bigboy007
06-03 01:40 AM
I have opened sep thread for the same , i am sorry if this is not acceptable policy of forum and i am reposting as this topic originated here:
================================================== =
I have been following with different threads over articles of Susherman / AILA on abolishing Dual intent for H1B visa and very much , deeply curious about finding the same :
Since i myself new of all these different texts of various immigration laws it took me some time but i think i found out the nerve of it atlast.
Here it goes :
There are two important sections of Student visas.
this bill is carefully drafted against us [h1B and green card] such that this provision is included in student visas section.
================================================== ====
(c) CLARIFYING THE IMMIGRANT INTENT PROVISION.— Subsection (b) of
14 section 214 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(b))
15 is amended—
16
17 (1) by striking the parenthetical phrase “(other than a
18 nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (L) or (V) of section
19 101(a)(15), and other than a nonimmigrant described in any
20 provision of section 101(a)(15)(H)(i) except subclause (b1) of
21 such section) " in the first sentence; and
22
23 (2) by striking “under section 101(a)(15)" and inserting in its
24 place “under the immigration laws.".
25
26 (d) GRANTING DUAL INTENT TO CERTAIN NONIMMIGRANT STUDENTS.—
27 Subsection (h) of section 214 of the Immigration and Nationality Act
28 (8 U.S.C. 1184(h)) is amended—
29
30 (1) by inserting “(F)(iv)," following “(H)(i)(b) or (c),"; and
31
32 (2) by striking “if the alien had obtained a change of status" and
33 inserting in its place “if the alien had been admitted as, provided
34 status as, or obtained a change of status";
================================================== =====
what does (c) in Student visas do :
214(b) of Immigration and Nationality Act : defines whether the applicant has an immigration intent or not and in general avoids , H , L , etc visas out of this category.
As stated in US code of Law this is what it is :
================================================== ======
"Every alien (other than a nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (L) or (V) of section 1101 (a)(15) of this title, and other than a nonimmigrant described in any provision of section 1101 (a)(15)(H)(i) of this title except subclause (b1) of such section) shall be presumed to be an immigrant until he establishes to the satisfaction of the consular officer, at the time of application for a visa, and the immigration officers, at the time of application for admission, that he is entitled to a nonimmigrant status under section 1101 (a)(15) of this title. An alien who is an officer or employee of any foreign government or of any international organization entitled to enjoy privileges, exemptions, and immunities under the International Organizations Immunities Act [22 U.S.C. 288 et seq.], or an alien who is the attendant, servant, employee, or member of the immediate family of any such alien shall not be entitled to apply for or receive an immigrant visa, or to enter the United States as an immigrant unless he executes a written waiver in the same form and substance as is prescribed by section 1257 (b) of this title."
================================================== ======
By doing this (i.e. remove my Underlined and Bold letters) they making H1B prone to 214B clause and any CONSULAR officer can reject visa based on this statute as a H1B categorized as IMMIGRANT intent rather than earlier being non-immigrant.
Now i think this should not effect 485 or 140 or any immigration applications as still H1B holder is still categorized in DUAL Intent.
This is how : when (d) of the above Student visa section is applied this is how it turns :
This is from US code of rules pertaining to 8 U.S.C. 1184(h)
(h) Intention to abandon foreign residence
The fact that an alien is the beneficiary of an application for a preference status filed under section 1154 of this title or has otherwise sought permanent residence in the United States shall not constitute evidence of an intention to abandon a foreign residence for purposes of obtaining a visa as a nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (H)(i)(b) or (c),(F)(iv), (L), or (V) of section 1101 (a)(15) of this title or otherwise obtaining or maintaining the status of a nonimmigrant described in such subparagraph, if the alien had been admitted as, provided status as, or obtained a change of status under section 1258 of this title to a classification as such a nonimmigrant before the alien’s most recent departure from the United States.
================================================== ======
Section 1258 is nothing but Change of nonimmigrant classification which allows for change of status with in Non-immigrant visas.
based on all these , conclusion i see is : h1B visa can now be rejected ( if law passes and i wish , i pray and i am doing all my best it doesnt) under 214B for consular posts.
Still h1B is considered DUAL Intent as per above amendment as it doesnt remove 101 (a)(b) (H) as they are speciality workers that is we.
Please comment , i know i am not an immigration attorney with my knowledge i tried to relate things i am curious about this subject and i request all to comment on this and i feel i made a good judgment based on these resources i have please comment.
----------------------
But logically i also feel this H1B under 214B as doesnt logical for a person whose 140 is approved as in principle his intent of being Immigrant is approved.
================================================== =
I have been following with different threads over articles of Susherman / AILA on abolishing Dual intent for H1B visa and very much , deeply curious about finding the same :
Since i myself new of all these different texts of various immigration laws it took me some time but i think i found out the nerve of it atlast.
Here it goes :
There are two important sections of Student visas.
this bill is carefully drafted against us [h1B and green card] such that this provision is included in student visas section.
================================================== ====
(c) CLARIFYING THE IMMIGRANT INTENT PROVISION.— Subsection (b) of
14 section 214 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(b))
15 is amended—
16
17 (1) by striking the parenthetical phrase “(other than a
18 nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (L) or (V) of section
19 101(a)(15), and other than a nonimmigrant described in any
20 provision of section 101(a)(15)(H)(i) except subclause (b1) of
21 such section) " in the first sentence; and
22
23 (2) by striking “under section 101(a)(15)" and inserting in its
24 place “under the immigration laws.".
25
26 (d) GRANTING DUAL INTENT TO CERTAIN NONIMMIGRANT STUDENTS.—
27 Subsection (h) of section 214 of the Immigration and Nationality Act
28 (8 U.S.C. 1184(h)) is amended—
29
30 (1) by inserting “(F)(iv)," following “(H)(i)(b) or (c),"; and
31
32 (2) by striking “if the alien had obtained a change of status" and
33 inserting in its place “if the alien had been admitted as, provided
34 status as, or obtained a change of status";
================================================== =====
what does (c) in Student visas do :
214(b) of Immigration and Nationality Act : defines whether the applicant has an immigration intent or not and in general avoids , H , L , etc visas out of this category.
As stated in US code of Law this is what it is :
================================================== ======
"Every alien (other than a nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (L) or (V) of section 1101 (a)(15) of this title, and other than a nonimmigrant described in any provision of section 1101 (a)(15)(H)(i) of this title except subclause (b1) of such section) shall be presumed to be an immigrant until he establishes to the satisfaction of the consular officer, at the time of application for a visa, and the immigration officers, at the time of application for admission, that he is entitled to a nonimmigrant status under section 1101 (a)(15) of this title. An alien who is an officer or employee of any foreign government or of any international organization entitled to enjoy privileges, exemptions, and immunities under the International Organizations Immunities Act [22 U.S.C. 288 et seq.], or an alien who is the attendant, servant, employee, or member of the immediate family of any such alien shall not be entitled to apply for or receive an immigrant visa, or to enter the United States as an immigrant unless he executes a written waiver in the same form and substance as is prescribed by section 1257 (b) of this title."
================================================== ======
By doing this (i.e. remove my Underlined and Bold letters) they making H1B prone to 214B clause and any CONSULAR officer can reject visa based on this statute as a H1B categorized as IMMIGRANT intent rather than earlier being non-immigrant.
Now i think this should not effect 485 or 140 or any immigration applications as still H1B holder is still categorized in DUAL Intent.
This is how : when (d) of the above Student visa section is applied this is how it turns :
This is from US code of rules pertaining to 8 U.S.C. 1184(h)
(h) Intention to abandon foreign residence
The fact that an alien is the beneficiary of an application for a preference status filed under section 1154 of this title or has otherwise sought permanent residence in the United States shall not constitute evidence of an intention to abandon a foreign residence for purposes of obtaining a visa as a nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (H)(i)(b) or (c),(F)(iv), (L), or (V) of section 1101 (a)(15) of this title or otherwise obtaining or maintaining the status of a nonimmigrant described in such subparagraph, if the alien had been admitted as, provided status as, or obtained a change of status under section 1258 of this title to a classification as such a nonimmigrant before the alien’s most recent departure from the United States.
================================================== ======
Section 1258 is nothing but Change of nonimmigrant classification which allows for change of status with in Non-immigrant visas.
based on all these , conclusion i see is : h1B visa can now be rejected ( if law passes and i wish , i pray and i am doing all my best it doesnt) under 214B for consular posts.
Still h1B is considered DUAL Intent as per above amendment as it doesnt remove 101 (a)(b) (H) as they are speciality workers that is we.
Please comment , i know i am not an immigration attorney with my knowledge i tried to relate things i am curious about this subject and i request all to comment on this and i feel i made a good judgment based on these resources i have please comment.
----------------------
But logically i also feel this H1B under 214B as doesnt logical for a person whose 140 is approved as in principle his intent of being Immigrant is approved.
wallpaper Anna Sui Shining Star Makeup
dilbert_cal
03-14 01:40 AM
Sorry - put in the wrong thread.
ilikekilo
07-24 11:47 AM
my own guess..with all these random approvals and stuff happening i am guessing that the PD for eb3 india would be in late 2003 (dec 2003) or early 2004 like jan/feb 2004...
2011 2011 Anna Sui limited-edition
needhelp!
07-15 01:57 PM
Thanks for your participation:
bestofall, johnnybhai, Mahatma, sparklinks, kevinkris, hariswaminathan, akhilmahajan, a_paradkar, tejonidhi, ho_gaya_kaya_?, June05, chintainfogc, k_usa, Sri_1975, cheshirecat, satyasaich, pd_recapturing, sajidmd, govindk, mjdup, alok_msh, plreddy, naidu2543, venkygct, j_bharadwaj, gsrknth, cooldude0807, for_gc, Chiwere, jayleno, funny, eight_8, ita, GCOP, desi chala usa, gc_kaavaali, lakshman.easwaran, ebizash, srhari, srinivas_o, ndny, rameshvaid, mhathi, rajesh_kamisetty, shana04, Vsach, leo2606, sujijag, sam2006, dhirajs98, dhirajs98 , vsbalaji, shiankuraaf, nosightofgc, prasadn, prasha98, Mani, DDash, bgp, gc28262, Caliber, gc_on_demand, agc2005, SkilledWorker4GC, vban2007, vvicky72, sriv1, desidude, Suva, sandy_anand, ckichannagari, h1techSlave, kushaljn, sirinme, WeShallOvercome, rajvepa, dodsatya, gc78, hotammo, gcbikari, abhijitp, wizpal
bestofall, johnnybhai, Mahatma, sparklinks, kevinkris, hariswaminathan, akhilmahajan, a_paradkar, tejonidhi, ho_gaya_kaya_?, June05, chintainfogc, k_usa, Sri_1975, cheshirecat, satyasaich, pd_recapturing, sajidmd, govindk, mjdup, alok_msh, plreddy, naidu2543, venkygct, j_bharadwaj, gsrknth, cooldude0807, for_gc, Chiwere, jayleno, funny, eight_8, ita, GCOP, desi chala usa, gc_kaavaali, lakshman.easwaran, ebizash, srhari, srinivas_o, ndny, rameshvaid, mhathi, rajesh_kamisetty, shana04, Vsach, leo2606, sujijag, sam2006, dhirajs98, dhirajs98 , vsbalaji, shiankuraaf, nosightofgc, prasadn, prasha98, Mani, DDash, bgp, gc28262, Caliber, gc_on_demand, agc2005, SkilledWorker4GC, vban2007, vvicky72, sriv1, desidude, Suva, sandy_anand, ckichannagari, h1techSlave, kushaljn, sirinme, WeShallOvercome, rajvepa, dodsatya, gc78, hotammo, gcbikari, abhijitp, wizpal
more...
inskrish
08-17 03:12 AM
Looking at the recent approvals looks like USCIS does the following:
1. Pick up x number of files using a random algorithm.
2. Arrange these files in a random order using the same random algorithm
followed in step 1.
3. Randomly pick any file arranged in step 2.
4. Toss a coin.
5. On odd dates if it is heads,approve the file. On even dates if it is tails
approve it.
6. If file is not approved in step 5 put it on the shelf to be picked up
in step 1 in next cycle.
For Disclaimers: on step (1), x is also a random number, and the coin used on step (4) by USCIS may sometimes have neither tail nor head..:D
1. Pick up x number of files using a random algorithm.
2. Arrange these files in a random order using the same random algorithm
followed in step 1.
3. Randomly pick any file arranged in step 2.
4. Toss a coin.
5. On odd dates if it is heads,approve the file. On even dates if it is tails
approve it.
6. If file is not approved in step 5 put it on the shelf to be picked up
in step 1 in next cycle.
For Disclaimers: on step (1), x is also a random number, and the coin used on step (4) by USCIS may sometimes have neither tail nor head..:D
snathan
02-13 10:38 PM
What are you waiting for
Quote:
Originally Posted by unseenguy
Quote:
Originally Posted by snathan
Quote:
Originally Posted by unseenguy
Quote:
Originally Posted by snathan
Quote:
Originally Posted by unseenguy
Quote:
Originally Posted by snathan
I am still waiting to see your contribution. Do you need any help to write the check.
I have contributed more than $500 to IV. I am not sure I want green card anymore. Thanks.
It shows what kind of person you are...when did you contributed more than $500. It seems like you are new here with only 14 posts. And why did you promise 'I will'.
Are you just another junk in IV...?
You are being mean to me and untrustworthy. I have no time for kids.
i dont need to be trustworthy for ur million $$$...you are just another junk for IV
A kid does not need to tell me my worth. I know it better than you do. I have lived more than you have and I like IVs mission and agenda but I dont like people who label others as junk when they are not contributing more. This represents selfish attitude. First you contribute $500 like I have done and then tell me to contribute more. Otherwise just lie down peacefully.
I dont have time for stingy junks...get lost in to
Vacuum
So what ?????????????
Quote:
Originally Posted by unseenguy
Quote:
Originally Posted by snathan
Quote:
Originally Posted by unseenguy
Quote:
Originally Posted by snathan
Quote:
Originally Posted by unseenguy
Quote:
Originally Posted by snathan
I am still waiting to see your contribution. Do you need any help to write the check.
I have contributed more than $500 to IV. I am not sure I want green card anymore. Thanks.
It shows what kind of person you are...when did you contributed more than $500. It seems like you are new here with only 14 posts. And why did you promise 'I will'.
Are you just another junk in IV...?
You are being mean to me and untrustworthy. I have no time for kids.
i dont need to be trustworthy for ur million $$$...you are just another junk for IV
A kid does not need to tell me my worth. I know it better than you do. I have lived more than you have and I like IVs mission and agenda but I dont like people who label others as junk when they are not contributing more. This represents selfish attitude. First you contribute $500 like I have done and then tell me to contribute more. Otherwise just lie down peacefully.
I dont have time for stingy junks...get lost in to
Vacuum
So what ?????????????
more...
geevikram
04-29 03:47 PM
Just called Senator Mitch McConnel's(R-KY) office. They were receptive to our message. Also, I was told that Senator is taking messages and has NOT taken a stand yet. Will post more if I call more people.
2010 ANNA SUI FALL 2011
bestofall
07-15 11:39 PM
Gentle Bump , to see the total 2000 $
more...
NKR
09-12 02:08 PM
Flower campaign had similar fate - 2 to 3 truck loads of flowers just went into hospital. it was more of Lofgren involvement that helped us.
We need to think with cool heads and execute things properly - first organize ourselves - gain support - consult our counsel - come out with proper plan of execution.
From what I observed the action of USCIS redirecting flowers to hospital and armymen backfired. It was perceived as an insult to the brave soldiers.
We need to think with cool heads and execute things properly - first organize ourselves - gain support - consult our counsel - come out with proper plan of execution.
From what I observed the action of USCIS redirecting flowers to hospital and armymen backfired. It was perceived as an insult to the brave soldiers.
hair Anna Sui - Front Row - Spring
GCBy3000
07-20 12:12 PM
We should not let Cornyn down due to this bill's failure. We have to send email and thank him for bringing up this bill eventhough it failed. This will keep up his spirit and make him feel that there are people behind him even if this bill failed. This will make him to pursue other amendments in favor of legal immigrants if at all there is a slight chance before this NOV.
So let us thank him. Should we? Yes if IV says.
So let us thank him. Should we? Yes if IV says.
more...
JazzByTheBay
09-12 12:04 AM
This is great... thanks! :)
Dear XXXX,
The issue of comprehensive immigration reform has received widespread coverage in the media over the last few months.
The issue of legal immigration, though a part of the CIR was less controversial and therefore sadly received less coverage.
Legal employment based immigration represents just 14% of all legal immigration and comprises mostly of high demand skills such as scientists, doctors, engineers, and other such occupations which in addition to filling an unmet need, creates further employment opportunities in the US economy. These are also the occupations that represent the most vital human capital of the 21st century for US economic competitiveness. Many of these people are US educated atleast in part and are currently gainfully employed and contributing to this vibrant economy.
Unfortunately the current immigration policy is doing a great injustice to this group of individuals who have quietly and patiently been waiting their turn. Many have waited 5-10 yrs and are still awaiting their green cards. The current backlogs are ominous.
Many have organized into a grassroots organization called Immigration Voice and are planning a pro legal employment based immigration rally in Washington DC on Sep't 18th. We would appreciate coverage of this first of a kind event which puts the spotlight on a just cause which for far too long has gone ignored by our lawmakers.
Dear XXXX,
The issue of comprehensive immigration reform has received widespread coverage in the media over the last few months.
The issue of legal immigration, though a part of the CIR was less controversial and therefore sadly received less coverage.
Legal employment based immigration represents just 14% of all legal immigration and comprises mostly of high demand skills such as scientists, doctors, engineers, and other such occupations which in addition to filling an unmet need, creates further employment opportunities in the US economy. These are also the occupations that represent the most vital human capital of the 21st century for US economic competitiveness. Many of these people are US educated atleast in part and are currently gainfully employed and contributing to this vibrant economy.
Unfortunately the current immigration policy is doing a great injustice to this group of individuals who have quietly and patiently been waiting their turn. Many have waited 5-10 yrs and are still awaiting their green cards. The current backlogs are ominous.
Many have organized into a grassroots organization called Immigration Voice and are planning a pro legal employment based immigration rally in Washington DC on Sep't 18th. We would appreciate coverage of this first of a kind event which puts the spotlight on a just cause which for far too long has gone ignored by our lawmakers.
hot Anna Sui 2011 Spring Shine
srikondoji
08-02 04:08 PM
This was answered in the trail of threads following the first post. However for the benefit of all, i updated the original post.
Please refer back to it.
Any updates for TSC who sent their applications to NSC??
Please refer back to it.
Any updates for TSC who sent their applications to NSC??
more...
house Anna-sui-2011-spring-fashion-
apb
09-12 05:18 PM
Bumping
tattoo Anna Sui Spring/Summer 2011
amitjoey
05-05 05:11 PM
I am on the west coast, so I call East coast senators before work (Just one or two offices) and then the rest at Lunch time. I use my cell phone.
more...
pictures the mood at Anna Sui was
frostrated
08-12 01:10 PM
Not true. Whatever they can outsource, its already gone. There are certain position where the clients demand onsite resource. I am not supporting this bill in anyway, I hate infy as much as I hate this bill. Remember these companies did not leave any stone unturned, milked the client every possible way and expoilted the employees to the maximum extent. In one another post - VLDRao was saying these companies does the tax filing on behalf the emoloyee, get the refund and again claim that tax in india using double taxation aoivdance treaty.
My wife works in a company where a good number of IT folks are staffed by INFY. The poor quality of work made the company think about not extending INFY's contract. But then it came out in the open that there was no documentation on how the applications were built, etc. INFY got wind of this, and now they have positioned themselves in the organization where without them, this company's IT would collapse.
There are many such stories of outsourcing firms that are holding client companies hostage. Though I do not agree with the bill, I think the bill brings back some ethics into play. Especially the L1 loophole.
My wife works in a company where a good number of IT folks are staffed by INFY. The poor quality of work made the company think about not extending INFY's contract. But then it came out in the open that there was no documentation on how the applications were built, etc. INFY got wind of this, and now they have positioned themselves in the organization where without them, this company's IT would collapse.
There are many such stories of outsourcing firms that are holding client companies hostage. Though I do not agree with the bill, I think the bill brings back some ethics into play. Especially the L1 loophole.
dresses Anna Sui
apb
03-06 05:16 PM
Few observations based on thread postings
1) Last year around this same time not many RFE/LUD were seen.
2) Most of these cases with RFE/LUD are either EB2 around 2005-2006 or EB3 2003-2004
3) My Lawyer based out of IL confirming RFEs are in high volume and majority of these are Employment verification with Birth verification and Health letter verification as close second.
Now given the gov attitude and the current scenario it does not seem that they would be interested in pre-adjudication. There is something else that is going on. On the same note I am also seeing that people with dates which could possibly be current anytime this year are not seeing any LUD/RFE. If pre-adjudicating is the objective than these cases should have received the RFEs first.
Just my observation. Any input is appreciated.
1) Last year around this same time not many RFE/LUD were seen.
2) Most of these cases with RFE/LUD are either EB2 around 2005-2006 or EB3 2003-2004
3) My Lawyer based out of IL confirming RFEs are in high volume and majority of these are Employment verification with Birth verification and Health letter verification as close second.
Now given the gov attitude and the current scenario it does not seem that they would be interested in pre-adjudication. There is something else that is going on. On the same note I am also seeing that people with dates which could possibly be current anytime this year are not seeing any LUD/RFE. If pre-adjudicating is the objective than these cases should have received the RFEs first.
Just my observation. Any input is appreciated.
more...
makeup ANNA SUI 2011 Spring - ANNA
rameshavula
01-12 03:59 PM
EB3 RIR, Pennsylvania
Sep, 2004
Sep, 2004
girlfriend Winter Hats Anna Sui 2011
makemygc
07-06 12:06 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.
They have just linked the two things together making it more explicit.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html
I don't know why they changed it suddenly.
They have just linked the two things together making it more explicit.
hairstyles ANNA SUI 2011 Spring - ANNA
h1techSlave
08-14 01:07 PM
If we can collect some data regarding the home purchasing trends among skilled immigrants vis. their GC status, that would be great.
For example:
% of people who have a home while they are in H1B status: a%
% of people who have a home while they are in EAD status: b%
% of people who have a home while they are in GC status: c%
% of people who have a home while they are US Citizen: d%
If we can collect the data for the variables a, b, c and d and if the value of c is significantly higher than a or b, then we do have a strong case.
But how will we collect data for a, b, c and d? I do not know?
This is the third place where I am posting this ..well why not ..In my view this is worth a shot since greenspan is also talking about it.
-----------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080813/bs_nm/usa_economy_greenspan_dc
-----------
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan predicts U.S. house prices will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday.
ADVERTISEMENT
Greenspan also offered a novel suggestion to bolster the housing market -- increase the number of potential home buyers by admitting more skilled immigrants
For example:
% of people who have a home while they are in H1B status: a%
% of people who have a home while they are in EAD status: b%
% of people who have a home while they are in GC status: c%
% of people who have a home while they are US Citizen: d%
If we can collect the data for the variables a, b, c and d and if the value of c is significantly higher than a or b, then we do have a strong case.
But how will we collect data for a, b, c and d? I do not know?
This is the third place where I am posting this ..well why not ..In my view this is worth a shot since greenspan is also talking about it.
-----------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080813/bs_nm/usa_economy_greenspan_dc
-----------
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan predicts U.S. house prices will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday.
ADVERTISEMENT
Greenspan also offered a novel suggestion to bolster the housing market -- increase the number of potential home buyers by admitting more skilled immigrants
java_jaggu
06-02 08:33 PM
Canadian_Dream, I think your interpretation is wrong..
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what AILA, our core group and other attorneys are trying to say is that as long as you filed before May 15, 2007 you will be fine regardless of whether your petition is pending or approved. There is no dispute about this point. Any applications that were filed after May 15, 2007 will become null and void the day this bill is signed by the president to make it a law. The 'effective date' ( Oct 1, 2008 ) does not apply for applications filed after May 15, 2007. I will be glad if you can prove me wrong :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what AILA, our core group and other attorneys are trying to say is that as long as you filed before May 15, 2007 you will be fine regardless of whether your petition is pending or approved. There is no dispute about this point. Any applications that were filed after May 15, 2007 will become null and void the day this bill is signed by the president to make it a law. The 'effective date' ( Oct 1, 2008 ) does not apply for applications filed after May 15, 2007. I will be glad if you can prove me wrong :)
sheela
09-28 07:38 PM
[QUOTE=JunRN;175492]They are working overtime for it, hopefully 24 hours as well.
Let us hope like on july 2nd week-end (when they worked on sat-sun to make 60,000 visa numbers available and adjucated even when name checks were not cleared for many applicants) these guys are working the same way this weekend ......
Let us hope like on july 2nd week-end (when they worked on sat-sun to make 60,000 visa numbers available and adjucated even when name checks were not cleared for many applicants) these guys are working the same way this weekend ......
No comments:
Post a Comment