shahuja
02-12 06:58 AM
FINALLY I GOT MY PP with Visa Stamp today !!!!
the status changed on the VFS website 'pp delivered' in the morning around 11am.
Here is my case:-
Int for H1B renewal, same company same job, at New Delhi consulate - 14th Jan. VO said "approved, you will get your passport couriered to your home in a couple of days'.
10 days went by and no response. By Feb 1st week, i started calling DOS ..DOS confirmed to have sent the clearance on Jan 25th..
Since then my lawyers and me have been trying to find out the reason for delay from both DOS and embassy.. NO LUCK @@
today on Feb 12th..30 calendar days..i got my pp back. And I am flying back home tonight.
Thanks to everyone who helped me and supported me during this long wait.
In my opinion my case was delayed only for PIMS..but since i had H4, F1, studied at 4 schools, and fairst H1 and this H1B renewal..it took VO good amount of time correlate and work on all this.
I guess mostly delays are for renewals and for people specially with longer history in states. The embassy's are swamped with work and now days a general processing time has been made to 30 days. Infact its also mentioned on their website that most cases are completed withing 30 days..Just FYI..even for PIMS verification, the embassy will report to you as administrative delay.
I hope all this helps to people who are still waiting and who may have long waits in future.
Once again all the best.
Shweta
the status changed on the VFS website 'pp delivered' in the morning around 11am.
Here is my case:-
Int for H1B renewal, same company same job, at New Delhi consulate - 14th Jan. VO said "approved, you will get your passport couriered to your home in a couple of days'.
10 days went by and no response. By Feb 1st week, i started calling DOS ..DOS confirmed to have sent the clearance on Jan 25th..
Since then my lawyers and me have been trying to find out the reason for delay from both DOS and embassy.. NO LUCK @@
today on Feb 12th..30 calendar days..i got my pp back. And I am flying back home tonight.
Thanks to everyone who helped me and supported me during this long wait.
In my opinion my case was delayed only for PIMS..but since i had H4, F1, studied at 4 schools, and fairst H1 and this H1B renewal..it took VO good amount of time correlate and work on all this.
I guess mostly delays are for renewals and for people specially with longer history in states. The embassy's are swamped with work and now days a general processing time has been made to 30 days. Infact its also mentioned on their website that most cases are completed withing 30 days..Just FYI..even for PIMS verification, the embassy will report to you as administrative delay.
I hope all this helps to people who are still waiting and who may have long waits in future.
Once again all the best.
Shweta
wallpaper Matthew Broderick
shantak
07-10 10:03 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/washington/politics-usa-immigration-indians.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
srinitls
09-20 01:36 PM
No checks withdrawn. Filed on July 2nd.
Is there anything we could do?
Ship (P/U) date: Jun 30, 2007
Delivery date: Jul 2, 2007 10:25 AM
Sign for by: J.BARRRET
Delivered to: Shipping/Receiving
Service type: FedEx Priority Overnight
Is there anything we could do?
Ship (P/U) date: Jun 30, 2007
Delivery date: Jul 2, 2007 10:25 AM
Sign for by: J.BARRRET
Delivered to: Shipping/Receiving
Service type: FedEx Priority Overnight
2011 christopher walkens movies
l1fraud
06-08 10:15 PM
Thanks ... normal options in USCIS asks you to call ICE.gov ... BUT ICE.gov doesn't seem to have a local office.. please let me know if anyone out there has gone this route and any update regarding what all documents we need to produce to prove our case. Since its a Billion dollar company they are bound to fight the case (hopefully). Any information regarding the same is appretiate.
more...
abuddyz
01-31 09:05 AM
I havent taken my appointment yet so dont know if that would be the case even for Delhi. But in Mumbai..r they asking to fax the documents (like I-129, I 797A, LCA etc) to them prior to the interview?
in mumbai, someone has to go personally to VFS center to submit documents... we need to submit passport copy, copy of I-797, appointment letter, etc.. but we don't need to submit I-129 and LCA. we need to carry that when we go for appointment.
in mumbai, someone has to go personally to VFS center to submit documents... we need to submit passport copy, copy of I-797, appointment letter, etc.. but we don't need to submit I-129 and LCA. we need to carry that when we go for appointment.
Env_Engr
10-02 04:25 PM
Hi:
I am a July 2nd filer too and still waiting for the checks to be cashed. Please add me to the waiting club.
PD -May 2006, EB2
I-140 Approved - July 2006,TSC
I-485/I-765 - RD 07/02/07 signed by J. Barrett at 10:25 am @ NSC
Checks Cashed - Not yet
I am surprised to see the list compiled by Sanjay b that all the pendig applications are received in the same time frame and received by J. Barrett. Do you guys think this package of applications is mispalced or something?
CADude and others... maybe your efforts are paying off. What I learned in this process is that have faith in your application filing. If everything is fine you'll definitely get the receipts. It may be either next week or in 2 weeks.
Couple of things...
1) Calling USCIS is useless...
2) Look for checks for cashed....
3) Keep in touch with our pending group. I gives you support and motivation.
santosh19-2nd july/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140-TSC/No CC/No RN
sanjayb - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 08/05 -- CHECKS CASHED -- 09/25 --- CASE IN TSC
Ashres11 - 2nd July/ 10:28/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ NO CC/ NO RN
Sairam - 2nd July/10:28/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No RN - 07/28
InsKrish - 2nd July/10.25/J.Barret/NSC/I-140 approved from TSC/No CC/RN
sudhi - 2nd July/ 10:25/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ NO CC/ NO RN - CHECKS CASHED 09/13 -- Received receipts too.
Danu2007 - 2nd July/10:25AM/J. Barret/NSC/140-TSC/NO RN
Triviagal - 2nd July/ 10:25AM/ J. Barret/NSC/140-TSC/NO RN
rkartik78- 2nd july/10:25am/ J.Barret/ I140-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
GCFISH- 2nd july/10:25am/ J.Barret/ I140-TSC/ 485 went to NE/NO RN NOCC
rexjamla- 2ndJuly/10:25am/J.Barret/ I-140-NSC/ NO RN NO CC
kmkanth- 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
BU007- 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
veerufs - 2nd july/10:28am/J. BARRET/I140-TSC/NO RN/NO CC
123456mg - 2nd july/10:25am at NSC/J BARRET/I140-Approved from TSC/NO RN/NO CC
aussie731- 2ndJuly/10:25am/J.Barret/ I-140-NSC/ NO RN NO CC
nkavjs - 2nd July/ 10:25am/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ I-140 TSC lud on I-140 8-5-07/ NO CC/ NO RN
jsb - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 07/27
gc_us - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 07/28
srinitls - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/NO RN NO CC
realraghu - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
vg1778 - nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
I am a July 2nd filer too and still waiting for the checks to be cashed. Please add me to the waiting club.
PD -May 2006, EB2
I-140 Approved - July 2006,TSC
I-485/I-765 - RD 07/02/07 signed by J. Barrett at 10:25 am @ NSC
Checks Cashed - Not yet
I am surprised to see the list compiled by Sanjay b that all the pendig applications are received in the same time frame and received by J. Barrett. Do you guys think this package of applications is mispalced or something?
CADude and others... maybe your efforts are paying off. What I learned in this process is that have faith in your application filing. If everything is fine you'll definitely get the receipts. It may be either next week or in 2 weeks.
Couple of things...
1) Calling USCIS is useless...
2) Look for checks for cashed....
3) Keep in touch with our pending group. I gives you support and motivation.
santosh19-2nd july/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140-TSC/No CC/No RN
sanjayb - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 08/05 -- CHECKS CASHED -- 09/25 --- CASE IN TSC
Ashres11 - 2nd July/ 10:28/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ NO CC/ NO RN
Sairam - 2nd July/10:28/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No RN - 07/28
InsKrish - 2nd July/10.25/J.Barret/NSC/I-140 approved from TSC/No CC/RN
sudhi - 2nd July/ 10:25/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ NO CC/ NO RN - CHECKS CASHED 09/13 -- Received receipts too.
Danu2007 - 2nd July/10:25AM/J. Barret/NSC/140-TSC/NO RN
Triviagal - 2nd July/ 10:25AM/ J. Barret/NSC/140-TSC/NO RN
rkartik78- 2nd july/10:25am/ J.Barret/ I140-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
GCFISH- 2nd july/10:25am/ J.Barret/ I140-TSC/ 485 went to NE/NO RN NOCC
rexjamla- 2ndJuly/10:25am/J.Barret/ I-140-NSC/ NO RN NO CC
kmkanth- 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
BU007- 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
veerufs - 2nd july/10:28am/J. BARRET/I140-TSC/NO RN/NO CC
123456mg - 2nd july/10:25am at NSC/J BARRET/I140-Approved from TSC/NO RN/NO CC
aussie731- 2ndJuly/10:25am/J.Barret/ I-140-NSC/ NO RN NO CC
nkavjs - 2nd July/ 10:25am/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ I-140 TSC lud on I-140 8-5-07/ NO CC/ NO RN
jsb - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 07/27
gc_us - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 07/28
srinitls - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/NO RN NO CC
realraghu - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
vg1778 - nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
more...
chanduv23
01-07 09:47 PM
Contact your lawyers, have them send this message to their clients and also have them post this on their website.
Reach out to your friends, urge them to send letters, ask them to send this to their friends - do not sit back and relax till they do it.
Post on community websites, blogs, post this message on notice boards, distribute fliers and post fliers on grocery stores and other places.
Keep spreading the message - JUST DON'T RELAX.
Contact other organizations, contact media personnel, contact influential personnel, contact community leaders, contact students associations, contact fellow American citizens.. Spread this message to everyone.
THIS HA TO BE THE BIGGEST CAMPAIGN IN THE HISTORY AND THE SUCCESS LIES IN THE HANDS OF OUR MEMBERS.
WITH UTMOST HONESTY AND SINCERITY PLEASE HELP IN THIS CAMPAIGN WITH YOUR FULL MIGHT.
Reach out to your friends, urge them to send letters, ask them to send this to their friends - do not sit back and relax till they do it.
Post on community websites, blogs, post this message on notice boards, distribute fliers and post fliers on grocery stores and other places.
Keep spreading the message - JUST DON'T RELAX.
Contact other organizations, contact media personnel, contact influential personnel, contact community leaders, contact students associations, contact fellow American citizens.. Spread this message to everyone.
THIS HA TO BE THE BIGGEST CAMPAIGN IN THE HISTORY AND THE SUCCESS LIES IN THE HANDS OF OUR MEMBERS.
WITH UTMOST HONESTY AND SINCERITY PLEASE HELP IN THIS CAMPAIGN WITH YOUR FULL MIGHT.
2010 Matthew Broderick, Mia Sara
inderman
10-25 03:11 PM
Congrats FatJoe... Enjoy your freedom!!!
Have Fun!!!
Have Fun!!!
more...
dontcareanymore
08-20 02:57 PM
Yes, there is one year agreement.
One additional year of contract for changing to world plan ? I already have 24.99 plan.
One additional year of contract for changing to world plan ? I already have 24.99 plan.
hair Matthew Broderick#39;s new
jonty_11
06-25 11:39 AM
Thx for ur regular updates Pappu...
My Lawyer - said U cannot have 2 485s for same person
My Wife's lawyer - U can have 2 485s, but it is not recommended...due to reasons mentioend by Pappu (USCIS confuses etc etc)
I think I will follow pappu's advise here
My situation
My EB2 PD Nov 2005 , 140 approved
Wife's EB2 PD Aug 2006 - 140 pending
I will apply my 485 w/ wife as dependent as first filing
Get A#'s from first filing ...and if and when opportunity comes (Dates are current)
File from my wife's Co. with me as dependent (second filing). ( I may decide against doing that if I get EADs in a timely manner from first filing)
My Lawyer - said U cannot have 2 485s for same person
My Wife's lawyer - U can have 2 485s, but it is not recommended...due to reasons mentioend by Pappu (USCIS confuses etc etc)
I think I will follow pappu's advise here
My situation
My EB2 PD Nov 2005 , 140 approved
Wife's EB2 PD Aug 2006 - 140 pending
I will apply my 485 w/ wife as dependent as first filing
Get A#'s from first filing ...and if and when opportunity comes (Dates are current)
File from my wife's Co. with me as dependent (second filing). ( I may decide against doing that if I get EADs in a timely manner from first filing)
more...
anotherone
01-29 04:41 PM
I had already mentioned my EAD status when they had the interview. But after acceptiing it I mentioned it again in the conext of I9 form. Then they said they cant offer me emp;oyment due to my being on EAD.
This is a pretty big company. I understand that H1B is not protected under anti-discrimination for employment, but EAD holders, specifically those with AOS pending, are a protected against employment discrimination.
Does anyone have any links to the above conclusion ? I am so tired of this BS. I have spent long enough in this immigration c**p that if I have leave, might as well leave with a fight.
regards
just anotherone of the expendable non-citizens
This is a pretty big company. I understand that H1B is not protected under anti-discrimination for employment, but EAD holders, specifically those with AOS pending, are a protected against employment discrimination.
Does anyone have any links to the above conclusion ? I am so tired of this BS. I have spent long enough in this immigration c**p that if I have leave, might as well leave with a fight.
regards
just anotherone of the expendable non-citizens
hot starring Matthew Broderick
new2gc
08-26 06:06 PM
Hi mckottayam,
Thanks for your question, while we don’t have a Vonage plan that can be used on your cell phone right now, we’ve got some exciting mobile news in development. Stay tuned to Vonage news on our Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/vonage) page and on our Twitter (http://twitter.com/Vonage_Voice)handle!
Best,
Michael
MY friend just spoke to Lingo, they are coming up a cheaper(may be $1 or $2 cheap) plan with unlimited to India/China and 101 countries and also can be used from a registered cellphone incase you do not have internet for any reason.
So, wait for couple of weeks and then choose the right one.
Thanks for your question, while we don’t have a Vonage plan that can be used on your cell phone right now, we’ve got some exciting mobile news in development. Stay tuned to Vonage news on our Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/vonage) page and on our Twitter (http://twitter.com/Vonage_Voice)handle!
Best,
Michael
MY friend just spoke to Lingo, they are coming up a cheaper(may be $1 or $2 cheap) plan with unlimited to India/China and 101 countries and also can be used from a registered cellphone incase you do not have internet for any reason.
So, wait for couple of weeks and then choose the right one.
more...
house and Matthew Broderick.
shree772000
11-07 10:31 AM
Are we seeing any kind of response to our letters in this matter? I would be very interested to know if they are responding in any way....
Please share if you have any info regarding that.
Please share if you have any info regarding that.
tattoo Starring Matthew Broderick as
asanghi
05-16 04:22 PM
I talked to my immigration about this today. My wife is on h4 and her h1-b is not selected in this year lottery process. I wanted her to go a school which issues CPT in less than one year so that she can start work. But my lawyer strongly recommended not to change her status from H4 to F1. My PD is 24 March 2005 EB2. Lawyer told me that it might cause a problem for my wife to get the GC on her I-485 application. Lawyer said some of her clients got through without a problem and some of her clients have problem regarding status change from h4 to f1. Fianlly i decided not to take that risk. I'm still waiting to file I-485.
My lawyer also strongly advised me against converting her H4 to F1. However since there was no visibility so I asked him what to do to get my wife working status. It was then he advised me that if she wants to start working badly then go ahead and apply for F1 but don't travel out of country while on F1.
My lawyer also strongly advised me against converting her H4 to F1. However since there was no visibility so I asked him what to do to get my wife working status. It was then he advised me that if she wants to start working badly then go ahead and apply for F1 but don't travel out of country while on F1.
more...
pictures and Matthew Broderick
%2B(In%2BHindi).jpeg "Matthew Broderick .")
chanduv23
01-29 06:41 PM
I had already mentioned my EAD status when they had the interview. But after acceptiing it I mentioned it again in the conext of I9 form. Then they said they cant offer me emp;oyment due to my being on EAD.
This is a pretty big company. I understand that H1B is not protected under anti-discrimination for employment, but EAD holders, specifically those with AOS pending, are a protected against employment discrimination.
Does anyone have any links to the above conclusion ? I am so tired of this BS. I have spent long enough in this immigration c**p that if I have leave, might as well leave with a fight.
regards
just anotherone of the expendable non-citizens
OK, unless you never initiated the EAD conversation, technically they are supposed to ask ONLY if you are legally authorized to work in the US or you need sponsership. At the time of joining, they are supposed to give you the i-9 form and you have 72 hours to return the form back with your documentation to prove that you can work for any employer. A valid EAD with a future expiration is very much a valid document and must be acccepted as a valid.
This is a pretty big company. I understand that H1B is not protected under anti-discrimination for employment, but EAD holders, specifically those with AOS pending, are a protected against employment discrimination.
Does anyone have any links to the above conclusion ? I am so tired of this BS. I have spent long enough in this immigration c**p that if I have leave, might as well leave with a fight.
regards
just anotherone of the expendable non-citizens
OK, unless you never initiated the EAD conversation, technically they are supposed to ask ONLY if you are legally authorized to work in the US or you need sponsership. At the time of joining, they are supposed to give you the i-9 form and you have 72 hours to return the form back with your documentation to prove that you can work for any employer. A valid EAD with a future expiration is very much a valid document and must be acccepted as a valid.
dresses Cast : Matthew Broderick
mamthavijai
07-11 08:57 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070710/pl_nm/usa_immigration_indians_dc_1
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Disgruntled green card applicants from India sent hundreds of flowers to the U.S. immigration agency on Tuesday to protest a recent policy flip-flop that hurt their quest for permanent residency.
ADVERTISEMENT
The campaign that directed around a thousand flower deliveries to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Emilio Gonzalez was modeled on a popular Indian film promoting the peaceful protest methods of Mahatma Gandhi.
The protest was inspired by the abrupt reversal last week of an announcement issued in June offering expedited processing of green card petitions for thousands of skilled foreign professionals working under H1-B visas.
Thousands of holders of H1-B visas -- reserved for skilled workers in computing, engineering and other special professions -- scrambled and spent money on lawyers and medical exams to prepare green card applications for a July 1 deadline.
The abrupt closure of this path to a green card -- proof of lawful permanent resident status -- sent the applicants back to the queue for 2008, when they will have to spend more time and money, organizers of the protest said.
"The gist of the campaign was to peacefully convey disappointment and concern at how things have evolved in the last month," said Sivakanth Mundru, a Virginia-based computer systems analyst who was affected by the policy.
FLOWERS SENT TO SOLDIERS
Gonzales said in a statement on the USCIS Web site that the agency would forward the flowers to Walter Reed Army Medical Center and Bethesda Naval Hospital in Washington, D.C., the main facilities treating U.S. soldiers wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"We welcome the fact that the director at least acknowledged this campaign and we are happy that our flowers will be bringing some color to our soldiers in those two medical hospitals," said Vikas Bajaj, a software developer in Wisconsin who helped organize the flower protest.
Although Indians staged the flower protest, the green card application setback affected skilled workers from China, Poland and many other countries.
Mundru and other activists said hundreds of thousands of people shared his state of limbo. Many were unwilling or unable to buy houses or start companies until their residency was secure, they said.
The situation of foreign professionals working in the United States while awaiting green cards was sidelined in this year's contentious immigration debate, which focused on illegal immigrants, Bajaj said by telephone from Wisconsin.
"We have never been in this country illegally, we are hard-working, we are skilled immigrants -- and yet very little space is devoted to our issues," he said.
"The irony is, in this whole migration debate, our issues are probably easiest to solve," said Bajaj.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Disgruntled green card applicants from India sent hundreds of flowers to the U.S. immigration agency on Tuesday to protest a recent policy flip-flop that hurt their quest for permanent residency.
ADVERTISEMENT
The campaign that directed around a thousand flower deliveries to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Emilio Gonzalez was modeled on a popular Indian film promoting the peaceful protest methods of Mahatma Gandhi.
The protest was inspired by the abrupt reversal last week of an announcement issued in June offering expedited processing of green card petitions for thousands of skilled foreign professionals working under H1-B visas.
Thousands of holders of H1-B visas -- reserved for skilled workers in computing, engineering and other special professions -- scrambled and spent money on lawyers and medical exams to prepare green card applications for a July 1 deadline.
The abrupt closure of this path to a green card -- proof of lawful permanent resident status -- sent the applicants back to the queue for 2008, when they will have to spend more time and money, organizers of the protest said.
"The gist of the campaign was to peacefully convey disappointment and concern at how things have evolved in the last month," said Sivakanth Mundru, a Virginia-based computer systems analyst who was affected by the policy.
FLOWERS SENT TO SOLDIERS
Gonzales said in a statement on the USCIS Web site that the agency would forward the flowers to Walter Reed Army Medical Center and Bethesda Naval Hospital in Washington, D.C., the main facilities treating U.S. soldiers wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"We welcome the fact that the director at least acknowledged this campaign and we are happy that our flowers will be bringing some color to our soldiers in those two medical hospitals," said Vikas Bajaj, a software developer in Wisconsin who helped organize the flower protest.
Although Indians staged the flower protest, the green card application setback affected skilled workers from China, Poland and many other countries.
Mundru and other activists said hundreds of thousands of people shared his state of limbo. Many were unwilling or unable to buy houses or start companies until their residency was secure, they said.
The situation of foreign professionals working in the United States while awaiting green cards was sidelined in this year's contentious immigration debate, which focused on illegal immigrants, Bajaj said by telephone from Wisconsin.
"We have never been in this country illegally, we are hard-working, we are skilled immigrants -- and yet very little space is devoted to our issues," he said.
"The irony is, in this whole migration debate, our issues are probably easiest to solve," said Bajaj.
more...
makeup Matthew Broderick Movie Photos
perm
06-19 09:36 AM
What should be the answer to this question on I-485 part 2- out of following 2 options for my dependents ? to me it seems #b is the right answer for my family members 485 and #a for me. BUt some how teh legal guys are changing this from #b to #a for my dependents!!
a. an immigrant petition giving me an immediately available immigrant visa number has been
approved. (Attach a copy of the approval notice, or a relative, special immigrant juvenile or
special immigrant military visa petition filed with this application that will give you an
immediately available visa number, if approved.)
b.an immigrant petition giving me an immediately available immigrant visa number has been
approved. (Attach a copy of the approval notice, or a relative, special immigrant juvenile or
special immigrant military visa petition filed with this application that will give you an
immediately available visa number, if approved.)
In your post both #a and #b are the same text. anyways. any updates on this one? I also have the same question
a. an immigrant petition giving me an immediately available immigrant visa number has been
approved. (Attach a copy of the approval notice, or a relative, special immigrant juvenile or
special immigrant military visa petition filed with this application that will give you an
immediately available visa number, if approved.)
b.an immigrant petition giving me an immediately available immigrant visa number has been
approved. (Attach a copy of the approval notice, or a relative, special immigrant juvenile or
special immigrant military visa petition filed with this application that will give you an
immediately available visa number, if approved.)
In your post both #a and #b are the same text. anyways. any updates on this one? I also have the same question
girlfriend LANE MATTHEW BRODERICK UMA
va_dude
08-25 02:22 PM
Vonage does work with a home security system, but they do no recommend using it for that purpose because then your security system is dependent on the internet to make the call out during an emergency.
hairstyles Matthew Broderick arrives at
DallasBlue
09-27 02:18 PM
http://www.ailf.org/lac/lac_pa_chrono.shtml
http://www.ailf.org/lac/mandamus-jurisdiction9-24-07%20PA.pdf
1. What are the general arguments that the government makes to dismiss a mandamus/APA case for lack of jurisdiction?
The government�s motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction are filed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP). The government generally makes some combination of the following four arguments, all of which center on alleged agency discretion with respect to adjudication of adjustment applications:
� That USCIS does not have a duty to adjudicate an adjustment application and therefore an essential element of the mandamus claim is missing;
� That the pace of adjudication of an adjustment application is discretionary and therefore not subject to mandamus relief;
� That adjudication of adjustment applications is committed to agency discretion by law and not subject to APA relief; and
� That 8 U.S.C. � 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), which limits judicial review over certain discretionary issues in immigration cases, bars review of these mandamus and APA cases.
2. In responding to a motion to dismiss, can I argue that at least some of the issues raised by the government are not jurisdictional?
Yes. An initial response to a government motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is to question whether, in fact, the government has raised a jurisdictional challenge. The Supreme Court has distinguished between jurisdiction � which is the court�s power to hear the case � and the sufficiency of a valid cause of action. See, e.g., Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 89 (1988); see also Ahmed v. DHS, 328 F.3d 383, 386-87 (7th Cir. 2003) (distinguishing between the court�s power to adjudicate the case, which is jurisdictional, and the court�s power to grant relief, which is not jurisdictional).
The failure to state a valid cause of action calls for a judgment on the merits and not for dismissal for want of jurisdiction. Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 682 (1946). The Supreme Court has made clear that:
�jurisdiction � is not defeated � by the possibility that the averments might fail to state a cause of action on which petitioners could actually recover.� Rather, the district court has jurisdiction if �the right of the petitioners to recover under their complaint will be sustained if the [ ] laws of the United States are given one construction and will be defeated if they are given another ��
Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. at 89 (quoting Bell, 327 U.S. at 682, 685). Thus, one court has held that in resolving whether mandamus jurisdiction is present in an immigration case, the allegations of the complaint are taken as true (unless patently frivolous) to avoid �tackling the merits under the ruse of assessing jurisdiction.� Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-387.
Applying these principles, the Seventh Circuit held in Ahmed that the question of whether a statute imposed a �duty� on the government for purposes of mandamus relief was not a jurisdictional question. As the court explained:
[T]he district court has jurisdiction under � 1361 [the mandamus statute] to determine whether the prerequisites for mandamus relief have been satisfied: does the plaintiff have a clear right to the relief sought; does the defendant have a duty to perform the act in question; and is there no other adequate remedy available. � A conclusion that any one of those prerequisites is missing should lead the district court to deny the petition, not [for lack of jurisdiction], but because the plaintiff has not demonstrated an entitlement to this form of extraordinary relief.
Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-87.
Thus, where the government claims that jurisdiction is lacking because a prerequisite to mandamus is missing, the plaintiff can respond by arguing that this is not a jurisdictional question and cannot lead to dismissal under Rule 12(b)(1). Most likely, you also will want to address the substance of the challenge, also, as an alternative way to dispute the government�s motion. See, e.g., � 3, below.
http://www.ailf.org/lac/mandamus-jurisdiction9-24-07%20PA.pdf
1. What are the general arguments that the government makes to dismiss a mandamus/APA case for lack of jurisdiction?
The government�s motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction are filed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP). The government generally makes some combination of the following four arguments, all of which center on alleged agency discretion with respect to adjudication of adjustment applications:
� That USCIS does not have a duty to adjudicate an adjustment application and therefore an essential element of the mandamus claim is missing;
� That the pace of adjudication of an adjustment application is discretionary and therefore not subject to mandamus relief;
� That adjudication of adjustment applications is committed to agency discretion by law and not subject to APA relief; and
� That 8 U.S.C. � 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), which limits judicial review over certain discretionary issues in immigration cases, bars review of these mandamus and APA cases.
2. In responding to a motion to dismiss, can I argue that at least some of the issues raised by the government are not jurisdictional?
Yes. An initial response to a government motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is to question whether, in fact, the government has raised a jurisdictional challenge. The Supreme Court has distinguished between jurisdiction � which is the court�s power to hear the case � and the sufficiency of a valid cause of action. See, e.g., Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 89 (1988); see also Ahmed v. DHS, 328 F.3d 383, 386-87 (7th Cir. 2003) (distinguishing between the court�s power to adjudicate the case, which is jurisdictional, and the court�s power to grant relief, which is not jurisdictional).
The failure to state a valid cause of action calls for a judgment on the merits and not for dismissal for want of jurisdiction. Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 682 (1946). The Supreme Court has made clear that:
�jurisdiction � is not defeated � by the possibility that the averments might fail to state a cause of action on which petitioners could actually recover.� Rather, the district court has jurisdiction if �the right of the petitioners to recover under their complaint will be sustained if the [ ] laws of the United States are given one construction and will be defeated if they are given another ��
Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. at 89 (quoting Bell, 327 U.S. at 682, 685). Thus, one court has held that in resolving whether mandamus jurisdiction is present in an immigration case, the allegations of the complaint are taken as true (unless patently frivolous) to avoid �tackling the merits under the ruse of assessing jurisdiction.� Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-387.
Applying these principles, the Seventh Circuit held in Ahmed that the question of whether a statute imposed a �duty� on the government for purposes of mandamus relief was not a jurisdictional question. As the court explained:
[T]he district court has jurisdiction under � 1361 [the mandamus statute] to determine whether the prerequisites for mandamus relief have been satisfied: does the plaintiff have a clear right to the relief sought; does the defendant have a duty to perform the act in question; and is there no other adequate remedy available. � A conclusion that any one of those prerequisites is missing should lead the district court to deny the petition, not [for lack of jurisdiction], but because the plaintiff has not demonstrated an entitlement to this form of extraordinary relief.
Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-87.
Thus, where the government claims that jurisdiction is lacking because a prerequisite to mandamus is missing, the plaintiff can respond by arguing that this is not a jurisdictional question and cannot lead to dismissal under Rule 12(b)(1). Most likely, you also will want to address the substance of the challenge, also, as an alternative way to dispute the government�s motion. See, e.g., � 3, below.
willwin
09-16 10:15 AM
PLEASE CALL NOW!!!!
mk26
03-31 08:44 AM
Looks like this year USCIS understood they need some money and accept some extra applications, which may be the same file I485 when PD is not current. and date might go to end of 2007.
Just a thought
Just a thought