that our system for admitting foreign-born professionals is also in tatters.
While globalization has increased the competition for international talent, U.S. businesses are frustrated by processing delays, long backlogs and especially the failure of Congress to increase the annual limits on visas for skilled immigrants. The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to resume its mark-up of Arlen Specter's immigration bill today. And the good news is that it contains long-overdue provisions for hiring more of the foreign professionals who help keep our economy competitive.
Under Mr. Specter's proposal, the annual cap on H-1B guest worker visas for immigrants in specialty fields like science and engineering would rise to 115,000 from 65,000. Moreover, the new cap would not be fixed but would fluctuate automatically in response to demand for these visas. We don't think any cap is necessary. But if a Republican Congress feels it must impose one, the least it can do is let market forces have some say in the matter.
Another important reform addresses foreign students who want to work here after graduating from U.S. colleges and universities. It doesn't make a lot of sense in today's global marketplace to educate the best and brightest and then send them away to England or India or China to start businesses and develop new technologies for U.S. competitors. But that's exactly what current U.S. policy encourages by limiting the employment prospects of foreign students who would rather stay here.
Mr. Specter would let more foreign students become permanent residents by obtaining an advanced degree in math, engineering, technology or the physical sciences and then finding work in their field. It's unfortunate that the U.S. isn't producing more home-grown talent in these areas, and the fault there lies with our K-12 educators and their political backers who tolerate poor performance. The reality today is that the U.S. ranks sixth world-wide in the number of people graduating with bachelor's degrees in engineering. Jobs will leave the U.S. and our economy will suffer if bad policy limits industry's access to intellectual capital.
Anti-immigration groups and protectionists want to dismiss these market forces, arguing that U.S. employers seek foreign nationals only because they'll work for less money. But it's illegal to pay these high-skill immigrants less than the prevailing wage. And employers are required to document their adherence to the law.
According to a new study by the National Foundation for American Policy, our broken system for admitting foreign professionals also contributes to outsourcing. Since 1996 the 65,000 annual cap on H-1B visas has been reached in most years, sometimes only weeks into the new year. This leaves employers with the choice of waiting until the next fiscal year to hire workers in the U.S. or hiring people outside the country.
"Many companies concede," says the report, "that the uncertainty created by Congress' inability to provide a reliable mechanism to hire skilled professionals has encouraged placing more human resources outside the United States to avoid being subject to legislative winds." Last week computer maker Dell Inc. announced that it hopes to double its workforce in India to 20,000 within three years. There's another such announcement by some company nearly every day.
This weekend's big-city immigration demonstrations focused on the debate over the estimated 11 million illegals already in the country. But the U.S. labor market has also long been a magnet for highly skilled and educated foreigners, many of whom attend school in America at some time in their lives. In a world where these brains have more options than ever in Asia and Europe, we drive them away at our economic peril.
Kudos to IV for all their efforts!!
The Other Immigrants
March 27, 2006; Page A16
Lost in the heated debate about the future of millions of illegal laborers in the U.S. is that our system for admitting foreign-born professionals is also in tatters.
While globalization has increased the competition for international talent, U.S. businesses are frustrated by processing delays, long backlogs and especially the failure of Congress to increase the annual limits on visas for skilled immigrants. The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to resume its mark-up of Arlen Specter's immigration bill today. And the good news is that it contains long-overdue provisions for hiring more of the foreign professionals who help keep our economy competitive.
Under Mr. Specter's proposal, the annual cap on H-1B guest worker visas for immigrants in specialty fields like science and engineering would rise to 115,000 from 65,000. Moreover, the new cap would not be fixed but would fluctuate automatically in response to demand for these visas. We don't think any cap is necessary. But if a Republican Congress feels it must impose one, the least it can do is let market forces have some say in the matter.
Another important reform addresses foreign students who want to work here after graduating from U.S. colleges and universities. It doesn't make a lot of sense in today's global marketplace to educate the best and brightest and then send them away to England or India or China to start businesses and develop new technologies for U.S. competitors. But that's exactly what current U.S. policy encourages by limiting the employment prospects of foreign students who would rather stay here.
Mr. Specter would let more foreign students become permanent residents by obtaining an advanced degree in math, engineering, technology or the physical sciences and then finding work in their field. It's unfortunate that the U.S. isn't producing more home-grown talent in these areas, and the fault there lies with our K-12 educators and their political backers who tolerate poor performance. The reality today is that the U.S. ranks sixth world-wide in the number of people graduating with bachelor's degrees in engineering. Jobs will leave the U.S. and our economy will suffer if bad policy limits industry's access to intellectual capital.
Anti-immigration groups and protectionists want to dismiss these market forces, arguing that U.S. employers seek foreign nationals only because they'll work for less money. But it's illegal to pay these high-skill immigrants less than the prevailing wage. And employers are required to document their adherence to the law.
According to a new study by the National Foundation for American Policy, our broken system for admitting foreign professionals also contributes to outsourcing. Since 1996 the 65,000 annual cap on H-1B visas has been reached in most years, sometimes only weeks into the new year. This leaves employers with the choice of waiting until the next fiscal year to hire workers in the U.S. or hiring people outside the country.
"Many companies concede," says the report, "that the uncertainty created by Congress' inability to provide a reliable mechanism to hire skilled professionals has encouraged placing more human resources outside the United States to avoid being subject to legislative winds." Last week computer maker Dell Inc. announced that it hopes to double its workforce in India to 20,000 within three years. There's another such announcement by some company nearly every day.
This weekend's big-city immigration demonstrations focused on the debate over the estimated 11 million illegals already in the country. But the U.S. labor market has also long been a magnet for highly skilled and educated foreigners, many of whom attend school in America at some time in their lives. In a world where these brains have more options than ever in Asia and Europe, we drive them away at our economic peril.
2010 cristiano ronaldo real madrid
roseball
07-27 12:43 AM
I am on 9th Year H1 extension and my H1 will expire in end of September 2009.My Labor got approved in 2007 So, I filed I140 and I-485 concurrently. But My I-140 got denied which filed with concurrent then Lawyer appealed as Motion to Reopen the I-140 which got denied and lawyer filed another I-140 as a brand new.
So there are 2 I-140's with the USCIS.
Recently I got intended to Deny like ability to pay query with the Second I-140 case, then lawyer answered the query and filed in premium this one got denied after a week.
Again, First I-140 which lawyer did Motion to Reopen this one also denied from the USCIS but the lawyer appealed this one.
Infact I recently travelled to india and came back on Advance Parole before all this denial happend.
Now, I filed my H1B extension , What will happen to the H1 extension ?
and What is my status now?
Can I tranfer my H1 and file the labor entirely new with the new company eventhough I am in the 9th year extension?
Any help would appreciate
Thanks
Reddy
Though you entered US on AP, since you are continuing working for the same employer on H1, you are still considered to be maintaining H1 status. Your H1 extension will probably get approved (assuming you submitted all supporting docs required for H1) for 1 yr based on your pending I-140 appeal. Your H1 extension will still be valid for its duration even if your appeal gets rejected after you get the H1 approval. So you can continue working for the same employer till H1 expires.
Regarding moving to a new employer and starting the GC process from scratch..You will have to find a new employer and transfer your H1 while your I-140 appeal is still in process. You will get the extension for 1 yr. Then you will have to get your PERM and I-140 approved before your H1 from the new employer expires, so you can get it extended for 3 yrs based on I-140 approval....You should consult an experienced attorney on your plan of action as time is critical for you..Good luck.
So there are 2 I-140's with the USCIS.
Recently I got intended to Deny like ability to pay query with the Second I-140 case, then lawyer answered the query and filed in premium this one got denied after a week.
Again, First I-140 which lawyer did Motion to Reopen this one also denied from the USCIS but the lawyer appealed this one.
Infact I recently travelled to india and came back on Advance Parole before all this denial happend.
Now, I filed my H1B extension , What will happen to the H1 extension ?
and What is my status now?
Can I tranfer my H1 and file the labor entirely new with the new company eventhough I am in the 9th year extension?
Any help would appreciate
Thanks
Reddy
Though you entered US on AP, since you are continuing working for the same employer on H1, you are still considered to be maintaining H1 status. Your H1 extension will probably get approved (assuming you submitted all supporting docs required for H1) for 1 yr based on your pending I-140 appeal. Your H1 extension will still be valid for its duration even if your appeal gets rejected after you get the H1 approval. So you can continue working for the same employer till H1 expires.
Regarding moving to a new employer and starting the GC process from scratch..You will have to find a new employer and transfer your H1 while your I-140 appeal is still in process. You will get the extension for 1 yr. Then you will have to get your PERM and I-140 approved before your H1 from the new employer expires, so you can get it extended for 3 yrs based on I-140 approval....You should consult an experienced attorney on your plan of action as time is critical for you..Good luck.
more...
ossidon
08-21 09:17 AM
My Details
EB2 - I
My priority date Dec 2004
I140 approved in May 07
I485 filed at NSC-2nd July 2007, RD 2nd July 07, ND 8 Aug 07
I140 LUD on 7/13/2008
Background Check Cleared : Source Infopass. SR Filed and IO mentioned in the Infopass on 8/8/08 that my file was being touched as recently as 8/7/08 but hasnt reached the Adjudicator.
Still waiting.................Am lost on what to do and whom to contact?
EB2 - I
My priority date Dec 2004
I140 approved in May 07
I485 filed at NSC-2nd July 2007, RD 2nd July 07, ND 8 Aug 07
I140 LUD on 7/13/2008
Background Check Cleared : Source Infopass. SR Filed and IO mentioned in the Infopass on 8/8/08 that my file was being touched as recently as 8/7/08 but hasnt reached the Adjudicator.
Still waiting.................Am lost on what to do and whom to contact?
hair Cristiano Ronaldo picked up a
raysaikat
12-19 08:16 PM
Thank you for replying.
I believe when I was young I entered with family visit visa, then I re-entered the country using a re entry visa. I assume both has expired for awhile now, although my I 94 doesn't state an expiration date, it stats "ans or status" Could you explain what that means?
You are probably reading the notation wrong - it is probably "and/or status".
In US immigration, there is a notion of "status" which basically means you do/live in US the way you promised the immigration officer at the time of entry. If you were entered as an F-1 student, then you remain a student in good standing; if you were entered as H1-B, you remain gainfully employed in the position (or a similar one) for which the H1-B was issued, etc.
The second notion is "unlawful presence", which basically means you are staying in US beyond the time the immigration officer allowed you to -- i.e., the date on I-94.
So it is possible to be out-of-status, but not unlawfully present (i.e., someone who entered on H1-B VISA stopped working even though his/her I-94 was valid for 6 more months).
If you remain in US "unlawfully" (i.e., after the date written on your I-94) for more than 6 months but less than 1 year, you get a 3 year ban on reentering US. If you stay in US unlawfully for more than 1 year, then you get a 10 year ban on reentering.
In your case, your I-94 seems to say the stay was valid until a date "X" and/or until you were in status. I am assuming that there is a date on I-94 even though you did not specify one. I am not familiar with that notation, so I am guessing. If the guess is correct, then that would mean that you started accruing "unlawful presence" from the date you became out-of-status and you were "old enough". As far as I remember, the "old enough" is 18 years old, but I could be wrong and it could be 21 years old.
To determine when you became out of status, you need to know what was the required status at the last entry. If your sole status was parolee (i.e., you used advanced parole based on your submitted I-485), then you became out-of-status whenever the I-485 was rejected. As far as I know, the appeals process allows you to live in US, but if the appeal fails, as it was your case, the date when the status became invalid does not advance.
So if you have no other VISA status as a dependent, then you are out-of-status. Assuming the I-94 expired long back, and that USCIS starts counting unlawful presence from your 18th birthday, then you have accrued unlawful days equal to your age in days minus 6574 days (counting leap-years ;) ).
You can apply for a college, and the college may give you I-20, based on which you can get an F-1 VISA. However, you would have to go to your "home country" to get the F-1 VISA stamp on your passport (and they may ban you depending on the number of days you were unlawfully present). Basically, the only way I know of for you to get a legal immigration status is to go out of the country and get back with a legal visa (and of course, risk being banned, or denied VISA for any other reason).
Your case is complex enough that you must seek advice from an immigration attorney before making any decision.
I believe when I was young I entered with family visit visa, then I re-entered the country using a re entry visa. I assume both has expired for awhile now, although my I 94 doesn't state an expiration date, it stats "ans or status" Could you explain what that means?
You are probably reading the notation wrong - it is probably "and/or status".
In US immigration, there is a notion of "status" which basically means you do/live in US the way you promised the immigration officer at the time of entry. If you were entered as an F-1 student, then you remain a student in good standing; if you were entered as H1-B, you remain gainfully employed in the position (or a similar one) for which the H1-B was issued, etc.
The second notion is "unlawful presence", which basically means you are staying in US beyond the time the immigration officer allowed you to -- i.e., the date on I-94.
So it is possible to be out-of-status, but not unlawfully present (i.e., someone who entered on H1-B VISA stopped working even though his/her I-94 was valid for 6 more months).
If you remain in US "unlawfully" (i.e., after the date written on your I-94) for more than 6 months but less than 1 year, you get a 3 year ban on reentering US. If you stay in US unlawfully for more than 1 year, then you get a 10 year ban on reentering.
In your case, your I-94 seems to say the stay was valid until a date "X" and/or until you were in status. I am assuming that there is a date on I-94 even though you did not specify one. I am not familiar with that notation, so I am guessing. If the guess is correct, then that would mean that you started accruing "unlawful presence" from the date you became out-of-status and you were "old enough". As far as I remember, the "old enough" is 18 years old, but I could be wrong and it could be 21 years old.
To determine when you became out of status, you need to know what was the required status at the last entry. If your sole status was parolee (i.e., you used advanced parole based on your submitted I-485), then you became out-of-status whenever the I-485 was rejected. As far as I know, the appeals process allows you to live in US, but if the appeal fails, as it was your case, the date when the status became invalid does not advance.
So if you have no other VISA status as a dependent, then you are out-of-status. Assuming the I-94 expired long back, and that USCIS starts counting unlawful presence from your 18th birthday, then you have accrued unlawful days equal to your age in days minus 6574 days (counting leap-years ;) ).
You can apply for a college, and the college may give you I-20, based on which you can get an F-1 VISA. However, you would have to go to your "home country" to get the F-1 VISA stamp on your passport (and they may ban you depending on the number of days you were unlawfully present). Basically, the only way I know of for you to get a legal immigration status is to go out of the country and get back with a legal visa (and of course, risk being banned, or denied VISA for any other reason).
Your case is complex enough that you must seek advice from an immigration attorney before making any decision.
more...
gcformeornot
10-06 08:40 PM
Hi,
I have approved H1 through consulate processing for the year 2009 and I am currently working on L1 visa which is going to expire on nov 2009.
My company is not going to extend my visa.Is there any speedy process where I can do COS with my approved H1 and how much will it cost to me?
Another thing I want to ask that Is it advisable for going back India for stamping as I heard that US consulate people are rejecting H1 B visa
Please advise
Thanks...
when you got H1 did you receive new I-94? If yes, then you should have been working with the employer who did your H1 and not L1 employer. If not you should be able to COS to H1 without issues.
I have approved H1 through consulate processing for the year 2009 and I am currently working on L1 visa which is going to expire on nov 2009.
My company is not going to extend my visa.Is there any speedy process where I can do COS with my approved H1 and how much will it cost to me?
Another thing I want to ask that Is it advisable for going back India for stamping as I heard that US consulate people are rejecting H1 B visa
Please advise
Thanks...
when you got H1 did you receive new I-94? If yes, then you should have been working with the employer who did your H1 and not L1 employer. If not you should be able to COS to H1 without issues.
hot cristiano real madrid
Macaca
07-17 07:59 AM
The attached blog is much more important then the article. Please respond in the attached blog. The previous article was very well responded.
Please don't post this (http://app.businessweek.com/UserComments/combo_review?action=all&style=wide&productId=19972&pageIndex=5) (from previous business week article (http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jul2007/db20070713_687551.htm))
Jul 14, 2007 11:31 PM GMT
I JUST WANT A GREEN CARD! I AM A PHARMACIST. I HAVE WAITED FOR 5 YEARS. PLEASE I WANT A GREEN CARD SO THAT I CAN TRAVEL WITHOUT ANY WORRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
Please don't post this (http://app.businessweek.com/UserComments/combo_review?action=all&style=wide&productId=19972&pageIndex=5) (from previous business week article (http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jul2007/db20070713_687551.htm))
Jul 14, 2007 11:31 PM GMT
I JUST WANT A GREEN CARD! I AM A PHARMACIST. I HAVE WAITED FOR 5 YEARS. PLEASE I WANT A GREEN CARD SO THAT I CAN TRAVEL WITHOUT ANY WORRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
more...
house kissing, Cristiano
shree09
08-08 06:14 PM
Thanks to everyone who replied.
I have got sufficient replies so it looks like it is OK to do both H1 Stamping and landing together.
Do you have any suggestions for the canadian places. I heard Vancouver is popular.
Is one place better than another one..
Any info will be really helpful
I have got sufficient replies so it looks like it is OK to do both H1 Stamping and landing together.
Do you have any suggestions for the canadian places. I heard Vancouver is popular.
Is one place better than another one..
Any info will be really helpful
tattoo cristiano ronaldo real madrid
Blog Feeds
09-01 10:00 PM
This is a recent update from the AILA Rome Chapter for the benefit of our readers. The State Department has substantially rewritten the FAM provisions relating to physical or mental disorders as medical grounds of inadmissibility. These significant changes, set forth at 9 FAM 40.11 N11, focus on physical or mental disorders with harmful behavior, and on substance-related disorders, corresponding to INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iii) and (iv), respectively.
The following is a summary of these sweeping revisions.
Introduction
As before, the mere presence of a physical or mental disorder does not by itself render a visa applicant inadmissible to the United States under 212(a)(1)(A)(iii). The trigger to inadmissibility is the presence of associated harmful behavior.
Key Concepts of Mental Health
In this new section, the Department defines the key concepts of physical and mental health disorders:
A "physical disorder" is a clinically diagnosed medical condition where the focus of attention is physical manifestations.
A "mental disorder" is a health condition characterized by alterations in thinking, mood or behavior.
"Harmful behavior" is an action associated with a physical or mental disorder that causes (or has caused) one or more of the following:
1. Serious injury (psychological or physical) to the foreign national or others. An example of harmful behavior to the foreign national is attempted suicide. An example of harmful behavior to others is pedophilia.
2. A serious threat to the health or safety of the foreign national or others. An example of a serious threat to both the foreign national and to others is driving while intoxicated.
3. Major property damage.
NOTE: The Department emphasizes the following principle: Only harmful behavior that is associated with a physical or mental disorder is relevant for the purpose of determining a medical inadmissibility.
A "substance-related disorder" can involve one of the following:
1. Substance dependence - compulsive long-term use of alcohol or other psychoactive substance despite significant problems (physical, social, and others).
2. Substance abuse - a pattern of recurrent use of alcohol or other psychoactive substance despite adverse consequences or impairment.
Remission in the context of mental or substance-related disorders is defined as "a period of at least 12 months during which no substance use or associated harmful behavior have occurred."
Class "A" medical conditions are those which render a visa applicant ineligible for a visa.
Class "B" medical conditions do not render a visa applicant ineligible for a visa, even though the applicant has a disease, disability or abnormality amounting to a substantial departure from well-being.
Alcohol Abuse or Dependence
The FAM changes stress that alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence constitutes a medical condition which can lead to inadmissibility. That said, a panel physician's diagnosis of alcohol abuse or dependence alone does not make an applicant ineligible to receive a visa unless there is evidence of associated harmful behavior which has, or is likely to pose a threat to the property, safety or welfare of the foreign national or others.
Consular officers are instructed to refer nonimmigrant and immigrant visa applicants to panel physicians if the applicant has a single alcohol-related arrest or conviction within the past five years, or if the applicant has two or more such arrests or convictions within the past decade. Officers should also refer applicants to panel physicians if, in the absence of DUI arrests or convictions, there is any other evidence to suggest that the visa applicant has an alcohol problem.
Role of the Panel Physician
Panel physicians have a central role in evaluating the existence of a physical or mental disorder or a substance-related disorder that would render an applicant ineligible for a visa. In performing a medical examination, the panel physician is responsible (inter alia) for identifying and diagnosing physical or mental disorders (including alcohol-related disorders); identifying harmful behavior associated with a disorder; and determining the remission status of any previously diagnosed disorder.
Class "A" or Class "B" Medical Conditions
Panel physicians may make the following diagnoses with regard to applicants referred for examination:
Class "A": The applicant has a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior.
Class "A": The applicant has a disorder characterized by substance abuse or dependence.
Class "B": The applicant has a physical or mental disorder with no associated harmful behavior.
Class "B": The applicant has a history of a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior which is unlikely to recur.
Class "B": The applicant's substance abuse or dependence is in full remission.
Neither "A" nor "B": The applicant has not been diagnosed as having a physical or mental disorder or a substance-related disorder.
Waivers for Immigrant Visa Applicants
An immigrant visa applicant who is determined to have a communicable disease of public health significance may be eligible for a waiver of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(i).
An immigrant visa applicant who objects on religious or moral grounds to receiving required vaccinations against vaccine-preventable diseases may be eligible for a waiver of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(ii).
An immigrant visa applicant who is determined to have a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior may be eligible for a waiver of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iii).
An immigrant visa applicant diagnosed with substance abuse or addiction is NOT eligible for waiver relief of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iv).
Waivers for Nonimmigrant Visa Applicants
Consular officers may recommend waivers per 212(d)(3)(A) for any of the medical-related grounds of inadmissibility set forth in 212(a)(1)(A).
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/09/us_visa_denials_medical_ground.html)
The following is a summary of these sweeping revisions.
Introduction
As before, the mere presence of a physical or mental disorder does not by itself render a visa applicant inadmissible to the United States under 212(a)(1)(A)(iii). The trigger to inadmissibility is the presence of associated harmful behavior.
Key Concepts of Mental Health
In this new section, the Department defines the key concepts of physical and mental health disorders:
A "physical disorder" is a clinically diagnosed medical condition where the focus of attention is physical manifestations.
A "mental disorder" is a health condition characterized by alterations in thinking, mood or behavior.
"Harmful behavior" is an action associated with a physical or mental disorder that causes (or has caused) one or more of the following:
1. Serious injury (psychological or physical) to the foreign national or others. An example of harmful behavior to the foreign national is attempted suicide. An example of harmful behavior to others is pedophilia.
2. A serious threat to the health or safety of the foreign national or others. An example of a serious threat to both the foreign national and to others is driving while intoxicated.
3. Major property damage.
NOTE: The Department emphasizes the following principle: Only harmful behavior that is associated with a physical or mental disorder is relevant for the purpose of determining a medical inadmissibility.
A "substance-related disorder" can involve one of the following:
1. Substance dependence - compulsive long-term use of alcohol or other psychoactive substance despite significant problems (physical, social, and others).
2. Substance abuse - a pattern of recurrent use of alcohol or other psychoactive substance despite adverse consequences or impairment.
Remission in the context of mental or substance-related disorders is defined as "a period of at least 12 months during which no substance use or associated harmful behavior have occurred."
Class "A" medical conditions are those which render a visa applicant ineligible for a visa.
Class "B" medical conditions do not render a visa applicant ineligible for a visa, even though the applicant has a disease, disability or abnormality amounting to a substantial departure from well-being.
Alcohol Abuse or Dependence
The FAM changes stress that alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence constitutes a medical condition which can lead to inadmissibility. That said, a panel physician's diagnosis of alcohol abuse or dependence alone does not make an applicant ineligible to receive a visa unless there is evidence of associated harmful behavior which has, or is likely to pose a threat to the property, safety or welfare of the foreign national or others.
Consular officers are instructed to refer nonimmigrant and immigrant visa applicants to panel physicians if the applicant has a single alcohol-related arrest or conviction within the past five years, or if the applicant has two or more such arrests or convictions within the past decade. Officers should also refer applicants to panel physicians if, in the absence of DUI arrests or convictions, there is any other evidence to suggest that the visa applicant has an alcohol problem.
Role of the Panel Physician
Panel physicians have a central role in evaluating the existence of a physical or mental disorder or a substance-related disorder that would render an applicant ineligible for a visa. In performing a medical examination, the panel physician is responsible (inter alia) for identifying and diagnosing physical or mental disorders (including alcohol-related disorders); identifying harmful behavior associated with a disorder; and determining the remission status of any previously diagnosed disorder.
Class "A" or Class "B" Medical Conditions
Panel physicians may make the following diagnoses with regard to applicants referred for examination:
Class "A": The applicant has a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior.
Class "A": The applicant has a disorder characterized by substance abuse or dependence.
Class "B": The applicant has a physical or mental disorder with no associated harmful behavior.
Class "B": The applicant has a history of a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior which is unlikely to recur.
Class "B": The applicant's substance abuse or dependence is in full remission.
Neither "A" nor "B": The applicant has not been diagnosed as having a physical or mental disorder or a substance-related disorder.
Waivers for Immigrant Visa Applicants
An immigrant visa applicant who is determined to have a communicable disease of public health significance may be eligible for a waiver of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(i).
An immigrant visa applicant who objects on religious or moral grounds to receiving required vaccinations against vaccine-preventable diseases may be eligible for a waiver of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(ii).
An immigrant visa applicant who is determined to have a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior may be eligible for a waiver of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iii).
An immigrant visa applicant diagnosed with substance abuse or addiction is NOT eligible for waiver relief of the inadmissibility set forth in INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iv).
Waivers for Nonimmigrant Visa Applicants
Consular officers may recommend waivers per 212(d)(3)(A) for any of the medical-related grounds of inadmissibility set forth in 212(a)(1)(A).
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/09/us_visa_denials_medical_ground.html)
more...
pictures real madrid 2011 squad photo.
add78
03-20 10:01 AM
I was told if you have valid stamping you do not need get new stamping even if you changed the employer. All you need is to give the new approval notice at the POE.
am I missing somthing here.
Frankly, I am surprised to see such a question from someone with so many posts.
If you read the OP and desi3933 responses, the OP is currently NOT in H1B status.
Since there is no such thing as H1 "transfer", a new H1B petition is needed, if one is inside the country AND currently maintaining H1B status while the new H1B is requested, USCIS can issue the new H1B WITH a new I-94 (i.e. new I-797 with I-94 at the bottom). In that case, next time if the person goes out, while coming back can use this new I-797 with I-94 along with a previously unexpired visa stamp. Since OP is currently NOT in H1B status, USCIS will NOT issue new H1B (I-797) with I-94 and therefore, as the old visa stamp is now invalid (no longer working for older employer and no longer in H1B), the OP MUST apply at the consulate for new H1B stamp which will enable his/her entry and upon entry will get a new I-94 (white card).
am I missing somthing here.
Frankly, I am surprised to see such a question from someone with so many posts.
If you read the OP and desi3933 responses, the OP is currently NOT in H1B status.
Since there is no such thing as H1 "transfer", a new H1B petition is needed, if one is inside the country AND currently maintaining H1B status while the new H1B is requested, USCIS can issue the new H1B WITH a new I-94 (i.e. new I-797 with I-94 at the bottom). In that case, next time if the person goes out, while coming back can use this new I-797 with I-94 along with a previously unexpired visa stamp. Since OP is currently NOT in H1B status, USCIS will NOT issue new H1B (I-797) with I-94 and therefore, as the old visa stamp is now invalid (no longer working for older employer and no longer in H1B), the OP MUST apply at the consulate for new H1B stamp which will enable his/her entry and upon entry will get a new I-94 (white card).
dresses cristiano real madrid 2011
akilhere
09-02 10:11 AM
I'm just curious as there has been approvals contrary to the bulletins in the years before. Please don't flame me as i'm just looking for any signs of hope around the corner for the EB3 folks.
more...
makeup Real Madrid#39;s Cristiano
nviren
04-28 04:20 PM
Isn't this the same proposed rule that was published on Feb 14 in Federal Register and the comment period ended on Apr 14th?
In www.immigration-law.com, go to breaking news section and take a look at posting on 4/12/05.
Or
Go here
http://www.aila.org/RecentPosting/RecentPostingList.aspx?Weeks=4
and look at the posting for date 4/10/05
I guess DOL has not come out with the analysis of the comments received and its final stand yet.
Let me know if I am missing something here.
In www.immigration-law.com, go to breaking news section and take a look at posting on 4/12/05.
Or
Go here
http://www.aila.org/RecentPosting/RecentPostingList.aspx?Weeks=4
and look at the posting for date 4/10/05
I guess DOL has not come out with the analysis of the comments received and its final stand yet.
Let me know if I am missing something here.
girlfriend cristiano ronaldo 2011
deardar
09-14 09:57 AM
And why does your profile say "NO" for the rally?
Cause i cannot make it to the rally.
Cause i cannot make it to the rally.
hairstyles cristiano ronaldo real madrid
ronhira
12-31 09:13 AM
You don't need a "path to citizenship" to family reunification. Please do not link A-B and so C-D. They are totally two different issues.
agree 100%..... aila tries to project that it represents immigrants..... aila actually doesn't represent immigrants..... it works for the benefit of its members ..... i.e. immigration lawyers...... most immigration benefit if more people like us are stuck in the system..... if there r more applicants..... & more people stuck in the system.... then more immigration lawyers will make more money...... so family unification which has nothing to do with path to citizenship..... somehow become related...... or even synonymous.... 3 cheers for representatives of "immigrations"........
agree 100%..... aila tries to project that it represents immigrants..... aila actually doesn't represent immigrants..... it works for the benefit of its members ..... i.e. immigration lawyers...... most immigration benefit if more people like us are stuck in the system..... if there r more applicants..... & more people stuck in the system.... then more immigration lawyers will make more money...... so family unification which has nothing to do with path to citizenship..... somehow become related...... or even synonymous.... 3 cheers for representatives of "immigrations"........
Panchtantra
09-01 04:06 PM
I think I am the "Chosen One" for investigation :-)
You arent alone, my friend :)
I am waiting too - similar story as yours....
You arent alone, my friend :)
I am waiting too - similar story as yours....
GoneSouth
07-18 04:16 PM
Anyone got a working link for this? I had at one point, but now I can't seem to find.
No comments:
Post a Comment