brentrh
May 2nd, 2005, 02:34 PM
Look great to me. Slowing the shutter speed and panning will give you illusion of motion but it is hit or miss be prepaired for a lot of misses.
wallpaper 2010 A very Nice urdu Love
.jpg "hairstyles love poems urdu.")
stuckinmuck
02-11 07:01 PM
gcformeornot, I don't see what's incorrect in my post. The point about intra-company transfer was implicit in my post since everyone knows L1 is for such transfers. So that should have been understood without being mentioned. My point was that the denial for extension could have been due to the USCIS looking carefully at the job description again and determining that it wasn't really a specialty occupation. So I was particularly pointing out the 'job description' that goes with an L1 visa. I was also saying the same thing as you i.e. the job should be that of an expert in a particular domain which is not readily available. For example, why would a company transfer a java programmer instead of directly hiring one in the U.S?
It's another thing that TCS, Infosys and the likes of those have abused this visa and destroyed its credibility. That issue needs to be looked at by the lawmakers and it is in genuine employers/employees' interests.
It's another thing that TCS, Infosys and the likes of those have abused this visa and destroyed its credibility. That issue needs to be looked at by the lawmakers and it is in genuine employers/employees' interests.
rongha_2000
04-30 05:24 PM
Its kind of an interesting thought process, but I am curious why do you assume that NON-Perm cases will be very few? And also forgive me for being negative here but you are "assuming" all those parameters which are critical to the decision making process. This is a very interesting approach and if we can get real data to back this up, then nothing like it. (BEC cases will be a big factor in this calculation)
All,
I am planning to write a letter to USCIS and DOS , suggesting the visa cut off dates for India. Kindly critique it. I will send this letter over the weekend and also post over here.
The rational are as follows (Of course , I will word them properly).
I have grouped applicants in the following groups
BEC, PERM ROW and PERM Non Row Countries. I then will estimate the visa usage by each categories using sources like FLCdata and DHS publications. Along the way I will make some assumption but the results should be realistic.
Fact 1: Per DOL , As of April'06 50K BEC labors were certified. Certification rates were 50% of labor processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 2: Per DOL, as of Sep'07 362,000 BEC labor were processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 3: Per DHS, total EB (2, 3, 4 and 5 only) visas issued in FY’07 were 135,479 and FY’06 was 122,121.
Fact 4: FLC data center indicates that between March’05 and Oct’05, ~6000 PERM applications were filled and certified.
Fact 5: Per FLC data , 46,340 ROW PERM applications were certified in FY’06 and 47, 251 ROW applications were certified in FY’07.
Assumption 1: Based on Fact 1, let us assume for FY’06 50K Eb2 and Eb3 visas were used for the people stuck in BEC.
Assumption 2: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 2, let us assumed that in total 200,000 labors were certified between March'05 and Sep'07 by BEC.
Assumption 3: The visa backlog is not an issue for the ROW countries. In other words, their dates could be made current.
Assumption 4: NIW applications are negligible
Assumption 5: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 3, let us assume in BEC accounted for 50K visa in FY’07.
Assumption 6: 50% of visas are used by retrogressed countries.
Calculation 1: BEC visa used in FY’06 = 122,121- 6,000 – 46,340 = 69,781
Calculation 2: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2006 = 200,000-69,781-50,000= 80,219
Calculation 3: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2007: Since total visas issued in FY07 > (47,251 + 80,219) therefore negligible. Also, assume that balance 8,000 application went to NIW.
So in other words, the dates in any case has to be greater than 10/01/2005 for the retrogressed countries. For the simple reason that Non-Perm cases would very few.
All,
I am planning to write a letter to USCIS and DOS , suggesting the visa cut off dates for India. Kindly critique it. I will send this letter over the weekend and also post over here.
The rational are as follows (Of course , I will word them properly).
I have grouped applicants in the following groups
BEC, PERM ROW and PERM Non Row Countries. I then will estimate the visa usage by each categories using sources like FLCdata and DHS publications. Along the way I will make some assumption but the results should be realistic.
Fact 1: Per DOL , As of April'06 50K BEC labors were certified. Certification rates were 50% of labor processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 2: Per DOL, as of Sep'07 362,000 BEC labor were processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Fact 3: Per DHS, total EB (2, 3, 4 and 5 only) visas issued in FY’07 were 135,479 and FY’06 was 122,121.
Fact 4: FLC data center indicates that between March’05 and Oct’05, ~6000 PERM applications were filled and certified.
Fact 5: Per FLC data , 46,340 ROW PERM applications were certified in FY’06 and 47, 251 ROW applications were certified in FY’07.
Assumption 1: Based on Fact 1, let us assume for FY’06 50K Eb2 and Eb3 visas were used for the people stuck in BEC.
Assumption 2: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 2, let us assumed that in total 200,000 labors were certified between March'05 and Sep'07 by BEC.
Assumption 3: The visa backlog is not an issue for the ROW countries. In other words, their dates could be made current.
Assumption 4: NIW applications are negligible
Assumption 5: Based on Fact 1 and Fact 3, let us assume in BEC accounted for 50K visa in FY’07.
Assumption 6: 50% of visas are used by retrogressed countries.
Calculation 1: BEC visa used in FY’06 = 122,121- 6,000 – 46,340 = 69,781
Calculation 2: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2006 = 200,000-69,781-50,000= 80,219
Calculation 3: BEC people remaining as on 10/01/2007: Since total visas issued in FY07 > (47,251 + 80,219) therefore negligible. Also, assume that balance 8,000 application went to NIW.
So in other words, the dates in any case has to be greater than 10/01/2005 for the retrogressed countries. For the simple reason that Non-Perm cases would very few.
2011 hairstyles love poems urdu.
mannan74
08-27 06:02 PM
The answer is right there for you
The following applicants do NOT qualify for appointments in the visa renewal category:
"Applicants applying for a different category visa (e.g. had a student visa, now applying for a work visa)."
You came on F1 and now want to get stamping based on H1, Ditto for your wife.
So not sure what your question is?
The following applicants do NOT qualify for appointments in the visa renewal category:
"Applicants applying for a different category visa (e.g. had a student visa, now applying for a work visa)."
You came on F1 and now want to get stamping based on H1, Ditto for your wife.
So not sure what your question is?
more...
perm2gc
01-07 03:17 AM
FYI:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/01/06/first.baby.ap/index.html
another reason to get a GC. although, toys r us reversed their decision, the whole incident kinda left a bad taste in the immigrant community. heck, they didn't ask for my GC when i bought toys in their store then why would they even bother about "citizenship" in their new year promotion. good thing they reversed it.
:(
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/01/06/first.baby.ap/index.html
another reason to get a GC. although, toys r us reversed their decision, the whole incident kinda left a bad taste in the immigrant community. heck, they didn't ask for my GC when i bought toys in their store then why would they even bother about "citizenship" in their new year promotion. good thing they reversed it.
:(
adde72
05-22 09:47 PM
What will happen to people who already made the move hoping to preserve their priority date from previous employer? Isn't this unfair to these folks. Do you think they may be exempt from this? I wish at least.
I assume USICS will accept the Labor's and I 140 until in the old form until the merit based system was introduced .I assume the transition will be like the introduction of PERM
I assume USICS will accept the Labor's and I 140 until in the old form until the merit based system was introduced .I assume the transition will be like the introduction of PERM
more...
Becks
02-23 09:15 PM
I think Degree+Experience is checked mostly during 140 stage. I have not seen this requirement for AC21 anywhere. All i have been hearing is the new jobs should be same or similar with job code/ job title / duties. So check with your lawyers again.
2010 house love poems urdu. pdf
Rohan99
10-29 01:27 PM
thanks for reply,
One more query..If H4 visa has expired but I have H4 extension till 2009, can I get H4 stamp in India.
My case traveling in Jan to india, My H4 was expired but I have extension. Can I get it stamped as H4. I will be appying for EAD in Nov 07.
Thank you..
Applying for EAD does not invalidate your H4 status. If you travel outside USA without AP and you don't have a valid H4 stamp on your passport, It is considered abandoning your AOS. Hope this helps.
One more query..If H4 visa has expired but I have H4 extension till 2009, can I get H4 stamp in India.
My case traveling in Jan to india, My H4 was expired but I have extension. Can I get it stamped as H4. I will be appying for EAD in Nov 07.
Thank you..
Applying for EAD does not invalidate your H4 status. If you travel outside USA without AP and you don't have a valid H4 stamp on your passport, It is considered abandoning your AOS. Hope this helps.
more...
prdgl
07-07 09:44 PM
Why can't you revise the ad before publishing it so you do not have to resort to such measures? What's wrong with just a MS? My company files several LCs for MS and they have no problems getting approvals.
In any case, the answer to your Q1 is Yes. I will not comment on Q2 since I neither encourage nor recommend such deceitful behavior.
Thanks,
Jayant
Thanks for your reply. We just published the ad a week ago. Is that a big deal to revise now ? It went into computer world and stuff. I am not sure how difficult it would be.
Hence for this matter, I have another employer willing to file my LC this month. But I am thinking since I was not with them when they sent out the ad and requesting wage details, IS this something considered equivalent to LC subsitution if I join them and file my LC with already sent out ad ??
Your answer is highly important.
Thanks
In any case, the answer to your Q1 is Yes. I will not comment on Q2 since I neither encourage nor recommend such deceitful behavior.
Thanks,
Jayant
Thanks for your reply. We just published the ad a week ago. Is that a big deal to revise now ? It went into computer world and stuff. I am not sure how difficult it would be.
Hence for this matter, I have another employer willing to file my LC this month. But I am thinking since I was not with them when they sent out the ad and requesting wage details, IS this something considered equivalent to LC subsitution if I join them and file my LC with already sent out ad ??
Your answer is highly important.
Thanks
hair urdu language. love poems
calaway42
10-04 01:38 AM
Yes!!YES!! finally!!! woohoo!! i GOT IT!! thanx lost!
more...
ram_ram
09-11 02:59 PM
The PDF says
FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT USCIS OCOMM 202.272.1200
So may be we can call and ask them if the 140 times are less than 3 months, Did we miss our approvals in mail? :)
http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/publicaffairs/USCISToday_Sep_06.pdf
According to the illustrious director of uscis, Mr Emilio Gonzalez, the backlog reduction centers have made rapid progress. In feb 2004, form i140 took 11 months to clear, but as of july 2006, there are zero, i repeat 0 backlogs. It is awesome that he is focusing on the positive, but I would also like to know is how many hundreds of thousands are waiting for their first stage labor to clear.
FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT USCIS OCOMM 202.272.1200
So may be we can call and ask them if the 140 times are less than 3 months, Did we miss our approvals in mail? :)
http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/publicaffairs/USCISToday_Sep_06.pdf
According to the illustrious director of uscis, Mr Emilio Gonzalez, the backlog reduction centers have made rapid progress. In feb 2004, form i140 took 11 months to clear, but as of july 2006, there are zero, i repeat 0 backlogs. It is awesome that he is focusing on the positive, but I would also like to know is how many hundreds of thousands are waiting for their first stage labor to clear.
hot love poems in urdu. northstar1
ksvreg
03-29 04:05 PM
As per my attorney, number of PERM applications filed in 2nd half of 2009 is very low (He has some good contacts at Atlanta DOL). He was expecting all 2009 non-audited cases to be processed in a couple of months....Not getting audited is the key in PERM process. My PERM will be finally filed this week, and I am hoping its not going be audited (MS + 6 yrs or BS + 8 yrs exp, 4G Mobile Communications R&D) though my attorney feels it will be....Keeping my fingers crossed...A successful EB3 to Eb2 conversion seems to be the only hope...
How long the process took before filing? How much time for PWD alone?
How long the process took before filing? How much time for PWD alone?
more...
house love poems in urdu language
.jpg "Barsooncollection of love")
GC092003
10-09 02:06 PM
I have a hard time to adjust my photo to designated spec. I shrunked to 62kb but they did not take it and if I make it lesser, it won't be 320 x 240 pixels but less. I use regular digital camera. anybody help me how to do?
tattoo I don#39;t not know when Urdu
mihird
09-26 04:29 PM
Ur missing the point.
The number after the letter, which stands for the classification category is pretty much irrelevant for the purpose of determining the maximum period of stay. You might notice that in many publications USCIS addresses visitors to the US as being in B, H or L status, omitting the #.
As long as your wife maintains her H4 status properly (providing you maintain your H1 status) and as long as she possess necessary travel documents she is free to enter and exit the country.
As far as I understand she will not have any legal problem obtaining an H1 visa after staying out of the country for a year, as long as the visa # is available, she has a job offer etc.
But I do not believe that her H status clock will reset if she leaves the country for a year, then enter in H4 status (which is still a derivative and tied to your principal H status clock). Therefore she will not be able to change her status to that of H1.
Again, it's a pretty complicated matter and you might want to consult an experienced lawyer.
Once you leave the US for 366 days, your H clock is reset. Now, you enter back on a H4, your H clock starts ticking down again..you should be able to do the H4->H1 change of status (once a H visa # is available) and exit and re-enter on a H1 visa and get new time on your H1 of [6 years - minus the time spent on H4]. Again, I am not an attorney, I am just saying this from what seems logical to me..
The number after the letter, which stands for the classification category is pretty much irrelevant for the purpose of determining the maximum period of stay. You might notice that in many publications USCIS addresses visitors to the US as being in B, H or L status, omitting the #.
As long as your wife maintains her H4 status properly (providing you maintain your H1 status) and as long as she possess necessary travel documents she is free to enter and exit the country.
As far as I understand she will not have any legal problem obtaining an H1 visa after staying out of the country for a year, as long as the visa # is available, she has a job offer etc.
But I do not believe that her H status clock will reset if she leaves the country for a year, then enter in H4 status (which is still a derivative and tied to your principal H status clock). Therefore she will not be able to change her status to that of H1.
Again, it's a pretty complicated matter and you might want to consult an experienced lawyer.
Once you leave the US for 366 days, your H clock is reset. Now, you enter back on a H4, your H clock starts ticking down again..you should be able to do the H4->H1 change of status (once a H visa # is available) and exit and re-enter on a H1 visa and get new time on your H1 of [6 years - minus the time spent on H4]. Again, I am not an attorney, I am just saying this from what seems logical to me..
more...
pictures Urdu Shairy; love poems
pappu
06-14 08:50 AM
This drive will continue until we meet our goals
dresses love poems in urdu language.
ggc
10-19 12:56 PM
Yes, but the field office is National Benefits Center in Missouri.
more...
makeup love poems in urdu language.
snathan
01-22 07:36 PM
I hate the word Donate but somehow I donated blood which will be sent to Haiti. I did some in monies. Life is life no matter who it is.
Can you provide more details...?
Can you provide more details...?
girlfriend love poems in urdu language.
krishna_brc
05-05 08:54 AM
Yes, we don't need original I-485 receipt notice to travel.
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
hairstyles urdu language. love poems
sanjay
03-24 02:26 PM
Now everything is queued..... no more cutting lines.
No more LC substitution --- This is old news.
No more delays in 140. --- How come? premium processing had not started yet and neither I see any news on this.
Can you elaborate !!!!
No more LC substitution --- This is old news.
No more delays in 140. --- How come? premium processing had not started yet and neither I see any news on this.
Can you elaborate !!!!
bobzibub
04-29 09:03 AM
Can you please explain why it is utter nonsense? I think you have very strong reasons for saying so. Would like to hear from you.
Thanks!
The original quote: puts the priorities of illegals above those of Citizens and legal people
There is no allowance for "illegals" in the legal system. They are basically tarring roofs and picking crops with no government protection for their safety etc. The crap jobs are always the worst for this sort of thing. And since they are "exploitable" it is essentially a subsidy for business to hire them.
Is there *any* case where an "illegal" has superior rights to a Citizen? I don't think so. The statement is nonsense.
Thanks!
The original quote: puts the priorities of illegals above those of Citizens and legal people
There is no allowance for "illegals" in the legal system. They are basically tarring roofs and picking crops with no government protection for their safety etc. The crap jobs are always the worst for this sort of thing. And since they are "exploitable" it is essentially a subsidy for business to hire them.
Is there *any* case where an "illegal" has superior rights to a Citizen? I don't think so. The statement is nonsense.
lonedesi
08-04 04:29 PM
I have made changes and posted separate letters on http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20657
Please post your comments on that thread
Please post your comments on that thread
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario